Posted on 05/03/2024 6:07:35 AM PDT by ChicagoConservative27
The British Empire and other major European powers did not significantly enrich themselves through slavery and colonialism but rather may have taken a net loss as a result, a report has asserted.
Contrary to narratives pushed by ‘anti-colonialism’ academics and promoted by leftist talking heads, Western capitalism was not built off the backs of colonialism and slavery, fresh research from Kristian Niemietz of the Institute of Economic Affairs claims.
The head of Political Economy at the IEA argues that while some select elite families within Britain and other colonial powers profited immensely during the time, such gains were not felt by the public at large, who rather than benefitting were instead steeply taxed to pay the exorbitant costs in extra military and administrative spending needed to maintain and protect far-away colonial outposts, a bill that citizens of non-colonial Western nations did not need to foot.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
the great benefit of colonialism was the spread of the English language and English legal system
Slavery is a failed economic system. It has no inherent advantages towards production or investment. Besides a few old buildings or graves from some long-dead empire, it leaves nothing.
That’s why the claim it “built” the American south was wrong. it was actually the reason for the destruction of the American south.
Once capitalism and property rights came along, slavery was dead.
Europe could have been even more angelic than angels in dealing with the colonies, but all the colonies would have done is use their trade with Britain to kill off competing tribes, which they often did.
You mistake "commerce" for human nature.
Humans have always fought each other for resources. The resources might be access to hunting grounds, fishing rights, nut trees, or even human flesh.
You never own anything you are not able to defend.
Mushy peas….no thanks
What? No Spotted Dick?................
Yea. Add in the continued costs of caretaking and policing the lawless, aimless descendants of the slaves and were definitely operating at a loss.
Of course it didn’t. That is why Britain destroyed European slavery in the 1940’s. Not slavery in general. The Muslims in Africa still captured slaves and sold them, just not to whites from Europe.
*You mistake “commerce” for human nature.
Humans have always fought each other for resources. The resources might be access to hunting grounds, fishing rights, nut trees, or even human flesh.
You never own anything you are not able to defend.
Mr. Twain you are very smart.
A famous baseball player once asked: Why should a king be happy with his own kingdom when he can raid the next one?
*all the colonies would have done is use their trade with Britain to kill off competing tribes, which they often did.*
You’re smart too. Please tell the blacks.
Because, evil rich man. Same BS, different spin.
This is a really old conclusion. My chancellor at UC-Santa Barbara, economist Robert Huttenback, published “Mammon and the Pursuit of Empire” which proved this back in 1984.
Well that too
Best BOL of the day:
Brits curried favor.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.