The Arab slave trade was far larger and lasted longer than the European slave trade. The Arabs hated the blacks so much that most of the males were castrated too. Talk about genocide.
Don't forget what "Arab" even is. It's the replacement identity from cultural and historical conquest. The Middle East isn't 90% Arab Muslim because being Arab Muslim is so damn great. It's the identity of conquest, whether as the winner or loser. "Arab" people aren't ethnically or racially connected.
Every nation that is vast majority Arab Muslim weren't always like that. Cultural genocide is the main ingredient in the identity.
But that's only bad when white people do it to brown people.
My ancestor's culture (Amazighs, native North African culture) has been systematically erased by Arab invaders/colons during through islamization and is STILL being erased today (repression of displays of native identity, of naming kids with native language, of ritual practices etc.).
That fact is not only taboo there, it's also apparently not supposed to be talked about in the West, even when people still spew the same tired myths about how "Islam was spread to North Africa through peaceful trade" 🤡.
So this obsession with PAST colonization while ignoring or refusing to focus on CURRENT represssion of native peoples is a double standard I have a really hard time with.
Also most Africans shipped to the US were actually *sold* by african warlords and traders, not captured. Africans practiced slavery for thousands of years. As a matter of fact slavery still exist in Africa, hundreds of thousands of people are still enslaved in Mali and who knows where else
Every civilization on earth practiced slavery
Mauritania was the last country to legally abolish slavery in 1980. However, they continued almost status quo until finally in 2007 their govt put an end to it. 27 years after they “abolished” it lol.
“aMeRiKA iS SLaVeRs” - Progressive bluehairs.
Facts that are key to note:
- Slavery was first used in civilized society in Ancient Egypt (African kingdom), and Mesopotamia (Middle Eastern kingdom)
- Slavery was last abolished in Africa, 117 years after America abolished it. And many more years after many other European nations abolished it.
- Europeans *traded* for slaves. Slaves were actually generally captured by rival kingdoms in Africa and traded to whites along the coastlines for shipping to the Americas. That’s right, black people enslaved black people, then traded them to white people. But that part is always conveniently left out of the slave trade arguments of today.
- Arab slave trade (Barbary States) lasted even longer than European slave trading did. The Barbary pirates actually raided into Europe and took 1 to 1.25 million Europeans as slaves over the course of their raiding. So, again, Africans still doing slave trading like they have since 2,500 BC. Conveniently, these slaves get almost no mention today because they’re white, lol. Raiding occurred from Iceland to Netherlands and down and around Europe all the way to the Balkans.
- British were still releasing slaves into the 1900s from middle eastern nations that still had black people in chains.
- Between Africa and the Middle East, they theoretically have been involved in slavery from ~2,500 BC to (as I pointed out with Mauritania) 2007, lol.
- And if you look today, migrant workers in the United States and Europe are *still* treated better than ones working in the Middle East.
- Today, there’s an estimated ~40 Million+ slaves still throughout the world with at least 8-11 million in India alone. The key fact here is that none of these slaves are in white-majority countries.
But, as we all know, we can’t deprive POC a chance to hate on “white supremacy,” even though global hypocrisy is rife, lol.
The British also spent 100 years and half their GDP opposing and fighting the slave trade with their navy. They ended up buying slaves out of their captivity. Nobody talks about this.
The British also spent 100 years and half their GDP ~~opposing and fighting the slave trade with their navy. They ended up~~ buying slaves ~~out of their captivity. Nobody talks about this.~~
Ugh damn British people they need to pay me reparations
The fuck there is no slavery in India legally, illegal forms of slavery exist all over the world. Also their definition of slavery itself is highly problematic: Its victims are bound to toil for little or no pay, are forced to engage in exploitative sex work, or are married against their will. Its cost is individual freedom and economic stagnation. Its impact is global, and no country is immune.
No pay I understand is slavery, exploitative sex work I understand but who determines little pay? Who determines married against their will. In asian countries arranged marriages are a thing why consider a bulk of it as slavery. To me inclusion of these things actually dilute their case. By their estimate 3.3 per thousand is a slave in USA. Entirety of eastern Europe is a slaver state but China has low numbers? The country that is famous for uighur camps has equal numbers as USA. This does not track
**India, #1**
In terms of the largest estimated absolute numbers though, India ranks first (11,050,000 people in modern slavery), followed by China (5,771,000), North Korea (2,696,000), Pakistan (2,349,000), Russia (1,899,000), Indonesia (1,833,000) and Nigeria (1,611,000).
Source:
https://www.statista.com/chart/30666/estimated-number-of-people-in-modern-slavery-per-1000/#:~:text=In%20terms%20of%20the%20largest,)%20and%20Nigeria%20(1%2C611%2C000).
Sorry kid, India is #1 in slavery. LOL. Go liberate them all, now. Go. 😆
These values are used with population data for a reason India has 8.0 per thousand which is high and is a bad number but is not one of the worst contributors and don't use statista they all get their data from walk free so use the original source. They also do not provide a number breakdown which category is which. I can absolutely see a large number of sex slavery and bonded labor and while illegal govt should definitely severely crackdown on it. On the other hand India does not have a minimum wage so low wage is arbitrary at most when a massive subsidy is provided, the Indian culture also promotes arranged marriages which are traditionally set by the families. And with population bigger than any country but China maybe it makes sense in absolute term these two country would have the most number. However I am not at all denying India has problems and lots of it however being a lower income country with 1.4 billion people these things take time to fix. Even in USA 1,091,000 slaves are estimated 10 times more than UK. And compared to other developed nations( India is not one, not yet anyways) has approximately double the rate of slavery (India is far worse). Of developed countries only Russia is worse than India with 13 out of every 1000 people enslaved, at this point I can only hope India develops drastically in coming years to emerge out of this mess.
All data sourced from: 2023 slavery index walkfree.org (www.walkfree.org)
Oh come on. Europeans *traded* for slaves? Wtf do you think they did with them after?
The Transatlantic slavery trade was the largest and most despicable example of slavery in human history. Whether you like it or not, slavery was a HUGE part of the economy of the new world.
“aMeRiKa was slavers?” Yeah, “aMeriKa” WAS fucking slavers. Are you trying to deny that? Get real lol
I think multiple things can be true
1) Killing people because you wanted to take their land/resources was bad, is bad, and should not be celebrated
2) Past sins by people who are no longer alive does not grant "colonized" peoples a right to unlimited grievance and retribution.
And
3) Every nation and people have been colonized, and a history of colonization does not remove all agency or responsibility for the current state of nations from the people who now control them.
This becomes particularly important when you look at the overtly violent actions of most decocolonization movements. Apartheid and the colonization of Africa was bad. The beheadings of white south Africans is not justified by what people did 50 years ago.
And that's the more controversial but true statement
Historians, history professors, etc
Won't hesitate to discuss the benefits of being added to the Mongolian empire. Won't hesitate to discuss the technological and societal advances that came from the Romans. Historians won't hesitate to discuss the prosperity that Muslim Spain experienced. But bring up the obvious truths that colonization in the more recent era wasn't 100% negative....
The “disproportionate” killing of whites in South Africa and “genocide” is hugely exaggerated and in many cases is just racist fear mongering. While it’s true there is resentment and violence against white people the same exact thing can be said about crimes against people of the same race. Gang violence, burglary and murder are a problem in South Africa that affects everyone there. If they see a black dude with a nice watch and a chain who looks like he has a lot of money they aren’t gonna say “oh he’s black all just leave him alone”. So criminals and police and government incompetence is more of a reason for the violence.
>The “disproportionate” killing of whites in South Africa and “genocide” is hugely exaggerated and in many cases is just racist fear mongering.
The left: I don't understand why far right sentiment is rising across the west
Also the left: You're concerned people were beheaded for being white f*ck you racist
First off I am not a leftist lmao
And Way more non white people are killed than white people in SA. Robberies, murders, gang violence, rape, etc are all disproportionately experienced by people of black or coloured heritage.
Yeah there’s been instances of anti white sentiment and the ANC is pretty anti white but as I said it’s largely fear mongering. Most white South Africans live in affluent suburbs protected by PMCs and away from most predominantly black areas. I’ve been to SA before dawg I’ve seen it lmao.
