As the Age of Discovery led to the colonization of Africa, the Americas and Asia, the transfer of wealth and knowledge is often overlooked. The truth remains that the colonies had virtually nothing to offer other than land and resources, although some illustrious people will point to the cultures that were virtually destroyed in the process of occupying the land. Let’s ask an old question for which there’s only one inconvenient answer.

Demonizing the Colonizers has become the preferred method to put forth the idea that if it wasn’t for the brutal occupation and disruption of the natives, those societies would have flourished quite well on their own. After all, everyone knows that all humans are intellectually equal, or so goes the refrain.

For this piece, we’ll focus on the Americas, and suffice to say that Africa and Asia produce similar results, often times worse. Plenty of books and articles have been written about colonization, often offering obscure tidbits to rationalize their positions, but life is far simpler than some people want us to believe. Ultimately the true measure of success is always reduced to socio-techno-economic achievement and everything else is a mere feel good mantra. Or “show me the money” as Rod Tidwell told Jerry McGuire — and it never fails because numbers don’t lie.

The idea here is not that it was acceptable for Europeans to colonize other lands, although conquest is as old as humankind, but rather to bring clarity to the current claim of migration benefits from peoples that cannot build successful societies on their own.

Africans mostly came to the Americas as slaves but if they’re that good, they should be able to adapt and build anywhere they go, especially their native lands without anyone’s help or input. Europeans did and still do. “Liberia: A Testament To Black Lack Of Achievement In An Oppression-Free State” already examined that bogus claim.

The Colonizers literally left Mexico, Central and South America about two centuries ago and here’s where we are, using the broad Gross Domestic Product (GDP) as the measuring stick.

Now in the 21st century the formerly Colonized actively seek to leave their prized cultures and societies behind and line up by the millions to enter Western Civilization in search of economic opportunity and welfare. The US southern border is a prime example although Europe faces the same invasion pattern. Notice that nobody is seeking to move to Uganda or Uzbekistan.

The argument is that the search for the “American Dream,” as we often hear it around these parts, should be supported because it’s the right thing to do and multiculturalism is beneficial, intellectually speaking. However that flies in the face of the claim that Colonizers are bad people because they brought diversity to the colonies. But these migrants have nothing of value to offer as proven by their socio-techno-economic development over the span of two centuries. However Nancy Pelosi, the fervent defender of illegal immigration, recently summarized the qualifications of illegal migrants crossing the southern border of the USA: crops pickers! As in cotton pickers? Make sense.

Here’s a simple comparative analysis between Colonizers and the Colonized, or Spain and Portugal vs. Mexico, Central and South America.

As of 2021, the Colonizers occupied only 6.4% of the total land area and accounted for only 8.1% of the total population.

Yet the Colonizers produced 24.6% of total GDP, with the average GDP per Capita of $29,012 for Colonizers obliterating the average GDP per Capita of the Colonized of $7,888 by over 367%. That’s almost two centuries of freedom that have fallen very short of expectations.

Considering that Spain and Portugal are not as strong economically as the United Kingdom or France, among others, the comparison only gets worse for the Colonized if the other European Colonizers are added along with Africa and Asia on the Colonized side of the formula. The GDP gap is much wider.

Now add the fact that the need for unskilled labor is quickly diminishing due to automation — “Population Shall Shrink As Automation Expands” — and we’re left with a quagmire that cannot be resolved unless taxation from the productive segment of Western Civilization keeps feeding the welfare of others.

No, migrants are not Einsteins, although that’s how they’re sold by ideologues with blinders. If only they had the opportunity, the education, and all that jazz, as the song goes. Really? Aren’t their cultures as good as advertised? Two centuries not enough?

What is the conclusion considering that the Colonized in this case have an abundance of natural resources that the Colonizers could only wish for? From a business perspective, there’s no net benefit to be derived from accepting the overwhelming majority of migrants into Western Civilization, legal or illegal. The Swedes and Italians have realized that migration eventually becomes a net burden on society, not to mention the cultural incompatibility, and they just voted accordingly. In brief, the resumés of those crossing the borders into Western Civilization fall very short of the required qualifications for the jobs. It’s that simple!

If we are to overlook the lack of skills and embrace the humanitarian argument, we may as well invite all 5 billion people to come to our home. All those in favor can welcome three random people into their abodes and let us know how it works out. Or should we go back to colonial times because everyone wants to be where Europeans are?

---