On the whole, the world is better because of the British Empire.

>>1461784
The opium war.
#Neverforget

>>1461799
The drugs were bad but it did force China to open up to the rest of the world which appears to have done them well in the long run.

>>1461799
The what war? I don't remember ever hearing about that.

It probably didn't happen.

File: 1445648909268.gif (3MB, 309x450px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 309x450px

Imagine a world where the British stayed out of the continental nonsense of the First and Second World Wars and just filled all dose markets that America filled instead.

>>1461820
It really is a shame we stopped being perfidious.

because we simply drew lines across the map to ccreate new countries and governorships, completely ignoring tribal alliances or regions. the net result of which has been the kurds fighting for thier autonomy in turkey and iraq, the creation of palestine and the resultant tensions of the israeli state, the arab-israeli war, the suez war, and so on. as a result od the instability from the destruction of the previously stable tribal borders held together under the Ottomans, we have ended up being the root cause of the major threat of the late 20th C and the rise of islamic fundamentalism.

>>1461784
India is worse off in just about every important way after British "cultural enrichment"

>>1461830
Absolute UTTER shit, what the fuck are you even suggesting

The fact that India as a nation even exists is because of the Brits. They unified the nation. They made it possible for them to be what they are today, instead of just a bunch of warring kingdoms.

>>1461835
This.

India is shit because they were so far behind the curve to begin with.

What the British did for them was nothing short of miraculous.

>>1461824
>we stopped being perfidious
we did?
when?

>>1461861
They wouldn't even have their tea industry if it wasn't for us and our hot brown drink fetish.

>>1461871
Yeah I don't know if we did. Look at Brexit.

>>1461835
>>1461835
muh unification! (which was actually enacted in detail by Vallabhbhai Patel btw, if Anglos had done it they would have fucked it up like they fuck everything up)

That makes up for plunging the entire country into poverty and purposefully destroying its trade (including such delightful things as breaking looms and fingers) so that it could serve as the cheap manufacturing base for the growing empire. That makes up for the famines created by British mismanagement where millions died. That makes up for being dragged into retarded wars it had no purpose being in. That makes up for going from the second largest economy in the world (22% of world GDP) to being a shithole and missing most if not all of industrialization because Brits again, were not interested in making labor and goods more expensive (fun fact: India's economy grew at 0 percent for almost 100 years under the Queen's "enrichment") That makes up for their retarded exit policy of drawing dumbass lines, displacing and killing millions.

India was a giant welfare pot for Britain so much so that colonialists would gladly fuck over actual Britain so keep India in their hands (Anglo perfidy is this disgusting)

What's next? muh sati? muh railways? muh English language?

>>1461902
>That makes up for going from the second largest economy in the world (22% of world GDP)

You really think meme estimates pre industrialisation are something to base an argument around? The Brits are the reason they had industrialisation in the first place. If Brits hadn't been there the Indian subcontinent would be a slightly less dark skinned sub-saharan Africa.

>>1461908
>If Brits hadn't been there the Indian subcontinent would be a slightly less dark skinned sub-saharan Africa.

Lol no Africa and India are completely different as fuck.

>>1461908
You're right. Nobody can industrialize without the some Anglo dude making sure you do it right.

There's absolutely no way that Indians themselves would do any worse than what Brits "did" for them (which was close to nothing)

>>1461928
Name a single country which industrialised without European influence.

>>1461902
They also did really fucked up things the Indian laborers abroad.

>>1461933
Japan

>>1461933
That's impossible because there's not a single country on the planet that escaped European influence in some way or the other

>>1461933
Japan and Sk.
Singapore.

>>1461908
>The Brits are the reason they had industrialisation in the first place.

No... it's the reason they didn't. They literally, intentionally suppressed industry.

>If Brits hadn't been there the Indian subcontinent would be a slightly less dark skinned sub-saharan Africa.

That's a pretty stupid thing to say considering the British colonized there too.

>>1461946
Singapore was colonized but all the stuff post independence and real development was done by Singapore.

Like even then like >>1461940 said no nation really 100% fits it because they will trade and make deals with Euros sooner or later.

>>1461953
The parts of Africa which the Brits did colonise are the best parts of the continent.

Anyway, give me a SINGLE fucking source on your claim that they "suppressed" industry. I'm waiting.

>>1461955
Singapore would not be relevant if not for the colonial influence. See also: Hong Kong.

>>1461937
False. Britain, France, and the US all helped to industrialise Japan.

>>1461961
>The parts of Africa which the Brits did colonise are the best parts of the continent.

Rwanda and Zimbabwe.

>>1461970
Rwanda was a German colony.

Zimbabwe is a shithole, but British Rhodesia was god-tier.

>>1461978
>Rwanda was a German colony.

Which later wound up administrated by the British.

>Zimbabwe is a shithole, but British Rhodesia was god-tier.

That's a moved goalpost. You said ARE the best parts of the continent, not were.

>>1461961
Not because of Britain solely though.
All the good and bad shit in post colonial Africa was more cold war and resource boom riding. The policies in the all African Colonies were awful as fuck though from a policy point of view.

>>1461984
The Germans had already fucked it by then

Zimbabwe is still better than a lot of places in Africa.

>>1461984
I didn't. Someone else did.

But that proves the point even more - British rule stabilises and develops shittier civilisations.

>>1461967
But they didn't colonize it. The original argument was that the British colonizing India was what allowed India to industrialize, but Japan was perfectly capable of industrialization without being colonized.

>>1461991
>The Germans had already fucked it by then

Britain did nothing to unfuck it and in fact exacerbated the already existing problems.

>Zimbabwe is still better than a lot of places in Africa.

Another moved goalpost. Being better than some places is not the same as being the best parts of the continent.

>>1461994
> Japan was perfectly capable of industrialization without being colonized
That implies Japan 'self-industrialised'; it didn't.

>>1461984
British Rhodesia was still pretty shit for the majority Black population living and development wise (let's tie voting with wealth and education and extremely underfunded the black education and bar blacks from attending white schools and dump the financial burden on parents and missionaires)

>>1461998
>Being better than some places is not the same as being the best parts of the continent.

You're the cunt with the wheely goals, the only countries that it's not better than are the other anglo colonial ones.

>>1461998
The point is that being the crappier of British colonies is still better than the best of, say, Spanish or Portuguese.

>>1461998
In Eritrea the Brits gypsy robbed everything the Italians built that wasn't bolted to the ground and took it after there short 10 year temp rule of the place was over.

>>1462003
>You're the cunt with the wheely goals, the only countries that it's not better than are the other anglo colonial ones.

No, you're the one who set the fucking standard. Zimbabwe is a shithole with some serious problems, and there are non-Anglo colony countries that are better than it.

God fucking damn, I'll never understand 4chan and their adamant refusal to ever admit any fault on the part of things they like. I think Britain was an important empire that set the tone of modern economics and ultimately established the modern world as we know it, I just don't think they're fucking perfect.

