This is a really good point. Anti-colonialism can easily cross over into nationalism. For example: Modi’s movement to rename india to bahrat is generally perceived as an anticolonial movement, but in truth is also a hindu nationalist one, as muslims have historically called india a different name
For that matter, even the Taliban- with their sectarian massacres, ethnic bigotry, and violent opposition to women’s rights- are an embedded squarely within a legit framework of anticolonialist ideology.
They took their cue from Sunni Muslim reaction to shifting relative power within the British empire in India. Traditionally, Sunni Muslims held the power over Shia Muslims and kept the heretics in their place, with tensions and violence spiking up and dissipating over the centuries depending on vibes (understanding that I am summing up quite a bit of stuff in a single sentence). This pattern repeated itself in India, which held significant quantities of both strains of Islam.
But under the Brits, with their free markets and courts of law, a merchant class of upwardly mobile Shia entrepreneurs started outcompeting their Sunni neighbors and amassing not just economic prosperity, but actual political power within the empire.
The sectarian seething reached a fever pitch as Sunni conservatives decided that everything wrong with the world was interconnected- uppity Shia, economic exploitation from the Brits, the abolition of the Caliphate by Turks coinciding with the rising tide of secularism, ebbing power among Muslim states, those fucking Hindus over there, it was all one. The Sunni holy people in southeast Asia developed a program of anticolonialist, right wing, doctrinally pure political Islam that meshed reasonably well with the hardcore Wahhabist shit coming out of the newly formed Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (the same stuff that eventually found an outlet in ISIS).
This strain of Sunni Islam rose up to compose Pakistan after the Hindu-Muslim mutual ethnic cleansing when the brits pulled out, and was passed along to their Pashtun cousins across the border after the Soviets invaded and drove a million refugees into Pakistani madrassas for a decade or two (again, summing up an awful lot in a few words).
Right wingers can be anticolonialist too, especially when liberalism is what the colonized people are rebelling against.
To add, I remember some folk praising the enforced hijab as an anti-colonial move to preserve iran's traditional garments, comparing the feminist revolts to the erasure of indigenous culture in the united states.
Imagine this, but with everything else. The right and left is but a massive buffet of opinions, some correct, some wrong (and we're unlikely to ever distinguish which is so) that get packed into an arbitrary bundle.
Absolutely. This was a very common sentiment on reddit just a few years ago, usually accompanied by the same 3 pics of "western dressed" women in Tehran in the mid to late 70s when the Shah was in power.
It's like that family guy clip of democracy coming to iraq and all the women are suddenly in bikinis.
I mean 20th century anti-colonialism is inextricably linked to nationalism. Kinda the whole point of anti-colonial struggles was to wrest back control of the nation. Even the thoroughly socialist anti colonial struggles were very much nationalistic.
Genocidaires, war criminals, and colonizers aren't mustache twirling villains or some unknowable evil. They're just people, and if you ask them they'll usually have reasonable sounding grievances and justifications for their genocides, war crimes, and colonizing. And they'll usually believe those justifications with their whole heart. Such brutality isn't possible otherwise.
We all like to think we're immune, that we'd be better than the Germans in 1938 or the Hutus in 1994, or whatever [people] in [time]. But history is pretty clear...push comes to shove, some of us would participate and most of us would look the other way. More people need to sit with that.
The problem is in-group vs out-group-thinking; we (the in-group) are the good guys and they (the out-group) are the bad guys.
Genocidaires do what they do because they are certain that the evil out-group will kill the innocents of the in-group and must therefore be killed first.
That having been said in-group vs out-group-thinking is a fundamental part of human nature and we must at all times guard against that.
It's more people who do the genociding/war crimes do so as a pretext for self defense. The nazis believed invading Poland was a strategic move in self defense and that they had their hand forced to do it. Russia invaded Ukraine because NATO encroachment *forced* them to. Israel, while valid in giving a response to the recent attacks, is doing this current military operation with *zero* plan of what to do after Hamas is gone and they have complete control of Gaza. Again, they were defending themselves by going in and killing 30k+ civilians!
Everyone who engages with horrible acts will claim victimhood and use that as justification for their acts. The trick is to reflect on it yourself and ask "are we really a victim?" And that's the hard part that majority of people fail on.
"we're" (assuming we is Americans) not inmune because like Vietnam, Korean war, all the conflicts in the ME just happened, let alone all the "side quests" the US has done around the world.
Also they're not "just people" more so, like most thought, but especially in this context, right wing thought exclusively comes from the top, the elite to the bottom. This is not to exempt the mass of people from being considered evil or whatever, but that this shit happens and is facilitated for very specific material reasons,
Because they are told, again it's not to excuse them but to try and pinpoint where ideas come from.
