When I was going through lessons in history, I cannot help but wonder if there is a right for anyone to "colonialise" others? During Geography lessons long long time ago, I learnt about the push and pull factors that caused people to migrate. It might be that in one's home country, there were not enough food and jobs, so by migrating somewhere else, there could be more stability. This is true of the migrants from China who came to Southeast Asia to carve out a better life.
It is not wrong to migrate and explore new frontiers, but should explorers or early settlers kill or repress the natives? How many Native Americans, Aboriginals and Maoris have been wiped out because the land was slowly being settled? What about the ancient Maya and Inca civilisation, which are now extinct? The early explorers to these parts came and took away not just riches, but the entire land, developing it for their own use and profit, killing and imprisoning any natives that stood in their ways.
I was born after independence, so I have never experienced any form of repression. However, the part of the world I come from has been pretty lucky, because except for the time when the country was under Japanese rule, and whose soldiers tortured the people mercilessly, the natives were not really repressed during Colonial times. At least there was opportunity for schooling, freedom of trade and scholarship.
Come to think of it, somehow all those Commonwealth countries (or any other countries that have been colonialised by anyone) always seem to be profitable to those who used to run the countries. Makes sense actually, afterall, who in the right mind will bother about setting up any bases in any country if they cannot gain anything from the country in question?
Colonialism is not totally wrong. If we had not had British rule in the past, we would not be learning English or have a Western education. We would not have been a developed society (although the development comes from our own efforts, but these were lessons which our ex colonial masters taught us). We would probably still have been a backward, third world country, not knowing how to fend for ourselves, falling to the next country that wanted to take over us.
If America had not been settled, it would not have been the country it is today, still one of the super powers. Same goes for Australia and New Zealand, despite being laid-back, the country itself is pretty prosperous and developed. Places like South Africa and Nigeria too, the better-developed countries of the African continent. Somehow all those countries that had been under Western rulers seem to prosper and develop pretty well in comparison to others.
There are many things one can learn from countries that are more developed. Like the British law we adopted, and the literature. There are also many things the Western world had learnt from their colonies, for instance, introducing chocolate to Europe from the West Indies.
It is one thing colonising a country for profit, but another thing showing supremacy over the natives. Why would those in the past think it is right to get Africans or black-skinned people (and even Asians) as slaves, lord over them like masters, and treat them as second-class? Are they not people, like everyone else, and entitled to same rights, no matter what skin colour?
Or why would anyone think it is right to plummet the country, draining the country of its own rich resources like oil, diamonds, minerals, just for their own profits? Afterall, if the country itself is full of resources that can make it rich, should anyone has the right to exploit? Would it not be better to let the country use the riches to help its own people?
As a result, these countries got exploited so much that they end up being in more poverty than before. And once the resources have been used up, what then? The colonial masters gave up and went to find other places to explore, not caring about what happened to the people. So many lives have been killed, culture forgotten, and country in an equal mess, all for the sake of profitting some others!
Things may be getting better in modern times, but even with more education, technology and development, it is sad to see that some people still view themselves as above others.
It is not wrong to migrate and explore new frontiers, but should explorers or early settlers kill or repress the natives? How many Native Americans, Aboriginals and Maoris have been wiped out because the land was slowly being settled? What about the ancient Maya and Inca civilisation, which are now extinct? The early explorers to these parts came and took away not just riches, but the entire land, developing it for their own use and profit, killing and imprisoning any natives that stood in their ways.
I was born after independence, so I have never experienced any form of repression. However, the part of the world I come from has been pretty lucky, because except for the time when the country was under Japanese rule, and whose soldiers tortured the people mercilessly, the natives were not really repressed during Colonial times. At least there was opportunity for schooling, freedom of trade and scholarship.
Come to think of it, somehow all those Commonwealth countries (or any other countries that have been colonialised by anyone) always seem to be profitable to those who used to run the countries. Makes sense actually, afterall, who in the right mind will bother about setting up any bases in any country if they cannot gain anything from the country in question?
Colonialism is not totally wrong. If we had not had British rule in the past, we would not be learning English or have a Western education. We would not have been a developed society (although the development comes from our own efforts, but these were lessons which our ex colonial masters taught us). We would probably still have been a backward, third world country, not knowing how to fend for ourselves, falling to the next country that wanted to take over us.
If America had not been settled, it would not have been the country it is today, still one of the super powers. Same goes for Australia and New Zealand, despite being laid-back, the country itself is pretty prosperous and developed. Places like South Africa and Nigeria too, the better-developed countries of the African continent. Somehow all those countries that had been under Western rulers seem to prosper and develop pretty well in comparison to others.
There are many things one can learn from countries that are more developed. Like the British law we adopted, and the literature. There are also many things the Western world had learnt from their colonies, for instance, introducing chocolate to Europe from the West Indies.
It is one thing colonising a country for profit, but another thing showing supremacy over the natives. Why would those in the past think it is right to get Africans or black-skinned people (and even Asians) as slaves, lord over them like masters, and treat them as second-class? Are they not people, like everyone else, and entitled to same rights, no matter what skin colour?
Or why would anyone think it is right to plummet the country, draining the country of its own rich resources like oil, diamonds, minerals, just for their own profits? Afterall, if the country itself is full of resources that can make it rich, should anyone has the right to exploit? Would it not be better to let the country use the riches to help its own people?
As a result, these countries got exploited so much that they end up being in more poverty than before. And once the resources have been used up, what then? The colonial masters gave up and went to find other places to explore, not caring about what happened to the people. So many lives have been killed, culture forgotten, and country in an equal mess, all for the sake of profitting some others!
Things may be getting better in modern times, but even with more education, technology and development, it is sad to see that some people still view themselves as above others.
4 comments:
I disapprove of colonialism because it stems for the notion that other peoples and nations are rightfully your property and chattel.
They may have done good, or tehy may have done harm (a good example is the difference between the Philippine and South American experience of Spanish colonization - the former was quite positive, the latter quite negative - yet the same colonisers).
I believe every nation, indeed every individual, has the fundamental right to lead their own life unfettered by others. Assuming of course, the nation or individual is not threatening or harming others in living their life.
I feel if someone does not want to abide by the laws, rules, precepts of a land, (s)he should be permitted to leave without hindrence (instead of being thrown in jail or executed, as happens in so many countries).
Yes, I agree. Whch is why I feel really disgusted that native people can be put to death and races wiped out just because they resisted the early settlers.
However, my views extend further than simply colonialism or slavery. I am equally disappointed by women who want their man to be a hunter / pursuer and they play role of trophy or catch.
It can work great when they are 20 and pretty, but when they are 40 and weathered, no man will look at them and they become gross caricatures.
Women all like to be pursued, no matter what age. To a lot of women, they feel if the man is really interested in her, he should be the one pursuing her.
That is not to say I agree though. THe effort should come from both parties, not just one, or else the interest will die out.
Post a Comment