[yunohn]

> But the underdeveloped world has also been benefited by the developed world.

Nobody is arguing that there aren’t potential benefits to the oppressed side. Slaves in the colonial days were also kept alive, housed, and fed.

But, since you’re talking about the knowledge and industrial revolutions, do consider that the former is a mutual exchange of ideas which has benefited all (not purely from the developed to the developing) and for the latter, it’s mostly the developing manufacturing for the developed, to this day!

Asia and Africa both had very advanced medical tools, machine, and philosophical and societal structures, which the West adopted innumerable ideas from. The developing countries have had civilisations that benefited their populace, and have had others that resulted in violence and death (just like the West).

I think the main problem with your viewpoint, like the other commenter said, is the false dichotomy you present between colonial oppression and no-contact outcomes.

Moreover, your understanding of world history reeks of “white saviour” principle. Hope you educate yourself one day!

[csee]

  "Slaves in the colonial days were also kept alive, housed, and fed."

You misunderstand. I'm talking about net benefit, not gross benefits.

  "it’s mostly the developing manufacturing for the developed, to this day!"

You sarcastically told me to educate myself, but maybe you should go and read about comparative advantage.

  "which the West adopted innumerable ideas from."

I didn't say otherwise.

  "is the false dichotomy you present between colonial oppression and no-contact outcomes."

Again, this is not a dichotomy in the sense of a false dichotomy. A hypothetical is categorically and definitionally different.

[yunohn]

> I'm talking about net benefit, not gross benefits.

What is the net benefit? How are you measuring the relative +/- to the colonised? You can imagine that the colonised would disagree with your colonising assessment.

> you should go and read about comparative advantage.

How is the ability to provide poverty wage manufacturing to the developed countries, a comparative advantage for the colonised people? I’m dumbfounded. You can feel happy that they’re being paid something more than enslavement, but they don’t feel the same way. They are forced to participate in a global extractive economy designed to ensure they are never richer than the developed countries.

> I didn't say otherwise.

But, you keep claiming that the oppression has led to a net benefit, and I fail to see any measured examples in your replies that prove this upliftment that the West has so generously provided as a “benefit”.

> hypothetical is categorically and definitionally different.

What is your hypothetical, exactly? “Imagine the (guaranteed) horrific future for the colonies, had they not been colonised and uplifted by the West”? That’s your opinion, not a hypothesis.