Colonialism and Neocolonialism
The West enjoys an extremely high level of economic prosperity, while other peoples live in the direst poverty, lacking all the comforts that seem obvious to us, often even suffering from real hunger. In certain circles of the ex-Marxist left (but not only there), the idea circulates that such a disparity in prosperity is due to the exploitation by the West of the Third World, as it was once called, or, as it is now called, the "developing countries." The majority of Western prosperity would therefore have originated from the colonialism of the last century and is still sustained by the so-called neocolonialism.
But does this explanation have any foundation? Let's examine the issue a bit.
Colonialism:
There are a number of accurate studies in economic history that show how,
overall, the possession of colonies did not bring great economic advantages:
what was gained, especially by private individuals, was offset by expenses,
particularly public ones. But without delving into studies that are always
problematic, as they are based on uncertain data and with the "ifs" and "buts"
that do not make history, let's limit ourselves to a simple observation of
historical reality, without "ifs" and "buts."
We observe that in the 19th century, the emerging countries were Germany and Scandinavia, which did not have colonies (Germany did have some, but they were of little importance). Spain and Portugal kept theirs even longer, and they were the poorest countries. In the last century, the colonialist countries that had historically been among the most prosperous (France, England, Belgium, the Netherlands) left the colonies and did not enter economic crises at all: in reality, they left the colonies without much resistance, except in particular cases for particular reasons (such as Algeria due to the presence of French settlers and Vietnam within the context of the Cold War), which is further proof that they were not really necessary.
Above all, we note that the most remarkable development was that of the United States, which did not have colonies. It seems to us that these simple historical observations are enough to demonstrate the inconsistency of the idea that Western well-being is born from the exploitation of colonial peoples.
Neocolonialism:
It is argued that even though the colonies no longer exist, Westerners still
exploit the former colonial countries by appropriating their natural resources
at bargain prices.
Let's
see how things really stand.
A Western company employs great skills and resources to find oil deposits, then builds large extraction plants, huge pipelines, and all kinds of infrastructure. It then pays large sums to the country where the deposit is located, which, however, has done practically nothing. Can we say that the company has stolen the oil? It doesn't seem that way to us. We might say that the countries where the deposits are located receive large resources without having produced anything, a parasitic income, but no one contests this right.
Let’s also consider that:
prices are not set by Westerners but by the market, like any other commodity;
if the local authorities, instead of using the immense sums received to build roads, schools, infrastructure, factories, pocket them, why would that be the fault of the Westerners and not of the peoples who accept those authorities?
and if it weren't for the Westerners extracting and using the oil, what would the locals do with it?
Conclusion:
It becomes evident that Western economic progress is the consequence of
technical and scientific development and of economic and political structures.
Higher income is clearly linked to technological and scientific progress. In the
West, Galilean science, which we simply call science, was born and has had ever
broader and more remarkable developments, from Newton to Einstein to modern
physics. Locomotives, cars, power plants, mass media, and more recently,
information technology have been invented, changing the world. And progress
continues with AI, which may be the future.
These discoveries have been accompanied by political, social, and economic structures that are able to implement and spread them throughout the population, which can therefore benefit from them. In fact, science is not secret, nor are inventions, and everyone could build and enjoy them.
It has happened that in the Far East, they have used these discoveries, but I would say especially the Western systems, and have progressed greatly, coming very close to our levels, sometimes even surpassing us in some fields, while the Arab world and Africa have remained entangled in pointless and endless ethnic and religious wars.
If other countries eventually follow the example of the Far East, there will be no problem for the West: indeed, it will presumably improve its well-being even further, because in the modern world the prosperity of some does not rely on the poverty of others but is enhanced even more by the prosperity of others. We export to rich countries, certainly not to poor ones.