Colonialism, Exploitation and Independence

What do you think is the functional difference between what you said and the following:
"Hey, Germany invading Poland and killing everyone was pretty bad."
"What? Germany is always getting blamed, no one ever talks about the aggressive wars of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth or how the Russians occupied Poland for even longer than Germany did!"
A lot, but then you're the guy who can't see a difference between keeping someone captive in your basement and preventing someone to break into your house, so your weird amalgams are par of the course.
Still, it's always a marvel to see your ever growing creativity into making anything and everything something you can call nazi or such.
 
Last edited:
If the Atlantic Slave Trade can't be considered even partially acceptable why did you try and downplay it with "but they traded other things too!" Like, anyway you want to look at it, the British Empire was from the start built on exploitation to at least some degree
All empires have taken and traded slaves. The British Empire is the one that eventually abolished that practice, with considerable effort spent enforcing it thereafter.
 
in a bid to conduct a campaign of hearts and minds to benefit the Evangelists who are the champions of slavery and whatnot to come for the next thousand years and to curtail the possible growth of United States as an hostile nation . Open to immigration that would bring in 5th columnists instead European supplied slaves . The American South was expansionist ! Invading slave free Mexico in the name of Liberty and Freedom ! Reportedly before the Civil War , the slaves in dollars were worth more than the rest of the industries in US combined ...
 
in a bid to conduct a campaign of hearts and minds to benefit the Evangelists who are the champions of slavery and whatnot to come for the next thousand years and to curtail the possible growth of United States as an hostile nation . Open to immigration that would bring in 5th columnists instead European supplied slaves . The American South was expansionist ! Invading slave free Mexico in the name of Liberty and Freedom ! Reportedly before the Civil War , the slaves in dollars were worth more than the rest of the industries in US combined ...
Slavery was everywhere in the world at that times. Like it happen now in some ME, SA countries
 
Last edited:
yeah , how can it still exist in an Anglosaxon dominatdd world ?

edit: ı think the speilling mistake is on me this time , not autocorrect .
 
Last edited:
so , you are saying the US is going catch some Gulf Sheik ?
 
Stranger things have happened, they best stay over there :
Sheikha Hamda al-Nahyan and her seven daughters did not attend the trial and rights activists said it was highly unlikely that the UAE would extradite them had they been jailed.
At the time of the trial, Nicholas McGeehan, an expert on migrant workers in the Gulf for Human Rights Watch, told the BBC that it would be "hugely significant" if one of the wealthiest families in the world was publicly linked with trafficking and slavery.
He argued that despite being abolished in law, domestic slavery continues in Gulf states - "perpetuated by ruling elites for whom it serves an important societal purpose in conferring status".
 
Last edited:
yes , US Rangers rappelling down from Stealth helicopters in the dark of the night .

Spoiler :

the guy was a Sunni and he loved an Alawite girl and that was impossible . Except to avoid unnecessary entanglements with super rich - super Sunni oil sheiks , the division of spoils in the Alawite Syria had required a Sunni Foreign Minister who would remain loyal to Bashar until the middle of the Irresuction when the "failed" Congregation coup thing otherwise called the Disgrace of July 15th , made it clear that the West could deploy the Army of Petrol for effect . Or something . Wikipedia has basically nothing on what he did .
Spoiler :

30-10-2025.jpg



the West has been controlling basically everything in Islam , because power in the field comes from having supporters who cost money and money is aplenty in oil sheiks and those lot depend on Western approval because there is always the next sheik when your throat is slit due to disagreements in some religious argument . America led this , taking over from but never entirely supplanting the horrendously effective control by the British . You can come to places with enough heads . He had 10 million dollars on his head , too , removed by Biden Administration after stabbing Russia in the back once again , taking Syria without a ceasefire or something but not unduly bothering Putin as Israel has become rather important to Moscow and Golani offers tantalizing prospects of ruling an emasculated Syria in the name of Zionists .


also . How the West let things happen as long as if doesn't disturb the narrative of the freedom only it could birth and support throughout the world .
 
Randomly stumbled upon a chart today that shows how Polish GDP per capita today is 6 times higher than Venezuela's, despite being only 2/3 of it mere 30 years ago.

Forgive me if I can not take people who attribute poor performance of a country to "bad institutions left behind by colonizers 200 years ago" entirely seriously.

1000012573.jpg
 
Venezuela is a poor comparison due to its complicated geopolitical situation, but Argentina is in the same graph and can make a comparable counter-example.
 
Randomly stumbled upon a chart today that shows how Polish GDP per capita today is 6 times higher than Venezuela's, despite being only 2/3 of it mere 30 years ago.

Forgive me if I can not take people who attribute poor performance of a country to "bad institutions left behind by colonizers 200 years ago" entirely seriously.

View attachment 746211
What exactly is the significance of this graph?
 
Last edited:
What exactly is the significance of this graph?
It clearly shows how just one generation (30 years) can be enough to run a country into ground or dramatically improve it.

This clearly demonstrates that any present shortcomings or successes will have much more immediate causes than whatever transpired centuries ago.
 
It clearly shows how just one generation (30 years) can be enough to run a country into ground or dramatically improve it.

This clearly demonstrates that any present shortcomings or successes will have much more immediate causes than whatever transpired centuries ago.
It is possible, but how likely is it given the earlier maps posted? It seems like a rather small sample size.
 
when a country is a single product thing and was a failed state even fully in the Western camp removes itself from capitalism

when a country is a failed state since it was led astray by actual Nazis but is open to capitalism and can raise loans to be bankrupted further down

when two countries are fully open to capitalism and protected by the might of the West to like blow up pipelines under the Baltic

if somewhat confusing , you could also say Socialism is bad .
 
Randomly stumbled upon a chart today that shows how Polish GDP per capita today is 6 times higher than Venezuela's, despite being only 2/3 of it mere 30 years ago.

Forgive me if I can not take people who attribute poor performance of a country to "bad institutions left behind by colonizers 200 years ago" entirely seriously.

View attachment 746211
Another interesting numbers, that you should take in mide about this chart. Since it per captiva.

### Population of Selected Countries (1998 - 2022)

| Year | Argentina | Venezuela | Estonia | Poland |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **1998** | 36,458,000 | 23,205,000 | 1,439,000 | 38,666,000 |
| **2003** | 38,428,000 | 25,799,000 | 1,361,000 | 38,225,000 |
| **2008** | 40,276,000 | 28,429,000 | 1,338,000 | 38,153,000 |
| **2013** | 42,669,000 | 30,690,000 | 1,320,000 | 38,065,000 |
| **2018** | 44,494,000 | 32,076,000 | 1,322,000 | 37,976,000 |
| **2022** | 46,234,830 | 28,199,867 | 1,349,810 | 36,821,749 |
 
It is possible, but how likely is it given the earlier maps posted? It seems like a rather small sample size.
Proof of concept does not really require a large sample size.

If you met a guy in his sixties who told you "I never managed to climb out of poverty during my life, because of how badly my grandpa was screwed over sixty years before I was born", you'd laugh at him.
Why would it be any more valid claim for a whole country?

EDIT: Even though it does not take a Nobel laureate to raise and prove a hypothesis that having a well-off grandpa makes it statistically somewhat more likely for his grandkids to be well off as well.
Another interesting numbers, that you should take in mide about this chart. Since it per captiva.
Not sure I follow. Data is presented per capita precisely to make population numbers irrelevant to the comparison. So...?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom