I can speak from a personal standpoint. But my family was from a later migration in the 20th century. They were poor Italians who had survived WWI, and for people like them, going to the Americas was like travelling to a land full of new opportunities and ways to reinvent themselves. The few people they knew who had gone to Argentina had a way better quality and social standing than back in Italy. So they got married young, packed up their few things, and just took their chance. They had nothing to lose, and at that time, Argentina and Chile had policies that made European migration easier. They would even give you land if you chose to stay in a remote area.
I think surviving the Muslims, the Mongols, the black death outbreaks, and the little ice-age were impressive achievements. The Mongols especially set the Sinosphere, South Asia and other Islamic regions back, slowing down advances in science and technology, while Europe was able to have the renaissance. I think even without colonizing the Americas, the Europeans around the 18th century could probably still defeat all major powers around the world. The colonization of the Americas gave Europe more capital and more men-power, with the introduction of American staples like potatoes and maize. By then, the only people who can stop the Europeans were other Europeans.
With regard to the British colonalism. This wasn’t the result of the individual decisions of the normal people who participated. But instead decisions by the crown and those controlling companies established by royal chaters. Then later by the directors of companies established by the stock market in London. Along with decisions made by UK government and parliament. The white men making the big decisions didn’t spread out at all, they stayed in London.
Yes, Argentina is so much more European than I thought. One recent trend I notice some from Argentina and Chile have moved back to Italy. As a tourist to Argentina, it seemed ok, but not sure living there is better though.
You know, that sounds kinda…do I need to spell it out? We already have one prolificly anti-Semitic poster here already (not naming names, of course, but regulars can figure out who I’m talking about.)
It’s like saying “Jews are good with money” or “black people can play basketball better than white people”. Positive stereotypes are still stereotypes. Boy, those Asians sure are good at math, aren’t they?
Since when does referencing published psychometric data constitute anti-Semitism, and why pivot to calling it a “stereotype” the moment your initial outrage fell apart?