You on the left have a tendency to believe that rights belong to groups rather than individuals. I believe in the rights of groups via the individual, not the other way around.

hopefully you can see the obvious logical failure in that statement without any need on my part to quote the reference to tribalism to which you were responding (although the tribal aspect does boost it almost to the level of entertainment).

Do you think, as I do, that sometimes colonialism, despite its reputation, really is a good way to go?

only in the sense that fascism, despite its drawbacks, provides a great environment in which to ensure trains arrive and depart exactly on schedule.

That was a cheap shot, a classic lefty-bash that has no relevance to the question. However, I also could quite easily mount the same argument against the Right if I used different examples. It's like the good old "left wingers want laws to make everything good, whereas the Right is all libertarian": It depends whether you're talking about abortion or racism.

Apparently you felt your opinions on the "rights of tribes" had some bearing on the discussion at hand. So I had a little something to say about that. Feel free to make any flame you want. I don't get bent out of shape about that stuff. Be truthful, and be reasonable. That's all.

Well Lee1776 seems to think he has a fair idea. But you're right, we can't know exactly, but then we can't know exactly what France was like before the toppling of the monarchy either because all history is biased.

"Exact" is not the question. To know exactly is to know everything, and that can't even be done contemporarily. We can have a good idea based on available evidence. Literature and archaeology can do excellent jobs at creating a picture of the past. Biases are natural. But we as human being have brains that are quite adept at figuring that out. We have the ability to look critically at things. Whether we choose to do so is another matter.

With regards to Africa, we are aware of its pre-colonial primitiveness through various means. While Arab and European sources may have been biased with respect to Africans, the very fact that the African lacked their own written language to counter is itself indicative of their primitiveness. There's no evidence of advanced science, architecture, transportation, or philosophy in the area.

In order for a culture to survive, it has to be able to defend itself. The tribal structure, while perhaps appropriate to sustain themselves for millennia in the past, was not able to do so in the modern world.

The dinosaurs did just fine for hundreds of millions of years, but when the world changed, their inability to adapt led to their demise. Climatological and zoological evolution "buggered them up," too.

Africa's tribal system now exists in a world with increased population, contact with the outside world, and with automatic rifles and explosives rather than spears and shields.

hopefully you can see the obvious logical failure in that statement without any need on my part to quote the reference to tribalism to which you were responding (although the tribal aspect does boost it almost to the level of entertainment).

Repeat after me:

- Rights aren't granted to groups, they belong to individuals.

Repeat again and again and again:

- Rights aren't granted to groups, they belong to individuals.
- Rights aren't granted to groups, they belong to individuals.
- Rights aren't granted to groups, they belong to individuals.
- Rights aren't granted to groups, they belong to individuals.
- Rights aren't granted to groups, they belong to individuals.
- Rights aren't granted to groups, they belong to individuals.
- Rights aren't granted to groups, they belong to individuals.
- Rights aren't granted to groups, they belong to individuals.
- Rights aren't granted to groups, they belong to individuals.


By virtue of man being a social animal, individual rights can and will be applied collectively. Man is neither a hermit nor a drone.

only in the sense that fascism, despite its drawbacks, provides a great environment in which to ensure trains arrive and depart exactly on schedule.

If the idea "the lesser of two evils" does not make sense to you, perhaps you should spend your time reading Dr. Seuss. It might be better suited to your intellectual capabilities.

Zimbabwe is not better off than Rhodesia, no matter how you try to spin reality.

You on the left have a tendency to believe that rights belong to groups rather than individuals. I believe in the rights of groups via the individual, not the other way around.

if you--as an individual--had not been so caught up in the same sorta tribalism you were condemning, you might have spared us both the need to go thru this again (not to mention your repetitive chanting). i'll try to be a lil more clear this time. you're testing logic's limits by addressing your paen to individual over tribe with phrases such as 'you of the left'.

dr seuss eh kemo sabe?

Zimbabwe is not better off than Rhodesia, no matter how you try to spin reality

yall kill me. its okay to shove your ideas down others' throats this way...

Do you think, as I do, that sometimes colonialism, despite its reputation, really is a good way to go?

except, of course, when it might be you on the receiving end of all them green eggs n ham, uncle sam i am.

if you--as an individual--had not been so caught up in the same sorta tribalism you were condemning, you might have spared us both the need to go thru this again (not to mention your repetitive chanting). i'll try to be a lil more clear this time. you're testing logic's limits by addressing your paen to individual over tribe with phrases such as 'you of the left'.

Maybe you should learn what tribalism is:

1. A unit of sociopolitical organization consisting of a number of families, clans, or other groups who share a common ancestry and culture and among whom leadership is typically neither formalized nor permanent.

There's no euphemistic or metaphorical use on my part. Got that?

yall kill me. its okay to shove your ideas down others' throats this way...

Hey, whenever you feel like making your case, the rest of us will be waiting.

