10 ms·

> The Dutch councils of state and war always included merchants who had experience of trading and living abroad [...] As eloquently described by Mike Dash in "

> The Dutch councils of state and war always included merchants who had experience of trading and living abroad [...] As eloquently described by Mike Dash in "Batavia's Graveyard" most Dutch explorer ships had merchants, sailors, soldiers and civilians on board — ranked in that order. That is, not the captain but the bean counter would have final say on important matters. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/128824.Batavia_s_Graveyard https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/128824.Batavia_s_Graveya...

beebeepka 4y ago
I am not ashamed to say that I am jealous of the Dutch. Sometimes I wonder what built the society that is powering this genuinely incredible country. Thanks for the link
- pipo234 4y ago
  The book is in't in Dutch, though. ;-) Incredibly well written, historically accurate (for as far I could tell) and entertaining to read. Warm recommend.
- melvinmelih 4y ago
  > It has been estimated that during the 17th and 18th centuries, 660,000 to 1,135,000 enslaved people in total must have been transported to the territories under control of the Dutch East India Company. I wouldn't necessarily romanticize the exploitative colonialism of European explorers.
  - spyremeown 4y ago
    Even more so when the current economic prosperity of the colonizing countries is still very much derived from their past. Sadly, most people living in said countries today don't realize how set back the colonies really were due to exploitation and slavery.
    - inglor_cz 4y ago
      "Even more so when the current economic prosperity of the colonizing countries is still very much derived from their past." This does not pass the comparison test. Many highly prosperous European countries of today (Scandinavian countries, Northern Italy, Switzerland, Austria, Germany, Slovenia, Ireland) didn't have massive overseas holdings, or only for a short time. Portugal, Spain, Turkey and Russia, four huge empires that existed for centuries (one still extant) are on the poorer side of Europe. PT and ES got only moderately prosperous in the last two generations, after shedding their last colonial possessions.
      - spyremeown 4y ago
        >poorer side of Europe Which is still much, much wealthier than most of colonized nations... except for Russia, due to the extreme political decline after the fall of the USSR. >Many highly prosperous European countries of today didn't have massive overseas holdings, or only for a short time. And I never said "colonies are needed for wealth". What is your point, exactly?
        hahaxdxd123 4y ago
        > And I never said "colonies are needed for wealth". What is your point, exactly? I think the point is that it's not this simple: "Even more so when the current economic prosperity of the colonizing countries is still very much derived from their past." Poor countries that were colonized are definitely held back by it. The colonial powers left extremely extractive institutions that focused on funneling power and profits into small groups of people. When they left, those institutions and that culture stayed. But isn't it difficult to say that Spain or Portugal's "wealth" today derives from colonial holdings years and years back? What did they extract that lasts today? In those 400 years, did they not spend most of their extracted silver and gold on things that are trivialities today (porcelain, tea, etc)? Or waste it buying arms during civil wars and dictatorships? I mean there was mass starvation during Franco's regime. It seems to me likelier that their wealth comes from the things they have in common with prosperous countries that never were colonial powers (Taiwan, South Korea, etc). Educated populace, functioning capital markets, property rights, rule of law, etc.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - beebeepka 4y ago
    I am not disputing past atrocities or still ongoing exploitation. However, reducing everything to "they exploited others for X years" strikes me as dishonest. Some are born into wealth and don't accomplish anything. With others it's the exact opposite (but harder, duh). Could be just luck but I am not convinced. Take a look our neighboring Russia just across the Black Sea. By far the biggest country in the world, and yet their society sucks. I would like to know what drives these things
- mtalantikite 4y ago
  There was quite a lot of genocide that it was built upon: https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/08/10/dutch-colonial-history-indonesia-villains-victims/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/08/10/dutch-colonial-history-...
  - jacquesm 4y ago
    Yes, there was a lot of that. Our colonial history is nothing to be proud of. But Dutch engineering prowess is something to be proud of. The whole country is essentially a giant machine and if we collectively stopped maintaining it within a surprisingly short time large chunks of it would cease to exist.
    - dekhn 4y ago
      I've told lots of people the US should get prepared to pay the dutch to build the Great Atlantic and Pacific Seawalls. We should probably get started soon...
      - jacquesm 4y ago
        A decade ago or so... it's going to get terribly interesting in the next 20 years.
  - boplicity 4y ago
    Interesting that the article, subtitled "A refusal to confront colonial atrocities persists in the Netherlands," lead to you getting downvotes. Coincidence? I think not. The so-called "civilizing mission" continues to this day, with glorification of Dutch ideas and ideals, even though those ideals indeed led to mass atrocities. Such atrocities were often cited as "necessary," in order to impose "improvement" upon the victims society. This "civilizing mission" is often seen as worth it -- it includes many good ideas, after all. Even to this day, the respect for "civlizing" ideas remains, while the acknowledging of mass atrocities is often ignored, or covered up. Even worse, many of the people who committed atrocities are thought of as heroes.
    - 4y ago
- SanderNL 4y ago
  I’m curious. What is so incredible about it?
