Quote (Black XistenZ @ Aug 21 2019 02:03pm)
the west also colonized china, vietnam and so on, and they dont struggle as much. even among african or latin american countries, there are huge differences in their recent trajectories which can only be explained by their contemporary politics and not by the colonial era.
also, the west cannot be blamed for the conflict between shiites and sunnis which has been ravaging the muslim world for 1400 years. (1) it also cannot be blamed for events like the genocide in Ruanda, which was sparked by animosities between neighboring Tutsi and Hutu tribes.
(2) south africa hasnt made much progress either under black rule since the end of apartheid.
(3) germany never colonized ethiopia, italy did. and only halfway; ethiopia is in fact one of the countries on this planet which has been a sovereign entity (at least on paper) the longest. furthermore, ethiopia up until recently has been one of the most successful african countries with a very positive development. it was considered a role-model, and compared to most other african countries, it still is, despite the increasing tensions and the increasingly authoritarian government.
1) Tutsi and Hutu segregation was created by Belgium colonization. They defined the groups and gave one group the better jobs, making them "superior". Now that's the breeding ground for "sparking animosities". Blame thrown there is valid.
2) Economic growth in SA is stagnating at a mere 3.5% in the foreseeable future, they want to be at 6% but that doesn't mean the country isn't doing well socially and economically, post the official point in history, to get rid of apartheid (massive social improvement!). Creating apartheid though, those were the Dutch and British.
3) And this must be me, but, when I think about the few countries Germany colonized I always think about Namibia. What was tested there and left a trail of bodies. Think that should be included when you're talking about where Germany has not been.
History isn't pretty, in most colonies we've left a social scar and depleted resources (a good reason to not be trusted with the Amazone). The economic growth we've created in history didn't benefit the locals in most cases... It still doesn't today tbh. We've still got Oil rich countries not getting a fair share for the resources they sell, Heineken not paying taxes in Africa and tourist hotels and resorts owned by western investors, importing western products and transferring all the profits back to the west. Now that might have been similar/worse/better in a what if there was no colonization in the past 300 years, but that butterfly effect would be impossible to predict. Perhaps they'd have more autonomy over the economy and sell resources and services at a decent price, giving a country a decent tax and the citizens a decent income, or still see capital generated by the means of production being transported overseas by multinationals. (modern colonization
)
This post was edited by Knoppie on Aug 21 2019 12:28pm