Which colonial power was the least destructive and why?

Germany

The Caucasian wars, the Circassian genocide, massacres of indigenous Siberians, and if we count places like Poland or Ukraine that opens an entirely separate can of worms

is the correct answer, or some other irrelevant meme country with meme colonies (like Germany)

Austria-Hungary, their only colonial posession was some Arctic meme island where only seals and fish live.

Wrong, they were some of the worst of the bunch. They're only ethical when compared to legitimate fascists.

>Austria-Hungary counts as colonial empire
>Qing China does not

/thread

Generally, Colonialism is different from Imperialism because Empires do involve subject races into the whole Empire while colonialists are big on differentiation and othering.

....which doesnt really explain Austria-Hungary, Turkey, being colonial powers while Qing China isn't. Shit map.

Italy's colonies weren't THAT badly treated, I mean they invested a lot into Libya and Eritrea, Abolished Slavery.

The Portuguese.

Either Oman or Denmark.

Belgium, because all the bad stuff happened when the Congo was technically not Belgian

Italia

Wait, Flipland was an american colony? I thought it was a spanish colony?

We took it over in the Spanish American War

We took it during the Spanish-American War and held onto it until after WW2. We probably would've held onto it longer, but with Japan and South Korea as de facto colonies, we no longer needed it so we gave them independence.

The Flips flipped from Philip's hands to ours

Im from Denmark, and my sister lived on Greenland for a half year.
Rumours said that sometimes rich danes would use the native to pull their sledge, like dogs.

Other than that nothing really.

Are you autistic or something

...

DING DONG YOUR OPINION IS WRONG

Ottomans i think.

Probably either the Dutch or Portugese powers

Learning more towards the Dutch to be honest

Why do you think there were US troops in the Philippines before WWII to go on the Bataan death march?

>What is Armenia

It's not completely fair to compare us with any of the major colonial powers I think.

I think Ottoman. For the most part they treated their subjects well and fairly.

Portuguese were horrible to the Brazilian natives, even the French treated them better.

> In 1655 the Swedish army entered the territory of the Duchy and the Swedish–Polish war (1655–60) had begun. The Swedish army captured Duke Jacob (1658–60). During this period, the Dutch took over both of Courland's colonies, and the merchant fleet and factories suffered destruction. This war ended with the peace Treaty of Oliwa (1660). Courland regained Tobago on the basis of the treaty and held it until 1689. Duke Jacob set about restoring the fleet and factories, but the Duchy of Courland never again reached its pre-war level of prosperity.

Pretty sad that someone could just occupy your country and bring down everything you and your ancestors have worked for

Nah they did a Fuckton of fucked up shit in Libya and Eritrea/Ethiopia

...

Danes.

I would say the Portuguese.

The Ottomans and Oman could be cited as well, but their context was different.

You're not going to find a real "benevolent" colonial power here OP, just about every one did horrible shit.

But the British, at least, tried to hold sustainable colonies. It wasn't just a parasitic existence of resource extraction like the Spanish or Belgians.

Even then they fucked up a lot of shit in the best of cases.

IN Eritrea they basically like Gypsies strippign a building full of copper and took every single piece of Italian thing they could take to their other colonies that wasn't bolted to the ground when they finished their short tenure of running the place.

They also had like, three city blocks in China.

Did help that the Libyan Bedouins just kept fucking rebelling. Yeah, I'm not saying they were good, I'm saying they weren't as bad as fucking Belgium