>>1462014
Damn you're salty, what the fuck did Brits do to you?

>>1462000
>> Japan was perfectly capable of industrialization without being colonized
>That implies Japan 'self-industrialised'; it didn't.
It doesn't imply jack shit. Japan industrialized without being colonized, which means that being colonized by an industrialized nation is factually not a prerequisite for industrialization, which means that India might have industrialized without the British colonizing it which is what this discussion was about in the first place.

>>1462003
A lot of African non brit former colonies are better then Zimmy

>>1462017
Nothing. I'm a resident of a British colony of English ancestry, I like the British Empire, and I like its history, I just don't think it was perfect.

>>1462024
I bet you voted remain

File: tumblr_ndga9aRyIs1qgnz5xo1_1280.jpg (105KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 640x640px

>>1461784
Too cannabilistically (kabalistically) cancerous of its own innards.

>>1462058
The big problems were gonna come up sooner or later and maybe it happening sooner is better then later as in right now.

>>1461784
The idiotic partitioning of the middle east

>>1461984
Hmm, I think he meant to say that the best parts of continent are those that were colonised by the british.
Let A be the set of places that were colonised by the british, let B be the set of the best parts of the continent. B is a subset of A.

On a random note is there a reason for the phenomenon of British people seemingly being everywhere in the world?

It's like you can't go anywhere on earth without bumping into somebody from Britain.

>>1462094

That's the fault of the French, the Brits wanted an Arab homeland.

>>1462112
Relatively wealthy, legal right to vacations, innate wanderlust.

It's the same for Aussies and Kiwis. Everywhere.

>>1462121
Nobody knows what the hell you people wanted and what you promised to which parties

>>1461784

I think the world would have been better off if free trade dominated. The British Empire was a drain on free trade, they acted deliberately to stifle it.

>>1461784
Agreed
Compare former english colonies to spanish ones
Can you imagine if Spain stayed the dominant power?
>Make Earth Mexico Again

>>1461784
I S R A E L

>>1462014
>God fucking damn, I'll never understand 4chan and their adamant refusal to ever admit any fault on the part of things they like.

It's literally autism. Not even memeing.

>>1462237
Is that also why they can't seem to handle ambiguity, uncertainty, nuance, or any answer that can be described as "good enough but not perfect?"

>>1462121
Good thing they failed, then, because Pan-Arabism is fucking stupid.

>>1461825
Are you attempting to argue that all the social, political and economic advancements made by the British empire where not worth some ignorant boarder lines in Africa and the middle East? Something that was done by nearly every power involved in African colonisation.

Allow me to recite a few facts for you, but before you spout your typical 'go back /pol/tard' spiel whenever your sensibilities are challenged, I am merely explaining a set of inevitable truths. Imperialism in the modern sense is now a 'bad thing' and although I agree that letting these countries have their 'little national projects' was necessary, it's for other reasons than giving them silly notions of self sustainability. In reality it is now that we can look back pointing and laughing 'I told you so'. It's important to see their multiple attempts over the century fail to show that we were in the right. There was nothing bad about Imperialism, not only was it an aide to them, but they can't even make it with the handicaps we've left them.

Anyway, here are some facts and no they are not opinions, they have been proven both by actions/reactions and time.

It's not racist to state that if Africa was inhabited only by white Europeans that over the span of half a century most of the continent would be as efficient and developed as Europe itself. Fact.

Black people had a head start with infrastructure, technology and governance, were granted their independence and the situation explains itself. They are a ruinous people. Fact.

Look at South Africa under the Boer/Brits. It is possible to have developed, functioning civilisation in Africa. North Africa under the Arabs to a lesser extent but still leagues ahead of Central Africa. Fact.

So considering this, how can it be racist to claim that indigenous Africans aren't better under colonial rule, like a child needing a parent. That they are wasted on a rich continent. That the world would be no worse off without them.

It's harsh and unethical to believe this, but is it not fact? It is all factual and true.

Keep in mind I'm not saying this from a racist standpoint, it's a realistic one. There is a problem, you identify the cause. Blacks are the problem of themselves, and unfortunately everyone else too.

>>1462348
>Lol every difference between countries is due to race and race alone
>Culture? What the fuck is that shit I literally have never heard of it.
Literally kill yourself.

File: 1452113858751.jpg (979KB, 1022x2413px) Image search: [Google]

979KB, 1022x2413px

>>1462358

That's not how you use the word 'literally' and I'm failing to see you form any basis of an argument.

Regardless I will pick apart your two points.

>Race
Yes, there is a difference between indigenous Europeans and Africans.
>Culture
''''''''''''''''''african''''''''''''''' culture. Find the pointy end of a fine, piss soaked African spear, friend.

>>146238
Every separate populous should be left to their own devices and be fully autonomous.

End of discussion.

>>1462384
dude that mudchurch or whatever it is IS pretty cool. it's no acropolis or st peter's but still neato, for them.

also that interior of st peter's was not made in 126AD. that shit was all rebuilt during the renaissance (but at least they had one amirite)

File: 1469068695817.jpg (74KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 640x480px

>>1462020
>Japan industrialized without being colonized.
>What was the Meiji period?

We didn't need to colonize them, it's like they did it themselves by absorbing the culture of Europe, destroying their self identity and tradition.

With every shipment that got unloaded on Japanese docks, they turned further away from themselves into a new identity.

When you think about it, they turned out more 'colonized' in a sense than any nation we actually physically colonized. How hilarious is that!

>>1462222
If the spaniards keep mixing with locals it would probably made non white races at least %25 european, their take on the colonies economy was to make them rich, because they saw them as being part of spain and not some hellhole wich only purpose is to steal it's resources. Plus muslims would have been converted to catholicism.

Perfidious Albion only cares for himself, Spaniards under the Habsburgs were nice with non-whites.

>>1462403

By that description, every European country also "colonized itself."

>>1462428

On a scale from 1-to-10 how dense do you think you are being tonight? Stay tuned for the results after this commercial break.

>>1462403
>Japan industrialized without being colonized
>lol that doesn't count because they colonized themselves XD

>>1462428
Not necessarily, Western neighbors always had synergistic cultures.

Japan is a stark contrast as they are not only so far away, completely untainted and previously isolationist.

It's not like England and Italy self-colonized, they were already adapted to Westernised culture and whatever advancements feed through Europe on the whole.

Again with Japan it was instantaneous and although it wasn't colonized physically, it's growth during that period surpassed any other physical colonization in history.

I'm an Irish guy.

I hate Unionists, and I hate pretentious British people.

Ireland was always irrelevant. Britain, as an Empire, is a fascinating fucking subject and what they accomplished is incredible.

Ireland's history really isn't all that interesting-unless you're irish-aside from a few bits and pieces of interesting events, but none are really that relevant.

