Quote Originally Posted by Dayuhan View Post
In parts of the third world yes, in other parts no.

The Soviets did read the writing on the wall relatively early, and wisely got an early foothold in supporting anti-colonial movements and leaders, often before they became leaders. The US very foolishly (IMO of course) often responded, once anti-colonial movements emerged, by propping up crumbling colonial regimes of by replacing them with oafish dictators charged with repressing the commie menace. In that sense the Russians got ahead in the perception wars... but I've been to few places where an actual Russian presence is fondly remembered.
It wasn't just that. In case of India, the cultural exchange was also very high. As per many Indians, these white folks were the completely different from the ones that left a few years earlier. They were the good guys.

http://www.monbiot.com/2005/12/27/ho...ts-holocausts/

By the standards of the colonial age My Lai or Abu Ghraib would have ranked too low on the atrocity charts to even deserve a mention. Business as usual.
People are dying even today, despite the fact that India hasn't faced a severe famine in last 40 years or so and every year hundreds of thousands of tonnes of grains are left to rot in the storage rooms. Post green revolution, India never faced a severe famine and most of the time produced a little surplus. Sad but true, governments come and go but most people stand exactly where they were in 1947.