Colonialism: A Moral Reckoning | Nigel Biggar
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 3 มิ.ย. 2024
- John is joined by ethicist, theologian and author Professor Nigel Biggar for a conversation about his latest book, Colonialism: A Moral Reckoning. Through rigorous historical and ethical analysis, Biggar presents a strong case for why the ubiquitous anti-colonial narrative has little grounding in historical fact. Rather, Biggar argues, a survey of the actions of the British Empire in particular reveals it to be a strong force against slavery, racism, and the long list of other sins that are often attributed to it.
Nigel John Biggar CBE is Regius Professor of Moral and Pastoral Theology at the University of Oxford, author, Anglican priest, and theologian. He also directs the McDonald Centre for Theology, Ethics and Public Life at Oxford which aims to foster a conversation between Christian theology and other disciplines.
In 2017, Biggar initiated the Oxford project “Ethics and Empire” which aimed to scrutinise a purely negative view of empires and argue that they were morally mixed. Some progressive historians and academics voraciously criticised the project for 'attempting to balance out the violence committed in the name of empire with its supposed benefits.'
#colonialism #empire #debate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
00:00 Introduction
00:39 Introducing Nigel Biggar
01:01 Why write a book about colonialism?
04:44 Trouble with the publisher
07:51 The man from Myanmar who preferred British rule
09:01 What is colonialism?
11:06 The many motives behind colonialism
14:20 How an understanding of sin tempers judgment
16:48 What the British Empire got wrong
18:11 To what extent was colonialism motivated by racism?
22:30 Christianity's influence on anti-racism
23:32 Why do we keep calling native disposession genocide?
26:48 Many of the wrongs were the action of individuals, not the state
29:30 The British Empire in India
32:10 How responsible is colonialism for post-colonial dysfunction?
35:16 Some false assumptions about Christianity and colonialism
39:28 How does the British empire compare to other colonial powers?
43:25 How violent was the British Empire?
51:19 Our response to modern slavery compared with the British Empire's
53:19 Advice for getting educated on colonialism
57:01 The two sides to colonial slavery
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conversations feature John Anderson, former Deputy Prime Minister of Australia, interviewing the world's foremost thought leaders about today's pressing social, cultural and political issues.
John believes proper, robust dialogue is necessary if we are to maintain our social strength and cohesion. As he puts it; "You cannot get good public policy out of a bad public debate."
If you value this discussion and want to see more like it, make sure you subscribe to the channel here: / @johnandersonconversat...
And stay right up to date with all the conversations by subscribing to the newsletter here: johnanderson.net.au/contact/
Follow John on Twitter: / johnandersonac
Follow John on Facebook: / johnandersonac
Support the channel: johnanderson.net.au/support/
Website: johnanderson.net.au/
Podcast: johnanderson.net.au/podcasts/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nigel Biggar
/ nigelbiggar
nigelbiggar.uk/
''...........virtue and vice runs through the middle of me.'' - Nigel Biggar so 100% correct. Nigel is a great man and John thank you for inviting him for this rational discussion.
Oh yes. Nigel Biggar's statement about virtue and vice coursing through the very core of his being is truly awe-inspiring. I mean, who needs clear-cut moral principles and ethical guidelines when you can just revel in the ambiguity of having both virtue and vice perfectly balanced within you? It must be such a delight to navigate through life, never knowing which side will prevail in any given situation. Nigel Biggar is undoubtedly a master of moral relativism, showing us all the beauty of being wishy-washy and indecisive when it comes to matters of right and wrong. We should all strive to be as delightfully ambiguous as him.
@@arunnaik3375 it is called ''original sin''
@@casperdog777 Ah, "original sin"! The ever-popular concept that reminds us how we're all off to a flying start in life, carrying the burden of some ancient indiscretion. It's like receiving an inheritance of guilt right from the moment we take our first breath. How marvelous! I can't help but chuckle at the thought of being held accountable for a misstep committed by Adam and Eve in the good ol' Garden of Eden. Talk about starting life on a high note! So, here's to us, dear friend, embracing our collective guilt with a dash of humor and a wink. After all, who needs a clean slate when we have "original sin" to spice up our existence? Cheers to carrying the weight of history on our shoulders!
@@arunnaik3375 you beast
@@casperdog777 Your wit knows no bounds! To dub me a beast, a wild creature of untamed allure, is to unravel the very fabric of my refined sensibilities. Surely, I shall prowl through the parlors of high society, adorned with a beastly grin, and regale the damsels and gents with tales of my primal escapades. Fear not, for I shall tame the beast within and present myself as a refined savage, a connoisseur of refined roars and elegantly executed pounces. Let it be known that I embrace this moniker with a twinkle in my eye and a playful growl upon my lips, for even in the realm of beasts, there lies a charm that captivates the most discerning of souls.
At 11:44 from a Sudanese perspective - much of what happened in Sudan was positive! Brought medicine & health needs to infant & mothers - dropping infant & maternal mortality rate. Brought education to girls all the way to University level…
these things can be brought to a country WITHOUT colonialism. Have you heard of charity, aid, immigration or trade? The latter two were common means of sharing knowledge before European colonialism.
A wonderful corrective to the insanity currently gripping the West. Thank you John for all the terrific conversations you host! You are an excellent interviewer!
The Scots were THE most enthusiastic participants in the British Empire.
And we still are! God Save The King!
The joy of learning...absolute joy. So sad and angry that our young have been robbed - as they have .
Never ever give up .
And how have they been robbed?
@@indusanon33 Classic English Liberalism runs on the idea of a Contract between the dead, living and those to be born. It says the society and its culture are part of an inheritance that the dead secured, the living enjoy and also the living are responsible for its care to give as intact as possible to the future generations. It’s the source of the concept of “Duty”. Something the English cherish.
Any deviations that dilute or destroy the gains made by the contract with the dead are inherently undesirable. Allowing a society to flourish. Cheers.
@@indusanon33By being denied an even-handed understanding of their own culture, why it is - in many ways - valuable, and what it took to create the relatively peaceful, comfortable, free and prosperous wrstern world that we enjoy.
Denying people the truth robs them of the ability to make good decisions.
@@abdabteleExcellent description of what is missing today, the social contract
After the British Raj took over India, in 1858, colonizers added a special new twist to the previous "tax-and-buy system". As the East India Company's monopoly broke down, Indian producers were allowed to export their goods directly to other countries. But Britain made sure that the payments for those goods nonetheless ended up in London. How did this work? Anyone who wanted to buy goods from India would do so using special Council Bills -a unique paper currency issued only by the British Crown. And the only way to get those bills was to buy them from London with gold or silver. So, traders would pay London in gold to get the bills, and then use the bills to pay Indian producers. When Indians cashed the bills in at the local colonial office, they were "paid" in rupees out of tax revenues - money that had just been collected from them.
So, once again, they were not paid at all; they were defrauded. Meanwhile, London ended up with all the gold and silver that should have gone directly to the Indians in exchange for their exports. This corrupt system meant that even while India was running an impressive trade surplus with the rest of the world - a surplus that lasted for three decades in the early 20th century - it showed up as a deficit in the national accounts because the real income from India's exports was appropriated in its entirety by Britain. India was the goose that supplied golden eggs to the British Banksters. Meanwhile, the induced "deficit" meant that India had no option but to borrow from Britain to finance its imports. So, the entire Indian population was forced into completely unnecessary debt to their colonial overlords, further cementing British control.
The "tax-and-buy system" in the context of colonialism refers to a practice used by colonial powers to extract wealth from their colonies. Here's a breakdown of the system:
How it worked:
Taxation: Colonial authorities imposed various taxes on the colonized population, including land taxes, income taxes, and indirect taxes on goods and services.
Forced production: The colonies were often forced to specialize in the production of certain raw materials or cash crops, which benefited the colonizers' economies.
Monopoly control: Colonial powers often set up monopolies on the trade of these raw materials, buying them from the colonies at artificially low prices and selling them at high profits in their own markets.