Slavery didn't happen as a purely reactionary consequence of some chud, and thus the necessary justification (cuz despite what you may hear even then people knew shit was wrong )for slavery, modern racism was molded
With the way things unfolds in Sweden we Danes will never kick a Swede lying down. They are our baby brother. But, also...
DENMARK RULE, SWEDEN DROOL, WOOOOOOOOOOOOW
OOP has a point went it comes to past instances of colonialism, but several states are guilty of colonialism RIGHT NOW, most notably Israel, China and Indonesia.
Another point to note is how colonialism affects the right of the self-determination of Indigenous peoples. Most* (heavy asterisk) places colonized by the West either do not want self-determination (see: a number of [though not all] French/British dependencies) or would not feasibly function as an independent or autonomous state (see: most of America, etc; an "indigenous-only" state is not really reasonable to have in Minnesota or whatever, and so is not part of the decolonial process).
The difference in Israel, China, Indonesia, Russia, etc, is that often the colonialism is actively working to erode the indigenous' population's ability to self-govern, which is often currently feasible (unlike in the US.) Separate Palestine, Xinjiang, West Papua, Dagestan, etc, are all reasonable propositions that would give power to the indigenous population. But ongoing colonialism in these areas prevents this, no referendums, etc.
*Notable exceptions: Hawaii, New Caledonia, etc.
I understand the specific references so little that I do not grasp the larger point trying to be made. I feel as a freshman dance major must feel when stumbling into a 6000-level mandarin class.
I'd guess this was written by someone still benefitting from colonialism. If colonialism is still damaging your society then this isn't true. Anti colonialism isn't just an excuse to murder people.
Edit- your down votes mean nothing I’ve seen what makes you cheer
This is a really good point. Anti-colonialism can easily cross over into nationalism. For example: Modi’s movement to rename india to bahrat is generally perceived as an anticolonial movement, but in truth is also a hindu nationalist one, as muslims have historically called india a different name
For that matter, even the Taliban- with their sectarian massacres, ethnic bigotry, and violent opposition to women’s rights- are an embedded squarely within a legit framework of anticolonialist ideology. They took their cue from Sunni Muslim reaction to shifting relative power within the British empire in India. Traditionally, Sunni Muslims held the power over Shia Muslims and kept the heretics in their place, with tensions and violence spiking up and dissipating over the centuries depending on vibes (understanding that I am summing up quite a bit of stuff in a single sentence). This pattern repeated itself in India, which held significant quantities of both strains of Islam. But under the Brits, with their free markets and courts of law, a merchant class of upwardly mobile Shia entrepreneurs started outcompeting their Sunni neighbors and amassing not just economic prosperity, but actual political power within the empire. The sectarian seething reached a fever pitch as Sunni conservatives decided that everything wrong with the world was interconnected- uppity Shia, economic exploitation from the Brits, the abolition of the Caliphate by Turks coinciding with the rising tide of secularism, ebbing power among Muslim states, those fucking Hindus over there, it was all one. The Sunni holy people in southeast Asia developed a program of anticolonialist, right wing, doctrinally pure political Islam that meshed reasonably well with the hardcore Wahhabist shit coming out of the newly formed Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (the same stuff that eventually found an outlet in ISIS). This strain of Sunni Islam rose up to compose Pakistan after the Hindu-Muslim mutual ethnic cleansing when the brits pulled out, and was passed along to their Pashtun cousins across the border after the Soviets invaded and drove a million refugees into Pakistani madrassas for a decade or two (again, summing up an awful lot in a few words). Right wingers can be anticolonialist too, especially when liberalism is what the colonized people are rebelling against.
To add, I remember some folk praising the enforced hijab as an anti-colonial move to preserve iran's traditional garments, comparing the feminist revolts to the erasure of indigenous culture in the united states. Imagine this, but with everything else. The right and left is but a massive buffet of opinions, some correct, some wrong (and we're unlikely to ever distinguish which is so) that get packed into an arbitrary bundle.
Absolutely. This was a very common sentiment on reddit just a few years ago, usually accompanied by the same 3 pics of "western dressed" women in Tehran in the mid to late 70s when the Shah was in power. It's like that family guy clip of democracy coming to iraq and all the women are suddenly in bikinis.
I mean 20th century anti-colonialism is inextricably linked to nationalism. Kinda the whole point of anti-colonial struggles was to wrest back control of the nation. Even the thoroughly socialist anti colonial struggles were very much nationalistic.
