Dear Log,
«Perhaps most grotesque in this postmodern calculus of political repression is the moral blindness displayed towards the record of colonialism. For most of the last century, vast swathes of the planet remained under direct imperial European rule, enforced with the most brutal violence by states that liked to see themselves as democracies. But somehow that is not included as the third leg of 20th-century tyranny, along with Nazism and communism. There is a much-lauded Black Book of Communism, but no such comprehensive indictment of the colonial record.»I am amazed at how easily the concept of "history" has changed from being hagiography of grandees (where knowing history meant knowing who bravely invaded/defended what when), to estimating numbers of dead (where knowing history means being able to play a game where everyone sits around and says "Oh yeah, well what about the N million dead in...", with points being scored for bigger numbers and more undeservedly obscure locales.
One of these days, history might mean the study of past ideas, instead of the assembly of stirring ethnic/national myths.
I'm no student of history, but is this really accurate? For most of the last century, vast swathes...? And, was colonialism "the most brutal violence" in the 20th century?
The largest colony in history, that of the Indian subcontinent, ended in 1947. For the last few decades of it, it's hard to describe it as the most brutal.
Africa was largely freed from colonialism around the same time.
South America was largely independent in the 20th century, I believe.
None of these acts, to my mind, stack up against the brutality of the tens of millions Stalin is thought to have brutally murdered. Or to the holocaust.
I understand that colonialism was extremely brutal historically. The mass murder and enslavement of non-European races comes to mind. But, among "European" powers, the US was the last to abolish slavery, and that was in 1865. The brutality of colonialism was largely pre-20th century and was more in line with "social norms" of the day.
I dunno, maybe I'm just brain washed by my public education with history books written by evil colonialists.
Re:Is this really accurate?
mary.poppins on 2002-10-24T10:57:37
How else does one describe the US worker's relationship (via Walmart) with
workers in China?
Much of the world is involved in extractive industry (mining, logging) or
largely unskilled manufacturing work (products sold at Walmart) which end up
being used by people living in more powerful nations. Whether the people doing
this work are being kept down by a local dictator, or direct colonial rule, has
little effect on how awful the situation is.
An African travel log by a decent Irish fellow is here. French and US
business interest are *very* active in the political situation in West Africa.
Part of the excitement around the Peru Letter (the MS thing) was (I think) the
vision of Peruvians doing skilled labor, solving their own problems, instead of exporting
raw materials and importing software licenses.
As for contests of awfulness, I usually try to avoid that sort of thing. The
interesting aspect of atrocities is the highly variable standards of corporate
media and politicians -- e.g. Turkey's military killing Kurds is okay, Iraq's
military killing Kurds is okay when they are also killing Iranians, but Iraq's
military killing Kurds is not okay now. I think the reasonable response to that
sort of thing is, "Those are all bad things -- what is the motivation for the
changing story on them?", and "How can we change society so *none* of these bad
things will happen again?"
Re:Is this really accurate?
jordan on 2002-10-24T11:52:32
- How else does one describe the US worker's relationship (via Walmart) with
workers in China?
Much of the world is involved in extractive industry (mining, logging) or
largely unskilled manufacturing work (products sold at Walmart) which end up
being used by people living in more powerful nations. Whether the people doing
this work are being kept down by a local dictator, or direct colonial rule, has
little effect on how awful the situation is.
Somehow, American business takes the brunt of criticism here. The left is silent about the activities of the real slave owners, the Chinese Political Machine and their like worldwide.
- As for contests of awfulness, I usually try to avoid that sort of thing.
If you don't draw some distinctions, then parking tickets become genocide.
- Turkey's military killing Kurds is okay, Iraq's
military killing Kurds is okay when they are also killing Iranians, but Iraq's
military killing Kurds is not okay now.
Washington has protested Turkey's treatment of Kurds. Iraq's killing of Kurds and using Chemical weapons against Iranians was widely condemned at the time in the West. These incidents led to a cooling of relations between the US and Iraq.
- "How can we change society so *none* of these bad
things will happen again?"
Well, we can make laws against "Hate" crimes (by definition, crimes committed against majorities cannot be motivated by Hate). Criminalize "Hate" speech (what part of the 1st Amendment does the left not understand?), we can "raise" consciousness about how all sex between a man and a woman is rape. You know, the standard Political Correctness line. That'll change society, right.
Re:Is this really accurate?
mary.poppins on 2002-10-26T06:59:23
See the definition
of "straw man". Seriously! Follow that link!
