On the other hand you can look at the list of the top 15 as either being European or Far Eastern, the hot beds of technological, medicinal, scientific, economic and social change in the last two millennia, with the outliers of the US, Aus and New Zealand being countries where many (not sure about NZ though), in fact the vast majority of the indigenous people(s) were killed off, whilst purposeful settlers moved in with all their respective technologies, and were kept in touch with advances in other fields because countries (primarily Britain of course) had vested interests in these countries resources and colonies.
In most cases with colonisation, the technologies brought by the arriving colonisers (stupid auto-correct) were largely denied, kept from or not immediately accepted by the locals, for obvious reasons like mistrust, reluctance to change and ginergenius' favourite, religion. The best example of this is South Africa. The controlling minority were able to do very well for themselves and set-up infrastructure in 'their' population centres which two decades on would put 1st world eastern European countries to shame. Of course if one looked at places like Darwin, one would see a similar pattern, but the country wide affect is negated as the once majority native population was exterminated.
Honestly, for the life of me I cannot see how what happened in Apartheid was as bad as what happened to the Aboroginies and Native Americans. Those were bloody genocides yet in comparison to the stick white saffas get for a regime few had anything directly to do with, those matters are swept under the rug by the global media.