"On my first trip there (Mozambique) a guy told me Communism was the best thing that ever happened to them".

This is quoted from another thread and judged as stupid foolish.

Here are some thoughts.

1. Why is that comment foolish? Well, from a Western capitalist perspective, it is ideologically opposed.
2. Why did people embrace socialism and communism in the 1920s to 1970s?

There is a lot of serious and well researched scholarships on post colonial politics. Most of it was / is not taught or published in most Western universities or media.

The first point to note is that post colonial capitalism was a trap designed to expand colonial control and influence without the cost and collateral risks of colonial conflict.

Capitalism from the West was not a charity or some benevolent boon from God to the poor tribal or feudal economies.

Colonialism was oppressive and exploitative. Capitalism in it's current oligarchic nature is worse.

The big pointer to the Mozambican situation is the history of Portuguese colonialism. It was not based on trade like English colonialism. Portuguese colonialism was based on appointing Feudal lords in the colonies who had little administrative infrastructure. The feudal lords then established virtual slavery on the local population. This happened in most Portuguese colonies. Brazil had 3 times or more slaves than the US.

Any wonder then about the "foolish" comment that Communism was better than colonial slavery?

While I am not a communist, calling something stupid is not an argument.

I have made the argument that the inability of colonial powers to transition to home rule based on democratic principles in colonial Africa are to blame for the rise of nationalistic, communist movements in colonial Africa.

I have not read a peer reviewed paper, or book that advanced my thesis. I am sure they are out there.

Folks here place the blame on the African instead on the colonial power that failed.

The White Man did not meet the Burden.

As I said in that original argument that the pro colonial argument never addressed, no one was going to agree to outs for the ethnic minority with the ability of that minority to veto legislation as was suggested for Rhodesia. The trigger for Republic of Rhodesia was rapid decolonization that was a threat to white minority rule. The white minority intended to not intend to loose or share political power with the majority. That from the beginning was a flawed and unworkable situation.

This failure set the table for the violence and inept nationalist-communist regime(s) that followed.

In short, both are guilty.

Colonialism is a simple matter of destroying the culture anywhere you colonize, refusing to let the colonized into yours for decades then sneering at them for having no culture of their own.

Geography matters little.

Wow, just wow.

Talk about spun out of context...

I didn't refer to anyone as stupid.

Just foolish.

I didn't include you Naki.

But, if the shoe fits...


.

I understood the context in which you used it Ty.

Thank you Shankspony.

This is an eclectic crowd in here and there's always the chance that something is being lost in translation from English.

But not in this case.


.

Well I have a feeling we are going to hit a period of comments being used out of context.

Lol. Passive aggressive eh?

Just for the record, I did not mention your name became that was not really relevant. The topic is relevant.

I have also edited the post to "foolish".

Irrespective of your intent, this thread still has its relevance and I hope it does not get sidetracked.

quote:

Originally posted by Thomas "Ty" Beaham:
Wow, just wow.

Talk about spun out of context...

I didn't refer to anyone as stupid.

Just foolish.

I didn't include you Naki.

But, if the shoe fits...


.

quote:

Originally posted by shankspony:
Well I have a feeling we are going to hit a period of comments being used out of context.

You hit the nail squarely on the head.


.

quote:

While I am not a communist, calling something stupid is not an argument.

Yeah...well...maybe....

But calling naki, the wacky paki stupid is just the plain,truth!

Calling Jtex the racist bully evangelical is the obvious.

quote:

Originally posted by JTEX:

quote:

While I am not a communist, calling something stupid is not an argument.

Yeah...well...maybe....

But calling naki, the wacky paki stupid is just the plain,truth!

You realise that some are confessing at the alter by sabotaging this thread just like the other one.

quote:

Originally posted by Thomas "Ty" Beaham:

quote:

Originally posted by shankspony:
Well I have a feeling we are going to hit a period of comments being used out of context.

You hit the nail squarely on the head.


.

Well, in my trip to Mozambique they did not think that communism was a good thing. But then, I wasn't talking to politicians or leaders.

At best, the reality is that the post colonial states became leftist because it was not the colonial nation's system.


In reality, most African nations "leftism" is really tribalism.

