How The North American Continent Would Be if it was Colonized by Spaniards?

[TheForeigner]

There is no way though that the English, French and Dutch would have just allowed the Spanish to take over almost all of the Americas. There is a reason why it didn't happen. Same reason why Spain and Portugal declined as great powers: wars and rivalry with England, France and the Dutch Republic.

[billErobreren]

There is no way though that the English, French and Dutch would have just allowed the Spanish to take over almost all of the Americas. There is a reason why it didn't happen. Same reason why Spain and Portugal declined as great powers: wars and rivalry with England, France and the Dutch Republic.

OK? Well, the Dutch were mostly interested in trade, not solidfying an empire. They would've put up a bigger fight for today's New England if that were the case. Only in this forum do people think Spain and Portugal always had this brotherly love for one another, there's a reason why Brites de Almeida became a folk hero in Aljubarrota. Portugal and England more often fought on the same side and guess where the French were mostly going as the dreaded Anglo heretic encroached upon their turf and lost it to them. Hint: They weren't Protestant colonies, the many that stayed were anything but keen to assimilate, which is why many in Canada regard Quebec as a pain in the ass and French Huguenots mostly came from the South and Navarre anyways.

[TheForeigner]

OK? Well, the Dutch were mostly interested in trade, not solidfying an empire. They would've put up a bigger fight for today's New England if that were the case. Only in this forum do people think Spain and Portugal always had this brotherly love for one another, there's a reason why Brites de Almeida became a folk hero in Aljubarrota. Portugal and England more often fought on the same side and guess where the French were mostly going as the dreaded Anglo heretic encroached upon their turf and lost it to them. Hint: They weren't Protestant colonies, the many that stayed were anything but keen to assimilate, which is why many in Canada regard Quebec as a pain in the ass and French Huguenots mostly came from the South and Navarre anyways.

I know about the Portuguese war of independence from Spain, but during the period of Spanish rule the Dutch especially raided and conquered many Portuguese colonies. Also, I didn't mean England, France and Holland were allies or friends, but all of them did have wars with Spain and all of them founded colonies in North America. Don't forget about the New Netherlands.

[billErobreren]

I know about the Portuguese war of independence from Spain, but during the period of Spanish rule the Dutch especially raided and conquered many Portuguese colonies. Also, I didn't mean England, France and Holland were allies or friends, but all of them did have wars with Spain and all of them founded colonies in North America. Don't forget about the New Netherlands.

Uh-huh, we know what happened and we know who won the day in North America. In this hypothetical scenario, it'd be the Spanish for whatever dumb reason. Nieuw Nederland was lost to Charles of England and Scotland, they barely saw fit to fight for it 'till the end, since the Dutch were by then a newly sovereign people in the old World, that colony was hardly worth going bankrupt over. The dreaded Spanish kingdom had no dog in that particular fight. Spain & France operated in similar ways, especially when it concerned heretics, most of the French animosity concerning them at the dawn of the 16th century was having the same family ruling over their Northern and Southern border. Their animosity toward the English was fueled by much more. The Anglo-Portuguese Alliance may well be one of the oldest living ones in the Western World, so a hostile exchange between those two was pretty scant. Spain was just the big dog back then, so that's why they'd see their New World holdings raided as often as they were and so many were concerned with their quick landgrabbing.

[luc2112]

This is per capita income, Brazil is 2nd world by definition. I was not comparing GDP of Brazil (our population is larger) with Australia, I showed the growth rate.

South Africa has been in decline for decades. Modern tech allows them to maintain the white minority, society just becomes like two seperate civilisations. A first world country for the rich, and third world shithole for everyone with little isolated pockets of white habitation trying to retain some semblance of a middle class while everything goes to shit around them.

A country with a poor population may have a high growth rate. China uses this format. Yes the SSA population that took over power in South Africa is wiping out that country.

Brazil was and still is rich in resources but because their population is composed of mongrels and a culture that is similar to that of blacks, they can't catch up to first world countries.

In economic growth is possible, but we would have more social problems than US with "multicultural" society.

[Adamastor]

I know about the Portuguese war of independence from Spain, but during the period of Spanish rule the Dutch especially raided and conquered many Portuguese colonies. Also, I didn't mean England, France and Holland were allies or friends, but all of them did have wars with Spain and all of them founded colonies in North America. Don't forget about the New Netherlands.

The Dutch were only capable to conquer some Portuguese colonies because the dumb Spanish kings did nothing to protect these colonies and they were left alone without proper defense by Portuguese troops or navy (which were under Spanish control). Actually the period under Iberian union was catastrophic for the Portuguese, the union with Spain was the main reason of the Portuguese decline in Asia, for example.

