Imperialism

[tonyh29]

8 minutes ago, blandy said:

Isn't Diego Garcia/Chagos islands one of those where the UN has said the UK needs to give it back to Mauritius, but the US and UK have a massive base there and loads of strategic interest in not doing so, so we've just ignored the UN? I'm pretty sure we treated the people living there absolutely appallingly - basically forcefully evicted them from their homes. I think we've very badly polluted the place too. All this in living memory for some, so it's not like the old historical ones like the Falklands which goes back centuries. I might be a bit muddled, on this, mind, but I'm sure I'm at least partially right.

I think the problem if the UK just gave them back as it would embolden Spain and Argentina with their aims so it was always a non starter ,  but literally a few days ago i read somewhere that an agreement is close to being agreed to handing the Islands back under some form of Indian / US security agreement  ... Mauritius plan is to let the Americans keep the airbase on Diego Garcia  via some form of lease (kerching ) 

a while back ,  I believe The British offered the Chagossians a referendum on the subject , Mauritius refused , as they don't want to acknowledge the potential right to independence of the Chagossian people ... wonder how that will play out long term  ?

 

[villakram]

2 hours ago, Mandy Lifeboats said:

That's the one.  The UK behaved appalling.

But @villakramseems to think it was an island discovered by the Royal Navy (It wasn't) and conquered by the Royal Navy (it wasn't).  

There are enough instances of the UK acting badly throughout history.  There is no need to make up history.  

I never stated that. I simply provided it as an example of the places that the UK "found" that also just happen to be incredibly important geo-strategic places. Coincidence of course.

I am fully aware of the appalling behavior related to Diego Garcia. Pilger has done trojan work about this.

[Mandy Lifeboats]

35 minutes ago, villakram said:

I never stated that. I simply provided it as an example of the places that the UK "found" that also just happen to be incredibly important geo-strategic places. Coincidence of course.

You have just repeated the exact thing you claim you didn't say!!!!!!!

Diego Garcia was not "found" by the UK. 

It was found by a Portugese captain working for Spain.  The island was settled by the French.  

[KentVillan]

1 hour ago, villakram said:

I never stated that. I simply provided it as an example of the places that the UK "found" that also just happen to be incredibly important geo-strategic places. Coincidence of course.

I am fully aware of the appalling behavior related to Diego Garcia. Pilger has done trojan work about this.

Pilger is right about some stuff, and no doubt a brave man, but he’s a polemicist who lets his views and biases get in the way of objective analysis a lot of the time.

I’m sceptical of someone who *always* finds fault with the US and UK, but rarely holds Russia to the same standards. Isn’t that just as bad as the inverse position, which he is so critical of?

“Anti-imperialism” too often means anti-US / anti-NATO, and glosses over the fact that most regimes act in their elite’s self interest and are comfortable with military action when it suits their goals.

[Panto_Villan]

Jesus, trying to understand the points Villakram is trying to make is like trying to decode a haiku delivered by Yoda.

The rest of the thread is an interesting read, and broadly aligns with my thinking - we need something like the statute of limitations for history.

It’s always seemed a bit strange to me when people are pushing historical grievances that happened before anyone that anyone alive today could have met. If nobody can possibly remember anyone that could remember it happening, maybe best just to move on?

[Davkaus]

5 minutes ago, Panto_Villan said:

Jesus, trying to understand the points Villakram is trying to make is like trying to decode a haiku delivered by Yoda.

The rest of the thread is an interesting read, and broadly aligns with my thinking - we need something like the statute of limitations for history.

It’s always seemed a bit strange to me when people are pushing historical grievances that happened before anyone that anyone alive today could have met. If nobody can possibly remember anyone that could remember it happening, maybe best just to move on?

It's an absolute minefield if you start going back generations thinking about who owes what and to whom, but it's a lot easier to say that it's best to just move on when you live in a country that benefited from centuries of taking what wasn't ours.

[Panto_Villan]

18 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

It's an absolute minefield if you start going back generations thinking about who owes what and to whom, but it's a lot easier to say that it's best to just move on when you live in a country that benefited from centuries of taking what wasn't ours.

