Quote:
Originally Posted by Itse
I'm sorry, but what? And people are actually thanking this post?
I mean, I have no idea what period in time you're talking about, but it's certainly not colonialism. Colonialism is a term that most commonly refers to European colonialism in the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries. It was basically created to describe exactly that thing.
After the age of colonization became the era of neo-imperialism, which includes The Scramble for Africa. This is the part where the map of Africa is drawn by mostly European countries.
After neo-imperialism became the era of neo-colonialism, which refers to the continued significant influence of mostly European and American powers over by-then technically de-colonized developing countries. At this point the multinational corporations really start taking over the picture, but I have never heard anyone claim that Europe was somehow out of the game.
The claim that the wealth of Europe and US was not in significant part built on natural resources from colonized countries is so absurd that it's mostly something I'd expect from a person who has never taken a single course of history in his life. I can't even come up with a comparative example of how ridiculous this is.
|
Well, this post is a pretty good example of how context can be abused for ideological ends.
European countries, from the beginning of the 16th century, were already creating the modern trade system, which is the cause of most of today's wealth.
The only country who stockpiled resources from its colonies was Spain, and by the mid 17th century, the country was a corrupt, bankrupt disaster.