What if the British had colonized Mexico instead of the Spanish?
You are currently reading a thread in /int/ - International
What if the British had colonized Mexico instead of the Spanish?
Mexico would be running north America right now
It would be a futuristic utopia.
What if the Aztecs had hijacked the Spanish galleons and conquered Spain?
If they resisted enough and there wasn't as many native allies as Spain had, they'd probably be made into a protectorate or whatever and would only economically exploit them/send missionaries too, they probably wouldn't turn it into a settler colony and mix with the natives. There's be a lot more pure bred indigenous people today as a result.
Another Mexico thread that will turn in a hate thread.
Stop.
>>52157885
go fuck yourself, gomez.
>>52157910
ur mom
>>52157768
Like Australia but with Mexicans instead of Abos?
>>52157885
Pedro de Madrid plz go
>>52157858
That would be impossible on their own. If Britain or France or someone else wanted to help them against Spain, maybe they could have. Like Britain would let them colonize Spain in exchange for being a trade/military ally because Spain would be a bigger threat to Britain, so they just care about neutralizing them and gaining an ally.
>>52157768
The provinces would probably be a lot more developed, more so than the average American province most likely, seeing as they already have such a high base tax.
>>52157858
It would be a futuristic utopia.
ANOTHER MEXICO THREAD!!!!
>>52157963
It would be a futuristic utopia.
>>52157952
It would be a futuristic utopia.
>>52157927
At least my mom's head is still attached to her body and nobody forcefully has sex with her.
It would be a futuristic utopia.
>>52157885
>oh noes theys gunna make fun of me :c
Grow a spine ,cocksucker
Think I have insomnia
Also Canada and Mexico would meet on the west coast and form one massive country
>>52157768
It would be a futuristic utopia
They wouldn't
The brits were about making money not conquering land, that actually came as a result
because it was a constinutional monarchy it can't just take foreign land and add it to the unified kingdom, that wouldn't work
what they would have done was set up a trading post like the dutch east indies and set up one in mexico, when some local thing come up they would try to buy the land off of them
a lot like hk or sri lanka
>>52158056
>niggerspeak
>>52157885
>>52158061
It would be a futuristic utopia.
it would be a futuristic utopia
>>52157941
Australia only had like 300k abbos when the British showed up. Mexico has the biggest population in north America before European contact. The population would be too big for Britain to just take the good land for their settlers and push the natives back like they did in their actual north American colonies/Australia. If anything, British colonization of Mexico would look more like their colonization of India. It's a good thing that didn't happen, Britain moved Indians all over their empire for cheap labor (there's a lot of Indians in the Caribbean, some irrelevant islands in the south Pacific, and parts of Africa now), so if they did colonize Mexico they'd likely have moved a lot of Mexicans to what is now the US to make up for the labor shortage since we had a lot less natives.
>>52157768
It's called Belize and it's an irrelevant shithole.
>>52157768
World super power would have been Etats-Unis d'Amerique. The smugness would've reached heights previously thought impossible.
>>52158114
It would indeed
>>52158139
>hey'd likely have moved a lot of Mexicans to what is now the US to make up for the labor shortage since we had a lot less natives.
So it would be the same as it is now.
>>52158212
How come the english were able to keep their dicks in their pants with respect to the natives but the spanish created an entire bastard race?
>>52157768
Lets see.
The British colonized the glorios nashaan of Egypt, the US, Canada, New Zealand, Australia. Every one is a first world country. They even owned Hong Kong for a few decades, and that ended up having a stronger economy then the whole of china, which was run by the Chinese.
The Spanish colonized every South American country except Brazil, all of Central America and Mexico, not to mention Dominican Republic, Philippines, and Cuba. Every one of them are third world countries, most have major problems with corruption.
The catholic church played a major role in governance for most of Mexicos history. I think you should take a look at that as well. There was freedom of religion in the british colonies, and I think that works wonders for development.
I guess my conclusion is obvious .-..
>>52158250
Are you still under military rule?
>>52158248
Because they cared more about spreading their religion than racial purity, and marrying native women was an effective way to convert the natives.
>>52158248
A lot of Anglos fucked indians, that's why there are so many 1/32nd Indian people here. The indian population of North America was just small compared to Latin America so the rates of Native admixture declined into near non-existence with more and more whites immigrating over centuries as the native population shrank. French did this too, but in larger numbers, they're known as Metis. You can still find a fair share of mixed native/white mestizos in parts of the midwest and south. My FWB is a legit Anglo-Injun halfbreed.
>>52158269
Y-ye... no ಠ~à²
>>52158324
How do they allow you access to 4chan? Didn't they block twitter at some point?
>>52158323
But he does have a point, I don't think there was anything like the one drop rule to discourage race mixing in Latin America. And mixing with the natives in the British (and French) colonies happened despite government attempts to stop it.