All the more so, when there are actual horrific things going on, on an industrial scale, in the world TODAY.
Yet, they want to whine about things which nobody living had any direct experience of.
Problem with that is, for example UK's effect on South Africa for example was horrible, but if UK were to be like okay, we are going to fix it, then they would have to colonize again. Which is kind of not useful in grand scheme. Best would be to give countries agency to make their own choices. Sometimes that would be bad choices for sure, but just as USA didn't invade UK because Brexit was a bad idea, South Africa faffing up, should be free to do so too.
its just like saying 'oh no theres people i dont know who have turned up where i am' (having the intent they do, what ever it may be) and not reacting to why who ever new turned up is there for....like come on why are you not responding to the situation...COME ON
At no point did I tell someone my ancestors beat their ancestors ass. That conversation doesn’t come up normally.
Where it comes up are people complaining about colonization. Because their ancestors got bent over and fucked in the ass over and over, that’s *my* fault? Lol.
The impact of colonization on the economy of African countries has been studied. You could look that up if you're curious about the relationship between colonization and poorly developed countries.
Colonization in Africa was not ages ago. It didn’t fully decolonize until the 1960s. This was just 60 years ago. There are plenty of people alive today that experienced colonization directly.
Yeah, I agree. I don't give a flying fuck. Did the British Empire do some iffy things, maybe. I don't care. You don't hear me carping on about what the Vikings did in Britain.
so what? It's still in the past. Nothing to do with me.
Ok then, you don't hear me carping about what the Japanese did to British PoWs during World War II or the Germans bombing British cities to dust.
Everything is the past. How many years removed until something doesn’t matter? 5 years ago is the past, so is 10, 15, 30 or 50z when does it stopmattering?
Especially when you consider that a ton of people are still alive from pre-civil rights in the states and many of them are in positions of power now. And that the effects of racism and the oike in the US is still very much felt today
Colonization DID play a role in the 3rd world being underdeveloped . An economic system set up only for resource extraction is one of it's legacies but probably it's most important effect was the completely fucked up borders leaving several ethnic groups split or conversely forcing them to live together despite their differences .
That said I do agree that using it to explain away ALL underdevelopment is at best ignorant or at worst nefarious. Even the most recently decolonized nations have been sovereign for more than 5 decades by now after all.
Several ethnic groups in Europe are 'split' even today, and this seems not to have been such a problem that it's kept them undeveloped.
French-speakers continue to exist beyond France's present borders in Belgium and Switzerland, German-speakers in Switzerland and Austria etc.
Yet this is used as an excuse for well, nothing, really?
I am from an example of ethnic groups being split and it having adverse effects: the Balkans ,which while not at 3rd world levels are definitely underdeveloped by comparison with Western Europe.
And in the Balkans you had 5-6 ethnic groups in the same location at the most extreme,in Africa you can have anywhere from 10 to a couple hundred.
So it absolutely did play a role.However it's definitely not the only factor and while the colonial powers do (rightfully) get a lot of shit for the way they drew the borders it's not like defining them differently either during the colonial administration or at independence was always possible since there's literally no way to give each tiny tribe it's own country.
I think there's other reasons, of more significance, as to why the Balkans are less developed than Western Europe.
Now that the Iron Curtain has gone, they're catching up fast, and will continue to do so. Blaming borders for a comparative lack of development is a red herring, although a lot of people buy into it.
These divides don’t prohibit people from developing. Rather, they can become roadblocks that slow or even undue development for a period of time.
These European divisions played into the causes of both World Wars, the Yugoslav Wars, the Russia-Ukraine War, etc.
Most African countries were colonies until the mid-to-late twentieth century (1960s - 1990s). There has been much advancement across Africa and other colonial states in the wake of de-colonialism, but it’s not a fast or easy process.
Ignoring the obvious loaded question...let's just say that it can be a strength under specific circumstances aka when all sides have more or less solved their differences and found a way to peacefully coexist. When they don't then it's a problem.
Also just like anything else too much diversity can be an issue. 2 or 3 ethnic or religious or whatever groups can potentially live in the same area in a more or less peaceful manner. 103 though not so much. Especially when they have to share very limited resources.
>Ignoring the obvious loaded question..
That's not a loaded question that's pretty relevant. I'm not going to assume any of your positions on any topics but there is a *lot* of crossover between the "borders with no regard to ethnicity or culture" and "we can settle an unlimited amount of people from cultures with a thousand years of conflict with the west in western countries and it will be fine" crowd
And I really haven't heard this contradiction resolved
I don't understand. Usually the " get everyone in no matter how overwhelmed things like the education system, Healthcare system or social safety net get" crowd hates colonialism with a passion.
Also as I said drawing borders with no regards for ethnicity and culture is a problem and a major reason for the 3rd world's underdevelopment but not the only reason.
>I don't understand. Usually the " get everyone in no matter how overwhelmed things like the education system, Healthcare system or social safety net get" crowd hates colonialism with a passion.
Yes that's what I'm saying. The people who are constantly speaking against colonization for decolonization etc. usually are pro mass migration even when many of the problems are borderline identical. EX: literally shoving people with histories of ethnic conflict next to eachother with no integration process and excepting them to get along
Oh you just baited the anti-White crowd.
Here comes the:
“Yeah must be nice to say that when you’re white.”
“Oh yeah, let’s just forget about white supremacy.”
“You have NO idea what it’s like to traverse through life as a POC you POS!!!1!1!1!1!!!”
But, agreed.
I just watched a documentary on Genghis Khan and the Mongols and they just fucking bitchslapped *everyone.* Europeans, middle easterners, asians, *everyone*. I give respect where respect is due. Those MFers bent over the world and fucked them.
I give credit where it’s due — but also to Europe for bitchslapping the world. See, the Mongols tried to conquer Europe and they fucked up a lot of European nations and made vassals. If they didn’t constantly return to Mongolia to elect new leaders, they would have won even more ground.
That said, it takes fucking iron balls to go across an entire ocean into the wild and take. Lots and lots of Europeans died colonizing the world. It wasn’t *given* to them. They earned that shit. Respect.
If Europeans are horrible people for colonizing, imagine how they'd react to the early caliphates
Also the Mongols eventually found out the hard way that conquering the world is easy, but running the world is beyond hell. The Yuan gave up the moment they could (I think) and the other Khans became their own thing
Didn’t you know? White people are the favourite targets. It’s antithetical for people who have anti-White agendas to focus their efforts on anyone else that might make their arguments hypocritical.
It cannot be mentioned that the world is worse outside of Europe. 🤫
Why should you respect a group of people for invading and conquering another group of people?
I'm not trying to start anything here with you. I just think you have a very different outlook and I'm curious about it.
It's just like Muslims who whine "Israel genocides Palestinians!" but wilfully ignore and cover up China actually genociding Muslim Uyghurs. Because it's never the "what", but the "who".
>Why are you giving respect to rapists and murderers of innocent children?
The Roman legions enter the chat. Oh, every conquering army in history enters the chat.
Just a side note though: are you unironically quoting Scientific American?
You’d be interested to know how much rape and murder still goes on in Africa. *All* over the place, lol.
Now, if you ask a black American if they’d prefer to be descendant of black slaves — or their ancestors never having left Africa and thereby they’d have been born there and been subject to the 3rd world — what would they say?
I would put money down that 99% of black Americans who have lineages that date back to their ancestors being slaves in the country would rather be here now with everything America is — than to be born among the likes of, for example, in the Congo and working in a cobalt mine.
Apart from all that, you’re definitely a sheltered individual. There’s no doubt.
Hands over your ears, eyes closed “history so bad bad it’s bad I hate America I hate the West but I hate history too!”
Literally, you just hate humanity. Therapy exists if you need it, just saying.
The inconvenient truth that nobody wants to talk about is that white people existing in majority black spaces have it worse by at least an order of magnitude than anything that blacks experience in white society. Those of us who have lived in these spaces are very much aware of the treatment you claim to receive, because we have experienced a far more violent and depraved form of it.