Limited exports: Restrictions were placed on the exports from colonies to other countries, forcing them to rely on the colonizers for manufactured goods.
Import dependence: The colonies were forced to import manufactured goods from the colonizers at inflated prices, further draining their resources.
Consequences of the system:
Exploitation of resources: The tax-and-buy system resulted in the depletion of natural resources and the exploitation of labor in the colonies.
Economic stagnation: The colonies were unable to develop their own industries and remained dependent on the colonizers for manufactured goods.
Poverty and inequality: The system led to widespread poverty and inequality in the colonies, as the vast majority of the wealth generated went to the colonizers.
Examples of the system:
British India: The British imposed a land tax (zamindari system) on Indian farmers, which they then used to buy Indian goods at low prices and sell them at high profits in Britain.
French West Africa: The French forced African colonies to produce cash crops like cotton and peanuts, which were then sold in French markets.
Belgian Congo: The Belgians forced Congolese people to work in rubber plantations, under brutal conditions, to meet the high demand for rubber in Europe.
Overall, the tax-and-buy system was a key tool used by colonial powers to exploit the resources and labor of their colonies. It had devastating consequences for the economic and social development of many colonized countries.
An outstanding interview again thank you. I have just started Nigel Biggar’s book so this interview is a great insight into what is to come.
Professor Biggar’s book is superb. It’s extremely balanced and very thought provoking. It really should be included on secondary school reading lists.
But sadly, it won’t. Let dissenters and nonconforming independent minded people advance it’s message.
British Empire is still being whitewashed by the school curriculum. I wonder why?
That'd just be too easy.
@@arunnaik3375Not British but see yank scholar Gilley for balanced view of many cases, Inc non British like Leopoldo on Congo. There is a remarkable amount of outright forgery in photographs etc exaggerating colonial harms.
@@Nill757 Oh, absolutely! Who needs a nuanced understanding when we can just turn to one scholar for a so-called "balanced view" of colonialism? And let's not forget the joy of dismissing any evidence that challenges our preconceived notions as outright forgery. Who needs critical analysis and multiple perspectives when we can simply label everything as exaggerated colonial harms? It's truly refreshing to see such a steadfast commitment to maintaining a singular narrative and ignoring any inconvenient truths. Bravo!
I read “Empire” about seven years ago, and it is a great read. I thought it does a great job of setting out the wider context and weighing up the Empire’s pros and cons.
Who wrote the book?
You are referring to 'Empire - How Britain Made the Modern World' by Niall Ferguson. First edition 2004, reprinted several times since. Well worth reading alongside Nigel Biggar's new book.
"Inglorious Empire" By Shashi Tharoor. He refutes colonial apologists. People should read Nigel Biggar's book and this book as well.
@@matthewdsouza8891 He doesn't refute but challenges
@matthewdsouza8891 thanks for offering a high quality sounding book to steel man the Scholarly case against it.
My guess at this point is that whether each empire was positive or negative on net balance may be a case by case sort of thing... and not even with each "case" being each empire, but each colony!
I recommend Nigel Biggar's book - very readable and even-handed, and well-sourced throughout.
Here are some examples of British historians who have written about Britain's colonial history in a balanced way:
Ronald Hyam: Hyam was a British historian who specialized in the history of the British Empire. His book, Britain's Imperial Century, 1815-1914, is a comprehensive overview of British colonialism. Hyam acknowledges both the positive and negative aspects of British rule, and he argues that the British Empire had a significant impact on the development of the world.
John Darwin: Darwin is a British historian who has written extensively about the history of the British Empire. His book, After Tamerlane: The Rise and Fall of Global Empires, argues that the British Empire was not a unique or exceptional phenomenon, but rather part of a wider pattern of global empire-building. Darwin also acknowledges the negative aspects of British colonialism, but he argues that the British Empire also had some positive effects, such as the spread of Western ideas and values.
Niall Ferguson: Ferguson is a British historian who has written about a wide range of topics, including the British Empire. His book, Empire: The Rise and Demise of the British World Order and the Lessons for Global Power, argues that the British Empire was a successful and beneficial enterprise. However, Ferguson also acknowledges the negative aspects of British colonialism, and he argues that the British Empire should not be idealized.
How do we get his book
I do believer i am growing up .Thank you both and especially you John , for indirectly contributing to this process...its quite an experience and does not seem to end ?
Blessings from Sydney Australia .
Always learn. Especially from others’ mistakes-less painful than making your own.
Why. Did you believe all the anti-colonialism stuff we all get fed and this opened your eyes?
Really enjoyed this interview. Keen to read Nigel's book now!
This was very encouraging and insightful, and balanced look of history. Thank you
It's a whitewashing of history. And that is being kind.
Balanced means ignoring the history of 140 countries?
Book ordered. Thank you, Prof Biggar and Mr Anderson.
Please write a book on how Britain helped STOP slavery
That is in Nigel's book.
At the same time they stopping slavery, they were invading Africa. And putting them in labour plantation.
Buy bringing in indentured servitude. Many people including Indians who were fleeing the British induced famines ended up immigrating to Fiji and the carribaen islands.
As a side point, focus on the present you might actually do something good for humanity. Asian countries have already overtaken UK and what ever is left of the White settler colonies in technology and manufacturing.
What a breath of fresh air in these foolish times.. Thanks very much for this interview
Excellent, balanced view - long overdue defence of our history and our British ancestors in Australia
Here are some examples of British historians who have written about Britain's colonial history in a balanced way:
Ronald Hyam: Hyam was a British historian who specialized in the history of the British Empire. His book, Britain's Imperial Century, 1815-1914, is a comprehensive overview of British colonialism. Hyam acknowledges both the positive and negative aspects of British rule, and he argues that the British Empire had a significant impact on the development of the world.
John Darwin: Darwin is a British historian who has written extensively about the history of the British Empire. His book, After Tamerlane: The Rise and Fall of Global Empires, argues that the British Empire was not a unique or exceptional phenomenon, but rather part of a wider pattern of global empire-building. Darwin also acknowledges the negative aspects of British colonialism, but he argues that the British Empire also had some positive effects, such as the spread of Western ideas and values.
Niall Ferguson: Ferguson is a British historian who has written about a wide range of topics, including the British Empire. His book, Empire: The Rise and Demise of the British World Order and the Lessons for Global Power, argues that the British Empire was a successful and beneficial enterprise. However, Ferguson also acknowledges the negative aspects of British colonialism, and he argues that the British Empire should not be idealized.
Meanwhile us Irish were sent to Australia as slaves for defending our home and civilians from British natcees.
@@arunnaik3375Ferguson’s book is much worse than the other two
Thankyou John for you excellent questions. I have just now ordered Professor Biggers book as it touches so much on us ANZAC's.
regards to you both
Steve
His book was most informative about Canada especially regarding indigenous history. What he wrote is very different from what we have been led to believe without questioning for years. It’s pretty well impossible to find scholarly research or any material dealing with pioneers / settlers in western Canada. It’s been purposefully suppressed and/or ignored.
I’ve really enjoyed this book Nigel, thanks very much.
Me too! Completely agree.
Excellent assessment and analysis. A most enjoyable, balanced discussion. Thank you.
How did you arrive at the conclusion, that this was a balanced view? Does that not require bringing in an author who does not agree with Nigel?
@@arunnaik3375It's a discussion not a debate.
@@jaed2630 LOL
lol dude, like 30 replies on this video from you. You are 'IMPERVIOUS', no doubt.
I feel for your family enduring the 4 hour rants about butter vs margarine every holiday. @@arunnaik3375
Wouldn’t it be wonderful if the BBC could produce a programme tackling this subject in such a balanced way. Somehow I cannot see this would fit the BBCs agenda. But we live in hope.
Thank you for such an intelligent discussion.
The BBC can barely do telling the time accurately and in a balanced way let alone something like this.
