Around the 1600s, the Indians were a group of advanced civilizations themselves. They weren't the wealthiest country in terms of GDP per capita, but they still were better off than most the world.
They were extremely poor and undeveloped, and were only relatively good because of how poor the rest of the world is.
Now after British colonization, South Asia is the poorest region in the entire world only behind Africa.
Mostly because the British introduction of advanced agricultre, medicine etc. allowed the population of south asia to rapidly expand, but they weren't capable of growing their economy proportional to this.
Most Britons don't even acknowledge colonzation. They have Indian blood on their hands.
Literally every single british school kid today gets brow beaten from childhood over colonialism.
100+ million Indians killed in 40 years. Bigger number than Hitler. Worse still, they don't even return India's prized artifacts. Never even apologised.
Ah yes, muh hundred gorillion. A higher number is invented every year. In reality, British rule resulted in a net reduction in indian deaths as evidenced by the fact that the population grew so much, and it stopped inter-kingdom conflicts and it stopped external invasions. In recent history, the main people who can be said to have killed large numbers of indians are the mughals, who literally never even warrant a mention despite doing far worse than the british ever did.
And how the fuck british possession of indian artifacts "worse still" than people supposedly being killed?
And in nay case, the only reason these artifiacts still is exist in most cases is because of british custody and preservation of them.
What happened to the Africans was even more tragic. Litterally enslaved and used like property.
"Enslaved" implies they were previously free. They weren't. The African slave trade existed many centuries before europeans became involved with it. At the peak of the atlantic slave trade, it is estimated that it represented a measly 10 PERCENT of the entire African slave trade. The rest was Africans and arabs. And the only reaosn we even talk about slavery in the US today is because there are still descendants of slaves living in the US today - arabs get away with pretending it didn't happen largely because, not only are they not white and therefore receive a pass for any historical injustices they perpetrate, but also because they castrated most of their male slaves and so there's very few africans in the arab world today.
Europeans by and large didn't make anyone a slave who wouldn't have otherwise been a slave, and not only did they not destroy lineages through castration, but the descendants now live in countries like the US instead of some shithole in africa.
At least India is on the correct path. No thanks to Europeans. Outside of Egypt and South Africa, which are still both very poor countries, Africa is extremely awful.
India would be vastly poorer without colonisation.
And Africa's problems are categorically not caused by colonisation. Africans couldn't even
maintain the countries built by Europeans, much less build functional countries of their own. South Africa has turned to complete shit since the ANC have been in charge, contrary to the wildly incorrect prediction of dorks like you. And Rhodesia was the bread basket of africa - now zimbabwe is one of the poorest countries in the world thanks to gross government incompetence.
Before Europeans showed up in South Africa, the genocidal zulus, a central african bantu people, had almost entirely wiped out the indigenous peoples of south africa (mostly the khoisan). And yet, what people get mad about it whites having separate drinking fountains to blacks, and not only is the zulu genocide not ever condemned, but the zulus are an exalted group and africans around the world have reverance for shakar zulu. Sad!
Africa has never been wealthy, and it wasn't developing when the Europeans arrived. They hadn't even invented the wheel ffs and almost none of them had written language. It was full of tribes murdering, raping and enslaving one another. The only reason sub-saharan africa has a meaningful economy to speak of is the legacy of europeans. The limited development they have experienced is all with technology invented by europeans, and idiots like to cry about western companies operating mines in africa, but africa would be without billions of dollars in income and tax revenue without this. You see those sad stories of shirtless children shoveling rock in some coltan mines? That's what happens when you don't have western (or chinese) companies to build and operatre proper, modern mines.
France still has massive power of Africa.
Yeah, mostly for the benefit of Africans. Countries that silll use Francs have avoided the gross corruption and mismanagement of other african governments that has resulted in egregious currency debasement. But by all means, it's good these countries are moving towards their own currencies, so they can wreck their economies even more than they have through currency debasement. Of course, they and fools like you will continue to blame white people, but it will at least be less convincing this time, one would hope.
Iran and Afganistan. WTF? Litterally killed everyone there and stole the oil. Made everyone's lives worse, under the guise of 911 and WMDs, when it was proven that Saudi Arabia has more involvment in 911, and Iran didin't even have WMDs, and the government knew it. Convinently they are also all MUSLIMS
Sure, this is bad. But I mean the reason that muslims and arabs in most of the middle east and north africa is entirely due to violent conquest. Most of this area was occupied by non-arab christians before islamic conquests, but now they turn around and act like oppressed indigenous peoples. It's nonsense.
And they didn't "steal the oil". The main reason for the Iraq invasion was to eliminate the risk of Iraq invading Saudi Arabia without US troops having to be stationed there (which was causing extreme anger by fundamentalist muslims in suadi arabia at the presence of dirty infindels in the holy land). So it was really all muslim vs muslim all along.
White countries aren't sorry for what they did. If they were, they would apologies and try to right any wrongs.
European countries teach children that colonisation was bad, they don't celebrate it, they tear down statues of colonial leaders, they voluntarily relinquished all of their african colonies etc.
When have any non-whites ever even pretended to apologise for their extensive histories of conquest and slavery? Not once.
They are still exploiting the results of their colonization today. At least the Musllims keep it in their part of the world.
First of all, it's only "their" part of the world due to historical conquest.
Secondly, middle eastern muslims have literally no ability to project power beyond the middle east and north africa. They're not choosing to be restrained, they simply have no choice. If muslims had the power that europeans have today, they would have conquered the entire world.
And again, you're apparently ignorant of the history of conquest and slavery in Africa by muslims. Muslims were responsible for more of the african slave trade than europeans were - and somehow this is "keeping it in their part of the world"? I mean Europeans abolished slavery before muslims did, and europeans were largely the ones who made the muslims abolish it.
The most remarkable thing about Europeans in not their extent of colonialism. It's how incredibly restrained they were/are despite being hte most powerful people ever to exist.
White people are FAR worse than Muslims. Christians killed way more people than Muslims.
The history of islamic conquest is far more brutal than european conquest. Muslims just never had the power that europeans did.
Don't underplay the Europeans fucking up the rest of the world.
I have no idea what kind of state you think the world was in before european colonialism, but I'll tell you how it actually was: Poor, violent, brutal. It's a great irony that progressives hate europeans, when everything progressive today is a product of europeans (sadly, imo). Did Europeans fuck up the world by helping to end the bulk of the african slave trade? Did they fuck up the world by introducing modern agriculture and medicine? Would Africa have been better if it were still tribes killing and enslaving one another? Or do you believe that Africans would have gone from being extremely primitive to extremely advanced overnight if europeans hadn't shown up, despite the complete lack of any of the intellectual precedents of European scientific and technological advances i.e. an intellectual tradition stretching back thousands of years involving written language, mathematics, philosophy and science)?
Fuck you. Fuck the American governmetn. Fuck the 51st state of America. Fuck Governor Anthony Albanse. And fuck ANYONE who supports Australian, American state sponsored terrorists miltary.
Die mad