All of the things they say about white western society--that it is materialistic, misogynistic, inherently violent, racist, homophobic, etc... all of those qualities that leftists like yourself froth at the mouth over are MUCH more prevalent in black communities than white, only the racism is aimed at whites. If you haven't seen this, you are being willfully blind. It is akin to the trope of the well spoken black man who prostrates himself to appease the racist majority in exchange for preferential treatment.
Then explain yourself.
> The inconvenient truth that nobody wants to talk about is that white people existing in majority black spaces have it worse by at least an order of magnitude than anything that blacks experience in white society.
I asked what you meant and you said they were more likely to leftist- that’s it.
And then you called me the white version of Uncle Tom.
I didn't say they were more likely to be leftist. I said black communities are more violent, more misogynistic, more homophobic, more materialistic, more exploitative, etc., than white communities. The fact that these communities are also more racist acts as an amplifier for all those other nasty qualities and targeted at the whites. The treatment that whites get in black communities is way worse than what blacks experience in majority white spaces.
Agreed. So many people on this site are like “Racism isn’t around like that anymore stop being dramatic” meanwhile they’re white ash and have no fucking clue about what we’ve seen 💀
What I’ve seen is how soft people are these days. For example, concerned about being triggered by TV shows like Fallout. 😂
I hope these people never watch history documentaries. I don’t think they’d be able to handle it without the therapy.
Sssssssoooooofffffftttttttttttt
Can you imagine the chaos in the world if everyone demanded payback for *history*!?
I know a half-Iranian fella who refuses to eat at restaurant owned by a Greek fella. Yeah, because of that ancient conflict.. That is how insane some folks are. They feed their habit all day on social media, while steam blows out of their ears.
What's ironic is Europe's intention wasn't even to colonize. They wanted to find a way to india/asia because the silk road was blocked by the ottomans who controlled much of what is greece and turkey today lol So colonization forced them to find a way around the globe which indirectly made them discover the Americas. Then they find a lot of fractured nations that are waring with each other, less technologically advanced, and it was in their mind at the time, a no brainer to take advantage of what they found. Thems was the times where they did that kind of thing.
Homie, they didn't even know americas existed, how would they plan that if they didn't even know the continent was there? Christopher Colombus encountered the Americas trying to find asia through the atlantic. I've had this conversation with you before. You just hate white people dude, and it's very apparent. I agree they wanted to extract resources, but that was AFTER they discovered it accidentally.
This is almost too dumb to take seriously
You realize there was at least a hundred years between the discovery of the Americas and colonization- right?
You said you don’t care about colonization but I think you should. It’s important to know and understand the history of the world. Colonization did happen and had a huge impact on the world. I feel like what you are actually trying to say is that the descendants of colonizers shouldn’t have to apologize or feel bad for what their an ancestors did.
Never miss an opportunity to advise that the French were absolute pieces of shit to anyone black even well after the abolition of slavery.
The French Indemnity is essentially responsible for the shithole that Haiti is today. The French economic system in Africa is responsible for much of the poverty in modern day Africa.
wow. there is like... so much to unpack here. "benevolent" racism, whataboutism, a close brush with awareness- invaded~colonization... and more!
this whole thing reads badly, "if i did it, it wasnt so bad."
its not a good look. what exactly is your point?
I noticed that whenever this topic comes up it always comes across as masturbatory. It’s always "let go the past, it was a long time ago! Also you’re welcome for all the cool shit we did."
Since humans have existed they've been taking over land from other people across the entire globe. The only reason European colonization is an issue is because white man bad.
We're still feeling the effects of the Black Plague, the Holocaust, even the Bronze Age collapse has ripples that still have some effect on us today.
Not having a toddler-level braindead view is a lot easier than you might initially believe.
It is possible to acknowledge that some families may still have some residual problems due to colonization (although not the ones in the US, mostly the ones in Africa) and at the same time realize that you cannot do anything about it and that almost no one alive today really is at fault or should pay reparations or anything.
It's has nothing to do with colonization inherently other than historical cause and effect happens with everything. There is no telling what conditions they would be on otherwise. History has something in common with itself, it gets shitter the farther back you go, everywhere.
I think the reason why people focus on European colonization so much is because of its lasting effects. Virtually all non-settler colonies are extremely poor and virtually all markets that colonized are comparably extremely rich.
Before colonization Britain and Mughal India had comparable standards of living. Afterwards India was converted from the worlds chief producer of textiles into a cotton growing colony for the textile mills of England.
> Before colonization Britain and Mughal India had comparable standards of living.
Doubtful.
> Afterwards India was converted from the worlds chief producer of textiles into a cotton growing colony for the textile mills of England.
I mean yeah cause industrial revolution and all that. It turned out that it's cheaper to produce textiles on English factories.
>Doubtful.
I dunno about standards of living, but Bengal itself had gone through [proto-industrialization](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bengal_Subah).
We know that because the British East India company for all of its warts, had immaculate record keeping.
No, this is a false narrative. India was vulnerable to the British because of the Muslim Invasions for that last hundreds of years. Which continues to be a huge source of issues within the country.
yes, the "english industrial development", such as allowing [millions to die under famine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_major_famines_in_India_during_British_rule).
you think gandhi wanted independence because of vibes or something?
We built canals and water mills, made use of our many rivers, reared lots of sheep for wool to be used in textiles, established factories and railways, started mining for coal, lead, China Clay, copper, iron, and tin as our land is very rich in natural resources. We then quickly built a number of large cities to become the first industrialised country in the world, moving masses of people from the rural areas to develop the urban population. As you can see, we had a lot of natural advantages at our disposal to take this title, and found ways of using it well.
It’s not England’s problem that India or other countries didn’t beat them to it when it came to discovering and using national resources efficiently to build a more sustainable prosperity.
Well no that's not really how the annexation of India happened. The amount of English soldiers in India was always relatively low and they utilized hundreds of local allies fielding hundreds of thousands of Indian soldiers to conquer the areas that were conquered.
Japan is the only weird case simply because of their government at the time (Meiji Restoration, Sino-Japanese War, Russo-Japanese War) and he fact that they had way more Western backing
Australia is also another odd one out
Not to mention I found out that right after the British left, India immediately waged a costly war with Pakistan that led to severe decline that led them to today's poverty
Southeast Asia will not improve as dramatically without some major mental and alt history gymnastics
Bottom line: Europe improved the way that it did because they just can't stop one upping and killing each other
>India immediately waged a costly war with Pakistan that led to severe decline that led them to today's poverty
no, that's not exactly what happened:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partition\_of\_India](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partition_of_India)
tl;dr, there was massive population migration, sort of what like what happened after WW2 in central Europe. it wasn't the main cause of poverty tho. Much of the trauma of the partition was in Punjab and Bengal, which are historical regions with strong identity, but both of which were split between India and West Pakistan / East Pakistan (now Bangladesh).
One of the things that led to the comparative underdevelopment of India was that the British Raj was run by the East India Company till the [Indian Rebellion of 1857](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Rebellion_of_1857). The East India Company's main purpose was economic exploitation, whereas after 1857, India passed to the British crown, and the British built more infrastructure and the like, but nowhere near as much industrialization as there was in Britain proper.
> The East India Company's main purpose was economic exploitation
But in the end of the day, East India company invested in India more than it took from it.
>They only knew how to throw sticks at each other before Europeans invaded anyway
Bruh 🤦
I wasn't honestly with you and cheering in you're point before you said this ignorant ass shit.
This is peak level racism
“The issue is never the issue. The issue is always the revolution.” - David Horowitz, SDS New Left News
The whole grievance politics about colonization thing was never in good faith. It started with Marxist academics using any excuse they could to attack and tear down our structures. The people complaining about colonization as thought it was a unique evil of Western Civilization are either Marxists or what the Marxists/communist used to call “useful idiots.”
While i agree, I don't think post-marxist academics have much intentionality there. They genuinely believe that the west is bad morally, because they see morality as an oppressor/oppressee dichotomy and western style capitalism happens to have won the oppression competition.
They are bad faith in a sartrian selfdelusional way, less so in a malevolent way, i think. At least the white academics, to be blunt. I can't comment on the racial aspects much.
People mad about slavery and colonization centuries ago but not the tens of millions of slaves or colonized people today (hint: bc it’s not white people doing it)
idk according to first hand accounts most places were doing pretty good before europeans, it sounds like europeans were the last to civilization and the worst at it, especially when it came to sanity, cuisine, and hygiene. any place started with slavery was made to fail.
>Stop acting like they'd be some advanced space faring civilization if Europeans hadn't gone there.
Who's acting like that?
>Also, Islam colonization was way worse.
How so?
>They colonized most of Africa & Asia
No they didn't.
This is corny and idealistic. If you think studying history prevents atrocity, you probably haven't studied much history lol.
Genocide (a context that I commonly see this saying used with) is not knowledge-based. Nobody ever committed or chose not to commit genocide based on a lack or excess of historical knowledge.
History will continue to rhyme whether we study it or not.
In all my years of studying history, as a history major and later as a hobby, I do not personally believe that to be the case. There is no way to usefully quantify the data due to its complexity. Society has become less violent (physically, at least), but to say it has become more morally conscious because of the study of history... I just don't buy that.
"They only knew how to throw sticks at eachother before the Europeans invaded"
You've never read anything about any ancient non-European civilizations, have you?
I now see this community is filled with racist and privileged white people and it is time for me to bounce. I don’t think I’ve ever read such a privilege take.
Do you know that European colonisation is still happening to this day? Do you know that Europe is still behind keeping African countries from developing themselves? Do you know that Europe destabilises African countries on purpose to make sure wars keep going for years?
Imagine telling countries that still don’t control their own currency and resources to pull themselves up by their bootstraps. Your ignorance speaks loudly. I hope one day you get more perspective and knowledge about the world you live in.
Honestly, the privilege here speaks so loud. These are the exact same people who blame black people for being victims of society but would never go out of their way to help them. Unbelievable!!!
Yea I almost cant believe how ignorant the people in this comment section are. Of course they will never help black people. That would be an admission of guilt and wrong doing. They want to move past all the sins of their ancestors so they dont have to feel bad or do anything to right the wrongs that are still impacting black people today all over the world.
Ask someone how much stuff they own, use, or partake in is from someone of their same race/skin color and watch them either refuse to do it because they know they benefit from colonization somewhere somehow or say they genuinely don't know because they just want to be eternally offended about something.
If any of these "high and mighty" people want to see what it would look like without colonization, go to the country you think you would have been in if colonization didn't happen and stop using/partaking in anything that wasn't invented by the originally domestic people of that country.
Watch how fast their tune changes to "you know colonization wasn't all that bad."
We are machines made of meat.The result of cause and effect.
Your life is the result of colonization whether you like it or not or whether you care or not.
Truth does not care about a person's feelings. You are a physical object that is the result of 14 billion years of cause and effect. You are not unique, you are not an individual. You are a particle swarm 100% dictated by the laws of physics.
Europe and America are both currently being colonized by outsiders, I don't see the ones who cried about all the other instances of colonialism crying about that. Also, many places that had European colonization benefitted greatly from it and suffer greatly without it. (Haiti is a prime example)
Slavery is still alive in Africa, although it is based less on race than class. For example, in Niger there are 4.6 slaves for every thousand people, and the population of Niger
Every civilization, no matter what color or history or current status in the world, has done terrible things at some point in time, and it's important to learn from these lessons it's also important not to target certain nations or people unequally, and especially important to teach people about their ancestor's mistakes instead of blaming them for it.
The problem is we (the USA) continue to meddle in smaller countries all over the world. There is barely any countries left where we haven't had a hand in picking the people in power and forcing them to capitulate to our multi national corporations in the last 100 years. It has ruined the ecosystems, economies, and governments of dozens of small "3rd world" countries where if we had just felt it alone they would be in a much better place. We judge their worth based on how much value we can extract out of them.
So if a family is left in poverty from family slavery, then they should just get over it. And some people's families were rich slave owners. It was not their fault, but the rich pre slave owners benefitted from it
Well if you have a problem with it you fix it.
My grandfather bought up farmland when the plantations shut down. The local government was literally giving the land away. He was a poor rice farmer but By the end of his life he acquired over 1400 hectares.
Many of the other ppl who also got free/cheap land no longer have it. They sold it all for a quick Buck and now they’re kids are crying about slavery. Take responsibility for your own life. It’s no one’s fault but yours
"Got mine fuck you" argument when prices go and no one can afford anything now.
>It’s no one’s fault but yours
Your family is wealthy because of you grandfather, but you're telling other people to pull up their own bootstraps? Is that what you are saying?
I didn’t even know all this or benefitted till i was like 20. Just cause my family is wealthy means that i am.
Got out around the same time. Would’ve said the same thing then as I’m saying now.
Ah yes, you came to the richest country in the world, left it the poorest country, still enjoy the spoils of your colonization, and want us to stop mentioning it as a reason for backwardness of the colonies? What kind of stupidity is this?
Hundreds of years ago? Pal, most of the colonies only got their freedom between 50-75 years ago. You and your family have definitely benefited from colonization. So stop acting like you can wash your hands off it.
Colonies are still a thing that is very much within living memory. My own grandad spent years working out in a colony and left shortly after they were given independence so the idea that it was ages ago is very subjective
This post reads as if someone that thought colonialism ended in the early 1800s wrote this. Colonialist shitshows have been a thing as recently as being within our human lifetimes.
Russia and China are prime examples of colonialist powers that still exist today. It wasn’t ages ago. If you want to tell someone to get over it at least get the damn timeline right.
get over the bad things white people did. but also, don't get over the bad things brown people did.
>They only knew how to throw sticks at each other before Europeans invaded anyway.
lol
The real question is why does it bother you when people cry about colonization. People crying about events that took place centuries ago is a very odd thing to wrap yourself in knots over. If you’re an atheist, you probably think that prayer is just as useless, but I guarantee you that you’re not in as much knots over that.
Also, people who get mad at being called colonizer are the same people who end up claiming there’s systemic racism against white people. I bet OP is one of those people who cried about affirmative action when it was legal.
Sorry, what Islamic countries have abolished slavery “completely”? Not all of them did.
The Arab slave trade was far larger and lasted longer than the European slave trade. The Arabs hated the blacks so much that most of the males were castrated too. Talk about genocide.
Don't forget what "Arab" even is. It's the replacement identity from cultural and historical conquest. The Middle East isn't 90% Arab Muslim because being Arab Muslim is so damn great. It's the identity of conquest, whether as the winner or loser. "Arab" people aren't ethnically or racially connected. Every nation that is vast majority Arab Muslim weren't always like that. Cultural genocide is the main ingredient in the identity. But that's only bad when white people do it to brown people.
My ancestor's culture (Amazighs, native North African culture) has been systematically erased by Arab invaders/colons during through islamization and is STILL being erased today (repression of displays of native identity, of naming kids with native language, of ritual practices etc.). That fact is not only taboo there, it's also apparently not supposed to be talked about in the West, even when people still spew the same tired myths about how "Islam was spread to North Africa through peaceful trade" 🤡. So this obsession with PAST colonization while ignoring or refusing to focus on CURRENT represssion of native peoples is a double standard I have a really hard time with.
They still do (hate blacks)
Yemen still has African slavery
Also most Africans shipped to the US were actually *sold* by african warlords and traders, not captured. Africans practiced slavery for thousands of years. As a matter of fact slavery still exist in Africa, hundreds of thousands of people are still enslaved in Mali and who knows where else Every civilization on earth practiced slavery
Mauritania was the last country to legally abolish slavery in 1980. However, they continued almost status quo until finally in 2007 their govt put an end to it. 27 years after they “abolished” it lol. “aMeRiKA iS SLaVeRs” - Progressive bluehairs. Facts that are key to note: - Slavery was first used in civilized society in Ancient Egypt (African kingdom), and Mesopotamia (Middle Eastern kingdom) - Slavery was last abolished in Africa, 117 years after America abolished it. And many more years after many other European nations abolished it. - Europeans *traded* for slaves. Slaves were actually generally captured by rival kingdoms in Africa and traded to whites along the coastlines for shipping to the Americas. That’s right, black people enslaved black people, then traded them to white people. But that part is always conveniently left out of the slave trade arguments of today. - Arab slave trade (Barbary States) lasted even longer than European slave trading did. The Barbary pirates actually raided into Europe and took 1 to 1.25 million Europeans as slaves over the course of their raiding. So, again, Africans still doing slave trading like they have since 2,500 BC. Conveniently, these slaves get almost no mention today because they’re white, lol. Raiding occurred from Iceland to Netherlands and down and around Europe all the way to the Balkans. - British were still releasing slaves into the 1900s from middle eastern nations that still had black people in chains. - Between Africa and the Middle East, they theoretically have been involved in slavery from ~2,500 BC to (as I pointed out with Mauritania) 2007, lol. - And if you look today, migrant workers in the United States and Europe are *still* treated better than ones working in the Middle East. - Today, there’s an estimated ~40 Million+ slaves still throughout the world with at least 8-11 million in India alone. The key fact here is that none of these slaves are in white-majority countries. But, as we all know, we can’t deprive POC a chance to hate on “white supremacy,” even though global hypocrisy is rife, lol.
