[libertine]

If you believe the US that colonized part of North America is the same as post-ww2 US, then I can understand.

I don't think they're the same, so many institutions were established that over the years that I don't see them as the former colony of the British crown.

But hey, if you want to discuss semantics, go for it.

[embedding-shape]

Yeah, when you draw arbitrary limits (30 years for you it seems), it's easy to paint one side as the better one. Once you start to think a bit bigger, you start to realize most big nations act as the others, and it's just different flavors of "bad", yet they're all as bad as the others.

What about segregation then, is that recent enough for you? Or that wasn't about culture/language, so that too isn't applicable? I'm afraid that with rose-tinted glasses, everything has an explanation why your favorite is different than their favorite.

[libertine]

Why is the founding of the UN, at the end of WW2, and the signature of the UN Charter, considered an arbitrary event in modern History for you?

It's the biggest geopolitical event in modern History to prevent the death of millions, by attempting to stop the expansion of borders through military force and making countries recognize the borders of each of its members.

> What about segregation then, is that recent enough for you?

What about segregation? Where? In different European countries? USA? South Africa? India?

Was there a global consensus to end segregation? Or were different events at different points in time, achieved in different manners? Is there still segregation happening in some societies?