What was it that a nameless Zimbabwe politician said after being confronted about having a Benz?

"Socialism here means what's mine is mine, and what's yours is ours."

Notice that the most successful subsaharan states are not marxist- like Botswana and Kenya.

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:
Colonialism is a simple matter of destroying the culture anywhere you colonize, refusing to let the colonized into yours for decades then sneering at them for having no culture of their own.

Geography matters little.

Exactly what America has been doing!

Under the guise of bringing them. “Democracy”

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:
Colonialism is a simple matter of destroying the culture anywhere you colonize, refusing to let the colonized into yours for decades then sneering at them for having no culture of their own.

Geography matters little.

Exactly what America has been doing!

Under the guise of bringing them. “Democracy”

How goes the famine that the UAE is financing in Sudan? Biggest in decades I hear. Good job

quote:

Originally posted by Nakihunter:
You realise that some are confessing at the alter by sabotaging this thread just like the other

The other thread in which you're hoist with your own petard?

That thread?


.

Many countries are in probably worse state after colonialism!

Taken over by all sorts of individuals whose sole purpose in life is to enrich themselves!

Communism.

Tribalism.

All have nothing in their minds except personal greed!

All of them ably supported by their ex-colonial masters!

Britain “couldn’t find” Mugabe’s millions stored in THEIR banks.

France was happy to charter the Concorde to Mabuto so his wife can hop on and do her shopping in Paris!

Who was the author?

My thread that I started and that I have a right to facilitate

quote:

Originally posted by Thomas "Ty" Beaham:

quote:

Originally posted by Nakihunter:
You realise that some are confessing at the alter by sabotaging this thread just like the other

The other thread in which you're hoist with your own petard?

That thread?


.

quote:

My thread that I started and that I have a right to facilitate

Bloody hell!

Why don’t you start your own forum, and decide who should say what and when?

You asked a question, others answered you.

Don’t like their answers?

Tough luck!

I'm surprised at your restraint Saeed!
I thought you would have said,
Tough Shit!

The funny thing is hes the worst behaved individual on that thread. He should facilitate himself.

quote:

Originally posted by shankspony:
The funny thing is hes the worst behaved individual on that thread. He should facilitate himself.

Now now!

Be nice to your countryman.

I have been exceedingly nice. I was contributing on the topic until the OP derailed the thread himself with ad hominem attacks and unfounded accusations.
In this one my crime was clarifying that I understood the context of a contributor who's comment was being used out of context.
Im simply responding and pointing out hes his own worst enemy.
If he didnt run off topic with accusations and bringing up the other thread, this one would still be on track too.

Here Ill help out.

The OP makes a valid point re colonisation.

I think as has been mentioned, part of it was the culture of the time. the entire world was only just starting to leave a fairly consistent world view of conquest where and when possible/ Slavery/ national and personal gain at any price as long as it was others.

In hindsight and with modern ideal we can see the cost of that and how its impacted those peoples who were colonised.
We in our nation. Naki and I share some burden as immigrants or descendants of immigrants who have had advantage from that initial colonisation. But what to do about it is the tough question.
Our nation now treats all equally and everyone has the tools at hand to do well. Free education, scholarships directed at those that might need them, Free health for all, special representation in politics for indigenous people are just some that come to mind.

I think it will take time.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:
Colonialism is a simple matter of destroying the culture anywhere you colonize, refusing to let the colonized into yours for decades then sneering at them for having no culture of their own.

Geography matters little.

Exactly what America has been doing!

Under the guise of bringing them. “Democracy”

You give us too much credit.

It doesn't matter who the colonizer is, who they are colonizing or where it's at, it almost always goes the same.

The colonizer always thinks they are imposing something better than the colonized had before, and the resources they strip out are just compensation for their benevolence, and they leave a vacuum when they are forced out or exhaust the resources.

UAE seems determined to learn the same lesson.

You are right Saeed.

My response was to his claim that I was side tracking my own thread. Go figure!

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

My thread that I started and that I have a right to facilitate

Bloody hell!

Why don’t you start your own forum, and decide who should say what and when?

You asked a question, others answered you.

Don’t like their answers?

Tough luck!

