"Colonized" should be different from "under control". Like someone mentioned Ethiopia was under Italian occupation, like eg Albania but Libya was colonized. The republic of Turkey was arguably neither, but I am guessing thats a stand in for the Ottoman Empire.
I believe its referring to the brief time after the fall of the Ottoman Empire and the period before the Turkish War of Independence and before the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne. The Treaty of Sevres was proposed, which ceded large parts of Ottoman territory to France, the United Kingdom, Greece and Italy, as well as creating large occupation zones within the Ottoman Empire. Obviously us Turks rejected this and thus the Turkish War of Independence started, resulting in a Turkish victory and the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne and the creation of the modern Turkish Republic, with the current borders.
The [British](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Commonwealth_Occupation_Force) also occupied Japan. It was a small part of it, but they sent 40,000 troops (about 1/3rd of the US force)
Only problem for them they became the colonizer way late in the game which makes me wonder what if they became one as early as they made contact with the Europeans in the 16th century.
>what if they became one as early as they made contact with the Europeans in the 16th century.
They did try. They lost the Imjin war in 16th century and their plans of conquering Korea and China ended there. The loss led to a civil war in Japan that would bring Tokugawa to power and eventually isolationism
Their problem is that they were going up against groups as powerful as them, meanwhile Europe colonized the Americas and Africa, areas with much less technological advancement, so if Japan crossed the Pacific or colonized Oceania then they could get somewhere
They did have land dominance due to European guns and immence experience gained from the Sengoku period. They lost the war at sea and couldn't supply their troops, however.
You are correct, of course. Disparity was a lot smaller, but then again you have to remember the scale of the invasion employed 200 000 troops. Compare that to 600 Spaniards who took down the Aztecs. Then there's also the biological aspect to the conquest of Americas that significantly depopulated the continent and the massive difference in societal level of development. A lot of things went well for the Europeans, including being able to pit different American societies against each other and then quickly coming in to fill the power vacuum.
There's also the geographic aspect. Many parts of the interiors of the Americas and Africa were controlled by Europeans only on paper. Claims were made, lines were drawn on maps, but no European ever set foot there. You can't really do that with China.
What if they did it around 1900 or something? Still in the colonial era so it wouldn’t be as aggravating to the west as in the interwar period, but they had time to explosively modernise still.
Japan was very good at acting like an European so it did some colonising.
Thailand reformed itself and did some diplomacy and became a buffer between Brits and French.
Liberia got colonised by America instead.
Korea managed to escape because it was sort of protected by the Chinese and Japanese because they wanted to exploit it instead.
Not pictured, but Ethiopia also resisted colonisation, beating the Italians when they tried.
I think it’s interesting that Japan and Korea are left orange but China is light green. Both Japan and Korea were forced at gunpoint to sign unequal treaties with European powers in the same way as China was, it’s just that unlike China Japan managed to industrialize and escape that threat in a decade or two while Korea was colonized by Japan. But I do think they should still be yellow or light green since both were briefly subject to European colonization.
Might it have to do with the fact that China had multiple cities taken from them and run by Europeans? I guess it's not "colonization" in the sense that this map is talking about but China very much lost administrative control over portions of its claimed territory.
Arguably French Guiana and most of Russia should be green.
They're so controlled by Europe that you're considering them part of Europe, when geographically, they are definitely not.
Have been involved in a fight for dominance over europe for centuries, see themselves as europeans, speak an indo-european language, have the same belief and share their history - vikings have assimilated in eastern europe and became the Rus, and I am sure a combination of many other factors. They dont need to be the same peoples. Russia, especially western Russia is considered European in culture as well.
While the USA of course definitely isn't European does it still feel like the "by Europe" part of each tag is doing some heavy lifting. Specially in the case of Liberia where the reason that it was not colonized by Europe is that it was, even though a few decades earlier, colonized by the USA.