Hating Anglos is entirely okay and justified.
Denying them of their legacy is not, regardless of how soon the UK will fester and die.

>>1462428

By... moving resources from their own country into their own country?

File: noargument.jpg (458KB, 1200x1700px) Image search: [Google]

458KB, 1200x1700px

>>1462348

Is anyone else going to step up to the plate and confront this? I'm assuming everyone naturally agrees with it at this rate.

>>1462185
What on earth are you talking about? Free trade was like a religion for Britain during the time of the empire, they were obsessed with it.

>>1462496

Show the progression in architecture in England between 2000 bc and 1 ad.

>>1462403

Embracing the benefits of western civilization doesn't mean you're destroying your identity outright.

Japan didn't identify as backwards savages who didn't understand technology, they saw the great things that the Western Europeans were doing and wanted in on it for their own benefit. To me I admire that they managed to do it on their own terms rather than being dragged kicking and screaming like a lot of other places.

File: 1463053406084.png (17KB, 367x461px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 367x461px

>>1462510

>>1462510

Do the same for Central Africa.

>>1462348
if you had done literally any cursory reading on the subject and come to a well-informed and logical conclusion, your post would be wildly different to what it is now. fact

The western world way be better because of the British empire, but certainly not the world.

>>1462507

Erm... That's what they /said/, but they did deliberately collapse the textile industry in India to support British industry, so... they weren't in favour of free trade. Just trade that benefits Britain.

>>1462518

It would have progressed at about the same rate.

European development picked up as they increased in population density and traded with the rest of Eurasia.

>>1462384
wow whites had glass in 126 ad?

>>1462519

I'm sure you've done said reading yourself?

Please share your knowledge with us all, I eagerly anticipate your findings.

>>1462403
>destroying their self identity and tradition.

that isn't true at all. shinto became the state religion and was taught as history

>>1462528
of course you would want your opinions to be spoon-fed to you

>>1462525

>It would have progressed at about the same rate.

I didn't know Central African was a part of the Bronze age?
>ohwaititwasn't.jpg

>>1462516
Does being forced to open your borders literally at gunpoint not count as "kicking and screaming"?

>>1462348
so mister wise /pol/ man, what is it exactly about Africans that make them so inferior to Europeans? what factors cause these "factual" and defiantly not reductive points.

>>1462525
That's a case of de-industrialisation, not trade restriction. The two are related but wholly separate

>>1462545

Between 2000 bc and 1 ad?

That's when Africa entered the iron age. As you'll know, there was no significant bronze age in sub-Saharan Africa, just an iron age.

>>1462537

I don't need to be spoon fed nonsense, I'm telling you the time tested facts that indigenous Africans are inept, they had a head start with everything they needed to catch up to us and it devolved in their hands.

It isn't outside influences, it isn't the white mans fault. Everything that was left to them turned to ruins, it's the nature of these people.

I believe the only way to actually fix this migrant crisis is to reestablish Colonial rule and forcefully repair that continent.

Because as much as you may hate the fact that in your heart of hearts you know this to be true, I promise you there are millions of Africans who actually want that to happen.

They know they fucked up yet still they can't do anything for themselves that isn't inefficient, broken, corrupt or shit in the 21st century.

>>1462566

Both examples of attacking free trade for the profit of one set of economic actors.

>>1462568

Then you believe that Africa has not, in fact, been sending wealth, on net, to the developed world over the last fifty years?

You are wrong. Compound interest destroys Africa. That's leaving aside all the 'aid' that is just put on the tab, very little charity actually gets into that continent.

>>1462384
isn't that African building the university of Timbuktu? a building constructed during the golden days of the Timbuktu state prior to the 12th century?

>>1462348
>Namibia's population is 8% white
>Botswana's population is 3% white
>Total population of both countries is roughly the same
>Botswana still has a higher HDI, GDP and PPP than Namibia
Explain this

>>1462592

You'd also have to look at how well off whites were compared to blacks in these countries. Could be that Namibia's white population are wealthier than Botswana's white population.

>>1462596
not an argument

>>1462348
>africans have different culture
>expect them to mimic our way of life
>hurr they are inferior
>its all because they are black

You're fucking retarded, seriously.

>>1462600

Nope, it's a statement implying a question.

Nicely spotted, anon.

>>1462547

I'm no scientist, I like to believe in a world where skin colour is the only difference between us, but that is not the truth.

Looking over the thousands of years of written history to modern day experiences, there is a narrative that is not biased, not staged. It shows people for who they are with and without the personality defining features. There is always an exception and a generalization, but over the span of it all you can get a rough idea of the persistent qualities in the groups of humans that exist on this earth.

I don't want to throw out obvious racial stereotypes but I won't lie in saying that is the mainstay, we're not talking about the niggas on the block slinging rock.

We're talking about indigenous Africans, specifically in the central parts of Africa. What can be said about them that we can't say about ourselves? Do they not want the same things as us? Surely they do. Do they not want the future we have built for ourselves? Who doesn't.

But the reality is why are we the ones who achieved it and not they? Even with our 'help' why is it that they are still stuck where they are?

It is who they are, it is banality of their condition. They do not look to the future, they live in the present. They do not seem to have the same emotional drives as we, their empathy is on a different level. They are a fierce, physically capable people who are definitely more aggressive in their natural behaviors than us. A metaphorical example of comparison is we're thinky they're fighty.

They're instinctual predispositions have shaped them into the athletic hulks they are, whereas our own ones have obviously yielded different results, more intellectual pursuits you could say.

You see a lot less of this in mixed breeds however, which you could say is the breeding of their condition out and the reduction of our own.

>>1462613

But, then why did the African continent develop up until the point it was colonized; why has it continued to change since then?

>>1462576

This isn't about charity, or the governments who bleed their people dry and send it over as a show of independence and maturity. Those things don't change who they are at the core.

And I'm not talking about the Arabic North or the semi-colonized South.

I'm talking about the 'nations' that so desperately wanted independence, for reasons as self destructive as the outcome. Imperialism isn't to blame, whitey isn't to blame. They themselves, the ones in power, the ones who want power to do the same thing again and again.

They are a desperate people who live in a perpetual downward spiral, given the chance they would repeat it all over again because that's what they are, it's a symptom of their own condition.

>>1462613
But the reality is why are we the ones who achieved it and not they?

Because we have different histories and realities. I think their intelligence is not questioned, africans can succed in yurop and murrica where they grow up in the same culture than whites. Why isnt it more common? Biology has nothing to do with that.

>>1462629

Because they are told to pay back money that nobody voted to take in the first place, that nobody got in the end.

If the ones in power are to blame, then the people who supported their bid for power are also to blame?

If the ones in power enact massive taxes to pay for the aid they received in conquering the country, this is entirely on them, and not on the people who demand they pay the money back?

>>1462222
Spanish colonies were all rich as fuck, and didn't turn to shit until the early 20th century

>>1462610
A question unrelated to the discussion at hand. It's changing the subject.