How in the world did we get to a place where the Colonizers were worried about the Colonized? Not once in the history of man was that a concern!
White European, black Africans, red Americans and any other society on earth migrated and colonized for their benefit and no other reason.

Sure, Spain and Portugal introduced Catholicism to their colonies, but it was as much to pacify as it was to "save" their colonized people.

The taking of the western United States, really all the States was about available land and natural resources that an indigenous population could be removed from. The same in Old Testament Palestine, the same for the movement of all American indigenous tribes, the same for the African indigenous cultures.

Ghengis Khan didn't give a shit about the well-being and happiness of those he colonized.

Our space exploration is no more or less than research in colonization. Where can we go next? If we can find other life in the universe that may we'll be a place we can live too!

I'm not being mean or cold hearted at all, but I personally don't give the slightest fuck about some historical injury and hurt feelings the Maori or the Pima of Arizona might have about being conquered centuries ago. Evolve and adapt or die girls!

Scott you would love a local exhibition here from the resident tribe. The AV presentation starts documenting how the original tribe held guardianship of a valuable resource. Then they tell how a new tribe ( The current one) moved in and conquered the original tribe for control of that resource and fairly well exterminated them and it was a great victory and everyone was happy.... Until the europeans arrived and unfairly took the land from them.
There was quite some irony.
Having said that, whi8le not as brutal as the massacre of the original tribe, the loss of land and resource, and early iunsitutuional racism has left lasting effects that are not good for modern society. The tools to help repair that are there in place. But its difficult at times convincing a group to use them and take advantage for whats on offer when there is a cultural mistrust of the system. And diference4s in how cultures behave from individual to societal levels.

One of the ones that really grinds my gears, and I bet you have similar in the US, is, for want of better words, tribally oriented Maori, attacking more westernly oriented Maori, as not Maori. Mallow puffs is one term they often call them. A chocolate biscuit thats white on the inside.

Shanks,

"A potato, brown on the outside, white on the inside."


No, there's a movement now for non natives to claim some kind of indigenous roots. We have a senator from back east we nicknamed Pocahontas because apparently she lied about it and looks whiter than the Pillsbury Dough Boy.

In the west here they are called "Pretendian" as in pretend Indian and they go so far as to dye their hair, get indigenous tattoos and dress accordingly in order to fake each other out.

You know, whatever I guess, it's a free country. It seems obvious to me that looking backwards ain't progressing.

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:
How in the world did we get to a place where the Colonizers were worried about the Colonized? Not once in the history of man was that a concern!
White European, black Africans, red Americans and any other society on earth migrated and colonized for their benefit and no other reason.

Sure, Spain and Portugal introduced Catholicism to their colonies, but it was as much to pacify as it was to "save" their colonized people.

The taking of the western United States, really all the States was about available land and natural resources that an indigenous population could be removed from. The same in Old Testament Palestine, the same for the movement of all American indigenous tribes, the same for the African indigenous cultures.

Ghengis Khan didn't give a shit about the well-being and happiness of those he colonized.

Our space exploration is no more or less than research in colonization. Where can we go next? If we can find other life in the universe that may we'll be a place we can live too!

I'm not being mean or cold hearted at all, but I personally don't give the slightest fuck about some historical injury and hurt feelings the Maori or the Pima of Arizona might have about being conquered centuries ago. Evolve and adapt or die girls!

Well written! Very well written!


.

Will you say the same thing to the Americans and Europeans who keep whining about immigrants and how they are invading?

"Evolve and adapt or die girls! "

"Well written! Very well wrotten !"

So you think that the MAGA movement complaining about immigrants are full of girls?

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:
How in the world did we get to a place where the Colonizers were worried about the Colonized? Not once in the history of man was that a concern!
White European, black Africans, red Americans and any other society on earth migrated and colonized for their benefit and no other reason.

Sure, Spain and Portugal introduced Catholicism to their colonies, but it was as much to pacify as it was to "save" their colonized people.

The taking of the western United States, really all the States was about available land and natural resources that an indigenous population could be removed from. The same in Old Testament Palestine, the same for the movement of all American indigenous tribes, the same for the African indigenous cultures.

Ghengis Khan didn't give a shit about the well-being and happiness of those he colonized.

