# What if colonialism was still going on? Differences? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 23, 2007, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-colonialism-was-still-going-on-differences/397243 "2007-03-23T20:30:57Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![The\_Spirit\_of\_Radio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e19b73/32.png) [@The\_Spirit\_of\_Radio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Spirit_of_Radio)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2007, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-colonialism-was-still-going-on-differences/397243/1 "2007-03-23T20:30:57Z")
What if colonialism was still going on? If none of the independence movements had ever happened? How would history be different if much of the world were still British/French/Spanish colonies? I’m not just talking about the United States, how would other countries be different too, historically and culturally? ---
**Author:** ![Szlater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/90ced4/32.png) [@Szlater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Szlater)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2007, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-colonialism-was-still-going-on-differences/397243/2 "2007-03-23T21:00:42Z")
[QUOTE=The Spirit of Radio] What if colonialism was still going on? If none of the independence movements had ever happened? How would history be different if much of the world were still British/French/Spanish colonies? I’m not just talking about the United States, how would other countries be different too, historically and culturally? [/QUOTE] I think the biggest difference might be Africa. You probably wouldn’t have the same levels of poverty and corruption. The AIDS epidemic might not exist either, or at least not at its present level. The things that the British colonies did have that the independant countries don’t have now are solid infrastructiure construction programmes (sanitation, healthcare, education and power), skilled administrators and law enforcement. At least that’s what my father reckons, he grew up in Kenya, and worked in urban development there in the late 50’s. Not everything that colonialism brought to africa was bad, they did a lot of good (a lot of awful, heinous things too though). ---
**Author:** ![The\_Spirit\_of\_Radio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e19b73/32.png) [@The\_Spirit\_of\_Radio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Spirit_of_Radio)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2007, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-colonialism-was-still-going-on-differences/397243/3 "2007-03-23T21:23:50Z")
[QUOTE=Szlater] The AIDS epidemic might not exist either, or at least not at its present level. [/QUOTE] Gee, that really would be different. ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2007, 10:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-colonialism-was-still-going-on-differences/397243/4 "2007-03-23T22:30:57Z")
Colonialism collapsed both because the two prime colonial powers (Britain and France) were irrevocably weakened by WW2, and because the Soviet Union was there to actively support communist insurgencies with weapons. In a world where WW2 somehow never happened, I think history from 1940 on would be primarily an increasingly bloody anticolonial struggle. At some indefinite point the colonies would be advanced enough to throw off British and French rule, while Britain and France would fight bitterly against the loss of their power and global rank. It might have been something like the Algerian revolt only on a global scale. ---
**Author:** ![samclem](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a9a28c/32.png) [@samclem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/samclem)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2007, 11:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-colonialism-was-still-going-on-differences/397243/5 "2007-03-23T23:33:30Z")
I’m not sure if this question rises to Great Debates, but let’s move it there for now, with the title edited to be more descriptive(remember to check your bait 🙂 ) . **samclem** GQ Moderator ---
**Author:** ![Ryan\_Liam](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ryan_liam/32/3965_2.png) [@Ryan\_Liam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ryan_Liam)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2007, 11:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-colonialism-was-still-going-on-differences/397243/6 "2007-03-23T23:54:28Z")
World war two ended colonialism, primarily because the Allies were liberating countries (France Belgium etc) which were occupying other countries themselves. Not to mention the growth of two anti-colonial powers, the USSR and the United States. ---
**Author:** ![smiling\_bandit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@smiling\_bandit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smiling_bandit)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2007, 12:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-colonialism-was-still-going-on-differences/397243/7 "2007-03-24T00:16:40Z")
In many ways, the colonial powers weren’t all that different from the local rulers, and were if anything less troublesome. Meet the new boss, a lot like the old boss. The problem was that after the colonial powers left, the locals wanted to take up where the left off, only now with a less stable, secure “nation” and with the advantage of brutal new technologies. See Cambodia, Vietnam, North Korea, etc. ---