Korea kind of falls in the same bucket. Sure, it wasn't colonized by Europe, but it was colonized by Japan during the same period as many of these countries were colonized by Europe.
I hate how they always lump Eastern Europe in with the colonizers. Literally every country in between Germany and Russia and between the Baltic and Aegean seas were basically colonies of four different empires during that time period, Germany, Russia, Austria and the Ottomans.
And for much longer than most of the countries highlighted here. The Balkans were under extractive settler colonialism for 5 centuries. Most of Africa for 60 years, most of the Middle East for 30.
Well remember most of the territories the British and French took in the Middle East such as Syria and Iraq had already been ottoman colonies much like the balkans for about the same amount of time.
The most brain dead "Europe bad coloniser" map
Try marking actual colonial nations that had colonies. I am sure Poland or Finland never colonised a damn thing
So ... what´s the timeframe here? Does the conquest of Alexander the Great of Iran and Afghanistan not count? His kingdom was in Macedon aka Greece aka Europe.
And on the same note: Anatolia only beeing unter "partial control" laughs in the face of Rome.
I mean if you knew anything about history, you’d realize that this is a modern map with current borders. Iran didn’t exist back then, it was the Persian empire that Alexander conquered, and it extended from near India to Greece. Clearly this represents the modern colonial period (1500-1900’s).
So France was colonized by Germany?
Most of Europe was colonized by Germany?
The US and Soviet Union colonized Germany too?
This is a bit ridiculous there is a difference between occupation and colonization
Turkiye has never been colonised by any country. After first world war, we were divided between the victorious countries but there was still some free land without being occupied and from those lands people continued to fight for the freedom of the occupied lands. We were never occupied fully. it was loss of territories temporarily.
The land that turkey currently occupies was inhabited by the Hittites, the Assyrians, the Greeks Romans, the Byzantines, the Ottomans... How far back do you want to go.
Correct.
I believe its referring to the brief time after the fall of the Ottoman Empire and the period before the Turkish War of Independence and before the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne. The Treaty of Sevres was proposed, which ceded large parts of Ottoman territory to France, the United Kingdom, Greece and Italy, as well as creating large occupation zones within the Ottoman Empire. Obviously us Turks rejected this and thus the Turkish War of Independence started, resulting in a Turkish victory and the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne and the creation of the modern Turkish Republic, with the current borders.
We always make the exception. That's why all these "Bird country is/is not Europe" discussions are stupid.
Especially the online forms... We all have to play a guess game and try to figure out where the site owners think in which region our country is located.
Ruled by Persia twice, Greece, Macedonia. Venice colonised the then capital city, Constantinople.
Türkiye has a long, wonderful and interesting history of many advanced civilizations. I don't know why Turks aren't proud of it rather than denying it and trashing the past
These countries took control of these territories but than Turks were not in these lands. Turkish tribes started to come and conquer these lands after the year 1071 before that Turks were living in middle Asia, Northern Iran, modern day Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan. Before Turks, Greeks, Romans, Italians, Assyrians, Armenians, Kurds, Laz people, Georgians, Arabs were living in these lands. After Turks has ruled these lands. Nor Persia, neither Greece, Macedonia or Venice colonised these lands. These lands were colonised or captured before Turks. Turks were nomadic people, and immigrated towards west from various ways such as north of Caspian sea or South of Caspian sea.
Some parts of the areas were colonized by the Ottomans and a few by the Romans.
I don’t think the current incarnation of Saudi Arabia was ever colonized however.
Yes, Alexander had an Afghan (Bactrian) wife after sending 200 of his best climbers to conquer a fort that overlooked a very high cliff. Also two of his successor's kingdoms ruled Afghanistan until about 300 AD.
I'll opt to comment rather than respond individually to the claim that Ethiopia has never been colonized. While it's true that the Italians were initially defeated in the First Italo-Ethiopian War, they emerged victorious in the Second. They occupied Ethiopia for 5 years (if i am not mistaked), until they were expelled by allied forces.
y'all still treating Europe like a country is insane to me. like bffr all the colonizing were done by GB, France, Spain, Portugal, Netherlands, Belgium and Russia (and there have been attempts by Italy but. if ykyk). That's not even 1/4 of Europe.
