What does Sup Forums think about colonialism?

What does Sup Forums think about colonialism?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akaroa#French_settlement
williameasterly.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/driwp90.pdf
sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/03/140319133548.htm
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Africa was a better place to live under colonial rule.

the world will never be as great

IT was a big mistake.
They should have just killed everyone and plundered the land, or left it alone.
Do NOT educate them.
Do NOT let them into your church.
Do NOT let them out of the colony.

Under french colonial rule.

I am a product of colonialism, and so far its pretty good except for the liberalism thing, I'm sure it will be over soon.

More trouble than it's worth. Once you understand "New Worldism" it becomes clear as day. In America and Canada that effect isn't so pronounced, given you largely retained the original culture and the climate there isn't so different from Europe, but pretty much anywhere else the New World is a place where Europeans went to die. Both literally and figuratively. They have their identity, personality and spirituality completely destroyed, until they seem like someone diametrically opposite from the immigrant all those years ago.
Here in Brazil this seems quite pronounced, and there were several novels up until the early 20th century telling the tales of men who came to the New World dreaming of the possibilities, only to have their souls corrupted and find themselves utterly destroyed. Make no mistake, this is no fiction. The first time I realized that was when I compared pictures of my grandparents in their 20s and 40s. They became an empty husk, to the point they appeared to have a different phenotype altogether. It's difficult to explain to those who haven't seen/felt it.
I think ideally Europeans should live in Europe, and if they're gonna live anywhere else it has to be North America. But even if the effect is much more subtle, New Worldism definitely still has an effect. And the saddest thing is the host doesn't even know it.

...

In general terms, colonization was a great deal more useful for Third World than to us.

Without our technology, hygiene and values, Africa would be a shitho... wait, it still is. But at least they have clothes and cars... well, somehow.

Bad example. Take America then. Without Europe, both North and South would still live as in Prehistory, and even though there are great differences in the development of North and South, in general terms, I'm sure Canadians, Argenitinians or Ecuatorians prefer to have Western technology instead of the primitive lifestyle of the native Indians.

Or this too. Seeing the outcome, all the anti-white propaganda, "white guilt", and everything, slaughtering them all would have been the best outcome.

German propaganda ? They were quite salty after losing Cameroun to France.

>"granny, why did you leave Indonesia?"
>"the country had no future"
cultural relativism is bullshit
some cultures are inherently inferior
we should have never abolished it
everything went to shit when the Europeans were forced to move out

Let it happen if it can. When the natives or colonists want independence then they can fight for it

Suck to be the people getting colonized, its awesome being the colonizer

You Spaniards literally did colonialism the best. You didn’t arrive and try to coexist like the British. You basically showed up with your dicks out and made them assimilate into your culture. And honestly, if it weren’t for socialism and the drug war South America would be a decent place

>'m sure Canadians, Argenitinians or Ecuatorians prefer to have Western technology instead of the primitive lifestyle of the native Indians.
Yeah to be bad Canadians and Argentinian (some percent) have European heritage (my family came in the XIX-XX century).
You need to talk to the natives descendents which religion, culture, language, way of living was completely destroyed and force to take the invaders customs. I mean sure this is better but if I was native I would be very pissed off.

Effective as a prestige thing and get in, get ressources, get out scheme. As soon as people tried to do something with the locals, it became a massive waste. We tried to tell Africans, Arabs and Asians they too were children of the Republic, we educated them, we built tons of shit for them, our colonies were money sinks. Results? The first batch of French-educated elites backstab us. The Brits had it right: either genocide them or do nothing except collect cash through local elites. Anything else will come back to bite you in the ass. And now that they have their independence, they invade us or ask us to take care of all their problems. "Muh Francophonie, come take care of those big bad islamists for us, pls Maman France” and then once it’s taken care of they ask us to fuck off again.

Is this implying Oceania was more of a prize in the early 19th century than all of Europe? Fucking Anglos.

It's just a word to whitewash the bloody conquests that fueled global mercantilism.

It was probably inevitable the moment that various emerging powers adopted doctrines favouring guns/naval/conventional ordinance, ending the previous paradigm of war in which the absence of prevalent firearms ensured that numbers usually mattered.

