Why did Canada and the US thrive compared to Spanish/Portuguese former colonies in the Americas?

[Anonymous]

Yes Chinese population increased rapidly post vaccination and their agriculture wasn't able to keep pace in the 50s through 70s, BUT MAINLY due to the arbitrary communist policies rather than lack of land. But once hybrid crops, better water utilization techniques were deployed from 1980s onwards there was never a shortage of food.

Your history seems to stop in the 1970s and also you attribute all of it to lack of land when MAO caused many a famine with his crazy communist policies of community farms and when educated people were moved to farms only to die in millions and reduce farm productivity. Please read some chinese history.

India also suffered due to socialist policies BUT because they are socialist democracy the Indian government policies wasn't as bad and certainly millions didn't die due to artificial famines after Independence.

[Anonymous]

Protestant work ethic, low corruption and rule of law as well as a primarily European demographic though Argentina was one of the weathiest countries in the world a hundred years ago and predominantly European dervived.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Protestant work ethic, low corruption and rule of law as well as a primarily European demographic though Argentina was one of the weathiest countries in the world a hundred years ago and predominantly European dervived.

The same old lies again and again. There is nothing called protestant work ethic. Every culture works hard depending socio-economic factors not religious or racial. How did Japan with buddhist work ethic still kick some protestant ass? Or the modern day Koreans or Chinese or Indians? How is Germany(50% catholic) and France(mostly catholic) doing just as well?

So now with the rise of China and India, what happened to the protestant work ethic? Have the whites become lazy? China is the largest economy today. Does it make Chinese the hardest workers and make TAOIST/Buddhist work ethic the best? Asians in Americans are the most successful and many actually consider whites to be lazy. What happened to the famous protestant work ethic? Its just a lie. The generation of whites who grew up in relative comfort are lazy today compared to Asian Americans. Thats all.

[Anonymous]

Protestant work ethic. Asian people also tend to have a hard work ethic. How many asian Catholics do you know? I know none, but assume there may be a few out there.

Combine that with tropical diseases and heat, which is a problem the South had before air conditioning..

[Anonymous]

Oh, I think countries like France and Britain had a little something to do with that. And then another country like the U.S. had a little something to do with that....

[Anonymous]

But.... the British colonized so much of Africa, why isn't it doing better????!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Protestant work ethic. Asian people also tend to have a hard work ethic. How many asian Catholics do you know? I know none, but assume there may be a few out there.

Combine that with tropical diseases and heat, which is a problem the South had before air conditioning..

Explain Canada.

Also France (in the 17th-18th centuries)

And Spain in the 16th-18th centuries

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Protestant work ethic. Asian people also tend to have a hard work ethic. How many asian Catholics do you know? I know none, but assume there may be a few out there.

Combine that with tropical diseases and heat, which is a problem the South had before air conditioning..

Exactly,Asians have a MUCH BETTER THAN work ethic than today's protestants. Every culture works hard and has a work ethic based on socio-economic factors, not based on religion or race.

French are Catholics, How come France is advanced nation on par with protestant UK? The answer is work ethic has nothing to do with religion or race.

[Anonymous]

It has to do with technological superiority. Europeans were able to colonize when they did due to technological advantages in ships, weaponry, farming, etc. In the post-Enlightenment period, Europeans somehow managed to gain a technological advantage over competitors in the Middle East, Asia, North America, and Africa. For much the previous millennia, Europeans had actually lagged behind much of the world when it came to technological revolution.

The big question: why did Europe have a sudden leap in technological improvement while other continents did not? It's still a bit of a mystery. I would say that the rise of sophisticated and centralized religious institutions - such as the Catholic Church and Church of England, plus the creation of universities affiliated with such religions - may have contributed to the concentration of European intellectuals. This, in turn, allowed them to more easily acquire knowledge and gain technological breakthroughs at a much faster pace than in previous centuries. Still, other continents also had sophisticated university systems that were even older than Europe's.

There's no straight forward answer. I honestly believe it was mostly a combination of favorable geography, temperate 4-season weather, and a strong dose of luck.

[Anonymous]

The US and Canada benefited from inheriting the British economic and political systems, which were more liberal and democratic than the Spanish and Portuguese systems, encouraging responsive governments and industry.

They also benefited from (mostly) friendly relations with the British Empire during the Victorian age, when Britain was the most advanced country in the world and the British navy ruled the seas. This made it easy for US ships to trade.

The British colonies were mostly settled with the intent of their colonists actually living there permanently, as opposed to simply exploiting resources, though Canada was most about the fur trade. By the time of the American Revolution, US citizens were already among the wealthiest and most educated in the world, even though the country was brand new. The Spanish and Portuguese were mostly interested in setting up plantations, enslaving the locals and plundering resources.

Some countries, like Argentina, Venezuela, Cuba, would have been wealthy if not for their embrace of ill-considered socialist governments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And then I look over to europe and see that as bad as the UK and France are doing, they are a lot better off than Spain & Portugal.

Is there something just inherent in Spanish and Portuguese culture that lends to more dysfunction when it comes to general economics and government administration?

If the British colonized mexico and south america, I don't think we would have the same issue we do today.

I think this split reflects Northern European culture vs Southern European culture.

Thank you Mr. White Ethnostate. Culture does not determine success. The major Empires in world history are not Northern European. How did those cultures create empires that were bigger and lasted longer?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It has to do with technological superiority. Europeans were able to colonize when they did due to technological advantages in ships, weaponry, farming, etc. In the post-Enlightenment period, Europeans somehow managed to gain a technological advantage over competitors in the Middle East, Asia, North America, and Africa. For much the previous millennia, Europeans had actually lagged behind much of the world when it came to technological revolution.

The big question: why did Europe have a sudden leap in technological improvement while other continents did not? It's still a bit of a mystery. I would say that the rise of sophisticated and centralized religious institutions - such as the Catholic Church and Church of England, plus the creation of universities affiliated with such religions - may have contributed to the concentration of European intellectuals. This, in turn, allowed them to more easily acquire knowledge and gain technological breakthroughs at a much faster pace than in previous centuries. Still, other continents also had sophisticated university systems that were even older than Europe's.

There's no straight forward answer. I honestly believe it was mostly a combination of favorable geography, temperate 4-season weather, and a strong dose of luck.

The question was about British colonies vs Spanish/Portuguese colonies. These are all European, but the British colonies in America were far more successful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Catholocism vs. Protestantism factored into it.

good point. Catholicism has always had a more tortured relationship with economic progress the modern administrative state than protestantism.

[Anonymous]

Why? Because we did not remain a Spanish/Portuguese colony.

[Anonymous]

Jamaica. English-speaking failure. Same for Belize. Sierra Leone? A mess. Thanks, English.