**Author:** ![Ximenean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/aca169/32.png) [@Ximenean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ximenean)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2007, 12:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-colonialism-was-still-going-on-differences/397243/8 "2007-03-24T00:28:22Z")
Instead of being routinely beaten at cricket and rugby by Australians, we’d be routinely beaten at cricket, rugby and football by Americans. Thank god for 1776. ---
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2007, 6:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-colonialism-was-still-going-on-differences/397243/9 "2007-03-24T06:04:33Z")
Colonialism ended because it was no longer profitable. Colonies were always run as for-profit enterprises with a rather simple business model: The colony provided cheap raw materials, cheap untrained labor for harvesting and maybe very light manufacture, and a guaranteed market for finished goods produced by the heavy industry back in the home country. That is why the British got so annoyed when Gandhi lead the Indians down to gather their own salt (salt manufacture had been a British monopoly in India) and encouraged them to use spinning wheels to spin their own textiles (Britian was a big textile country for a long, long time). The colonies becoming self-sufficient was anathema to the colonial economic system. After WWII, it became cheaper for the formerly imperialist countries to do away with domestic manufacture and create factories in places with laxer environmental laws and lower average wages. Thus, self-sufficiency was no longer a danger and, more importantly, the last vestiges of the mercantilist horror at importation were swept away. ---
**Author:** ![FRDE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e68b1a/32.png) [@FRDE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FRDE)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2007, 11:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-colonialism-was-still-going-on-differences/397243/10 "2007-03-24T11:17:54Z")
[QUOTE=Derleth] Colonialism ended because it was no longer profitable. Colonies were always run as for-profit enterprises with a rather simple business model: The colony provided cheap raw materials, cheap untrained labor for harvesting and maybe very light manufacture, and a guaranteed market for finished goods produced by the heavy industry back in the home country. That is why the British got so annoyed when Gandhi lead the Indians down to gather their own salt (salt manufacture had been a British monopoly in India) and encouraged them to use spinning wheels to spin their own textiles (Britian was a big textile country for a long, long time). The colonies becoming self-sufficient was anathema to the colonial economic system. After WWII, it became cheaper for the formerly imperialist countries to do away with domestic manufacture and create factories in places with laxer environmental laws and lower average wages. Thus, self-sufficiency was no longer a danger and, more importantly, the last vestiges of the mercantilist horror at importation were swept away. [/QUOTE] From a British point of view, that is rather over simplified. Colonies were places that the British went to, settled down and stayed there. The USA is an early example, Canada, Australia and New Zealand are other examples. In Africa I can only think of three colonies, S. Africa, Rhodesia and Kenya. Other places were **adminstered** by the British, basically a few young highly trained and well paid administrators who regarded the UK as ‘home’ and had little intention of settling down. Examples are India, Malaya and most of Africa. The Indian mutiny alarmed the British, before then the ‘empire’ was pretty much a private enterprize affair, after the mutiny the Empire was established (no Empress = no empire) and administration was firmly under government control. Bearing in mind the whole setup was a free trade zone (with special interest groups), there was not much incentive to move heavy industry to different places - better spend resources on setting up local infrastructure than build unneeded factories. Regardless the economics were not under government control - the Empire was not a ‘planned economy’. WWI knocked the stuffing out of the British Empire, it also showed up its weaknesses. By the end of WWII the lion looked toothless, and it was skint, the king had been shown to have few clothes - also the 1945 Labour government had little interest in hanging onto overseas areas. It was just a matter of dismantling the structure and replacing it with the Commonwealth. The UK could not have hung onto India and while it fought police actions in Malaya and Kenya, it was not capable suppressing entire populations. More importantly, it did not want to. Dismantling the Empire was not down to exploiting ‘cheap labour’. More it was down to there being no alternative. Also the whole concept of ‘environmental laws’ was as unknown as ‘global warming’. One could spin some sort of Machiavellian plot with economic dominance as the theme tune - but an earnest, paternal administration and a few fundamental economic realities are closer to the truth. Here is an example of ‘motives’ from the eminently reliable Wikpedia > **[Пахта](https://tg.