historic Eastern and Western commerce

 This book, titled Orient, sheds new light on Orient (the world history of the East), as can be seen in the subtitle "Global Economy of the Asian Era." At the same time of publication, it really turned Western intellectual society upside down and caused a great sensation in non-European regions, especially China and Japan. It raises significance to existing historical narratives and social theories, and calls for revising the views implied by European centralism and completely re-establishing the framework of thinking about the modern economy. This is because it is relentlessly breaking down the historical description and social science theory of modern Western studies, which have been like an iron fortress for the past 150 years. The main theme is that the East is returning to the center of world history, correcting the wrong view of history centered on the West. It provides opportunities for fundamental re-recognition of the rise of the West and the origins of the world system, while also inviting them with innovative and exciting stories.Frank points out that the world history we know and learn today was written from a Eurocentric perspective that did not exist before the 19th century, and that the universal social science we pursue was also newly created as a Eurocentric invention. In other words, the ideology invented by European historians and social theorists to increase European interests is Eurocentrism. This has not only served as a political, economic, and cultural support for reproducing European or Western hegemony since the late 19th century, but has also spread around the world through colonial rule. Frank, who has sought the roots of this Eurocentrism, finds it in the perspective of social scientists representing modern Europe. They are all convinced that the inherent characteristics of Europe have brought about exceptional European development different from those of the rest of the world. Marx argued that only Europe had a capitalist infant who could transition from feudalism to capitalism, and that Asia, represented by the "Asian mode of production," had its identity fixed, so it should benefit from progress from Europe to break away from it. Weber says Protestant ethics and the spirit of capitalism are the blood and flesh of capitalism, explaining that religions outside Europe all had mythical, mysterious, magical, and, in short, anti-rational elements. According to this, it is concluded that the "Western" with the yeast of a rational mind emerged, and the "remaining world" that lacked it did not. Even a European historian like Fernand Brodel, who has an exceptionally wide field of view, said, "China has fallen behind because of its less developed economic structure than Islam and the West. Chinese entrepreneurs were not enthusiastic about making profits. Compared to the spirit of Western capitalists, they were clumsy." As mentioned earlier, Frank also criticizes himself and Wallastin, who was an academic comrade. " Both Wallastin and I focused on theoretically analyzing and modeling the structure and process of the modern 'world' economy/'world' system. Wallastin still thinks so, but I believed at the time that the center of this system was Europe, and that the rest of the world was integrated into a European-based "world" economy as it expanded. That was the limitation of Wallastin/Frank's theory." That's not all. The Europeans also invented geography. This is because the word "Eurasia" itself is European-centered. In fact, Europe is just a frontier peninsula far from the vast Eurasian continent. Nevertheless, Europeans have expressed the "progress of history" on the map centered on Europe. For example, in Mercator's way, Britain, a small island country, is depicted as large as India. In addition, contrary to geographical facts, India, which has a much larger population, is only a subcontinent, and China is just a "country." Frank's argument is that in order to crush such deep-rooted prejudice, it is necessary to analyze and grasp the reality of a single global economic system from a global perspective. This is because it is not possible to properly explain what parts have developed, including the part of Europe, without analyzing the whole that is more than the sum of parts. From a global perspective, Frank of the Asian world economy argues that European domination is only a temporary phenomenon that has lasted for more than 200 years since 1800. "Europe's economic growth in modern Europe was not achieved by itself, nor was it achieved by rationality, institution, entrepreneurship, technology, warm climate, or the European 'exceptionism' of a European race, and Europe before 1800 was neither more important nor more advanced than the rest of the world economy. If there had been a region that dominated the world economy before 1800, it was Asia. If there was a 'central' position and role in the world economy at that time and there was a ranking among the 'central', it should be considered that China was at its peak." Europe has long been eyeing Asia's abundant products and quality products. European countries were eager to explore ocean routes to ensure safe access to Asian goods such as cotton, ceramics, spices and tea. However, silver rolled into Europe through the discovery of the New World. Until then, Europe lacked money and had no decent goods to sell to the Asian market, so it could not buy as many Asian goods as it wanted. Silver quenched this European thirst. Europe "bought a ticket to the train called the Asian Economy with the silver of the New World." Europe has been running a chronic deficit in trade with Asia, but it has made up for the deficit with silver. Most of the silver that Europe brought from the Americas flowed into China. Without silver, Europe would not have been able to offer business cards to the world economy. Britain later cultivated opium in India and exported it to China because there was nothing to sell. European products were less competitive than Asian products, so they did not work well outside the colony. China and India overwhelmed Europe in terms of technology, productivity and quality. According to Frank, it is only a myth that Europe eventually won the industrial competitiveness through the scientific revolution that took place in modern Europe thanks to the inherent nature of European rationality. The level of science and technology in Asia represented by China and India did not lag behind Europe until at least 1800, but rather outperformed Europe. Ironically, the biggest reason why the situation reversed in 1800 was that Asia was highly competitive until then. Asia had abundant goods and high-quality agricultural technology, and because of its abundant population, labor costs were naturally low. This was directly linked to the competitiveness of the product. Inventions were steadily made in Asia by engineers working in the production field, but it was more economical and reasonable to input additional labor than technological innovation in developing labor-saving machines. On the other hand, Europe had a small population and continued to outflow due to the expansion of colonies, resulting in a much lower population/land resource ratio than Asia, which led to a high-wage/high-cost production structure. Europe had an urgent reason to build a labor-saving machine. In Europe, however, it was not scientists who invented machines, but mainly field engineers. They raised the curtain on the Industrial Revolution, and Europe began to gain an edge in competitiveness from this time on. However, Eurocentrists have not seen history from this global perspective, but have evaluated rationality, entrepreneurship, and technological innovation as exceptional phenomena that can only be found in Europe and argued that Europe has created the world. Frank strongly criticizes this. Europe did not create the world, but "the world created Europe." Europe's rise is not only explained by its internal factors, but has also benefited Europe much more economically, technologically, and culturally than Europe, which has remained around for most of its world history. Frank has an interesting metaphor for this. "Europe took a ticket to the third-largest train called the Asian Economy, but soon rented a car, and in the 19th century, it drove Asians out of trains and succeeded in becoming the owner." However, the same phenomenon is happening in East Asia today. Frank was born in Berlin, Germany in 1929, introduced by Andre Gunder Frank, the author of the "Provided by Yes24" in the economic war between China and the United States, although Asia suffered a financial crisis in the "Preface to the Korean version." In 1941, he moved to the United States with his parents to escape the Nazi regime and received a doctorate in economics from the University of Chicago in 1957. He then served as an instructor and assistant professor at the University of Michigan until 1962. In 1926, he went to Latin America as an assistant professor at the University of Brasilia and taught anthropology theory. In 1965, he became a special professor at the National School of Economics at the National University of Mexico. From 1966 to 1968, he served as a visiting professor of economics and history at George Williams University in Montreal, Canada. In 1968, he was a professor of economics and sociology at the University of Chile in Santiago, Chile, and was involved in the reform of the Allende government. He fled to Europe after a military coup in Chile in 1973, and worked as a visiting research professor at Max-Planck Laboratory in Starnberg, Germany, from the following year to 1978. In 1978, he left Germany again to Norwich, England, where he became a professor at the School of Development and Research at the University of East Anglia. Since 1981, he has been a professor of developmental economics and social science at the University of Amsterdam. After retiring as an economics professor at the University of Amsterdam in 1994, at the age of 65, he worked as a visiting professor at several universities, and is now a raw material professor at the World History Center at Boston University. In 1999, he was awarded the Best Writings Award by the World Society of History, and Orient was awarded the Book of the Year award by the American Society of Sociology in 2000.