In the places with enough Portuguese colonists like Brazil and Central Africa the Dutch had their asses kicked.

[sean]

This is per capita income, Brazil is 2nd world by definition. I was not comparing GDP of Brazil (our population is larger) with Australia, I showed the growth rate

No, you showed some outdated map, I just refuted it. Brazil is third world.

In economic growth is possible, but we would have more social problems than US with "multicultural" society.

Simply because really shit countries can have a lot of growth at first, but will reach their saturation level after developing and will not grow forever. This is why super modern countries like Japan, Singapore, South Korea etc have slow rates of growth, because they have reached the upper levels already.

And personally I don't think latin mongrel countries will ever be as developed as those countries. Have latin mongrels as a civilisation actually really accomplished something?

Simon Bolivar even tried to unify them all, but failed. Why? You can take the mongrel out of Latin America but you can't take Latin America out of the mongrels. As simple as that.

[luc2112]

No, you showed some outdated map, I just refuted it. Brazil is third world.

Third world based on what?

Brazil is 9° richest country in the world (208 milion/hab), Ethiopia has (100 milion/hab) and the GDP is that of my state with (10 milion/hab).

Brazil:
Agricultural production feeds 1/6 of the world.
4° largest producer of electricity in the world.
4° Largest Vehicle Fleet in the World
4° largest shipbuilder in the world

Simply because really shit countries can have a lot of growth at first, but will reach their saturation level after developing and will not grow forever. This is why super modern countries like Japan, Singapore, South Korea etc have slow rates of growth, because they have reached the upper levels already.

Brazil has industry but its objective is agricultural production, China, for example, must import between 50 - 75% of its consumption in agricultural.

Simon Bolivar even tried to unify them all, but failed. Why? You can take the mongrel out of Latin America but you can't take Latin America out of the mongrels. As simple as that.

Brazil must unite all of South America into one economic block.

World forecast:

[sean]

Third world based on what?

Third highest incarceration rate in the world, an extremely high homicide rate, roughly three times as high as the States, widespread corruption, etc.

Brazil has industry but its objective is agricultural production, China, for example, must import between 50 - 75% of its consumption in agricultural.

Brazil requires billions of dollars of imported equipment to maintain their agriculture. Billions of dollars in equipment that can only be manufactured when the industry, economy and infrastructure allows for it. Guess where most of that is?

Brazil must unite all of South America into one economic block.

I honestly don't really know of a viable way Latin American countries can thrive without the US and other rich western countries buying their products. They dont have enough money to import from each other.

Picking your country and comparing to the shittiest African country doesn't prove Brazil has a good economy on par with nations like the USA. As I said before, a nation with many resources that is poorly managed can be poor, latin mongrels are incapable of running any country.

[Adamastor]

I honestly don't really know of a viable way Latin American countries can thrive without the US and other rich western countries buying their products. They dont have enough money to import from each other.

Picking your country and comparing to the shittiest African country doesn't prove Brazil has a good economy on par with nations like the USA. As I said before, a nation with many resources that is poorly managed can be poor, latin mongrels are incapable of running any country.

I don't know about the context of other Latin American countries but one of the main reasons of Brazilian stagnation isn't the fact it is being ruled by ''latin mongrels'', but the fact that it has a traitor/anti-national elite who prefer to enjoy it's privileges in the local context instead of developing the country and risking their position as elites. In fact most Brazilian presidents have been of purely European descent and some even of Northern European descent; the same is true for a good portion of Brazilian elites. Just look at our current president (who's a very dumb individual btw): all his ancestry is from Germany and Northern Italy, but he's as dumb as average Mexican Mestizo. I don't think racial admixture is the main reason of Latin American faillure, there are other sociological and geopolitical problems which are even more difficult to overcome than just racial admixture.

Brazil actually have been industrialized for a period and could produce it's own equipment but it's passing through a hard process of de-industrialization since the 80s. Most of Brazil's problems derive from two sources: the corrupt/traitor elites and USA constant sabotage since the 40s. Basically all presidents with projects to complete Brazilian industrialization have been deposed by coups financed by the USA and with internal support of local corrupt elites. USA even sent it's navy to help Brazilian conspirators to depose president J. Goulart in 1964. Recently CIA leaked documents revealed that US intelligence recommended his deposition because his reforms would be good to Brazil and against American interests.

I think some Latin American countries like Brazil and Argentina would be better off had the Axis won WWII. Unfortunately for Brazil (and maybe all of Latin America) the only way out of the faillure is the dissolution/balkanization of USA.