Colonialism as a "Net Benefit"

Is he right?

(This isn't a shitpost, I'm seriously asking)

Other urls found in this thread:

reddit.com/r/JonTron/comments/5z69gh/35_quote_compilation_of_the_debate//
h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=1217
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

You can't exactly quantify harm vs good, so I guess the question should be: are countries that were colonised by the west better off today than they would have been today if they were never colonised?

There's probably many that are and many that aren't.

Lel, did jontron become brainwashed by /pol/ or something?

I think it would be more fair to ask that in relation to the people who got colonized, not the countries themselves.

depends on the country

colonization made asians realize that white man are the devil and now asians are strong with the white devil technology so they can remove hamburger from asia in history's greatest form of poetic justice

OBVIOUSLY NO.

HOW COLONIZATION IS SUPPOSED TO BE A BENEFIT FOR THE COLONIZED IS BEYOND MY COMPREHENSION.

THE IGNOBLE ONES WILL RESORT TO ANY KIND OF CONVOLUTED LOGICAL MEANS TO RATIONALIZE THEIR SAVAGERY.

Well colonialism in my country (Ireland) came with the order to clear the natives off the land to make way for the settlers, so I wouldn't say it was a benefit to those people.
Who does he mean when he says it was a benefit to them?

Definitely not because of how it ended. If there was somehow a peaceful transition were Africans were able to adopt western society it might have been.

it certainly wasn't for the Irish

Depends who and where. French and British generally benefitted the locals, Belgians and Germans were absolute shit to them

Jontron isn't even white btw

You can't really say that. Benefit in what sense? Afrcans got access to the modern world, medicine, science, production and opportunities never seen before, but at the cost of bloody civil wars and general deestructalisation (is that how it's spelled in English?) of societal values and laws that had been with them for centuries. They lost the tribal structures that huaranteed a certain degree of stability to multi ethnic states that are prone to instability and fragmentation, but have the potential to create functioning societies in some decades. It really is very early to tell if they won or lost from it.

Native Americans just got outright genocided the fuck out, so it's not even a discussion there.


Also, JonTron Reich WHEN?

India certainly would've been better off. The British destroyed their old industry and extracted the riches from India. India went from top 1/2 economy to falling completely off the top 10 chart after British took hold.

>British generally benefitted the locals
where?

>Arabic name
>Implying someone from that culture can contribute anything good to rational discourse

>Afrcans got access to the modern world, medicine, science, production

Not even lol.

This reminds me of weatherford claiming genghis khan was positive for the world despite killing like a tenth of the world and destroying everything in his way because he connected european chinese and arab civilizations. Pretty sure they would have all preferred avoiding the "benefits" of his invasions.

Ry is, like, some kinda central Asian. Maybe Kazakh?

Now throwing belgians and germans in the same pot is mean. The germs genocided one or two tribes but were not as arbitarily cruel as the belgians to the whole.

Too complex to determine

Any other answer is horse shit.

>Is he right?
Absolutely not. Just looking at it from a purely economic standpoint, colonialism left the colonies as completely economically dependent on exporting raw materials instead of producing anything themselves, which has kept them very very poor

They sure did

Why do you think their populations are booming through the roof these days?
Nigeria will be almost as populous as China in 2050

Oh, sorry. My mistake.

>Kazakh or some other kind of central Asian
>Implying someone from that culture can contribute anything good to rational discourse

Fixed it.

>"positives" and "negatives"
spooky

>Nigeria will be almost as populous as China in 2050
I really have a hard time understanding why stormfags defend colonization. Half the shit they complain about is a consequence of colonization.

Post colonization when the nations could actually make use of modern tech and Healthcare as an independent entity instead if bring tied down to the metropolis extremely small budget.

>he connected european chinese and arab civilizations.

Pretty sure they had contact pre-khaned as well for quite some time I think.

