[agumonkey]

tbh, and not trying to dismiss USA in anyway. I find their situation in time and space pretty exceptional. They had no aggressive neighbors and half a continent. At a time where new knowledge was popping out, having such a playground was very timely.

[seanmcdirmid]

The North American tribes had plenty of warfare and territory turn overs long before the Europeans arrived. The isolation of the americas did prevent diffusion of technology, but we also saw the same thing happen in Africa and even Asia to similar extents. It wasn't very unique.

[agumonkey]

Sorry I meant after the United states formed. They became the only player on that area weren't they ?

I always oppose their situation to Europe where many similarly large countries were shoulder to shoulder.

[chrisco255]

Then why did the U.S. fare so well compared with Canada, Mexico, Venezuela, Brazil, etc. India, Russia and China had close to the same landmass for several hundred to thousand years prior but they didn't achieve what U.S. did despite a huge head start.

[jogjayr]

> India, Russia and China had close to the same landmass for several hundred to thousand years prior but they didn't achieve what U.S. did despite a huge head start.

Uh they did.

"The Mughal Empire began a period of proto-industrialization, and Mughal India became the world's largest economic power, with 24.4% of world GDP, and the world leader in manufacturing, producing 25% of global industrial output up until the 18th century. The Mughal Empire is considered "India's last golden age" and one of the three Islamic Gunpowder Empires (along with the Ottoman Empire and Safavid Persia)." [1]

Can't find a similar citation for China but before colonialism, India and China were the world's two largest economies. It's telling that European explorers were searching for a sea route to India and not the other way around. Europeans wanted silk and spices from India and China. But Europe had nothing India or China wanted. Or at least, knew they wanted. Arguably they could've used the superior maritime knowledge[2] and gun manufacturing techniques Europeans possessed.

I guess if there's anything that history teaches us, it's that attaining a lead is no guarantee of maintaining it.

There's a whole Wikipedia article exploring why these two nations fell behind the Western World in the 18th and 19th centuries. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Divergence#Possible_fact...) I'd argue that colonialism was certainly a major factor for India. Being treated for 150+ years as a source of cheap raw materials and captive market for exports will do terrible things to a country's industry and economy.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mughal_Empire

2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volta_do_mar

[chrisco255]

U.S. had wars with Mexico, Canada, itself, Spain, plenty of war happened in the 19th century.

[agumonkey]

Except maybe for Canada, these weren't invasion though. I have to admit there were lot more conflicts I knew about. We shouldn't learn history focused around our own country only .. it makes us foolish about the rest of the world.