SuperSage125
Banned
What was the most "benevolent" empire to under during the Second age of Imperialism (relations with natives; investment in colonies; economic growth; post colonial stability, etc..)(Africa, Southeast Asia, East Asia)
Yes this.The answer varied considerably between different decades of the given 170 year long period.
Which was mostly due to the high integration the mainland had with the colonies.I've gone for Portuguese. They were less racist than most, willing to let people of mixed race have full citizenship and not very powerful.
On the debit side they did hold on longer than most.
They were also particularly brutal toward the natives of their colonies in AfricaWhich was mostly due to the high integration the mainland had with the colonies.
I voted for French, I heard they ruled with a relatively light hand. That said , I could be wrong as I am no expert on colonialism. I wonder why Belgium and Japan are even on the list considering how brutal the Congo was as well as the entire Japanese Empire.
Mainland or in a colony? Which colonies? I'd rather live in London than any of the dominions and them before the Raj. Hong Kong is a maybe. ... before ww2Here is another way of looking at this question? If you had to be ruled by one of the colonial powers, which one would you prefer to have been ruled by?
I like the dutch since they had a actual government policy dictating that they help improve the natives life (Dutch ethical policy) by investing a education and improving irrigation techniques.If it was only post 1900, the answer would be the Spanish without a single doubt just because they did less damage than anyone else since they had 2 colonies (and they didn't contorl the interior of either Western sahara or Rio Muni until the late 20s/early 30s), one of which (Fernando Po) had one of the highest quality of life of any African colony just before indepndence.
But then it's 1830+ which includes the mass slave trade to cuba, plantationsand terrible repression in Cuba and phillipines so idk.