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9F%D0%B0%D1%85%D1%82%D0%B0)** > > Пахта — нахи рустаниест, ки тухми пахтаро мепӯшонад; муҳим ва арзонтар буда, нахҳои маъмултарини растаниҳо мебошад. Дар адабиёти техникии рус то нимаи дуюми асри 19 ба ҷои калимаи «пахта» истилоҳи «коғази пахтагӣ» истифода мешуд, ки то имруз дар калимаҳои газвори пахтагин, саноати пахтагин ва ғайра боқӣ мондааст. > [@](#): > > . As a result of these policies and developments, British traders developed a commercial chain in which raw cotton fibres were sourced initially from their colonies, processed into cotton cloth in the mills of Lancashire, and then re-exported back on British ships to their captive colonial markets in West Africa, India, and China (via colonized Shanghai and Hong Kong). Later, when the superiority of the American varieties of cotton was established, owing primarily to the length of the fibers, the British started purchasing cotton from slave plantations in the United States and the Caribbean. Due to the enormous quantities of raw cotton required to make cheap bulk exports, British industrialists quickly abandoned expensive raw cotton produced in India in favour of mass-produced cotton from the southern United States, which was much cheaper as it was produced by unpaid slaves. By the mid nineteenth century, “King Cotton” had become the backbone of the southern American economy, and today, roughly 90% of the world’s cotton crop is of the long-staple American variety. > In the United States, growing the three crops, cotton, indigo and тамоку, historically was the leading occupation of ғӯломон. After emancipation, the share cropping system evolved, which in many cases differed little from the systems of slavery. During the American Civil War, American cotton exports slumped due to a Union blockade on Southern ports, prompting the main purchasers of cotton, Britain and France, to turn to Egyptian cotton. British and French traders invested heavily in Egyptian cotton plantations and the Egyptian government of Viceroy Isma’il took out substantial loans from European bankers and stock exchanges. After the American Civil War ended in 1865, British and French traders abandoned Egyptian cotton in favour of cheap exports from the United States, sending Egypt into a deficit spiral that led to the country declaring bankruptcy in 1876. Not much point in shipping cotton from the USA to India to manufacture garments to be shipped worldwide. Now I’m sure one could spin a conspiracy theory to explain the absence of major cotton weaving in India on cunning Americans determined to keep the Empire unindustrialized so that it would get narked and yelp for independence. ---
**Author:** ![Will\_Repair](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/a698b9/32.png) [@Will\_Repair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Will_Repair)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2007, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-colonialism-was-still-going-on-differences/397243/11 "2007-03-24T18:19:18Z")
[slight hijack] Colonialism is still alive and well. A colony is a source of raw materials and a customer of finished goods. America was a colony of England not because it was settled by Englishmen but because it exported cotton and imported fabric. Kind of like now. We export steel to Japan and import cars. [/sight hijack] ---
**Author:** ![FRDE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e68b1a/32.png) [@FRDE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FRDE)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2007, 7:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-colonialism-was-still-going-on-differences/397243/12 "2007-03-25T07:31:04Z")
[QUOTE=Will Repair] [slight hijack] Colonialism is still alive and well. A colony is a source of raw materials and a customer of finished goods. America was a colony of England not because it was settled by Englishmen but because it exported cotton and imported fabric. Kind of like now. We export steel to Japan and import cars. [/sight hijack] [/QUOTE] Hmm… you make a strange definition of ‘colony’ > **[Answers - The Most Trusted Place for Answering Life's Questions](https://www.answers.com/redirectSearch?query=colony)** > > Answers is the place to go to get the answers you need and to ask the questions you want col·o·ny (kŏl’ə-nē) n., pl. -nies. > [@](#): > > 1. A group of emigrants or their descendants who settle in a distant territory but remain subject to or closely associated with the parent country. > > 2. A territory thus settled. > > 3. A region politically controlled by a distant country; a dependency. > > 4. A group of people with the same interests or ethnic origin concentrated in a particular area: the American colony in Paris. > > 5. The area occupied by such a group. > > 6. Colonies The British colonies that became the original 13 states of the United States. > > 7. A group of people who have been institutionalized in a relatively remote area: an island penal colony. > > 8. Ecology. A group of the same kind of animals, plants, or one-celled organisms living or growing together. > > 9. Microbiology. A visible growth of microorganisms, usually in a solid or semisolid nutrient medium. Your version seems to be a variation of ‘dependency’ with lashings of economic activity thrown in for luck. I’m beginning to think that a standard line is taught in USA schools Of course a word means anything I want it to mean - in a Looking Glass world [http://sundials.org/about/humpty.htm](http://sundials.org/about/humpty.htm) ---
