Abu-Lughod Response 2

            Abu-Lughod describes the units of international trade by diving them into three main units, Western European, Far Eastern and Middle Eastern. Even though there was no regional world system in place, states were still mildly dependent on each other for trade and became connected in new ways. Abu-Lughod describes the early world system as being mostly reliant on states location and possibility between actors. She explores the modern capital world by using previous economic and political failures of previous systems in place and describes the system of early capitalism.  This early world system was dominated by the Mongol Empire, which allowed states to trade and form relationships across oceans and land. The second part of this book looks more in-depth at the fourteenth century. It is described as a breakthrough time period with art and cultural successes, which lead to the eventual formation of modern and present day European political and economic assimilation into society.  
            Europe, at first was not a dominant state and was placed on the periphery of the world system. Some of the main factors that allowed the west to dominate trade and have power over the eastern states can be attributed to a few different reasons. The first is that Europe did not have enough power to dominate other regions. Another reason is that instead of trying to shape the world system to make it more appealing and useful for itself, Europe joined the preexisting system and allowed other, more powerful states to take control. She describes the early world system as being dominated by the east, and if it were not for Chinas economic downfall they would most likely have been the main power and trade focus, possibly even in present day. States that were able to produce and offer unique, coveted goods were those considered to have the most power in terms of this trading system. One of the main reasons for the collapse of this market can be attributed to the world system being too large for sporadic markets, political conflicts amongst states and the advancement of technology. All of these factors contributed in one way or another to the collapse of the three main trading units.
            While the author describes the phenomenon of Euro centrism as being one of the main reasons historical views favor the West, she does not goes into great detail as to why. If the East was in fact dominate and part of the core, then what caused this power to shift to the West? Also, if the West has been shaped and functions similar to the early East, what were the main factors that allowed the East to adopt the main principles of the West? And, since the West has remained dominate in terms of trade and capitalism, how did the ideas they adopt from the West allow them to stay afloat for many years while the East collapsed? Was the East able to control the trade route longer because of how it is historically viewed in comparison to the West? These all just some questions I asked myself while reading this section.