It's not to say that at all. Brenner's point is that SOMETHING happened in England around 1500 that was historically special. Feudal-type societies were the norm around the world, stable and long-lasting. Then the English did something--quite accidentally--that created an anomalous but very dynamic alternative that has, in 500 years, swept all before it. You know this. You are being deliberately perverse.
This is just such crap that I can't leave it alone I'm afraid. Stable and long lasting? No class conflict, no emergence of a bourgeoisie from within the womb of feudalism, no conflict of interest between merchants and aristocrats? No opposition to the role of the church ever? Have you ever heard of the absolutist state? If you have how do you explain its rise? The only kinds of thing that I can think of when you say the English did something quite accidentally are things like colonise America, India and half the rest of the world, import slaves into America, wipe out the indigenous inhabitants there, invent certain types of industrial machinery, create banks that could be used to accumulate the surplus from all these adventures. Wow what a series of accidents! It's crap like this that reminds me of why I turned to marxism in the first place. Tahir