Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > European History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

European History European History Forum - Western and Eastern Europe including the British Isles, Scandinavia, Russia


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old November 17th, 2012, 06:46 AM   #161
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 19,934

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ancientgeezer View Post
Where is the cut-off point of "first and second wave" colonialism? Something arbritarily arrived at to prove a pre-conception? As far as Anglo-Saxon Empires are concerned there are five distinct phases, extended to eight if one regards American expansion as an extension of the earlier British acitivity.
If one assumes that the "cut off" is 1776, then of those twenty eleven came under British rule only after that date.

Your libel in calling me a bigot is noted. If you have a dictionary you may wish to look up the word. Amongst its meanings as used by non-British people is a "person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially: one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance"
This perfectly descibes the small, but noisy community of anti-British, Anti-Anglo-Saxon, anti-White losers who post here regularly.
As for me personally, hatred and intolerance are for the lower classes. Does one hate the waste paper basket? Does one hate the furniture? Of course not.
Does one have a responsibility to correct a child? Of course! Unfortunately, like adolescents full of their own self-importance, many of Empire's children decided that they knew how to drive the car before they had even been in it--with predictable results.
Once evidence is not enough, it is always useful to call fro straw men and bratuitous disqualifications.

It was simply noted that a less bigoted way of expressing the same message could have been used here.

It would be hard to deny, right?

Especially regarding the incredibly pretentious, hilarious and absurd analogy that any colonial master may become any paternal figure who may "have a responsibility to correct a child" just for having conquered, decimated, plundered, & enslaved for decades and additionally eventually negligently abandoned any number of native populations all around this nice planet.

Is simply possible any more ridiculous bigotry than this cheap fanatic version of the white-man's-burden crap at its acme?

Rest assured something similar could be said with exponentially less bigotry.

It's easy if you try.

In your own words, all that you require is a little relevant hard evidence for your own libels.
sylla1 is offline  
Remove Ads
Old November 17th, 2012, 06:49 AM   #162

anmol's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Jun 2012
From: chandigarh
Posts: 707

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ancientgeezer View Post
If this list is intended (by malicious interpretation) to show the relative advantage or otherwise of being born in a land once, but no longer, blessed with the honour of being part of the Great Imperial Family it is noteworthy that of the top 19 countries outside of Europe, 13 were former British colonies or territories. Clearly some people are capable of being potty trained and others continue to make a mess once the Memsahib has returned home.
Out of curosity which are those 13 countries
anmol is offline  
Old November 17th, 2012, 07:26 AM   #163
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 19,934

Quote:
Originally Posted by apophaticlogos View Post
Although there aren't many defenders of colonialism, I don't think there can be a lot of debate that the Europeans left their colonies in better shape in 1960 than they found them in 1860. They had built infrastructure - road, schools, hospitals, bureaucracy; given their colonies education - philosophy and Christian religion; linked them into the home countries social and economic world (see here for a fascinating graphic on facebook social connections between some former colonizers and the rest of the world Daily chart: The sun never sets | The Economist).

The colonizers definitely left their colonies better a hundred years later - though surely they didn't leave them a hundred years better, and that says nothing about native suffering or comfort in the meantime.
Demonizing a transgressor does nothing to right an injustice, and it only discredits your standpoint.


On another note, I have to say, I thought this looked like an interested place to have serious historical discussions, but given the level of petty pebble tossing I see, I'm about to head back to the Europa Universalis forums... at least on a computer game site there is real historical analysis.
It's been fun; and if Ancientgeezer will lend me his dictionary, I will find the loosest definition of 'fun' that I can.
With respect, it's clear that we have been reading different sources and surfing in different websites.

There can and there is a lot of debate on such an extremely controversial issue, here & elsewhere

There is a surprisingly great number of defenders of colonialism, as anyone could easily verify all along Historum & elsewhere, for any reason fundamentally from the former colonial masters.
God only knows why.

As a whole, the colonizers definitively didn't left their colonies "better", irrespectively if some infrastructure was inevitably required for the exploitation of any colony, even by the most brutal and disrupting conquerors.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but this obvious fact must be particularly evident in Korea & Taiwan, right?

The very HDI that you shared with us in a previous post is a rather hard evidence against such rosy apologetic rationalization linked in your last post.

