Where Is The Apology For Slavery and Colonisation?

[Khayr]

Originally posted by Benson and Hedges:

I am of the belief that colonialism was a actually a positive thing. it led to globalisation which in turn led to the world we live today. slavery is altogether a different matter - it has occurred through out the history of the world.

Colonialism served one purpose - to feed the overspending of the European Kings and Queens.

It still does serve the same purpose.

 

Was it positive? It depends from where you stand. If you are a white, then ofcourse - it created what is termed now WHITE PRIVLEGE, so that rich white man's grandkids can get university eduction for free, homes paidoff without mortgages, trips to the safari for "vacation" etc.

[Rayyan]

[qb0

Originally posted by Khayr:

It is selective because they the victors and history is written from the prespective of the victors. Colonialism still exists albeit not the same blatant extent as in the past. Its just that the conquered have accepted it as a normality. [/QB]

The conquerors couldn't find there kind of medicine, when they took over the lands, and eliminating entire native nations, if there was mortars and gunpowder in the hands of the natives what you been expect, or the whip is on the other hand. That doesn’t happen till today, and/or imagine they were using a bow and an arrow; they wouldn’t have had stand a chance.

 

The might is always right, and no apology – But on contrary God Save the Queen, the gunpowder, Alfred Nobel of Sweden(Dynamite), the old collapsed Islamic Spain (Andalusia) the birth place of first shotguns and the bullets ever invented, the industrial revolution. Ask people like Cecil Rhodes, the man who took both sides of river Zambezi, and claim the prospect of all diamonds and gold and whatever not. His treasure till day is hidden in Oxbridge for Rhodes scholarships.

 

And just ask where the leaders of the colonised took the money,the remaining bits. to Paris, London,Washington, Brussels, and their subjects want to cross the seas to go to the coloniser’s lands to have a decent living till day, and often possible they die in the seas. Tahriib…. Ohhhh What a funny little world.

[B]

Originally posted by Khayr:

quote:Originally posted by Benson and Hedges:

I am of the belief that colonialism was a actually a positive thing. it led to globalisation which in turn led to the world we live today. slavery is altogether a different matter - it has occurred through out the history of the world.

Colonialism served one purpose - to feed the overspending of the European Kings and Queens.

It still does serve the same purpose.

 

Was it positive? It depends from where you stand. If you are a white, then ofcourse - it created what is termed now

WHITE PRIVLEGE

, so that rich white man's grandkids can get university eduction for free, homes paidoff without mortgages, trips to the safari for "vacation" etc.

Colonialism like its counterpart Islamisation has led to the same result (cultural imperialism, evaporation of indigenous customs, laws etc., displacing people from their land, drawing arbitrary lines across tribal borders etc) Its not an issue of whether it was positive or not but that the dominant ideology at the time prevails. More so that Islam, colonialism and its subsequent effects of globalisation had indeed led to interconnectivity of the worlds disparate populations and had led to a new age of discoveries insofar as technology, transportation and communication is concerned.

[Maxaatiri]

To those of you who believe that an apology amounts to little/nothing/an insult, I partially agree you with you. An isolated apology which is not followed on by pressure to mark it as a Holocaust, and then agree on defining the terms of reparation is a travesty.

 

The issue of reparations themselves is currently contentious one for many people of African descent, but it really does boil down to fear of gaining little or nothing from negotiation. If France were allowed to take compensation from Haiti for 'freeing' the slaves there, how can people morally not fight for the losses of their now descendants? The same issue in the other African diasporas like the States and the Caribbean, they have lost out on perhaps trillions due to slavery (trade, land + interest being of prime concern). The question isnt whether it is right or wrong to correct the past, it is simply gaining a cohesive narrative going between all affected by it.

 

Getting the West to admit to this is a very small part of a struggle for freedom. Recognition of the atrocities as just that; atrocities, is the very first step, without pushing for it to be recognised as such, you will forever be labelled an extremist and much worse. The struggle to liberate Africa of its current colonised status, begins with getting to grips with what preceded this situation. So yes, colonialsim and slavery still exist, but in order to tackle these, we have to start from the base it was built upon.