While I don't deny that's true, it just takes us back to the start of the thread. If we're not allowed to move on from historical grievances, what do we do? Are we obliged to start harassing the Italians about the Roman conquests etc?

[KentVillan]

54 minutes ago, Panto_Villan said:

While I don't deny that's true, it just takes us back to the start of the thread. If we're not allowed to move on from historical grievances, what do we do? Are we obliged to start harassing the Italians about the Roman conquests etc?

The problem is some of these grievances are really very recent and have ongoing effects. In the same way that most Jewish people aren’t just going to park the Holocaust now, lots of people descended from slaves or colonised countries aren’t just going to say ok, all good, let’s crack on.

There’s a balance that has to be struck. I do agree that there’s an element of futility to obsessing over the past, but you can see why it continues to affect things.

What I am uneasy with is this idea that all White Europeans are de facto imperialists who have enormous privilege and must atone for the sins of their ancestors, when clearly white European cultures also have class systems and poverty and exploitation which many white Europeans were also victims of. I imagine your average Polish, Romanian or Irish person would laugh at the concept that they have enjoyed master race privileges.

The US-centric nature of this debate creates lots of stupid subplots that don’t make sense outside the US.

[chrisp65]

Inclosure Acts over several centuries have taken what was common land in england available to all and handed it to what we would now call the landed classes. 20% of all land in england was appropriated in this way, taken from common ownership and free access, in to private landlord hands. I’m not talking about mediaeval times, it wasn’t repealed until the First World War.

The resultant wealth for a few and subsequent dependence of the dispossessed on the wealthy land owners for access to work and food is quite a neat trick. Now, if you want to earn a living, perhaps you need to join the navy for a few years, and go and take some land off some people further away, to give to our wealthy people. 

Now, you can strongly argue that Kevin has a better life working in insurance in Swindon than when he had to sell apples and pigs to survive. But I think its clear that the guys that did even better, were the ones that took Kevin’s land, built an insurance office on it, and got Kevin to work in the office, on a salary that involves the occasional visit to a food bank, opened by a tory MP photographed donating some beans.

I don’t think Kevin should be counter charged for what’s happened in African states depleted of resource by other African states that sold slaves to the white ship owners, that insured their ships in Swindon.

[Panto_Villan]

13 minutes ago, KentVillan said:

The problem is some of these grievances are really very recent and have ongoing effects. In the same way that most Jewish people aren’t just going to park the Holocaust now, lots of people descended from slaves or colonised countries aren’t just going to say ok, all good, let’s crack on.

There’s a balance that has to be struck. I do agree that there’s an element of futility to obsessing over the past, but you can see why it continues to affect things.

What I am uneasy with is this idea that all White Europeans are de facto imperialists who have enormous privilege and must atone for the sins of their ancestors, when clearly white European cultures also have class systems and poverty and exploitation which many white Europeans were also victims of. I imagine your average Polish, Romanian or Irish person would laugh at the concept that they have enjoyed master race privileges.

The US-centric nature of this debate creates lots of stupid subplots that don’t make sense outside the US.

If you're talking about something that happened back in a time where nobody currently alive could remember someone who lived through it, you're talking about things that happened a minimum of 200 years ago - i.e. the Napelonic wars and before.

I'd argue that's not recent at all. Honestly I think there's a huge distinction between Jewish people parking the Holocaust when there are still people alive who lived through it and many more who lost relatives in it, and historical grievances that aren't actually a memory anyone alive could possibly have.

My pet peeve with the issue is really just that the definition of "recent history" invariably stretches or compresses to suit whatever argument is being made, and at a certain point it becomes farcical.

[KentVillan]

4 minutes ago, Panto_Villan said:

If you're talking about something that happened back in a time where nobody currently alive could remember someone who lived through it, you're talking about things that happened a minimum of 200 years ago - i.e. the Napelonic wars and before.

I'd argue that's not recent at all. Honestly I think there's a huge distinction between Jewish people parking the Holocaust when there are still people alive who lived through it and many more who lost relatives in it, and historical grievances that aren't actually a memory anyone alive could possibly have.

My pet peeve with the issue is really just that the definition of "recent history" invariably stretches or compresses to suit whatever argument is being made, and at a certain point it becomes farcical.

