Was there anything the Spanish could have done to retain their Colonies?

>colonies break free
>they turn into third world countries
Lol

Yet in average Spanish colonies did better than British colonies.

Blue = "Very High" Human Development Index score
Green = "High" Human Development Index score
Yellow = "Medium" Human Development Index score
Red = "Low" Human Development Index score

Yeah, because the USA and argentina are very comparable.

At the high end you have Argentina and USA.
And at the low end you have Bolivia and Zimbabwe.

Where would you rather live in?

Fact is, if you had to pick a former Spanish colony and a former British colony at random you'd have more luck with the Spanish.

?

Seems pretty comfy senpai
The United States has two of the 20 most dangerous cities in the world (St. Louis and Chicago), last time I checked Argentina didn't.

And Australia is a much better place to live if I had to pick an Anglo nation anyway. You Americans need to get over yourselves.

t. Uruguayan

most retarded post I've ever seen ngl

The Spanish king appointed the viceroys.This post is garbage

what is this bloated ass map portugal never controlled half that shit

>Was there anything the Spanish could have done to retain their Colonies?

Charles III was pitched a Commonwealth of Spain, with a Spanish Emperor at the top and infantes being given autonomous Spanish Kingdoms. That may have hinder fragmentation alittle and maintained a looser confederation.

But at the end of the day, Latin-American independence was economic. Agricultural economies will always push for free market trade, which means breaking with the Spanish trade block.

Former British colonies actually have futures though lol.

But Jesuits were the good guys

British colonies were mostly held for like 80 years, while Spain held to theirs for over 200

This to be honest. they were the ones that stood up for natives, tried to agitate for better treatment of them (and supprotedthem through that), respected native sovereignty and culture (they Christianized them but didn't force natives to ape Europeans in their Reductions) and showcasing that said natives can be better Christians then many people who were born into it. They also preserved many written records on languages, artwork and other things from natives.

The Jesuits were as far as I know were the best order to be approached by in colonial times.

YOU know what lets make a tier list of the best Christina order/organization to encounter if you werea leader in some foreign land.

Do they?

South Africa is about to blow up Zimbabwe-style
India is a shithole and outclassed by China
The US is becoming Mexican

Kill Luther before he can start shit and keep Francois in jail to save Charles V's european dream.

Or

Kill Richelieu so the "30 years war" becomes an anecdotic chimp-out. Alternatively refrain from baby-sitting the austrian Habsburgs and focus on dealing with the constant french and berber aggression against Spain and Italy.

You're retarded. Do you think that the spanish monarch was some wizard with magic? Half your plan is impossible if he isn't.

>South Africa is about to blow up Zimbabwe-style

Not really if you actually bother to read up on it.

I think it includes areas of influence/patrol aswell but Indonesia and southern China (outside Macau and some other small ports) weren't completly under Portuguese control

Because they were not ffs

It's just probably a false flag attack by the Americans so thay have an excuse to declare war on Spain to grab Spanish possessions in the Carribean and Asia

Replying to this

The spanish viceroyalties are wrong too. New Granada and Rio de la Plata were still under Peru in 1580. It's a school book and, since it's in catalan, they probably didn't put much attention to the period of the spanish empire except for the franco-spanish war and the succession war.

Julius Malema went from being a joke nobody took seriously to commanding South Africa's third largest party and growing.

completely reforming their absolutely retarded colonial system would be a start. there were so many things wrong with it I don't even know where to begin

It failed with the trade oriented 18th century because of that retarded trade monopoly that encouraged smuggling and caudillos
it failed with the nationalism oriented 19th with Cuba and the Philippines, despite them being Spaniards in all but name, because of that retarded 400 years old "only Spaniards can govern colonies" rule

On top of that it was an administrative disaster with the viceroys sitting on their capital beating on their dicks while criollos and jesuits built all the cities and universities. Some of the iner cities haven't seen a Spanish representative since being funded.

Investing in them rather than raping them for gold.

Australia bans videogames, it's shit.

The masons orchestrated and sustained the whole independent movement, not only the founding fathers of all of south america were freemasons, but they also wrote every single constitution.

This.

I really don't want to participate in this retarded argument but your point is dumb as shit.
If Spain was powerful enough to colonize Africa during the time everybody else was, their colonies would've been just as bad as the British African Colonies.
Also most of the British ones with a low HDI became independant after world war 2, and I'm not mentioning the million of circumstances that led to those zones being extremely unstable, unlike the Viceroyalties of Spanish America (who had/have their share of instability).
You can't just point out a map, say "LOOK ITS DIFFERENT" and make a giant logical leap that it happened for this particular reason.

My point wasn't to bash to British but to destroy this ridiculous Angloboo myth that the Spanish only exploited their colonies and the magical British Empire only left developed countries and civilized tea-sipping democracies wherever it went.

If the British had colonized Mexico it would still have been a mess, if the Spanish had colonized Canada it would still be a nice place to live.