Why was the Spanish empire so mediocre.
They can blame the anglos or whatever for the black legend, but that doesn't remove the fact that the Spanish empire was shit in general. The average person had shit living standards and stagnant wages.
At least with the British empire, the average person saw higher living standards, longer life expectancies and wage growth.
If Argentina was a British colony, it would have had a similar GDP per capita as New Zealand.
 Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
 |
Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
There's no physical evidence for the smallpox crap
They were stretched too thin to administer their colonies effectively and they spent all their money on failed wars with the British.
What?
Also there's no physical evidence for the smallpox crap. Obviously.
No one mentioned smallpox, but archeological evidence and primary sources both indicate a devastating sickness wiping out swaths of Central and South America around the time Spain made landfall in the Americas
t. people who have no fricking idea.
The output of manufacturing (obrajes) in Mexico was 3 times larger than that of mining and Spanish America had a much larger manufacturing sector than the US until independence in which very large debts, mineral concessions and low tariffs bankrupted the colonial economies and the trade amongst them (Mexico traded more in GBP with what is modern day Venezuela than the US did with the UK) in 1784
>the Spaniards were actually the good guys because Mexico used to have a good economy
What?
>If Argentina was a British colony, it would have had a similar GDP per capita as New Zealand.
Yes because british colonies are grea
In argentinas case it would have been mostly populated by the british, meaning the contingent of subjugated natives wouldn't have impacted the gdp per capita all that much. It was sparsely populated before colonization, after a british-style rounding up and extermination, the more productive settlers would be majority.
it was a mideval preindustrial state
In fact the spanish colonies were pretty rich under castillian administration. They became shit after independence, proving again that shitskins can't rule themselves and need of euro overlords to tell them what to do.
Here is the paper from the colombian historian and economist Salomon Kalmanovitz (from the The University of New Hampshire) for the TADEO University in Bogota about New Granada economy before and after independence.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwja1uvOxsfzAhUyD2MBHZBuA00QFnoECAIQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fdialnet.unirioja.es%2Fdescarga%2Farticulo%2F2332082.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2MvHVhtRw1J96uXyM05iBd
There are literally 3 sentences of primary source information on entire Grenada and they say it was a Catalonian vassal.
Catalonia, Castille, they both are the same thing
South Americans blaming Spain is basically the same tier than Subsaharans blaming Frenchs and British for their c**ts being shitholes.
Expelled the euros and their lands turned into shitholes.
The only crime of moorberians was to let shitskins alive instead of filling those lands with europeans.
>shitskins can't rule themselves
forgive me if I'm wrong but weren't the leaders of independence movements white?
Yes but at least Simón Bolívar admitted that he had fricked up. He put it in a poetic way, "plowing the sea". You don't see many historical world leaders admitting their mistakes, I think Bolívar deserves respect for that.
Soo you are blaming the local low class mestizos for something done by whites??
The complete letter from Bolivar.
The New World is ungovernable for us (whites) ... The only thing that can be done in New Worldis to leave. This continent will infallibly fall into the hands of the out of control multitudes, and then pass to almost imperceptible tyrant, of all colors and races. (Letter from Bolívar to Juan José Flores, Barranquilla, November 9, 1830).
>black legend
Pure Spaniard cope. We have hundreds of primary sources from Spanish priests and Spanish conquistadors that explain how they viewed the natives and what they did to them. We also archeological evidence of Spanish conquests throughout the Americas. The sack of Tenochtitlan, the destruction of the temples, the enslavement of local tribes, and the torture of “heathen” natives who refused to convert are all irrefutable instances of Spanish cruelty.
I personally don’t give a shit, but modern Spaniards and Latinos want to have their cake and eat it too. They want to act morally superior to Anglos by pretending that their own form of colonization “totally wasn’t even that bad, hombres!”
Frick off, atleast in the case of mexico, the aztecs were even worse, they were war hundry sacrificial buttholes. But spanish bad because muh forced religion.
homosexual
>the aztecs were even worse, they were war hundry sacrificial buttholes. But spanish bad because muh forced religion.
Spaniards bad becauae they're Moorberian shitskins who ruined the homogenous makeup of Mexico and plunged the continent into a long era of European-style fuedalism.
>MUH HOOOOOOMAN SACRIFICE
Literally the only gokd thing the Spanish ever did was end the lractice of human sacrifice. They never abolished slavery, fiefdom(encomenda system), or class systems based on brutal racial heirarchy just like the Aztecs. Go be a Moorberian somewhere else , Pancho.
>homogenous makeup of Mexico
Mexico didn't exist back then and the Mexicas were an invasive tribe from the north, moron.
México didn't even exist by that point, the mexicas came from the north and were a violent nation hated by every other mesoamerican group. México wasn't conquered, it was founded by the defeat of the Aztec empire by an alliance of Spanish conquistadors and native nations. Tlaxcala was so loyal that they are featured in various codices bearing catholic banners. Hell they even swore alliance to the king so technically they became spaniards by virtue of being catholic and loyal to the king.
Because it was a medieval style empire stuck in it's ways in a changing world. The spanish empire was grossly unfit for industrialization and so was it's capital, in a way it was victim of it's own earlier success, it became wealthy through extraction of bullion from the new world and spent most of it financing wars in europe to "protect catholicism". The spanish empire never saw the need to improve it's economic base, it was too rich for it's own good, when the industrial revolution came rolling in, it was too late to compete, Spain was a has-been monarchy and it's colonies were bunch of medieval vassals.
>If Argentina was a British colony, it would have had a similar GDP per capita as New Zealand
Argentina had a higher GDP per capita than NZ ca. 1890. Long after independence.
Wasn't that just a short term boom while NZ has had a consistently high GDP per capita?
It's gdp=tourism anything else is irrelevant.
Argentina was the 7th richest country in the world in the early 20th century. It's not the Spanish's fault that the Argentines fricked it up
According to Angus Maddison, it was *the* richest country in the world before 1900, per capita. Not some semi-wealthy country, not some nice place. The richest. Venezuela was 4th.
Univ. Groningen keeps up with this research: https://www.rug.nl/ggdc/historicaldevelopment/maddison/?lang=en
It's gdp=tourism
so what happened?
>At least with the British empire, the average person saw higher living standards, longer life expectancies and wage growth.
Only in north america and australia/new zealand, and maybe south africa. Everywhere else in that empire was a shithole.
>If Argentina was a British colony, it would have had a similar GDP per capita as New Zealand.
They would have imported half of africa in there as anglos do.
Also economics is fake and you're a moron
you're like terry davis without the intelligence underneath the schizophrenia.
Same.
Make more shitposts, show the world you can't read or do math. Go on.
Nah I think you've got that covered
There were never a Spanish Empire until 1716. Spain was a feudalistic mess like the HRE, also it was one of the poorest and illiterate places in Europe. There were almost no Spanish merchants, all merchantile jobs were done by Italians or Dutch. The only rich people in the country were the royal family and aristocrats who were too stupid to understand how economy works. The Spanish "Empire" was going bankrupt almost every decade. Their army and navy was shit, they were only able to win small or costly victories which effected their economy very seriously since the 16th century. Their colonial policy was just about plundering silver and golds, because of that barbaric and uncivilized economic policies every nation that has been ruled by Spain in the past are still poor shitholes.
You already got BTFOed
No, cope
No, cope
thats a linguistic map, not a territorial map, those are not political territories. Also spain was one of the first kingdoms in Europe to abolish feudalism, that was already very rare in the north as the villages were usually self sustained and depended only of the king
reddit spacing sage
Why does LULZ have a hateboner with Spain?
Chicanos
>chicanos
do hispanics really think they have any room to look down on anyone?
This place is filled of chicanos, most of latin americans don't even give a shit.
>most of latin americans don't even give a shit
Most latinos don’t want to admit that their ancestors were also brutal colonizers because they would lose victim points and wouldn’t be able to cry about los evil gringo colonizers anymore
Most of latinos are illiterate peasants and workers with no time to discuss their origins, their country history, etc.
Well consider that the Spanish Empire upon Charles V's ascension to the throne had to deal with near constant wars against France; England, Protestant Germans, Ottomans, Moroccans, Italian states and the Dutch.
Considering what they had to contend with I'd say the Spanish performed pretty excellently, the Netherlands only gained independence thanks to the Dutch winning a war of attrition, anything else is just a cope because the Spanish were fricking destroying them in the field, anything else is just a dutch cope.
Just look at the track record of spanish wars during their height and you'll see why the Tercios had such an aura of invincibility, even in the late stages of the thirty years war they were still able to best the Swedes and French in battle.