> Instead of talking about why capitalism emerged where it did, we
could talk
> about its inability to capitalize the world.
>
You put your finger on a key question - why the real story of the 20th c is not about the rise of the West compared to the rest, but about the _absolute_ under-production of capital, amounting to a capital-famine as capitalism fails to generalise its alleged benefits. That's what I mean about a 'race against time' - actually all that capitalism did was take a solution to an impasse (over-population, poor diet, social breakdown) which afflicted 18th c Europe, and apply it in the 20th c to the whole world, but in the process succeeded only in generalising the _problem_ (relative over-population) and generating the immiserated masses Marx predicted. Actually we still LIVE IN that 18th c crisis, because the 'solution' (use of non-renewables, machinery) is no solution at all, it only makes matters worse, and MEANWHILE the non-renewables are in shorter supply. As you have also pointed out, it is possible for oil to be 'cheap' and 'plentiful' while 75% of human still have to forage for wood and dung for fuel...
Mark