[SPORK] Was Colonialism good or bad for the world? (was: Q: Was British rule bad or good for India? and before that: The rhetoric of liberation...)
Fri, 21 Mar 2003 12:21:07 -0800
Yet the question was fairly limited to India, I didn't see a question
about colonialism in general.
There was a quote, I think I read it in a book called "Out of America",
which said that the Europeans had played a cruel trick on Africa.
Namely, Africa would have been better off if they had never come _OR_ if
they had stayed much longer.
So I can easily see both points. Colonialism was great for North
America and India but rarely anywhere else.
For India it was great for everyone. For North America, which was a
settlement operation, it wasn't so great for the earlier inhabitants.
In particular, being in a colony run by Belgium really sucked IIRC.
> From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of JS
> Sent: Friday, March 21, 2003 12:02 PM
> To: email@example.com
> Subject: [SPORK] Was Colonialism good or bad for the world? (was: Q:
> British rule bad or good for India? and before that: The rhetoric of
> to isolate just india and just britain is to look at such a small
> the picture. so many of today's '3d world' countries are former
> of england, france, italy, spain, portugal, belgium, holland (and in
> end, germany). given that it is impossible to know 'what would have
> been,' the history and outcomes of that system taken as a whole seem
> pretty solidly on the negative side.