So, what is the point of dwelling so endlessly on colonialism? It is implying that the world would have been better off if Europeans had never touched Africa, the Americas, etc. OK, so everyone there would still be living in the stone age. Ask the teenagers in Nigeria, Ghana, Kenia, if that would appeal to them! Just ask them!
Assuming this is an argument in good faith, I think you're falling into the trap of equating colonialism and technological development. In so far as Nigeria, Ghana and Kenya have poverty issues these ARE the pressures of colonialism, not 'natural' states. By and large Colonialism was the process of active exploitation of colonised areas justified with logics of progress and advancement (the very logics which themselves were products of Colonialism). A good example of this would be Native American culture. I think Pueblo Bonito is a pretty solid example of this. Contrary to your claims Africa the Americas etc were not in the stone age in these eras. They possess (and possessed) complex and varied civilisations with their own strengths and weaknesses, in their environmental contexts. Colonialism wrote over these, co-opting elements as curiosities, rereading cultural codes as valuable or non-valuable (see for example the tendency to ignore the complexity of clothing practices in Bali or elsewhere instead substituting this for flat notions of 'naked tribes'). This is the reason study of De/Coloniality is important. It can help people to see the damage done by imperialism(s) and assess if they actually feel their position is valuable or whether they want to create something else. Granted this is only a start (realistically material support is also needed given the damage done to a lot of areas by extractionist resource management on the behalf of Empires). But to head off the criticism as well. This is also about Europe. Colonialism did a lot of rewriting of European cultures too (see Ireland, Greece etc.) and empires continue to try to do this. The idea that Europe 'developed' the areas it conquered is part of the problem. It underestimates the cultures that lived there and assumes that the issues they face are results of their people's failure rather than active continual problems of colonialism (Haiti's enforced debt to France, Bali's use as a tourist destination and the implementation of monoculture farming all spring to mind here). Beyond all this though, colonialism is interesting. History is interesting and an actual understanding of the forces, ideologies and economic considerations that created our present day is just more satisfying than the flat notions of linear progress that are often presented to us. Even the history of Europe is so much more interesting when we stop treating them like a monolith and recognise the politics involved in constructing notions of 'European history' and linking the Greeks to the English to the Vikings (rather than trying to project our ahistorical notions of race and culture backwards). So yes, go and ask people from Nigeria, Ghana and Kenya about their history. Go and ask experts from those regions. You might just learn something.
@@jorgegallo3261 You really didnt have to bring mass destruction with it tho, and i say mass destruction but the horrors of it is just beyond words. Plus how is it even marxist? Is your brain not capable of comprehending that europeans are not the white saviour you thought them to be, ``saving`` people from their ``primitive livings `` with their barbarism, that theyre not the main character, they are not the superior ones or the most advanced and moderns of humanity but they are the villains, an enemy to civilizations and to humanity in this story.
Buhat shukria. Thanks very much. From Pakistan. Shahzeb Khan
Decoloniality is the need in the present to restitute what has been destituted.
So, what is the point of dwelling so endlessly on colonialism? It is implying that the world would have been better off if Europeans had never touched Africa, the Americas, etc. OK, so everyone there would still be living in the stone age. Ask the teenagers in Nigeria, Ghana, Kenia, if that would appeal to them! Just ask them!
Assuming this is an argument in good faith, I think you're falling into the trap of equating colonialism and technological development. In so far as Nigeria, Ghana and Kenya have poverty issues these ARE the pressures of colonialism, not 'natural' states. By and large Colonialism was the process of active exploitation of colonised areas justified with logics of progress and advancement (the very logics which themselves were products of Colonialism).
A good example of this would be Native American culture. I think Pueblo Bonito is a pretty solid example of this. Contrary to your claims Africa the Americas etc were not in the stone age in these eras. They possess (and possessed) complex and varied civilisations with their own strengths and weaknesses, in their environmental contexts. Colonialism wrote over these, co-opting elements as curiosities, rereading cultural codes as valuable or non-valuable (see for example the tendency to ignore the complexity of clothing practices in Bali or elsewhere instead substituting this for flat notions of 'naked tribes').
This is the reason study of De/Coloniality is important. It can help people to see the damage done by imperialism(s) and assess if they actually feel their position is valuable or whether they want to create something else. Granted this is only a start (realistically material support is also needed given the damage done to a lot of areas by extractionist resource management on the behalf of Empires).
But to head off the criticism as well. This is also about Europe. Colonialism did a lot of rewriting of European cultures too (see Ireland, Greece etc.) and empires continue to try to do this.
The idea that Europe 'developed' the areas it conquered is part of the problem. It underestimates the cultures that lived there and assumes that the issues they face are results of their people's failure rather than active continual problems of colonialism (Haiti's enforced debt to France, Bali's use as a tourist destination and the implementation of monoculture farming all spring to mind here).
Beyond all this though, colonialism is interesting. History is interesting and an actual understanding of the forces, ideologies and economic considerations that created our present day is just more satisfying than the flat notions of linear progress that are often presented to us. Even the history of Europe is so much more interesting when we stop treating them like a monolith and recognise the politics involved in constructing notions of 'European history' and linking the Greeks to the English to the Vikings (rather than trying to project our ahistorical notions of race and culture backwards).
So yes, go and ask people from Nigeria, Ghana and Kenya about their history. Go and ask experts from those regions. You might just learn something.
@@packman2321 A lot of Marxist sophistry! Colonization DID bring modern tech to Africa. - it didn't get there by itself!
🤣🤣🤣🤣😒SMH
@@jorgegallo3261 You really didnt have to bring mass destruction with it tho, and i say mass destruction but the horrors of it is just beyond words. Plus how is it even marxist? Is your brain not capable of comprehending that europeans are not the white saviour you thought them to be, ``saving`` people from their ``primitive livings `` with their barbarism, that theyre not the main character, they are not the superior ones or the most advanced and moderns of humanity but they are the villains, an enemy to civilizations and to humanity in this story.