Chapter 23 Chapter 18 North and South America and the British Dominions (Part 2)

Europeanization in the economic sphere is as widespread as in the political sphere.As far as the European powers are concerned, their economic goals and methods were basically the same at first.They all embraced the mercantilist principle of subordinating the colonial economy to that of the mother country.The following order, issued by London in 1763 to Murray, Governor-General of Quebec, does not differ in any way from innumerable others issued on this subject by Paris, Madrid, or Lisbon: Despite this common mercantilist background, the European colonies soon developed unique economies; not only were these economies different from those of Europe, but they were also different from each other.We will see that this diversity arose from several factors, including differences in the economic development of the home countries and differences in the natural and human resources of the colonies.

As shown in Chapter VI, Section VIII, the economic development of Latin America was determined both by the availability of large quantities of gold and silver and native labor (which were lacking in British and French America) and by the The development of monoculture plantations based on African slave labor was also determined by the economic backwardness of the Iberian states (which was passed on to their colonies).The end result was that Latin America never achieved the balanced economic development characteristic of regions north of the Rio Grande, but instead was long subordinated to northwestern Europe and, later, to the United States.

The economic history of the Thirteen Colonies and New France was fundamentally different from that of Latin America because of the lack of indigenous labor resources and precious metals.This situation forced the British and French settlers to work themselves to develop some sort of viable economy based on the natural resources available.From the outset, both the governments of Paris and London tried to influence the economic development of their colonies in traditional ways.On both sides of the St. Lawrence River, the French established a manor system modeled on the French feudal system.Residents had to pay taxes to their estate owners in the form of money and labour.Likewise, in the Thirteen Colonies, Britain tried to impose various rigid economic institutions.Corporations similar to modern corporations were established in Virginia and Massachusetts, where capital was raised by stockholders who were promised dividends based on their investment.The Virginia Company set out to create an economic system in which no one who came to Virginia owned land privately, and everyone worked for the company.All the products produced are stored in a public warehouse, and people can only get what they need from the company's warehouse.

These regulations and restrictions proved impracticable in the French and British colonies, where there was a large amount of land upon which disaffected immigrants could rely.These colonies could not, like Latin America, rely on the mother country to provide the feudal "Guardian Tax System" as a prize, because to implement the "Guardian Tax System", a large amount of indigenous labor must be available.The inhabitants did pay taxes to the manor, but these taxes were much higher than the usual taxes in France.The church tried to collect a thirteenth of the products obtained by the residents as a tithe, but it could only collect half of it.All efforts by the authorities to prevent the youth from escaping and becoming illegal fur traders have failed in the face of the allure of the heath and the lucrative fur trade.New France thus developed in its own way, with most engaged in subsistence farming and a few engaged in the fur trade; furs being the only export of importance.

Likewise, in the Thirteen Colonies, the corporations could not long control their immigration.A Virginia governor reported that when he arrived here he found people "scurrying through the streets, busy with their daily activities."Inspired by the fact that land was more abundant than labor, the British colonists developed their own economic institutions and practices.Since geography determines the type and success of farming, most people must be devoted to farming. In the temperate climate and fertile southern colonies, settlers discovered that the best crops were tobacco, rice, and indigo.In the Middle Colonies—Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware—cereal crops grew so well that the area soon became the breadbasket of the colonies.Much of New England also turned to agriculture, but the long winters and rocky land were a formidable obstacle.As a result, they had to engage in other occupations, mainly fishing, shipping and manufacturing.