Even the real histories of success (fundamentally Far East Asia) could hardly be explained by the influence of any Christian philosophy; if anything, they could be explained fundamentally for the resistance of the local culture against the conqueror's "philosophy"

BTW here is the linked rationalized apology:
Click the image to open in full size.
Aside of the obvious fact that plenty of people uses English (as good a language for communication as any other) all around this Planet, especially but hardly exclusively in former British colonies (because last time I checked the bulk of Facebook connexted Europe and former Soviet republics were never British colonies) I'm not sure what exactly are these fascinating maps expected to demonstrate here.

BTW, please note that plenty if not most of the African nations with Facebook connections to Britain (let say notoriously Libya, Congo (DRC) & Mali) were actually never British colonies.
sylla1 is offline  
Old November 17th, 2012, 07:36 AM   #164
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 19,934

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ancientgeezer View Post
If this list is intended (by malicious interpretation) to show the relative advantage or otherwise of being born in a land once, but no longer, blessed with the honour of being part of the Great Imperial Family it is noteworthy that of the top 19 countries outside of Europe, 13 were former British colonies or territories. Clearly some people are capable of being potty trained and others continue to make a mess once the Memsahib has returned home.
I'm truly sorry, but all the enthusiastic bigotry, naive wishful thinking, creative maths and fantasy of this world wouldn't be enough to show the rosy fairy tale apologetic white man burden's justification for the brutal conquest, decimation, plundering, humiliation, enslavement and eventual negligent abandonment of Colonialism as a whole all around this nice Planet some people here are so desperately & aggressively looking for.

Sorry, but facts are facts.
And that's all we have.
We couldn't just bring here some better figures just from mere thin air.
You can't imagine how truly sorry I am.
One would really love to describe some infinite blessings of any altruistic white (& yellow)-man's-burden all around a forever-happily-living-after Planet as nothing less that the Messiah's second coming.
But that's impossible.
Some people must simply understand that such pretension simply couldn't be any more unhistorical, absurd, offensive and frankly delirious to the Nth degree.
So please, please try to kill the message, not any messenger.
Period.

Last edited by sylla1; November 17th, 2012 at 07:47 AM.
sylla1 is offline  
Old November 17th, 2012, 09:49 AM   #165
Historian
 
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,034

Quote:
Originally Posted by dagul View Post
Your own link provides that there was an order from Spanish King that Filipinos should not be enslaved. In those links that you provided, it also shows that a certain Filipina slave became a nun. Ever heard of a Black African who work in the cotton farm in the U.S. that became a Catholic nun? Such example that you gave, is not slavery in the true sense of the word because to become a nun and a servant of the church is a choice, and a real slave is a commodity of ones owner and cannot exercise the right to choose of what to become someday.

Like you, in my country there are revisionists historians that create stories that those who built the Catholic Churches in my country were slaves, which runs in contrast to the the inscriptions in the stones that bear their name and their devotion to Jesus.

It is true that in the Philippines there were Chinese uprising against the Spaniards but, these people were considered as bandits in the early history of the nation. While it is correct that Filipinos rebelled against the Spaniards, because they suffered from abuses of these colonizers, however, the experience was not all about pain but also it was the love of religion, family relationships, festivals, and the awakening of learning the Western education in the Philippines, and as a matter of fact, University of Sto. Tomas which was founded in April 28, 1611 in the City of Manila, is amongst the oldest in Asia.
For colonialism to even slightly benefit people , it has to bring new things which the people don't have already

Philippines had indigenous writing

A visit to the Philippine Islands - John Bowring - Google Books

Chinese pottery in the Philippines - Fay-Cooper Cole, Berthold Laufer - Google Books

Religion (islam and hinduism/animism)

Indigenous states (kingdom of luzon, kingdom of maynila and sultanates).

The malay states already had gunpowder weapons and cannons so the spanish didn't introduce them there. There was a fully developed trade system between the philippines, japan, china, and the malay sultanates.

There were many indigenous schools run by the moros in mindanao and sulu. When non spaniards like Dr. Najeeb Saleeby who was an arab christian studied the moros, they had a positive view and said that the juramentados were not religious fanatics at all. He also wrote positively of their education system.

All western accounts about chinese rebellions in the philippines are pretty clear that they were due to spanish oppression and that the spanish committed massacres of thousands of people. This is a 19th fentury western account, even back then they were acknowleding whose fault it was. I can post links to modern scholar's writings on the massacres if you want to see them.

