3 ms·

>A big part of what is perceived as "backwards" are long term effects of British colonial rule, from which they are still recovering. There's a lot of ink spilt

>A big part of what is perceived as "backwards" are long term effects of British colonial rule, from which they are still recovering. There's a lot of ink spilt studying how the systems which colonial powers set up get left behind, which keeps in place a stratified society with the goal of enriching all the people in positions of power (read: corruption). That takes time to overcome. This is as true for Latin America as it is for Nigeria, India and all the rest. This is very debatable. Ethiopia and Liberia were never colonized. So wasn't Japan. Places where the institutions of colonization were toppled like Haiti did not fare well, neither did Nepal. This is a Marxist reading of History that imo is way too simple and results in a lot of inconsistencies, but it's in tune with feelings of justice (or revenge if you like Nietzsche).

cafard 3y ago
a. Who perceives Japan as backwards? b. Every Fourth of July we shoot off fireworks to remember the toppling of the institutions of colonization.
- hotdogscout 3y ago
  That is my point. Violent colonization can have wildly different outcomes and there's a lot more to the success of a society than predation. That is a simplification that's often resting on emotional resentment to injustice but doesn't really define or predict how a country develops.
RajT88 3y ago
> This is a Marxist reading of History Marxist only in the sense that Marx observed that colonialism/imperialism is a part of the rise of capitalism. Claiming something is "Marxist" because you disagree with it is itself: > way too simple and results in a lot of inconsistencies
- hotdogscout 3y ago
  No. Distilling societies to material conflicts between anarchist actors for their own good is how Marxism as a school of thought (historical materialism) distills colonialism, which is really close to realism. https://content.csbs.utah.edu/~ehrbar/valmat.pdf https://content.csbs.utah.edu/~ehrbar/valmat.pdf https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxist_schools_of_thought https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxist_schools_of_thought I said Marxist and not Realist because most people know about Marx and people confuse realism in political development with the common definition of realism. >Claiming something is "Marxist" because you disagree with it Strawmanning.

cafard 3y ago

a. Who perceives Japan as backwards? b. Every Fourth of July we shoot off fireworks to remember the toppling of the institutions of colonization.

hotdogscout 3y ago
That is my point. Violent colonization can have wildly different outcomes and there's a lot more to the success of a society than predation. That is a simplification that's often resting on emotional resentment to injustice but doesn't really define or predict how a country develops.

RajT88 3y ago

> This is a Marxist reading of History Marxist only in the sense that Marx observed that colonialism/imperialism is a part of the rise of capitalism. Claiming something is "Marxist" because you disagree with it is itself: > way too simple and results in a lot of inconsistencies

hotdogscout 3y ago
No. Distilling societies to material conflicts between anarchist actors for their own good is how Marxism as a school of thought (historical materialism) distills colonialism, which is really close to realism. https://content.csbs.utah.edu/~ehrbar/valmat.pdf https://content.csbs.utah.edu/~ehrbar/valmat.pdf https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxist_schools_of_thought https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxist_schools_of_thought I said Marxist and not Realist because most people know about Marx and people confuse realism in political development with the common definition of realism. >Claiming something is "Marxist" because you disagree with it Strawmanning.