That's very true. However, as another user commented above, not all cultures have been the same throughout history. And no matter how resentful an Indian may be today, I think the European lifestyle is objectively better than living like in Prehistory, or having savage rituals such as the Aztecs had, taking the hearts of people and throwing them from their temples.

In any case, I must say I hold a deep respect for Argentina and Chile. Surrounded by so many "failed" states, at least you show that the Spanish heritage in South America has some value.

Saludos desde España, amigo mío.

Take Algeria et al, they'd still be fucking their camels in the desert while beaten by turkroaches without France.
We brought them all our education and culture. In the 50's they had one of the best agriculture in the world due to our knowledge. British colonialism is quite different though, since their goal never was assimilation.
Go suck some Albion cock and gtfo. Assimilation was a good model, it failed because of foreign interferences, i.e. US and China in Indochine, Arab in Maghreb, etc.

Colonialism was both good and bad:

Pros:
Spread European Civilization across the world
Pushed technology forward

Cons:
Gave medicine to niggers and their numbers are ballooning

It was acceptable at the time.
Frowned upon now.
The descendeants of the exploitees are trying to profit off of it.
Never forget that African king that traveled to mekka and colonized the middle east.
Everybody did it. Everybody who denies this is a racist.

>Map
Strictly speaking NZ should be pale yellow
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akaroa#French_settlement

>not all cultures have been the same throughout history. And no matter how resentful an Indian may be today, I think the European lifestyle is objectively better than living like in Prehistory, or having savage rituals such as the Aztecs had, taking the hearts of people and throwing them from their temples.
You know amigo mio, that this is literraly the same reasoning progressive do when pushing their tolerance on people's troath "it's for you own good ".
Indeed there are retarded cultures and they are good cultures, but I think we should let that be and let societies change naturally instead of forcing our superior culture to people who aren't prepared for it.

This being angry for cultural assimilation would be as iberians bein g angry with romans for making us learn latin building roads and assimilating us in their empire

What did they mean by that?

...

...

That's the exact reason why the Spanish and Portuguese fucked up you retard. They should have killed all the natives and niggers. Fucking them was the worst thing they could have ever done, and it's why Latin America is a shithole. North America is only better because you retained white identity until very recently. Mixing is the absolute worst thing that can happen to a place, and it has been going on here for 5 centuries.
>if it weren't for socialism and the drug war
You're so ignorant it hurts. It was a shithole way before that, Argentina and parts of Brazil had a short period of prosperity because of recently arrived European immigrants. That period was an exception, not the rule. The rule is shithole.

...

>they'd still be fucking their camels in the desert while beaten by turkroaches without France.
I think you should have leave them that way or nuke them both are perfect solutions

It was stupid in the long term and it's no wonder it fell apart. People tried to bring to civilization to cultures/people that couldn't handle it and most still can't. The only halfway successful colonies were the US and Australia, and that was because the natives were just fucking removed.

I don't think the original iberians just said "oh well you want to conquer us? Wow its that an aqueduct, you bought me"

Exactly. I don't think anyone could be so idiotic as to blame the Romans for having brought their sophistication to Iberia. In that sense, I can't but laugh at the propaganda of some South American countries that stress their Indian culture and diminish the Hispanic one. Funnily enough, they all speak and read in Spanish, are Catholic and live in the cities the Empire built there. Utter hipocrisy, that's what it is.

No, but from a historical point of view, I, as a Spaniard, am a lot more proud of the Latin heritage we have in our country, than of the Iberian tribes we had here.

From a moral stand it was questionable, from an economical point of view it was a fucking disaster.

If instead of fucking around trying to enslave locals and creating a colossal profit for companies that had the monopoly of the trade, if they tried to enable a fair and open commercial relationship, both economies would've grown.

Take the India Shitfest Company as an example: they bought land and treated it like shit not generating any actual value, they had the monopoly so the market was stagnant, only few (((individuals))) profited since it was an economical oligarchy, and in the end they still fucked up and the British governament had to spend a shitload of PUBLIC shekels to fix their debts

Basically this. Not exterminating the lower races when we had the chance was the worst historical error ever made

But of course you are descendent of the Latins and the original iberian heritage it's almost wiped out. Thats like I said asking an Argentinian or Canadian if they prefer they euro heritage or the native heritage they have no connection whatsoever. (Indios identitarians aren't Argentinians they don't want to be Argentinians but since they are in our soil they are Argentinian by default )

Didn't know that, I'll edit the map thanks.
As a catholic and as a French, I can't help but being universalist. It could have worked, and it did in some countries, look at Martinique, la Réunion, Gabon, Lebanon (before shtf) and even Laos.