>>1462643

About the time when they were beginning to be incorporated into the American economy?

>>1462568
your posts are all rhetoric and no substance, and it's not even good rhetoric at that

>>1462644

If you wanted to find out why the two countries in question have different outcomes, knowing how much of the wealth in each country is controlled by whites and blacks is relevant, is it not?

>>1462635

We will never be able to live in a sandbox parallel reality where we get to see indigenous Africans exist in Europe by themselves. Until then we can only speculate.

However a good example as I mention is the differences between North, Central and South Africa.

South Africa, whilst still being fairly 'colonized' by whites both historically Boers and Brits, is currently the shining example of what could be achieved in Africa. You can say it's the best, currently top dog etc. Followed by North Africa, which is inhabited primarily by Arabs. Still infinitely higher than Central Africa in terms of development and prosperity.

And in the middle is the fairly untouched part, which is allocated to the blacks themselves. Look where it is in comparison, that there is as close as you will get to the reality of achievement.

If we could do a continent swap and start from blank, in half a century honestly do you think anything would be any different? Europe would be the new Africa, and Africa would be the new Europe.

>>1462613
>i'm proud of the fact that i'm on a history board without any concrete knowledge of history, just ideas i got about how the world works due to looking at its current condition with a number of preconceived biases. i expect to be taken as seriously by others as much as i take myself seriously

>>1462613
>They're instinctual predispositions have shaped them into the athletic hulks they are, whereas our own ones have obviously yielded different results, more intellectual pursuits you could say.

well the majority of african-american or arfo-europeans are generally more athletic due to breeding programs brought on by the slave trade. other blacks, migrants from africa with no slave history generally have a more athletic lineage due to generations of work in harsh territory. it is not an biological factor that only Africans can obtain.

inherit European intelligence is also not true. considering you can teach a black person as much as a white person. differences in educating black children in the USA or Europe is due to cultural factors and depending on the location, standard of teaching.

>We're talking about indigenous Africans, specifically in the central parts of Africa. What can be said about them that we can't say about ourselves? Do they not want the same things as us? Surely they do. Do they not want the future we have built for ourselves? Who doesn't.

this is coming from a western cultural standpoint. cultural, historical and environmental differences cause people to want different things. you can see that in places like iran, westernisation occurred then was immediately thrown out.

>But the reality is why are we the ones who achieved it and not they? Even with our 'help' why is it that they are still stuck where they are?

most of what we deem as helping has hurt the countries further. Rhodesia is the biggest example of that. mughabe, a person supported by the west was put in power and he immediately fucked it all up. "aid" is constantly given to Africa in the form of hospitals, schools and food. all of which cannot induce economic growth. we should be providing infrastructure and industry.

>>1462649

What are you even on about? I don't have any sources, my apologies.

I'm not stating written history, I'm stating what could be perceived as racist anecdotes to those who want to bury their head in the sand.

It's not news friend, we're just hitting a point where it's painfully obvious to see that our 'independence' projects all have varying results. India seems to have got on rather well, Africa not so?

Why is it that what we left the Indians was put to use yet the Africans not? Could it be a societal, cultural or instinctual thing? Sorry I don't have a sources for that.

>>1462670

This is something I've been conflicted with in my original statement.

If you put both indigenous Europeans and Africans through the same education from a young age do they both yield the same results?

I believe to an extent it will, how it is put to use is up for debate however. Even so, leaving Africa to educate its own is not doing the job, even those who get an education still have to contend with the state of their country and their people.

But the same education for them doesn't suddenly isolate them from themselves, their culture and their homogeneous identity. Aside from trying to escape the continent, if they had to stay put what would they do? This is all speculation, but do you not think the cycle would repeat itself? They, given their superior education, put it to use either through politics or business? If they choose politics, do you think they would repeal the corrupt behavior that has gone on since independence? If they choose business do you think they will use it to stimulate their own economy or outsource and help themselves?

I'm not saying those motivations don't exist within us Europeans, but for whatever reason they are not as apparent and all encompassing.

Like I said before, I think the best thing for them would be a reinstatement of Imperialism. Anyone who tries to make a difference there is going up against insurmountable odds, and everything done to keep most of the continent running is like filling a barrel riddled with holes.

>>1462708
>Even so, leaving Africa to educate its own is not doing the job, even those who get an education still have to contend with the state of their country and their people.

i agree. Africa currently is not doing a good job at educating its population however this again isn't directly the fault of the biology of Africans but rather various socio-economic problems that plague the continent. these issues are not unique to Africa but do exist mostly in Africa.

the two biggest things that need to happen in africa prior to education and medical reform are nationalism and industrialisation. without infrastructure and industry the economy cannot grow and thus the poverty situation will remain the same. you need money for schools and medicine. Africans currently are still very tribal in the fact that they put their local communities before their nation. a positive national narrative and support for ones nation will increase public interest in government, security and culture, hopefully inducing positive change.

>But the same education for them doesn't suddenly isolate them from themselves, their culture and their homogeneous identity.

it doesn't necessarily have to isolate them. just because curtain cultural and social factors interfere with education or progression, this doesn't mean either of these things wont happen. the social and cultural factors will change with education, maybe not immediately but change will come. this can be seen just as much in Europe. social and cultural change occurred to suit education levels and economic stimuli of the time. a blanket removal of ones culture will negatively effect them in the long run. a look at the cultural stagnation in soviet Russia demonstrates the lack of social and cultural progression we see in the rest of the western world.

>>1462763
>cont.
>Aside from trying to escape the continent, if they had to stay put what would they do? This is all speculation, but do you not think the cycle would repeat itself? They, given their superior education, put it to use either through politics or business? If they choose politics, do you think they would repeal the corrupt behavior that has gone on since independence? If they choose business do you think they will use it to stimulate their own economy or outsource and help themselves?

again, this is pure speculation however what i would like to see with a more well-educated populous would be private business and industrial growth leading to further economic improvements and potential foreign investment in such projects. this will provide long term economic stimulus and a boost in GDP. this could see the governments, corrupt as they may be, investing in infrastructure to further feed said businesses and further increase the rate of economic growth and growth of private business. this would provide essential jobs and financial security to those who had previously been in poverty allowing their children to attend school rather than work. this would further increase the educated population leading hopefully to a form of limited nationalism, not jingoism but a belief in ones nation. this could induce immediate government reform or mass boycotting and strikes which at this point would have an effect on the government as it would effect the increased GDP. essentially giving more power to the people due to their value in a industrialised economy which would bring in more democratic processes. eventually this nationalism could lead to democracy, higher security standards and economic modernisation. with all of these would come social and cultural progress with less Ephesians on the community and greater Ephesians on the nation, social liberalisation and the induction of an Africanised version of western individual ideals. again just my ideal scenario

>>1461830
angry poo detected
go shit on your street that we built for you

>>1461825

Arabs will fight each other whatever happens.