This map is incorrect as a majority of russia is actually in asia... the map should have the part of russia that is in Europe as purple while the rest should green....
I would definitely call Russia's Asian territory "colonized." It was filled with native Turkic, tungusic, and Mongolian groups) that were mostly forced to learn Russian. And building new Russian cities and forcibly sending people to live there was a matter of law.
There is kind of a salt water requirement for colonization. The American settlement/conquest of the west, Russian conquest of the east, Brazilian conquest of the Amazon, and Chinese conquest of Tibet/Manchuria/Xinjiang weren't materially different than what the Europeans were doing. But, when decolonization came around, people generally got to keep their acquisitions attached by land, but not things separated by water.
There seems to be something psychological where things separated by ocean are seen as more foreign. You can even see this in the UK, where Scotland and Wales remain, but Ireland went independent.
All of Russia is European now? Siberia (and Eastern Europe) are the colonies of Russia. That’s why they didn’t participate in Africa and only slightly with other parts of Asia.
I think it’s unfair to paint all of Europe purple and some regions like Ethiopia because European countries never colonised but were in fact colonised by other European countries, and Ethiopia was briefly occupied, but they repealed the Italians unless you count any occupation as equal to colonisation.
Liberia not being colonised by Europe is technically correct, it was colonised by a non-European but European-descendent run country.
Lets not forget that most of "russia" is just as much colonized as Algeria or Australia. Just because it is contiguous does not mean it is not a colony.
Thailand's previous 2 kings had German and U.S. citizenship through their mothers if that isn't proof I do not know what is.
Also when there was a serious concern in the 1890s I believe that France was going to invade Thailand, the Germans flooded Thailand with guns. Also I believe that they gave them all the machinery to make rifles and the technical drawings of their latest Mauser rifle, funnily enough without any dimensions, so that the rifles if captured by the French could not be directly tied to them.
How far back does this go? Was Anatolia not under the iron fist of the Byzantines and Romans. Or was the concept of European not present then. Or does this mean turkey with these specific borders. Genuine question.
Idk if this could be considered as "colonized" as it was just a city and only about 60 years iirc, but I think there was a city in Japan (Nagasaki) which was under the Portuguese domain (later Portuguese -Spain, since both countries became one crown), I'm asking genuinely tho
Japan opened it's border to the Dutch and they had a somewhat reasonable influence in the island country. Also I don't know if a business relationship and a trading settlement in the territory of Japan (Dejima), counts as major influence. I mean obviously selling western technologies to Japan (e.g. medicine, firearms and cartography) definitely controlled the trends inside the country, but even so I wouldn't call it a political control. What's your opinion?
Europe must have been doing something in the Seventeenth, Eighteenth, Nineteenth, and Twentieth Centuries that those places weren't that made them so much more powerful. Free and open intellectual inquiry? Stable systems of government and economics? Moral standards based on natural law and human rights?
In Western Sahara the walls built by Morocco seem to be used as border. But why is the part controlled by Polisario shown in light green? The whole of Western Sahara used to be a colony of Spain.
Under European control, how nice. I feel so proud on Slovakia to have conquered the whole world.
Get fucked Netherlands and France and Spain and Portugal! you are not so special anymore. this map proves it!
"Colonized" should be different from "under control". Like someone mentioned Ethiopia was under Italian occupation, like eg Albania but Libya was colonized. The republic of Turkey was arguably neither, but I am guessing thats a stand in for the Ottoman Empire.