My point is if you could ask some original iberian Ooga booga if he liked being colonized, he would most definitely tell you no and they would hostile to roman culture just like the germanics were for several years until they finally end up loving roman culture so much they destroyed and started to we wuz as Romans

Yes, as you say, a tribe would never acknowledge that another tribe is better, even if all evidences prove so.

It would be interesting to hear other Europeans, such as the French, about their opinion on the Roman Empire. But, in general, I'm sure the vast majority of us believe that being part of the Empire was a great deal more benefitial than to remain savage tribes.

But as you said very well here , the case with Indios is slightly different, since they're direct inheritors of the native Indians of that time, so they do feel as if they are surrounded by a "hostile" culture, even if it's objetively superior (life standards, hygiene, health, wealth, refinement, etc.)

colonizing empty land, like in the Americas and Southern Africa was a pretty good idea. it was going well until recently.

trying to rule over populated places is a bit more complicated. the locals will always resent you. so the best thing to do imo is to teach them good morals, breed out the lower classes (essentially recreating the European Revolution), then when they're finally ready, help them utilize their labor and natural resources, and trade with them, everyone wins.

the problem is, that process takes about 500 years. I'm afraid the Chinese will fuck up real bad by going straight to step 3 with Africa. thankfully most Africans are pretty stupid and incompetent. but they do have those on the far right side of the bell curve that are fairly smart, but are pretty evil. if they wound up with something like nukes it wouldn't be good for anyone.

a great read is those Belgians that trekked through the Congo in their Land Rover. now the DRC is far worse than most other African countries (only Somalia and Sierre Leone are as bad) but something I noticed is that the only safe spots they had were the various Christian missions. those people need good morals before anything.

Not it never worked can we please stop pouring gibs to nigger shitholes like the Reunion ok thks

Probably the best time period in history

>A pro-colonial American.
Kim needs to nuke the coasts right now

not as bad as
>1 post by this ID

Lol WTF are these numbers. 150 million native Americans? I kinda wish these were true though...

The proper step in establishing colonies is to exterminate the natives, move in, and civilize.

That's why we managed to get the USA and Africa is still a shithole without equal.

Works for my country lol

Colonial empires FAILED to perform massive impregnating of the Female populations, this would have tamed the natives in 2 generations

It makes fun of us too so I'd say it's more satire than propaganda.

You should always exterminate the native population. I think the US is the only one that (almost) got that part right, but Jews still managed to fuck us over by important a shitload of niggers that we gave citizenship and voting rights to for some fucking reason.

A mistake that backfired on Europe big time, especially Africa. They should have just left them alone to starve to death or invaded and genocided them. At any rate certainly not what they did.

>retarded post
>meme flag
Checks out, the whole south america is a mix of europeans and natives, all the way up to mexico, and 44% of USA

>important
*importing

French were literally the worst colonisers. There is no former French colony that isn't a shithole. And when compared to the former British colonial shitholes. The British shithole are preferable to the french. In Africa and Asia former British shithole are better than the french.
Louisiana in the US is a shithole anybody who says otherwise is lying. And Quebec in Canada is a shithole which would have collapsed without British rule.

The ruin of Britain began when Romans marched in and founded London.

Those numbers are bullshit. Even so Muslim bodycount is much higher.

The imperialists greed never ends.

Sure it was beneficial, they brought us knowledge in both engineering and arts and didn't touch our cultural and ethnic backgrounds. Anyway, continental Celtic tribes aka "Gauls" (including half of Spain) already benefited from the Roman empire before the invasion.
La Réunion, as all our settlements, is important in matters of geo-strategy (France has 2d maritime area in the world), culture and language spreading, rare resources (rare earths), tourism... Trust me, the cost is ludicrous if you put everything in perspective.
Québec is economically raising Canada up, not mentioning they are the most based and didn't vote Trudeau.
See + Maghreb, Québec... Compare to ex-british colonies in same areas, like Lybia, Liberia, New Guinea, ...
I agree about Louisiana though, but it wasn't a shit hole back then.

