Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      

*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.

Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds


CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ----> Connect



Goto page 1, 2  Next  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 2
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
kwlafayette





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 6155
Reputation: 156.2Reputation: 156.2
votes: 28
Location: Saskatoon Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Fri Oct 27, 2006 10:05 pm    Post subject: Colonialism, force for good. Reply with quote

It seems everything the left asserts is quantifiably wrong.

This hasn't been discussed here yet, as far as I could see. Picked up on it at Daimnation.

Quote:
Feyrer and Sacedote's key findings are that the longer one of the islands spent as a colony, the higher its present-day living standards and the lower its infant mortality rate. Each additional century of European colonization is associated with a 40 percent boost in income today and a reduction in infant mortality of 2.6 deaths per 1,000 births.

...

So, what did the Europeans do right? The authors conclude that there's no simple answer. The most plausible mechanisms include trade, education, and democratic government. When the study directly measures these factors, some of them help to explain income differences among islands—for example, the places that traded only basic agricultural products in colonial times now have lower living standards. But even after accounting for these concrete determinants, longer European colonization has some extra pro-growth effect. Exposure to European colonizers, it appears, benefits living standards for reasons apart from the direct effects of government, education, and markets.

...

The authors also compare the experiences of separate Pacific islands with eight different colonizers: the United States, Britain, Spain, the Netherlands, Portugal, Japan, Germany, and France.* Their verdict is that the islands that are best off, in terms of income growth, are the ones that were colonized by the United States—as in Guam and Puerto Rico. Next best is time spent as a Dutch, British, or French colony. At the bottom are the countries colonized by the Spanish and especially the Portuguese.

http://www.slate.com/id/2151852/

I wonder, could that unidentifiable reason actually be the Christianity that the left so despises today?
FF_Canuck





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 3360
Reputation: 73.4
votes: 17
Location: Southern Alberta

PostPosted: Sat Oct 28, 2006 11:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I wonder, could that unidentifiable reason actually be the Christianity that the left so despises today?


I'm sure it made some impact, but among the colonial powers listed those that were arguably the 'most religious' during their respective eras of colonialism (Spain, Portugal, and France) occupy the bottom spaces on the list.

I would argue that it was not necesarrily the type of faith, but the kind of culture that supports organized religion that would be responsible for this effect.
CC Scott





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 151
Reputation: 15.9Reputation: 15.9
Location: Edmonton

PostPosted: Sat Oct 28, 2006 5:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm not sure that I would say tht colonialism was a complete force for good. Just look at the former colonies that countries such as France, the Netherlands, Belgium, and Germany controlled. They're generally places of civil strife, and/or dictatorships. At least Britain's former colonies are faring a little better.
kwlafayette





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 6155
Reputation: 156.2Reputation: 156.2
votes: 28
Location: Saskatoon Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Sat Oct 28, 2006 11:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yeah obviously some mistakes were made, by all the imperial powers. On the balance though, I think I will take my British colonial heritage over say, North Korean citizenship, or some other current hell hole.
jnarvey





Joined: 04 Sep 2006
Posts: 47
Reputation: 17.2Reputation: 17.2
Location: Vancouver

PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2006 10:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Yeah obviously some mistakes were made, by all the imperial powers. On the balance though, I think I will take my British colonial heritage over say, North Korean citizenship, or some other current hell hole.

Um... What the heck are you talking about? How does North Korea come into this?

"Mistakes were made"? Right. The age of European (and Japanese) Imperialism exterminated entire nations and left the ones that managed to hang on in bad shape as weak dependent vassal states. The debateable benefits to a few tiny islands in the Pacific is hardly relevant to the overall picture.
kwlafayette





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 6155
Reputation: 156.2Reputation: 156.2
votes: 28
Location: Saskatoon Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I guess, if India, Hong Kong, Singapore, Canada, Australia, and the US, all former British colonies, and all among the better places to live in their neck of the woods, are all weak dependent vassal states, well, I will stick with my weak dependent vassal state. Living conditions are a lot better here than a lot of other places.

You look at the history of the places colonized by the Britsh, and how they are doing today, and it is undeniable that the Britsh left some good in their wake. Compare India's government to Pakistan's. Compare the standard of living in Singapore, a Britsh colony, to Vietnam, a French colony.
jnarvey





Joined: 04 Sep 2006
Posts: 47
Reputation: 17.2Reputation: 17.2
Location: Vancouver

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 4:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I guess, if India, Hong Kong, Singapore, Canada, Australia, and the US, all former British colonies, and all among the better places to live in their neck of the woods, are all weak dependent vassal states, well, I will stick with my weak dependent vassal state.


