Final answer:
The option that is NOT considered a negative effect of colonialism is the investment of money by colonizers into their new colonies. This could potentially lead to positive developments, unlike the other options listed.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question posed seeks to identify which option is NOT considered a negative effect of colonialism. Colonialism, throughout history, has had numerous detrimental effects on the colonies, such as the exclusion of local inhabitants from participating in their own government, violation of human rights, the spread of foreign diseases, and economic exploitation. However, it is also recognized that colonizers would sometimes invest money into their new colonies, which does not inherently carry a negative connotation and could have facilitated development in certain aspects. Investments might have been made in infrastructure, technology transfers, or administrative systems, which were intended to benefit not only the colonial powers but occasionally the local population as well.
Therefore, the option "Colonizers would invest money into their new colonies" is NOT considered a negative effect of colonialism, as such investments could lead to developments such as improved infrastructure, education, and medical care, despite the overarching negative impacts of colonial rule.