Posted: 6/24/2016 2:07:13 PM EDT
| Why is just about every country that Spain occupied a shithole? most have spanish ancestry, so is it something in Spanish blood that brings out the worst in humankind? |
|
Quoted:
One theory Different types of colonies. Not just the Spanish. Colonies established for wealth extraction from indigenous populations GENERALLY fare worse than colonies established that were meant to house excess population. Also, the Spanish were massive pricks and basically stuck their dick in everybody's mashed potatoes, then punched them in the face and raped their women if they complained. |
|
Quoted:
One theory Different types of colonies. Not just the Spanish. Colonies established for wealth extraction from indigenous populations GENERALLY fare worse than colonies established that were meant to house excess population. substantially this. extractive vice settler colonialism. |
|
Quoted:
Also, the Spanish were massive pricks and basically stuck their dick in everybody's mashed potatoes, then punched them in the face and raped their women if they complained. Quoted:
Quoted:
One theory Different types of colonies. Not just the Spanish. Colonies established for wealth extraction from indigenous populations GENERALLY fare worse than colonies established that were meant to house excess population. Also, the Spanish were massive pricks and basically stuck their dick in everybody's mashed potatoes, then punched them in the face and raped their women if they complained. Yes French colonies even worse It's a Latin cukture I think as well And French are Latin culture as well |
|
Quoted:
Yes French colonies even worse It's a Latin cukture I think as well And French are Latin culture as well Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
One theory Different types of colonies. Not just the Spanish. Colonies established for wealth extraction from indigenous populations GENERALLY fare worse than colonies established that were meant to house excess population. Also, the Spanish were massive pricks and basically stuck their dick in everybody's mashed potatoes, then punched them in the face and raped their women if they complained. Yes French colonies even worse It's a Latin cukture I think as well And French are Latin culture as well Shithole countries seems have a correlation to Roman Catholicism. |
|
Quoted:
substantially this. extractive vice settler colonialism. Quoted:
Quoted:
One theory Different types of colonies. Not just the Spanish. Colonies established for wealth extraction from indigenous populations GENERALLY fare worse than colonies established that were meant to house excess population. substantially this. extractive vice settler colonialism. Exactly: some colonies were established by people who were planning to live there and didn't want to live in a shithole, so they put some effort into things like real agriculture and real industry and actually making stuff that they could use or sell and having the rule of law and some sort of education, etc, and that's where the US and Canada and Costa Rica and (at least arguably) Chile and (almost) Rhodesia came from. And then there were colonies that got planted for the sake of just digging a bunch of gold or diamonds or sugarcane out of the ground and sending it back to Spain. Nobody who was there gave a damn about twenty years later, and that's how Haiti and most of Latin America and Africa happened. There's also a theory floating around about psychological differences between one group of Europeans and another, with respect to future-time orientation vs. present-time orientation, which also explains why the EU is basically a north-to-south wealth transfer, but the lack of overseas Scandinavian colonies in the data set and the fact that most former French colonies positively suck (come to think of it, Quebec may be the only livable one) makes this imperfect. |
|
Quoted:
Shithole countries seems have a correlation to Roman Catholicism. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
One theory Different types of colonies. Not just the Spanish. Colonies established for wealth extraction from indigenous populations GENERALLY fare worse than colonies established that were meant to house excess population. Also, the Spanish were massive pricks and basically stuck their dick in everybody's mashed potatoes, then punched them in the face and raped their women if they complained. Yes French colonies even worse It's a Latin cukture I think as well And French are Latin culture as well Shithole countries seems have a correlation to Roman Catholicism. Go further back. Much further. Hint: Latin |
|
Quoted:
Exactly: some colonies were established by people who were planning to live there and didn't want to live in a shithole, so they put some effort into things like real agriculture and real industry and actually making stuff that they could use or sell and having the rule of law and some sort of education, etc, and that's where the US and Canada and Costa Rica and (at least arguably) Chile and (almost) Rhodesia came from. And then there were colonies that got planted for the sake of just digging a bunch of gold or diamonds or sugarcane out of the ground and sending it back to Spain. Nobody who was there gave a damn about twenty years later, and that's how Haiti and most of Latin America and Africa happened. There's also a theory floating around about psychological differences between one group of Europeans and another, with respect to future-time orientation vs. present-time orientation, which also explains why the EU is basically a north-to-south wealth transfer, but the lack of overseas Scandinavian colonies in the data set and the fact that most former French colonies positively suck (come to think of it, Quebec may be the only livable one) makes this imperfect. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