![lead_960[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/5zGkCBD.jpg "lead_960[1].jpg")
>>52158323
>5 minutes into New World and chill and she gives you this look
>>52158356
I dunno .-.
All the red boards on 4chan are blocked tho except for /pol/
>>52158372
I think it was Anglos in the US government that tried to prevent race mixing. I'm not aware if the British crown ever created policies against it in the Americas.
>>52158409
>5 minutes into Thanksgiving and chill he gives you this blanket
>>52158448
Why does pol get a pass?
>>52158250
I don't think freedom of religion had much to do with Britain's ex colonies being more developed. Slaves in the 13 colonies/early America were forced to accept Christianity and stuff, so it wasn't even that free. Also Britain colonized India, which is a shithole. The prosperous ex colonies are mainly settler states where the natives were replaced and the settlers were not economically exploited as hard as the other colonies like India. I think the big difference that leads to prosperity is how the economy/society of the colony was organized. In Latin America, things were very unequal. The elite was only concerned with their own wealth, so they didn't have incentive to develop their countries as long as they could exploit the poor people. In the Anglo settler colonies, there was much less inequality and the middle class had a lot more power. Because of that, and the increased democracy in the Anglo colonies, the middle class had more political power and they didn't want to be left behind in development, so they forced economic development to happen for all of society.
Mexico was a mistake.
>>52157768
Is that the shoop?
>Being proud of Indian heritage
Why don't you go drink mouthwash with your abbos buddies
>>52158250
kek no, you totally forgot about India and the rest of their african colonies
>>52157768
If the British conquered and colonised Mexico and brought their civilisation like the Spaniards did, coffee would be the national beverage of Britain, Mexicans would be a Nahuatl Germanic/Celtic mix, Mexicans would speak English, Mexicans would have British heritage and institutions instead of shittier Spanish ones.
It would be like Belize but much, much larger.
>>52157768
We all would be part black like Americans.
>>52160048
Sounds pretty good actually. It'd be neat to have a bunch of Aztec/Victorian style architecture in North America.
>>52158248
I think when it came down to really amerindian places like Bolivia, the criollos were vastly outnumbered and took native brides?
>>52158248
They sure did, that's why you all look nordic.
>>52160143
please no memes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIzHIRCBtdE
>>52160964
>23&me is representative of the entire population
You realise that most of your country don't have $1000 saved on their bank accounts? An expensive $200 kit is not something they can afford. Looking at studies done in hospitals more than half of self reported whites have above 5% black ancestry.
http://www.disabled-world.com/health/cancer/racial-disparities.php
And said ancestry is visible in 1/3 of whites.
>>52161076
at least.
>>52160964
>No Alaska
>No Hawaii
Trash.
>>52161076
i dont need 23andme to know where my family came from
>>52157768
Depends
>Mexikek/Liberturd mind
A FUTURISTUC UTOPIAH
>Reality
Lmao all indios dead and every last ounce of gold stole and sent to britain instead of the diezmo.
>>52157768
It would be a goddamn paradise.
>>52161076
Might not be a perfect measure, but its still better than your guessing.
Also, keep in mind that mixed-race people might be more interested to see where they came from.
>>52161379
We know that you are exclusively celtic and German Billy Bob.
>>52161980
The 1/3 part comes from the observations I've made while I've been there. Black genes are notorious, specially the button-like nose.
>>52162279
>muh personal observations
lel
>>52160048
>Belize's superior british institutions
>>52162351
I'm talking about east coast whites, not midwesterners.
>>52161980
Mixed-race people doesn't self-identify as whites though.
It would be a futuristic utopia
imagine latin-anglo Mexicans, no one would be able to compete
>>52157963
>base tax
t. Europa Universalis 3
>>52157768
>>52163061
>imagine latin-anglo Mexicans
America?
>>52164709
No way, they're all 1/88th kraut and half Irish
>>52164734
Gibraltar?
>>52157768
It would be a white country, of course after a Mayan and Aztec genocide.
>>52157849
Y-you didn't do bad Spain, socialism ruined it, that's not your fault.
>>52164928
Are you ignoring that Britain always ships blacks to their colonies because they owned lots of countries in Africa? Canada escaped that fate because it is too cold to sustain blacks.
>>52157768
It would be a futuristic utopia but tacos would be named little jons and enchiladas cheesy chasers
>"So what do you chaps do for a living? Oh, you cut out hearts? Absolutely smashing, then. Carry on, ta-ta."
>>52165032
He means the kind of "white" country the USA is.
>>52158250
>egypt
>first world country
AY LMAO
It would be another bland cultureless wasteland like Canada, USA, and Australia.
>>52157768
Mexicans wouldn't exist and the world would be a safer place.
>>52157858
Native Americans didn't have any domestic plagues to spread to the old world. They also had worse tech, worse logistics, fewer domesticated animals; they were inferior in almost every way that would let them challenge European power.
It probably would be some sort of futuristic utopia