Argument invalid.

File: 1446672720727.jpg (72KB, 520x853px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 520x853px

>>1462315
Are you saying that colonization was a good thing?

>>1461813
Not really. China's opening to the world' was spearheaded by Deng and Jiang which was after a period of insularity by Mao. The initial 'opening to the world' just caused a fuck tonne of grief and a concentration of wealth in oligarchs which resulted in interprovincial war and mismanagement during the Sino-Japanese war to the extent people started endorsing Mao's ideas - someone completely disassociated with the existing establishment.

>>1461830
Just to play devils advocate, a lot of Indian intellectuals IN India who are ethnically Indian are ambivalent and even feel warm towards Britain. Why's that

>>1461946
>Japan
>Without European Influnence

Fucking weeb thinking Japan was some strong independent island but nasty gaijin ruined it.

Without the USA, France and Britain, Japan would of had nothing to base its military, Government, factories and technology off. Not to mention that, even before that, it was effectively a colony as it gave ups land and trade to the westerners through treaty ports

>>1461784

Has anyone got that webm/link/name of the video where a chinese engineer is berating an african man for how underdevloped Africa is? He's saying something about infacstructure being left for them and it being destroyed.

>>1463855

Terrible spelling and diction, my fat thumbs can't into iphone.

>>1462403
That's fucking stupid logic. Why is the prerogative of 'Westernisation' given to Europe and nobody else? Yes, Japan did adapt 'European' customs of statesmanship but it's not like Europe unanimously agreed to invent 'Western ways of glory'. Some European countries did jack shit, others adapted methods off preexisting countries which adapted ideas off countries before that. Lumping them together into one idea that is 'Western' is pretty anachronistic and has no intellectual basis

>>1461784
>On the whole, the world is better because of the WW1.
>On the whole, the world is better because of the WW2.

>>1463858
SJW fuck off.

>>1463864
Not an argument

In a similar vain I see 'SJW'-like behaviour on part of the alt-right much more than I do from the general left at all on both the Internet (on obviously not only this website, but also youtube, Facebook and various other interest forums) but also in real life

>>1463858
You're talking out your arse, what do you mean the "perogative of westernisation", you'rw chatting shit. Westernisation refers to the process of developing systems of governemt, economy or military in order to match the major western powers i.e Britain, France, the USA etc.

So what if other European powers tried it, European does not equal western as The Balkans are culturally not western, they are eastern orthodox, and yet they are European. The point is Japan gave up its sovereignty through treaty ports and aspects of cultre and government in order to adopt western ideas and technology because they a backwards nation that desperately fucking needed it

>>1463892
>Balkans are culturally not western, they are eastern orthodox

You know fuck all about both the Balkans and Japan. Japan never gave up sovereignty or elements of its culture in any lasting or permanent way. Even the famous sword confiscations didn't change the fact samurai families remained Japan's military elite up to 1945. Japan Westernised because they wanted to protect their sovereignty and they succeeded spectacularly. Don't forget Japan negotiated with The British Empire on equal terms before 1900.

>>1461784
>muh benevolent oppressor

same case can be made for every other oppressor really

>>1461861
>so far behind the curve
do you have any proof of that whatsover you crooked tooth imbecile? Britain would have remained a second rate power if it were not for the colonization and exploitation of India, using it's vast resources to increase it's economic output.
>But we built railways!
In england, and shipped them over to India instead of making the necessary factories there, which had the surprising result of indian railway tracks that were 5 kinds of fucked up because the british had 5 railway boards each with their own specifications. Most of the railway expansion in India was hobbled because successive governments had to balance modernizing the railway with providing affordable mass transit.

The brits did jack shit in modernizing india, and had several laws that stifled industrial output and economic growth, not to mention the entire partition fiasco.

>>1463851
because it makes them feel superior. Those indian intellectuals were also the ones that send their kids to foreign hign schools with the plan of becoming a permanent resident.

>>1461784
The only good thing the British Empire ever gave the world was the United States

>>1461784
WTF, british empire colonized countries to steal its wealths, also it was the reason why vast countries and nations devided to smaller countries which fucked things up such as the middle east now everybody fighting each other there when they were one vast nation

>>1462456
Ireland is British clay though.

Jews have the highest IQ, followed by East Asians, then Whites, then Hispanics, then niggers.

If America were only black people it would only be marginally better than Africa within a hundred years, due to the fact that most blacks in the States are partly white.

Once you see the truth in race and IQ you cannot unsee it. I am white and acknowledge that East Asians and Jews, specifically Ashkenazi Jews, will blow the average white out of the water.

I think the solution to the problems in Africa is to inject their women with White sperm to raise the IQ up over the course of a few generations.

>>1463993
Come on this board's standard for bait has really dropped

Genetic solutions are the only way to solve the issues in Africa. If you don't have a brain your could give each person there a million dollars and it wouldn't do anything.

>>1461799
Jews got the British to fight the opium war because the Chinese protested Jew David Sassoon's shipping tons of Opium into china and sucking out the wealth for nothing

>>1461825

Wrong. The Kurds and Armenians were promised areas but the Turks blocked that effort. In Iraq a similar problem happened; from the moment Britain was forced to hand over power the Kurds were discriminated against by the Arabs. So the true cause is clearly decolonization besides Arab and Turkish nationalism.

>>1462576
>Compound interest destroys Africa.

Unlikely. African countries under the Soviet hegemony were not particularly better off.

File: andyetifeelnothing.jpg (101KB, 692x960px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 692x960px

>>1461825
>Kill almost as many people using food control in India as the TEUTONS in the holocaust
>Churchill starts razzing Gandi about it
>plague was "merrily" culling the population

And nobody cares or remembers. Why?

File: 1448161228620s.jpg (3KB, 83x125px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 83x125px

>>1461784
That is a Niall ferguson claim. He is a piece of shit neoliberal propoganda chief.

File: 741px-BoerWarVictoryParade,BarringtonSt.HalifaxNovaScotiabyNotmanStudioNSARMNo1983-310Neg5691.jpg (105KB, 741x600px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 741x600px

This is colonialiam:

Some fuckin barbarian breaks into to your house and decides to live there. He fuck your wife, your kids and maybe you. He takes all your best shit and sends it back to his home. He makes you take care of the house he has stolen. He charges you taxes as a former of protection money.

Eventually he leaves but not before he has throughly humiliated your culture through violence and probably left many many collaborating little shit's in control of the country.

>>1464274
Leaving you with healthcare, industry, stability, and much higher living standards.

Oh no.

>>1464221
because the opium wars was literally the shoah
everything else was gravy.

You know the world is fucked when people take the opium war to the be the worst thing the BEIC ever did.

>>1464288
>healthcare
oh yeah, a few jesuit hospitals surely help the entire country.
>stability
because africa is such a stable continent
>higher living standard
for a tiny minority of people who collaborate with the colonialists
>industry
that is located in the mother country, not the colony.