Coloniasm was soo good let's do it reverse....let people freely immigrate to uk
Excellent book. Well done Mr. Biggar
I wonder if anyone here has read "Blood on the Wattle" by Bruce Elder. I doubt if any of the 'dominated people' buried in those mass graves felt safe and protected.
I don't think I'll be reading this book just quietly.
its just empires doing empire things. Plenty of upsides, plenty of downsides. Its the story of every empire to have ever existed. People look on the romans, the greeks, and the mongols "favourably" relative to british colonialism at least. They forget all that peace and prosperity was built on a mountain of corpses.
Is it awful? yes. Are great things born from it? also yes. Its just a matter of weighing whether its worth it in your eyes. Theres certainly regions britain colonised that are 100x worse for the average person after them having gained independance. Rhodesia and zimbabwe especially. How many die due to the conditions in those countries, VS how many died to rifles when they were occupied. which is a lesser evil? I dont have the answer, its a very subjective thing.
This book falls into the same category as Dark Emu,Rubbish!
Thank you very much for this conversation!
Interesting conversation. Ordered the book while listening. Look forward to reading it.
The case of a materialistic gain to Africa from missionaries or how the West helped Africa wear shoes.
This is laughable.
Case in point Haiti 🇭🇹
Isn't Haiti begging for Western aid?
Culture is not race. One culture can be inferior to another and in many ways clearly are. I am not British but it is clear to me that on the whole Britain has largely been a force for good in world history.
Great interview, thankyou both.
Terrific interview 🕊
Thank you 🕊
More please 🕊
Excellent and balanced conversation, thank you
A wonderful conversation, thank you
Colonial officials, engineers, agriculturalists etc, serving in Africa in the 1800s died from tropical disease including their wives and children.
Abuse of local counterparts and people would result in dismissal from Government service.
Government inspectors could turn up at any time.
For example the local Brit officer was not allowed to have a drink before sunset and had to wash and change for dinner.
The term "Sundowner" came from this practice.
I should say I lived and worked as an engineer in six countries in Africa from 1969 to 1996
The east is colonizing in the west
Which is unfortunate. When the West colonised, they brought advancement with them. The east has no advancements to bring.
Look at Africa. Lots of those countries are now colonies of China.
No Marxists have been slowly colonizing idiots!
Islam at least
We have the feminism disease leaving ourselves wide open.
So excited to see this, just started watching and it is very reassuring with these older gentlemen (as they are gentlemen) speaking in a relaxed, articulate way to create a sense of hope . Hope that a balanced, historically accurate, intelligent and rational record of past events can still be created and put out into the world, to hopefully make a difference. Thanks for sharing this. I will be purchasing that book, BTW this is how history and most educational discussions and teaching were done in years gone by - my experience in the 70, 80s - you could still get a decent education then! Forget it now, so this is good to see.
Well, China will win Africa in this new era. Expect majority of the Africans to speak Mandarin by 2100
Interesting to note that the UK is currently being colonized by the Muslim world. In 50 years, England will be a Muslim country. Cathedrals will become Mosques in our lifetimes.
VERY good video. I love when I hear opinions, which are controversial and at the end make me to re-think popular stereotypes. Some very good points. Congrats for that treat.
The pacifying of a multiplicity of warring factions, accurately describes the impetus for the creation of, and the signing of, The Treaty of Waitangi.
These counter arguments are so seldom heard, brings Orwell to mind: ‘who controls the present controls the past’
I’ve read the book. It’s a good anti-dote to the woke lies.
Well you got what you were looking for, I guess. But good history it ain’t
I don't agree with him, but it is so freaking hard to find people trying to examine this issue from different angles nowadays that I count myself lucky of having found this video.
What do you specifically not agree with?
Are you speaking about genocide ideas?
@@EmperorsNewWardrobeI always ask that question because it can't be that hard to say what you don't agree with if you make that statement.
I recommend perusing Johann Hari's critique of this literary work, as it could provide a more nuanced perspective. By examining both sources, you may attain a better understanding.
A superb session in every way. Along with its edification, the pleasures and benefits of gentlemanly conversation are elements of civilization at its best. The presentation is most admirable, too. Many thanks!
Very enjoyable interview!
Thank you.
Fascinating discussion
God bless heal and save you
Worthy book. My thanks. Carry on!
The issue with colonialism and empire is that it enhances all the impulses of human nature one can experience through the use of technology and modernity.
There were people who utilized the narrative as moral licensing that resulted in genocide and there were others who were sincere in helping people that had contemporary acceptance. Lawrence of Arabia is one. Jonathan Edwards too.
Nonetheless, the past is the past. Modernity occurred during the days of colonialism to push forward and away new and old practices that were deleterious by all accounts we understand today. This also is the case with the modernity today absent of colonialism, the spirit of self determination proceeded from colonialism just as science proceeded from an era of faith. The world today moved forward from the blood sweat tears of the past. This includes mistakes and successes.
If anything historical discourse has a role not just by collecting and recording what happened but perhaps more primarily serve as some guide for perpetuating humane treatment. Humane treatment aligns with the restraint in the use of force and the use of good faith and good will. New Zealand is an example.
The hazards of historiography is that it's practiced by human beings. There is nothing easier than demonstrating and investigating the imperfections of humanity. It goes nowhere at some point.
Fact is, some post colonial states have moved on though some haven't had the circumstances to fully move on from the baggage. One interpretation is that colonialism was not the aim but the byproduct of the infighting within Europe that required nation states there to find resources they needed which was already taken by others in the region. France didn't share with the British who didn't share with the Germans who then oppressed the Poles and so on. There's an interpretation where Europe isn't just a collection of nation states but a country or region of civilization itself that at this point in time for the longest time is in a condition akin to a warring states period.
A reason Europeans left to the US was to get away from all that and as a result the coagulating spirit in Europe rehoused itself in the US. All states have somehow no matter how different were able to come to be a United States. A key facet of how this occurred is the idea of a shared fate each state felt with another. No European country at the time thought they had a shared fate or a fate to be in a world where another state they didn't like didn't exist. It seemed like it was getting there since the fall of Napoleon, but there are kinks still within each identity and culture that is at odds with another.
Someone from China or Japan would feel a bit differently to the different parts of their civilization. If one part messes up itself the others are able to pool in to help them get back on their feet and not get left behind. People from Yunnan province would feel no animosity to people from Guangdong province even when they don't speak exactly the same language and eat exactly the same cuisine. The writing has a common source that everyone can understand just as European languages have elements that exist as a root or common source share by many. This includes Latin etc. At some point everyone stopped fighting and agreed to be part of a larger whole.
The hazards in Europe for being part of a larger whole is the historical experience of oppression from a tyrant. Particularly one of one culture who held a pejorative view of another within Europe. Almost all Europeans have some history of being mistreated by another obviously since there were wars in almost every century and no rational arbitrator existed as once perhaps did in the Roman Empire. Everyone in the Roman Empire considered themselves Roman even when their ancestors were Gauls, North Africans, Arabs, Italian, or Greek. All were able to pool their efforts into legions that defended their borders and keep the peace. In fact, Romans from Italy were at one point distinct being of different identities. They were once separated into Latins, Samnites, Etruscans, etc and they knew that and accepted knew tribes into the whole without losing the history of each but instead adding them to a shared canon.
No one in Europe ever talks like this or mentions that even if that tribe is different, they can still become citizens just as one came from a tribe that took time to have their generations become citizens as well. One example of this happening was in the speech of Claudius Lugdunum, who though himself was from Gaul did not hold the Roman legions with a grudge whilst the Senate still held the Gauls with a grudge for them at one point warring with the legions. He made a speech where two columns out of four have been found and within there was an argument that the ruin of Sparta of Athens by the Romans occurred due to their infighting. And, the founder Romulus, fought enemies "then hailed as fellow-citizens several nations." It continued with: "Strangers reigned over us. That freedmen's sons should be intrusted with public offices is not, as many wrongly think, a sudden innovation, but was common practice in the old commonwealth."