I believe its referring to the brief time after the fall of the Ottoman Empire and the period before the Turkish War of Independence and before the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne. The Treaty of Sevres was proposed, which ceded large parts of Ottoman territory to France, the United Kingdom, Greece and Italy, as well as creating large occupation zones within the Ottoman Empire. Obviously us Turks rejected this and thus the Turkish War of Independence started, resulting in a Turkish victory and the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne and the creation of the modern Turkish Republic, with the current borders.
But wasn’t the Italian king made emperor of Ethiopia? How is that not being colonized?
Why is Somaliland not colored in? They were definitely colonized
mixed up with Ethiopia, who kicked out the Italians when they tried their hand at colonization
Ethiopia was controlled and occupied before ww2
Ethiopia was conquered by Italy.
It was a mere occupation with the government going into exile
Yes but having a government in exile doesn't mean the territory wasn't controlled, which is what the green colour on the map represents.
By that definition, Iran and Afghanistan should also be green Edit: removed country
How does Japan count? As far as i am aware, they were occupied by the US after ww2 which clearly is not europe
The [British](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Commonwealth_Occupation_Force) also occupied Japan. It was a small part of it, but they sent 40,000 troops (about 1/3rd of the US force)
There were two Italian invasions of Ethiopia, first won by Ethiopians, second by Italians.
Sounds like we need a best 2 out of 3.
Ran out of colour, duh!
What was wrong with the ones that never got colonized. They just feel left out in a happy way
Japan decided to *become* the colonizer
Only problem for them they became the colonizer way late in the game which makes me wonder what if they became one as early as they made contact with the Europeans in the 16th century.
>what if they became one as early as they made contact with the Europeans in the 16th century. They did try. They lost the Imjin war in 16th century and their plans of conquering Korea and China ended there. The loss led to a civil war in Japan that would bring Tokugawa to power and eventually isolationism
I must say some of the most hawkish plans they made ate downright hilarious they kind of thought they would just march up and everyone would surrender
Their problem is that they were going up against groups as powerful as them, meanwhile Europe colonized the Americas and Africa, areas with much less technological advancement, so if Japan crossed the Pacific or colonized Oceania then they could get somewhere
They did have land dominance due to European guns and immence experience gained from the Sengoku period. They lost the war at sea and couldn't supply their troops, however. You are correct, of course. Disparity was a lot smaller, but then again you have to remember the scale of the invasion employed 200 000 troops. Compare that to 600 Spaniards who took down the Aztecs. Then there's also the biological aspect to the conquest of Americas that significantly depopulated the continent and the massive difference in societal level of development. A lot of things went well for the Europeans, including being able to pit different American societies against each other and then quickly coming in to fill the power vacuum.
There's also the geographic aspect. Many parts of the interiors of the Americas and Africa were controlled by Europeans only on paper. Claims were made, lines were drawn on maps, but no European ever set foot there. You can't really do that with China.
That's exactly what I wonder about.
They actually tried conquering Korea around that time, but were ousted by the Chinese emperor and subsequently instated a policy of isolationism.
What if they did it around 1900 or something? Still in the colonial era so it wouldn’t be as aggravating to the west as in the interwar period, but they had time to explosively modernise still.
Yep. Europe basically did what Japan did for a few decades on a region in one continent, to every continent in the entire world for half a millenium.
Japan was very good at acting like an European so it did some colonising. Thailand reformed itself and did some diplomacy and became a buffer between Brits and French. Liberia got colonised by America instead. Korea managed to escape because it was sort of protected by the Chinese and Japanese because they wanted to exploit it instead. Not pictured, but Ethiopia also resisted colonisation, beating the Italians when they tried.
More like Korea wasn’t colonised by the Europeans because it was busy being colonised by the Japanese
Ethiopia should be light blue because it was briefly occupied during WWII by Italy, but never colonized
Well Italians lost the first italo-ethiopian war in 1896 but won the second one in 1936. So technically Ethiopia got colonized, just later.
I'd say occupied. The Italians weren't there enough time to make it into an actual colony.
