It seems to me that the crux of Harari’s argument is that all these things are connected because the people of the time believed that this would lead to progress. People were beginning to look toward the future as opposed to idolizing and romanticizing past accomplishments. Scientists and politicians wanted to find what was out there beyond their borders, Harari says that “European imperialists set out to distant shores in the hope of obtaining new knowledge along with new territories.” (Harari 284) So it seems that Europe hoped to gain knowledge to advance science, technology, and over all knowledge instead of just finding new lands with resources and peoples to exploit. In the beginning science and imperialism were intrinsically linked for these communities. Harari then attempts to link economics with this idea. Progress, research, expansion; they all need money and financial backing to happen. People began to believe in science and think about the future, so there was this newfound interest on thinking forward and attempting to better future generations. Of course, all this cost money. This is where the economic factor comes into play when talking about how these three things are connected. Scientific and imperial ideas can’t come to fruition without capital.
I think that this is a very valid argument to make. Harari make a point to mark when humans went from studying and idolizing the past to when people began to study what was around them and potentially look toward the future with Isaac Newton’s “The Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy.” (Harari 255) Humans began to push for science and empire because of the idea of progress. Without the shift from romanticizing the past to wanting to think about the future is when science and empire were thought of as viable uses of resources. I don’t think there would’ve ever been a need for science and empire, let alone a need for them to work together without the shift from focusing on the past to focusing on the future.