We see, then, that the economies of the thirteen colonies were far more diverse and more vibrant than those of Latin America, where indigenous labor was suppressed to a subsistence level and did not form the basis of the local economy .In the thirteen colonies, the fast galleons sailing the seven seas, the series of factories along the banks of the rivers, and the frontier settlers who built their homes on the wasteland by gun and ax and pushed the boundaries of new settlements westward instead Generations of Indian serfs and African slaves who toiled with the same tools and techniques. It was precisely because the economy of the thirteen colonies was so vibrant that it had disputes with the mother country, making it difficult for Britain to control the economy of the thirteen colonies and make it difficult to subordinate them to Britain's own economic interests.New England's manufacturing and shipping industries ran afoul of mercantilist regulations such as the Acts of Navigation; after the abolition of the French colonies in 1763, the British government began to take strict measures against violations of its statutes.To avoid disputes with the Indians, they prohibited immigration beyond the Appalachian Mountains into the Ohio River Valley.The colonists repeatedly and loudly protested against these restrictions, and finally, they resorted to force.The American Revolutionary War was not only a struggle for political independence, but also an economic one.

In order to satisfy both the needs of the citizens, formerly supplied by the British, and the needs of the American army, the war itself led to a great increase in the manufactures of the colonies.American shipping expanded during the Revolutionary War and was transformed into a provisional navy; it continued in its expanded form after independence was won.Only a few years after the signing of the peace treaty, American captains began a very lucrative trade with California and China.The Revolutionary War had a profound effect on agriculture, still practiced by the vast majority.State statutes now abolished the archaic system of land titles; such systems were embodied in the laws of primogeniture and limited succession enacted to perpetuate the landed nobility.Large estates, especially in the South, were given to farmers; land west of the Appalachians was opened to frontier dwellers as settlements.The vibrant American economy expanded rapidly across the continent and overseas in these various ways.

Economic discontent contributed to revolutions in Spanish colonies as well as English colonies.There was a conflict between the Spanish born in the colonies (Creoles) and the Spaniards born in Spain (Peninsularians); the latter were given preferential treatment in terms of appointments to government offices and the right to certain occupations.As a result, Creoles who wanted to end this inequality initiated and led revolutionary movements in many colonies.Equally important in promoting the revolution were the Spanish mercantilist regulations that restricted the colonies' trade with the mother country.This regulation was especially intolerable because Spain could neither absorb the new raw materials produced by the colonies, nor supply the colonies with the cheap and good manufactures they needed, as England and other European countries did.As a result, a large-scale illegal trade developed, especially during the years when Spain was caught in a desperate struggle with Napoleon's France and could not maintain normal economic relations with its colonies.After the war, Spain attempted to impose its trade restrictions on its colonies, but the colonists finally took up arms and rebelled.They had the support and assistance of the British, since the Rue had established profitable trade relations with Spanish America.The following impassioned appeal, made by the mouthpiece of the Argentine ranchers in 1809, reflects the economic motives behind the Latin American revolution:

Independence did not boost the economy in Latin America as it did in the United States, mainly because the Latin American economy was still dominated by mines, plantations and plantations; The lives of Indians and African slaves provided labor.Free trade did bring greater economic dynamism to the coast, but it had little effect on the stagnant interior.Due to lack of capital, lack of technology, and lack of sound socio-economic structures, independent Latin America remains stagnant in the world economy. Economic discontent contributed to the outbreak of the Great Canadian Revolt in 1837; a notable factor contributing to the revolt was popular outrage over the Queen's Reserve and the Clergy's Reserve, which each accounted for one-seventh of the colony's total land .This large tract of land was set aside to pay for the government and the established Church of England.People were extremely unhappy about this because they hindered the development of the colony because only a few people attached to the church that owned the fund.In addition, a small, privileged group known as the "Valley Family" enjoyed in Canada the same official privileges enjoyed by peninsula residents in Latin America.Moreover, the Canadian provinces were not as prosperous as the American states across the border, and many believed that British rule was responsible for this economic disparity.This is made evident by the following accusation made by rebel leader William Roy Mackenzie:

Such was the sentiment which culminated in the uprising of 1837.As these uprisings proved ineffective, no fundamental reforms took place in Canada during the next few years.Instead, the country developed steadily and measuredly: the population grew steadily, new areas were opened up as settlements and roads and ditches were built; Cotton mills and carding mills produced wool for textiles and weaving it into cloth, and cheese factories processed surplus milk from farmers.Canada, however, did not possess the rich and varied resources of the republic to the south, so differences in the rate of economic development persisted after 1837 as before.