Our space exploration is no more or less than research in colonization. Where can we go next? If we can find other life in the universe that may we'll be a place we can live too!

I'm not being mean or cold hearted at all, but I personally don't give the slightest fuck about some historical injury and hurt feelings the Maori or the Pima of Arizona might have about being conquered centuries ago. Evolve and adapt or die girls!

quote:

Originally posted by Nakihunter:
Will you say the same thing to the Americans and Europeans who keep whining about immigrants and how they are invading?

"Evolve and adapt or die girls! "

"Well written! Very well wrotten !"

So you think that the MAGA movement complaining about immigrants are full of girls?

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:
How in the world did we get to a place where the Colonizers were worried about the Colonized? Not once in the history of man was that a concern!
White European, black Africans, red Americans and any other society on earth migrated and colonized for their benefit and no other reason.

Sure, Spain and Portugal introduced Catholicism to their colonies, but it was as much to pacify as it was to "save" their colonized people.

The taking of the western United States, really all the States was about available land and natural resources that an indigenous population could be removed from. The same in Old Testament Palestine, the same for the movement of all American indigenous tribes, the same for the African indigenous cultures.

Ghengis Khan didn't give a shit about the well-being and happiness of those he colonized.

Our space exploration is no more or less than research in colonization. Where can we go next? If we can find other life in the universe that may we'll be a place we can live too!

I'm not being mean or cold hearted at all, but I personally don't give the slightest fuck about some historical injury and hurt feelings the Maori or the Pima of Arizona might have about being conquered centuries ago. Evolve and adapt or die girls!

Europe and America are getting what they deserve!

quote:

Originally posted by Nakihunter:
Will you say the same thing to the Americans and Europeans who keep whining about immigrants and how they are invading?

"Evolve and adapt or die girls! "

"Well written! Very well wrotten !"

So you think that the MAGA movement complaining about immigrants are full of girls?

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:
How in the world did we get to a place where the Colonizers were worried about the Colonized? Not once in the history of man was that a concern!
White European, black Africans, red Americans and any other society on earth migrated and colonized for their benefit and no other reason.

Sure, Spain and Portugal introduced Catholicism to their colonies, but it was as much to pacify as it was to "save" their colonized people.

The taking of the western United States, really all the States was about available land and natural resources that an indigenous population could be removed from. The same in Old Testament Palestine, the same for the movement of all American indigenous tribes, the same for the African indigenous cultures.

Ghengis Khan didn't give a shit about the well-being and happiness of those he colonized.

Our space exploration is no more or less than research in colonization. Where can we go next? If we can find other life in the universe that may we'll be a place we can live too!

I'm not being mean or cold hearted at all, but I personally don't give the slightest fuck about some historical injury and hurt feelings the Maori or the Pima of Arizona might have about being conquered centuries ago. Evolve and adapt or die girls!

Yep. its fair enough to ask that question. I guess the difference is right now, the invasion is being allowed. A sign that the west is much more compassionate and modern than many of the nations these immigrants are moving from.
There are good examples of this throughout history. The Saxon and angle arrival in Britain seems to have been a benefit to those parties and the native inhabitants.
Rollos settling in Normandy.
The other difference between past colonisation and what you refer too, is that western colonisation and early conquering couldn't be stopped by the native inhabitants. The west can choose to stop immigration at any p[oint it wants.

And really classy highbrow stuff picking on a spelling mistake.
And you winder why it becomes personnel. You see the I and O are next to each other on the keyboard. A person with understanding and empathy instinctively knows its not a flaw in an individual, but rather a simple misplaced finger in typing, and an easy mistake to not pick it up.

quote:

Originally posted by shankspony:

quote:

Originally posted by Nakihunter:
Will you say the same thing to the Americans and Europeans who keep whining about immigrants and how they are invading?

"Evolve and adapt or die girls! "

"Well written! Very well wrotten !"

So you think that the MAGA movement complaining about immigrants are full of girls?

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:
How in the world did we get to a place where the Colonizers were worried about the Colonized? Not once in the history of man was that a concern!
White European, black Africans, red Americans and any other society on earth migrated and colonized for their benefit and no other reason.

