Blockades and forced reparation helped, HUH?
No, who said they helped?
I mean, these benevolent Colonizers obviously just wanted what was best for Haiti!!
Who said they did?
Compelling argument
The colonies never were for the people of the colonies. They always were for the collaborators and the colonizers. Duh.
Who ever said anything to the contrary?
We can go to the Congo, Africa, Asia, anywhere.
We can talk the filipino-American war, which American classrooms STILL DON'T teach because it was such a shit sandwich that flew in the face of EVERYTHING America supposedly stands for.
What you are telling me is the same reason America made for taking the Philippines from the Filipinos. It was bullshit back then, and it is bullshit now!
It sounds like you're too overcome with emotion to think clearly.
I originally took your astounding misinterpretations of my statements as dishonesty.
Now I am certain that your problem is pathological.
And you keep saying "civilized" Exactly what is "civilized"?
The first condition is civil peace, which requires a stable state. The culmination is a liberal economic order.
It is a spectrum, or more accurately a journey.
Haiti or sub-Saharan Africa, for instance, were way to the left of the spectrum, at the very beginning of the journey toward civilization at the time of independence - and consequently went completely pear-shaped. Given enough time, they'll move rightward, further down the path, but their progress would have been more rapid had they never become independent. They also would be further along had they never been colonized in the first place.
The best possible scenario for the natives would have been colonization which never ended (or at least not for a long time after it historically did). This would have catapulted them ahead further along the path than they would have been left to their own devices.
The second best would have been no colonization at all. Under this scenario, they would have developed at their own natural pace.
The worst case scenario was what actually happened; the Europeans came, but then left too soon.
...and, not that it really matters, but one cannot blame the Europeans for that last bit. They were pushed out by the natives and by "enlightened" members of their own, who seriously misunderstood what would happen post-independence. Colonialism became a problem only because of anti-colonialism. And, one final item, just to ensure that your head reaches critical mass; colonialism was bad for the Europeans (the colonies were always a money-losing proposition) and good for the natives, while anti-colonialism was good for the Europeans (stopped the red ink) and bad for the natives.
*The colonial powers were not irrational. The enterprise was a loser for the country as a whole, but the costs and benefits were not equally distributed. People in power reaped the rewards, while taxpayers footed the bill.
The way the "civilized" Belgians treated the People of the Congo? The civilized way the Germans treated the Africans in German East Africa? What exactly is this "civilized" you speak of? Do you mean the "civilized" death camps of Nazi Germany? Perhaps the "civilized" civil war in the United States, and its "civilized" institution of slavery.
LOL
