Why is 'exploitation' an insufficient explanation for the Industrial Revolution? O Textile workers in Britain had already been exploited long before the Industrial Revolution. O Exploitation explains a lot of the Industrial Revolution, but not all of it. O You cannot make everyone rich by stealing from poor people. O By 1760, Britain had abandoned its exploitation of its colonies.

icon
Related questions
Question
**Why is 'exploitation' an insufficient explanation for the Industrial Revolution?**

1. ⬜ Textile workers in Britain had already been exploited long before the Industrial Revolution.

2. ⬜ Exploitation explains a lot of the Industrial Revolution, but not all of it.

3. ⬜ You cannot make everyone rich by stealing from poor people.

4. ⬜ By 1760, Britain had abandoned its exploitation of its colonies.

**Explanation**:
This image presents a multiple-choice question that addresses the limitations of attributing the Industrial Revolution solely to the concept of exploitation. Here are the four provided options:

1. **Textile workers in Britain had already been exploited long before the Industrial Revolution** - This suggests that exploitation of labor was not unique to the Industrial Revolution but had been a longstanding condition.

2. **Exploitation explains a lot of the Industrial Revolution, but not all of it** - This option acknowledges that while exploitation was a significant factor, it does not provide a complete explanation of the Industrial Revolution.

3. **You cannot make everyone rich by stealing from poor people** - This choice implies that systemic wealth generation involves other factors beyond merely taking resources from less privileged groups.

4. **By 1760, Britain had abandoned its exploitation of its colonies** - This statement challenges the idea that colonial exploitation was a driving force behind the Industrial Revolution, suggesting instead that colonial exploitation ceased before the Industrial Revolution took full effect.

This question prompts students to think critically about the multifaceted reasons behind the Industrial Revolution, encouraging a deeper understanding that goes beyond a singular cause.
Transcribed Image Text:**Why is 'exploitation' an insufficient explanation for the Industrial Revolution?** 1. ⬜ Textile workers in Britain had already been exploited long before the Industrial Revolution. 2. ⬜ Exploitation explains a lot of the Industrial Revolution, but not all of it. 3. ⬜ You cannot make everyone rich by stealing from poor people. 4. ⬜ By 1760, Britain had abandoned its exploitation of its colonies. **Explanation**: This image presents a multiple-choice question that addresses the limitations of attributing the Industrial Revolution solely to the concept of exploitation. Here are the four provided options: 1. **Textile workers in Britain had already been exploited long before the Industrial Revolution** - This suggests that exploitation of labor was not unique to the Industrial Revolution but had been a longstanding condition. 2. **Exploitation explains a lot of the Industrial Revolution, but not all of it** - This option acknowledges that while exploitation was a significant factor, it does not provide a complete explanation of the Industrial Revolution. 3. **You cannot make everyone rich by stealing from poor people** - This choice implies that systemic wealth generation involves other factors beyond merely taking resources from less privileged groups. 4. **By 1760, Britain had abandoned its exploitation of its colonies** - This statement challenges the idea that colonial exploitation was a driving force behind the Industrial Revolution, suggesting instead that colonial exploitation ceased before the Industrial Revolution took full effect. This question prompts students to think critically about the multifaceted reasons behind the Industrial Revolution, encouraging a deeper understanding that goes beyond a singular cause.
Expert Solution
trending now

Trending now

This is a popular solution!

steps

Step by step

Solved in 3 steps

Blurred answer