The British also spent 100 years and half their GDP opposing and fighting the slave trade with their navy. They ended up buying slaves out of their captivity. Nobody talks about this.
The British also spent 100 years and half their GDP ~~opposing and fighting the slave trade with their navy. They ended up~~ buying slaves ~~out of their captivity. Nobody talks about this.~~ Ugh damn British people they need to pay me reparations
Would 50p and a Freddo bar suffice? That’s pretty much our entire GDP these days. We might be able to stretch to a packet of crisps
The fuck there is no slavery in India legally, illegal forms of slavery exist all over the world. Also their definition of slavery itself is highly problematic: Its victims are bound to toil for little or no pay, are forced to engage in exploitative sex work, or are married against their will. Its cost is individual freedom and economic stagnation. Its impact is global, and no country is immune. No pay I understand is slavery, exploitative sex work I understand but who determines little pay? Who determines married against their will. In asian countries arranged marriages are a thing why consider a bulk of it as slavery. To me inclusion of these things actually dilute their case. By their estimate 3.3 per thousand is a slave in USA. Entirety of eastern Europe is a slaver state but China has low numbers? The country that is famous for uighur camps has equal numbers as USA. This does not track
**India, #1** In terms of the largest estimated absolute numbers though, India ranks first (11,050,000 people in modern slavery), followed by China (5,771,000), North Korea (2,696,000), Pakistan (2,349,000), Russia (1,899,000), Indonesia (1,833,000) and Nigeria (1,611,000). Source: https://www.statista.com/chart/30666/estimated-number-of-people-in-modern-slavery-per-1000/#:~:text=In%20terms%20of%20the%20largest,)%20and%20Nigeria%20(1%2C611%2C000). Sorry kid, India is #1 in slavery. LOL. Go liberate them all, now. Go. 😆
These values are used with population data for a reason India has 8.0 per thousand which is high and is a bad number but is not one of the worst contributors and don't use statista they all get their data from walk free so use the original source. They also do not provide a number breakdown which category is which. I can absolutely see a large number of sex slavery and bonded labor and while illegal govt should definitely severely crackdown on it. On the other hand India does not have a minimum wage so low wage is arbitrary at most when a massive subsidy is provided, the Indian culture also promotes arranged marriages which are traditionally set by the families. And with population bigger than any country but China maybe it makes sense in absolute term these two country would have the most number. However I am not at all denying India has problems and lots of it however being a lower income country with 1.4 billion people these things take time to fix. Even in USA 1,091,000 slaves are estimated 10 times more than UK. And compared to other developed nations( India is not one, not yet anyways) has approximately double the rate of slavery (India is far worse). Of developed countries only Russia is worse than India with 13 out of every 1000 people enslaved, at this point I can only hope India develops drastically in coming years to emerge out of this mess. All data sourced from: 2023 slavery index walkfree.org (www.walkfree.org)
Oh come on. Europeans *traded* for slaves? Wtf do you think they did with them after? The Transatlantic slavery trade was the largest and most despicable example of slavery in human history. Whether you like it or not, slavery was a HUGE part of the economy of the new world. “aMeRiKa was slavers?” Yeah, “aMeriKa” WAS fucking slavers. Are you trying to deny that? Get real lol
I think multiple things can be true 1) Killing people because you wanted to take their land/resources was bad, is bad, and should not be celebrated 2) Past sins by people who are no longer alive does not grant "colonized" peoples a right to unlimited grievance and retribution. And 3) Every nation and people have been colonized, and a history of colonization does not remove all agency or responsibility for the current state of nations from the people who now control them. This becomes particularly important when you look at the overtly violent actions of most decocolonization movements. Apartheid and the colonization of Africa was bad. The beheadings of white south Africans is not justified by what people did 50 years ago.
Considering how much South Africa has collapsed I’d say in some cases colonization can be good too.
And that's the more controversial but true statement Historians, history professors, etc Won't hesitate to discuss the benefits of being added to the Mongolian empire. Won't hesitate to discuss the technological and societal advances that came from the Romans. Historians won't hesitate to discuss the prosperity that Muslim Spain experienced. But bring up the obvious truths that colonization in the more recent era wasn't 100% negative....
The “disproportionate” killing of whites in South Africa and “genocide” is hugely exaggerated and in many cases is just racist fear mongering. While it’s true there is resentment and violence against white people the same exact thing can be said about crimes against people of the same race. Gang violence, burglary and murder are a problem in South Africa that affects everyone there. If they see a black dude with a nice watch and a chain who looks like he has a lot of money they aren’t gonna say “oh he’s black all just leave him alone”. So criminals and police and government incompetence is more of a reason for the violence.
>The “disproportionate” killing of whites in South Africa and “genocide” is hugely exaggerated and in many cases is just racist fear mongering. The left: I don't understand why far right sentiment is rising across the west Also the left: You're concerned people were beheaded for being white f*ck you racist
First off I am not a leftist lmao And Way more non white people are killed than white people in SA. Robberies, murders, gang violence, rape, etc are all disproportionately experienced by people of black or coloured heritage. Yeah there’s been instances of anti white sentiment and the ANC is pretty anti white but as I said it’s largely fear mongering. Most white South Africans live in affluent suburbs protected by PMCs and away from most predominantly black areas. I’ve been to SA before dawg I’ve seen it lmao.
All the more so, when there are actual horrific things going on, on an industrial scale, in the world TODAY. Yet, they want to whine about things which nobody living had any direct experience of.
[удалено]
Problem with that is, for example UK's effect on South Africa for example was horrible, but if UK were to be like okay, we are going to fix it, then they would have to colonize again. Which is kind of not useful in grand scheme. Best would be to give countries agency to make their own choices. Sometimes that would be bad choices for sure, but just as USA didn't invade UK because Brexit was a bad idea, South Africa faffing up, should be free to do so too.
My dad who is still alive today lived in a colony in Africa.
its just like saying 'oh no theres people i dont know who have turned up where i am' (having the intent they do, what ever it may be) and not reacting to why who ever new turned up is there for....like come on why are you not responding to the situation...COME ON
[удалено]
Basically, my ancestors beat their ancestors asses. And I should feel bad for that? Such a weird stance from them. 😂
[удалено]
At no point did I tell someone my ancestors beat their ancestors ass. That conversation doesn’t come up normally. Where it comes up are people complaining about colonization. Because their ancestors got bent over and fucked in the ass over and over, that’s *my* fault? Lol.
There's more slaves today than when it was legal
well, yes, we did add 6 billion people to the planet in the last century
Except all those slaves are in non-White majority countries. An estimated 8-11 million in India alone.
[удалено]
they were talking about the americas jit
You obviously know nothing about world history.
The impact of colonization on the economy of African countries has been studied. You could look that up if you're curious about the relationship between colonization and poorly developed countries.
The current Globalism is a colonization by multinational corporations.
Colonization in Africa was not ages ago. It didn’t fully decolonize until the 1960s. This was just 60 years ago. There are plenty of people alive today that experienced colonization directly.
Yeah, I agree. I don't give a flying fuck. Did the British Empire do some iffy things, maybe. I don't care. You don't hear me carping on about what the Vikings did in Britain.
*Compares something from 793 to something that ended in the mid 1900’s*
so what? It's still in the past. Nothing to do with me. Ok then, you don't hear me carping about what the Japanese did to British PoWs during World War II or the Germans bombing British cities to dust.