Your examples only prove my point. India was already at an approximately equal stage of industrial development with Britain when the Brits took over the place. Now look at the disparity. As for Canada, Australia and the US, you've missed my point. Of course the colonizers have done well - but the indigenous populations, by any standard, have not.

As for Hong Kong and Singapore, I hardly think that the examples of city states necessarily prove anything about the larger question of large swathes of the Earth's territory being taken over by a few temporarily technologically-advantaged nations.

Your thesis is bankrupt.
Tim K





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 40
Reputation: 28.3Reputation: 28.3Reputation: 28.3
votes: 2

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 7:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yeah, KW - you're a colonizer, not one of the colonized. Don't we respect the concept of cultural sovereignty and self determination? What was the basis for colonizing these places anyway? To tame the savages?
kwlafayette





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 6155
Reputation: 156.2Reputation: 156.2
votes: 28
Location: Saskatoon Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Thu Nov 02, 2006 10:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tim K wrote:
Yeah, KW - you're a colonizer, not one of the colonized. Don't we respect the concept of cultural sovereignty and self determination? What was the basis for colonizing these places anyway? To tame the savages?

Your presumptions make me laugh. Did you know that Lafayette was the name of a French general who helped free the slaves during the American civil war? What basis do you have for calling me a colonizer? None, simply your own prejudice.
jnarvey





Joined: 04 Sep 2006
Posts: 47
Reputation: 17.2Reputation: 17.2
Location: Vancouver

PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 5:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
What basis do you have for calling me a colonizer? None, simply your own prejudice.

Actually, your own words are the problem, here.

Frankly, your distant (and possibly non-existent) relation towards some obscure French general who may have helped slaves during the American Civil War is not even relevant. The civil war was not even a colonial conflict in the sense of a colonized people fighting the invaders. I'm not even sure why you brought it up.

You've made clear that you believe that colonization was a good thing (which it arguably was, for the colonizing nations), while ignoring any examples we've provided of the effect on the indigenous populations.

You are obviously not a colonizer in the sense that you personally helped your imperial nation conquer distant lands and attempt to assimilate them into your empire - but you clearly share the same outlook and rationalizations as the ones who carried out such campaigns.
kwlafayette





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 6155
Reputation: 156.2Reputation: 156.2
votes: 28
Location: Saskatoon Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 12:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am entirely unrelated to the French general Lafayette. As you may know, when slaves were brought over, their names were taken from them. Lafayette was the name my ancestors chose for themselves when they were freed.

So call me a colonizer if you want, I will take Christian liberal values over what you are peddling any day of the week.

My family has traced it back, and we believe that this is the first Lafayette in our family.

http://www.americanrevwar.home...../JAMES.HTM
biggie





Joined: 06 Sep 2006
Posts: 1738
Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44
votes: 10
Location: Ottawa, Ontario

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 12:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

kwlafayette wrote:

My family has traced it back, and we believe that this is the first Lafayette in our family.

http://www.americanrevwar.home...../JAMES.HTM


Wow, that's something else...
Certainly a heritage to be proud of.
jnarvey





Joined: 04 Sep 2006
Posts: 47
Reputation: 17.2Reputation: 17.2
Location: Vancouver

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 1:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
My family has traced it back, and we believe that this is the first Lafayette in our family.

Again... what? This just ain't relevant. Anything else?

Quote:
So call me a colonizer if you want, I will take Christian liberal values over what you are peddling any day of the week.

And I'm peddling... what? Clarity of language? A world where indigenous cultures don't get trampled on by imperialists "spreading their goodness"? What's wrong with that?
kwlafayette





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 6155
Reputation: 156.2Reputation: 156.2
votes: 28
Location: Saskatoon Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 10:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I just don't get what you have against a higher standard of living, lower infant mortality rate, and all the rest. I guess we will have to agree to diagree.
jnarvey





Joined: 04 Sep 2006
Posts: 47
Reputation: 17.2Reputation: 17.2
Location: Vancouver

PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 11:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I just don't get what you have against a higher standard of living, lower infant mortality rate, and all the rest. I guess we will have to agree to diagree.

Now you're just being ignorant. Try reading what I've actually written and responding to it. What I've suggested again and again is that colonized people could actually have a higher standard of living, lower infant mortality rate and all the rest if their lands hadn't been seized, their people hadn't been ravaged by war and disease, and the others hadn't been forced into a regime of assimilation. You're just ignoring everything I wrote.
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 2

Goto page 1, 2  Next  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Colonialism, force for good.

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB