3 ms·

People are alive today who experienced apartheid, who cannot visit their family because of the India–Pakistan border, or who remember when the Ireland–Northern

People are alive today who experienced apartheid, who cannot visit their family because of the India–Pakistan border, or who remember when the Ireland–Northern Ireland border was "troubled". (What an amazing euphemism for a horrific memory.) The events I talked about, and so many more, are not just etched upon the history of the British Empire, but have repercussions which echo to the current day. And yeah, either an action was a crime against humanity or it wasn't; either it was a war crime or it wasn't. We have an international system for this, but the British and American Empires refuse to submit to it, partially because they can't guarantee that the Russian and Chinese will also submit to the rule of international law, and partially because they know that it will be the end of the imperial era.

tomxor 6y ago
I'm not sure what you are arguing. That remnants of the British empire still exists? that present is derived from past? or that there are current events as well as these historic ones? Whichever, is it then more constructive to focus on who is the most guilty? or try to prevent bad shit from happening again and look at the finer points rather than invoke vengeful attitudes? My point was that when we are so focused on who is worst, who is the evil one by framing things in terms of blame, the entire scenario is coloured that way. This doesn't seem useful, it's just a fairy tale, the evil vilain in a Disney film that does not exist in reality. I think this can apply to present day events as much as past - I think I was foolish to hang that extra argument of "past" on this more fundamental one since all the replies are focusing on that.
- Kednicma 6y ago
  I'm arguing that colonialism has lasting negative pragmatic effects in the world. Further, I'm arguing that we should not practice colonialism, and that we should actively work to decolonize; this makes me one of the anti-colonialists whose narrative is being questioned by the original article's author. What are you arguing? I recognize the tactic as one of the most ancient: You're scooping up handfuls of sand and throwing it in the air to try to make everything harder to see. From my perspective, it's almost as if you're anti-anti-colonialist, but that's a rude accusation to make without hard evidence. Either way, I can't tell where you're headed and it feels like you just wanted to make sure that the thread was derailed.
  - tomxor 6y ago
    > What are you arguing? I recognize the tactic as one of the most ancient: You're scooping up handfuls of sand and throwing it in the air to try to make everything harder to see. Reality _is_ harder to see, this is my entire point, to not quantize massive complex events into 0 and 1.

tomxor 6y ago

I'm not sure what you are arguing. That remnants of the British empire still exists? that present is derived from past? or that there are current events as well as these historic ones? Whichever, is it then more constructive to focus on who is the most guilty? or try to prevent bad shit from happening again and look at the finer points rather than invoke vengeful attitudes? My point was that when we are so focused on who is worst, who is the evil one by framing things in terms of blame, the entire scenario is coloured that way. This doesn't seem useful, it's just a fairy tale, the evil vilain in a Disney film that does not exist in reality. I think this can apply to present day events as much as past - I think I was foolish to hang that extra argument of "past" on this more fundamental one since all the replies are focusing on that.

Kednicma 6y ago
I'm arguing that colonialism has lasting negative pragmatic effects in the world. Further, I'm arguing that we should not practice colonialism, and that we should actively work to decolonize; this makes me one of the anti-colonialists whose narrative is being questioned by the original article's author. What are you arguing? I recognize the tactic as one of the most ancient: You're scooping up handfuls of sand and throwing it in the air to try to make everything harder to see. From my perspective, it's almost as if you're anti-anti-colonialist, but that's a rude accusation to make without hard evidence. Either way, I can't tell where you're headed and it feels like you just wanted to make sure that the thread was derailed.
- tomxor 6y ago
  > What are you arguing? I recognize the tactic as one of the most ancient: You're scooping up handfuls of sand and throwing it in the air to try to make everything harder to see. Reality _is_ harder to see, this is my entire point, to not quantize massive complex events into 0 and 1.