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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

More myths and lies. Europe was nowhere near as technologically advanced as China until 1500s. China was the one that invented gun powder and had ships 4 times the size of the Ship Columbus sailed. India was also sailing the SE Asia for centuries before that.

The explanation for bolded above as to the mystery of how Europe became more advanced than China is, the Plundered resources from Americas and slave labor. The two Asian giants simply couldn't muster enough resources from within to match the plunder from Americas and lil later Africa. Then there was 200 years of slave labor that killed textile industry in Asia because not only they were outdone by the plunder BUT ALSO BY FREE SLAVE LABOR. SoChina suffered a long decline and India's decline was lil faster than China's.

The straight forward answer is New resources from the new continents, slavery, geography, climate, arable land, in other words, All of the above.

But now that there are no more plunder from new land and slavery is no longer passe, you see CHINA and India with huge Internal resources back as worlds top economies.

Thank you. It amazes me how few people recognize the way in which SLAVE LABOR affected world economies. White washing at its finest.

—White Woman

Slave labor ended generations ago in the west.

Heck in this country, it wasn't slave labor that was responsible for the northern economy.

It certainly was a major part of it. How stupid are you?

Pre- civil war, the northern economy was not slave based, nor could it have been numerically.

There were only around 250k African Americans living in the north out of a population of 18 million people.

You don't have to have slaves in the North to have economy that is based on slavery. Ever heard of cotton? or cotton mill? I guess that wasn't a big industry in the North? Ever heard of New England Mills?

[Anonymous]

This has been a very interesting thread and relatively civil for this forum too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

More myths and lies. Europe was nowhere near as technologically advanced as China until 1500s. China was the one that invented gun powder and had ships 4 times the size of the Ship Columbus sailed. India was also sailing the SE Asia for centuries before that.

The explanation for bolded above as to the mystery of how Europe became more advanced than China is, the Plundered resources from Americas and slave labor. The two Asian giants simply couldn't muster enough resources from within to match the plunder from Americas and lil later Africa. Then there was 200 years of slave labor that killed textile industry in Asia because not only they were outdone by the plunder BUT ALSO BY FREE SLAVE LABOR. SoChina suffered a long decline and India's decline was lil faster than China's.

The straight forward answer is New resources from the new continents, slavery, geography, climate, arable land, in other words, All of the above.

But now that there are no more plunder from new land and slavery is no longer passe, you see CHINA and India with huge Internal resources back as worlds top economies.

Thank you. It amazes me how few people recognize the way in which SLAVE LABOR affected world economies. White washing at its finest.

—White Woman

Slave labor ended generations ago in the west.

Heck in this country, it wasn't slave labor that was responsible for the northern economy.

It certainly was a major part of it. How stupid are you?

Pre- civil war, the northern economy was not slave based, nor could it have been numerically.

There were only around 250k African Americans living in the north out of a population of 18 million people.

You don't have to have slaves in the North to have economy that is based on slavery. Ever heard of cotton? or cotton mill? I guess that wasn't a big industry in the North? Ever heard of New England Mills?

And you ever hear of the northern founderies? Factories? Shipyards? Rail Roads? I guess that wasn't a big thing up in the north. All that labor was provided by those slaves they had up there wasn't it?

"How stupid are you?"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The Spanish/Portuguese populated areas where there had been great indigenous cities/empires (Inca, Maya, Aztec) and much higher numbers of indigenous peoples. They lived side by side and developed the hacienda system (much like our southern plantation system). The British developed the slave trade to compete economically. The Spanish definitely used the native population as labor, but viewed them in a different way; they intermarried and created a "mestizo" group.

The southern part of the US was similar in some ways to many parts of Latin America . . . mainly agricultural. Without the northern states, the US as a whole would have been much more similar to the "hacienda" economy of Latin America. Even to this day, the southern US states are poorer and not known for good schools (in general). More than a few Confederates fled to Latin America after the Civil War.

+1

And the basic reason why is: IMMIGRANTS

https://www.britannica.com/place/North-America/The-economy

“The large numbers of energetic immigrants from a rapidly modernizing western Europe, who brought with them the newest technological advances, ”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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..

I know plenty. Goans, Koreans...

Has nothing to do with religion.

-signed a life long Asian protestant

Filipinos! Many Vietnamese.

[Anonymous]

In the US the land became a country of the immigrants, in other regions the immigrants did not outnumber the native population, killing them to take the land was pointless as there was not enough people to do something with this land
The indigenous people were thrust into the modern era of the time and survived. Much of their culture and customs, beliefs have not been lost

[Anonymous]

Go read Guns, Germs and Steel and recognize that history isn't built on white supremacy

[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.

Canada is mostly catholic, and nowadays majority of people do not go to church anymore. I was in a Methodist church in Toronto and it had 10 to 20 people most of the time.

I used to live in a resurrection college in Canada, which used to train priests but since there was so few people becoming priests and so it was converted to a college dormitory.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Um. OP, have you ever read much European history? I mean history going back centuries, not just the past one or two? Do you know how large and powerful the Spanish Empire was? Did you know that Spain essentially ruled over western Europe for several centuries (including over the low lands)? here's a hint - google Habsburg Spain and see what you find.

And going back way before that, do you recollect who had a ginormous empire that extended all the way from Britain to the Middle East? Yes, indeed, it was the Romans, who where - wait for it - SOUTHERNERS!

Please, get back to school and redo your history classes.

My people really rocked it at one point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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..

I know plenty. Goans, Koreans...

Has nothing to do with religion.

-signed a life long Asian protestant

Filipinos! Many Vietnamese.

pinoys and viets are no where near as successful in the US as Chinese, Indian, and Koreans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

I'm waiting for OP to answer this, too.

OP, please learn so European history, then come back to this thread.

Do you really want to know? Because Africa, although blessed with tremendous resources, is and has been comparatively primitive.

Read "Guns, germs and Steel". You are too simple to understand complex evolution of societies. But atleast make an effort to learn.

Africa didn't have usable land for large empires to evolve. Africa is either desert or thick equatorial forests for the most part. Africa doesn't have predictable rainfall or arable land on fertile river plains. Thats why big empires came in India/China with large, fertile, river fed plains. Europe came later on but empires never came out of sweden or Finland(too cold). They still came out of the german plains and northern italy which is flat.

Africa only has famine because of politics, not because of lack of food or land.

You need to understand the historical context why Africa didn't develop. And development is cumulative. If you haven't developed for centuries due to poor geography, climate, lack of resources etc, you can't suddenly develop or create sustainable institutions.

The politics can't suddenly get better when they suffered from colonialism and apartheid as recent as 2-3 decades ago. You are a simpleton expecting a simple explanation to complex evolution of humans and human culture(anthropology).

https://news.osu.edu/when-europeans-were-slaves--research-suggests-white-slavery-was-much-more-common-than-previously-believed/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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..

I know plenty. Goans, Koreans...

Has nothing to do with religion.

-signed a life long Asian protestant

Filipinos! Many Vietnamese.

pinoys and viets are no where near as successful in the US as Chinese, Indian, and Koreans.

This is not correct according to a Pew study. Indians have the highest median household income, followed by Filipinos. Next are Japanese, Chinese, Pakistanis and Koreans, in that order. Vietnamese do not show up on the household income chart, but the text indicates they have the highest rate of home ownership.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/09/08/key-facts-about-asian-americans/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Show your work. The ability to plan ahead ahead likely has a genetic basis. Places like England where successful people had more children for many hundreds of years experienced genetic selection for desirable traits like this. Other parts of the world where tribalism was not replaced by the rule of law and we’ll functioning economies did not experience the same phenomenon. Nicholas Wade, NYT science writer, recently wrote an interesting book about this called “A Troublesome Inheritance.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
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.





Show your work. The ability to plan ahead ahead likely has a genetic basis. Places like England where successful people had more children for many hundreds of years experienced genetic selection for desirable traits like this. Other parts of the world where tribalism was not replaced by the rule of law and we’ll functioning economies did not experience the same phenomenon. Nicholas Wade, NYT science writer, recently wrote an interesting book about this called “A Troublesome Inheritance.”

While I have not read this book, I know plenty of wealthy people who are good planners, yet their children are not. Do you think this is a a dominant gene? Maybe the next generation doesn't always inherit the gene? It seems like the bad planners would be the ones with more children?

[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.

Because the Brits and the Americans essentially killed all the native populations, destroying old cultures and habits and building new ones from scratch.

Instead, the Spanish and Portuguese wanted to convert the indigenous populations to Catholicism, whic obviously you couldn't do if you massacred them. So what resulted was a mixture of cultures, for good (over half of all Lat Am inhabitants are at least part indigenous) and for bad.