It's been almost over 2000 years since that speech was made in Europe and no country seemed to have that same spirit without at some level subjugating another into their own culture instead of coming together. The fact that there are only two tablets of what he said found and the question of the other two has the sentiment of "Who knows where they are. Oh well."
That sentiment of division seems to have not changed even when those ideas were broached millennia ago and history has been examined within the boundaries of nation states rather than European civilization. When a French person speaks of European civilization, they reference more French thinkers, Germans reference more German thinkers, English reference more English speakers. When the sentiment becomes that Europeans reference German and French thinking whilst being English when contemplating their civilization; some progress would exist.
If all Europeans came together just as Japan China or India did, they wouldn't have had to leave Europe to get resources that they would have otherwise been able to get around them or live in societies they considered civilized for them and leave all the others as nothing to offer other than for trade.
Even here, I sense it has British colonialism and empire in mind over the French, Dutch, or Spanish. In trying to affirm some western unity there is still some stop gap or door stopper keeping the door opening further in conversations of some Europeans. Britons look down on Poles. Poles hold a grudge against the Germans. Northern Europe feels better than Southern Europe. Western Europe seems better than Eastern Europe. One can watch an English language news channel from a country but when watching the French or German language news channel it says something different as if avoiding and finding something not meant to be said for viewers of another language - even when they're all European.
If this goes on who knows if in 100 or 500 or 1000 years Europe would still have multiple states just as is today whilst the Arabs would have united to enshrine the Umma into one entity just as China coalesced into one entity. So thinking in terms of the next century or millennia, what outcome would there be that can be reached by what's done today
Extraneous and off topic question, I know, but can anybody tell me the name of the kind of chairs they are sitting on?
Great listening ….very informative and interesting…
This is a great discussion.
Excellent book. The audio book is great
Glad you are happy for
Amritsar Massacre (1919): British troops opened fire on a peaceful gathering in Amritsar, India, resulting in the deaths of hundreds and injuring thousands.
Bengal Famine (1943): During World War II, the British administration in India failed to adequately respond to a severe famine, leading to the deaths of millions of Bengalis.
Partition of India (1947): The hasty and poorly planned division of British India into India and Pakistan resulted in widespread violence, displacement, and communal riots, causing immense suffering for millions.
Mau Mau Uprising (1952-1960): In Kenya, the British employed brutal tactics, including torture, detention camps, and collective punishment, in their attempts to suppress the Mau Mau rebellion against colonial rule.
Boer War Concentration Camps (1899-1902): British forces established camps during the Boer War in South Africa, where thousands of Boer civilians, including women and children, perished due to inadequate living conditions and diseases.
Cultural Suppression: British colonialism often entailed the imposition of Western culture and the suppression of indigenous practices. Local languages, customs, and traditions were often denigrated or even banned, leading to the erosion of cultural heritage.
Land Dispossession: Indigenous communities across various colonies suffered from forced evictions, displacement, and the seizure of their lands. This had severe consequences for their livelihoods, cultural identity, and social structures.
Indentured Labor: The British employed systems of indentured labor, such as in the Caribbean and parts of Africa, subjecting workers to harsh conditions, low wages, and limited rights.
Systemic Racism: Colonial policies frequently reinforced racial hierarchies, with discrimination and segregation against indigenous populations and people of color. This included the implementation of discriminatory laws and unequal treatment under the legal system.
These examples merely scratch the surface of the injustices perpetrated during the era of British colonialism. It is important to acknowledge and confront this troubled history, recognizing the lasting impacts it has had on affected nations and communities.
Quite an elaborate discussion about how the rule of man over man by force is not necessarily evil, justified and even desirable. The long-form argument for 'Might makes right', in the form of the state.
Thanks.
Please come to New Zealand to help sort out the "anti-colonial problem" The New Zealand native, the Maori would have wiped themselves out but for the British intervention through The Treaty of Waitangi.
Educational- and moving.
Great interview! I would love to read “Colonialism: A Moral Reckoning”, which unfortunately is not available yet at my local library. I live in Canada, where postcolonialism is all the rage now, and statues of former British monarchs are torn down or defaced. Biggar mentioned the controversy about the residential schools in Canada. These started before Confederation, when Canada was indeed a British colony. It is fair to say that in general they were intended to assimilate Indigenous children and to erase their languages. This is rightly condemned today, but these were still schools, not concentration camps, and certainly not death camps. The news report about the alleged graves of Indigenous children in the grounds outside a former residential school in Kamloops, British Columbia, often referred to a mass grave, evoking comparison with the Katyn massacre. Not all Indigenous languages have died, and the growth of the surviving languages can still be encouraged, and is being encouraged. Our Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations, Marc Miller, himself a French-Canadian, has learned to speak Mohawk.
The word “genocide”, as defined by the United Nations, is so broad it can mean almost any kind of ill-treatment of an ethnic group. By that definition, the British Empire was certainly guilty of genocide against Indigenous Canadians. The popular understanding of genocide doesn’t match the legal definition, but corresponds to a deliberate effort to exterminate a people. In this sense of the term, there was never any genocide committed by the British Empire on Canadian soil. The Beothuks of Newfoundland no longer exist as a tribe, but they were not deliberately exterminated by the white population. Their numbers were always small, they were decimated by disease, and they were also killed in conflicts with Micmac tribesmen. Some of the Beothuks were assimilated by the Micmacs, and their genes have been passed onto the current Micmac residents of Newfoundland.
Eastern Newfoundland was claimed by France until the Treaty of Utrecht in 1713. The French, as well as the British, have been blamed for the disappearance of the Beothuk. The Micmacs were allies of the French, but it is not true that the French government established a bounty to Micmac warriors for taking Beothuk scalps. The Beothuk only started to disappear in the 1800’s, a century after the French lost control of any part of Newfoundland.
I'm reading the memoir of Omer Aziz, one of your fellow Canadians right now. The book is mostly him trying to create a narrative of how horrible and intolerant Canada is. He doesn't seem to have a lot of self awareness. The guy gets a scholarship even though he was a poor student through most of his high school career, gets to study at prestigious universities, gets to work in the Canadian government as an advisor, yet still makes insane claims about Canada having overwhelming barriers for minorities. It's just a way for him to usher in his DEI agenda by misrepresenting the extent of racism to justify appointing minorities to positions of power. He says openly that he requested minorities fill government positions. That's what most of these woke people are doing.
@@electriczombie8299 Thank you for your reply, Electric Zombie. I didn’t recognize the name Omer Aziz, but when I looked it up, I think I had heard something about his memoir “Brown Boy”. Thanks for the summary. Now I know I don’t want to read the book. I am not sure why South Asians seem to dominate the Diversity, Equity, Inclusion landscape in Canada as much as they do. Ratna Omidvar, who PM Trudeau appointed as a so-called independent Senator in April 2016, comes immediately to mind. She wrote a defamatory chapter on the Stephen Harper government’s immigration record for the book “The Harper Factor”. My sister-in-law is a Roman Catholic immigrant from Pakistan. She and her family are all fine people. Most of our South Asian immigrants are happy to be here and just want to get on with their lives. Of course, we do need laws to protect people from unfair treatment based on race, religion or whatever, and everyone should regulate their own thoughts to guard them against unseemly prejudices, but we really shouldn’t become a country where every tenth person is a DEI enforcer. Thank you again for your comment.
@@andrewbaldwin4454 well, I would suggest still reading the book to get his perspective. I still don't agree with what he says, but it's important to get the perspective from people you don't agree with.
"The news report about the alleged graves of Indigenous children in the grounds outside a former residential school in Kamloops, British Columbia, often referred to a mass grave, evoking comparison with the Katyn massacre." A news report is about all it was. No buried bodies were found and I believe that even after 3 years no excavations have taken place to find out if there are any.
The British indeed established concentration camps or death camps - whichever term you prefer - that were as harrowing as those of the Nazis. It is a matter of historical record that they drew lessons from such methods and, rather curiously, deemed them to be a commendable notion.
