I don’t think that the successful British administration of colonies is a total non-starter. Look at the U.S., Canada, South Africa, Australia, New Zealand and so on. Even Belize and Jamaica are better off than their neighbors. India’s in better shape than most of the rest of South Asia. What former Spanish colonies are doing as well as Canada or Australia? Argentina is about the best-off of former Spanish colonies, and even they’re a little weaker than the best former British successes.
Is it really, as a whole? I don’t doubt that parts of Mexico are fairly well off, but the northern section has a truly nasty drug war going on, and India doesn’t have any more public corruption, does it?
Better than most of its neighbors, isn’t it? It’s rated higher on the 2011 Human Development Index than Guatemala or Nicaragua, which is a start, at least.
If I had to be a black slave I’d much rather be one under Spain. Spain at least thought that I had a soul and could become “civilized.” They were also open to more race mixing, whereas the English colonies had that pesky one-drop rule.
Also, it’s an easier job to administer colonies when you displace/murder the vast majority of the indigenous population.
It also has a border with México which according to the criteria found on your cite is far ahead of Belice. As are other Central and South American countries.
Have you ever been to either country? And while we are making comparisons and you mentioned India’s neighbors, México is far better off than Bangladesh, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Sr Lanka which were ruled by the British. In fact most Latin American countries all rank higher on the scale you linked to.
To me it appears that the former British colonies that are the most advanced are the ones in which they basically eliminated or greatly reduced or marginalized the indigenous population.
Pure BS, Napoleon, for all his wrongs, cooled of the Revolution. None of the French revolutionaries started out with intents of massacre. But France faced far greater opposition in its Revolution than the US ever did (and it didnt have a powerful state backing it, nor did it receive any tangible support from the nation whose revolution it had just helped). As a result, the level of violence was constantly upped. That’s how angels end knees deep in blood.
And yet, the supposed point of origin of the American Revolution is “lack of representation”. Chose your myth, you cant have both.
Yeah, I’m sure the legion of British colonial failures in Africa is a testament to that.
Gonna bow out of this thread though, it’s cringe factor is dangerously close to that other thread in GQ. Americans are certainly exceptional in their patting themselves on the back, no question.
How exactly? I’m comparing the major British colonies in America with that of Spain’s.
Of course the Enlightenment thinkers influeneced them, it should be noted though many of those thinkers admired the English system of governance.
Largely due to its Hindu culture, which British administration failed to fully reform. In areas where British culture has been far more strongly adopted the differences are obvioous. In addition Mexico has the benefit of being right next to the US.
No look at Singapore and Malaysia.
Heard of Robespierre or the Reign of Terror. And the other powers waged war only because France tried to export revolution,
There were something called legislatures in each colony in addition to town meetings/ :rolleyes:
Legion of failures? British colonies are overall the most successful African countries-especially Botswana, Zimbabwe (until Mugabe), and South Africa (if Zuma doesn’t run it into the shiiter).
I have been to India (and Nepal, but that wasn’t a British colony, exactly, nor a model of human development). I haven’t been to Mexico. Unfortunately, we don’t have a good comparison for Spanish colonies in the area; the closest would be the Philippines, but that had a long American possession too.
No, it’s not, but since we were comparing Spain’s New World possessions to Britain’s, they probably are the best parallel.
First, cite? Second, the American revolutionaries probably wouldn’t have minded Britain’s system of government if they had a chance to be a part of it.
OK; lets go back and compare Belice to its neighbors and the rest of America. It ranks near the bottom of the index you linked to. Why would a former British colony be so far below most of its neighbors?
