Should Europeans offer their apologies for their colonization?

Should the European apologize for their colonization?

  • Yes

    Votes: 29 11.5%
  • No

    Votes: 147 58.3%
  • No, but educate the European children more about this subject

    Votes: 76 30.2%

  • Total voters
    252
  • This poll will close: .

johnincornwall

Ad Honorem
Nov 2010
7,676
Cornwall
I'm not a big fan of colonial-bashing. It happened, it's gone, great.

And though I'm not Gandhi's biggest fan either, there's something to be said for the view - 'rather be governed badly by ourselves, than governed well by others"
 

Peter Graham

Ad Honorem
Jan 2014
2,621
Westmorland
LOL, and here we go folks. A Middle Eastern supremacists graces us with their presence.

Also, Middle East, such a big region. What country are you from? Why wont you reply?
Be careful about criticising someone's use of English as a fifth language when you appear to be struggling with it as a first language.
 
Mar 2019
52
Belgium
Firstly. No they shouldn't

Secondly, what's the purpose of this topic? It has nothing to do with history. We should remove it
 
Dec 2015
510
Middle East
Has the Muslim world ever apologized for invading North Africa? What about all those Christians there who were put to the sword for not converting to Islam? Yes, those Christians which the Muslim world killed? Oh, you forgot about that? Shame on you.
Shame on me? hahaha your claim would be valid if the oriental christians were not firmly in the anti-imperialist camp... Just look at Lebanon and Syria where Christians support Assad. Even Christian Armenians are firmly in the Russian camp and Christian Georgia split in 3 the minute western imperialism reach that country and they sided with Russia. Your claim would be valid if there were no Christians in the Middle East but they are in their Millions... How many native non-Christian people are in Europe? Around zero?

What a cheap attempt to distract from Western imperialism but it is not gonna fly....

By the way.... If the the Middle East had remained non-Muslim, Western imperialism would not have lasted even for two seconds.... Let me remind you that it was the Muslims bedouins from Arabia who invited the imperialist into the Middle East in the early 20th century while it was non-Moslem groups such as the Druze and Alawaites (Both groups are considered non-Muslim by the Sunnis who are the majority) who kicked the French out of the Levant. Even Oriental Christians rejected western imperialism and joined the other non-Muslim groups. The oriental christians were too responisble for Arab nationalism which at its core is a rejection of western imperialism.

Believe you me... you do not want to see the Middle East turn into non-Muslim.
 
Last edited:
Oct 2011
421
Croatia
Shame on me? hahaha your claim would be valid if the oriental christians were not firmly in the anti-imperialist camp... Just look at Lebanon and Syria where Christians support Assad. Even Christian Armenians are firmly in the Russian camp and Christian Georgia split in 3 the minute western imperialism reach that country and they sided with Russia. Your claim would be valid if there were no Christians in the Middle East but they are in their Millions... How many native non-Christian people are in Europe? Around zero?

What a cheap attempt to distract from Western imperialism but it is not gonna fly....

By the way.... If the the Middle East had remained non-Muslim, Western imperialism would not have lasted even for two seconds.... Let me remind you that it was the Muslims bedouins from Arabia who invited the imperialist into the Middle East in the early 20th century while it was non-Moslem groups such as the Druze and Alawaites (Both groups are considered non-Muslim by the Sunnis who are the majority) who kicked the French out of the Levant. Even Oriental Christians rejected western imperialism and joined the other non-Muslim groups. The oriental christians were too responisble for Arab nationalism which at its core is a rejection of western imperialism.

Believe you me... you do not want to see the Middle East turn into non-Muslim.
1) Of course they are, they suffered a lot from imperialism - starting with Persian Zoroastran imperialism, then Muslim imperialism, then Western imperialism.
2) Assad is a secular leader and is opposed by (and opposes) islamists, of course they will support him.
3) Around 25 million - but in oldest Muslim countries, there is zero of them. Christianity in the Middle East - Wikipedia As for native non-Christian people, they were usually pagan or polytheist, and those are easier to convert than monotheists. Even so, there were still pagans in Greece as late as 10th century or so.
4) European imperialism was significantly preceded by Muslim imperialism, partly because "Europe" as a geopolitical entity only came into being thanks to Islam... up until then, Western civilization was Mediterranean civilization, not European one. European civilization came about as a consequence of loss of Northern Africa and Middle East to Islam.
5) Any smart person will reject any form of imperialism, including things that go with imperialism such as multiculturalism.
 

Asherman

Forum Staff
May 2013
3,405
Albuquerque, NM
I take to mean European colonization can be said to have begun as a result of explorations during the 15th century, and continuing until the mid-20th century, Of course, social groups have been extending their groups reach for territory and power since we invaded the Savanna. Population density and distance limited ethnological exposure, so differences between Colonizer and Colonized increased as transportation technology improved. It is arguable that Rome owed much of its lasting power to reducing other political entities to "colonial" status, and to the establishment of colonies of its military veterans,. While Rome was master to much of the Mediterranean basin, Colonialism was an important means of securing that power. From the 5th to the 15th centuries, Europe was so focused on its internal conflicts that "colonialism" almost ceased among European nations. Hence, no significant "racism" in a modern sense.

The members almost certainly intend(ed) focusing the thread on ex-colonies who gained their independence between the 18th and 20th centuries. The English Colonists of North America gained independence at the end of the 18th century from the British government, and the other English speaking colonies became virtually independent as the Common Wealth strategy took off in the 19th century. Spain conquered and claimed a huge world spanning empire, but unlike its competitor England, Spain's interests were exploitation and the aboriginal inhabitants were reduced to peonage. The English Colonies in the North also exploited the empty, virgin lands they settled, but regarded the aboriginal inhabitants more as an impediment to their land claims. The most advanced economic theories of Mercantilism at the time stressed a zero-sum game with a nation's wealth and power centered on its Gold reserves. Spain got the gold, England spread Anglo-Saxon/Celtic populations around the world. Other European nations followed suite and joined the rush to colonize and exploit those regions previously far beyond their knowledge and reach. Those areas tended to be less technologically advanced than Europe ... Africa, Asia, and South America. The competition between European colonizers was stiff and fueled by a rising need for the raw materials needed to grow the technology that made Colonialism possible. Understanding others, especially those who looked different or whose cultural verities were regarded as simple superstition by the Christian Weltanschaunng after the 15th century sectarian religious wars. Aboriginal societies met the challenge using various strategies, but were no match for European intrusions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Picard
Mar 2016
806
Antalya
What is insulting in exposing some nations to the concept of democracy ,mathematics and double entry bookkeeping
the effective rooting out of some obscurantist traditions is also to be seen a boon
non European nations did adopt many technologies and intellectual tools to achieve their emergence
bolt action rifles were gleefully adopted as a most efficient way to promote the very Western idea of national independence
the Vietminh leaders were all progressives , many communist party were founded in Europe by expatriates
many leaders of India independence were Oxbridge educated

colonialism achieved in a few decades what the old local rulers would have been quite happy to never see emerge
colonialism must be seen as the midwife of the modern world
You are in a history forum. You should know better that Arabs and Persians were great at Mathematics and other scientific fields once. They also did a good job of recording the prior scientific progress. I find it rather ironic that current numerals system that we are using is Hindu-Arabic numeral system, especially ironic in regards to this post. I find the notion of Colonials bringing democracy to their colonies a mixture of ignorance and naivety. Gandi studying in Oxford is irrelevant to what you are suggesting. You are being brazen.
 
Last edited: