Colonialism

[Braunwyn]

Your using something that is still a "theory" as a gauge for someones intellect? .

You crack me up, CIC.

 

[gnomon]

I'm having a hard time understanding how the same people, that say they support "progress" and structure at the same time condemn colonialism, the very thing that brought civil structure, innovation, technology, medical advance, and government to the world.

I really would like people to think what our world would be like if colonialism never happened. Would there be any progress or structure? Would we be able to live in generally safe environments in the comfort of our own homes? The point is we need to stop blacklisting these people. The colonialists were ambitious people who were seeking advancement and progress, something that the western world feeds on right now. Without the ambitions of these people, progress would have been halted and we would be stuck in much worse conditions.

Has anyone watched the documentary "Farewell Africa"? It is a documentary film about the de-colonization of Africa and the consequences that arises from it. I warn you however, if you are a sensitive politically correct person, don't watch it(because some comments are seen as racist by the director, but rather I would like people to see the documentary on the problems on de-colonization), because it will go against everything you have been taught.

Africa Addio / Farewell Africa (English Su Video

Colonialism was not a process that possessed progress and advancement (redundant) as its goal. Colonialism was a process to further the economic interests of European states. In the process cultures were shoved aside or destroyed to for those states to reap the benefits of the resources.

The progress that the Western world achieved may not have been as quick without the existence of the United States but the wheels were already rolling. We can only speculate what would have happened if the European states did not engage in racist and destructive practices but instead engaged only in sharing and did not displace indigenous cultures.

One of the primary issues of "decolonization" that happened in Africa was that the European states had redrawn tribal boundaries, engaged in promoting one tribe over another (ex. Rwanda) and paid no interest in maintaining stability.

Yes, the United States and Europe are the leaders in technological and medical innovation. What we can learn from the brutality of colonialism in Africa, the West Indies, the Americas, Southeast Asia, etc. is that forcing other cultures to change with violence only creates greater problems in the long run.

Look at Rwanda and Vietnam. Rwanda suffered what was a genocidal civil war because the French had created a class distinction in that nation based upon arbitrary standards. Vietnam was a situation where the United States decided to support the French colonial leaders rather than pay attention to the Vietnamese leaders who wanted the colonialists out.

The millions of Native Americans killed, none of whom remain among some of the Antilles due to European aggression to reap the economic benefits of the region, for the sake of perpetuating jingoism.

The point is that going forward, especially with the issues of globalization, it is important to note the idea of cultural integrity and no need to engage in revisionist history as painting European colonialists as benefactors to so called ignorant peoples. Especially when Europe imploded in the 20th Century with two world wars that shame any notion of civility.

 

[Wyzaard]

What's this measuring?

GNP probably... of course, one must point out the exploitative economic and political relationships that have maintained such inequalities, and the disparities that exist within such nations as well; GNP doesn't establish all that much, really.

 

[tanzanos]

Russia, for the most part of its post-history is communist and IS still partly communist(under the guise of national socialism).You realize Putin got in office due to his support for communists? Former director of KGB. Russia still has market based communism. Either way it should be called for what it is and they are still a communist threat, especially when Putin gets out of office.

Yes and G.W.Bush is a communist atheist!

You really must have little knowledge of the technology of the US military.




The U.S. is:

- 2.6x stronger than Japan.
- 12.4x stronger than the O.I.C. states
- 14.4x stronger than China.
- 20.3x stronger than Mexico.

WikiAnswers - What are the most powerful nations in the world

Is that why you lost in Vietnam to sandal wearing foot soldiers????

 

[Andreusz]

Your the ones who claim that something can come from nothing, lol.

Actually, you are.

 

[CreedIsChrist]

What's this measuring?

human development. The darker greener areas are more developed. The orange and red are the least developed.

Thanks in large part of exploitive colonial regimes that built next to nothing in the way of infrastructure that didn't have to do with resource extraction. After independence, most of these countries had to start from scratch in a Western-dominated world built off of their blood and soil; few options other than continuing their indenture to corporations and Western geopolitical ambitions exist. As such...

yes yes, the terwibble 'white man'. How horrible it was to bring over new technology, food, structure, civility, a justice system, clean water, clean housing, roads, beautiful architecture, chemistry, medicine, and a commerce system where people are able to try to live out their dreams. That must be so horrible for you..

Give back the lands so we can go back to straw huts, no soap or electricity, no medicine, no education, brutality, no law, low life expectancy. And if your lucky, your name won't be drawn in the next weeks cannibalistic sacrifice festival. I wonder how todays modern left-wingers would do in such a setting..

 

[Wyzaard]

yes yes, the terwibble 'white man'.

Yep... we were, and in many respects still are. The facts are crystal clear.

How horrible it was to bring over new technology,

To the benefit of whom? For which classes of people, which vested market interests?

food,

Where food was (and in many respects still is) produced in the third world, it was cash-crop monoculture that served gloabl markets, NOT the local populations.

structure,

Laughable... Europeans more often brought chaos that they then "needed to pacify", a classic pretext for imperialism.

civility,

Take your "white-man's burden" elsewhere, Kipling.

a justice system,

Research how this worked for the British amongst the Tiv.

clean water, clean housing,

Complete nonsense. Where improvements were actually usable for the locals, they were taken up, rebuilt, and maintained after independence.

roads,

To extraction zones... population centers in many cases were completely overlooked; though Indians were able to press the British to develop reasonable rail infrastructure, it came from their moxy, not British foresight.

beautiful architecture,

As opposed to all those grass huts, huh? Ethnocentrism becomes no one.

chemistry, medicine,

For whose needs, locals or colonials?

and a commerce system where people are able to try to live out their dreams.