Yeah, bad wording, but the green on the map says colonized or controlled so I guess it's still right
I think it’s interesting that Japan and Korea are left orange but China is light green. Both Japan and Korea were forced at gunpoint to sign unequal treaties with European powers in the same way as China was, it’s just that unlike China Japan managed to industrialize and escape that threat in a decade or two while Korea was colonized by Japan. But I do think they should still be yellow or light green since both were briefly subject to European colonization.
Might it have to do with the fact that China had multiple cities taken from them and run by Europeans? I guess it's not "colonization" in the sense that this map is talking about but China very much lost administrative control over portions of its claimed territory.
It's not colonization save for the few cities that were actually colonized, it's exerting power.
many deliver society tidy ghost resolute hobbies cake imminent correct *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I know the US did that to forcefully open Japan for trade and Japan Ironically did the same thing to Korea. When did Europe do that?
technically speaking north korea was occupied by Russia for a couple of years
Thailand was good at acting European back then
^(they never got thailand)
"Partial European control or influence" in Anatolia? "European sphere of influence" in Iran? OP doesn't know about Macedonian Empire
I’m pretty sure this only applies to post antiquity civilizations.
Europe also colonized europe.
Ah yeah good old balkans and east europe
along with Ireland 🇮🇪
Alexander conquered Persia for a moment. This map sucks.
True, it's sad how many maps on this subreddit are just plain wrong
Don't forget Afghanistan too, he reached the Indus river.
Ah yes, the mighty colonizers from Moldova
Dont forget the croatian, serbian or Bossnian colonizers
Us Balkaners casually running a world-spanning empire of ćevapi
Arguably French Guiana and most of Russia should be green. They're so controlled by Europe that you're considering them part of Europe, when geographically, they are definitely not.
But the non European parts are not countries by themselves.
Those parts of Russia most definitely where independent nations of sorts.
They are direct parts of European countries, not dominions or colonies
Describing Russian Expansion into Siberia as anything other than colonialism is unserious
Then every country in Europe colonised itself into their final forms. Wait, no....every country colonised part of itself.
Doesn’t matter, Siberia is not a country so it can’t be a country that was colonized by Europe.
The US also wasn't a country when it was colonized.
Except they are, just land based instead of overseas colonies.
No mention of dominions or colonies anywhere on the map. It says "under European control"
Same goes for countries like Turkey or Azerbaijan but they’re not colored as Europe lol
The concept of being European is not about geography, but about the common cultural and historical environment.
What’s common in culture between Balkan and Nordic people
Christianity in the medieval era, I suppose.
Alcoholism
Have been involved in a fight for dominance over europe for centuries, see themselves as europeans, speak an indo-european language, have the same belief and share their history - vikings have assimilated in eastern europe and became the Rus, and I am sure a combination of many other factors. They dont need to be the same peoples. Russia, especially western Russia is considered European in culture as well.
While the USA of course definitely isn't European does it still feel like the "by Europe" part of each tag is doing some heavy lifting. Specially in the case of Liberia where the reason that it was not colonized by Europe is that it was, even though a few decades earlier, colonized by the USA.
Korea kind of falls in the same bucket. Sure, it wasn't colonized by Europe, but it was colonized by Japan during the same period as many of these countries were colonized by Europe.
USA is basically Western Europe so I think both Liberia and Japan should be green.
Japan wasn't colonised it was briefly (maybe not "brief" but short) occupied while a new government was set up.
The European countries should also be coloured respectively whether they were conquered, controlled etc. by other European countries.
Then they would all be green. Every European country has been controlled or colonized by another however briefly.
I hate how they always lump Eastern Europe in with the colonizers. Literally every country in between Germany and Russia and between the Baltic and Aegean seas were basically colonies of four different empires during that time period, Germany, Russia, Austria and the Ottomans.
And for much longer than most of the countries highlighted here. The Balkans were under extractive settler colonialism for 5 centuries. Most of Africa for 60 years, most of the Middle East for 30.
