Page 1 of 14 12345678911 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 326
  1. #1
    Your local I.Q. Monitor
    Hugh Cow's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Last Online
    Today @ 01:13 PM
    Location
    Qld/Bangkok
    Posts
    2,354

    Colonialism.... a comparison

    In the past the great Imperial powers thrived and enforced colonialism through much of the undeveloped world and onto vast populations of indigenous peoples. Be it Britain France Portugal and Spain to name the largest, from the 15th century on,these major world powers divided up much of the world. In that time some thriving civilisations especially in the new world were wiped out or decimated and disposessed.
    Also in saying that there was some positives that some of these nations gained. This is not to justify what happened but one thing that does seem to stand out is the difference in development of these countries. On initial examination it would appear the countries that seemd most successful were countries "acquired" by Britain. As examples I would suggest the USA Canada,Australia, New Zealand. In Asia, Malaysia, Hong Kong And Singapore and in Africa, South Africa and Rhodesia pre independance.
    In comparison, "Portugese" Brazil blessed with huge natural resources, Venezuela and its oil plus many other Latin American countries variously colonised by the Portugese and Spanish have long laboured under corruption instability and poverty. One thing that was prevalent in the British model was giving parcels of land to many of the early colonists. The Spanish model tended to keep a more landless serfdom model more reminiscent of the middle ages in Europe. Although fairly acquainted with early Australian history I am not so aquainted with others. Without getting too deeply into the negatives of colonialism. What made the British model the most economically successful? Or do other TDers disagree and why?

  2. #2
    Mex
    Mex is offline
    I am in Jail

    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Last Online
    24-08-2018 @ 11:56 PM
    Posts
    539
    For a start the Poms built railway lines and developed infrastructure.

  3. #3
    Thailand Expat cyrille's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Online
    Today @ 05:22 PM
    Posts
    17,305
    I'd suggest the main reason why the countries colonised by Britain did rather better than those colonised by Portugal, and to a lesser extent Spain, was simply because as the pre-eminent maritime power Britain had 'first pick'. Thus, Britain picked the areas with most potential.

    While Brazil did have lavish resources, it was far more inaccessible than the US and Canada.

    An exception to this would be Australia, which was of course a penal colony and chosen simply because of its isolation and distance from the UK.

  4. #4
    ความรู้ลึกลับ HuangLao's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    สุโขทัย
    Posts
    6,801
    Undeveloped ​world....??

  5. #5
    Thailand Expat
    bsnub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    19,108
    The US kicked the British out before they had any influence on the development of the nation so the US technically should not be on your list.

  6. #6
    Days Work Done! Norton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    Roiet
    Posts
    30,441
    Quote Originally Posted by bsnub View Post
    The US kicked the British out before they had any influence on the development of the nation so the US technically should not be on your list.
    The overwhelming majority of the founding fathers were English and no doubt were influenced by British norms and customs. Their bitch was they had no representation in British parliament but were still taxed. Had George 3 granted the colonies representation history would be much different.

  7. #7
    Thailand Expat

    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Last Online
    26-03-2019 @ 11:28 AM
    Location
    across the street
    Posts
    4,109
    The Dutch had a pretty big empire, too limited in their thinking though. They let New Amsterdam go because it didn't have much use in the spice trade.

    A,slight change in their thinking would have changed things alot in present day.

  8. #8
    Thailand Expat
    bsnub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    19,108
    ^^ I am not disagreeing with that but my point was the US was not under colonial rule for very long when compared with the other nations mentioned in the OP. Most of its economic development happened 100+ years after the British had left.

  9. #9
    Days Work Done! Norton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    Roiet
    Posts
    30,441
    Quote Originally Posted by bsnub View Post
    Most of its economic development happened 100+ years after the British had left.
    Yes. Prior to independance the colonies existed to supply British consumers.

  10. #10
    Thailand Expat raycarey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    13,202
    Quote Originally Posted by Hugh Cow View Post
    Without getting too deeply into the negatives of colonialism.


