With the paradoxical viewpoint that if they hadn’t been involved in colonialism, they would have had no wealth to speak of in the first place.
There have definitely been examples throughout history of colonial empires callously exploiting weaker nations for resources, but as this article points out simplifying the disparity of wealth between nations then and now as being simply a matter of colonialism does not make sense. The king of Belgium engaged in probably the most exploitative and evil form of colonialism the Western World had ever seen, and yet it didn’t turn Belgium into a global power.
South Korea grew from a tiny impoverished country with little to no natural resources to an economic and cultural powerhouse through almost hard work and education alone. As a matter of fact when empires are built on conquest and colonialism alone without a strong foundation of independent wealth they tend not to maintain a great level of independent power after they lose their empire, case in point the Arabian and Mongol empires.
