I see what you're getting at, Ed, but I'd say in the current age the term "colony" is not a helpful, or necessarily relevant, description. Firstly, perhaps even you might agree that, for example, Jersey and the Chechen Republic don't have too much in common but neither have ultimate control over their foreign policy (although Jersey has a lot of input into its foreign agreements it can't act as an independent entity and sign them). Secondly, some oversees states like the Falkland Islands don't seem to want full independence. Thirdly, I don't think territories are traded as in the old days; did anyone consider Trump's offer to buy Greenland from Denmark as a serious proposition. (And Greenland has a high degree of self determination as I believe besides the UK it's the only other territory that has left the EU?)It's a bit like Android Smartphones, Apple Macs, Raspberry Pis, Windows Servers, Routers are all encompassed by the generic term "computers". However, in practice most people I know will use the more specific term such as "smartphone " or "router" - and might well think one's talking about an IBM mainframe if someone referred to a computer. They are obviously all used for different purposes and it would be confusing not to be explicit when referring to them. Things progress and there's a need to update and refine terminology. So if you're talking about a colony I'm more inclined to think of a 19th century territory outside of Europe but annexed by a European state with both its population and resources (agriculture, minerals, etc) exploited by that state not a modern overseas dependecy that has elections and is generally self governing on internal matters. As regards exploitation, mineral resources in, say, Africa are as likely to be exploited by Russia and China as well as western European powers.I'm sure one could, or people have, written long theses about this as one has to put the whole subject into various contexts, from the history of colonisation, more recent historical events, and political trends past and present.Anyway, Ed, when you used the term "colony" weren't you deliberately being controversial and trying to promote a discussion? You're correct in that the west still considers itself superior and has privileges and standards of living higher than elsewhere because it exploits former other territories. But that's irrespective whether or not they're still tied politically to European states. In fact, places like the Canary Islands have a lot higher standard of living than many independent states, even if by you're definition they are stil a colony.
Michael Ixer ● 632d