What in the blue blazes?

That must be so horrible for you..

It was horrible for them, as the historical record shows; native populations didn't lay down their lives for indepedance and revolution for no reason.

Give back the lands so we can go back to straw huts, no soap or electricity, no medicine, no education, brutality, no law, low life expectancy. And if your lucky, your name won't be drawn in the next weeks cannibalistic sacrifice festival. I wonder how todays modern left-wingers would do in such a setting..

Yeah... you're done; your not-so-subtle racism has worn a tad thin.

/thread.

 

[tanzanos]

human development. The darker greener areas are more developed. The orange and red are the least developed.




yes yes, the terwibble 'white man'. How horrible it was to bring over new technology, food, structure, civility, a justice system, clean water, clean housing, roads, beautiful architecture, chemistry, medicine, and a commerce system where people are able to try to live out their dreams. That must be so horrible for you..

Give back the lands so we can go back to straw huts, no soap or electricity, no medicine, no education, brutality, no law, low life expectancy. And if your lucky, your name won't be drawn in the next weeks cannibalistic sacrifice festival. I wonder how todays modern left-wingers would do in such a setting..

No matter how much technology you invent; you will always remain BARBARIANS

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

human development. The darker greener areas are more developed. The orange and red are the least developed.

"Human development"? How do you measure that? Does it refer to economical factors? Technology? Societal factors? Just because you've grown fat by exploiting others doesn't eman that you are more "developed". Quite the contrary.

 

[CreedIsChrist]

"Human development"? How do you measure that? Does it refer to economical factors? Technology? Societal factors? Just because you've grown fat by exploiting others doesn't eman that you are more "developed". Quite the contrary.

What exactly were they exploiting? What did the Native Americans even have that could be exploited? considering they were living probably 1500 years behind the colonialists. They had no use for gold. Flint knives? Tomahawks? The Natives sure loved our guns though. Do you realize how big North America is?? The native Americans could have gone to more rural less populated areas rather than attacking every settler they saw, especially in Canada. 60% of the US is still rural even. There was enough land for everybody. And in reality this isn't really about land, but rather the hatred of progress and establishment.

"Exploiting" would be taking advantage of a well to do system, surplus, or law. Like abuse of welfare, poaching , usary, excessive gaming and fishing, gambling, prostitution and pornography, drug cultivation, etc.

 

[tanzanos]

What exactly were they exploiting? What did the Native Americans even have that could be exploited? considering they were living probably 1500 years behind the colonialists. They had no use for gold. Flint knives? Tomahawks? The Natives sure loved our guns though. Do you realize how big North America is?? The native Americans could have gone to more rural less populated areas rather than attacking every settler they saw, especially in Canada. 60% of the US is still rural even. There was enough land for everybody. And in reality this isn't really about land, but rather the hatred of progress and establishment.

"Exploiting" would be taking advantage of a well to do system, surplus, or law. Like abuse of welfare, poaching , usary, excessive gaming and fishing, gambling, prostitution and pornography, drug cultivation, etc.

I agree with you. Any country has the right to conquer the US and subjugate the Americans. It is after all human nature to do so? I therefore put the US on Ebay for free land grab. I am sure Iran, China, and Russia are interested. After all Most Americans cannot place their continent on the map therefore they are primitive savages and don't deserve America; soon to be called the Peoples republic of ....... America (just add the conquering country's name on the dotted line).

 

[tanzanos]

I sure do hope that this is sarcasm and not you attempting to offend people who live in America.

Yes I was being sarcastic. Just because a nation may be considered by another nation to be inferior; does not give it the right to conquer and subjugate the people of that supposedly inferior nation.

Funny how the more religion condones such acts while The science of Genetics proves that all humans are one species and the differences are only skin deep. Religion teaches us that not all humans are equal and that slavery is not a bad thing.
Where are the illuminati when you need them?

 

[Maren]

I agree with you. Any country has the right to conquer the US and subjugate the Americans. It is after all human nature to do so? I therefore put the US on Ebay for free land grab. I am sure Iran, China, and Russia are interested. After all Most Americans cannot place their continent on the map therefore they are primitive savages and don't deserve America; soon to be called the Peoples republic of ....... America (just add the conquering country's name on the dotted line).

Eh, China would likely object to your putting us on eBay -- don't they already own us (are the largest creditor of the US)?

 

[tanzanos]

Eh, China would likely object to your putting us on eBay -- don't they already own us (are the largest creditor of the US)?

Mere formality my dear, mere formality

 

[Wyzaard]

What exactly were they exploiting? What did the Native Americans even have that could be exploited? considering they were living probably 1500 years behind the colonialists. They had no use for gold. Flint knives? Tomahawks? The Natives sure loved our guns though. Do you realize how big North America is?? The native Americans could have gone to more rural less populated areas rather than attacking every settler they saw, especially in Canada. 60% of the US is still rural even. There was enough land for everybody. And in reality this isn't really about land, but rather the hatred of progress and establishment.

I'm done with responding to this vacuous ethnocentric garbage.

/thread.