Do you think, as I do, that sometimes colonialism, despite its reputation, really is a good way to go? except, of course, when it might be you on the receiving end of all them green eggs n ham, uncle sam i am.

The only thing worse than being ignorant is being a smug bastard about your ignorance. Go back and read the discussion. It's obvious to everyone but the illiterate and the idealogue that the comment is in the context of "the lesser of two evils."

Link

Sunuvabitch!!.....I asked one simple question, and the floodgates opened. Nice to start a discussion, however.
Okay, you're obviously all much more learned than myself on the history of colonialism.
For my part, everything I've ever read on colonialism seemed to focus on its negative aspects; the exploitation of the masses, the advancement of imperialism, and of empires in general, etc. What never seemed seemed to be addressed, however, or was given little attention, is the fact that when the empires withdrew, and the people were freed, chaos mostly was the result.

They work or fight for years to earn their independence, then when they get it, they use it to go back to fighting amongst themselves, one of the things which most likely made it so easy for the invaders to conquer them to begin with.

Having never myself lived under colonial rule, I haven't really got much of a point of reference, but I have to say that the end of colonialism in the 20th century was definitely one of the many factors that made it the bloodiest century in history, mostly due to the afore-mentioned lack of adaptability among the more backward peoples.
I still say, however, that the spreading of demcratic principals among lesser nations would definitely be a step in the right direction.
All government is corrupt in some way; it's the nature of the beast. One of the greatest advantages of democracy, however, is that when we get a corrupt leader, we have the option of impeaching him/her or voting them out come the next election. Dictatorships obviously do not have that advantage.

Anything else I could say here would only be repeating what you all have said, and not quite so well. Thank you all for posting.

There's no euphemistic or metaphorical use on my part. Got that?

please forgive my ignorance in misperceiving you as a member of the 'those who sit on on the side from which the sun rises' lodge's powerful clan of 'bearers of the stick from which comes fire and death' society of the 'pale skinned men who defend their version of the old ones' beliefs' branch of the tribe of the mighty elephant currently headed by the war chief in the big white tipi on the potomac.

please forgive my ignorance in misperceiving you as a member of the 'those who sit on on the side from which the sun rises' lodge's powerful clan of 'bearers of the stick from which comes fire and death' society of the 'pale skinned men who defend their version of the old ones' beliefs' branch of the tribe of the mighty elephant currently headed by the war chief in the big white tipi on the potomac.

---kingbee

As a longtime member of that lodge, I say....

You're forgiven.

But let me add that life was further from a utopia before colonialism began. The Africans had been enslaving, sacrificing, eating and generally massacring each other long before Europeans arrived in Africa (and in greater numbers). The Zulus are said to have depopulated their and surrounding regions by over 50%. The Cherokee here in the US murdered an estimated 50,000 male men and boys during one raid alone on the tribes we call the mound dwellers of the Mississippi valley about 1500 years ago.

The Germans killed 6 million within the period of a decade. Stalin killed something like 20 million. America killed over 100,000 in two raids on two cities in 1945.

The Germans killed 6 million within the period of a decade. Stalin killed something like 20 million. America killed over 100,000 in two raids on two cities in 1945.

What does that have to do with colonialism? My point was to say that many people try to portray life before colonialism as one big happy place in order to make colonialism out to be the big bad wolf.

You also missed the fact that the area of what we call today as Germany was depopulated by 75% during the 100 years. But that has nothing to do with colonialism, just like your statement.

Also Germany and Stalin did most of the deaths to other own people, because they were not Democracies. The 100,000 (actually 237,062) Deaths you talk about in the Nuclear Bombing of Japan in 1945, prevented a much larger death count of not only US lives, but Japanese military and Civilian lives too. If you don't think that would have happened, just remember it is estimated that close to 40% of the civilian population on Okinawa did suicide attacks or committed suicide. Think of the death count for the invasion of the Japan’s main Islands.

That's My Two Cents

The Germans killed 6 million within the period of a decade. Stalin killed something like 20 million. America killed over 100,000 in two raids on two cities in 1945.

I, too, would like to know what this has to do with colonialism. Or is it just another attempt by a Leftie to lump the US in with two of history's greatest mass-murderers? Not even a nice try, and totally off the mark and completely out of line.
I still say that sometimes colonialism was the best alternative for some of the more "backward" peoples. I've seen nothing here that changes that view.
It gave some of them a certain stability regardless of the more negative aspects, of which there were many, of course.

I'd be curious to know whether the Lefties on here would still (or would they yet, rather) consider the USSR to have been an empire or a colonialist government.
They did, after all, "liberate" the nations of Eastern Europe from the Nazis only to establish a ring of friendly puppet goverments, which they directly controlled (best evidenced by Kruschev's remark "When I want to make the West scream, I squeeze its testicles....Berlin.") , between themselves and the Western nations.