  - jacquesm 4y ago
    That by rights this country shouldn't exist, and that if we aren't careful soon it will stop to exist.
    - jeremyw 4y ago
      Any recommended material to learn about fragility in the Dutch system? You've made a number of comments in this vein. Do you see it as apart from the cycle of the successful? Wherein we slowly relax the effort is took to make success. And then deny these efforts altogether, and create fantasies of what _really_ brought success.
      - WJW 4y ago
        I think jacquesm means that rising sea levels (due to climate change) is a particular problem for a country where much of the land is below sea level.
        jacquesm 4y ago
        Yep.
      - jacquesm 4y ago
        I'm writing this from ~sea level, and there are large parts of the country around me that are below sea level, some more than just a little bit, think 2 to 3 meters and in extremes more than 6. As the sea level rises the risk of storm surges increases quite a bit. We have essentially barricaded the country against the sea up to a certain point. But beyond that the country would flood much like a bathtub would and even if all those barriers are closed the rivers will pour in water from the other side. Managing all this is tricky in the short term, difficult in the mid term and quite possibly impossible in the longer term if the sea level rise is more than anticipated when these defenses were built. And you can only raise them so much, if rivers no longer flow out then you'll end up flooded anyway.
- nebula8804 4y ago
  Sure they have clean streets, quiet cities and pretty quaint scenery...but have you seen their toilets? They are so freakin tiny. The dutch are skew on the taller side so I don't know how they deal with this. As a 6' 2 in person I hate it. Also the food isn't anything to celebrate. Having lived in both Amsterdam and the US, I greatly prefer the US and our larger houses with proper sized toilets.
  - Aeolun 4y ago
    Wut? What is your beef with Dutch toilets? I’m 6’4” and I can’t say it ever bothered me. The food is ok. It’s just that Dutch people seem to be a bit more utilitarian about food consumption (something I didn’t know until leaving the Netherlands).
    - nebula8804 4y ago
      >Wut? What is your beef with Dutch toilets? I’m 6’4” and I can’t say it ever bothered me. I explained already: they are too tiny. [1]: Dutch toilet: https://i0.wp.com/noplacelikeanywhere.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/20160911_133649.jpg https://i0.wp.com/noplacelikeanywhere.com/wp-content/uploads... [2]: American toilet: https://www.amazon.com/American-Standard-211AA-104-222-Toilet-Linen/dp/B006TIEOW2?th=1 https://www.amazon.com/American-Standard-211AA-104-222-Toile... The bathrooms are typically smaller as well. It can often be claustrophobic. (Although the bathrooms in France are the worst, I once couldn't even close the door because my legs were too long) >It’s just that Dutch people seem to be a bit more utilitarian about food consumption (something I didn’t know until leaving the Netherlands). Restaurant quality seemed poor during my time living there. Bitterballen is delicious the first time, afterwards its just grease food. Other than good cheese I can't seem to point to any particular Dutch foods that really stand out.
      - lucumo 4y ago
        > I explained already: they are too tiny. Hard to say without anything for scale. They look about the same size to me. They're different models though. The standing one would be considered a bit old-fashioned here. New toilets don't touch the ground for easier cleaning of the floor. And the flush compartment will be hidden in the wall just because it looks nice.
skrebbel 4y ago
This is because they weren’t explorer ships. They were trading ships first and foremost, owned by a large public for-profit corporation. It’s more like Maersk than like a navy. Exploration, or conquest, was not a goal. If it happened, it was just a means to an end. Thing is, trade is the most profitable when you get monopoly contracts with suppliers, especially when those suppliers are the only (known) suppliers of $THING. How do you get a monopoly contract? You make the supplier an offer they can’t refuse. All that fighting and fort building was only to enforce monopoly contracts, not empire building. Basically, to make sure the Portuguese didn't get their hands on those spices, so the price could stay high. Sometimes suppliers broke those deals and the Dutch took out the guns, and that’s what the soldiers came along for. Eg in the Travancore battles linked in another comment. They lost that one, but often they did not: For example, one day the people of the Banda islands, then the only source of nutmeg in the world, broke the monopoly deal they had made with the Dutch and sold nutmeg to the British too. The Dutch went in fully loaded, killed everybody (the entire archipelago population), and replaced them with Dutch settlers to farm the nutmeg. Problem solved, monopoly restored! No hard feelings, it’s just business. So yes! I concur! There’s just so much to learn from the Dutch East India Company! Who cares about all the genocide, we even have a VC fund[0] named after them, that’s how proud we are. [0] https://voccp.com/ https://voccp.com/
jillesvangurp 4y ago
My home country was a republic at the time. Made for some pragmatic leadership. While the French and the Spanish were basically pyramid schemes where wealth flowed to the top, the Dutch Republic was basically prospering on trade and attracting talent from all over Europe. Basically all the intellectuals and outcasts. Spanish Jews, French Huguenots, various refugees from German warring city states, etc. That made for a potent mix of wealth, trade, science, and relative religious freedom. The UK had their revolution in the 17th century, invited a Dutch king on the throne, and essentially copied all the best parts of Dutch practices. Basically, that's how they bootstrapped the British empire. The bank of England was created around the same time. Meanwhile the Dutch empire prospered for a while but fizzled out. Napoleon put an end to the republic. And after it's defeat, the British turned it into a monarchy.