In the period when most of the overseas colonies settled by Europeans had won their independence, the Europeanization of the economy was extremely thorough and amazing.The unprecedented economic development and expansionism of Europe during those years can fundamentally explain this paradox.As mentioned earlier, this period was a period of mass migration from Europe, which meant not only racial Europeanization but also stronger economic relations between Europe and its overseas colonies.Advances in science and technology enabled Europe to provide the railroads, ships, machine guns, and agricultural machinery necessary to conquer and efficiently develop vast continents.In addition to exporting the capital necessary to finance those costly activities, Europe also provided markets for inexhaustible supplies of food and industrial raw materials from overseas.All of these developments meant an unprecedented economic impact of Europe on the rest of the world, especially those areas to which European immigrants settled. The U.S. economy grew at breakneck speed between the Revolutionary War and the Civil War. This is especially true of industry after the introduction of protective tariffs in 1816.In the textile industry, the number of spindles increased from 87,000 in 1810 to 250,000 in 1820, and then rose to more than 12 million in 1860. The iron and steel industry expanded westward from the eastern coastal areas and reached Lake Superior in 1860. .At the same time, roads were improved, ditches and railways were built. In 1830, there were no railways. By 1860, the number of railway miles had risen to more than 30,000 miles. However, in the decades after the Civil War, the United States experienced the most amazing economic development.The Civil War itself prompted a massive expansion of industry; this expansion continued after the war with the opening of the West and the completion of the transcontinental railroad.Large quantities of grain and various raw materials were transported by rail and ship to the rapidly growing urban centers of the eastern United States and western Europe.At the same time, millions of immigrants provided a large amount of cheap labor for American industrialists and farmers, further expanding the domestic market.The end result was that the American economy grew by leaps and bounds in the second half of the nineteenth century at a speed unmatched at the time: in 1860, the United States ranked fourth among the world's industrial countries, but by 1894 it had jumped to the top. Between 1860 and 1900 the number of industrial enterprises tripled, the number of industrial wage-earners quadrupled, the value of manufactured goods increased sevenfold, and the total amount of industrial investment increased ninefold. In 1890 manufactured goods were equal in value to agricultural produce, but in 1900 they were twice as valuable. Whereas in 1860 industry was still largely concentrated on the eastern seaboard, by 1900 it had spread to the Great Lakes region and to much of the South and West. As mentioned earlier, the decades after Latin America won its independence remained depressed; however, after the mid-19th century, the economy began to grow rapidly.As much as Europe played important roles in the construction of railways, steamships, refrigerated ships, and in providing the capital necessary for such equipment, so did Europe's contribution to food (e.g., grain, meat, coffee, sugar, and cocoa) and industrial Also important is the growing demand for commodities such as minerals, wood, wool and leather.The statistics in Table 4 on British trade with Argentina and British investment in Argentina illustrate this point. Table 4 UK-Arab trade and investment (unit: thousands of pounds) Similar statistics can be made for other countries in Latin America such as Chile for saltpetre and copper, Mexico for gold and silver, Brazil for coffee and rubber, and Bolivia for tin.As a result, Latin America has entered the world economy in a way it never had before.On the other hand, this economic development is one-sided and unhealthy in many respects.Most Latin American countries are growing rapidly in only one or two commodities, while other economies remain stagnant.The semi-feudal system of latifundia based on land ownership and labor relations remained virtually unchanged, so most people continued to work hand-to-mouth as day laborers.Foreign economies infiltrate and control most profitable businesses, whether waterways, utilities, or mining assets.The benefits of this economic development were not as widely spread as they were in the United States, and were bestowed upon a small number of foreign and domestic landowners, merchants, and privileged individuals, giving rise to social conflict and political unrest