A system of universal geography: or A description of all the parts of the ... - Conrad Malte-Brun, Jean-Jacques-Nicolas Huot - Google Books

When the dutch showed up in spanish taiwan, the aboriginals immediately defected to the newcomers

How Taiwan Became Chinese: Chapter 5

Spanish Experience in Taiwan 1626-1642: The Baroque Ending of a Renaissance ... - Josť Eugenio Borao Mateo - Google Books
deke is offline  
Old November 17th, 2012, 10:23 AM   #166

Epix's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 630

Quote:
Originally Posted by WeisSaul View Post
The French were hypocrites though. They proclaimed themselves as the nation of brotherhood, equality, liberty, and democracy, and denied those rights to their colonies.
I always wondered about that. Many French intellects at the start of the French revolution tried to live by this. But it seems in time the intellects and their equality and liberty beliefs were pushed aside by people more interested in acquiring profit in Frances overseas territories.
Epix is offline  
Old November 17th, 2012, 01:09 PM   #167

WeisSaul's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Mar 2012
From: New Amsterdam
Posts: 2,418

Quote:
Originally Posted by Epix View Post
I always wondered about that. Many French intellects at the start of the French revolution tried to live by this. But it seems in time the intellects and their equality and liberty beliefs were pushed aside by people more interested in acquiring profit in Frances overseas territories.
Even when they integrated a colony into the metropole (Algeria) they weren't very nice.

And of course there was Toussant L'Ouverture in Haiti, who wanted Haiti to remain French on the terms that they be treated as a mostly equal part of the empire. That didn't fan out too well with Mr. Bonaparte.

If you compare former French/Belgian/Italian colonies to former British/Dutch ones, the difference is shocking.

The Japanese were also terrible, though their former colonies in South Korea and Taiwan were able to recover due to US support, something that probably would have happened in S Vietnam too.

If you look at Cameroon and Somalia, just have a look at the formerly British and formerly non-British parts and see the shocking difference in development.
WeisSaul is offline  
Old November 17th, 2012, 01:30 PM   #168

Mike Lynch's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Aug 2012
From: Maryland
Posts: 1,196

Quote:
Originally Posted by WeisSaul View Post
If you compare former French/Belgian/Italian colonies to former British/Dutch ones, the difference is shocking.
The British wiped out the populations of Canada, the eastern US, Australia, NZ, etc etc. The French didn't do this - in the best comparable example (Canada), they treated the natives far better British.

The British also virtually enslaved much of India, and the Dutch engaged in similar action in Indonesia - this is not any different from any of the other European powers.

The 'good' former British colonies pointed out by ancientgeezer are in their current condition because the British exterminated the native population and replaced them with their own people. It makes no sense to compare formerly British Australia to formerly French Algeria. These 'colonies' are two completely different types of colonies. The British in Australia were far, far worse - just ask the few aboriginals who remain.

The reality is that the British have eliminated loads of native peoples from the face of the planet - perhaps more than any other colonial power, but surely more than the French or the Dutch.
Mike Lynch is offline  
Old November 17th, 2012, 01:33 PM   #169

Mike Lynch's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Aug 2012
From: Maryland
Posts: 1,196

Quote:
Originally Posted by Epix View Post
I always wondered about that. Many French intellects at the start of the French revolution tried to live by this. But it seems in time the intellects and their equality and liberty beliefs were pushed aside by people more interested in acquiring profit in Frances overseas territories.
The British were much more honest. They didn't bother to claim everyone was equal or anything like that - they said it as they saw it - they were the superior race.
Mike Lynch is offline  
Old November 17th, 2012, 01:36 PM   #170

Mike Lynch's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Aug 2012
From: Maryland
Posts: 1,196

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ancientgeezer View Post
Clearly some people are capable of being potty trained and others continue to make a mess once the Memsahib has returned home.
Wow, really? Isn't that against forum rules or something?
Mike Lynch is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > European History

Tags
colonial, colonies, european, power, treated, worsts


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How did the colonisation of Africa give European countries power? kate1001 History Help 5 November 18th, 2012 02:16 PM
What would it have been like had India been ruled by any other colonial power? St. Anselm Speculative History 25 March 23rd, 2012 10:52 AM
Which European nation has the most power. rory1497 European History 85 May 7th, 2011 08:45 PM
Why are Chinese Dynasties treated differently from European ones? Kiwi Asian History 31 November 2nd, 2010 09:19 AM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.