beebeepka 4y ago

I am not ashamed to say that I am jealous of the Dutch. Sometimes I wonder what built the society that is powering this genuinely incredible country. Thanks for the link

pipo234 4y ago
The book is in't in Dutch, though. ;-) Incredibly well written, historically accurate (for as far I could tell) and entertaining to read. Warm recommend.
melvinmelih 4y ago
> It has been estimated that during the 17th and 18th centuries, 660,000 to 1,135,000 enslaved people in total must have been transported to the territories under control of the Dutch East India Company. I wouldn't necessarily romanticize the exploitative colonialism of European explorers.
- spyremeown 4y ago
  Even more so when the current economic prosperity of the colonizing countries is still very much derived from their past. Sadly, most people living in said countries today don't realize how set back the colonies really were due to exploitation and slavery.
  - inglor_cz 4y ago
    "Even more so when the current economic prosperity of the colonizing countries is still very much derived from their past." This does not pass the comparison test. Many highly prosperous European countries of today (Scandinavian countries, Northern Italy, Switzerland, Austria, Germany, Slovenia, Ireland) didn't have massive overseas holdings, or only for a short time. Portugal, Spain, Turkey and Russia, four huge empires that existed for centuries (one still extant) are on the poorer side of Europe. PT and ES got only moderately prosperous in the last two generations, after shedding their last colonial possessions.
    - spyremeown 4y ago
      >poorer side of Europe Which is still much, much wealthier than most of colonized nations... except for Russia, due to the extreme political decline after the fall of the USSR. >Many highly prosperous European countries of today didn't have massive overseas holdings, or only for a short time. And I never said "colonies are needed for wealth". What is your point, exactly?
      - hahaxdxd123 4y ago
        > And I never said "colonies are needed for wealth". What is your point, exactly? I think the point is that it's not this simple: "Even more so when the current economic prosperity of the colonizing countries is still very much derived from their past." Poor countries that were colonized are definitely held back by it. The colonial powers left extremely extractive institutions that focused on funneling power and profits into small groups of people. When they left, those institutions and that culture stayed. But isn't it difficult to say that Spain or Portugal's "wealth" today derives from colonial holdings years and years back? What did they extract that lasts today? In those 400 years, did they not spend most of their extracted silver and gold on things that are trivialities today (porcelain, tea, etc)? Or waste it buying arms during civil wars and dictatorships? I mean there was mass starvation during Franco's regime. It seems to me likelier that their wealth comes from the things they have in common with prosperous countries that never were colonial powers (Taiwan, South Korea, etc). Educated populace, functioning capital markets, property rights, rule of law, etc.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- beebeepka 4y ago
  I am not disputing past atrocities or still ongoing exploitation. However, reducing everything to "they exploited others for X years" strikes me as dishonest. Some are born into wealth and don't accomplish anything. With others it's the exact opposite (but harder, duh). Could be just luck but I am not convinced. Take a look our neighboring Russia just across the Black Sea. By far the biggest country in the world, and yet their society sucks. I would like to know what drives these things
mtalantikite 4y ago
There was quite a lot of genocide that it was built upon: https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/08/10/dutch-colonial-history-indonesia-villains-victims/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/08/10/dutch-colonial-history-...
- jacquesm 4y ago
  Yes, there was a lot of that. Our colonial history is nothing to be proud of. But Dutch engineering prowess is something to be proud of. The whole country is essentially a giant machine and if we collectively stopped maintaining it within a surprisingly short time large chunks of it would cease to exist.
  - dekhn 4y ago
    I've told lots of people the US should get prepared to pay the dutch to build the Great Atlantic and Pacific Seawalls. We should probably get started soon...
    - jacquesm 4y ago