He's Mexican

if enough emigrated, set up decent institutions and stayed there as the majority then sort of yes (though not for the native population really)

if they just went there, set up extractive institutions and maybe built a road and a railway then no not really

How would you even begin to quantify and answer that question? How many exploited and killed natives are worth a place being introduced to Western technology and practices?

>Mexican
>Implying bla bla bla you know this already...

>deontology

Just repeating his arguments:
>At the time of his birth in 1162, the Old World consisted of a series of regional civilizations each of which could claim virtually no knowledge of any civilization beyond its closest neighbor. Genghis Khan built a new and unique system based on merit, loyalty, and achievement. He took the disjointed and languorous trading towns along the Silk route and organized them into history's largest free-trade zone.

B-but I'm not defending colonialism though
Neither am I a stormfag

But the introduction of modern science and society in Africa undoubtedly came from the institutions created during colonialism. For better or worse.

But are we talking about the general influence of colonialism or just the events around it themselves? The effects of colonialism still affect Africa and the world to this day

...

>Net benefit
>Getting displaced from your ancestral lands, enslaved, and sometimes genocided is worth getting some books/machines you don't understand/know how to use and medicine that only prolongs your servitude

Yeah, total benefit

>B-but I'm not defending colonialism though
I wasn't talking about you, user. You just pointed the causal connection between a thing stormfags defend (colonialism) and something they complain about (the relative growth of african population), which are also heavily related to other of their major talking points like immigration and globalization.

Yes.

>did he became brainwashed by /pol/

/reddit.com/r/JonTron/comments/5z69gh/35_quote_compilation_of_the_debate//

Yes

Oh, absolutely.
Who could've known? Neo-nazis are clinically retarded

These people are fucking dumb, they think that koreans and japanese can be racist towards each other. It's the same fucking race.

fucking reddit, not even once.

>unironically linking to reddit

Pls go back to /r/The_Donald

reddit isn't the same person. do you want to be grouped in with /x/ and /b/?

you can also move your fatass back to welfare centre of /r/socialism

The obvious question is, what was the alternative to colonialism?

Would an independent India have still benefited from the access to Western trade routes and western technology and science? Or is your conceit that India would have no access to the West whatsoever on the basis that it would have impossible to have such an unequal power relationship without it just immediately developing it into economic exploitation and more colonialism.

Because in the case of the latter, chances are India would have remained an iron age feudal society. Chances of an Indian industrial revolution happening on its own are virtually nill.

>koreans and japanese
>same race

So it wasn't racism when the Germans systematically killed white Jews and Slavs?

>I use reddit so everyone else must as well

No, reddit. You are lost.

>technology only transfers through colonialism

Anyway India itself only came into existence due to British imperialism.

Without the British the subcontinent would probably consist of multiple feuding and intermittently warring nations. Like an even shittier Balkans.

>Would an independent India have still benefited from the access to Western trade routes and western technology and science?

Well it's not like you need to be colonized to have access to western things or skilled teachers, policy advisors and things like it.

Wrong way round

>Technology creates power imbalances
>Power imbalances lead to colonialism

One European with a pistol > 200 natives with spears

What fucking chart? Was there some Ye Olde Forbes magazine? This retroactive "top 10" is nothing but pure speculation and nationalist dick waving.

How many bullets does a pistol have?

That would be cool though

Yes but that's how colonialism started.

The soldiers didn't show up first.

First came the merchants, missionaries and teachers.

You retards listen to some Let's Playe YouTuber for historical political analysis

Jesus we are doomed as a society

How many Bullets can you carry into the jungle?

>admitting he uses it and shills his garbage political opinions

>India went from top 1/2 economy
India was like a dozen states and part of the mughal empire. What in the fuck are you on about

it's fun to see people coming to their senses and speak out against garbage that is american liberty

>Jafari
Is Jon Arab?

Superior persian culture. The only worthy rivals of the Greco-Romans

Damn thats wrong and dumb
He's talk like some kind of commie too

Depends, that is how it started with the conquistadors.

>they think that koreans and japanese can be racist towards each other.

You have no idea

India didn't exist before the British

Completely varied by the place.

Read "Physicians, Colonial Racism and Diaspora in West Africa." by Adell Patton Jr.

Or just read this review of it

h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=1217

They were basically pirates though. They were in it for the gold and the slaves.

No one checking this out?

Of course.

One user already said it was their introduction to modern medicine making life expectancy go up and child mortality go down, both significantly.

That only happened post-independence.

This

>India was like a dozen states and part of the mughal empire.
India virtually was the mughal empire then.

Or it would be another version of the rest of Europe where wars between nations belong to the unusual or never happens

Or state(s) form organically with peace and war and merges.

If you live in places like South America colonization was the best thing that could happen.
t. South American

>By 1900 the indigenous population in the Americas declined by more than 80%, and by as much as 98% in some areas. The effects of diseases such as smallpox, measles and cholera during the first century of colonialism contributed greatly to the death toll, while violence, displacement and warfare by colonizers against the Indians contributed to the death toll in subsequent centuries. As detailed in American Philosophy: From Wounded Knee to the Present, "It is also apparent that the shared history of the hemisphere is one framed by the dual tragedies of genocide and slavery, both of which are part of the legacy of the European invasions of the past 500 years. Indigenous people north and south were displaced, died of disease, and were killed by Europeans through slavery, rape and war. In 1491, about 145 million people lived in the western hemisphere. By 1691, the population of indigenous Americans had declined by 90-95 percent."

Well, no source I found in a quick google agrees with your 145million statement, with most giving the number between 50-100 million.

Also, disease would've gotten there eventually, so lots would have died whether or not some random fuckers decided to sail west to trade with chinamen.

The natives were not victims of genocide or slaved (at least in South America), i dont know who is that "historian" but he is retard as fuck

He's not talking about south america specifically.

also
>145 million people lived in the western hemisphere
TER WUZ 150 GORILLON HABITANTS IN MURICA

So why you quote him if i am talking about South America?

>Korea
>client state of the US
>Japan
>client state of the US

Only china is uncucked by the white man but thats because the white man cucked them super hard and then everyone cucked them super hard like 200-100 years ago

Well its like saying the Holocaust actually benefited the jews.

South Korea and Japan are shining examples of American style Democracy lol

it did

what about Vietnam? they seems pretty uncucked for me

Because most of the quote does apply. Shit like "South America colonization was the best thing that could happen" is just being a retarded edgefag. But whatever m8, I'm sure natives from the americas were pretty happy.

They're the ultimate uncucked, same with Iran

Many tribes in South America received the Spaniards as liberators and those who were outside the viceroyalties tried to enter Spanish territory where they would neither be assassinated nor enslaved, for example the guaranies and the Eastern missions

People still reply to this seriously lol.

Yet they still got btfo lol.

Schools are better then no school
Hospitals are better then witchdoctors
Law is better then spearing
Roads
Infrastructure
Etc

india?

but the romans had heard of china and vice versa

>listen

no I shitpost about it on Veeky Forums. I've no idea who actually listens to youtube gamers but apparently they exist.

t. consumer of John Green rubbish

wasn't trade to the far east a significant enough reason for romans and later byzantines to constantly battle it out with persia?

>There were no schools before the Europeans showed up
>There was no medicine before the Europeans showed up or no alternative ways to acquire European medicine traditions
>There were no legal traditions before the Europeans showed up
>There were no roads before the Europeans showed up
>There were no infrastructure before the Europeans showed up
Maybe a few African tribes matched that but even there it isn't nearly as backwards as you're claiming.
Most of the world had some forms of customary laws, some form of medicine traditions (and the Europeans weren't necessarily geniuses there, these are the same people that were still bleeding people until the 1800s), roads, infrastructure, and education. They could have acquired European innovations through means other than colonialism too, just like Japan, the most successful modernizer.

>Ireland was colonised and not planted
I know it's st Patrick's day but this is blind drunk behaviour

>Ireland was colonised and not planted
I know it's st Patrick's day but this is blind drunk behaviour g