Sure, Spain and Portugal introduced Catholicism to their colonies, but it was as much to pacify as it was to "save" their colonized people.

The taking of the western United States, really all the States was about available land and natural resources that an indigenous population could be removed from. The same in Old Testament Palestine, the same for the movement of all American indigenous tribes, the same for the African indigenous cultures.

Ghengis Khan didn't give a shit about the well-being and happiness of those he colonized.

Our space exploration is no more or less than research in colonization. Where can we go next? If we can find other life in the universe that may we'll be a place we can live too!

I'm not being mean or cold hearted at all, but I personally don't give the slightest fuck about some historical injury and hurt feelings the Maori or the Pima of Arizona might have about being conquered centuries ago. Evolve and adapt or die girls!

Yep. its fair enough to ask that question. I guess the difference is right now, the invasion is being allowed. A sign that the west is much more compassionate and modern than many of the nations these immigrants are moving from.

I'm skeptical about the "compassionate".

As I've thought for a while, the West generally finds it much less messy to take umbrage, shout outrage, shake a fist and feel compassion, "over there!" and by that I mean way way over there rather than the disaster on our front lawn. Case in point the American homeless. So yeah, my fellow citizens are all sweaty and lay awake at night fretting about Ukraine, Somalia and Sudan, Hamas shoot, sorry I meant the Palestinians because it doesn't affect them. Americans can blubber and cry over the Kurds because it doesn't alter their Sunday brunch in the slightest.

The same with illegal immigrants if those Americans live nowhere near the border. What and who is coming across the border doesn't matter to any of the gated communities in Massachusetts or Washington. Sanctuary Cities? That's a false front as the headlines have plainly exposed.

The West certainly does not feel compassionate about this 21st century invasion by the East and it certainly should be repulsed forcefully. It will not be repulsed because Westerners won't be bothered until Ghengis Khan is barbecuing their pet cats and dogs in their garden.

Well said Scott. I totally agree.

Some people need better education in history and actual facts.

In 1640 and a bit earlier the British started trading in india. The Portuguese came 140 years earlier and the Dutch were about 80 years earlier.

At that time India was the wealthiest nation on earth for 1500 years. It was the most advanced in science and technology. The West colonials came with inferior technology.

There was no compassion. Just the opposite. The Portuguese murdered 3 or 4 Indian bishops of the Orthodox church on the west coast, trying to convert them to Catholicism. That church was established from the times of Thomas the disciple of Jesus.

The British lied, cheated and back stabbed the various local rulers to cause conflict. The classic colonial policy of "dived andrule".

They were not welcome. They pretended to be guests and became treacherous invaders. Same in NZ.

The current immigration issue is a lot more complex. A huge majority of the eastern immigrants are legal. They are highly educated and skilled. Western nations NEED those immigrants to do those jobs. They NEED Indian, Korean, Philippino, Pakistani, Nigerean, doctors, nurses, engineer, IT specialists etc.

quote:

Originally posted by Nakihunter:
Well said Scott. I totally agree.

Some people need better education in history and actual facts.

In 1640 and a bit earlier the British started trading in india. The Portuguese came 140 years earlier and the Dutch were about 80 years earlier.

At that time India was the wealthiest nation on earth for 1500 years. It was the most advanced in science and technology. The West colonials came with inferior technology.

There was no compassion. Just the opposite. The Portuguese murdered 3 or 4 Indian bishops of the Orthodox church on the west coast, trying to convert them to Catholicism. That church was established from the times of Thomas the disciple of Jesus.

The British lied, cheated and back stabbed the various local rulers to cause conflict. The classic colonial policy of "dived andrule".

They were not welcome. They pretended to be guests and became treacherous invaders. Same in NZ.

The current immigration issue is a lot more complex. A huge majority of the eastern immigrants are legal. They are highly educated and skilled. Western nations NEED those immigrants to do those jobs. They NEED Indian, Korean, Philippino, Pakistani, Nigerean, doctors, nurses, engineer, IT specialists etc.

I don't believe there's many here that oppose legal immigration.

I've had the pleasure of meeting two "boat people", the label my parents generation gave Vietnamese immigrants from the fall of Saigon. Neat guys! Really neat guys! Their stories were riveting.