that persists to this day. As in Latin America, the economic growth of the British Dominions has lagged behind that of the United States.This is not because of the semi-feudal social system, but because natural resources are inferior to those of the United States.Canada, for example, does have abundant resources, but they were not put to good use until the mid-20th century, when air transportation made them accessible, and when the more readily available resources in the United States were exhausted.And in the 19th century, Canada could not compete with its prosperous neighbors.The barren Laurentian plateau was an insurmountable obstacle to colonial development.Canada has no regions that closely resemble the fertile Midwest, the cotton-rich South, and the industrial East; each of these three regions complements and contributes to the development of the others.Instead, Canadian settlers faced mossy swamps 1,500 miles to the west and arctic wastelands to the north, leaving them no choice but to cross the border into the American states; United States.The appeal of the United States was so great that in the decade 1881-1891, more than 1 million Canadians crossed the border into the United States, even though Canada's total population at that time was less than 5 million.It is estimated that half of the offspring of young people who married in Canada 50 years ago live in the United States today. The other Dominions of England have even fewer natural advantages than Canada.Australia, New Zealand and South Africa are all located in the southern half of the city, and they are far from the populous industrial centers of Western Europe.Perth is 9,500 miles from London, Cape Town is 6,500 miles from London, and New York is only 3,000 miles from Liverpool, making a huge difference.In addition, the resources of these three dominions are not as rich and diverse as that of the United States.This is true even of Australia, which is as large as the United States excluding Alaska.However, Australia is mostly arid, its rivers are barely suitable for irrigation, and it lacks forests, oil deposits and base metals. These shortcomings are all relative to the United States, which is blessed by nature. In fact, the British Dominion still has abundant resources for full economic development.In Canada, the first transcontinental railway was built in 1885 and two more were laid in 1915.These railroads, together with mass immigration, accelerated the settlement of the three prairie provinces of Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba. The population of these provinces doubled between 1906 and 1911.Industry also developed considerably, especially after the protectionist "state policy" of 1878. In Australia, sheep farming has long been a mainstay of the economy.The number of sheep soared from 200,000 in 1820 to 20 million in 1860 and to 100 million in 1890.This country is as dependent on sheep farming as the American South is on cotton.The gradual diversification of production included sugarcane cultivation in Queensland and, more importantly, gold mining (there was a huge gold rush in the 1850s).In the decade between 1851 and 1860, Australia produced 39 percent of the world's gold (compared to 41 percent in the United States); million people (while the population of the United States in 1860 was 31.4 million people). New Zealand, like Australia, has developed an economy dependent on European markets.The economy was centered on sheep herding and dairy manufacturing, and its exports were mostly wool, beef, cheese and butter. South Africa's economy was based on the diamond mines opened at Kimberley in 1870 and the gold fields discovered at Westwaters in 1886.In addition, tobacco, sugar, tea, and other tropical products were exported in small quantities by 1914. The state period up to 1914 was a period of rapid economic growth in North and South America and the British Dominions, but we should not forget that this was the result of economic Europeanization.It is Europe that provides manpower, capital, technology and markets to a large extent.Europe contributes as much to independent states as it does to dominions that still maintain relations with their mother country.It is perhaps not difficult to understand why the British bourgeoisie financed the construction of the Canadian transcontinental railway and the development of the mining industry in South Africa.However, in countries that do not plant the British flag, British capital and business are also very active.For example, after the thirteen colonies won their independence, their trade with Britain did not decline, but rose sharply. In 1765, the last year of normal trade before the Revolutionary War, Britain exported £1,944,114 worth of goods to the thirteen colonies. In 