At some point in recent history, there has been some form of control by one nation upon another. Whether that be in the Americas, Africa, the Middle East or in Australasia, there has been some element of colonial rule. But the question to ask is, why have some countries reacted better to being controlled than others and what factors help to determine such a reaction?
Where the effects have been positive
It is important to focus first of all on the nations that have fared well following colonial rule. These include the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.
However, in contrast, there are countries, mainly from Africa, who have not. These include nations such as Liberia, Zimbabwe, and Zambia. The question is, what has helped determine the future of these differing countries? The single most important factor and it may seem obvious, is the care and attention paid by the colonial power to its colonised nation. This can be clearly seen by the treatment from Great Britain. Unlike with other European nations, in the first wave of English colonies, the people from England "settled in those colonies" as stated on Quora dot com. Although many of the locals were "driven out" to remote settlements, the Englishmen who chose to settle in the United States et al.
"brought their ideas and technology and built their homes". Now although it was not necessarily done to aid those the people were in control of themselves, the fact that they were intent on building the nations that they colonised, ensured that after they were removed from power, the remains of a decent society were left. This desire to build a country, to enshrine their rights and moral values had a major impact.
One can see that clearly in the constitution of the United States as a result.
Whereas there was genuine interest in the United States and Canada to build and live in a decent society, in Africa the thinking amongst the European powers was very different. As reported in Exhibitions NYPL, there was essentially a "scramble for Africa".
The desire to ensure economic and political supremacy on its neighbours ensured that an arms race of land really took hold. There was no intent to build a land to live in; it was simply about beating everybody else in that 'scramble'. It is as a result of this that the African nations that were colonised, not only failed to develop but experienced problems going forward after achieving independence; problems such as civil war, corruption, and dictatorial leaders.
It is clear that the status of a country under colonial rule depends heavily on the colonial power. The impact of rule can be seen in further examples, most notably in Germany after the end of World War II. Whereas West Germany was controlled by the West, East Germany was controlled by the Soviet Union.
The two sides could not have been more different. Whereas West Germany was a democratic nation with a capitalist structure, East Germany was a Marxist-Leninist dictatorship. Furthermore, whereas West Germany flourished into "the most prosperous economy in Europe" as stated on Wikipedia, East Germany stagnated and its people suffered greatly as a result.
The actions and intent of the colonial power
It is clear that the future of a colonised nation was formed largely by the nation that controlled it. If proper care and attention was paid, as in the case of the United States and Australia, the impact of colonial rule can be and largely was, positive. But where that has not been the case, the consequences, as seen, have been catastrophic. The effects of colonial rule have differed throughout the world. To understand why one only needs to look at the actions and intent of the nations that controlled it.