No quantity of benevolent actions can eclipse the paramount value of freedom. The essence of this assertion lies in the notion that no matter how virtuous one's deeds may be, they cannot supersede the intrinsic worth and importance of liberty. Freedom stands as an indispensable cornerstone of human existence, essential for fostering individual autonomy, self-expression, and the pursuit of one's aspirations. It serves as the bedrock upon which societies build their frameworks of justice, equality, and human rights.
In essence, while acts of kindness and altruism undoubtedly hold significance in fostering compassion and social cohesion, they must always be contextualized within the broader framework of preserving and safeguarding freedom. For it is through the unfettered exercise of individual liberty that humanity can truly flourish, innovate, and realize its fullest potential. Thus, in the balance between good deeds and freedom, the latter invariably emerges as the preeminent value, indispensable for the realization of a just and equitable society.
This topic is examined indirectly but in a balanced way in Foster’s Passage to India. The movie also makes clear the advantages and disadvantages of the British empire in India.
Great book.
Isn’t it just beautiful how people are no longer even ashamed of their crimes? 😅
John, I really enjoy your presents in my feed. Your interviews are thoughtful and poignant. You have a logical and calming influence on the discourse and your wealth of knowledge and experience is greatly appreciated.
Thank You,
Daniel
TH-cam at its best! 👍👍👍👍
During Britain's presence in India, the country's economic share declined significantly from 23 percent to below 4 percent. This decline can be attributed to India being governed in a manner that primarily benefited Britain. Britain's economic success during its two-century rise was heavily reliant on the exploitation of India, which facilitated its own industrial revolution.
India had a renowned industry of skilled handloom weavers who produced high-quality products, including fine muslin fabric. However, with the arrival of the British, this industry was forcibly disrupted. The British deliberately dismantled the handloom weaving sector by breaking looms, imposing steep tariffs, and exploiting India's raw materials for their own cloth production. Consequently, British-made cloth inundated global markets, originating from the dark and exploitative mills of Victorian England.
Regrettably, the policies and actions of the British also led to devastating famines in India, causing the death of an estimated 15-29 million people. One notable example was the Bengal famine during World War II, where approximately 4 million people perished. Shockingly, Winston Churchill, through written policy, diverted essential supplies from Bengal's civilians to prioritize stockpiling for soldiers and Europeans. He callously expressed that the starvation of underfed Bengalis mattered less than that of "sturdy Greeks." This statement by Churchill reveals a disturbing disregard for the suffering of the Bengali population. Furthermore, when British officials raised concerns about the consequences of these decisions, Churchill responded insensitively by questioning why Mahatma Gandhi had not died yet, displaying a lack of empathy and remorse.
It is important to recognize and reflect upon the severe impact of colonial policies and practices, including economic exploitation, cultural suppression, and the loss of millions of lives due to famines. Understanding this history is crucial for developing a nuanced understanding of the lasting legacies left behind by colonial powers.
Furthermore, it is worth noting that during World War I and World War II, India made significant contributions to Britain's war efforts. Indian soldiers comprised one-sixth of all British forces in World War I, with thousands losing their lives or being wounded. Indian taxpayers also provided substantial financial support, and India supplied vast quantities of ammunition, weapons, garments, and other supplies. The financial debt owed by Britain to India after World War II amounted to a significant sum, which, despite being owed, was never fully paid.
These historical facts highlight the deep impact of British colonialism on India, encompassing economic exploitation, military contributions, and financial obligations. Understanding these realities helps shed light on the complex dynamics between Britain and India during this period.
But if India had gained much earlier independence from, or never been settled at all, by the British, the burgeoning movement of global capitalism would have left it far, far behind.. further than now, certainly given it’s now huge population, which is has grown out of lockstep with sustainable, equitable GDP per capita growth. And this is mainly why huge swathes of the population are globally abjectly poor, but with a huge wealth disparity between top and bottom. I think if trade routes, relations to the west, and British influence had not occurred at all.. even with the natural resources at hand, now it would be a similar situation to sub-Saharan Africa.
The wealthiest parts of the world now, outside Western Europe as a whole, are without fail where the British had a footprint and the largest footprint .. United States, Australia, Canada.. South Africa also, Dutch and British rule.. the most wealthy section of a very poor continent still… as they set up the economic functions that would be required to prosper through the 20th century particularly.. stock markets and commodity exchanges being very important. I think the net gain for India now, as a modem developing nation, surround by poverty in the delta on one side, Nepal and China the other .. is a positive one, as you say, natural resource and subjugation will always happen with empire, but is is a net good historically and for fortune now? I think so. And also … you know, cricket
And I’m talking democratic, meritocratic wealth building, where opportunity is inbuilt .. enterprise and entrepreneurship. Not state-funded oil wealth in theocracies such as Saudi Arabia and the UAE.. that doesn’t count.
@@Alex-mj5dvI stand in utter disbelief at your woeful lack of knowledge regarding the magnificent discoveries forged in the realm of India. From the profound concept of zero to the sublime marvel of pi, from the mastery of medicine to the finesse of plastic surgery, from the artistry of cotton cultivation to the elegance of muslin, from the omnipresent Hindu-Arabic Numerals, which stand as the most ubiquitous system for the symbolic representation of numbers throughout the globe, to the wondrous realms of trigonometry and quadratic equations, where even the value of π was calculated with an impeccable precision of four decimal places.
Let us not forget the ingenious methods employed to solve the enigmatic puzzle of the Least Common Multiple (LCM), the resplendence of algebraic equations and the unraveling of indeterminate mathematical equations. The celestial domains were not spared our intellectual pursuits, as we ventured forth to calculate planetary longitudes, decipher the secrets of eclipses and planetary transits. Even the intricacies of interest computation lay within our grasp, as we traversed the realms of arithmetical and geometrical progressions. The mastery of plane and solid geometry adorned our intellectual tapestry, while we dared to tread upon the elusive notion of division by zero, revealing its enigmatic nature as a gateway to infinity.
Behold, the grandeur of Mohenjo-Daro and Harappa, our meticulously planned cities, adorned with their very own plumbing and drainage systems, Lothal which had the world’s Earliest Known Dock, a testament to our foresight in matters of urban design. And let us not overlook the illustrious steel industry, which flourished in our land, gifting the world with the unparalleled strength of Wootz, known in later times as the famous Damascus steel. Even the art of shipbuilding found solace within our shores, as our craftsmen honed their skills to construct vessels of sublime magnificence. Not to mention the great universities of India, where scholars from all over the world came to learn.
These are but a mere glimpse, a mere smattering of the bountiful treasures that our civilization, steeped in a glorious legacy of 5000 (or even more) continuous years, has bequeathed to humanity. And yet, with the weight of incredulity pressing upon my weary mind, I must ask, do you dare suggest that we, the inheritors of such profound wisdom and mastery, were in dire need of the British? Do you jest, sir? Are you beset by a madness so profound that it has clouded your judgment?
In the face of such awe-inspiring achievements and an illustrious legacy that spans the annals of time, the very notion of requiring the British presence upon our soil appears nothing short of absurd. Nay, it is an affront to reason, an insult to the brilliance that radiates from the heart of our nation. So I implore you, in the name of intellect and historical truth, to reconsider your stance and cast aside such misguided beliefs.
For it is clear to any discerning mind that the great nation of India, with its fathomless depths of knowledge and cultural heritage, stands tall and resolute, an indomitable force in the tapestry of human civilization. The shadows of foreign dominion may have dimmed our radiance for a time, but our brilliance, like the eternal flame, shall forever burn bright, illuminating the path of progress and reminding the world of our true essence.
