Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The people of China would be much more aware of the outside world, less ignorant and society would function better if China was colonized instead of the Communists taking over in 1949. The education system would be better, the healthcare (although its not terribly bad now) would be better, and you would have less of a population if it weren't for some of Mao's policies (although some of his policies did kill millions as well).
That being said, you would not have as much development in China like you have now because you may have democracy, which slows things down compared to a one party system.
That's just my opinion but I can see a good argurment the other way which I would respect. The Communist party did take hundreds of millions of people out of poverty, which perhaps would not have happened outside of a one party system. Take a look as India and see how that's working out with a democracy.
I don't see any real advantage of one-party monopoly.
South Korea has experienced fast economic growth under democracy.
Hong Kong, Japan, Taiwan all experienced fast economic growth when they were dirt poor.
The people of China would be much more aware of the outside world, less ignorant and society would function better if China was colonized instead of the Communists taking over in 1949. The education system would be better, the healthcare (although its not terribly bad now) would be better, and you would have less of a population if it weren't for some of Mao's policies (although some of his policies did kill millions as well).
That being said, you would not have as much development in China like you have now because you may have democracy, which slows things down compared to a one party system.
That's just my opinion but I can see a good argurment the other way which I would respect. The Communist party did take hundreds of millions of people out of poverty, which perhaps would not have happened outside of a one party system. Take a look as India and see how that's working out with a democracy.
Where's the evidence of this? India and Nigeria aren't anymore worldly after colonization (unless you count emigration as worldly) and Papua New Guinea is an absolute hellhole with a horrific education system and widespread belief in sorcery.
Where's the evidence of this? India and Nigeria aren't anymore worldly after colonization (unless you count emigration as worldly) and Papua New Guinea is an absolute hellhole with a horrific education system and widespread belief in sorcery.
Maybe India was even worse before that?
Chinese civilization was among the most sophisticated in the world before the industrial revolution. Being colonized could unlock its potentials. I can't think of any other way to catch up with the west.
The people of China would be much more aware of the outside world, less ignorant and society would function better if China was colonized instead of the Communists taking over in 1949. The education system would be better, the healthcare (although its not terribly bad now) would be better, and you would have less of a population if it weren't for some of Mao's policies (although some of his policies did kill millions as well).
The only viable alternative to communists taking over in 1949 is the rule of Republic of China. The U.S didn't help ROC to defeat the communists, which was the start of the nightmare. Had the U.S offered real help, it would be a bliss for Chinese people as well as the U.S itself.
One: Parts of China were colonized by Germany, Japan, Portugal, England, etc. already.
Two: Most of the world was colonized...almost all of Africa (except for Ethiopia), and all of Latin America (Haiti, Venezuela, Cuba, all of it, etc.). Quite a bit of Asia (the Philippines, Indonesia, etc.)
The ORIGINAL POST has two major flaws...the assumption that China never had colonizers, and two the assumption that colonization made countries ideal.
Thailand (not colonized) is doing better than Myanmar (colonized by Britain), Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam (all 3 colonized by France). Japan is doing very well too without being colonized. North Korea was colonized by Japan too, not just South Korea. The economic success of many places cannot be attributed to its being colonized.
I don't see any real advantage of one-party monopoly.
South Korea has experienced fast economic growth under democracy.
Hong Kong, Japan, Taiwan all experienced fast economic growth when they were dirt poor.
Who taught your history?
When South Korea, Hong Kong, and Taiwan developed fast, they did not have democracy at all. Not to mention Japan before WWII. You can say they had capitalist economy then.
What are they supposed to catch up to? They've already surpassed the United States, particularly in manufacturing and infrastructure.
The U.S. can barely put enough money together to build a subway system...many cities have no metro system whatsoever in the U.S. Meanwhile, China is building infrastructure throughout Africa, and throughout Asia all the way to Europe....just to move their products. They have already built bullet trains throughout, and all of the main cities have subway systems throughout their own country that rival the ones found in Japan - U.S. doesn't have a single bullet train, not even from NYC to DC.
The U.S. is involved with Trade Wars, where they are giving 12 billion dollars to farmers in a socialized state system to offset more bad decisions by the U.S. We can't even move our farm products in the U.S., and they are still trying to build up old industries like coal in a world market that is moving towards much more advanced energy technologies and products.
If you're hoping for a world for China to 'catch up' to the U.S., you can rest assured, they've already surpassed it. The only thing the U.S. has going at the moment is the war-related technologies (bombs, tanks, guns) and pharmaceuticals.
There's a lot more to "surpassing" a place than building skyscrapers and metro systems.
The US have 12 bn to farmers to make up for lost exports to China; China released 100 bn to keep it's currency stable.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