Somehow, American business takes the brunt of criticism here. The left is
silent about the activities of the real slave owners, the Chinese Political
Machine and their like worldwide.
At no point did I suggest support for the Chinese state, or the horribly corrupt
people who run it, or the system that leads to such corruption ard repression.
The nastiness of a colonial government does not change the colonial
relationship.
If you don't draw some distinctions, then parking tickets become genocide.
Sure, I just try to avoid comparing, say, the repression of people in Nigeria
today with the repression of people in the USSR. Clearly both are terrible.
Washington has protested Turkey's treatment of Kurds.
It has not prevented the US gov from sending lots and lots of military aid,
equipment which is then used against the Kurds. This suggests to me that the
protest is mostly for show.
Well, we can make laws against "Hate" crimes (by definition, crimes committed
against majorities cannot be motivated by Hate). Criminalize "Hate" speech (what
part of the 1st Amendment does the left not understand?), we can "raise"
consciousness about how all sex between a man and a woman is rape. You know, the
standard Political Correctness line. That'll change society, right.
Again, check the link above about straw men. I didn't suggest any of these
things -- I didn't even suggest any specific thing at all! You are assuming
that anyone who acknowledges injustice in the current world supports these
things? Do you actually know anyone who does either of them?
I dunno, maybe I'm just brain washed by my public education with history
books written by evil colonialists.
I imagine this was sarcasm, but I think it's pretty close to the mark.
Please, try responding to things that people say, rather than things you think
they might say.
Re:Is this really accurate?
jordan on 2002-10-27T13:51:59
- See the definition
of "straw man". Seriously! Follow that link!
I know what a 'straw man' is. I wasn't really debating there. I was trying to draw you out on what you really believe.
- Well, we can make laws against "Hate" crimes (by definition, crimes committed
against majorities cannot be motivated by Hate)...
You are assuming
that anyone who acknowledges injustice in the current world supports these
things? Do you actually know anyone who does either of them?
What do you believe? Up to now, I've not met anyone on the left who wasn't in favor of Hate Crimes legislation? Are you the exception?
Just to recap how this discussion has gone so far; I questioned the accuracy of a quote that said that colonialism in the 20th century is the among the 'most brutal' acts committed by man, in apparent comparison to Hitler and Stalin. I questioned various assumptions in that quote.
Rather than actually challenge what I said, you piped up with some vague statements about how we shouldn't compare atrocities and that we must work to eliminate all bad things.
You appeared to blame Wal-Mart for the enslavement of the Chinese people and gave this as an example of how colonialism is alive and well and repressing people.
I really would like to understand where you are coming from. Your first reaction is to blame American Capitalism for the enslavement of the Chinese people. Incredible! This is not unlike blaming the Canadians who wore cotton shirts in the 1850s for American Slavery.
- At no point did I suggest support for the Chinese state, or the horribly corrupt
people who run it, or the system that leads to such corruption ard repression.
The nastiness of a colonial government does not change the colonial
relationship.
So, the Chinese state is a colonial government now? Is the Chinese state controlled by Wal-Mart? If Wal-Mart were not involved, would the Chinese stop murdering Tibetans? I don't see as Wal-Mart is involved in this relationship you seem to be suggesting when you said:
How else does one describe the US worker's relationship (via Walmart) with
workers in China?
Your kneejerk to blame Americans first suggests to me that you don't really find fault with the proximal cause of the enslavement of the Chinese people, the Chinese elite. You know, the Chinese people were pretty brutally repressed before they had much of a commercial relationship with the West.
Nope. It's blame America first. I wonder if you care at all about the Chinese people, or if they are just a convenient prop in a political campaign to destroy evil American Capitalists. I don't recall those on the left being concerned with worker conditions in Viet Nam or China before they started selling their output to the West. I don't think this focus on the working conditions of the peoples in those countries has anything to do with concern about injustice. It appears to be just a bludgeon to beat up Wal-Mart and other evil American Capitalists.
- I dunno, maybe I'm just brain washed by my public education with history
books written by evil colonialists.
I imagine this was sarcasm, but I think it's pretty close to the mark.
I actually do believe that American education teaches us biased history, and I'm willing to be enlightened. For example, I didn't discover until I was an adult that The War of 1812 was really just an attempt by the US Government to seize Canada.