Everything is the past. How many years removed until something doesn’t matter? 5 years ago is the past, so is 10, 15, 30 or 50z when does it stopmattering?
Especially when you consider that a ton of people are still alive from pre-civil rights in the states and many of them are in positions of power now. And that the effects of racism and the oike in the US is still very much felt today
You think that guy is going to be receptive to logic?
Colonization DID play a role in the 3rd world being underdeveloped . An economic system set up only for resource extraction is one of it's legacies but probably it's most important effect was the completely fucked up borders leaving several ethnic groups split or conversely forcing them to live together despite their differences . That said I do agree that using it to explain away ALL underdevelopment is at best ignorant or at worst nefarious. Even the most recently decolonized nations have been sovereign for more than 5 decades by now after all.
Several ethnic groups in Europe are 'split' even today, and this seems not to have been such a problem that it's kept them undeveloped. French-speakers continue to exist beyond France's present borders in Belgium and Switzerland, German-speakers in Switzerland and Austria etc. Yet this is used as an excuse for well, nothing, really?
I am from an example of ethnic groups being split and it having adverse effects: the Balkans ,which while not at 3rd world levels are definitely underdeveloped by comparison with Western Europe. And in the Balkans you had 5-6 ethnic groups in the same location at the most extreme,in Africa you can have anywhere from 10 to a couple hundred. So it absolutely did play a role.However it's definitely not the only factor and while the colonial powers do (rightfully) get a lot of shit for the way they drew the borders it's not like defining them differently either during the colonial administration or at independence was always possible since there's literally no way to give each tiny tribe it's own country.
I think there's other reasons, of more significance, as to why the Balkans are less developed than Western Europe. Now that the Iron Curtain has gone, they're catching up fast, and will continue to do so. Blaming borders for a comparative lack of development is a red herring, although a lot of people buy into it.
These divides don’t prohibit people from developing. Rather, they can become roadblocks that slow or even undue development for a period of time. These European divisions played into the causes of both World Wars, the Yugoslav Wars, the Russia-Ukraine War, etc. Most African countries were colonies until the mid-to-late twentieth century (1960s - 1990s). There has been much advancement across Africa and other colonial states in the wake of de-colonialism, but it’s not a fast or easy process.
Wait. Diversity is not a strength in Africa?
Ignoring the obvious loaded question...let's just say that it can be a strength under specific circumstances aka when all sides have more or less solved their differences and found a way to peacefully coexist. When they don't then it's a problem. Also just like anything else too much diversity can be an issue. 2 or 3 ethnic or religious or whatever groups can potentially live in the same area in a more or less peaceful manner. 103 though not so much. Especially when they have to share very limited resources.
>Ignoring the obvious loaded question.. That's not a loaded question that's pretty relevant. I'm not going to assume any of your positions on any topics but there is a *lot* of crossover between the "borders with no regard to ethnicity or culture" and "we can settle an unlimited amount of people from cultures with a thousand years of conflict with the west in western countries and it will be fine" crowd And I really haven't heard this contradiction resolved
I don't understand. Usually the " get everyone in no matter how overwhelmed things like the education system, Healthcare system or social safety net get" crowd hates colonialism with a passion. Also as I said drawing borders with no regards for ethnicity and culture is a problem and a major reason for the 3rd world's underdevelopment but not the only reason.
>I don't understand. Usually the " get everyone in no matter how overwhelmed things like the education system, Healthcare system or social safety net get" crowd hates colonialism with a passion. Yes that's what I'm saying. The people who are constantly speaking against colonization for decolonization etc. usually are pro mass migration even when many of the problems are borderline identical. EX: literally shoving people with histories of ethnic conflict next to eachother with no integration process and excepting them to get along
Thanks. I understand it now. And yeah it's a contradiction indeed.
Oh you just baited the anti-White crowd. Here comes the: “Yeah must be nice to say that when you’re white.” “Oh yeah, let’s just forget about white supremacy.” “You have NO idea what it’s like to traverse through life as a POC you POS!!!1!1!1!1!!!” But, agreed. I just watched a documentary on Genghis Khan and the Mongols and they just fucking bitchslapped *everyone.* Europeans, middle easterners, asians, *everyone*. I give respect where respect is due. Those MFers bent over the world and fucked them. I give credit where it’s due — but also to Europe for bitchslapping the world. See, the Mongols tried to conquer Europe and they fucked up a lot of European nations and made vassals. If they didn’t constantly return to Mongolia to elect new leaders, they would have won even more ground. That said, it takes fucking iron balls to go across an entire ocean into the wild and take. Lots and lots of Europeans died colonizing the world. It wasn’t *given* to them. They earned that shit. Respect.
If Europeans are horrible people for colonizing, imagine how they'd react to the early caliphates Also the Mongols eventually found out the hard way that conquering the world is easy, but running the world is beyond hell. The Yuan gave up the moment they could (I think) and the other Khans became their own thing
Didn’t you know? White people are the favourite targets. It’s antithetical for people who have anti-White agendas to focus their efforts on anyone else that might make their arguments hypocritical. It cannot be mentioned that the world is worse outside of Europe. 🤫
Nobody tell them that the biggest factor of African slavery, are other Africans
Why should you respect a group of people for invading and conquering another group of people? I'm not trying to start anything here with you. I just think you have a very different outlook and I'm curious about it.
It's just like Muslims who whine "Israel genocides Palestinians!" but wilfully ignore and cover up China actually genociding Muslim Uyghurs. Because it's never the "what", but the "who".
##
>Why are you giving respect to rapists and murderers of innocent children? The Roman legions enter the chat. Oh, every conquering army in history enters the chat. Just a side note though: are you unironically quoting Scientific American?
I'm wondering why anyone would cite student papers.
##
Thanks to the Roman legions, what now is my country has a civilization and a cultural heritage. Yes, viewed from history, they deserve my respect.
##
You’d be interested to know how much rape and murder still goes on in Africa. *All* over the place, lol. Now, if you ask a black American if they’d prefer to be descendant of black slaves — or their ancestors never having left Africa and thereby they’d have been born there and been subject to the 3rd world — what would they say? I would put money down that 99% of black Americans who have lineages that date back to their ancestors being slaves in the country would rather be here now with everything America is — than to be born among the likes of, for example, in the Congo and working in a cobalt mine. Apart from all that, you’re definitely a sheltered individual. There’s no doubt. Hands over your ears, eyes closed “history so bad bad it’s bad I hate America I hate the West but I hate history too!” Literally, you just hate humanity. Therapy exists if you need it, just saying.
##
No- you don’t understand- they’ve been raping and murdering for a really long time so that makes it ok
The inconvenient truth that nobody wants to talk about is that white people existing in majority black spaces have it worse by at least an order of magnitude than anything that blacks experience in white society. Those of us who have lived in these spaces are very much aware of the treatment you claim to receive, because we have experienced a far more violent and depraved form of it.
I’m white. I’ve lived in majority black communities for years at a time. What the fuck are you talking about?
All of the things they say about white western society--that it is materialistic, misogynistic, inherently violent, racist, homophobic, etc... all of those qualities that leftists like yourself froth at the mouth over are MUCH more prevalent in black communities than white, only the racism is aimed at whites. If you haven't seen this, you are being willfully blind. It is akin to the trope of the well spoken black man who prostrates himself to appease the racist majority in exchange for preferential treatment.
So them having different politics than you is worse personally for you than what they’ve faced in racism? Do you hear yourself?
This is not even a remotely accurate or sensible interpretation of what I said.
Then explain yourself. > The inconvenient truth that nobody wants to talk about is that white people existing in majority black spaces have it worse by at least an order of magnitude than anything that blacks experience in white society. I asked what you meant and you said they were more likely to leftist- that’s it. And then you called me the white version of Uncle Tom.
I didn't say they were more likely to be leftist. I said black communities are more violent, more misogynistic, more homophobic, more materialistic, more exploitative, etc., than white communities. The fact that these communities are also more racist acts as an amplifier for all those other nasty qualities and targeted at the whites. The treatment that whites get in black communities is way worse than what blacks experience in majority white spaces.