One theory Different types of colonies. Not just the Spanish. Colonies established for wealth extraction from indigenous populations GENERALLY fare worse than colonies established that were meant to house excess population. substantially this. extractive vice settler colonialism. Exactly: some colonies were established by people who were planning to live there and didn't want to live in a shithole, so they put some effort into things like real agriculture and real industry and actually making stuff that they could use or sell and having the rule of law and some sort of education, etc, and that's where the US and Canada and Costa Rica and (at least arguably) Chile and (almost) Rhodesia came from. And then there were colonies that got planted for the sake of just digging a bunch of gold or diamonds or sugarcane out of the ground and sending it back to Spain. Nobody who was there gave a damn about twenty years later, and that's how Haiti and most of Latin America and Africa happened. There's also a theory floating around about psychological differences between one group of Europeans and another, with respect to future-time orientation vs. present-time orientation, which also explains why the EU is basically a north-to-south wealth transfer, but the lack of overseas Scandinavian colonies in the data set and the fact that most former French colonies positively suck (come to think of it, Quebec may be the only livable one) makes this imperfect. could some of this be due to the difference between Catholicism verse Protestant .? |
|
Quoted:
could some of this be due to the difference between Catholicism verse Protestant .? Quoted:
Quoted:
Exactly: some colonies were established by people who were planning to live there and didn't want to live in a shithole, so they put some effort into things like real agriculture and real industry and actually making stuff that they could use or sell and having the rule of law and some sort of education, etc, and that's where the US and Canada and Costa Rica and (at least arguably) Chile and (almost) Rhodesia came from. And then there were colonies that got planted for the sake of just digging a bunch of gold or diamonds or sugarcane out of the ground and sending it back to Spain. Nobody who was there gave a damn about twenty years later, and that's how Haiti and most of Latin America and Africa happened. There's also a theory floating around about psychological differences between one group of Europeans and another, with respect to future-time orientation vs. present-time orientation, which also explains why the EU is basically a north-to-south wealth transfer, but the lack of overseas Scandinavian colonies in the data set and the fact that most former French colonies positively suck (come to think of it, Quebec may be the only livable one) makes this imperfect. could some of this be due to the difference between Catholicism verse Protestant .? Maybe, but I haven't quite looked at it in those terms. Although that also raises its own pile of exceptions: Bavaria is Catholic and is not a soup sandwich. But it also has to fit into the rest of Germany, which is not Catholic. Poland and Lithuania are Catholic and have started to clean up nicely once they got out from under the communist thumb. Greece is not Catholic but is possibly one of the biggest economic disasters in Europe. Ireland is Catholic but economically could be worse. Switzerland is plurality Catholic but may be one of the best-off countries in Europe right now. Scotland is largely Protestant but is an economic dumpster fire: take away wealth transfers from England and they become Venezuela North. Short version: I think there's just a lot more to it than "Catholic vs. Protestant." And none of those countries were ever really colonial powers anyway. |
|
No. Spain is a beautiful country, with good people. Their immigrants are an issue, as the rest of Europe, but the Spanish are cool. It's the problem of the third world, backwards ass indigenous people that makes a place a shit hole. They refuse to engage their brain and think. Liberal policies make it so they can thrive by giving them everything they need to get by. This is the case with most poor third world countries, until they fail. Then like locust, they migrate looking for other populations to strip mine. |
|
Quoted:
substantially this. extractive vice settler colonialism. Quoted:
Quoted:
One theory Different types of colonies. Not just the Spanish. Colonies established for wealth extraction from indigenous populations GENERALLY fare worse than colonies established that were meant to house excess population. substantially this. extractive vice settler colonialism. There are a lot of studies on colonial structures and the effect they have had on the independent nations, and in broad terms they agree with this. It also comes down to the political structures they left behind, and how they incorporated the indigenous population into those structures. |
|
Quoted:
No. Spain is a beautiful country, with good people. Their immigrants are an issue, as the rest of Europe, but the Spanish are cool. It's the problem of the third world, backwards ass indigenous people that makes a place a shit hole. They refuse to engage their brain and think. Liberal policies make it so they can thrive by giving them everything they need to get by. This is the case with most poor third world countries, until they fail. Then like locust, they migrate looking for other populations to strip mine. I'll read this...manana... |
|
Quoted:
Why is just about every country that Spain occupied a shithole? most have spanish ancestry, so is it something in Spanish blood that brings out the worst in humankind? You've clearly never been to Spain. Spanish are very cool people. I'm currently living in Spain. Sure has its issues like any other place but I cant say I ever lived in a more welcoming place. Spain did spread all over America but most of what you call Spanish blood is actually native American blood. These guys where literally eating one another before the Spanish came, so if anything they improved their cultures. Besides, what country did you occupy that turned out so well? You occupied Iraq and turned it into ISIS. 
FerFAL |
|
Quoted: Swedish colonies are the best. Just look at Finland and Norway.  The Dutch are pretty convinced they chased the Swedes out of Delaware. Interestingly, as a complete aside, they just located one of the forts locally, that was part of the Dutch v Swede conflict. The funny part(sad, not ha ha) is that nobody local knows the history and generally were like "whhhhhhhaaaaaaaat?" when told of the conflict the fort was constructed for. |
|
Quoted: I'll read this...manana... Quoted: Quoted: No. Spain is a beautiful country, with good people. Their immigrants are an issue, as the rest of Europe, but the Spanish are cool. It's the problem of the third world, backwards ass indigenous people that makes a place a shit hole. They refuse to engage their brain and think. Liberal policies make it so they can thrive by giving them everything they need to get by. This is the case with most poor third world countries, until they fail. Then like locust, they migrate looking for other populations to strip mine. I'll read this...manana... Hahahahaaha, |
|
Palma, Majorca
is nice https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palma,_Majorca 
|
|
Quoted:
Also, the Spanish were massive pricks and basically stuck their dick in everybody's mashed potatoes, then punched them in the face and raped their women if they complained. Quoted:
Quoted:
One theory Different types of colonies. Not just the Spanish. Colonies established for wealth extraction from indigenous populations GENERALLY fare worse than colonies established that were meant to house excess population. Also, the Spanish were massive pricks and basically stuck their dick in everybody's mashed potatoes, then punched them in the face and raped their women if they complained. yeah, we did that 
I ain't even gonna apologize though.
instead of building land looking for a better life, we came looking for gold to take back to spain to become rich. Weren't looking for land to grow or to find a better place to live as the conditions in Spain after kicking out the Moorish was pretty awesome. the northern europeans left looking for a new home the Spanish left looking to get rich through gold, silver or trade and spices. some areas are different though, look into northern NM history and Sepharic jews, many came here to get away from the inquisition and build a new place to live, by extension their history was different then that of Mexico, it never turned into a shit hole, was always just poor, kept to themselves farmers. about 65% of my family can be traced back to the Sephardics. |
|
Quoted:
Also, the Spanish were massive pricks and basically stuck their dick in everybody's mashed potatoes, then punched them in the face and raped their women if they complained. Quoted:
Quoted:
One theory Different types of colonies. Not just the Spanish. Colonies established for wealth extraction from indigenous populations GENERALLY fare worse than colonies established that were meant to house excess population. Also, the Spanish were massive pricks and basically stuck their dick in everybody's mashed potatoes, then punched them in the face and raped their women if they complained. That's quite some achievement when you are narcoleptic for most of the day. |
|
Quoted:
Shithole countries seems have a correlation to Roman Catholicism. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
One theory Different types of colonies. Not just the Spanish. Colonies established for wealth extraction from indigenous populations GENERALLY fare worse than colonies established that were meant to house excess population. Also, the Spanish were massive pricks and basically stuck their dick in everybody's mashed potatoes, then punched them in the face and raped their women if they complained. Yes French colonies even worse It's a Latin cukture I think as well And French are Latin culture as well Shithole countries seems have a correlation to Roman Catholicism. Did not have the Protestant Work Ethic? |
|
Quoted:
Maybe, but I haven't quite looked at it in those terms. Although that also raises its own pile of exceptions: Bavaria is Catholic and is not a soup sandwich. But it also has to fit into the rest of Germany, which is not Catholic. Poland and Lithuania are Catholic and have started to clean up nicely once they got out from under the communist thumb. Greece is not Catholic but is possibly one of the biggest economic disasters in Europe. Ireland is Catholic but economically could be worse. Switzerland is plurality Catholic but may be one of the best-off countries in Europe right now. Scotland is largely Protestant but is an economic dumpster fire: take away wealth transfers from England and they become Venezuela North. Short version: I think there's just a lot more to it than "Catholic vs. Protestant." And none of those countries were ever really colonial powers anyway. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Exactly: some colonies were established by people who were planning to live there and didn't want to live in a shithole, so they put some effort into things like real agriculture and real industry and actually making stuff that they could use or sell and having the rule of law and some sort of education, etc, and that's where the US and Canada and Costa Rica and (at least arguably) Chile and (almost) Rhodesia came from. And then there were colonies that got planted for the sake of just digging a bunch of gold or diamonds or sugarcane out of the ground and sending it back to Spain. Nobody who was there gave a damn about twenty years later, and that's how Haiti and most of Latin America and Africa happened. There's also a theory floating around about psychological differences between one group of Europeans and another, with respect to future-time orientation vs. present-time orientation, which also explains why the EU is basically a north-to-south wealth transfer, but the lack of overseas Scandinavian colonies in the data set and the fact that most former French colonies positively suck (come to think of it, Quebec may be the only livable one) makes this