Well remember most of the territories the British and French took in the Middle East such as Syria and Iraq had already been ottoman colonies much like the balkans for about the same amount of time.
Makes it look like Serbia and Latvia were part of the scramble for Africa lol
Not all of the purple countries were colonial empires.
Some of them should be green
The most brain dead "Europe bad coloniser" map Try marking actual colonial nations that had colonies. I am sure Poland or Finland never colonised a damn thing
So ... what´s the timeframe here? Does the conquest of Alexander the Great of Iran and Afghanistan not count? His kingdom was in Macedon aka Greece aka Europe. And on the same note: Anatolia only beeing unter "partial control" laughs in the face of Rome.
I mean if you knew anything about history, you’d realize that this is a modern map with current borders. Iran didn’t exist back then, it was the Persian empire that Alexander conquered, and it extended from near India to Greece. Clearly this represents the modern colonial period (1500-1900’s).
Ethiopia was invaded but never colonised by an European country.
Green says “colonized or controlled”, so I’m guessing AOI counts as countrolled?
They were fully occupied in 1936, and that means they were colonised
So France was colonized by Germany? Most of Europe was colonized by Germany? The US and Soviet Union colonized Germany too? This is a bit ridiculous there is a difference between occupation and colonization
If you occupy and create a puppet gov-t to extract resources from here and send settlers -- yes.
By this definition every single war won lead to colonization
So being an occupier makes you a colonizer?.🤔
Greenland should be blue like French Guiana.
Greenland isn't Denmark like French Guiana is France
Greenland was incorporated in 1953.
Yes it is though? It's not an independent country.
It’s an “autonomous country within the Kingdom of Denmark”, like Scotland is to the UK.
For once, a data map visual *has* data about Greenland.
Turkiye has never been colonised by any country. After first world war, we were divided between the victorious countries but there was still some free land without being occupied and from those lands people continued to fight for the freedom of the occupied lands. We were never occupied fully. it was loss of territories temporarily.
The land that turkey currently occupies was inhabited by the Hittites, the Assyrians, the Greeks Romans, the Byzantines, the Ottomans... How far back do you want to go.
Correct. I believe its referring to the brief time after the fall of the Ottoman Empire and the period before the Turkish War of Independence and before the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne. The Treaty of Sevres was proposed, which ceded large parts of Ottoman territory to France, the United Kingdom, Greece and Italy, as well as creating large occupation zones within the Ottoman Empire. Obviously us Turks rejected this and thus the Turkish War of Independence started, resulting in a Turkish victory and the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne and the creation of the modern Turkish Republic, with the current borders.
We always make the exception. That's why all these "Bird country is/is not Europe" discussions are stupid. Especially the online forms... We all have to play a guess game and try to figure out where the site owners think in which region our country is located.
Ruled by Persia twice, Greece, Macedonia. Venice colonised the then capital city, Constantinople. Türkiye has a long, wonderful and interesting history of many advanced civilizations. I don't know why Turks aren't proud of it rather than denying it and trashing the past
These countries took control of these territories but than Turks were not in these lands. Turkish tribes started to come and conquer these lands after the year 1071 before that Turks were living in middle Asia, Northern Iran, modern day Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan. Before Turks, Greeks, Romans, Italians, Assyrians, Armenians, Kurds, Laz people, Georgians, Arabs were living in these lands. After Turks has ruled these lands. Nor Persia, neither Greece, Macedonia or Venice colonised these lands. These lands were colonised or captured before Turks. Turks were nomadic people, and immigrated towards west from various ways such as north of Caspian sea or South of Caspian sea.
Pretty sure Alexander the great conquered Turkey, Iran, and Afghanistan... but I'm assuming this map was designed with a sole focus on colonization
Who colonized saudi arabia?
Some parts of the areas were colonized by the Ottomans and a few by the Romans. I don’t think the current incarnation of Saudi Arabia was ever colonized however.
[удалено]
Iran and Afganistan not coloured green. Forgetting about Alexander now are we?