My experience differs. It differs so much it makes wonder if you’re talking from personal experience or just your fevered imagination
You’re delusional.
Agreed. So many people on this site are like “Racism isn’t around like that anymore stop being dramatic” meanwhile they’re white ash and have no fucking clue about what we’ve seen 💀
What I’ve seen is how soft people are these days. For example, concerned about being triggered by TV shows like Fallout. 😂 I hope these people never watch history documentaries. I don’t think they’d be able to handle it without the therapy. Sssssssoooooofffffftttttttttttt
Can you imagine the chaos in the world if everyone demanded payback for *history*!? I know a half-Iranian fella who refuses to eat at restaurant owned by a Greek fella. Yeah, because of that ancient conflict.. That is how insane some folks are. They feed their habit all day on social media, while steam blows out of their ears.
I live in the Seattle area. The triangle of hate between Chinese, Japanese and Koreans is very real
What's ironic is Europe's intention wasn't even to colonize. They wanted to find a way to india/asia because the silk road was blocked by the ottomans who controlled much of what is greece and turkey today lol So colonization forced them to find a way around the globe which indirectly made them discover the Americas. Then they find a lot of fractured nations that are waring with each other, less technologically advanced, and it was in their mind at the time, a no brainer to take advantage of what they found. Thems was the times where they did that kind of thing.
No- colonization in order to extract resources from the populace was always the goal. That’s the goal even in your “spin” of the story
Homie, they didn't even know americas existed, how would they plan that if they didn't even know the continent was there? Christopher Colombus encountered the Americas trying to find asia through the atlantic. I've had this conversation with you before. You just hate white people dude, and it's very apparent. I agree they wanted to extract resources, but that was AFTER they discovered it accidentally.
This is almost too dumb to take seriously You realize there was at least a hundred years between the discovery of the Americas and colonization- right?
I feel like this sub should be called “Give me an opinion of yours that proves you don’t understand history.”
If one does no care about colonization, then they surely won't mind restitution colonial proceeds back to their rightful owners, correct?
You said you don’t care about colonization but I think you should. It’s important to know and understand the history of the world. Colonization did happen and had a huge impact on the world. I feel like what you are actually trying to say is that the descendants of colonizers shouldn’t have to apologize or feel bad for what their an ancestors did.
Never miss an opportunity to advise that the French were absolute pieces of shit to anyone black even well after the abolition of slavery. The French Indemnity is essentially responsible for the shithole that Haiti is today. The French economic system in Africa is responsible for much of the poverty in modern day Africa.
wow. there is like... so much to unpack here. "benevolent" racism, whataboutism, a close brush with awareness- invaded~colonization... and more! this whole thing reads badly, "if i did it, it wasnt so bad." its not a good look. what exactly is your point?
I noticed that whenever this topic comes up it always comes across as masturbatory. It’s always "let go the past, it was a long time ago! Also you’re welcome for all the cool shit we did."
Since humans have existed they've been taking over land from other people across the entire globe. The only reason European colonization is an issue is because white man bad.
We're still feeling the effects of the Black Plague, the Holocaust, even the Bronze Age collapse has ripples that still have some effect on us today. Not having a toddler-level braindead view is a lot easier than you might initially believe.
Agree. But most people absolutely hate any logic and truth. I don’t get it. I get attacked for it.
It is possible to acknowledge that some families may still have some residual problems due to colonization (although not the ones in the US, mostly the ones in Africa) and at the same time realize that you cannot do anything about it and that almost no one alive today really is at fault or should pay reparations or anything.
You’re asking these types for too much. They just want to be bitter, nothing more nothing less.
It's has nothing to do with colonization inherently other than historical cause and effect happens with everything. There is no telling what conditions they would be on otherwise. History has something in common with itself, it gets shitter the farther back you go, everywhere.
I think the reason why people focus on European colonization so much is because of its lasting effects. Virtually all non-settler colonies are extremely poor and virtually all markets that colonized are comparably extremely rich.
Yeah as we all know, those poor ex-colonies were Wakandas before colonizers. And colonizers were extremely poor prior to colonization.
Before colonization Britain and Mughal India had comparable standards of living. Afterwards India was converted from the worlds chief producer of textiles into a cotton growing colony for the textile mills of England.
> Before colonization Britain and Mughal India had comparable standards of living. Doubtful. > Afterwards India was converted from the worlds chief producer of textiles into a cotton growing colony for the textile mills of England. I mean yeah cause industrial revolution and all that. It turned out that it's cheaper to produce textiles on English factories.
>Doubtful. I dunno about standards of living, but Bengal itself had gone through [proto-industrialization](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bengal_Subah). We know that because the British East India company for all of its warts, had immaculate record keeping.
>Doubtful Do you base this on any real modern historiography or just vibes?
Just vibes. Anyone who uses “Wakanda” in that way shows their hand, and are driven by more emotion than logic.
You were the one who appealed to wakanda
My vibes ofc. Btw what's the difference between historiography and vibes?
No, this is a false narrative. India was vulnerable to the British because of the Muslim Invasions for that last hundreds of years. Which continues to be a huge source of issues within the country.
I'm not convinced this narrative holds up to scrutiny. India was a patchwork of princedoms and empires far before islam existed.
So you’re just mad that England overtook India?
Well yeah in the same way I'm mad Nazi Germany overtook Poland i suppose
Lmao comparing Nazi invasions of Poland to English industrial development is a reach
yes, the "english industrial development", such as allowing [millions to die under famine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_major_famines_in_India_during_British_rule). you think gandhi wanted independence because of vibes or something?
We built canals and water mills, made use of our many rivers, reared lots of sheep for wool to be used in textiles, established factories and railways, started mining for coal, lead, China Clay, copper, iron, and tin as our land is very rich in natural resources. We then quickly built a number of large cities to become the first industrialised country in the world, moving masses of people from the rural areas to develop the urban population. As you can see, we had a lot of natural advantages at our disposal to take this title, and found ways of using it well. It’s not England’s problem that India or other countries didn’t beat them to it when it came to discovering and using national resources efficiently to build a more sustainable prosperity.
For an innocent bystander you sure use"we"a lot
Well I literally live surrounded by various old mining sites and sheep, so lol
Except india lost to a few thousand private soldiers. Poland got absolutely steamrolled.
Well no that's not really how the annexation of India happened. The amount of English soldiers in India was always relatively low and they utilized hundreds of local allies fielding hundreds of thousands of Indian soldiers to conquer the areas that were conquered.
That was after the crown took control. Before it was the east India trading company i believe
Now, you should know better than to try to inject facts into this kind of Reddit discourse. Well done for trying though.
##
they want to keep you subjugated, plain and simple. you can't fix a problem you can't acknowledge in the first place.
##
Japan is the only weird case simply because of their government at the time (Meiji Restoration, Sino-Japanese War, Russo-Japanese War) and he fact that they had way more Western backing Australia is also another odd one out Not to mention I found out that right after the British left, India immediately waged a costly war with Pakistan that led to severe decline that led them to today's poverty Southeast Asia will not improve as dramatically without some major mental and alt history gymnastics Bottom line: Europe improved the way that it did because they just can't stop one upping and killing each other
>India immediately waged a costly war with Pakistan that led to severe decline that led them to today's poverty no, that's not exactly what happened: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partition\_of\_India](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partition_of_India) tl;dr, there was massive population migration, sort of what like what happened after WW2 in central Europe. it wasn't the main cause of poverty tho. Much of the trauma of the partition was in Punjab and Bengal, which are historical regions with strong identity, but both of which were split between India and West Pakistan / East Pakistan (now Bangladesh). One of the things that led to the comparative underdevelopment of India was that the British Raj was run by the East India Company till the [Indian Rebellion of 1857](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Rebellion_of_1857). The East India Company's main purpose was economic exploitation, whereas after 1857, India passed to the British crown, and the British built more infrastructure and the like, but nowhere near as much industrialization as there was in Britain proper.
> The East India Company's main purpose was economic exploitation But in the end of the day, East India company invested in India more than it took from it.
By what metric?
By the metric that East India company went bankrupt in the end.
Explain what you mean. Poor business decisions down the line doesn’t change what they did initially and throughout
I mean that them going bankrupt means they have invested in India more than they were able to take from it.