[B]

^

I don't think the issue is colonialism but rather the legacy of colonialism. The aftermath of colonialism and the struggle for many nations to break these shackles is the real concern in my opinion.

[Maxaatiri]

Rayyan...Atleast you see that, but the rest of the world wants to shut its eyes and ears to it because it will not suit them, just as anyone with the upper hand would. All of that aside, this generation really needs to take the next step towards decolonisation, and we have it a little better in the sense that we are in the West, vote in the West and pay taxes in the West, we are a lot more influential than we think, if only we came together as a very loud collective. just think of how many people this troubles.

 

Benson and Hedges - Im surprised you think that way. Do you have access to some sort of device that allows one to see what the world would have been like if it wasnt for XYandZ? Most of these technologies that you see arent originally Western, you know that, and people have been sailing and trading ideas for millenias, who says we wouldnt have advanced?

[Maxaatiri]

How can you separate the two? How can you deal with something whilst ignoring/sidelining its cause?

[B]

^ The question is can you quantify suffering and put a monetary value on this. I don't agree with the whole idea of reparation from slavery. This is an entirely subjective and a matter of interpretation.

 

Its a self-defeating attitude.

[Maxaatiri]

Originally posted by Khayr:

quote:Im disgusted, sickened and angered (Im not using hyperbole loosely here)that they are allowed to be so bloody selective in their morality.

It is selective because they the victors and history is written from the prespective of the victors. Colonialism still exists albeit not the same blatant extent as in the past. Its just that the conquered have accepted it as a normality.

On the contrary, many Africans are unhappy with colonialism, and there is an awful lot written on the subject from other viewpoints. Many people, particularly those relatively better off in the West want change. The real problem is getting those truths to Africa, and how we go about educating the youth, starting from scratch...that a significant portion of the reason they are poor and cant go to school, or live in shanty towns, or dont have a great father figure (read Willy Lynch) is because of Slavery and or Colonisation.

[General Duke]

Maxaatiri, a great topic, thanks.

 

These westerners will never apologise for this until Africa becomes powerfull, then they will grovel as they do with the Chinese today..

 

On one occasion, hearing a great noise from belowdecks where the blacks were chained together, the sailors opened the hatches and found the slaves in different stages of suffocation, many dead, some having killed others in desperate attempts to breathe. Slaves often jumped overboard to drown rather than continue their suffering. To one observer a slave-deck was

"so covered with blood and mucus that it resembled a slaughter house."

 

Under these conditions, perhaps one of every three blacks transported overseas died, but the huge profits (often double the investment on one trip) made it worthwhile for the slave trader, and so the blacks were packed into the holds like fish.

 

First the Dutch, then the English, dominated the slave trade. (By 1795 Liverpool had more than a hundred ships carrying slaves and accounted for half of all the European slave trade.) Some Americans in New England entered the business, and in 1637 the first American slave ship, the Desire, sailed from Marblehead. Its holds were partitioned into racks, 2 feet by 6 feet, with leg irons and bars.

 

By 1800, 10 to 15 million blacks had been transported as slaves to the Americas, representing perhaps one-third of those originally seized in Africa. It is roughly estimated that Africa lost 50 million human beings to death and slavery in those centuries we call the beginnings of modern Western civilization, at the hands of slave traders and plantation owners in Western Europe and America, the countries deemed the most advanced in the world.

 

Howard Zinn, a Peoples History of the United States

[Maxaatiri]

Like the quote..pity people forget that slavery happened to living breathing people, seems to me some people have swallowed the old 'African savages' label and couldnt care less about the past.

 

Africa will never become powerful until this very generation wills it to. Currently we see the entire world taking what it can and has no reason to feel shameful because the West have sucessfully managed to make talking about these issues taboo to further their own agendas. From Europe, to N.America, to Australia, to the Far East, to the Emirates; Africa is being systematically robbed and set back thousands more years. There is no time for waiting for Africa to recover, it will continue to regress and be depleted of its populations (via hunger, expatriation, disease and land grabbing etc). that is unless this generation change this. I hate sounding like an armchair revolutionary, but this is our job, whether in Somalia (best to start on home ground) or in the diaspora.

