One school of thought says absolutely nothing spurs growth except technological change. I wouldn't go that far but at the same time they're on to something. Ostry et al. found that redistribution has either a positive or at least a benign effect on growth, one of my favorite studies to drag out this year. Anyway, yes, that was one of the red flag phrases from the article. EDIT: some of your examples have to do with spending, which encourages growth, and which is also supposedly impacted by redistribution in various ways. Everything is a bit more unclear than Ostry makes it seem. I present only other people's opinions to avoid coming under fire...
I don't think it's limited to technological change, and technological change can certainly be the more proximate cause of growth that is itself caused by something like a war. Anyway, redistribution would theoretically churn out more money to more people to spend it. You can't have an economy if everybody's hoarding and not spending.