In the book The Case for India by Will Durant, he writes,
When the British came, India was politically weak but economically prosperous. It was the wealth of 18th Century India which attracted the commercial pirates of England and France”. Quoting Sunderland, he says, “Nearly every kind of manufacture or product known to the civilized world existing anywhere had long been produced in India. India was a far greater industrial and manufacturing nation than any in Europe or than any other in Asia. Her Textile goods-the fine products of her looms, in cotton, wool, linen and silk-were famous over the civilized world; so were her exquisite jewelry and her precious stones cut in every lovely form; so were her pottery, porcelain, ceramics of every kind, quality, colour and beautiful shape; so were her fine works in metal-iron, steel, silver and gold. She had great architecture-equal in beauty to any in the world. She had great engineering works. She had great merchants, great businessmen, great bankers and financiers. Not only was she the greatest ship-building nation, but she had great commerce and trade by land and sea. Such was the India which British found when they came.”
So I ask you, in the words of reason and sanity, to relinquish your absurd claims and bask in the glory of India's remarkable past, present, and future. For we, without a shred of doubt, have never been in need of the British
@@Alex-mj5dv And as far GDP:
#1 United States Of America (U.S.A) 26,854
#2 China 19,374
#3 Japan 4,410
#4 Germany 4,309
#5 India 3,750
#6 United Kingdom (U.K.) 3,159
#7 France 2,924
#8 Italy 2,170
#9 Canada 2,090
#10 Brazil 2,080
Yes, we lag behind in GDP per capita, but that too will rise.
@@Alex-mj5dv The fundamental principle of the British has been to make the whole Indian nation subservient… they have been taxed to the utmost limit; the Indians have been denied every honor, dignity or office”.… F J Shore testifying to the House of Commons in 1857.
“The Governments’ assessment does not even leave enough food for the cultivator to feed his family” - Sir William Hunter, 1875.
Seems like a lovely book of wonderful anecdotes and sweeping generalisations... must put it on my xmas stocking list.
For a long time, I, progressive leftie, felt uncomfortable about the stories of how unredeemable, bad, if not wicked, every aspect of the British Empire, Colonialism, hence, recently, the "West's" values were.
There are many professional victims, very comfortable individuals whose ancestors may have been amongst those working enthusiastically with the European slavers.
Now looking to join the cancel and compensation culture...
This work will for sure be suppressed 😞
Are you still a progressive leftie or have you come to your senses?
Could you explain the Irish famine...... Shiploads of gráin exported while the Irish population was halved from 8 m to about 4 M during 1840s......
I'd recommend just about anything by Thomas Sowell.
Thanks, Arun Naikji for speaking out the truth about British colonization.You are indeed a well read person.
My pranam to you. SATYAMEVA JAYATE.❤
.
Like almost all human endeavors, colonialism brought both good and evil. It's complicated.
Like all usurpers, the socialists gain nothing by being fair.
Mostly good.
@@fraseredk7433 Do you find sheer satisfaction in reminiscing upon the grand orchestration of 40 concentration camps, meticulously designed to cage and confine 150,000 Boer refugees? Such splendid architectural feats, resembling thriving miniature towns, where the internees were bestowed with the privilege of dwelling. And let us not forget the additional 60 camps erected to house the 115,000 native Africans, diligently serving the Boers as their loyal servants. Oh, what gratification do you derive from such historical accounts?
Ah, and how can we overlook the mesmerizing tale of Britain's Gulag, where the British, in their noble pursuit of quelling the Mau Mau anticolonial uprising, ingeniously confined 1.5 million Kenyans within a web of detention camps and vigilantly patrolled villages? A saga of systematic violence and masterful concealment, it was. Pray, enlighten us, what joyous pleasure do you derive from this narrative?
Shall we not relish the vivid recollection of the Jallianwala Bagh massacre, that unforgettable spectacle where General Dyer, following his impeccable orders, commanded his soldiers to relentlessly unleash their deadly ammunition? In a matter of a mere 10 minutes, 379 to 1,000 protestors perished, and another 1,100 were left writhing in pain. Oh, do share the delight you glean from such harrowing episodes.
And let us revel in the intricate web of British tyranny, where crop patterns were maliciously destabilized, rendering Indians susceptible to catastrophic famines. Behold the magnanimous death toll of 12 to 29 million Indians, succumbing to starvation under the benevolent watch of the British Empire. How delightful it must be to contemplate their audacious denial of relief aid, deeming starvation a 'natural' and 'necessary' remedy for overpopulation.
Ah, the Great Famine of 1876-78, a masterpiece of callousness. Only after 5.5 million Indians had perished did the British authorities deign to administer meager relief efforts. Instead of embracing the virtues of charity, the British ingeniously established labor camps for the destitute, ensuring that Indian workers were bestowed with food portions no larger than half the rations provided in Nazi concentration camps. What immense pleasure do you derive from this exquisite display of insensitivity?
And behold the ravages unleashed upon India by the very ships that carried British troops returning from the First World War. Ah, the Spanish Flu, a delightful gift to the Indian populace, resulting in the decimation of an entire generation. Rivers choked with lifeless bodies, their cremation hindered by the scarcity of firewood. A pandemic of epic proportions, claiming the lives of over 17 million souls. Pray, reveal the immense joy you derive from this unparalleled tragedy.
Indeed, even the most despicable of Nazis would recoil in shame when confronted with the magnitude of these abominations.
Pray, illuminate my yearning mind, for it is with great ardor that I ask you to reveal the virtuous deeds of such magnitude and splendor that they would cast a radiant light to eclipse the profound darkness and heinousness of these historical transgressions.
unfortunately this is not what the comment section takes from this. not to speak of the fact that motivation is not the same as factual outcomes.
What positive aspects did colonialism bring about that would have been unattainable otherwise?
Speaking as someone who is striving to remain open, minded about this topic and analyze its objectively in systematically, I Is i'm always halfway through this and I think many of his Points are interesting and I am Disappointed I was not aware of any of them before.
However, his point That most of the massacres and indiscriminate killings of indigenous peoples in the british empire was done by british settlers who were unaffiliated with the colonial governments or the crown is only compelling as a defense of the British government, their colonial governments, and the Crown, not as a defense of "The British."
Because those setters were still British.
Absolutely Riveting John, maybe next time a few thoughts on Social Darwinism, Excellent
Applied social Darwinism might have saved the world from the dysgenics now destroying the species.
Yup we all love the costume drama empire and Downtrodden Abbey!
The EIC was the very opposite of ethical business. William Dalrymple covered this in the Anarchy. It's so called "trade" led to a massive financial crash in Britain and mass deaths in Bengal due to it's handling of the famine.
If only the intellectuals who have studied the past would speak out in unison about what's really happening right now in France then maybe the West would have some chance of survival!
If colonialism of East was great so should be on going colonialism of west...
Let people immigrate freely
The West is still Imperialist. They need to look in the mirror for all the grief they have caused and are still causing.
Yes, these people have no notion of assimilation. More like colonization but by far less advanced nations. It’s a kind of national suicide by the woke left.
I've just read his new book and recommend it to anyone interested in balanced history.
Indeed. Biggar's book, _Empire_ by Niall Ferguson, and Bruce Gilley's _The Case for Colonialism_ and _The Last Imperialist: Sir Alan Burns's Epic Defense of the British Empire_ are all worth one's time. Gilley's books are the most vigorous defence of the three.
Is there a good case for colonization of Jamaica, Barbados, Ghana and South Africa.
My friends in Africa really want to see that video.
I can believe Nigel is Scottish. He reminds me of my uncle John who hasn't quite got over the fact we do not have the empire anymore. I think he is quite thoughtful and my experience of the Indian community is that they have mixed feelings about the empire - obviously there were benefits to some. 1000 years ago we were very much hanging, drawing and quartering people though,
Did you pluck the last one out of your orifices, or just wanted to parade your vacuity for the world to witness?
Pushing the benefits of peace, rule of law, etcetera should be moderated.
Why?
Because the ruled will claim that they prefer the alternative if by self rule.
Therefore weave in ample views reflecting upon human nature.
Not "they are even worse" rather "we are all the same now let's improve together".