[General Duke]

Maxaatiri

 

My sister, I understand your anguish, however I see a different Africa emerging in the next couple of decades, if one takes a holistic look at the continent today, one realizes that it has less conflict, more cohesion [AU] and a number of rising nations led by, South Africa, Ghana, Tanzania and others. Even the world cup is being held for the first time in the continent.

 

Today Africa has other options in a multi-polar world. The emergence of China, India and their need for natural resources will also allow the continent to leverage the newcomers against the old imperialist and kick start their own development.

 

The west is also changing, people of color are playing key roles in western democracies and are changing the way the majority think. It is remarkable that a son of Africa today is the President of the United States.

 

We have a long way to go but I have no doubt that soon, there will be peace in the old continent and much progress.

[Maxaatiri]

Walaal I have to disagree. That is a cop out and you know it, I have heard dozens of people say that in order to control their level of despair. Not that you are guilty of that, but the truth is that action is what is needed, not hope for things to work themselves out.

 

You speak of an Africa with a high level of autonomy, that isnt reality, it is a well known fact that many of the offices of power in Africa are held by corrupt puppets who profit to lesser degree from stripping Africa of its assets as the neocolonialists do. Why would that suddenly change because the exploiters speak a different language? Africa has the rescources but no effective leadership, and thanks to SAPs and PRSPs, the education and health system is virtually non existant, if China becomes the world power, who is to say they will change these structural policies which suit exploitation so well?

 

And the World Cup is held in SA...not exactly the best example. South Africa is a settler colony, they have to decolonise effectively and it will take many years before they are equal to the minority whites in terms of land ownership, business ownership, educational opportunities etc, let alone gain their freedom.

[General Duke]

My sister, I must disagree with you. Positive incremental change is taking place in Africa today. Take the example of the rapidly developing economies of Mozambique & Angola. You did not fully grasp my earlier point, the problem as you have correctly mentioned is the exploitation of Africa by the western powers. The emergence of other great powers will change the playing field as African nations will be able to negotiate better terms for their commodities. The Chinese are investing heavily in Africa, building new roads, ports, not because they loves us anymore than Europeans, but because they need to get the natural resource for their developing economy. The Europeans & America are reacting by changing their approach to doing business in the continent and giving the nations they neglected sweetness unthinkable a decade or so ago. Foreign direct investment is pouring into the continent, because of the potential for rapid economic growth with potential good returns.

 

South Africa is a remarkable nation, the ANC has changed that country for the better, the blacks are empowered and run every level of government, sloppy leadership does exist. However let me address one point, the Afrikaners are also citizens of that nation & Africans and should not as you implied be exiled. The growth of the black middle class, as well as the education of a whole new generation of South Africans has vindicated the vision of Mandela. Lets not play down our success and forever keep our selves in the gutter.

 

Yes, many Africans are without much needed resources, but this is the case even in China, & India, yet with time these things can be addressed as the continents economy grows and specially when African nations start to develop trade with each other.

 

Again I disagree with you, Africa is emerging from the darkness, it will take time, but we have seen a turn around.

[NASSIR]

Maxaatiri has articulated great points. She is right, we need action and discourage the notion of using one powerful nation against another in our own backyard.

 

A very interesting insight by George Ayittey, Distinguished Economist from Ghana.

 

[Economist Debates: Africa and China]

 

"Professor Juma rightly noted that there are

serious concerns about China's involvement in Africa.

But instead of addressing them, he chose to dismiss them. One set of standards cannot be applied to Chinese companies doing business in Africa and another set to Western companies.

 

To be sure, the West's historical relationship with Africa was atrocious: slavery, colonial oppression and exploitation, as well as indifference during the cold war. Unfortunately, however, many African leaders operate on the fallacious notion that China is the enemy of the West and, therefore, "The enemy of my enemy must be my friend."