This last fall we imported a guy from Cameron to teach in our high school. I couldn't help myself, first time I saw him in the grocery store I had to go ripping over to him and talk him up while we walked around together. Again, neat, neat guy with lots of interesting things to say, im guessing he found me annoying.

I'm very certain pre and colonial India was awesome. I'm sorry I wasn't a British young officer in 1900. If my commanding officer wouldn't have sent me there I'd of stowed away.

I'm 100% for legal immigration, productive people that actually add to society!

Of course that's why we didn't let naki in......


.

quote:

Originally posted by JTEX:
I'm 100% for legal immigration, productive people that actually add to society!

Of course that's why we didn't let naki in......


.

J, I don't know you well enough to say, do you think you'd of been the young man to set sail for the Colonies? I sure would have. When I was 18 or 22 I was chomping at the bit to go, to go anywhere! I'd of been the first on the boat to Hispaniola, Cape Town, India, I don't care.

quote:

Originally posted by JTEX:
I'm 100% for legal immigration, productive people that actually add to society!

Of course that's why we didn't let naki in......


.

While I think most of what Naki posts is ridiculous I have a question for him.

Didn't the fact that colonialism happened in his home country open up the opportunity to immigrate to another former colony? Seems like colonialism did have 'some' benefits?

quote:

Originally posted by Nakihunter:
Well said Scott. I totally agree.

Some people need better education in history and actual facts.

In 1640 and a bit earlier the British started trading in india. The Portuguese came 140 years earlier and the Dutch were about 80 years earlier.

At that time India was the wealthiest nation on earth for 1500 years. It was the most advanced in science and technology. The West colonials came with inferior technology.

There was no compassion. Just the opposite. The Portuguese murdered 3 or 4 Indian bishops of the Orthodox church on the west coast, trying to convert them to Catholicism. That church was established from the times of Thomas the disciple of Jesus.

The British lied, cheated and back stabbed the various local rulers to cause conflict. The classic colonial policy of "dived andrule".

They were not welcome. They pretended to be guests and became treacherous invaders. Same in NZ.

The current immigration issue is a lot more complex. A huge majority of the eastern immigrants are legal. They are highly educated and skilled. Western nations NEED those immigrants to do those jobs. They NEED Indian, Korean, Philippino, Pakistani, Nigerean, doctors, nurses, engineer, IT specialists etc.

Firstly, if you are going to play spelling cop, you ought to mind your own. Note Nigerian, not “Nigerean”

Secondly, I rather doubt India was wholesale ahead technologically, or else as the larger, more technologically advanced, and (in India) closer power, they could not have lost.

Sociologically speaking India was way behind the eight ball with a considerable portion of its populace being consigned to not even third class status. While class mobility was limited in the west, it still existed. In India? Not so much then. An untouchable was… untouchable.

You want to call India as a whole larger, but India was hardly a nation-state. It was a collection of separate political entities back then. That India is a country as a whole now is probably one of those dubious blessings that the British gave them.

While India was ahead in some areas at the time (such as architecture) in others, particularly in engineering or physics) they were behind. Some things, given a huge population of people who were not considered an asset by their leaders, they had no need of- why develop industry when you have more than enough individual craftsmen that are near starving and socially cannot organize to demand better.

Another thing to ask is what was the per capita productivity and wealth of the two? I think that the colonial powers at the dawn of the age were more productive per capita, and they made sure it stayed that way.

The British certainly took advantage of the cultural system in India and leveraged their areas of technical superiority to control a much larger and certainly overall wealthier land.

Culturally the anverage Englishman was willing to kill and die for king and country. The average Indian was not willing to fight for his Rajah- that was only for the certain castes.

In essence, India’s grasp of social science was much less advanced than the west’s, even if the west had huge holes in it.

The way you put it, it’s an amazing improbability that the west would dominate India. In reality, it was a certainty until the people of India caught up in some areas. That does not deny that the Empire tried to keep them backwards for their own purposes.

The myth that an imperial power is just there to protect the ignorant admittedly was always a myth. The US probably came closest to benign imperialism, but even then it wasn’t really benign. The Philippines may have been better off than the Indians but it was only a matter of degree, not an absolute.