3 ms·
I am reminded of this excerpt from Orwell’s Road to Wigan Pier, discussing attitudes to colonialism in Britain: (In other words, it is easy to sneer at US cont
by graeme 8y ago
I am reminded of this excerpt from Orwell’s Road to Wigan Pier, discussing attitudes to colonialism in Britain:
(In other words, it is easy to sneer at US control of the internet, but do people who do so actually want the alternative on offer)
“The same streak of soggy half-baked insincerity runs through all 'advanced' opinion. Take the question of imperialism, for instance. Every left-wing 'intellectual' is, as a matter of course, an anti-imperialist. He claims to be outside the empire-racket as automatically and self-righteously as he claims to be outside theclass-racket. Even the right-wing 'intellectual', who is not definitely in revolt against British imperialism, pretends to regard it with a sort
of amused detachment. It is so easy to be witty about the British Empire. The White Man's Burden and 'Rule, Britannia' and Kipling's novels and Anglo-Indian bores--who could even mention such things without a snigger?
And is there any cultured person who has not at least
once in his life made a joke about that old Indian havildar who said that if the British left India there would not be a rupee or a virgin left between Peshawar and Delhi (or wherever it was)? That is the attitude of the typical left-winger towards imperialism, and athoroughly flabby, boneless attitude it is. For in the last resort, the only important question is. Do you want the British Empire to hold
together or do you want it to disintegrate? And at the bottom of his heart no Englishman, least of all the kind of person who is witty about Anglo-Indian colonels, does want it to disintegrate. For, apart from any other consideration, the high standard of life we enjoy in England depends upon our keeping a tight hold on the Empire, particularly the
tropical portions of it such as India and Africa. Under the capitalist system, in order that England may live in comparative comfort, a hundred million Indians must live on the verge of starvation--an evil state of affairs, but you acquiesce in it every time you step into a taxi or eat a plate of strawberries and cream. The alternative is to throw the Empire overboard and reduce England to a cold and unimportant little island where we should all have to work very hard and live mainly on herrings and potatoes. That is the very last thing that any left-winger wants. Yet the left-winger continues to feel that he has no moral responsibility for imperialism. He is perfectly ready to accept the products of Empire and to save his soul by sneering at the people who
hold the Empire together.”
- Leary 8y agoI read this passage as calling out the hypocrisy of the English intellectuals who benefit from colonialism in India while flippantly call out its moral faults. It is not making a statement that imperialism is better than its alternative. Indeed Orwell himself calls out the overbearing attitude of the British "flabby" and "boneless"
- graeme 8y agoWhat I meant to suggest is that many people in the US took for granted the benefits of their hegemony, much like the British intellectuals took for granted the benefits of their imperialism. Hence, it may be a surprise to some that loss of US hegemony may be replaced by a China-ization of the internet outside of China. Orwell was an anti-imperialist. I didn’t mean to say that imperialism was a good thing - that wasn’t what he was saying. (US hegemony may or may not be a good thing compared to the alternative - that will only become clear with time. I think it’s less obvious than in the case of imperialism)