Unlike the commercial revolution of the fifteenth century, the Industrial Revolution provided a new, more agreeable, option: development of an economic power base through intense application of the new factor of production--technology--that had appeared during the century. This option could minimize risk of conflict by creating new markets for new products based on new industrial technologies. The same factor that created the problem was paradoxically a solution: technology.
The fundamental power of the Industrial Revolution was not in the additional factor of production (technology) that it introduced. The critical feature of industrialization (as of commercialization) that could separate growth and conflict was innovation, the ability to create new knowledge and use it to achieve valuable purposes. This ambiguity and paradox have evolved into the still controversial issues of "guns or butter," "national competitiveness," "economic security," "managed trade," and "industrial policy." The evolution, however, has not much elucidated the fundamental relationships between growth and conflict. Nor has it exposed anything more effective than knowledge and human reason for managing either growth or conflict, and understanding the relationships between them.
"Then a slice of our neighbors' land will be wanted by us for pasture and tillage, and they will want a slice of ours if, like ourselves, they exceed the limit of necessity, and give themselves up to the unlimited accumulation of wealth?" "That, Socrates, will be inevitable." "And so we shall go to war, Glaucon. Shall we not?" "Most certainly," he replied. "Then, ... this much we may affirm, that now we have discovered war to be derived from causes [growth & accumulation of wealth] which are also the causes of almost all the evils in States, private as well as public." "Undoubtedly."
Plato, The Dialogues of Plato, trans. by J. Harward ( Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica, 1952), 318-319.