1784, the first year of normalcy after the war, Britain exported goods worth £3,679,467 to the thirteen colonies. Between 1820 and 1830, 36 percent of all U.S. exports went to Great Britain, and 43 percent of all U.S. imports came from Great Britain. During the nineteenth century, especially when the railroads were being laid, European capital—mainly British, Dutch, and German capital—continued to flow into the United States.By 1914, total foreign investment was no less than $7.2 billion.In the less developed countries of Latin America, European investment controls the national economy to a much greater degree than in the United States. With racial, political, and economic Europeanization came cultural Europeanization; that was true of the areas that remained in the Commonwealth, and almost as much of the many areas that won independence.In Latin America, with the exception of Portuguese Brazil, the dominant cultural form is Spanish; the obvious sign of this form is that the overwhelming majority of the people speak Spanish and that they believe in the Bishop of Rome.It is also seen in architectural style, such as houses with courtyards or yards, windows with iron bars, and houses with fronts facing sidewalks.The same is true of town planning based on a central square rather than a main street.Much of the clothing was also Spanish, including a fez or straw hat for men and a cotton head covering for women—a tulle, turban, or decorative towel.The typical Spanish form of male dominance and close supervision of the girl, including the period of companionship, was also followed in the family structure, a tendency to regard manual labor as unseemly and inappropriate for respectable persons. Although the culture of Latin America is basically that of Spain or Portugal, the influence of Indians is still strong and widespread, especially in Mexico, Central America and northwestern South America, because Indians in those areas account for a large proportion of the total population. A large proportion.This influence (see Chapter 9, Section 5) is still perceptible in cooking, clothing, building materials, and religious customs. Latin America also had a considerable African element in its culture, thanks to the importation of millions of slaves to work on the plantations.This African influence is strongest in the Caribbean, where most slaves lived, but examples, especially in music, of this influence can also be found in much of Latin America; Contributed traditional drumming. The culture of the United States is less influenced by the native Indians than the culture of Latin America, mainly because the number of Indians in the United States is small and backward.However, Indian influence cannot be entirely ignored: 25 states are named after Indian words; there are now at least 300 Indian words in the English language; and many Indian inventions, including moccasin boots, canoes, toboggans, and snow Shoes, have been widely used. Likewise, the United States is less influenced by African culture than some Latin American countries in the Caribbean.But the effect is still considerable in the United States; blacks make up 10 percent of the U.S. population, while Indians make up only 0.5 percent.The influence of black people is mainly in folk culture.One is folk tales, such as those popularized by Joel Chandler Harris in Uncle Remus' Epic; the other is folk music, including so-called hymns and secular songs, such as labor Songs, prison songs, songs from the railroad and steamship worlds, ballads such as "Frank and Johnny" and "John Henry", and world-famous jazz, etc. Although American culture contains elements of these Indian and African cultures, it is mainly European in origin, but its European character has undergone drastic changes in the process of its transplantation and adaptation.Many European travelers have noticed this since colonial times.A typical example is the question posed by the Frenchman Jean Clive Cole in 1782: "What, then, is this new man, the American?" The national characteristics of human beings, from the time of Klei Yao Kerr to today, many people have tried to answer this question.From the multitude of conflicting replies, a definite image of "this brand new man" did emerge. In a country where constant labor is necessary, first to establish colonies, and then to conquer whole continents, such a man naturally regards industry as honorable and idleness as shameful.President Theodore Roosevelt expressed this national sentiment when he said: "I feel sorry for the fellows who don't work—no matter what end of the social ladder they are." The fact that America's Who's Who doesn't have a penchant for it is also quite telling. Americans believe in social equality, and closely related to this, they also believe in social