Could the era of European Empires have lasted past WW2 or did

World War I was more the real death blow to that kind of thing, although World War II hastened it. It probably would have clung on for a few more decades before being gradually wound down, albeit in a much more organized manner than what ended up happening.

That being said, I've often wondered if there would have been any incentive to stop that kind of thing without a World War I.

>>2801088
>It probably would have clung on for a few more decades before being gradually wound down, albeit in a much more organized manner than what ended up happening.

Not really. There's no real reason to actually develop the majority of the colonies and waste all your money on them when you can use it on the metropole.

Like the process of gradually winding down before independence is such a huge thing to abuse,delay, manipulate to immense degrees that if they were forced to develop it and raise it up from say stronger powers like the U.S (The U.S indirectly helped the colonies with the Marshall Aidor harassment from non colony holding nations they'd rather cut the colonies off and not deal with that burden.

Like the scenarios that woudl feasible happen would be too much to count but are so easy to think up it's astounding because any of the colony powers can totally be douchebags in any way if they desire with or without a forced "10-40 years then independence".

Empires require power to maintain. World War I and II imploded Europe, so they lost their empires

>>2801088
>>2801394
Lets say America gave aid to Europe Scot free.They were allowed the keep their military bases and didn't owe America any money. What happens to the French and British Empire? What about Netherlands?

>>2800897
Sure they could have.. but we know they didn't..

Their are levels of analyzing international events at the : individual level, State lvl, and International (think alliances/ balance of power)

ask yourself while researching questions, smart questions!

like: How did the German industrial era influence state security?

then compare it with another question...

like: how did the British colonialism advance develop under mercantilism.

system v system.. each have competitive and relative advantages.

>>2800897
>young European powers could have taken their place.
No they couldn't have lmao. The powers that colonized were the best and barring tribal areas in Africa/Australia it was unlikely to very much happen again.

>>2801754
>The powers that colonized were the best
Not necessarily. Just like many countries today are growing, the European Second world could have easily been an emerging power.

>>2801760
>Just like many countries today are growing, the European Second world could have easily been an emerging power.
Russia maybe. Eastern Europe + the Balkans? I doubt it.

>>2800897
People's morals and ethics were changing. War showed the errors of racial theories and colonial empires.

People were done with the empire building and racial theory, both economically(bankrupt) and morally(grew up).