I didn't find anything educational about your comments, however. Instead of enlightening me, you preferred to throw out an Ad Hominem attack. Seriously! Follow that link!
Re:Is this really accurate?
mary.poppins on 2002-10-28T20:06:42
I'll try to be more clear.
1. Are you asserting that the US worker's relationship (via Walmart) with workers in China is not colonial?
2. While Walmart is not responsible for the actions of Chinese elites, it pays money to said elites, and certainly does not aim to depose them. So I agree with you that one cannot blame solely the owners of Walmart for the sorry situation of Chinese workers.
3. Do you not agree that these "evil American Capitalists" exist, and are powerful? Have you been paying attention to the actions of, say, any oil company? I am not asserting that American elites are somehow more evil than other powerful elites around the world. They are simply more powerful, and so have a greater evil impact.
4. What to do about this situation? I don't have a formula, but I *am* working on it. Here are a few suggestions that, while obviously of limited impact, don't involve going out on a limb:
a) Use and support free software (I imagine, given the forum, that you're on to this one already)
b) Buy food at farmers markets, from organic farmers (or via subscriptions, if possible)
c) Don't consume what you feel you don't need (obviously, this is a personal judgment call)
5. I think there are a few important things that people need to realize:
a) They don't need bosses (whether corporate bosses or government bosses) to tell them what to do.
b) People are all human, and have the same needs and rights, wherever they happen to have been born, and whoever their parents are.
If we can get everyone to really internalize these two points, those evil power elites will come tumbling down.
Re:Is this really accurate?
jordan on 2002-10-29T02:42:50
- 1. Are you asserting that the US worker's relationship (via Walmart) with workers in China is not colonial?
I'm not sure what you are saying here. Is China like a US colony because we buy goods from them?
Is your argument is that they are like a colony because they get so little for their goods because they are essentially slave labor?
I don't get it. If Wal-Mart didn't buy their goods, then the Japanese, Russians, Indians, Australians and Europeans would buy their goods. Oh, guess what? They all do! Is China a colony of the rest of the world? I don't see how they are a colony via Wal-Mart.
Is anyone who buys goods made in China contributory to their enslavement? Or, is it possibly more complicated that that? If the commercialization of China is increasing their standard of living, as it appears to be, is there more opportunity for the Chinese to become educated and help to throw off their own chains?
- 2. While Walmart is not responsible for the actions of Chinese elites, it pays money to said elites, and certainly does not aim to depose them. So I agree with you that one cannot blame solely the owners of Walmart for the sorry situation of Chinese workers.
Do you aim to depose the Chinese elites? Or Wal-Mart? Or both? As I said, I don't recall any interest in the state of the Chinese worker before they started trading with Capitalists in the West. In fact, the standard of living in China was quite a bit worse before they started trading with evil Capitalists, deserving of even more attention than it has now, but the left was silent in those days.
Now, I wouldn't be at all opposed to a moral stand where we stop trading with the slave masters of China, much as there was an almost universal stand not to trade with South Africa a few years ago. I don't see this happening, however. Without a univeral, international stand against the Chinese elite, a boycott would be ineffectual. The Chinese would just sell into those markets that would buy and we'd have to buy from Taiwan or Thailand or wherever.
Somehow, there's no interest in freeing slaves when a Socialist Government are the slaveholders.
- 3. Do you not agree that these "evil American Capitalists" exist, and are powerful? Have you been paying attention to the actions of, say, any oil company? I am not asserting that American elites are somehow more evil than other powerful elites around the world. They are simply more powerful, and so have a greater evil impact.
I believe Capitalists are not uniformly evil. I believe they are kept in check in many instances by countervailing factors, like competition and government restriction.
The evil done by the likes of the Chinese elite, and other despots, is much more problematic and more centralized. The Chinese elite control more power and influence than any Oil company or Wal-Mart could ever dream of wielding.
- 4. What to do about this situation? I don't have a formula, but I *am* working on it. Here are a few suggestions that, while obviously of limited impact, don't involve going out on a limb:
a) Use and support free software (I imagine, given the forum, that you're on to this one already)
b) Buy food at farmers markets, from organic farmers (or via subscriptions, if possible)
c) Don't consume what you feel you don't need (obviously, this is a personal judgment call)
5. I think there are a few important things that people need to realize:
a) They don't need bosses (whether corporate bosses or government bosses) to tell them what to do.
b) People are all human, and have the same needs and rights, wherever they happen to have been born, and whoever their parents are.