Hey it all worked out in the end, no need for any guilt. Britain is now largely owned by people from the Indian sub-continent, Saudis, and Russian oligarchs haha. It is gratifying that the short, vicious 20 year virus of Nazism was foiled by the slow cancer of 200 years of British Imperialism, and both were killed off.
I have seen a few of these apologist guys now, and it is remarkable how quickly they all skip over what happened with those troublesome folks on the neighboring island. "We brought law and order, ended slavery, tried to be nice to our inferiors and are lovely really, now buy my book"
Well articulated and presented with great integrity, I will order a hardcover to read.
Hi I watched a video by Canadian JJ mcClough on YT about 4D Character it's a term he is coining, we need to keep evolving
Very interesting view, I was brought up in Rhodesia and I garantee it was extremely well run, there was no crime, it was very peaceful, and succesful, it became independant , and could have grown into the most succesful country in Africa,but that wasnt to be, however, the indigenus people are still the most respected and saught after working force, with good education and work integraty.
Attagirl !
No crime there Jennifer? I distinctly remember hearing of a houseboy partying in the boss's Sunday suit while the family was away. That was in 1953 Lochinvar, it's still there, west of Salisbury. As a criminal lad in Bulawayo I stole couple of explosive caps left on rail lines to warn workers ahead, of oncoming trains. I guess hundreds of 'em died.
@@Mrbobinge very droll.
As a black Zimbabwean, born-free, woman i disagree with you. A large part of our current problems as a nation stem from the racist rule in Rhodesia (another part of course stems from our pre-colonial tribal dynamics and such). We have our work cut out for us, who knows we might actually rebuild a better, just Zimbabwe with time.
I don’t think Henry Reynolds (re: Tasmania) holds the view that Mr Biggar thinks he does. Perhaps he meant Keith Windschuttle.
Echo chamber issues here. Narrowness of perspective is almost palpable.
1. Cannot be comprehensive about European colonial expansion without the trigger-conflicts with Rome.
2. Modernity is not a unique property of the West. The assumption that modernity would not have happened without Europeans is an implicit bias not worthy of serious scholarship.
3. Cross-flows between various colonial projects is an important factor.
4. 1850s decade was a major point separating colonialism before and after that period.
5. Not a strong case at all for bifurcation of culpability between Imperial government and colonial settlers.
"Modernity is not a unique property of the West. The assumption that modernity would not have happened without Europeans is an implicit bias not worthy of serious scholarship." Actually that is a subject for serious scholarship. The result of it could well be the conclusion that that modernity would not have happened but for Europe and Europeans. Or as Niall Ferguson has put it in the title of his book 'Empire', Britain made the modern world.
@@marc21091 thanks for thoughtful contribution. But I differ. Worth of scholarship must be evaluated in a global context -hence literature review is necessary. Outside NATO alliance, nobody even takes this seriously because we know two things.
1. Colonisation disrupted civilisations that were morally, economically and technically superior -just not as brutal. Pre-colonial EU writings wax in glowing and admiring terms of Africa, India and other places. Would you need elaboration on this?
2. Europe’s progress was hamstrung by religious oppression and the period is called Dark Ages for a reason. It had also been bankrupted by forever wars -Crusades. Present atheistic bias whitewashes the historical fact that the Enlightenment was ignited by The Reformation. But the rest of the world had not been benighted to start with.
Hence I say, a broad reading of history settles this question, it is beyond reasonable doubt. It comes across as ego-soothing but desperate therapeutic use of scholarship to flog this horse.
I've read, in some South Seas missionary biographies from the 19th century, that the British were much more tolerant of the continuance of native languages than the French were.
Having listened to the entire interview, I would now add that John Anderson has reinforced my view of his far right politics, especially given his often defensive tone about colonialism. And that’s OK with me because I listen to views across the political spectrum.
There is enough in this interview to drive me to read Biggar’s book on colonialism. It is not otherwise persuasive however because much of what the author says is anecdotal, not based on figures, polling, original sources, etc. The most persuasive part of the interview indeed is his struggle to get his book published!
By the way, I suspect that the Indians who joined the British army to fight the Japanese were motivated less by their fondness for British authorities and more by the necessity of finding a well-paying job to support their families. One can see the analogy to Third World peoples joining Putin‘s nefarious aggression in Ukraine because they don’t otherwise have job opportunities.
British morality, a symphony of contradictions, echoes through time. In Kenya's embrace, concentration camps stood stark, like ominous monuments to power's brutality. The crown's hand, draped in claims of enlightenment, revealed its iron fingers. Famines in India, a stark contrast, summoned suffering, yet the empire's response was a pale whisper of empathy. Amid the grandeur of dominion, the compass of conscience often wavered, casting shadows on the legacy of moral rectitude.
as in contrast with the Indian morality - sooo straight and humanitarian and altruistic! Cut it off man!! As we speak, your country is still a cauldron of infection - the dirtiest country in the world - that's something that the clean British colonists could not instill it into your culture; as we speak you still retain the existence of casts - casts which look down their noses to each other. In fact, the most callous acts against Indians were performed by indians or by people of indian origins - see the veery bloody conflict that lasted for centuries between hindu indians and Muslim Indians (named now Pakistani). The only thing i see here is the old jelousy and envy of the ex- servant against its ex- master. Of course, Brits were superior to you, first of all, in terms of behavior and values! I am coming from Eastern Europe. And here we KNOW what it really means to be under a thoroughly ruthless domination - like the Soviet Bolshevik one. You are just winning out of envy and jelousy and because it is convenient now to do it. You are encouraged by a corrupt mainstream. That's all. So, stop talking in this fastidious and ridiculous way which reveals also your complexes of inferiority
@@Politics_is_PUBLIC_TOILET Indeed, it's quite the spectacle, isn't it? The audacity with which you flaunt their ignorance, as if it were a grand procession for all to behold. You trot along, blissfully unaware, with their knowledge as vast as an ocean yet about as profound as a footprint in the sand.
Geographical origins seem to become a peculiar insignificance in the face of such a display. It matters not where you hail from when the crux of the matter is the vacuous nature of your discourse. Ignorance, like yours, that relentless companion of the uninformed, cares not for borders or backgrounds. It spreads its wings with abandon, indifferent to the distinctions that humanity might impose upon itself.
So here we stand, watching this parade of your shallowness, as wide as the mighty Pacific in its geographic scope but as shallow as a puddle that forms after the faintest drizzle. It's a curious sight, that you choose to display to the world indeed, and one can't help but marvel at your paradox of such expansive ignorance held within such limited intellectual depths.
The concept of colonialism is overly simplified into one single narrative. But the truth is that European colonialism spanned over 300 years by vastly different powers.
British colonies were governed vastly differently from Spanish ones and thus left very different legacies behind.
Even the british colonisation of Asia is vastly different from british colonisation of Africa because of time and people involved.
Excellent - I will definitely be buying a copy of this book. The genocide, and including enslavement of the Moriori by Maori in New Zealand, notably the 1835 massacre, needs to be included in ANY discussion and so narrative about colonialism in this country.
This from a believing Jew (not in the Christian faith mind).
Thank God for the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
Without the Gospel, past evils and colonial atrocities would have been much worse.
These matters really should be studied thru the lense of recognizing human nature common to us all.
Then maybe we can all release joint healing laughter at the thought of how absurd and damaging we can all be to one another.
Ah, how intriguing to witness such an audacious proclamation from an individual who identifies as a believing Jew, disclaiming any adherence to the Christian faith. It is truly a marvel to witness the audacity of your gratitude to a deity, who, in your eyes, graced humanity with the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
Pray, do enlighten us on the basis of your remarkable assertion that without the Gospel, past evils and colonial atrocities would have reached even greater depths. Such a profound revelation it must be, to credit the very source that has been wielded as a tool of subjugation and oppression throughout history, as the savior from a bleaker fate.
How fascinating it is that you propose to study these matters through the lens of recognizing a common human nature shared among us all. Yet, in the same breath, you advocate for a collective release of laughter, as if the infliction of absurdity and damage upon one another is an innocuous jest to be mirthfully celebrated.