Colonialism is good and natural. If you can’t defend the land or properly develop it, fuck you and make space for those that do.

The only mistake Europeans did was use slave labour, that’s it.

All the way or not at all.

If Europeans were willing to colonize Africa to uplift them and exploit them they shouldn't have left. If they went in, they should have stayed, if not they should have never gone. The act of colonizing and then leaving has almost permanently fucked over Africa into a wasteland hellhole. Would it have been a wasteland without european influence? Maybe? Probably? But it wouldn't be as bad as it is now. The very structure of African countries is based on maps drawn by Europeans who had no idea what they were doing and has created tribal conflict all over the continent.

It's like slavery in the USA. We should have either kept slaves or never had them at all, having them then releasing them is the worst of both worlds.

if a country has the means to overpower natives why shouldnt it

it's not like the land is inherently property of the natives

>the act of building infrastructure in a country then leaving totally fucked them up

When will this meme die? Africa is a hell-hole because of the low IQs of the inhabitants.

We did vote for Trudeau.
See, unlike le anglo I have the humility to tell the truth, it's better than badly lying to save your ego in vein on an imageboard

The USA has, in general, had the best relationship with its native peoples except for maybe Canada. Nearly every other colonial power engaged in deliberate genocide and their countries are fucked. The USA tried its hardest to maintain Tribes, it just kept pushing them further west and into reservations. We never made any attempt to exterminate the indians. Not even Jackson wanted to kill them, he wanted them moved and paid for their land (it just turned into a death march because of other factors).

Actually exterminating the native population has pretty much never occurred. It is too difficult to genocide a large group of people. The USA's more "favorable" treatment of the Natives actually forced the Natives to become more like Americans, rather than the opposite (like you see in South American countries).

When the europeans began decolonization they often dumped uneducated, poorly trained, and generally ignorant people to start running countries that contain multiple tribal groups that have a long history of conflict. The entire cultural evolution of Africa was put on halt for hundreds of years because of European colonization. In most African countries to see the same pattern emerge:

>European power puts some random tribal group in charge after they leave
>This tribal group has long lasting blood feuds with other tribes, and with no europeans to control them they instantly begin taking revenge on the other tribes
>Other tribes fight back and or are slaughtered, which leads to the complete break down of any social stability in a society, leading to collapse

Many of the colonies in Africa were relatively successful, even for blacks. The primary reason was the suppression of tribal conflicts, but when europeans draw up a map and force you to live near your enemies, chaos ensures.

Africa is a hellhole and probably would have been without colonization (I said as much), but it would have been better off than some colonization.

Good in theory but it was executed terribly.

Africa was developing in the 50’s, 60’s, and 70’s, until faggot American, and Soviet governments decided to interfere because muh democracy, muh freedom, which of course, screwed it all up. SA is the last holdout of the white men rule in Africa, and its pretty much over for them as well.

Slave labour wasn't such an issue, our biggest mistake with slavery was the expatriation. That's precisely what is fucking us now.
Holohoax flipped the table. We couldn't have stayed after judging nazis. The fact that the USA both organized Nurnberg and supported independence in our colonies really makes you think.

The USA is a shithole full of the people we didn't want.

>be leftist
>hate western world and its foundations
>muh anti-colonialism
>muh anti-imperialism
>conveniently ignore that colonialism created the world today, including the US, and all the advances that have come with the Western world
>engage doublethink
>we need to colonize space! let's set up space colonies!

mfw no face.

It doesn't matter what /pol thinks, you alphabet nigger/Shariablue/JIDFnigger you. The only thing that matters is empirical evidence, and the evidence shows that colonialism helped nations wherever it went, you ignorant faggot.

Study: European colonial settlement has positive economic development on outcomes today
Study: 47% of average global development levels today are attributable to Europeans

The previous literature was correct to focus on colonial settlement by Europeans as one of the pivotal events in the history of economic development. We confirmed it in this paper by directly measuring this colonial European settlement for the first time and showing it to have dramatic effects on outcomes today.
williameasterly.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/driwp90.pdf

African nations with a British colonial legacy are the most productive, having superior enrollment levels in higher education
sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/03/140319133548.htm