The introductory paragraphs of this review consist entirely of ad hominem attacks on a largely imaginary opponent.<p>The review suggests the author believes spreading the "free market" gave "opportunities" to millions, thereby justifying British colonialism in India. For more on how that "opportunity" compared with what came before and after British rule, see:<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_major_famines_in_India_during_British_rule" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_major_famines_in_I...</a>
A rather more serious review that actually bothers to consider the argument properly: <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/03086534.2023.2209947" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/03086534.2023.2...</a>
I always found it amusing how without a darwinian racial worldview, europe's colonialism and even transatlantic slave trade would be seen as similar to other ancient empire's colonialism and slave trade. Children of the colonised and enslaved could not pursue economic opportunities, wealth, power, and more because they were considered bilologically inferior, as if they were a different sepcies alltogether thanks to darwinian evolutionary inventions of race.<p>What I wish historians would explore (were it not for the political controversy over the pursuit), is what came first? Was the drarwinian concept of race invented and popularized because it suited the wealthy capitalists of Europe or perhaps the horrors of european slavery and colonialism were unleashed and birthed by darwin and his followers? The former sounds more plausible to me.<p>We still live in a world where profit and exploitation of not just people but the whole planet is planned and then social norms and acceptable worldviews are formed around that concept. I will give you an easy example: the war on drugs. The profit margins of existing companies, budget allocation potental to fight drugs and its impact on communities who just got civil rights and universal suffrage was figured out first and for decades (even now in many places) the war on drugs was seen as good thing. Trillions spent, the whole thing including rehabs and local drug dealers is it's own powerful industry now.<p>Colonialism and slavery was made so cruel and brutal compared to historical counterparts because it was more profitable and the culture of capitalism was king.<p>Lastly, I find it even more amusing how colonialism and slavery allowed more people to study academics and coincided (I insist: facilitated) with the european rennaisance which gave eventual birth to the industrial revolution and much of europe's great accomplishments.