Oh, the irony of your words is as palpable as it is disheartening. To trivialize the profound suffering and enduring consequences wrought by the actions of individuals upon their fellow human beings, under the guise of joint healing laughter, is a lamentable display of callousness and indifference.
Let it be known that the path to true understanding and healing lies not in dismissive laughter, but in genuine empathy, acknowledgement of past wrongs, and a commitment to rectify the lingering injustices that persist in our shared human history
As they say about natural justice, you cannot be the judge in your own case. Neither the justice nor the injustice of colonialism are for the beneficiaries of colonialism to decide.
My first reaction was 'OMG! You can't be serious!?' Then he said, "I'm a Theologian and Professional Ethicist, mostly" , and it all made sense. Yikes. The world simply does not accept British excuses for the atrocities of British Empire. Can't, won't, and if the British refuse to remember, why should their victims forget?
Really,you are so naive.Read this book and learn the truth.Not the rubbish you hear from ‘aboriginal’ activists.
And by British, you mean anyone who doesn't want endless revenge and reparations, right?
Very convenient belief for parasites to believe they have somehow been wronged. Then they're not only justified in desiring to steal, they can blame the victims.
Endless hatred, whipped up by the jealous and amoral
I am glad eventually somebody writes a book about this!
It is absolute nonsense nonsense to say that the British Empire was a force for good. It was as described by Sashi Tharoor in his book “Inglorious Empire” “a totally amoral, rapacious imperialist machine bent on the subjugation of Indians for the purpose of profit, not merely a neutrally efficient system indifferent to human rights. And its subjugation resulted in the expropriation of Indian wealth to Britain, draining the society of the resources that would normally have propelled its natural growth and economic development’ (p. 222).
India’s share of world GDP fell from 27 per cent in 1700 to 3 per cent by the time the British left in 1947. (By contrast, Britain’s share was about 3 per cent in 1700, rising to a peak of 9 per cent in 1870.) The plundering of India began with the exploitative activities of the East India Company and its officials, such as Robert Clive, and accelerated during the 19th century through British industrial strength and naval networks, control of communications, and the cynical application of free trade policies. The effect was to complete India’s economic ruin commercially. Among the most flagrant examples of this tendency, Tharoor argues, was the deliberate destruction of India’s ship and textile concerns, while at the same time Britain became a world-leader in these industries. The increasingly agricultural Indian state paid for its own vassal status through outrageously high levels of taxation, which were syphoned off to pay for such developments (all in the British interest) as the enormous Indian army, the construction of railways (at an abnormally high five per cent return for British investors), and the building of public works in both India and Britain. Among the many negative impacts on the Indian population were an increasingly poor agricultural sector, recurrent famine, and a low national morale which stifled independence and ingenuity.
In the eighteenth century, India’s share of the world economy was as large as Europe’s. By 1947, after two centuries of British rule, it had decreased six-fold. Beyond conquest and deception, the Empire blew rebels from cannon, massacred unarmed protesters, entrenched institutionalised racism, and caused millions to die from starvation.
British imperialism justified itself as enlightened despotism for the benefit of the governed, but Shashi Tharoor takes on and demolishes this position, demonstrating how every supposed imperial “gift”-from the railways to the rule of law-was designed in Britain’s interests alone. He goes on to show how Britain’s Industrial Revolution was founded on India’s deindustrialization and the destruction of its textile industry. In this bold and incisive reassessment of colonialism, Tharoor exposes to devastating effect the inglorious reality of Britain’s stained Indian legacy.
If british going to india and ruling was good for indians...i assume indian going to britain and doing same will be good for britain?
So immigration should be free
What advancements are you bringing to the table?
@@gagamba9198You don't get to ask. Just As Indians didn't get to ask.
Although, here are two of the (badly needed) advancements brought:
Dental care.
Tongue cleaning devices.
Back in my university days in Los Angeles I knew many Pakistanis and Indians. The Pakistanis spoke positively of the British in keeping peace in the subcontinent and the Indians spoke of the British as colonizers who did no good whatsoever.
I don't think it was on purpose but it's normal for people that speak the same language, of the same religion to be more tribal.
So what Club are they at? Looks a bit like the East India Club, but that is small club, and this one looks bigger.
The other one looks anderson.
@@briankelly5828 Can you interpret that? What does that mean?
I am the Human you all suppose to be trying to free. Because no one defined iti
Like what economic system or religious system.
What about greed?
How does he explain the hatred the colonies had and in some cases still have for the British?
I think part of the problem with Colonial Empires is that there bundled up as a collective, Belgium has a dreadful record, French ,Spanish, Dutch and Portuguese were all very different models run with different levels of conquered peoples individual rights compared to British colonialism. There were horrific tragedies done in all countries, yet there are just as horrible tribal wars within these areas before these areas were colonised. ( areas because in many instances these countries were not recognised countries without names or borders prior to colonialism). One thing we gave many cultures was the ability to read and write to communicate with there own people living in their continent.
Ah, how enlightening it is to witness such a selective and apologist perspective on the legacy of colonial empires! Your attempt to downplay the horrors perpetrated by various colonial powers is truly astounding. Yes, let's conveniently separate them into neat little categories, as if the British colonialism, with its own catalogue of atrocities, can be absolved of guilt by merely comparing it to the records of other nations.
Belgium, the crown jewel of oppression and exploitation, with its infamous record in the Congo. But fear not, for we shall not tarnish the image of other colonial powers by associating them with such atrocities. Let us conveniently forget the brutal practices of the French, Spanish, Dutch, and Portuguese, who, with their own unique models of domination, inflicted untold suffering upon conquered peoples.
And how generous of these colonial powers to grant the gift of literacy to the indigenous populations! How gracious of them to impose their languages and educational systems upon cultures that had their own rich and vibrant means of communication. Surely, the native peoples were eternally grateful for having their own languages and cultures supplanted by those of their benevolent colonizers.
Ah, and let us not forget the dismissal of pre-colonial conflicts as justification for the brutality of colonial rule. How convenient it is to absolve the colonizers of their responsibility by pointing to internal tribal wars, conveniently ignoring the fact that colonization often exacerbated and manipulated these conflicts for their own gain.
Your foolish attempt to whitewash the devastating impact of colonialism is nothing short of repugnant. It reeks of ignorance and a willful disregard for the immense suffering endured by indigenous peoples at the hands of imperial powers. To suggest that the ability to read and write in European languages somehow compensates for the loss of lives, destruction of cultures, and enduring legacies of exploitation is an insult to historical truth and the resilience of those who have borne the brunt of colonial oppression.
Your revisionist and apologetic view of colonial empires demonstrates a severe lack of empathy, historical understanding, and a callous disregard for the lived experiences of those who suffered under the yoke of imperialism. It is my sincere hope that you embark on a journey of self-reflection and education, so that you may come to grasp the true magnitude of the crimes committed in the name of colonialism.
British colonialism was good. European coloninialism was bad. A very balanced view indeed!
*their
@@ncheedxx0109 To suggest that British colonialism was inherently good while other European colonial ventures were uniformly bad is a blatant distortion of history. British colonialism, like its European counterparts, caused immense harm to colonized peoples across the globe. The British Empire, while claiming to bring progress and civilization, inflicted widespread suffering through economic exploitation, cultural erasure, and brutal suppression of indigenous populations.
The consequences of colonialism are far from being a matter of balance or preference. They encompass generations of trauma, lost autonomy, and the systemic dismantling of indigenous cultures and societies. The exploitative practices employed by colonial powers have had enduring repercussions, from economic disparities to political instability that continue to plague numerous countries today.
If you genuinely seek a balanced view, I suggest you broaden your understanding beyond a simplistic dichotomy. Educate yourself about the true costs of colonialism and listen to the voices of those who have experienced its devastating effects.
Do you know what being ironical means? Jeez!