>>1464293
A lot more hospitals than the literally nothing before.

Nice job assuming that every colonial empire left things in the same way, too. Colonies were as good as the people who colonised.

>>1464299
>colonies were as good as the people who were colonized
oh yeah, sure all the extraction of wealth and forced famines were all the fault of the people, not the assholes who were making farmers grow high nutrient demanding crops for years on end leading to bad harvests.

fucking faggot. Bet you fell for the raj memes as well.

>>1463845

Colonization was the best thing that could have ever happened to these backwards shitholes.

Colonization is responsible for their advancements, no matter how minimal (Africa) or great (India).

Imperialistic motives weren't altruistic, but the impact they had was still for the better.

We even let everyone have their countries back in the end and left them the tools and guidance they needed to catch up to us, although many still haven't and probably won't as a symptom of their own ignorance.

>>1464687
>colonialization is responsible for india being great
this is what anglos tell themselves to feel relevant now?

File: 1464275663729.jpg (1MB, 1045x3515px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1045x3515px

>>1463855
>>1463857

I know what you're on about, I only have this modified version though.

>>1461784
>Give me one reason the british empire was bad
>Not that one it doesnt count because people say it a lot

File: 1468270766804.jpg (95KB, 948x676px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 948x676px

>There are people in this thread who think 'Imperialism' was bad.

File: 1466091773552.webm (2MB, 662x480px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 662x480px

>>1464691

We couldn't breed out the street shitting, but if you're a liberal cuckold you should at least be happy that we helped eradicate the caste system.

In contrast to Africa, all the things we left them they put to good use which is why they are where they are and most of Africa is not.

Prove me wrong, Pajeet.

>>1461784
>Win WW2
>Lose empire

>>1464747
>we helped eradicate the caste system
oh yeah, because there is no caste system in india anymore. The brits were ambivalent towards the caste system and grassroots level social reformers like gandhi helped deal with the caste system in india. Of course post independence it is a different story.

But you will post an ebin meme image and say that indians shit on the street, so anglo rule would have been better.

>in contrast to africa
ah so the british were responsible for india's infrastructure? I don't recall any british colonial government starting the green revolution in India, or the white revolution or the growth of southern india.
Then why is it that independent india was in such shambles and it took nearly the next 50 years before india was able to be competitive enough in the world market to actually open it's markets?


>you are a liberal cuckold
says the brexit voter who fucked his country with a farage dildo because some retard wanted to lash out. Enjoy the next batch of useless punjabi fucktards who come from India or pakistan.

File: 1414642308181.png (618KB, 500x591px) Image search: [Google]

618KB, 500x591px

>>1462384
>snownigger and barbarian claim to be "we wuz roma n shit"
>roma
>white

>>1464703

Cheers Anon, i'll get digging.

>>1464221
How did they control the food, exactly? Was there some kind of rationing system?

>>1464703

Got it! Empire of Dust on youtube.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0C4_88ub_M&nohtml5=False

>>1465034


1:12:47 for you lazy anons to watch the verbal beatdown.

If the british let their former colonies organize themselves Africa might have been a decent place
instead they drew some lines by a ruler and here we are

>>1461825
le ebin "everything wrong with the middle east is because of sykes picot" meme. Absolutely eric.

>>1465033
>complex system of multiple crops grown in fields throughout the year.
>"lol no, you gotta make da indigo and the opium all year round instead."
>suddenly, starvation and famine

>>1463916
1900 is still after the Meiji you dip.
The Meiji in which they adopted western European styles of governance, dress, military organization, shall I continue? Hell they practically went full krautaboo in their imitation of the German state.

If that isn't "westernization" then what the fuck is? If I imitate the traditional Chinese/Vietnamese/Korean way of doing things, you can say I have undergone "sinification", you won't see me getting butthurt about terminology.

File: 1469185280227.jpg (92KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 500x375px

>>1464778

Calm yourself, Imperialism always leaves a hole where it once was, what is important is how the affected nation develops from being handed the reigns suddenly.

India was in the shit (literally and figuratively kek) but given the tools and left the foundations they eventually caught up.

Do you think if Britain hadn't Imperialised India that they would even have been able to get to the stage where they started their own agricultural and industrial revolutions? No, they wouldn't.

That is what I'm saying, what is Africas excuse? You still haven't been able to provide one.

>>1465068
>implying they wouldn't have turned into war mongering land grabbers.

It's almost like we prevented that to some extent, huh really makes you think.

>>1464274
Well, I'll just inform the Singaporeans of that. Oh wait.

>>1464221
They did the exact same thing in Ireland and also starved innocent Boers to death in concentration camps. During WW1 they also starved the people of Germany with blockades. Anglos seem to have an obsession with starving others.

File: picmonkey collage_1442397499.jpg (42KB, 700x370px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 700x370px

>>1465264

If I recall correctly, it was the paddys who preferred to go without food not the other way around.

>>1465237
I am not talking about africa at all.
>if britain hadn't
oh yeah, lets speculate 300+ years of indian history right from scratch. I am sure you have done your homework and come up with a comprehensive way in which india would have remained backward. So post it.

Britain didn't provide the tools to the indian people , they left india as one of the poorest places on earth. the indian people picked themselves up from that and had their industrial revolutions in a very socialist manner.

File: hurrahboys360 copy.jpg (580KB, 400x1191px) Image search: [Google]

580KB, 400x1191px

>>1464274

That photo is in Canada.

>>1465258
I will be sure to inform the indians of that.
Oh wait.

>>1465049

I love how stubborn and backwards they are. A total flat refusal to advance and try and undercut and lie at every turn.

They deserve everything they get.

File: ayyhungryaf.jpg (142KB, 604x592px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 604x592px

>>1465406

This is what I want these ignorant liberals to understand.

What can you do with these people? Nothing, that's what.

They were better under Colonial leadership, I think that is where we will need to return to in the future. Rebuild their shit holes for them hoping that they comply in exchange.

They now know what happens without us, they can't cry for independence again knowing that.

In time, after their country is functioning to the smallest villages and constitutional laws reign instead of jungle vigilantism, once corruption has been wrung out and they have been coached and eased into running the lower levels of their own country, hopefully under this watchful eye and supervision their base instinct to cheat, steal and chimp out will be eradicated.

>>1462537
>i have arguments and proofs but i won't share them with you
Top kek, m80.

>>1465336
Halifax to be precise.

>>1465600
>implying they weren't better off before we gave them guns

>>1461784
on the whole it is a roman fragment....

>>1463845
Are you saying it wasn't?

>>1465693
I am.

>>1465651

Even if they were happier a few hundred years ago living in mud huts, this point of being modernised would of come along at some point.

When it happened at the turn of the century and just before, on terms of being run by outsiders, it was by people whom with we can't compare by todays standards.

