3 ms·

Why not look at decolonization as a step forward instead? Why not collect restitution from the colonial/imperial powers that have been extracting wealth from So

Why not look at decolonization as a step forward instead? Why not collect restitution from the colonial/imperial powers that have been extracting wealth from South Asia for centuries? Why not use natural resources for the local population? https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00472336.2018.1506043?journalCode=rjoc20 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00472336.2018.15... https://www.dandc.eu/en/article/contemporary-bangladeshi-law-still-largely-colonial-nature-well-spirit https://www.dandc.eu/en/article/contemporary-bangladeshi-law...

rayiner 6y ago
“Decolonization” is, as the article observes, usually an attempt to eliminate the influence of western institutions, culture, and thought. That would be a huge step backward. It would be cutting off your nose to spite your face. Restitution is a separate issue. I think it would be fair for the British to return wealth they expropriated, but I’m not holding my breath. More to the point: I wouldn’t trust anyone who advocates “decolonization” to do what’s the best thing for the country going forward. I’ll stick with the British colonial legacy rather than invite a new wave of intellectual colonization from western left-wing universities. If the developed world wants to destroy itself with those ideas, let that be their problem.
- godelzilla 6y ago
  > "Decolonization" is, as the Economist defines it... FTFY. If you're going to use a colonizer magazine's definition of decolonization, then of course it'll sound bad.
  - pinkfoot 6y ago
    … because in your world it is all factions, no one can make an independent rational assessment of anything, so if they are not on your team you can just dismiss them out of hand?
SuoDuanDao 6y ago
People I respect use the term decolonisation so I'm trying to keep an open mind about it, but I'm unclear what it means and suspect there may be a motte-and-bailey strategy at play around it. Could you explain where the dividing line is between decolonisation and cultural segregationism?

rayiner 6y ago

“Decolonization” is, as the article observes, usually an attempt to eliminate the influence of western institutions, culture, and thought. That would be a huge step backward. It would be cutting off your nose to spite your face. Restitution is a separate issue. I think it would be fair for the British to return wealth they expropriated, but I’m not holding my breath. More to the point: I wouldn’t trust anyone who advocates “decolonization” to do what’s the best thing for the country going forward. I’ll stick with the British colonial legacy rather than invite a new wave of intellectual colonization from western left-wing universities. If the developed world wants to destroy itself with those ideas, let that be their problem.

godelzilla 6y ago
> "Decolonization" is, as the Economist defines it... FTFY. If you're going to use a colonizer magazine's definition of decolonization, then of course it'll sound bad.
- pinkfoot 6y ago
  … because in your world it is all factions, no one can make an independent rational assessment of anything, so if they are not on your team you can just dismiss them out of hand?

SuoDuanDao 6y ago

People I respect use the term decolonisation so I'm trying to keep an open mind about it, but I'm unclear what it means and suspect there may be a motte-and-bailey strategy at play around it. Could you explain where the dividing line is between decolonisation and cultural segregationism?