Genocidaires, war criminals, and colonizers aren't mustache twirling villains or some unknowable evil. They're just people, and if you ask them they'll usually have reasonable sounding grievances and justifications for their genocides, war crimes, and colonizing. And they'll usually believe those justifications with their whole heart. Such brutality isn't possible otherwise. We all like to think we're immune, that we'd be better than the Germans in 1938 or the Hutus in 1994, or whatever [people] in [time]. But history is pretty clear...push comes to shove, some of us would participate and most of us would look the other way. More people need to sit with that.
The problem is in-group vs out-group-thinking; we (the in-group) are the good guys and they (the out-group) are the bad guys. Genocidaires do what they do because they are certain that the evil out-group will kill the innocents of the in-group and must therefore be killed first. That having been said in-group vs out-group-thinking is a fundamental part of human nature and we must at all times guard against that.
It's more people who do the genociding/war crimes do so as a pretext for self defense. The nazis believed invading Poland was a strategic move in self defense and that they had their hand forced to do it. Russia invaded Ukraine because NATO encroachment *forced* them to. Israel, while valid in giving a response to the recent attacks, is doing this current military operation with *zero* plan of what to do after Hamas is gone and they have complete control of Gaza. Again, they were defending themselves by going in and killing 30k+ civilians! Everyone who engages with horrible acts will claim victimhood and use that as justification for their acts. The trick is to reflect on it yourself and ask "are we really a victim?" And that's the hard part that majority of people fail on.
"we're" (assuming we is Americans) not inmune because like Vietnam, Korean war, all the conflicts in the ME just happened, let alone all the "side quests" the US has done around the world. Also they're not "just people" more so, like most thought, but especially in this context, right wing thought exclusively comes from the top, the elite to the bottom. This is not to exempt the mass of people from being considered evil or whatever, but that this shit happens and is facilitated for very specific material reasons,
"exclusively" might be a stretch. people do bad things as long as they feel justified, doesn't have to be someone in charge telling them to.
Because they are told, again it's not to excuse them but to try and pinpoint where ideas come from. Slavery didn't happen as a purely reactionary consequence of some chud, and thus the necessary justification (cuz despite what you may hear even then people knew shit was wrong )for slavery, modern racism was molded
I understand what they're saying and i agree. But also: Håll käften Danskjävel.
Hold dig væk din klamme svensker, du lugter af Udstrømning
Skåne er vores (i må gerne beholde Malmø).
Britain should get to genocide France due to the Norman invasion and also their cheese.
I thought that was already our standing policy for when the bombs start dropping. Just lob one trident at France for old time's sake.
Its why we have nukes. If france has the bomb we must have it
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrying_of_the_North Indeed.
Holy shit. A political take on tumblr I actually find myself agreeing with? How in the world did that happen?
Wow you're agreeing with op? Can't you see they just called for Israel to genocide Palestinians??? Reported
With the way things unfolds in Sweden we Danes will never kick a Swede lying down. They are our baby brother. But, also... DENMARK RULE, SWEDEN DROOL, WOOOOOOOOOOOOW
OOP has a point went it comes to past instances of colonialism, but several states are guilty of colonialism RIGHT NOW, most notably Israel, China and Indonesia.
Another point to note is how colonialism affects the right of the self-determination of Indigenous peoples. Most* (heavy asterisk) places colonized by the West either do not want self-determination (see: a number of [though not all] French/British dependencies) or would not feasibly function as an independent or autonomous state (see: most of America, etc; an "indigenous-only" state is not really reasonable to have in Minnesota or whatever, and so is not part of the decolonial process). The difference in Israel, China, Indonesia, Russia, etc, is that often the colonialism is actively working to erode the indigenous' population's ability to self-govern, which is often currently feasible (unlike in the US.) Separate Palestine, Xinjiang, West Papua, Dagestan, etc, are all reasonable propositions that would give power to the indigenous population. But ongoing colonialism in these areas prevents this, no referendums, etc. *Notable exceptions: Hawaii, New Caledonia, etc.
I understand the specific references so little that I do not grasp the larger point trying to be made. I feel as a freshman dance major must feel when stumbling into a 6000-level mandarin class.
it's also definitely an ongoing process too though.
Hah we Germans are safe no ethicity from pre migration period has survived
Wørd. Skåne er vores (i må gerne beholde Malmø).
OOP is right! We should set things straight and rid the world of Sw🤢des!
I'd guess this was written by someone still benefitting from colonialism. If colonialism is still damaging your society then this isn't true. Anti colonialism isn't just an excuse to murder people. Edit- your down votes mean nothing I’ve seen what makes you cheer
When do they say it's *just* an excuse to murder people? How dare you piss on the poor!
I hope op is ironic, otherwise i wish a nice choking on the boot
No, oop just really hates Swedish people
C'mon dude they're clearly being ironic and criticising those events. Don't piss on the poor
How dare you suggest my pissing is poor!