It's said in the blurb of that Empire of Dust that the Chinese, whilst developing it for their own gains and having a poor human rights record in the process, don't care about it. But they're trying to help and develop the country whichever you spin it.

The thing thats infuriating is the short sightedness of these people. They won't give the man gravel to build roads to protect their own interests. In doing so they deny themselves an asset that can be used to further their businesses and the quality of life of people around them. It's Insane.

>>1465721
yeah, its all fun and games until your resources are being extracted and your people are starving because the landowner makes more money selling stuff to the chinese.

>We couldn't breed out the street shitting, but if you're a liberal cuckold you should at least be happy that we helped eradicate the caste system

Caste discrimination was abolished post-independence.

The cultural circumstances surrounding India's sanitation condition are unique.

The underclass outside of the caste system was delegated responsibility for cleaning out pit latrines and performing sanitation duty (which is why they were considered untouchable).

The Vedas don't have mention of any untouchable class so that designation may having come to being over history for those families that otherwise transgressed some social order or caste boundaries, after which their lineage is relegated to some unclean status.
They were forbidden from occupations other than the dirtiest work. And they continued to be stigmatized because of their designation as sanitation workers.

When institutional caste discrimination was outlawed, the majority of untouchables naturally decided they prefer desk jobs for them and their children. As a sort of affirmative action program, those born into scheduled castes (including untouchables) are given preference for certain employment opportunities.

The problem is the stigma against sanitation work has not extinguished as rapidly as cultural evolution has been slower than legal. This is compounded by a vicious cycle of nobody wanting to take responsibility. Nobody wants to sacrifice for greater social good because there is a fear they will be taken advantage of and have nothing to show for it. The result is that there aren't enough folks performing sanitation work and nobody's willing to take responsibility for it.

>>1465763
you forgot
>tier 1 cities have WAY more people than their outdated infrastructure can support.

>>1465730

They live in shit and are starving anyway. They can't develop on their own and when they're shown how, they ignore it.

Even with being swindled, they stand to gain from it.

>>1461824
>I'll send the divorce application immediately to Brussels IF the brexit team wins!
Instead of doing that, Cameron resigned and May is saying no evoking of the treaty of Lisbon before 2017

>not perfidious

>>1465796
>they are starving anyway
>might as well make sure their future generations starve as well.

>>1465826

What part of this aren't you understanding? They're at rock bottom. They cannot get any lower.

>Be KiKiwakalakmungo
>living in mud hut/slum, $1.70 daily income
>Chinese man shows up
>Gives a job building a road, earn $5 a day
>Road connects towns
>Farms have direct better direct access to town for market day, Trade increases, infrastructure increases, work is generated.
>Sure the chinese man is earning a fuck load and exploiting me, but i have more money, a better standard of living and a trade now.
>None of the above matters anyway, because im african, when the Chinese man leaves i'll revert back to what i was doing, being dirt poor and disregarding what i've learnt. Some faggot argues my case on 4chan and insists i'm happier this way

>>1462006

No fucking way.

Say what you want about South America, but its miles ahead of most former colonies in Africa or Southeast Asia in terms of stability.

>>1465884
oh wow, a greentexting story. That counts as an argument.
Why do you think people are resistant to foreigners entering their country and lording them around with carrots and sticks?
The same thing happened to them with colonialism. The last thing anyone will want is to get another colonial power in.

>>1465955

It's an attempt to highlight the point and you clearly didn't watch the video.

They positively revelled in the colonialism of the belgians when they were there. They didn't want them to leave, even going as far to refer to it as a golden age.

After they left, they left all the infrastructure behind. It fell into disrepair and ruin because the congoloese couldn't be bothered to upkeep it. The Chinese logistics guy is completely baffled and aghast as to why people who had more advanced railways than china at the time would let it fall to ruin.

They aren't unified in some patriotic pact to keep foreigners out, they're just fucking stupid and now have nothing.

>>1466030
>bothered
absence of trained personnel means you are unable to maintain it. The gook is retarded because china had to make railways from scratch and gained the technical knowhow to maintain them, courtesy of their soviet friends initially.

>>1466030

You can't reason with a liberal my friend. Don't try to enlighten him, he refuses to accept the base realities of this world.

>>1465955

I promise you with all truth and honesty, hand on my black heart, that there is a large percentage of Africans who want to go back to the days when the white man ruled them.

If you can't understand why, then please off yourself. You are either too far away from salvation or just broken.

>>1466084
yes, and a large percentage of brits want to go back to the days of their empire. Doesn't mean the rest of the world is going to allow it.
people like you are the kinds of idiots who will point at africa then, and africa now and say that the golden days of colonialism were so much better, even though it is the same high handed approach of the white man knowing the best that caused the current state of africa in the first place.

>>1466051

They had the qualified tradesmen, engineers and workforce. They just didn't bother. Like the guy said in the video. They'd rather piss their money up the wall on payday and come the next day when they have nothing, they come looking for a loan. When the belgians left, thats precisely what happened.

The rentention of knowledge is Precisely why China have been so rapid in their development. They take on board information, process it then apply it. In the absence of it, they seek it out. Something which the congolese didn't do in Africa.

The workforce steal, the tradesmen are incompetent and lazy and the foresight of the businessmen out there doesn't extend further than the end of their nose.

>>1466084
god damn you're deluded as fuck. Only some white guy on 4chan would be this retarded.

>>1466106
>so rapid
yes, because having total control of a state and not having to care about the whims of the people have nothing to do with it. You think the average chink trader or engineer in china doesn't steal or is corrupt as fuck?
The chinese began to get access to technology in the first place because they had a large workforce that was put into work in factories. It is only after so many years of those things that they are now beginning to have the technical knowhow to actually expand their knowledgebase on their own without resorting to stealing from other countries.

People like you think of colonialism as a force of nature that just happened, without thinking of the human cost and baggage that turned those places into the shitholes that they are.

>>1461820
It would be great, because Britain would have collapsed into a civil war.

>>1466103

I'm not looking back at them then and now.

I'm looking at the world now and them now.

Colonialism served its purpose, the world moved on and these people no matter how downtrodden you think they may have been were still left with a headstart.

It wasn't like they had to start from scratch, they were given everything they needed. It didn't have to be leeched from neighbors and manufactured. They had everything they needed and like >>1466051
said.

China didn't have the same headstart, they had to leech and start from scratch and look where they are.

If you are African yourself and refuse to see your own peoples ignorance, or just some bubble headed sympathetic fool, you cannot deny that the fate these people have is at their own folly.

Imagine where they would be without that headstart.

>>1466126

I've never said the chinese weren't corrupt. I've even maintained that they know they're ripping the place off.

Whatever you say, colonialism in the instance of the congolese was a good turn for them. They even said it themselves. They also have no capacity or want to help themselves or develop. It's how they are.

It's like Arabs fighting wars. They just can't.

>>1461933
Name a single country which modernized without American influence?