imperfect. could some of this be due to the difference between Catholicism verse Protestant .? Maybe, but I haven't quite looked at it in those terms. Although that also raises its own pile of exceptions: Bavaria is Catholic and is not a soup sandwich. But it also has to fit into the rest of Germany, which is not Catholic. Poland and Lithuania are Catholic and have started to clean up nicely once they got out from under the communist thumb. Greece is not Catholic but is possibly one of the biggest economic disasters in Europe. Ireland is Catholic but economically could be worse. Switzerland is plurality Catholic but may be one of the best-off countries in Europe right now. Scotland is largely Protestant but is an economic dumpster fire: take away wealth transfers from England and they become Venezuela North. Short version: I think there's just a lot more to it than "Catholic vs. Protestant." And none of those countries were ever really colonial powers anyway. Sadly, you just wasted your energy typing that. This is all about starting with a conclusion and cherry-picking "evidence." |
|
Quoted:
Did not have the Protestant Work Ethic? Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
One theory Different types of colonies. Not just the Spanish. Colonies established for wealth extraction from indigenous populations GENERALLY fare worse than colonies established that were meant to house excess population. Also, the Spanish were massive pricks and basically stuck their dick in everybody's mashed potatoes, then punched them in the face and raped their women if they complained. Yes French colonies even worse It's a Latin cukture I think as well And French are Latin culture as well Shithole countries seems have a correlation to Roman Catholicism. Did not have the Protestant Work Ethic? Spurious correlation 
|
|
Quoted:
Shithole countries seems have a correlation to Roman Catholicism. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
One theory Different types of colonies. Not just the Spanish. Colonies established for wealth extraction from indigenous populations GENERALLY fare worse than colonies established that were meant to house excess population. Also, the Spanish were massive pricks and basically stuck their dick in everybody's mashed potatoes, then punched them in the face and raped their women if they complained. Yes French colonies even worse It's a Latin cukture I think as well And French are Latin culture as well Shithole countries seems have a correlation to Roman Catholicism. Canada was basically founded by French Catholics. And most of the former Spanish colonies were rather nice wealthy places before the socialists got there. There were times when the major South American powers were militarily better off than the US. |
|
Quoted:
Canada was basically founded by French Catholics. And most of the former Spanish colonies were rather nice wealthy places before the socialists got there. There were times when the major South American powers were militarily better off than the US. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
One theory Different types of colonies. Not just the Spanish. Colonies established for wealth extraction from indigenous populations GENERALLY fare worse than colonies established that were meant to house excess population. Also, the Spanish were massive pricks and basically stuck their dick in everybody's mashed potatoes, then punched them in the face and raped their women if they complained. Yes French colonies even worse It's a Latin cukture I think as well And French are Latin culture as well Shithole countries seems have a correlation to Roman Catholicism. Canada was basically founded by French Catholics. And most of the former Spanish colonies were rather nice wealthy places before the socialists got there. There were times when the major South American powers were militarily better off than the US. Ireland is like 80% Catholic. In the country they are still very religious folks. Great place, great people. FerFAL |
|
Quoted:
Canada was basically founded by French Catholics. And most of the former Spanish colonies were rather nice wealthy places before the socialists got there. There were times when the major South American powers were militarily better off than the US. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
One theory Different types of colonies. Not just the Spanish. Colonies established for wealth extraction from indigenous populations GENERALLY fare worse than colonies established that were meant to house excess population. Also, the Spanish were massive pricks and basically stuck their dick in everybody's mashed potatoes, then punched them in the face and raped their women if they complained. Yes French colonies even worse It's a Latin cukture I think as well And French are Latin culture as well Shithole countries seems have a correlation to Roman Catholicism. Canada was basically founded by French Catholics. And most of the former Spanish colonies were rather nice wealthy places before the socialists got there. There were times when the major South American powers were militarily better off than the US. Indeed - the rise in socialism was almost always correlated with a rejection of the Church, yet many here seem to want to blame the Church. Spain itself is a perfect example, where Franco barely fought off a Communist takeover. Let's also not forget the role of the Church in Poland during the Cold War. Then, there's the pesky problem where modern Northern European socialism gets ignored in the whole "Protestant work ethic" circle jerk. And, as mentioned, everyone forgets Bavaria, Austria, and Switzerland, as if Italy and Spain are the only Catholic countries in Europe. We can also compare Croatia to the other post-Yugoslav states. Sometimes, GD forgets this meme and we'll get a thread about how much nicer Goa is then the rest of India, though. Religion won't come up in those threads. I'll also still take much - if not all - of Latin America over the post-colonial mess that Protestant and Catholic countries created in Africa. |