Who ...

[Drooperdoo]

Osservatore,
If you're right then that implies that the West isn't what it imagines itself--a system that wins with ideas, but rather a people who have superior weapons and force their will on the rest of the world at the end of a gun.
You're clearly wrong. Becaue look at the United States in Iraq: We want to win them over with ideas. The napalm and bombs are only tools to get them to like us more.
Bwa-ha-ha-ha-ha

[osservatore]

;D

[penetratorx]

Why is it some countries/places have become very successful during and after colonialism and others have just gone backwards since independence. Take Singapore and Hong Kong, they were both insignificant barren shitholes before colonisation and they are now among the most advanced places on earth, and of course there is countries like Australia/New Zealand/Canada. Then you get somewhere like Zimbabwe, which was also a complete shithole when it was 1st colonised then became very succesful during colonial times but has now regressed back to being a shithole.

Of course it's nothing to do with the corrupt mentality of the ruling elite that prevails over most of SSA, it must all be down to those Europeans and the way they built roads and other such infrastructures.

Anyone ever seen the sketch in the Monty Python film - 'The life of Brian' when the Jews are sitting around complaining about "what have the Romans ever done for us" and they end up with the conclusion:

"All right, but apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, a fresh water system, and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?"

To which someone replies:

"Brought peace !"

[henerte]

henerte: you forget our mighty Italian African Empire . Btw Etiopia or Lybia are still benefiting for it (no kidding).

Yeah! But...so what that they were a colony? Honestly, so what?

I'm descended from a bunch of morons who settled between Germany and Russia. ;D And actually, for a good part of modern history we were a colony.

During WWII Poland lost 6 million people. That's not much - especially when 50% of them were Jews so actually not of polish ethnicity. What was really frightening was the destruction of transport, industry and agriculture. 65% of all factories were destroyed and what was left was robbed by Russians. Over 50% of all means of transport (cars, wagons, trucks...) were detroyed too, The number of pigs, cattle and horses was down to 20% of the pre-war situation, which meant that our agriculture was on a brink of collapse and famine was a real danger. Warsaw was non-existant. At the same time Germany was receiving a substantial economical support from the Marshall plan.

Yet, I hardly ever hear people here in Poland complaining about that and blaming others. Maybe if we were black or at least brown someone would feel pity for us.

That retarded "homo sovieticus" mentality is hardly noticeable in Poland today and all these Western European philosophers and intellectuals preaching about social justice, distributism blah, blah are treated like freaks.

Once people realize that they themselves are responsible for their fate there is a chance for progress.

Santa Claus doesn't exist. It's for children....

[osservatore]

henerte said:

During WWII Poland lost 6 million people. That's not much - especially when 50% of them were Jews so actually not of polish ethnicity.

What the heck does this mean?
They were jews, so they dont' count?

Anyway, to me is completely blind not to see how former colonies may diverge completley in economic infrastructures and social formations, which, IMO influence economy more than "races", and, given the fact that Singapore is different form Zimbabwe, ending up saying the colonialism was a good thing.

And those retarded soviets helped to rebuild your industries. maybe not in the best way, but they did, which Italy e.g. NEVER did in Ethiopia.
Of course Marshall plan, which Italy enjoied, was surely better than soviet occupation, that's why Italy is richer than Poland.
And not because we "realized that be responsible for ourselves blah blah blah"

Santa Claus is for children!




Really, nothing against you, even if you belong to the "homo catholicus" which happens to be not very popular where I'm living.
But don't you thing that tribute everything to largely hypothetic cultural traits is oversimplyfieing?

[Tautalos]

osservatore said:

nockwasright said:

osservatore said:

Actually they have been miserable and starving before and after colonialism, not during it. So ...

This is a common, yet false, belief.

Actually till the beginning of european colonialism the average indian or chiense or even african (in many parts of Africa) was just as wealthy, or even wealthier than the average european.

In that case, nobody stops them if they want to go back to their ancestors' huts.

And, of course, no more European aids of any type.