OK, let's try this again.

[BigTex]

We also weren't subjected to slavery. You are also only taking into account the white experience here, not the experience of our native Aboriginals. I would write more, but I have to go to Uni.

Sorry my references to Australia and India are merely meant that their governments are the most stable. They are one of the few old colonies that are still functional after their former masters left.

There really is a big difference between india and australia probably shouldnt have used them together. But still the fact remains it is a former colony that is a first world nation. India is on it's way to becoming a world power, something was truly lost in the decolonization of Africa and the Middle East by European powers.

and Australia could more easily be put in the same category as Canada and the US. The colonists never really left.

The USA rebelled, won, gained it's independance. Canada is still a territory of the crown.

Australia was colonized more so then africa true. Are you saying that this has lead to it being more stable then the other former colonies? Was the prime belief of colonialism partly true, are these countries incapable of governing themselves?

[PanzerJaeger]

The USA rebelled, won, gained it's independance. Canada is still a territory of the crown.

Australia was colonized more so then africa true. Are you saying that this has lead to it being more stable then the other former colonies? Was the prime belief of colonialism partly true, are these countries incapable of governing themselves?

I'm saying that modern Australia was built, administrated, and populated by former Europeans who pushed the natives aside and never really cut ties with Europe and Western culture/advancement, much like the USA and Canada. I wouldn't really put that country in the same category as India or Africa, where the indigenous populations were left to try and sort things out.

[Marshal Murat]

Panzerjager does have a point.

1. South Africa is one of the few stable mineral rich African countries, and it was run by whites, and did very well for itself.

2. Rhodesia had money coming out of it's earlobes before it became Zimbabwe under Mugabe.

3. Australia is white, has a white majority, and is alot more homogenous than any African country.

India is really the only example of a former British colony maintaining a stable independence, and that's through a strong nationalism and independence movement under Gandhi. The British did allow many Indians into low-level government jobs, ensuring that the bureaucracy was functioning before handing it over to the politicians.

Other African nations had entirely European governments. Namely the Congo (I watched Lumumba).
They were ready, but the Belgians were too ingrained in the system for independence to work.

[CountArach]

I'm saying that modern Australia was built, administrated, and populated by former Europeans who pushed the natives aside and never really cut ties with Europe and Western culture/advancement, much like the USA and Canada. I wouldn't really put that country in the same category as India or Africa, where the indigenous populations were left to try and sort things out.

Actually we have largely severed our cultural ties with England (And soon perhaps our political ties *crosses fingers*) and have now turned in so many ways towards America. Other than that though, I agree with you.