      A decade ago or so... it's going to get terribly interesting in the next 20 years.
- boplicity 4y ago
  Interesting that the article, subtitled "A refusal to confront colonial atrocities persists in the Netherlands," lead to you getting downvotes. Coincidence? I think not. The so-called "civilizing mission" continues to this day, with glorification of Dutch ideas and ideals, even though those ideals indeed led to mass atrocities. Such atrocities were often cited as "necessary," in order to impose "improvement" upon the victims society. This "civilizing mission" is often seen as worth it -- it includes many good ideas, after all. Even to this day, the respect for "civlizing" ideas remains, while the acknowledging of mass atrocities is often ignored, or covered up. Even worse, many of the people who committed atrocities are thought of as heroes.
  - 4y ago
SanderNL 4y ago
I’m curious. What is so incredible about it?
- jacquesm 4y ago
  That by rights this country shouldn't exist, and that if we aren't careful soon it will stop to exist.
  - jeremyw 4y ago
    Any recommended material to learn about fragility in the Dutch system? You've made a number of comments in this vein. Do you see it as apart from the cycle of the successful? Wherein we slowly relax the effort is took to make success. And then deny these efforts altogether, and create fantasies of what _really_ brought success.
    - WJW 4y ago
      I think jacquesm means that rising sea levels (due to climate change) is a particular problem for a country where much of the land is below sea level.
      - jacquesm 4y ago
        Yep.
    - jacquesm 4y ago
      I'm writing this from ~sea level, and there are large parts of the country around me that are below sea level, some more than just a little bit, think 2 to 3 meters and in extremes more than 6. As the sea level rises the risk of storm surges increases quite a bit. We have essentially barricaded the country against the sea up to a certain point. But beyond that the country would flood much like a bathtub would and even if all those barriers are closed the rivers will pour in water from the other side. Managing all this is tricky in the short term, difficult in the mid term and quite possibly impossible in the longer term if the sea level rise is more than anticipated when these defenses were built. And you can only raise them so much, if rivers no longer flow out then you'll end up flooded anyway.
nebula8804 4y ago
Sure they have clean streets, quiet cities and pretty quaint scenery...but have you seen their toilets? They are so freakin tiny. The dutch are skew on the taller side so I don't know how they deal with this. As a 6' 2 in person I hate it. Also the food isn't anything to celebrate. Having lived in both Amsterdam and the US, I greatly prefer the US and our larger houses with proper sized toilets.
- Aeolun 4y ago
  Wut? What is your beef with Dutch toilets? I’m 6’4” and I can’t say it ever bothered me. The food is ok. It’s just that Dutch people seem to be a bit more utilitarian about food consumption (something I didn’t know until leaving the Netherlands).
  - nebula8804 4y ago
    >Wut? What is your beef with Dutch toilets? I’m 6’4” and I can’t say it ever bothered me. I explained already: they are too tiny. [1]: Dutch toilet: https://i0.wp.com/noplacelikeanywhere.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/20160911_133649.jpg https://i0.wp.com/noplacelikeanywhere.com/wp-content/uploads... [2]: American toilet: https://www.amazon.com/American-Standard-211AA-104-222-Toilet-Linen/dp/B006TIEOW2?th=1 https://www.amazon.com/American-Standard-211AA-104-222-Toile... The bathrooms are typically smaller as well. It can often be claustrophobic. (Although the bathrooms in France are the worst, I once couldn't even close the door because my legs were too long) >It’s just that Dutch people seem to be a bit more utilitarian about food consumption (something I didn’t know until leaving the Netherlands). Restaurant quality seemed poor during my time living there. Bitterballen is delicious the first time, afterwards its just grease food. Other than good cheese I can't seem to point to any particular Dutch foods that really stand out.
    - lucumo 4y ago
      > I explained already: they are too tiny. Hard to say without anything for scale. They look about the same size to me. They're different models though. The standing one would be considered a bit old-fashioned here. New toilets don't touch the ground for easier cleaning of the floor. And the flush compartment will be hidden in the wall just because it looks nice.

