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

Forum Index » Political Discussion

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

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Europeans conquered most of the New World and India before the Atlantic Save Trade really got going, though I doubt they would have been able to conquer China.

India was not a nation until the 20th Century. Prior to the British imperialism, India was a collection of "princely states" that shared some cultural ties, like European states, but were not a single nation. Discussing India as if it was a nation in 1600 is anachronistic.

There is no question that the British Empire benefited enormously from India. I'm not sure if the US really benefited that much from slavery. The South was economically backwards and weaker than the North, despite the slavery. It's a bit like the Middle East and oil. The easy oil makes people lazy and suppresses innovation and hurts them in the long run. It only "helps" the wealthy aristocracy who own everything.[/quote]

This is BS. India was never conquered by the BRITS because a conquered country everywhere in the world loses its culture, language and religion. India was too big for brits or anyone to fully conquer. Thats why India is still over 80% Hindu with its own culture and Language. The west was conquered by middle eastern religion Christianity AND TODAY there is no remnance of Pre-christian culture in Europe. THAT IS CONQUERING.

India is the size of Europe. India had empires stretching from Afghanistan to the south. The Mauryas, Guptas, Moghals united the North and the south was mostly controlled by cholas and chalukyas. At times of transition these empires broke into smaller units only to be united later on by another empire.

Atlantic slave trade has been going on since the 1600s. India was part of British empire only in 1850s, around the end of slavery. So Your chronology is way off.

China would not have been conquerable at all because it was more united than India for sure, and bigger than India for sure. China also has deep hinterland and so no China is simply unconquerable. And yes the US benefited a lot from slavery because China was the leaders in textiles and other industries and India in spices. Indeed it was the need to find trade route to India's spices that triggered the discovery of Americas to begin with. So centuries of slavery and free plunder from Americas did collapse Chinese economy and the Indian economy(whether one entity or northern and southern entities the economic effect was the same).

[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics