I am not doubting that British influence was very beneficial to a number of countries. What I was dispelling was the notion that it was overwhelmingly a superior influence compared to other colonisers, or even that it was always a beneficial influence.
Even if the British influence was a positive one during their rule (which I would dispute was always the case for the local population), if chaos ensued after their departure, then they clearly did not lay the groundwork for a self sustaining prosperous future.
It is clear then, that for most countries that they colonised, their influence was no more beneficial than that of the Spanish, French, Dutch, Portuguese etc.