skrebbel 4y ago

This is because they weren’t explorer ships. They were trading ships first and foremost, owned by a large public for-profit corporation. It’s more like Maersk than like a navy. Exploration, or conquest, was not a goal. If it happened, it was just a means to an end. Thing is, trade is the most profitable when you get monopoly contracts with suppliers, especially when those suppliers are the only (known) suppliers of $THING. How do you get a monopoly contract? You make the supplier an offer they can’t refuse. All that fighting and fort building was only to enforce monopoly contracts, not empire building. Basically, to make sure the Portuguese didn't get their hands on those spices, so the price could stay high. Sometimes suppliers broke those deals and the Dutch took out the guns, and that’s what the soldiers came along for. Eg in the Travancore battles linked in another comment. They lost that one, but often they did not: For example, one day the people of the Banda islands, then the only source of nutmeg in the world, broke the monopoly deal they had made with the Dutch and sold nutmeg to the British too. The Dutch went in fully loaded, killed everybody (the entire archipelago population), and replaced them with Dutch settlers to farm the nutmeg. Problem solved, monopoly restored! No hard feelings, it’s just business. So yes! I concur! There’s just so much to learn from the Dutch East India Company! Who cares about all the genocide, we even have a VC fund[0] named after them, that’s how proud we are. [0] https://voccp.com/ https://voccp.com/

jillesvangurp 4y ago

My home country was a republic at the time. Made for some pragmatic leadership. While the French and the Spanish were basically pyramid schemes where wealth flowed to the top, the Dutch Republic was basically prospering on trade and attracting talent from all over Europe. Basically all the intellectuals and outcasts. Spanish Jews, French Huguenots, various refugees from German warring city states, etc. That made for a potent mix of wealth, trade, science, and relative religious freedom. The UK had their revolution in the 17th century, invited a Dutch king on the throne, and essentially copied all the best parts of Dutch practices. Basically, that's how they bootstrapped the British empire. The bank of England was created around the same time. Meanwhile the Dutch empire prospered for a while but fizzled out. Napoleon put an end to the republic. And after it's defeat, the British turned it into a monarchy.