Yes but usually the debate around imperialism is talking about white rule in Africa, South Asia, East Asia, the Middle East, the slave trade in the Americas, and so on. In each of those cases, atrocities were still happening well into the twentieth century.

Clearly stuff like the Falklands or Gibraltar is much older and in those cases I agree with you, but they’re a sideshow really.

[villakram]

20 hours ago, Mandy Lifeboats said:

You have just repeated the exact thing you claim you didn't say!!!!!!!

Diego Garcia was not "found" by the UK. 

It was found by a Portugese captain working for Spain.  The island was settled by the French.  

Good Sir, might I kindly suggest that you read my posts rather than "read" them. 

[fruitvilla]

There's a deep philosophical side to all this discussion and pretty much all the posts that can be found on this forum. If we believe in cause and effect, say from the big geopolitical aspects down to the biochemistry (if not physics) of the choices that have been made in the past then it is difficult to see how things could have been otherwise.

Similarly, if we deny cause and effect, then two possibilities seem to arise, 1) human beings are mini gods or 2) the whole caboodle is a crap shoot. If anyone wants to respond here would be more appropriate.

[Mandy Lifeboats]

1 hour ago, villakram said:

Good Sir, might I kindly suggest that you read my posts rather than "read" them. 

Good Sir, thank you for your advice.  You can be assured that I am treating your advice with the appropriate level of respect.  

[Rustibrooks]

In regards to colonialism I think there’s more of an argument to be had of some sort of reparations to the countries deeply affected by it. It’s not just UK, but the countries involved haven’t given things back to the countries that have been affected or paid any reparations, some of these countries are still profiting off colonialism while the countries they are profiting from are poor. 
 

I couldn’t tell you the best solution because its so complex, but I think a good start would be to at least return some of the artefacts from museums etc and let the countries that they originated from have them. 
 

[Captain_Townsend]

On 17/03/2023 at 09:19, Panto_Villan said:

 

It’s always seemed a bit strange to me when people are pushing historical grievances that happened before anyone that anyone alive today could have met. If nobody can possibly remember anyone that could remember it happening, maybe best just to move on?

Do you think we should forget about WW2? Places that were subjected to colonialism can't just 'move on' as they are still dealing with the impact on their culture, their land and their identity. We can't just cherry pick from history. 

[bickster]

2 minutes ago, Captain_Townsend said:

Do you think we should forget about WW2?

I've met people who were alive in WW2. I've met people who were alive in WW1 and the Russian Revolution. I've met people who were alive when Queen Victoria was on the throne

[Panto_Villan]

5 minutes ago, Captain_Townsend said:

Do you think we should forget about WW2? Places that were subjected to colonialism can't just 'move on' as they are still dealing with the impact on their culture, their land and their identity. We can't just cherry pick from history. 

If you don’t think any of the places subjected to German aggression in WW2 have moved on from it, despite the obvious negative effects they suffered, I’m not sure it’s worth discussing this point. Most of them are currently demanding Germany build a bigger military and be a lot more willing to use it.

And obviously WW2 is not an event where nobody currently alive could have possibly met anyone who lived through it, so I don’t see the relevance of bringing it up.

Do you think we should move on from the Roman conquest of Britain, or continue to hold a grudge against Italy for it? If you’re willing to forgive them, why is that also not “cherry picking”?

[VILLAMARV]

On 16/03/2023 at 20:33, KentVillan said:

he’s a polemicist who lets his views and biases get in the way of objective analysis a lot of the time.

I’m sceptical of someone who *always* finds fault with the US and UK, but rarely holds Russia to the same standards. Isn’t that just as bad as the inverse position, which he is so critical of?

To me, he's one of the few journalists I'm aware of with any integrity left. Left wing bias, yeah, obviously. But interested in truth. And sharing that to the wider public. I'm always suspicious of arguments that attack the messenger rather than the message.

[veloman]

On 17/03/2023 at 11:32, chrisp65 said:

Inclosure Acts over several centuries have taken what was common land in england available to all and handed it to what we would now call the landed classes.

 

 

 

"The law locks up the man or woman  who steals the goose from off the common'

But lets the felon loose who steals the common from the goose" 

 An early anti "Enclosure Movement" poem. Could almost apply today !