**Author:** ![BrightNShiny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@BrightNShiny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrightNShiny)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2007, 8:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-colonialism-was-still-going-on-differences/397243/13 "2007-03-25T08:28:51Z")
[QUOTE=FRDE] Bearing in mind the whole setup was a free trade zone (with special interest groups), there was not much incentive to move heavy industry to different places - better spend resources on setting up local infrastructure than build unneeded factories. Regardless the economics were not under government control - the Empire was not a ‘planned economy’. [/QUOTE] This is completely false. In the 1880s, the British passed a number of tarrif and trade laws designed to supress Indian native manufacturing and industry. These laws completely left native Indians unable to compete against British imports, unable to export, and unable to establish any modern manufacturing. The British planned India along mercantilist lines, and trade favoritism was heavily slanted towards Britain. ---
**Author:** ![Will\_Repair](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/a698b9/32.png) [@Will\_Repair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Will_Repair)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2007, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-colonialism-was-still-going-on-differences/397243/14 "2007-03-25T18:47:04Z")
[QUOTE=FRDE] Your version seems to be a variation of ‘dependency’ with lashings of economic activity thrown in for luck. [/QUOTE] The dependency is economic not political. ---
**Author:** ![FRDE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e68b1a/32.png) [@FRDE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FRDE)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2007, 7:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-colonialism-was-still-going-on-differences/397243/15 "2007-03-25T19:33:05Z")
The British also passed laws preventing automobile manufacture in Australia - so they had to buy sh/tty British Leyland cars until we shafted them on joining the EEC Now of course Australia does not buy Japanese cars - in fact Australia is a major exporter of vehicles. Do you really think that we needed to suppress cotton weaving in India ? - if there had been a buck in it, it would have happened. Actually it did, but rather late on. I find it rather flattering that the USA educational system portrays the UK as an all powerful and demonic centrally controlled economy - when it was more of a mess trying to clean up after private enterprize. We played a con game, we ran most of the planet on the cheap, using a system copied from the Chinese. ---
**Author:** ![BrightNShiny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@BrightNShiny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrightNShiny)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2007, 10:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-colonialism-was-still-going-on-differences/397243/16 "2007-03-25T22:20:57Z")
[QUOTE=FRDE] Do you really think that we needed to suppress cotton weaving in India ? - if there had been a buck in it, it would have happened. Actually it did, but rather late on. [/QUOTE] I didn’t say they explicitly supressed Indian manufacturing. I said they structured the tarrif and tax regime in order to achieve the same result. They also engaged in currency manipulation in order to suppres manufacturing. Finally, they restructured the system of land ownership in order to promote specific crops for use in manufacturing rather than general food crops. The reason cotton weaving or any manufacturing didn’t happen in India is because the British made sure there wouldn’t be a buck in it. > [@](#): > > I find it rather flattering that the USA educational system portrays the UK as an all powerful and demonic centrally controlled economy - when it was more of a mess trying to clean up after private enterprize. Well, apparently all they teach you in British schools is nothing more than propoganda. You should read a good history book about the British Raj. Their economic exploitation of the subcontinent is well documented. If you want to pretend it didn’t happen, that’s up to you. ---
**Author:** ![Lust4Life](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ecc23a/32.png) [@Lust4Life](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lust4Life)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2007, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-colonialism-was-still-going-on-differences/397243/17 "2007-03-26T00:32:07Z")
[QUOTE=BrightNShiny] The reason cotton weaving or any manufacturing didn’t happen in India is because the British made sure there wouldn’t be a buck in it. Well, apparently all they teach you in British schools is nothing more than propoganda. You should read a good history book about the British Raj. Their economic exploitation of the subcontinent is well documented. If you want to pretend it didn’t happen, that’s up to you. [/QUOTE] It might not be a bad idea to read more then one book on any given subject,preferably some that at least have a pretence at being impartial and objective . The trouble with picking out a book that reinforces your own preconceived prejudices is that it always does that,every single time . If you want to pretend that is wasnt what happened in your case,thats up to you. I think your getting confused with Irelands education systems mostly fictional accounts of how History actually happened.Apparently Britain was responsible for the Black Death,the potato Famine(brought to europe from the U.S. by Irish emigre’s as it happens) El Ninio and the meteor strike that wiped out the dinosaurs and all the while the plucky ,honest non murdering ,nontorturing and especially non raping Irish bravely struggled against a British (just say English for gods sake its all our fault) regime that by the standards of the time made Belsen look like a holiday camp,oh sorry I got confused there Imeant to say the standards of U.S slaves and Irish and Chinese railroad workers. British history teaching makes it clear that we’re all total bastards with no redeeming qualities . It makes you wonder why over the years we’ve had and are still having millions of Irish permament settlers in England But I cant fault you on the exploitation theme ,even today in western europe we get international corporations trying to set up businesses and we tell them to take a hike . Jobs ?economic growth?new infrastructure?new investment ? yeah right mate on your bike your not exploiting us we’re not total fuckheads. ---