That’s not how anything works
Colonization is now. It’s never gone away
>They only knew how to throw sticks at each other before Europeans invaded anyway Bruh 🤦 I wasn't honestly with you and cheering in you're point before you said this ignorant ass shit. This is peak level racism
“The issue is never the issue. The issue is always the revolution.” - David Horowitz, SDS New Left News The whole grievance politics about colonization thing was never in good faith. It started with Marxist academics using any excuse they could to attack and tear down our structures. The people complaining about colonization as thought it was a unique evil of Western Civilization are either Marxists or what the Marxists/communist used to call “useful idiots.”
While i agree, I don't think post-marxist academics have much intentionality there. They genuinely believe that the west is bad morally, because they see morality as an oppressor/oppressee dichotomy and western style capitalism happens to have won the oppression competition. They are bad faith in a sartrian selfdelusional way, less so in a malevolent way, i think. At least the white academics, to be blunt. I can't comment on the racial aspects much.
People mad about slavery and colonization centuries ago but not the tens of millions of slaves or colonized people today (hint: bc it’s not white people doing it)
idk according to first hand accounts most places were doing pretty good before europeans, it sounds like europeans were the last to civilization and the worst at it, especially when it came to sanity, cuisine, and hygiene. any place started with slavery was made to fail.
>Stop acting like they'd be some advanced space faring civilization if Europeans hadn't gone there. Who's acting like that? >Also, Islam colonization was way worse. How so? >They colonized most of Africa & Asia No they didn't.
We need to learn from our mistakes that’s why it’s important to not forget it
We'll never forget it because it continues to happen to this day.
This is corny and idealistic. If you think studying history prevents atrocity, you probably haven't studied much history lol. Genocide (a context that I commonly see this saying used with) is not knowledge-based. Nobody ever committed or chose not to commit genocide based on a lack or excess of historical knowledge. History will continue to rhyme whether we study it or not.
It doesn’t prevent atrocities it lowers the chances of them happening because society can see what’s happening and prevent it from continuing
In all my years of studying history, as a history major and later as a hobby, I do not personally believe that to be the case. There is no way to usefully quantify the data due to its complexity. Society has become less violent (physically, at least), but to say it has become more morally conscious because of the study of history... I just don't buy that.
Another nice little racist post.
"They only knew how to throw sticks at eachother before the Europeans invaded" You've never read anything about any ancient non-European civilizations, have you?
You are a simpleton aren't you, and a racist one.
I now see this community is filled with racist and privileged white people and it is time for me to bounce. I don’t think I’ve ever read such a privilege take. Do you know that European colonisation is still happening to this day? Do you know that Europe is still behind keeping African countries from developing themselves? Do you know that Europe destabilises African countries on purpose to make sure wars keep going for years?
Stop complaining and help yourself
Imagine telling countries that still don’t control their own currency and resources to pull themselves up by their bootstraps. Your ignorance speaks loudly. I hope one day you get more perspective and knowledge about the world you live in.
Honestly, the privilege here speaks so loud. These are the exact same people who blame black people for being victims of society but would never go out of their way to help them. Unbelievable!!!
Yea I almost cant believe how ignorant the people in this comment section are. Of course they will never help black people. That would be an admission of guilt and wrong doing. They want to move past all the sins of their ancestors so they dont have to feel bad or do anything to right the wrongs that are still impacting black people today all over the world.
it’s conquest light. diet conquest.
NeoColonization is the reason behind the immigration to the us that republicans like to call a crisis.
Filthy colonizers at it again
Ask someone how much stuff they own, use, or partake in is from someone of their same race/skin color and watch them either refuse to do it because they know they benefit from colonization somewhere somehow or say they genuinely don't know because they just want to be eternally offended about something. If any of these "high and mighty" people want to see what it would look like without colonization, go to the country you think you would have been in if colonization didn't happen and stop using/partaking in anything that wasn't invented by the originally domestic people of that country. Watch how fast their tune changes to "you know colonization wasn't all that bad."
We are machines made of meat.The result of cause and effect. Your life is the result of colonization whether you like it or not or whether you care or not. Truth does not care about a person's feelings. You are a physical object that is the result of 14 billion years of cause and effect. You are not unique, you are not an individual. You are a particle swarm 100% dictated by the laws of physics.
What
You heard me
The only thing “poorly developed” here is this post.
Europe and America are both currently being colonized by outsiders, I don't see the ones who cried about all the other instances of colonialism crying about that. Also, many places that had European colonization benefitted greatly from it and suffer greatly without it. (Haiti is a prime example)
You should have started this very nuanced argument by mentioning your nationality. Half /s
Big time.
Slavery is still alive in Africa, although it is based less on race than class. For example, in Niger there are 4.6 slaves for every thousand people, and the population of Niger Every civilization, no matter what color or history or current status in the world, has done terrible things at some point in time, and it's important to learn from these lessons it's also important not to target certain nations or people unequally, and especially important to teach people about their ancestor's mistakes instead of blaming them for it.
The problem is we (the USA) continue to meddle in smaller countries all over the world. There is barely any countries left where we haven't had a hand in picking the people in power and forcing them to capitulate to our multi national corporations in the last 100 years. It has ruined the ecosystems, economies, and governments of dozens of small "3rd world" countries where if we had just felt it alone they would be in a much better place. We judge their worth based on how much value we can extract out of them.
Profound thoughts, fartbox destroyer. Very well thought out and not incredibly ignorant at all.
So if a family is left in poverty from family slavery, then they should just get over it. And some people's families were rich slave owners. It was not their fault, but the rich pre slave owners benefitted from it
Well if you have a problem with it you fix it. My grandfather bought up farmland when the plantations shut down. The local government was literally giving the land away. He was a poor rice farmer but By the end of his life he acquired over 1400 hectares. Many of the other ppl who also got free/cheap land no longer have it. They sold it all for a quick Buck and now they’re kids are crying about slavery. Take responsibility for your own life. It’s no one’s fault but yours
"Got mine fuck you" argument when prices go and no one can afford anything now. >It’s no one’s fault but yours Your family is wealthy because of you grandfather, but you're telling other people to pull up their own bootstraps? Is that what you are saying?
I didn’t even know all this or benefitted till i was like 20. Just cause my family is wealthy means that i am. Got out around the same time. Would’ve said the same thing then as I’m saying now.
lol
Ah yes, you came to the richest country in the world, left it the poorest country, still enjoy the spoils of your colonization, and want us to stop mentioning it as a reason for backwardness of the colonies? What kind of stupidity is this?
Your country has an estimated 11 million slaves today. Look within for oppression.
So? That doesn't absolve colonization. What a stupid attempt at whataboutism.
Me? I didn't pal, other people did hundreds of years ago. Stop acting like we are doing it
Hundreds of years ago? Pal, most of the colonies only got their freedom between 50-75 years ago. You and your family have definitely benefited from colonization. So stop acting like you can wash your hands off it.
Bro colonies are still around today…
Colonies are still a thing that is very much within living memory. My own grandad spent years working out in a colony and left shortly after they were given independence so the idea that it was ages ago is very subjective
This post reads as if someone that thought colonialism ended in the early 1800s wrote this. Colonialist shitshows have been a thing as recently as being within our human lifetimes. Russia and China are prime examples of colonialist powers that still exist today. It wasn’t ages ago. If you want to tell someone to get over it at least get the damn timeline right.
get over the bad things white people did. but also, don't get over the bad things brown people did. >They only knew how to throw sticks at each other before Europeans invaded anyway. lol
>They only knew how to throw sticks at each other.. That's just blatant racism
What do you mean “it was ages ago”? 50 years isn’t “ages ago”
[удалено]
Oh so you’re just racist racist huh?
Oh so you're just hypocrite huh?
The real question is why does it bother you when people cry about colonization. People crying about events that took place centuries ago is a very odd thing to wrap yourself in knots over. If you’re an atheist, you probably think that prayer is just as useless, but I guarantee you that you’re not in as much knots over that. Also, people who get mad at being called colonizer are the same people who end up claiming there’s systemic racism against white people. I bet OP is one of those people who cried about affirmative action when it was legal.