Colonialism wasn't all bad‚ says Helen Zille

[Vrotappel]

Really? People on twitter tried to make her admit that even though somebody else oppressed "her people", it wasn't "all bad" as she says.

Not so easy when the shoe is on the other foot.

Well if you see the Jews as HER people you most probably see the Afrikaner republics of the 1890s as MY people. Do you?

 

[Knyro]

/snip

Lol @ false equivalency. Would you rather be a black person under colonialism a few centuries ago? Or get gassed?

Quite frankly I'm not sure which is worse. Permanent enslavement, or a quick death.

 

[Knyro]

Well if you see the Jews as HER people you most probably see the Afrikaner republics of the 1890s as MY people. Do you?

The fact that I put it in inverted commas should tell you something.

 

[Spizz]

Yeah right. Under colonialism I never would have had the chance to accumulate the education I have today.

Eh? Pretty much no one would have had that chance. Black, white or anyone else. Further education was a privilege enjoyed by very few and even then they were wealthy and well to do families. And the white Afrikaners for example were among the poorest people in SA with basic education until Apartheid swung things in their favour. Colonialism did nothing for them.

Anyway, you are conveniently ignoring the fact that colonialists built schools and taught whole populations. Rhodesia for example had the highest literacy rate in the whole of Africa. Not any more of course.

The infrastructure in Africa was built to extract mineral wealth from the continent and other economies popped up around it naturally. All the benefits I have now are incidental as well. Colonialism is not a necessary condition for the spread of knowledge and technology. Thus any benefits are a side-effect.

Perhaps. But that is the whole point of the discussion in the first place. There is no certainty, it can be argued either way but no-one can say anything for definite.

 

[Spizz]

Of course it is. You think Europeans, with the views held at the time. Came here to share all their cool tech with Africa and live in peace? Ha. Extracting wealth from colonies to enrich the homeland was the order of the day. Colonialism is driven by economics.

Indeed. But do you think colonialists could extract said wealth without order? Infrastructure was essential to the long term plan.

 

[Spizz]

Lol @ false equivalency. Would you rather be a black person under colonialism a few centuries ago? Or get gassed?

You can lol all you want. It is a false equivalency and furthermore, it is completely irrelevant to South African politics.

Quite frankly I'm not sure which is worse. Permanent enslavement, or a quick death.

Permanent enslavement? What are you on about?

EDIT: And quick death? Holy crapp, you are seriously misguided my friend. Maybe you should look beyond taking sides because of your skin colour and get a few facts. Go and look up the Warsaw ghetto for example or read up on Anne Frank even.

 

[Vrotappel]

The fact that I put it in inverted commas should tell you something.

What would that be?

 

[Spizz]

The fact that I put it in inverted commas should tell you something.

What should it tell us? I don't get it.

 

[Knyro]

Eh? Pretty much no one would have had that chance. Black, white or anyone else. Further education was a privilege enjoyed by very few and even then they were wealthy and well to do families. And the white Afrikaners for example were among the poorest people in SA with basic education until Apartheid swung things in their favour. Colonialism did nothing for them.

Anyway, you are conveniently ignoring the fact that colonialists built schools and taught whole populations. Rhodesia for example had the highest literacy rate in the whole of Africa. Not any more of course.

I'm not ignoring anything. I could also rattle off things the Nazis did which benefit us today.

You were much better off being white that black in those days, even if you were poor.

Perhaps. But that is the whole point of the discussion in the first place. There is no certainty, it can be argued either way but no-one can say anything for definite.

Yes it can. Was Japan colonised by Europe? No. Did European knowledge and tech make it there anyway? Yes. Therefore colonialism is not a necessary condition for advancement.

So why should we tolerate this "If colonialism didn't happen you wouldn't have X" nonsense?

 

[Nick333]

Of course it is. You think Europeans, with the views held at the time. Came here to share all their cool tech with Africa and live in peace? Ha. Extracting wealth from colonies to enrich the homeland was the order of the day. Colonialism is driven by economics.

Here's the cold hard truth: there would have never been any black professionals (think Nelson Mandela and extended families ) if there had been no intention on the colonialists for the betterment of blacks. No Gandhi either. No fccking Pol Pot.

The fact is one colonial Xhoza doctor in 1920 is one better than the Xhoza people could have managed on their own. That on its own would be a marked improvement brought by colonialism. There were black professionals in 1920. And 1930, and 40 and etc.

 

[Knyro]

Here's the cold hard truth: there would have never been any black professionals (think Nelson Mandela and extended families ) if there had been no intention on the colonialists for the betterment of blacks. No Gandhi either. No fccking Pol Pot.

The fact is one colonial Xhoza doctor in 1920 is one better than the Xhoza people could have managed on their own. That on its own would be a marked improvement brought by colonialism. There were black professionals in 1920. And 1930, and 40 and etc.

"betterment of blacks" Ha. More like workers to support the wealth extraction machine. Having large population of useless uneducated people in your colony is a burden. Killing them off is a huge undertaking and a waste of human capital. Much better to have them be semi-prodictive and docile, while keeping them under your thumb.