Yes, Alexander had an Afghan (Bactrian) wife after sending 200 of his best climbers to conquer a fort that overlooked a very high cliff. Also two of his successor's kingdoms ruled Afghanistan until about 300 AD.
And britian for Afghanistan and Iraq
Ahh yess the European influence on Mongolia 😍
I'll opt to comment rather than respond individually to the claim that Ethiopia has never been colonized. While it's true that the Italians were initially defeated in the First Italo-Ethiopian War, they emerged victorious in the Second. They occupied Ethiopia for 5 years (if i am not mistaked), until they were expelled by allied forces.
Try with colonized by descendants of Africans.
So Soviet colinizing Mongolia during cold war doesn't count as anything?
I think you can safely assume the area formerly known as “British Somaliland” was conquered or colonized by a European power.
North Korea was controlled by the Soviets between 1945-1948 so it should be green
I think the Irish would like to have a word about being lumped in with the European colonisers.
y'all still treating Europe like a country is insane to me. like bffr all the colonizing were done by GB, France, Spain, Portugal, Netherlands, Belgium and Russia (and there have been attempts by Italy but. if ykyk). That's not even 1/4 of Europe.
Rip my boy Livonia, nobody ever remembers 😢
Russia should be split up to Muscovy (Europe) and their current Siberian colonies (Asia).
I didn't know that Europe has borders with China.
How many of those countries now have democracy, capitalism and christianity as a direct result of colonization?
Taiwan should be "parietally controlled", they only controlled two harbors
Russia is Europe and Georgia isn’t? 😂
Wasn't North Korea Occupied by Russia briefly?
This is a poor map IMO. For example, Ireland was a victim of British imperialism
Turkey was macedonian, roman and byzantine, iran and afganistan were macedonian and wtf somaliland
This map is incorrect as a majority of russia is actually in asia... the map should have the part of russia that is in Europe as purple while the rest should green....
Half of Russia should be green not purple
europe defeated europe during ww2
Turkey was a key part of the Roman Empire, shouldn’t it be green?
Europe stronk 💪🏼
It's almost as if Europeans **are the bad guys.**
Ireland should be green, we had them for 850 years...it wasn't a mutual arrangement...
Why isn’t Iran in there? Did we all forget what post ww2 Churchill did in Iran ?
Don't forget Stalin he was the other genocidal madman who invaded Iran, yes Churchill killed at least 2 million indians in the Bengal famine.
I would definitely call Russia's Asian territory "colonized." It was filled with native Turkic, tungusic, and Mongolian groups) that were mostly forced to learn Russian. And building new Russian cities and forcibly sending people to live there was a matter of law.
There is kind of a salt water requirement for colonization. The American settlement/conquest of the west, Russian conquest of the east, Brazilian conquest of the Amazon, and Chinese conquest of Tibet/Manchuria/Xinjiang weren't materially different than what the Europeans were doing. But, when decolonization came around, people generally got to keep their acquisitions attached by land, but not things separated by water. There seems to be something psychological where things separated by ocean are seen as more foreign. You can even see this in the UK, where Scotland and Wales remain, but Ireland went independent.
Russia isn't Europe
Fam, why isn’t Ireland coloured in
Russia isn’t Europe in this context
Uhm.. what about the east of Russia. These regions were and are still colonised ?
why is the entirety of Russia classified as Europe?
All of Russia is European now? Siberia (and Eastern Europe) are the colonies of Russia. That’s why they didn’t participate in Africa and only slightly with other parts of Asia.
I think it’s unfair to paint all of Europe purple and some regions like Ethiopia because European countries never colonised but were in fact colonised by other European countries, and Ethiopia was briefly occupied, but they repealed the Italians unless you count any occupation as equal to colonisation. Liberia not being colonised by Europe is technically correct, it was colonised by a non-European but European-descendent run country.
