It's always an interesting tossup of pros and cons. Probably more cons in the end but I'm sure it's case-by-case. Good discussion.
People defended slavery by comparing the benefits to leaving the slaves in Africa.
There are benefits to exploitation - and prices, including freedom.
In a perfect world, the end of colonization would include 'real independance' for nations to develop.
But in the real word, it usually doesn't.
The primary goal of colonization was the exploitation of a nation's resources cheaply. On the other hand, the primary goal of post-colonial poicy is the exploitation of a nation's resources cheaply.
The methods change.The tradeoffs change. The costs to the dominant nations - colonial forces, rebellious wars - change.
Not many have much of a clue about the policies. The CIA isn't acting to ensure malleable corporate-serving governments around the world, it's collecting data for its factbook.
It's always an interesting tossup of pros and cons. Probably more cons in the end but I'm sure it's case-by-case. Good discussion.
So in other words you found a journalist and a language professor and dismiss peer reviewed historians as 'pro-imperialism'. That makes no sense unless your only goal is to demonize the British. Which seems entirely probable since you also ignore other great empires, their conquests, and destruction and solely focus on Brits. Also you Ignore modern genocides we should be drawing attention to which can actually be stopped. Not just here either almost every post. So what's the deal?
I have no love for Brits buy Lawrence was a man for all peoples like we all should be. Are you Indian?
I think I found where bias lies and desire to blame all things on Brits -
For India "Colonialism" was a very good thing. I have 3 reasons for that:
(All considering Britishers never ruled India)
1.The modern Infrastructure of Rails and Roads would have very likely not been there in 1947.
2. "India" would have been much smaller geographically. No one united India like the Britishers, Southern and Eastern India would have been separate countries.
3. India (north central which would have been a separate country) would have become a "Muslim nation".
the alternate would have been india languishing under mughal rule. If the brits hadnt colonized us, we would probably be an islamic nation today.
You say that as though it would be a bad thing [India being Muslim majority].
Not only that, but in some places it was helpful. The American Empire in the Philippines nearly wiped out cholera, greatly reduced malaria, and almost wiped out smallpox.
Those were different than what the British did. The british ruled with thier white power racist fists - oppressing non-white minorities. While the Arabs only sought to spread Islam, the Mongols to spread buddhism and the Japanese to force racism out of Asia [the british].
The sheer volume of murdered civilians posed a formidable logistical challenge when it came to disposing of the bodies. Many Chinese were conscripted into "burial teams", an experience they would later recall as horrifically traumatic.
You say that as though it would be a bad thing [India being Muslim majority].
I am at heart what one might call a cultural imperialist. I believe in the superiority of Western civilization and values, and I absolutely reject the idea that all cultures are equally valid, just different. That being said, I'm also a realist about the futility of trying to fix or improve inferior societies. I wish that we could drag places like Afghanistan into the 21st century, but real life experience has shown that it simply doesn't work. In principal I think that colonialism could have been a good thing under some circumstances, but in reality you can't force people into the modern world.
You say that as though it would be a bad thing [India being Muslim majority].
I am at heart what one might call a cultural imperialist. I believe in the superiority of Western civilization and values, and I absolutely reject the idea that all cultures are equally valid, just different. That being said, I'm also a realist about the futility of trying to fix or improve inferior societies. I wish that we could drag places like Afghanistan into the 21st century, but real life experience has shown that it simply doesn't work. In principal I think that colonialism could have been a good thing under some circumstances, but in reality you can't force people into the modern world.
They are too whether they admit it or not, that's why they move in droves to Western countries and many remaining in their own see benefit of hard fought freedoms and mixed economies as this story points out. Japan is another they would like to move to but they don't anyone in.
I was thinking that the birth rate in Western countries is so low because they see no future in Western civilization and values for their children.
I was thinking that the birth rate in Western countries is so low because they see no future in Western civilization and values for their children.
Or, western countries treat thier women like humans and not like baby factories. Getting a education and working, and using condoms to have managable sized families kind of takes a toll on birth rate.
Of course before that happened, the PhilippineAmerican War killed a million civilians in the worst atrocities ever committed by the US military.