Why exactly were the French such shitty colonial overlords?

Why exactly were the French such shitty colonial overlords?
>inb4 "haiti only sucks because it's black" meme
The Dominican Republic is majority mulatto, and the majority of Dominican mulattoes are majority black, it's still orders of magnitude better than Haiti which is literally located on the same island.

A bit of white genes go a long way.

its the fault of the people who live there, not the people who ruled hundreds of years ago, for that countries current state. And as I recall, the greatest former colony, the USA, revolted against its rulers.

>t. retard
How is Haiti supposed to develop when they have a shit ton of debt to France in their peace treaty? They couldn't field anywhere close to the manpower of the US nor could they find allies abroad.

Extremely extremely incompetent Haitian leadership, coupled with economic exploitation from France and later on, American meddling.

It also didn't help that they killed nearly all the whites there.

>the greatest former colony
>not, 'the nation that spawned out of technological product of the most advanced nations on earth, that also happened upon abundant fertile and naturally-fed agricultural basins unseen practically anywhere in the world that allow for enormous food output; in addition to minerals, timber, furs and cotton; in addition a demand for all the above'

>not the people who ruled hundreds of years ago
Haiti was still paying a significant portion of its GDP in debts to France as late as 1947. Its development was irreversibly fucked over.

>and later on, American meddling
American meddling was the best thing that ever happened to Haiti.

Haiti at the time had a higher GDP than the USA. It would've had no problem paying its denbts if haitians were not utterly incompetent.

Dr actually is notably bigger then Haiti. fun fact Everywhere in Haiti is near the coast while DR has a nice chunk of inner land.

that is their fault, for signing that peace treaty and agreeing to pay that debt.
i don't get waht your point is. did the resources make the US great, and not the people? because savages lived there for hundreds of years, and they weren't great at all.
it is their fault, for paying.

Was it the shittiness of colonial overlords, or the ineffectiveness of their transition to majority/native rule?

>Example: Ghana

>it is their fault, for paying.
France threatened to burn down their cities, the demand for payments was delivered by a fleet of warships.

The fucking propped up the doc family dictators. The American invasion befire was done out if completely stupid reasons just to economically dominate the country.

and France was right to do so. For murdering so many French people.

The French murdered 6 out of every 10 blacks on the islands beforehand.

Every single French colony was a basket case (bar maybe the northern parts of Algeria). Without exception. Vietnam, for example, was poorer than most of Sub-Saharan Africa until very recently.

unproven as there were no court cases.

They wanted a challenge.

Yeah because you can totally take a bunch of illiterate tribesmen (the lowest of their societies) from a hundred different places, enslave them for 300 years, kill millions of them to the point that one small colony requires more slave imports than the whole of mainland North America, kill the majority of their population when they declare independence, place a huge debt on them, and then magically they will fix everything in a few dozen years. Clearly French policy has had no lasting effect on the country.

France never cared about the whites killed at all. The debt was about losing Haiti as their premier money making colony not the people.

>Haiti at the time had a higher GDP than the USA.
I highly doubt that considering the US had nearly 6 times the population but give a source.

torture makes people more pious user. Its what made territories of the roman empire white, constant warfare and sacking of cities. As for that case, they went from tribal savages to murderous americans in banana republic. Which is something Africans failed to acomplish in the thousands of years they lived as 'tribesman'.

Resources did in part make the United States an excellent country; another part was its attraction to those who had been marginalised by society; everyone from English-speaking Scots who were ousted from their highland homes to French Huguenots to Dutch Reformists to Protestant Germans.

Regardless, there was a huge rush for the Americas. It's really not a surprise to look at their status as a world power. They have an area the size of most european countries solely dedicated to growing cereal crops and corn for world markets.

they hanged people for the murders though.

Their piety, above that, granted them their world status.

The French made the mistake of educating their slaves, which made them just wise enough to realize they were getting the shaft but not wise enough to know what to do after killing the people that taught them.

Study the history of the Domincan, it was run by the United States Military for a long while durring the cold war. We built the infrastructure that their country uses

>France threatened to burn down their cities, the demand for payments was delivered by a fleet of warships.
And the Haitians killed all the white people

>piety

...

1+ Dread

>it is their fault, for paying.

Ironically there's a lot of truth to this. If you conduct a violent revolt overthrowing your oppressors, you better have a plan to keep what you fought for. It's silly to massacre your rulers to then bend to their will anyway and push your people into centuries of debt.
>bu-but the french threatened retaliation and they had warships
Don't revolt then.
>but they were oppressed
Then revolt and do it right.
>they were outclassed in technology!
Small wonder they got shipped off as slaves, huh?

>Ayyo we finna be free lmao