Why were English Colonies In The Americas More Successful Than Spanish Colonies?

[Stefan]

Why do you think class divisions developed in Spanish colonies more than the British ones?

1. Dictators privileged themselves and their friends, creating class stratification.
In North-America, while there was a monarchy, it wasn't an absolute monarchy and there was self-governance/freedom.

2. There was less property ownership, solely because of the reason I presented before.

One must realize that even before the American independence, the ideas of liberalism (self-governance) were quite ingrained in the British legal system. People were recognized to have these things called "rights." The success wasn't due to republicanism but due to liberalism (of the classical variety.)

[Anglojew]

Good point. But I think is important to remark that the degree of development between the Spanish colonies and the British were completely uneven. The British usually developed the infrastructure of colonies, white in the Spanish Empire almost anything was improvised. The levels of poverty of average people, and the degree of development of institutions were completely different. Common, in Spanish America the education was medieval, and there was not industry but basic stuff, while the British colonies already had scientific development and the seeds of the Industrial Revolution.
Remember that at those times almost everything technological Spain needed was imported, from telescopes to clocks! That difference from the starting point was only magnified with the series of problems of the decades after independence.

If I even mention how under developed Spain itself was/is I'm likely to get banned. You're completely right.

[poiuytrewq0987]

You might as well ask why Spanish colonies in the Americas were more successful than British colonies in Africa.

[pinguino]

1. Dictators privileged themselves and their friends, creating class stratification.
In North-America, while there was a monarchy, it wasn't an absolute monarchy and there was self-governance/freedom.

2. There was less property ownership, solely because of the reason I presented before.

One must realize that even before the American independence, the ideas of liberalism (self-governance) were quite ingrained in the British legal system. People were recognized to have these things called "rights." The success wasn't due to republicanism but due to liberalism (of the classical variety.)

True. And liberalism only has been imposed in the last 3 decades in Latin America That's the difference. When I was a child, for instance, there were still large Haciendas in my country, with peasants working like servants... And that was in the 70's!!

[Anglojew]

Because the Spanish colonies were founded around a small parasite elite supported by a sea of peasants (read about the Hacienda), while in the British colonies (if we forget a bit about slavery) the economical nucleus was the small farm and the small economical unit, where the owner produced its own resources.

Exactly my point. The Spanish basically pillaged while the British developed. The amazing thing about this is the Spanish today seem proud of this.

[Anglojew]

1. Dictators privileged themselves and their friends, creating class stratification.
In North-America, while there was a monarchy, it wasn't an absolute monarchy and there was self-governance/freedom.

2. There was less property ownership, solely because of the reason I presented before.

One must realize that even before the American independence, the ideas of liberalism (self-governance) were quite ingrained in the British legal system. People were recognized to have these things called "rights." The success wasn't due to republicanism but due to liberalism (of the classical variety.)

Is it Catholicism that held-back Spanish cultural liberalism or something deeper about the Spanish culture?

[pinguino]

You might as well ask why Spanish colonies in the Americas were more successful than British colonies in Africa.

Or why colonies like Belize and Guyana in the Americas are poorer than the Latin American countries
It looks like only where the British put white people things worked well. After a genocide on natives, of course.

[pinguino]

Is it Catholicism that held-back Spanish cultural liberalism or something deeper about the Spanish culture?

I don't think so. Jesuits were the more educated people in the Spanish American colonies, and they did wonders with small resources. The problem was mercantilism, and the way Spain saw the New World. Besides, Spain was falling down economically, so it did what it could. By contrast Britain was in an economic boom, fuel by the Industrial Revolution. That, I think, was the main difference.

[pinguino]

Exactly my point. The Spanish basically pillaged while the British developed. The amazing thing about this is the Spanish today seem proud of this.

Well, thanks to Spaniards we changed llamas by donkeys

[Anglojew]

You might as well ask why Spanish colonies in the Americas were more successful than British colonies in Africa.

The British colonies in Africa weren't settled in the same way as North America/Australia were. The British there plundered in a similar way to the Spanish in Latin America I'd say.