You probably think it was out of the goodness of their hearts of something.

"Hewers of wood and drawers of water".

 

[Vrotappel]

"betterment of blacks" Ha. More like workers to support the wealth extraction machine. Having large population of useless uneducated people in your colony is a burden. Killing them off is a huge undertaking and a waste of human capital. Much better to have them be semi-prodictive and docile, while keeping them under your thumb.

You probably think it was out of the goodness of their hearts of something.

"Hewers of wood and drawers of water".

And?

 

[Spizz]

I'm not ignoring anything. I could also rattle off things the Nazis did which benefit us today.

You were much better off being white that black in those days, even if you were poor.

Sure. Probably still the same today.

Yes it can. Was Japan colonised by Europe? No. Did European knowledge and tech make it there anyway? Yes. Therefore colonialism is not a necessary condition for advancement.

So why should we tolerate this "If colonialism didn't happen you wouldn't have X" nonsense?

Who said only colonialism advanced any nation or society? But surely you, with your knowledge of Japan, cannot compare Japan and sub Saharan Africa before there was any interaction with Europe?

I have no idea really apart from what I pick up loosely, but Japan was probably more advanced in those days in many ways more than Europe was, no? Or was Japan and Africa on a par wrt development, infrastructure, law & order, knowledge & writing?

Nope, I don't think Japan needed Europe at all, but no doubt collaboration has helped both sides.

Would you say the same about Africa?

 

[Knyro]

And?

Therefore any benefits incurred by these people because of colonialsm is a side-effect. The main aim is wealth extraction.

 

[Temujin]

"betterment of blacks" Ha. More like workers to support the wealth extraction machine. Having large population of useless uneducated people in your colony is a burden. Killing them off is a huge undertaking and a waste of human capital. Much better to have them be semi-prodictive and docile, while keeping them under your thumb.

You probably think it was out of the goodness of their hearts of something.

"Hewers of wood and drawers of water".

So, no different than it was before colonialism... although, shaka did slaughter his own people who weren't sad enough and kill people who got pregnant so... /shrug

 

[Knyro]

Sure. Probably still the same today.





Who said only colonialism advanced any nation or society? But surely you, with your knowledge of Japan, cannot compare Japan and sub Saharan Africa before there was any interaction with Europe?

I have no idea really apart from what I pick up loosely, but Japan was probably more advanced in those days in many ways more than Europe was, no? Or was Japan and Africa on a par wrt development, infrastructure, law & order, knowledge & writing?

Nope, I don't think Japan needed Europe at all, but no doubt collaboration has helped both sides.

Would you say the same about Africa?

You know what a backwater Japan used to be before Chinese influence? There is a reason they use their writing system.

Over time knowledge flowed from China to Japan (again no colonialism) until it eventually became the Japan Europeans encountered. That just further proves my point.

 

[Spizz]

"betterment of blacks" Ha. More like workers to support the wealth extraction machine. Having large population of useless uneducated people in your colony is a burden. Killing them off is a huge undertaking and a waste of human capital. Much better to have them be semi-prodictive and docile, while keeping them under your thumb.

You probably think it was out of the goodness of their hearts of something.

"Hewers of wood and drawers of water".

Were the Zulus who wiped out the British at Isanlwana under the thumb, semi productive and/or docile?

And as an aside but not really the point, that was in 1879. Hundreds of years after colonialist influence. So what kind of developments did this type of self sufficient and closed society have? Any flushing toilets or steam engine? A pencil even?

 

[Nick333]

"betterment of blacks" Ha. More like workers to support the wealth extraction machine. Having large population of useless uneducated people in your colony is a burden. Killing them off is a huge undertaking and a waste of human capital. Much better to have them be semi-prodictive and docile, while keeping them under your thumb.

You probably think it was out of the goodness of their hearts of something.

"Hewers of wood and drawers of water".

All I'm going to say is that all I hear is an intelligent, educated, black person making lame excuses while his country goes to shyt.

So, hahaha, everything you say is true. You got me. What now biotch?

Oh, ja. Vok all. Countries still burning and mathematicians are less and less valuable than day labourers by the sec. The market just has to adjust. Hang on a sec,wont be long my proud black bro.

 

[Knyro]

All I'm going to say is that all I hear is an intelligent, educated, black person making lame excuses while his country goes to shyt.

So, hahaha, everything you say is true. You got me. What now biotch?

Oh, ja. Vok all. Countries still burning and mathematicians are less and less valuable than day labourers by the sec. The market just has to adjust. Hang on a sec,wont be long my proud black bro.

I'm not making excuses. I'm saying don't come here acting like Europeans came here to do my ancestors any favours.

Now what? Nothing.

Like most people on MyBB I'm just trying to get on with my life in peace.

 

[Spizz]

Therefore any benefits incurred by these people because of colonialsm is a side-effect. The main aim is wealth extraction.

Yes, it was/is. And the British approached it very differently from the French for example. The British believed in bringing systems and infrastructure as evidenced in SA, whereas the French just took and invested a minimum. I've bene in Togo and Chad for example. They re complete broken down schitholes. The French brought nothing much and robbed everything.