If we can get everyone to really internalize these two points, those evil power elites will come tumbling down.
I have to say that I'm surprised by your stance here. I did misjudge you. Through my own kneejerk reactions to what I saw as a typical leftist agenda, I failed to take into account that you might have a sensible bottom-up approach to the problems of the world, as you see them.
I do believe that the power elites want to paint broad categories to divide us and cloud our ability to make connections. Just as the certain advocacy groups keep inner-city people poor, uneducated and dependent while fulmenting hatred of other groups. Just as the Chinese elites used People's Army Divisions drawn from the poorest of the poor to confront the Tianamen Square protestors, mostly relatively rich College students, one social class is played against another.
I find personal solutions that advocate personal responsibility refreshing. I'd have to admit that I'm not as far along as you appear to be in formulating a plan.
Re:Is this really accurate?
mary.poppins on 2002-10-29T07:26:03
Thanks for taking the time to respond.
Is your argument is that they are like a colony because they get so little for their goods because they are essentially slave labor?
Yes.
Is anyone who buys goods made in China contributory to their enslavement? Or, is it possibly more complicated that that?
Yes, and yes.
If the commercialization of China is increasing their standard of living, as it appears to be, is there more opportunity for the Chinese to become educated and help to throw off their own chains?
I am no expert, but is my impression that most of the wealth is concentrated in a few coastal cities, and within those cities, in relatively few people. The land has been ruined by Mao's population/industrial push, and the continuing industrial activities.
Now, I wouldn't be at all opposed to a moral stand where we stop trading with the slave masters of China, much as there was an almost universal stand not to trade with South Africa a few years ago. I don't see this happening, however. Without a univeral, international stand against the Chinese elite, a boycott would be ineffectual. The Chinese would just sell into those markets that would buy and we'd have to buy from Taiwan or Thailand or wherever.
US residents consume many of the manufactured goods of the world. In any case, we don't have to wait for the government to tell us to boycott -- we can make choices for ourselves. I personally suggest trying to purchase only those goods manufactured in decent conditions (US union labor is one approximation).
Do you aim to depose the Chinese elites? Or Wal-Mart? Or both?
Yes, yes, and yes.
Somehow, there's no interest in freeing slaves when a Socialist Government are the slaveholders.
On the contrary, I think that State Capitalism (the government is your boss) is much worse than the US variety. At least in the US you can pretty much do your own thing as long as you don't threaten power. (If you do, though, watch out -- you might end up like Fred Hampton Sr. (not that I am endorsing his politics; I'm just using his death as an example of how freedom in the US has limits)).
I believe Capitalists are not uniformly evil. I believe they are kept in check in many instances by countervailing factors, like competition and government restriction.
They want to make money. They do not care about what happens to you, or to me, or to your family. That they are kept in check to some extent by other power centers does not change their evil intent. Of course, there are a few people around who own companies who are still nice people, but they definitely are the exception, from what I can see. In fact, I have seen people I know get much less nice after they get more power within a company.
Of course, (as the refrain goes), it's more complicated than just State vs Capital, because powerful businessmen tend to rotate through influential positions in the State, and because elections are financed by private Capital. So you get situations where the Clinton administration helped out the banking industry, the Bush administration is helping out the oil industry, etc., while at other points these people are expanding the power of the State at the expense of business (examples of the latter being Clinton's attempted health care nationalization, and Bush's expanded police powers).
Notice that nowhere in this struggle does anyone push for rights for individuals, other than those individuals themselves, and grassroots organizations like the ACLU and EFF.
Notice also how this points out how much of a crock US Libertarianism is -- remove the State from the equation, and private Capital will ride roughshod over everyone.
The evil done by the likes of the Chinese elite, and other despots, is much more problematic and more centralized. The Chinese elite control more power and influence than any Oil company or Wal-Mart could ever dream of wielding.
The owners of those companies *do* dream of having that kind of power and influence. Some more mergers, and they could start to get there -- this is why States sometimes oppose mega-mergers.
And in certain contexts (Nigeria, for instance) oil companies *do* actually have as much power as the State. Sometimes they are backed up by US military power (subject to the tensions I mentioned earlier).
A sensible bottom-up approach to the problems of the world.
Lately I've gotten very interested in anarchism. It's all about bottom-up problem solving, based on personal responsibility, while acknowledging our existence as social beings. It's about not expecting people to do things *for* us, and about asserting our ability to solve the problems ourselves, democratically.