  11. #11
    Thailand Expat

    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    15,837
    Quote Originally Posted by Norton View Post
    Had George 3 granted the colonies representation history would be much different.
    So it's Britain's fault for the US 2nd Amendment.

  12. #12
    Thailand Expat

    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Last Online
    07-11-2019 @ 01:52 PM
    Location
    I'm Dead
    Posts
    4,570
    Quote Originally Posted by raycarey View Post
    well, blame the Dutch, French, and Americans for the continuation of the slave trade.

    Then again we could always come into to the present day and blame the Africans, Arabs.

  13. #13
    Member
    harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    Today @ 05:23 PM
    Posts
    61,820
    Quote Originally Posted by bsnub View Post
    The US kicked the British out before they had any influence on the development of the nation so the US technically should not be on your list.
    The "US" were primarily Brits you silly old fool.


  14. #14
    Member
    harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    Today @ 05:23 PM
    Posts
    61,820
    Quote Originally Posted by Maanaam View Post
    So it's Britain's fault for the US 2nd Amendment.
    You're closer to the truth than you think.

  15. #15
    Member
    harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    Today @ 05:23 PM
    Posts
    61,820
    Quote Originally Posted by bsnub View Post
    ^^ I am not disagreeing with that but my point was the US was not under colonial rule for very long when compared with the other nations mentioned in the OP. Most of its economic development happened 100+ years after the British had left.
    Yes, the British had no influence on the development of the US.

    What was that language you're speaking there Snubby old boy?


  16. #16
    Thailand Expat

    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Last Online
    07-11-2019 @ 01:52 PM
    Location
    I'm Dead
    Posts
    4,570
    Quote Originally Posted by Maanaam View Post
    So it's Britain's fault for the US 2nd Amendment.
    Nah those pesky Spanish, Dutch and Frenchies armed the buggers

  17. #17
    ความรู้ลึกลับ HuangLao's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    สุโขทัย
    Posts
    6,801
    Oh, the grandeur purposeful practicalities of Civilising Missions........and the illusion that it chased.

  18. #18
    disturbance in the Turnip baldrick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Last Online
    Today @ 05:19 PM
    Location
    Heidleberg
    Posts
    21,743
    you missed the french - their colonies they are still fcuking up

  19. #19
    Thailand Expat
    wasabi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Last Online
    28-10-2019 @ 03:54 AM
    Location
    England
    Posts
    10,958
    Oih ^ what about the Germans, successful colonies, South West Africa and Tanganika .

  20. #20
    Member
    harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    Today @ 05:23 PM
    Posts
    61,820
    Don't forget Guam.

  21. #21
    Thailand Expat
    wasabi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Last Online
    28-10-2019 @ 03:54 AM
    Location
    England
    Posts
    10,958
    Don't forget Belguim Congo.

  22. #22
    Thailand Expat
    beerlaodrinker's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Online
    Today @ 04:13 PM
    Location
    vientiane
    Posts
    6,589
    The poms colonised australia. And back then all you needed to enter was a criminal record.

  23. #23
    Thailand Expat

    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Last Online
    07-11-2019 @ 01:52 PM
    Location
    I'm Dead
    Posts
    4,570
    The poms should have left all the crims, in the UK and did a mass exit to OZ.

  24. #24
    Mex
    Mex is offline
    I am in Jail

    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Last Online
    24-08-2018 @ 11:56 PM
    Posts
    539
    Quote Originally Posted by harrybarracuda View Post
    The "US" were primarily Brits you silly old fool.
    A relatively sane discussion and then this numpty kicks off.

  25. #25
    I am in Jail

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Online
    Today @ 10:32 AM
    Location
    Bungling in the jungle
    Posts
    9,153
    . Without getting too deeply into the negatives of colonialism. What made the British model the most economically successful? Or do other TDers disagree and why?
    Ask the Taiwanese and or the Chinese in Hong Kong.
    I do not profess to know anything about the checkered past but hell if I were them I'd have gave back India to.
    Sometimes it pays to know when you're in it too deep and way over your head.




    The fish

Page 1 of 14 12345678911 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •