If the Philippines was never colonized, would they be a rich country today? (places, jobs)
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.
Philippines was in fact the relatively most well-off country in Asia after gaining independence from U.S. The GDP per capita was about US$300+ in late '40s. Manila was tipped as one of the promising cities in Asia back then.
IMO U.S. should stay in Philippines longer to set up all the institutions required for a modern state like Britain did in Malaysia and Singapore. Domestic problems like land reform are more easily resolved by an alien benign regime. Land reform in Japan and South Korea were forced to be implemented by U.S.
This is the old "White Man's Burden" concept - modern western countries are morally obligated to bring non-western civilization up to modern standards. It's an outdated concept because it basically assumes that some civilizations (or, let's face it, races) are superior to others, with all the racism and injustice that comes with it. It is also used to justify imperialism and exploitation.
The US actually thought what you described above, and it justified the Philippines-American war that occurred in 1901 to 1903 (covered extensively in some recent threads). The period from 1935 (much earlier actually) to 1946 was always meant to be a peaceful transition period to Philippines independence, and by that time Philippines was essentially self-governed and indeed the Philippines went through a modern renaissance of sorts and period of prosperity through the 30s. But only after many lives were lost decades earlier.
Filipinos online say that had the US never colonized them, they would become one of the richest countries in the world but because the US did colonize them, and never gave them their freedom, they are today one of the poorest countries in Asia and would probably remain this until the US ceases to exist.... is this true?
The islands of king phillip of spain have been going downhill since 1380 with the arrival of the bedoiun ideology and then the Spaniards. These ideologies and people did not allow the free exchange of ideas which is the key to prosperity. They forgot their pagan ways and now their food is bland.
At least with the US, some of them learned to speak English.
This is the old "White Man's Burden" concept - modern western countries are morally obligated to bring non-western civilization up to modern standards. It's an outdated concept because it basically assumes that some civilizations (or, let's face it, races) are superior to others, with all the racism and injustice that comes with it. It is also used to justify imperialism and exploitation.
The US actually thought what you described above, and it justified the Philippines-American war that occurred in 1901 to 1903 (covered extensively in some recent threads). The period from 1935 (much earlier actually) to 1946 was always meant to be a peaceful transition period to Philippines independence, and by that time Philippines was essentially self-governed and indeed the Philippines went through a modern renaissance of sorts and period of prosperity through the 30s. But only after many lives were lost decades earlier.
The more economically successful countries in East Asia all underwent land reforms. Some implemented by Western powers, some by alien regime, some by really radical measures. Japan and South Korea by U.S., Taiwan by KMT which was an alien regime when it assumed control of the island, China by Communist Party which set up fixed quota on how many landlords and rich peasants in each village needed to be executed.
I don't know much about politics in Philippines. But it seems that many former presidents, i.e. Marcos, Aquino,...etc all came from very wealthy landlord families.
in fact America could have built the Philippines to become more prosperous when colonizing the country, but the actual target of the America was not the Philippines but the countries in Greater East Asian including Vietnam. moreover Philipines far from mainland Asia maybe not Strategy for America
I doubt so. Look at some countries like Somalia. Never colonised but still faring poorly. I think the Philippines would actually have done better if they were colonised by the British. They might be like Hong Kong.
AMERICA is bombing Somalia as we speak. Wealthy ib history culture resources but America just can't mind its own
Even some prosperous empire in history collapse after colonialization but they are not blame here and there.
Just part of national fallen and rising.
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.
