According to the popular opinion in AH.com, both British and Spanish colonial empires were evil states that did many atrocities, cruelties, and other bad things to the Natives in their colonies. (mainly in India and Mesoamerica, respectively)
In contrast, (not only here, honestly, but in anywhere else as well) both French and Portuguese colonial empires were looked upon by somewhat good views, and often mentioned as examples of "nice" colonial empires.
But I remember reading somewhere that the French and Portuguese are mainly seen as good colonial powers due to various reasons:
- French colonies in North America have good relations with the Native Amerindians because their economy depended mainly on fur trade with the Natives, in contrast to the British, who forcefully took the lands of the Natives for settlements and plantations, and the Spanish, who enslaved the Natives for gold and silver mines.
- Meanwhile, the Portuguese colonized the most sparsely populated region in New World (present-day Brazil), so they only did little to no atrocities in said colony.
- Both French and Portuguese African and Asian colonies were nowhere as heavily populated as the British ones, so, again, no need for atrocities to the Natives.
So, basically my question: are there any sources or informations to prove that the French and Portuguese were as bad as, or even worse than, the British and Spanish?
OR are there any sources or informations to prove that the British and Spanish were as good as, or even better than, the French and Portuguese?
EDIT: maybe this thread should be moved to Political Chat forum...