3 ms·
These points look cherry-picked to support your argument. To cherry-pick a few more points: Bangladesh, India, Nigeria, Pakistan. All of these were British col
by vitus 6y ago
These points look cherry-picked to support your argument.
To cherry-pick a few more points: Bangladesh, India, Nigeria, Pakistan. All of these were British colonies prior to Hong Kong (which was a British territory from 1841 to 1997). All of these have populations >150M (significantly greater than the UK itself!). All of these are in the bottom third of countries in terms of GDP per capita (and in fact worse off than Vietnam).
(Well, okay, India hovers right around that 33%ile depending on your choice of measure.)
Next on the list of Commonwealth of Nations by population are UK itself (wealthy, but wasn't a colony...), Tanzania (poor), South Africa (wealthy!), Kenya (poor), Uganda (very poor).
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- jariel 6y agoThey are not cherry picked, they are have a modern relation to colonialism. If the UK were to have been more deeply involved in India up until 1997 (i.e. a soft political distancing instead of sharp uprising) then India would be wealthier today than otherwise.