mobility.They considered themselves as good as everyone else and insisted that all men should be free to advance their social status through talent and effort, not by class origin. Reflecting America's farm and frontier background, Americans were habitual tinkerers, frequently inventing gadgets to speed up the work they had to do. An observer in the mid-nineteenth century commented: "Who but the Americans has invented a milking machine, or an egg scrambler, or a boot-cleaning machine, or a knife-sharpening machine, or an apple-peeling machine, or a machine capable of doing a hundred things? Others have been doing it with ten fingers since ancient times." Such "new people" are optimists when it comes to their future: they firmly believe in the inevitability of the course of events.The same observer who noted American mechanical ingenuity also wrote: "Americans are so confident that any ill can be cured if only the right medicine can be found; they see no reason why they should not try to find it." All kinds of medicines for all the ills of life.” This optimism is often expressed in self-vaunted love of the nation.Living in a land of vast resources and perfect equality of opportunity, Americans find it natural to praise the future and talk about it as if it had already come true.Frontier humor is based on "big talk," and folk heroes are supermen like Paul Bunyan and Pecos Bill. Nineteenth-century Americans clearly felt less like their European counterparts in the more esoteric realm of formal literature and art—and for good reason.Americans are too busy subduing the wilderness to pretend to be gentle and aesthetic.Furthermore, the Puritan tradition held that hard work and the saving of souls were of greater value than artistic accomplishment. In 1835, the French traveler Alexis de Tocqueville wrote: "He who spends every day of the week in earning money has nothing to entertain the Goddess of Comedy .” As late as 1820, at least 80% of the books in the United States were imported from Britain, and by 1830, this figure was still as high as 70%.As far as European intellectuals were concerned, American culture did not exist.The attitude of the British critic Sidney Smith is quite typical. He asked rhetorically in 1820: "Who in the world has read an American book, seen an American play, or seen an American painting?" What about my painting or an American statue?" This superior attitude was gradually accommodated by the Americans themselves.Henry Adams wrote: "Throughout a lifetime it has been seen that the American has always bowed to the European in literature." Thus, nineteenth-century Americans made a serious effort to imitate European culture.They went to study in London, Paris, Vienna, and Rome, built Greek sanctuaries as public buildings and churches, brought in European musicians and singers, and helped found opera houses and orchestras.Some wealthy tycoons sent agents to Europe to buy "works by great European painters before the 18th century".Some even bought castles, took them down stone by stone, and rebuilt them in America.As expected, these efforts failed to impress most of Europe's intellectuals; they still dismissed the American as a "declining, spurned, guessing, calculating, betting, beating slaves, a nation that loves to drink lightly and slowly." Towards the end of the nineteenth century, some noticeable shifts in this attitude began. "As everything in Europe wanes, and as the last remnants of feudal culture disappear," Walt Whitman and Mark Twain, especially Mark Twain, became authentic American writers, their style " Local, Western, and Continental." Also significant was the publication in 1888 of James Bryce's discriminating masterpiece, The American Republic.As the nineteenth century drew to a close, European intellectuals increasingly took notice of a growing group of American stars: John Dewey, William James, Oliver Wendell, Holmes, Thorstein Veblen, and William Dean Howells.However, European tutelage remains entrenched. At the end of the nineteenth century, Henry Cabot Lodge could still write: "The first step in an American's literary career is to call himself an Englishman in order to be recognized, not by the British but by the recognition from the natives." British Dominions European culture has had a greater influence on the British Dominions than the United States or Latin America.One reason is to keep the empire united, thus giving rise to a greater degree of interaction between the dominions and the home state.Also, with the exception of South Africa, the Dominions are much more populated by people of European origin than in the United States and Latin America, where there are many blacks and Indians.However, this does not mean that each dominion developed the same culture; unique