Thread 18131646

No.
>Was ending colonialism and giving the poopskins stuff a mistake
yes

It's neither a mistake nor a success. these are two broad generalizations for what is an incredibly broad and long lasting concept and period in history. On one hand it gave the world the United States and brought us into modernity and on the other hand you had the hastily constructed states of Africa and India that ended up being massive money sinks for their colonial masters and points of internal conflict and instability. Some people argue that Europe "brought up" Africa, which they did in the sense that they drew Africas modern borders, and thus formed the basis for succeeding states that gave Africa foundation for further development, but on the other hand you can argue that these borders were drawn as a result of a colonial scramble for the continent, leading to landlocked borders like those of South Sudan surrounded by similar states in similarly precarious positions that kneecap development combined with disastrous global policy that now seeks to maintain these borders rather than enabling the conditions for the emergence of a proper regional hegemon to bring stability to the continent, which would likely have happened within the Bantu peoples had Europeans not meddled in the continent.

>>18131648
Why do you think you need colonies? Just buy and trade like everyone else.

>>18131673
>It's neither a mistake nor a success.
Peak golden means fallacy

>>18131710
>Peak golden means fallacy
Fallacy fallacy
You don't actually know what that means and it doesn't apply in any way to that post. Stay in your lane retard

>>18131713
You points weren't that solid.

>>18131714
The point is coloialism is extremely broad, happened over the course of multiple centuries across multiple continents, and to call it inherently good or bad would be an insane generalization to make. Overgeneralization is a logical fallacy too anon.

The scramble for Africa was a mistake.
Not genociding Muslims was a mistake.

>>18131646 (OP)
Do you reckon the slow decay that followed it was punishment for colonialism?

>>18131646 (OP)
the europeans should've kept all the good stuff to themselves

>>18131720
Ottomans not wiping out every nailed kike worshipper to the last all the way to croatia and pest and resettling the land with the faithful was a mistake

>>18131648
>poopskins
what is this a fluffy pony story?

>>18132504
SAAAAAAR

>>18131646 (OP)
Yes, especially since it held on long enough to give these people the material and medical advancements to reproduce exponentially, but not long enough to teach them high-trust values. Because of colonialism the majority of Indian children survive to adulthood, but the majority of them also don’t know that public shitting is bad.

>>18131673
Spbp. "Colonialism" is vague and retarded and applies to pretty much every instance of imperial expansion yet it's used solely to describe the period between 1492-1960s. The motives and policies of expansionist European empires of that time varied wildly.

>>18131710
>Why do you think you need colonies?
Why did African Kangz need their Kingdom?

If a polity can expand its power, it will do so, this was the same for Europe and elsewhere. If they are moral goody2shoes who refuse to do so, then some other colonial power or Kang will do so, it makes no difference. If anything it was a moral good for Europe to do so, the Zulu for example routinely impaled prisoners as well as those they conquered, when they invaded the Xhosa they would impale every civilian they could find. The Maori were also fond of it, see what they did to the Moriori. The British however abolished torture and slavery in the 19th century.

>>18131646 (OP)
>you tell me you can go to my land and take all the resources but I can not come to your land to earn a living?
you tell me.

redistribution of wealth would have been better, imo: the underdeveloped countries would have caught up.
>the frens we made along.

ahhh, the european spirit...

>>18131646 (OP)
no to them, yes to us. fuck ancestors

>>18131646 (OP)
Kinda

Yes. I love the idea of the prime directive in star trek. Giving advanced technology to cultures that can't possibly handle it is a very bad idea. Giving the 3rd world access to internet, machines guns, chemical weapons and nuclear energy when they can't do basic things was a terrible idea.

>>18135290
>slippery slope fallacy
start slow, with the ideas, select the middlemen, build wisely, advise, etc.