[Alessio]

After WW2 the economies of the West European countries were pretty much destroyed. Most of our colonies became independent and the inhabitants of (former) colonies gained a certain level of economic freedom. Major advantages gained in the colonial age were lost. You could say most countries landed in a new economic crisis, which allowed the United States gain to lead over all other countries. In Europe and Japan people swore off violence, rebuild entire cities and aimed to intensify future international economic trade and cooperation. Eventually, we rebuild our nations and led our countries in economic prosperity.

During the powershifts after WW2 Middle Eastern, Asian, African and South American countries had a great oppertunity to gain a certain economic advantage over other countries. Unfortunately only a very few countries seized this moment.

Human resources have limited capacity. So you would say the countries with the most natural resources would have the most financial means to rebuild their countries. The opposite it true however. Countries with few natural resources such as Japan and Germany gained a great economic lead over the other countries. Some countries (such as East Germany, Russia and China) were held down by communist regimes. Other countries (Arabian and African) were held down by the lack of ambition, lack of respect for ownership and lack of humanity within the population itself.

It always strikes me when people tell me the West, slavery or capitalism is to blame for the poverty in certain parts of the world. It's more likely that the exact opposite is true. Especially Arabian countries had all the opportunities in the world to develop themselves to world-leading economies after WW2. And the refusal of some countries to develop themselves has been a huge burden on our economies. If after WW2 more countries would have chosen for a humanistic and (semi-)capitalistic approach we would all have been a lot richer.