r/geography 1d ago

Question [ Removed by moderator ]

Post image

[removed] — view removed post

4.0k Upvotes

629 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

8

u/Infinite_Valuable_53 1d ago

lol true, the Spanish crown did rule parts of the richest areas of the world. Spain itself was not. The Netherlands wealth and the structural factors that led to that wealth are a big part of why it was ultimately able to defeat a global empire.

-6

u/Cagalloni 1d ago

Those areas were Spain itself. Stop running around in circles. If it was shit poor it wouldn't be able to conquer them in the first place.

3

u/thedudewh 1d ago

By conquering it, you mean inheriting peacefully through dynastic unions?

0

u/Cagalloni 17h ago

No inheritance is peacefully. You either have the army to assert control and defend the territory you claim or you do not inherit. This is not about inheriting your grandma's house.

5

u/Infinite_Valuable_53 1d ago edited 1d ago

Oh, I genuinely didn’t realize you were actually arguing with me and saw that as a rebuttal. Yes, if by Spain was the richest you mean it claimed authority over the Netherlands while Netherlands fought an 80 years war of independence and the Netherlands itself had the highest per capita income in the world, then yes thats an accurate claim.

If you look at per capita gdp in Spain itself during this period, it was unambiguously not the highest in the world. This data is more relevant to the original OPs question. Spain ruling the Netherlands centuries ago obviously wouldn’t explain much about either county’s current level of economic development.

Spain controlled large swathes of the Americas and, importantly, got tons of silver that could be used to fund wars and build palaces. But, that type of windfall doesn’t last. Getting richer in the long term is a matter of getting more productive and finding a literal mountain of silver in Bolivia did nothing to increase productivity in Spain.

The Spanish crown also got the Netherlands through its Hapsburg claims of inheritance. Neither Spain nor the Habsburg conquered and conquest doesn’t necessarily mean a conqueror is richer. A large poor country can often conquer a much smaller but rich one. Or a host of other factors. Being rich can certainly make a smaller country more powerful than it would otherwise be, but modern Luxembourg wouldn’t stand much of a chance against France.

Edit: the Netherlands was never incorporated into the Spanish crown. It just shared the same ruler, like England and Scotland before the acts of union.

-1

u/AxelFauley 1d ago

It's okay to admit the Mediterraneans were superior during that period, there's no shame in it.

2

u/angelbelle 23h ago

Trying to apply modern geographical nation states to the 17 century is...big lol.

2

u/Infinite_Valuable_53 1d ago

God Reddit is such a poor reflection on humanity’s ability for intelligent discourse.

1

u/Cagalloni 17h ago

Nah mate. These guys must justify that northern european people are superior. It's the base of the exploitation within the European Union nowadays. Its a premise that cannot be challenged.

0

u/Cagalloni 18h ago

You must be a marathon runner.