British ate most meat and conquered all. Mongols ate most meat in the past and mogged many as well. Meat is key to mogging and conquest.
Nothing to do with meat.
My response is in the context of Indians.
In around 700 A.D. Due to Islamic invasions, the priests and kings of Europe had no choice but to arm the commons in large numbers. And so, citizens gained more weapons. which had led to the empowerment of common citizens.
Because the weaponization of the commons is the mother of democracy. Weaponization of common makes commons so strong that in 950 A.D, the citizens of UK could force Kings to introduce Jury System, in form of Coroner’s Jury where in 12 citizens chosen at random can expel a policemen accused of killing a citizen.
Later Coroner’s Jury became so popular, that citizens got convinced that Trial by Jury is less nexus prone than Trial by judges.
The demand for Jury Trial and abolition or reduction of judge trials grew and in around 1100 AD, the citizens forced the King of England to print and sign Magna Carta where-in king was forced to make a promise that he and his officers will not punish citizens without approval Jury chosen from common citizens, and Jury got powers to expel/fine officials. So, by 1200 AD, UK had “Right to Recall via Jury System” over junior officials.
So, jury system in 1200 A.D distributed the power of judgement in common citizens by grab power of judgement from the aristocrats. This was a historical change.
A change that diametrically changes relation between rulers and subjects. The ruler was no longer in charge of deciding imprisonment or even fines.
It was after this Jury System; the craftsmen and traders could protect themselves from the arbitrary rule of Lords and progress started.
It was only this reason, why craftsmen became prosperous in Britain and some of them later became industrialists.
The industrial revolution in Britain was only because of this Jury System – the Jurors protected the craftsmen, traders and industrialists from the arbitrary fines of Lords and the Kings and thus Jurors enabled these craftsmen to become wealthy.
This technical development leads to new inventions. And it was during this technological development that he learned to make better guns. Due to the absence of a jury system, the technical development could not take place outside Europe and they were deprived of making better weapons.
One thing I want to indicate that inventing is good for nation’s development. But the fate and power of nation depend on, if they can produce these inventions in factories on large scale. I give you an example:
Suppose ABC has invented "X' (a product) in his nation Wakanda which is good for society. But Wakanda has judge system and police are not under the right to recall. So, the Aristocracy (comprise judges, politicians, top level bureaucracy) knows that if ABC produce X in large quantity, then he will become rich. So, ABC become a scapegoat for bribes. Similarly, XYZ has invented “Y’ (a product) in his nation Negitia, which has inferior quality as compared to X. but the condition here is “Negitia’ has jury and right to recall on government official. So, no one can interfere in the production of product “Y’, which leads to mass production and XYZ become wealthy. after some time XYZ improved their product as par with X.
if you understood what I meant to say. Then let’s go forward. if no, then let me tell you that we Indians also had developed the gunpowder and guns. but unfortunately, our administration was corrupt or not as par with European's administration. We never had well-functioning judicial system and police department as par with Britishers. Which made impossible to set up factories or production on large scale. by which it became just an invention or side project, as result we never developed advance weapons and have to face invasions from various imperialists.
The Britishers got to know the fact that they had best guns in the world.
So, they started attacking all the kingdoms one by one. Now in one hand he held modern technology items which were in demand by people all over the world, and in the other hand he had guns which he was using to threaten the kings who did not allow him to sell goods in his country.
In this way all the empires of the world were under the target of Britishers. Wherever they were going, they were destroying those empires. During this time, britain turned to India and we also came under britains grip.
So, the conclusion is that every nation's fate is decided by the development of weapons. If a country is unable to manufacture its own weapons, it will eventually become a client or puppet state of powerful nations that can.
The so-called Renaissance had no role to play. If Renaissance was responsible for the progress UK made, well, why didn’t Italy make such progress, where Renaissance came first?
The eminent intellectuals have deliberately suppressed the role of Jury System in explaining why Europe overtook rest of the world as they do not want students to know about Jury System, lest they would demand for it.