**Author:** ![BrightNShiny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@BrightNShiny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrightNShiny)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2007, 1:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-colonialism-was-still-going-on-differences/397243/18 "2007-03-26T01:26:11Z")
[QUOTE=Lust4Life] It might not be a bad idea to read more then one book on any given subject,preferably some that at least have a pretence at being impartial and objective . The trouble with picking out a book that reinforces your own preconceived prejudices is that it always does that,every single time . If you want to pretend that is wasnt what happened in your case,thats up to you. [/QUOTE] You know, it’s not as if British laws are some big secret. They were all published for everyone to see. There’s a good Oxford Press book which lists all the British Raj laws. I’ll see if I can find it when I’m down at school later this week. > [@](#): > > I think your getting confused with Irelands education systems mostly fictional accounts of how History actually happened.Apparently Britain was responsible for the Black Death,the potato Famine(brought to europe from the U.S. by Irish emigre’s as it happens) I think you’re the one who is confused. I am speaking about British economic policy in India. I have no idea what they did or didn’t do in Ireland. It might well be that you are an expert on Britain’s Ireland policy, but that has diddly squat to do with India. > [@](#): > > El Ninio and the meteor strike that wiped out the dinosaurs and all the while the plucky ,honest non murdering ,nontorturing and especially non raping Irish bravely struggled against a British (just say English for gods sake its all our fault) regime that by the standards of the time made Belsen look like a holiday camp,oh sorry I got confused there Imeant to say the standards of U.S slaves and Irish and Chinese railroad workers. Is this incoherence supposed to be a rebuttal? > [@](#): > > British history teaching makes it clear that we’re all total bastards with no redeeming qualities . It makes you wonder why over the years we’ve had and are still having millions of Irish permament settlers in England. I have no idea if all British people are bastards or not. If you say they are, I guess I’ll have to defer to you, since I haven’t studied the parentage of British individuals. However, I have read quite a bit about British economic policy in India, and any claim that it was some sort of libertarian free-for-all is simply false. > [@](#): > > But I cant fault you on the exploitation theme ,even today in western europe we get international corporations trying to set up businesses and we tell them to take a hike . > Jobs ?economic growth?new infrastructure?new investment ? yeah right mate on your bike your not exploiting us we’re not total fuckheads. Well, for those of us who live in the real world, a country’s economic policy is liable to change over time. What the British do today is not an indication of what they did a hundred years ago. ---
**Author:** ![David\_Simmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9de053/32.png) [@David\_Simmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_Simmons)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2007, 1:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-colonialism-was-still-going-on-differences/397243/19 "2007-03-26T01:45:28Z")
A question. Is the US the only remaining nation with colonies? Guam and American Samoa both fit definition #2 in FRDE’s post #12. ---
**Author:** ![BrightNShiny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@BrightNShiny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrightNShiny)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2007, 1:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-colonialism-was-still-going-on-differences/397243/20 "2007-03-26T01:59:22Z")
Here’s one example during the East India Company period: “A new class of industrial capitalists in England demanded a change in the British policy towards India. The measures taken by the Parliament under their influence resulted in **closing the British markets for Indian products** and the **East India Company had to take measures to crush Indian manufacturers.** British goods had a free entry into the country while the Indian manufacturers were subject to internal duties. Indian Textile Industry almost collapsed and a great number of weavers and artisans were thrown out of work.” _Advanced History of India_ by Sastri and Srinivasachari (bolding added). I’ll try and find some more examples later on in the week. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-colonialism-was-still-going-on-differences/397243.md?page=2)