 

The fact is, China was not an innocent bystander or absent from Africa during the cold war. It was actively engaged and, back then, the Soviet Union was China's enemy in Africa, not the West.

 

China's conception of the world was tripolar: the West, the Soviet Union and the third world. It viewed the third world as an adjunct of the West and competed with the Soviet Union to win adherents to its brand of communism and to recruit the allegiance of the African nations by supporting their liberation movements. Denouncing Moscow as reactionary and revisionist, China trained and armed liberation movements in Africa. In its zeal to stymie Soviet efforts at every turn in Africa, China committed a series of blunders.

 

China meddled in Burundi's deadly ethnic pogroms. It trained a number of Tutsi in guerrilla warfare and unwisely backed a 1963 Tutsi expedition that resulted in the massacre of more than 20,000 Hutu. It earned China much opprobrium in Africa. China also supported Biafra's secession from Nigeria, simply because Moscow backed the Federal Government of Nigeria. The ensuing civil war (1967-70) cost over a million lives. China's intense enmity toward the Soviet Union even caused Julius Nyerere of Tanzania to complain as early as 1963 of a new scramble for Africa between the Soviet Union and China. Only in Tanzania did China achieve some diplomatic and ideological success. The Tan-Zam railway line it built to overshadow the Soviet-built Aswan High Dam in Egypt was an engineering marvel. It was completed two years ahead of schedule and was much touted as a model of what foreign aid could do for Africa. But subsequent maintenance was poor, services deteriorated and the Dar es Salaam terminal became chronically clogged to the point of immobility. Although the Chinese had nothing to do with these shortcomings, their reputation suffered. Hopefully, a similar fate does not await the flurry of new infrastructural projects China is currently undertaking across Africa.

 

I vehemently disagree with Professor Juma's suggestion that "China is an important role model for Africa". The Chinese communist model is fundamentally alien to indigenous Africa. Strong centralised rule was never part of Africa's political heritage.

 

In the West the basic economic and social unit is the individual. In traditional Africa, it is the extended family, which acts as a corporate unit owning the means of production. The cattle of the Masai do not belong to the tribal government or chief. They are private property. Land is owned by extended families or lineages, which decide what to grow on it. The harvest is used to feed the families and the surplus is sold in free village markets. Markets are such ancient institutions in Africa. In West Africa, market activity has for centuries been dominated by women and prices are determined by bargaining, not fixed by chiefs or kings. And free trade routes criss-crossed the continent; the most notable was the trans-Saharan trade route.

 

Africans engage in trade to make a profit. The traditional practice is to share it. In the abusa scheme of the cocoa farmers of West Africa, profit is divided into three: a third to the workers, another third to the owner and the remaining third set aside for farm maintenance and expansion. In commerce, the common practice was abunu, in which the profit was equally shared between the market trader and the workers. Part of the profits from market activity was used to finance Africa's liberation movements in the 1950s. Africa's salvation lies in returning to its roots and building upon its own indigenous heritage of free village markets, free enterprise, free trade and participatory democracy based upon consensus. Africa's future lies in its own hands, not inside the corridors of the World Bank, the inner sanctum of the China's communist politburo, nor in the steamy sex antics of cockroaches on Jupiter. But for decades, hordes of African leaders travelled abroad and blindly copied all sorts of foreign paraphernalia to transplant to Africa. The continent is littered with the putrid carcasses of such failed imported systems. Now, we are being told to emulate China. Enough.

 

The role model African leaders should use is Botswana.

It is the only African country that went back and built on its own indigenous institutions. It is a multi-party democracy and capitalist, neither of which China is. Africa does not need Chinese aid. The aid resources Africa desperately needs can be found in Africa itself. According to the African Union, corruption alone costs Africa $148 billion a year. If African leaders were to cut that in half, they would find more than enough resources for development than the miserable $10 billion in low-interest loans China pledged to offer African countries over the next three years, or the $25 billion in aid Africa receives from the West, for that matter.