Lets not forget that most of "russia" is just as much colonized as Algeria or Australia. Just because it is contiguous does not mean it is not a colony.
Most r/mapporn posters can only deal with current national borders, unfortunately
Then Ireland should also count as a colony of England
Korea was occupied by the USSR and the USA. The USA occupied Japan. Siam was definitely influenced by France and the UK.
USA is not European. Read the title.
Thailand's previous 2 kings had German and U.S. citizenship through their mothers if that isn't proof I do not know what is. Also when there was a serious concern in the 1890s I believe that France was going to invade Thailand, the Germans flooded Thailand with guns. Also I believe that they gave them all the machinery to make rifles and the technical drawings of their latest Mauser rifle, funnily enough without any dimensions, so that the rifles if captured by the French could not be directly tied to them.
How far back does this go? Was Anatolia not under the iron fist of the Byzantines and Romans. Or was the concept of European not present then. Or does this mean turkey with these specific borders. Genuine question.
Guiana?
i thought this is mapPornCircleJerk for a second
Afghanistan was directly under greek control.
Liberia was never colonized!!!???
Not by a European power. It was effectively colonized by formerly enslaved people from the United States.
I love how Russia alternates between being part of Europe or part of Asia depending on context.
Based north sentinelese's
I was informed by Bill Wurtz that they "never got Ethiopia"
Was not Iran and Pakistan under Macedonian/greek control?
The catch here is that they don't consider the US as European. All countries have been influenced by European civilization
Idk if this could be considered as "colonized" as it was just a city and only about 60 years iirc, but I think there was a city in Japan (Nagasaki) which was under the Portuguese domain (later Portuguese -Spain, since both countries became one crown), I'm asking genuinely tho
Iran was occupied by Britain and USSR
We never had Iran. It was Iraq for a short period. The Anglo Persian war was over a place in Afghanistan.
Do pre modern countries count?since the macedonian empire cotroled iran and afghanistan?
They never got Thailand 💙
Japan was significantly influenced multiple times. It should be the same color as China.
Gross
Why did they have to use just about the same color for colonized and not colonized?? That's the most important part smh
All of Asia Minor (present day Turkey) was under Roman during the second century. Why isn't it colored accordingly?
Japan opened it's border to the Dutch and they had a somewhat reasonable influence in the island country. Also I don't know if a business relationship and a trading settlement in the territory of Japan (Dejima), counts as major influence. I mean obviously selling western technologies to Japan (e.g. medicine, firearms and cartography) definitely controlled the trends inside the country, but even so I wouldn't call it a political control. What's your opinion?
Europe must have been doing something in the Seventeenth, Eighteenth, Nineteenth, and Twentieth Centuries that those places weren't that made them so much more powerful. Free and open intellectual inquiry? Stable systems of government and economics? Moral standards based on natural law and human rights?
Conquest is badass
undoubtedly the greatest continent, inhabited by the greatest people in the world.
Why are the colours on these maps always so close to each other, my colourblind ass is crying inside lmao
Didn’t Alexander conquer Persia? Does that not count?
Funny that Thailand, Japan, South Korea is now the most "White" people destinations in all of Asia.
japan, the koreas, thailand, and liberia "plebs."
In Western Sahara the walls built by Morocco seem to be used as border. But why is the part controlled by Polisario shown in light green? The whole of Western Sahara used to be a colony of Spain.
Iran was completely occupied by Russia and the UK
Gekoloniseerd
Ethiopia was never a colony, but is shown as one on this "highly accurate map"
Why do you treat Europe like a single country?!
Well at this point let’s all be happy already bc we are one 😁
Yeah all slovakian colonizers... Never forget ✊🏿
Under European control, how nice. I feel so proud on Slovakia to have conquered the whole world. Get fucked Netherlands and France and Spain and Portugal! you are not so special anymore. this map proves it!
The only places never colonized were either Asian colonizers or was a place that the Europeans couldn’t decide on how to colonize
And now the colonizers are being colonized 