He published numerous studies and papers, of which the most well-known is the "Development of Low Power" (1969), which is called the beginning of the "subjugation theory." Preface to the Korean version of the table of contents Chapter 1 Competition between real world history and European social theory The holistic methodology and purpose of this book is not Europeanism, but globalism Smith: Marx.Weber's contemporary Eurocentrism, its critics, economic historians, Western social theory, Chapter 2 Introduction to World Trade, 13th to 14th centuries, Columbus's exchange of world economy, map the global division of labor and trade balance.The World's Currency: Its Production and Exchange: Global Casino's Big and Small Attractiveness Global Casino Number Game How Did the Silver/Gold/Credit Winners Spend Their Money? In the theory of reserve-theme inflation or money supply, the production currency expands the boundaries between settlements and production. Chapter 4 Global Economy-Comparison and Quantitative Issues in Asia: Population.production, productivity, incomeTrade Population, Production, Income Productivity and Competitiveness World Trade 1400-1800 Qualitative Issues: Technology Technology Asia Science. Technology and Eurocentric Guns/Ships/Prints/ Textiles/Metallurgy. Coal.Mechanism of Technological Development in the Power/Transport World: Economic.Comparison between the Asian and European systems of the financial system and the European system: India/China Chapter 5 is not a coincidence, but rather a cross-integrated macro-demographic demographic. Structural analysis of the 17th century 1740 silver crisis Kondratiev "B" phase: crisis and recession? CHAPTER VI Why did the West (temporarily) win? Were there long-cycle roller coasters? Did the decline of the East precede the rise of the West? India's decline and other decline in Asia How did the West rise? Asia on the shoulders of a giant, the demand for technological change, the supply and source of capital supply, the global economy, demographic explanation, demographic.Settlement Model Higher Balance Trap Evidence: Transformation of India, China, Europe, and the World from 1500 to 1750 Transition India/China/Western Europe/The rest of the world, Chapter 7 Conclusions of History and Theoretical Conclusions: Eurocentrism was a naked king. Asian Production Style European Exceptionist European World-Organization? Is it a global economy? 1500 Years: Continuous?The rise of the West and the hollow categories of the Industrial Revolution and Procrustes' bed theoretical implications: holistic-partial commonality/similarity/specificity/discontinuous cross-sectional cycle vs. single-line Europe. When Europe discovered the Roman Empire, they said... "Finally, Europe has discovered a civilization comparable to the Orient". In fact, the Roman Empire...Contrary to popular belief... There are many things that have been evaluated by future generations. Westerners...While "discovering" the Roman Empire, the West also...I thought the Orient was second to none... The traditional perception of Westerners is... I'm second to the Orient.That's what I mean.

However, considering the selfish savagery of Japan and China, the East cannot be said to be better than the West. When these Eastern gangsters seized hegemony, they robbed, bullied, and arrogant a weak country.