>>1461961
>Anyway, give me a SINGLE fucking source on your claim that they "suppressed" industry. I'm waiting.
In Kenya, they banned the production of commercial crops such as sugar and peppers to ensure an easy market for white settlers (who sucked as at farming).

>>1466135
>look at china then and look at it now
>just don't look at the years of reforms and soviet aid that helped china onto it's feet.
you are full of shit. Its like listening to a trust fund kid telling a blue collar seminar about the importance of risk taking.

>>1466146
>its like arab fighting wars
who would have thought that politically appointed loyalists would be bad at leading troops eh?
No, its just that arabs are bad at war, except the entire overrunning north africa, persia and the like.

>>1466216

A few hundred years ago, maybe. Now. Awful.

http://www.meforum.org/441/why-arabs-lose-wars

File: 1466949017340.jpg (526KB, 2465x795px) Image search: [Google]

526KB, 2465x795px

>>1466159
>sucked at farming

Stupid white settlers taking their jerbs!

>>1466209
>State I'm not comparing them then and now
>You shit out a non-argument whilst claiming I was comparing the past with the present.

Truly you are a great asset to this board.

>>1466239
yeah. Lawrence of arabia actually fought with englishmen.
>>1466264
ah yes, I pale in comparison to you who already has an agenda decided that niggers are incapable of ruling themselves and need to be shepherded by the white man, and will look at history selectively to fit his biased agenda.

>>1466311

Lawrence of Arabia was an Englishmen. What's you point?

>>1466331
and he fought with arabs and with great success against the ottomans.

File: 1468628122708.gif (3MB, 368x349px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 368x349px

>>1466311
>niggers are incapable of ruling themselves and need to be shepherded by the white man, and will look at history as it is to fit his factual agenda.

Fixed that for you, you're almost there friend. You're almost at the point of acceptance, you'll get there eventually.

>>1466392
>factual agenda
>don't keep trained personnel in the country
>infrastructure falls apart
>"lol niggers"

>>1461784
A small nation which created a large empire. The only way it could maintain governmental control was by exploiting local differences and cultivating division.
The empire left it's former colonies deeply divided and conflicted.

>>1466344

So a white man shows arabs how to fight, further showing how arabs can't into war by themselves.

And to this day, they can't fight a modern war without help.

>>1466569
most arab militaries were trained by the americans or the russians you idiot.

Now that we've got this thread going, what are the essential books on the British Empire. I'd like to see arguments for and against it being a positive thing for the world. Already read some Niall Ferguson.

>>1466135
>It wasn't like they had to start from scratch, they were given everything they needed. It didn't have to be leeched from neighbors and manufactured. They had everything they needed and like

if we assume that in the absence of colonial rule, there would have been no change, then you'd be correct.

I think that competition and self-interest alone are sufficient to promote trade and exchange of ideas and technology.

I don't know that the physical presence of Europeans in charge of command economies in Africa was good or bad either way.

>>1466420
>The empire left it's former colonies deeply divided and conflicted.
Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United States of America.

>>1466569

Europeans had developed more advanced strategy, tactics, organization, and technology because Europe was a relatively large place with many nation states engaged in constant trade and competition.

Under Ottoman rulership, culture and technology stagnated in the Arab world, because it was insulated from trade and competition.

North India had trouble fending off the initial waves of Islamic invaders because the Indian subcontinent had been quite insulated from foreign armies since the end of the Classical era. War between Hindu kingdoms proceeded according to long standing caste traditions and strict etiquette in which Kings had to agree upon the location and time of battle beforehand and Hindu armies had strict organization standards and were developed almost exclusively to fight pitched battles (reflected in chess). In contrast Arab invaders had experience against a wide variety of foes, were willing to fight under a wide variety of circumstances, valued raiding / hit-and-run tactics, and were single minded with respect to conquest.

>>1467702
Canada was mostly French, the US hasn't been part of the empire for centuries, and New Zealand barely has a population to feel conflicted

File: australian.png (251KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

251KB, 900x900px

>>1461784
They're responsible for Australia.

File: anglosss.jpg (22KB, 490x313px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 490x313px

>Colonial empire, empire on Black, native, third world countries
>Improvment of the world

File: Bashar_al_Assad.jpg (92KB, 410x580px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 410x580px

>>1468186
o shit it's Bashar

>>1466633

That's precisely my point. Thats the whole point of this fucking thread you cleft.

Arab nations have been trained by westerners. In most cases the Brits. When left to their own devices, they can't do it themselves. In todays world, they need us to help them.

Honestly it's like you didnt read any of the argument above and picked one part to sperg out on.

>>1466420
You need to differentiate between exploitative cash-cropping for-profit colonies and the ones which exist as stable nation states today, which were mostly social experiments in governance and control.

>>1467688

Well you can agree that after they sought independence for long enough to finally be granted it that they would at least be ready to take over so to speak.

It never happened, I think their idea of independence wasn't 'taking over and continuing', I think it was more of a pride and ego vibe.

They were tired of being lorded over, no matter how beneficial it may have been. Surely they were being told what to do and how to do it, but don't all 'children' need strong 'parenting'?

Otherwise they grow stunted and undeveloped... which actually explains Africa completely.

>>1465258

What are you on about? There was no raping involved in Singapore. Most of its population comprises of descendants of immigrants and not the indisgenious population.

>>1467702

That's some shitty reasoning. Look at native americans or aborigines- not doing too well are they

>>1466127
Based on what?

>>1461784
You just made the opposition's point.

"muh oppression" indeed.

File: celt city.jpg (3MB, 3283x2462px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3283x2462px

>>1462510
I've got this, not sure where it is though.

>>1472056
Turns out its in Spain.

Lol this ass thread is still up?
Anyway one interesting point ot make is that most people back then and now don't even fucking know what their country did in the colonies that wel so that's why you havre a ton of "I never knew my nation did that in there!".

>>1461825
I don't think people give enough credit to this whole line-drawing thing. It's much harder than it sounds if you have never been to a place and are given a vague estimate of where everything is, including people and cultrual/language borders. Also, perhaps in some cases this apparent mismatch was creates on purpose, perhaps as a favor or to keep down groups of people by causing infighting. It's not like they just randomly drew lines in pages for no reason 90% of the time.

>>1468406
>muh argument
>when left to their own devices they can't win.
The americans and soviets trained their officers and tech personnel, just like several several germans trained the japanese officers. Politicking an appointing yes men and party loyalists as high ranking officers means that they will not be fighting as well. Might as well say that the soviets in the ww2 era were terrible because they had disproportionate casualties against the finns.

>Sausage and beans for breakfast
Most degenerate civilisation known to mankind.

File: king in the north wishes.jpg (91KB, 501x531px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 501x531px

>"those fookin muslim paki immigrants are takin over this damn country and stealing our women!"
>"oi m8, u better fookin know that the british empire made this ole world betta."