local circumstances produced unique cultures. For example, the development of Canadian culture was determined by two overriding factors: the French-Canadian group, which constituted one-third of the population, and geographical proximity to the United States.Due to this large French-Canadian minority, two official languages ​​are used in Canada; this is known from the inscriptions on coins, banknotes, government announcements, and merchandise distributed by the state.What is more important is the perspective and national role of French and Canadians.In a very real sense, they are a people without a mother country. After France abandoned Canada in 1763, they turned their backs on republican, secular France, taught by their most powerful Catholic Church, and what they considered to be the commercialism and materialism of English-speaking Canadians and Americans be contemptuous.Their main desire, then, was to remain uninterrupted and to preserve their identity in a continent dominated by Protestant Anglo-Saxons. Perhaps even more important to Canada was the overwhelming impact of the Great Southern Power; Formation.The average Canadian wakes up with an American-made alarm clock, brushes his teeth with American-made toothpaste and a toothbrush, and shaves with an American-made shaving cream and razor.A quarter of the news he read in the morning paper was about American affairs.He would drive an American car to work; step into an American-style elevator in an office building; and work all day with office equipment mostly made in the United States.At home, he will likely end the day by listening to or watching an American radio or television program, reading an American novel or magazine, or perhaps driving to a nearby movie theater to see an American movie. All of this does not mean that Canadian culture is a direct copy of Southern culture.For example, there are few similarities between the format of political meetings and campaigns, advertising and salesmanship, law enforcement, and court procedures in Canada and the United States.However, a well-known Canadian journalist has concluded: "Canada is a union, not a country." In 1949, the Canadian government appointed the "National Arts, Letters and Science Development Council".The committee's report included the following passage: The cultural development of Australia and New Zealand has been largely influenced by their ethnic identity.Neither Dominion has a black minority, which makes up one-tenth of its population, like the United States, nor a French-Catholic minority, which makes up one-third of its population, like Canada.Despite considerable non-British immigration since World War II, 90 per cent of people in Australia and 98 per cent in New Zealand are of British descent.As a result, both Dominions maintain unusually close cultural ties to their home countries.New Zealanders generally consider the UK to be their 'home' and New Zealand to be a place to make a living.Australians don't feel as strongly attached, partly because of the sizeable proportion of Irish immigrants.But during World War I, Australian troops fought as bravely as New Zealanders in Gallipoli and elsewhere.In Canada, on the other hand, the French Canadians created violent riots because they believed that they were under no obligation to fight for any purpose other than the defense of their own land. It is perhaps worth noting that, since World War II, Australians and New Zealanders share Canadian concerns about American cultural infiltration.U.S. influence has extended to the South Pacific, partly as a result of huge U.S. investments in recent years, but also the presence of U.S. troops there during World War II.A young Australian writer, Robin Boyd, has voiced the concerns of many of his countrymen: "Australia is sinking 'culturally' into the Pacific Ocean, a new nation we might call 'Australia' On the rise.... Austerliga's main industry is imitation of the froth on American soda drinks. Its religion is 'magic' and believers are psychologically speaking refugees; they imagine paradise as Las Vegas旅馆的赌场。” 我们已看到，在文化领域如同在政治领域和经济领域一样，欧洲文明的大规模移植已经发生，不过其中有许多变更。这种文化传播和文化适应在语言方面表现得极为明显。一个英国人在访问澳大利亚、美国或加拿大时，能容易地理解他所操的语言在这些国家中发生的变化；不过，以下这些情况也是真实的：在澳大利亚，他可能给诸如“aboes”（土著居民）、“sheilas”（姑娘）、“galahs”（唠叨多言的人）和“dills”（笨人）之类的同弄得莫名其妙；而在加拿大和美国，他很快就会了解到他所说的petrol（汽油）、silencer（消音器）、boot（行李箱）和demister（除雾器）这些词已变成gas、muffler trunk和windshield wiper。他还会发现加拿大人不受英国人和美国人影响、仍保持自己个性的一些例子。如果他要“chesterfield”，在英国他将得到一件男式大衣，在美国他将得到一包香烟，而在加拿大他将得到一张垫得又厚又软的沙发。 然而，这种种差别常常被过分夸大，而忽视了其潜在的、基本的相似点。其实，英国人即使周游广为分散的使用英语的世界，也极少会遇到使他费解的词。法国人在魁北克、葡萄牙人在巴西、西班牙人在拉丁美洲其他地区的情况也是如此。在海外发现的大多数特殊的惯用法都可追溯到母国的地方方言。西班牙人能在本国找到他在国外所遇到的大多数变化，而这种情况对英国人或法国人来说也一样。 因此，我们可以得出结论：南北美洲和英国自治领文化上的欧化既普遍又持久。欧洲人只须访问纽约、墨西哥城、蒙特利尔或墨尔本，然后访问开罗、德里、东京或北京，就会了解其文化在海外传播的真实情况及其所达到的程度。