3 ms·

The alternative is western colonialism Africa experienced before, and bombing campaigns.

• CaptWorld 2mo ago
  Western colonialism is better than eastern colonialism tho. Look at the Russian orgs in Africa.
  • marcus_holmes 2mo ago
    Better for whom? Certainly not the colonised...
    • CaptWorld 2mo ago
      Yeah for the ones who get colonized, western ones were better than eastern ones. Japanese ones would've made Britishers look like kids when they were occupying eastern India.
      • marcus_holmes 2mo ago
        You know the British invented the concentration camp in Africa, right? We're told a relatively benign version of our history. You kinda have to travel to the countries involved to get the real version.
        • rmunn 2mo ago
          Even with all the downsides of being colonized by Britain, it was still far better than being colonized by Belgium. Heck, being colonized by pretty much anybody but Belgium was better than being colonized by Belgium. Read up on the Belgian Congo sometime: it was a parade of horrors. GP was making a relative comparison; pointing out that both were bad in absolute terms does not negate the point. -2 is still greater than -17.
        • kajaktum 2mo ago
          Who cares who invented it first. Who did it best? Japans concentration camp was unholy abomination and it doesn’t get enough attention today
      • edoceo 2mo ago
        How can you see the road not taken?
        • CaptWorld 2mo ago
          You check existing conditions and extrapolate.
      • amunozo 2mo ago
        You just put Russia and Japan as "Eastern"; they have nothing to do with each (and I would consider both as more Western than Eastern regarding imperial/colonial matters) other nor with China. China is a massive country that has always been massive and rich. Their style is more like the tribute systems they had before, as it is being observed in the BRI and other projects.
        • CaptWorld 2mo ago
          I understand China but in no way were japan and Russia close to western. IJA, MAO and soviet union makes westerners look like chuds. Russians still have the wagner group shit which is nowhere near what western countries have currently.
          • amunozo 2mo ago
            First, sadly, the west is full of similar examples, like Leopold II in Congo, Nazi Germany, the Bengal and Irish famines in the British empire, transatlantic slave trade... Not to talk about similar genocides perpetrated by third nations but with the support of the west like the Indonesian mass killings of 1965-66. I see quite a lot of similarities. The West is not a moral example of anything at all, but the opposite. But second, Russia is not Eastern, it was more European than anything else until the Soviet Union. And Japanese Empire drew inspiration in the Western nations, even if they took it a even more horrible twist. So blaming this on "the East" is racist and reductionist.
            • CaptWorld 2mo ago
              Western countries have good internal competition that the atrocities they commit can be stopped by themselves whereas middle eastern/eastern ones needed external support for reformation famously hiroshima, deng reforms, soviet dissolution, korean war.. west is superior in terms of liberalism and capitalism that any successful country you can think of now has roots in utilising its ideas.. this is not to downplay atrocities committed by westerners but to think that somehow western nations are worse than eastern is being in denial. Russia was more european before the communists started their revolution and made themselves anti-west. They support many kinds of anti western movements like their war crimes in Africa, support for iranian/Islamist regimes, support dictatorship of china etc. these are all happening right now.. you are talking as though churchil wantedly cause famine in India when there's limited resource and he had to take care of his country before shipping to India and there was some amount of corruption too in Bengal at that time.. I'm not saying that they're blame free but it's a complex issue with multiple causes.. even the AI that was trained on mostly using western data and infrastructure that chinese models distill and all..
      • Hikikomori 2mo ago
        "whatever happens we have the maxim gun" Well if we take India as an example we have the Bengal famine.
        • CaptWorld 2mo ago
          For the love of God, you guys are brain broken.. there's a limited resource and churchill didn't want to provide to India because of that and add that there's some major corruption in Bengal at that time that caused it.. you guys don't see nuance at all..
          • Hikikomori 2mo ago
            India had a system in place to handle famines, Brits decided to do away with it setting the stage to allow millions to die. Was it also just corruption that caused millions to die during the Irish famine?
            • CaptWorld 2mo ago
              How do you not know about the policies like prioritising calcutta and ignore other regions of Bengal, surrounding states restrictions to supply food to bengal, price controls, local shortages + 1942 cyclone + british prioritizing their own citizens all caused such issues.. jz doing a cursory research would have provided you these details.. if churchill wanted to intentionally induce famine, how does that explain him asking FDR to provide as they surplus and why FDR had to not do that.. please jz do a cursory glance regarding irish famine too.. some folks jz can't do pros and cons of their own views as well which is a shame..
          • owebmaster 2mo ago
            Are you really Indian? Would you prefer that India was still occupied by the UK?
            • CaptWorld 2mo ago
              What a disingenuous question. Par for the course for the likes of you. Just because I view the west as less evil than the east doesn't mean we like to get colonised. These are my views: 1. We would not like to get colonised. 2. But history shows that the world was a place where you conquer or be conquered. 3. Mughals first invaded and as they were falling then, Europeans occupied, which is par for the course if you view the world history at those times. 4. It would've been better if they left early but they were better than japanese imperialists and nazis who bose was cozying up to. 5. The japanese were super violent to indians. I can't imagine the nightmare scenarios if japanese enacted what they did in nanjing/Andaman/few east indian places but they were weak at that time and British + indian army repelled them which is good. 6. After colonisation, nehru, being fabian, failed to open up the economy and he sympathised with soviets/china which exacerbated many economic and military issues at the border. 7. 1991 reforms changed india for the better and it would be better even if they pivot to green energy so that they can pivot off of Russia and Ally with west which biden and dems were trying but now trump worsened the relationship.
  • subscribed 2mo ago
    Single counterexample for single counterexample: Belgium's Leopold - not sure if Western colonialism is so much better (and notice I didn't even bring up "western India")
    • CaptWorld 2mo ago
      Not so much better but better in general compared to the middle eastern/eastern colonialism.. westerners have good competiton that the atrocities will be self corrected by itself but middle eastern/eastern colonies needed external western support like Korean war, hiroshima/nagasaki.. main example I can think of opposite is china under deng but there too deng had become relatively capitalist to fix the issues.