Imperialist past - is it always reprehensible?

[Llywarch Hen]

[post copied from another thread, everything except the part concerning the topic of this discussion deleted]

And there's no shame in an imperialistic past per se, or half of Europe would be hanging its head in guilt! There are many things to be proud of in our imperial past, but that is a question for history.

[Marcus Marulus]

Originally Posted by Llywarch Hen

There are many things to be proud of in our imperial past

Which ones?

[Llywarch Hen]

Originally Posted by Marulus

Which ones?

Like the fact that we had such a large amount of brave, daring and smart young men who were willing and able to travel all around the world and make the whole world know about us. That they established our language as the lingua franca of international relations, including this forum. That they brought literacy to and eliminated human sacrifice in huge tracts of lands that had previously been impenetrable to civilisation. That they conquered, and yet were careful enough to record much of what they observed among native peoples for future anthropologists to muse over.

Honestly, do I really have to spell out how heroic an achievement much of this was?!?

That some things that were done are now contributing to our present downfall is more the result of contemporary policies that allow such things to happen, and could be reversed very simply with a change in the political atmosphere.

[M.R.]

Originally Posted by Llywarch Hen

Like the fact that we had such a large amount of brave, daring and smart young men who were willing and able to travel all around the world and make the whole world know about us.

Hahaha, yes very brave people - fighting against natives on the level of stone age, even Zulus made them trouble... Commiting horrible crimes against those people, stealing their land, destroying their culture etc - this is really something nationalist can be proud of.

That they established our language as the lingua franca of international relations, including this forum.

You must be very proud of that. I mean destroying other peoples cultures and all that. Don't confuse those primitive coward savages with nationalism though.

That they brought literacy to and eliminated human sacrifice in huge tracts of lands that had previously been impenetrable to civilisation.

You know as we nationalists say, their lands their rules. I don't want anyone to force me their culture and the other way around. It's not the same with British imperialism which you obviously praise though.

That they conquered, and yet were careful enough to record much of what they observed among native peoples for future anthropologists to muse over.

So they could slaughter them later... Really good people.

Originally Posted by Llywarch Hen

Like it or not, there is a considerable ethnic group in the north of the island that doesn't feel the closest of kinships with those who were the architects of the Republic of Ireland, or those who at present control its political destiny.Why should their opinion not count? You asked 'since when', and I would answer that this has been the case since they ceased to be only Scots, Englishmen, Irishmen and Welshmen, and forged a common identity based on a common situation, strengthened by endogamy and religion. They constitute a relatively young ethnicity, sure, but should that be held against them? They cannot be compared with Russians for example, as they have nowhere else to go.

They're immigrants there and their opinion should not count. IMHO. Or maybe Germans should count the opinion of let's say Turks in Germany when it comes to German issues? It's not a religious thing anyway, you have Irish following the Protestant tradition of their ancestors which is the right thing to do.

As a nationalist I find this unacceptable, but then again it's not for me to decide, it is just my nationalist view point and beside I have all right to be anti-British after what Britain has done to Slovenia trough history.

The BNP are far from perfect, and often express themselves incorrectly, but they are at least fighting to end immigration into my country.

They do? How? By being loosers with few percents of the vote and fighting against nationalism?

[Llywarch Hen]

Originally Posted by M.R.

Hahaha, yes very brave people - fighting against natives on the level of stone age, even Zulus made them trouble... Commiting horrible crimes against those people, stealing their land, destroying their culture etc - this is really something nationalist can be proud of.

Yeah yeah... If Slovenia had done the same, you'd feel the same as me.

Atrocities happened, sure, but weren't the rule! Far from it. Britons travelled to unknown lands, struggled in often small numbers in unfamiliar environments against opponents who knew the land intimately. And they did very well on the whole. Blaming it all on technological superiority is simplistic, there was a very strong mental edge that we had, from our confidence in ourselves. Read some Joseph Conrad (your Slavonic cousin) and you'll get an idea of what I mean.

And tell me this, what do you want me to feel about it all? Do you want grovelling and begging for forgiveness? Apologies, and guilt? That would only lead to the death of my nation.


EDIT: This was moved from a thread on a separate matter, so don't interpret the thread title here as my own question! I was just responding that a Briton now can have some legitimate pride in the Imperial achievements of the last few centuries, and needn't feel guilty about it all. He shouldn't ignore the naughty things that went on, but neither should he allow them to be discussed to the point that it seems that was ALL that happened Back In The Day.

[Marcus Marulus]

Originally Posted by Llywarch Hen

Like the fact that we had such a large amount of brave, daring and smart young men who were willing and able to travel all around the world and make the whole world know about us.

So were Genghiz-Khan's Mongol horsemen, Ottoman ghazis and sipahis etc.

Originally Posted by Llywarch Hen

That they established our language as the lingua franca of international relations, including this forum.

Before that, French was international language, once it was Latin etc.

Don't tell me you are proud of globish, the adulterated form of English used today throughout the world, by vulgarized spawns of consumer mass-society?

Originally Posted by Llywarch Hen

That they brought literacy to

Whereto? India had an ancient literacy, as did Middle East. Maybe the argument about "bringning literacy" could be said only of some parts of sub-Saharan Africa.

Originally Posted by Llywarch Hen

and eliminated human sacrifice in huge tracts of lands that had previously been impenetrable to civilisation.

Not an achievement unique to British imperialism, others did it too. Islamic conquest also brought about ending the human sacrifices, whereas in many places it was done through the work of Christian missionaries, without the explicit conquest of some area.

Originally Posted by Llywarch Hen

That they conquered, and yet were careful enough to record much of what they observed among native peoples for future anthropologists to muse over.

People like Richard Burton or William Jones (to cite only two) are admirable, to be sure, and I often enjoyed reading their accounts about foreign and distant lands and people, I also admired the wealth of knowledge they amassed, their linguistic abilities etc, but the fact is also that there were many researchers of the kind who came from countries which had no colonial empires, like the brothers Humboldt or the Hungarian Korosi Csoma Sandor. Researches upon which the anthroplogists later based their theories were carried out both in countries controlled by the British Empire, in those controlled by other forces, as well as in those controlled by no colonial power.

Originally Posted by Llywarch Hen

That some things that were done are now contributing to our present downfall is more the result of contemporary policies that allow such things to happen, and could be reversed very simply with a change in the political atmosphere.

Yet the fact remains that the British Empire brought about the creation of something like the global civilization whereof the free movement of people is seen as one of main traits, which leads to the current state of immigration. I heard such excuses before, like saying "imperialism has nothing to do with all of this, it is just some evil Marxists of the 68 that are to blame etc." That's no valid excuse, because colonialism/imperialism already forged some kind of bond between the colonizer and the colonized, which sooner or later leads to allowing some among the colonized to move into the country of the colonizer, if the power elite needs them, for economic or purely ideological or whatever other reasons. So the situation of today is direct result of the colonial enterprise.

[Marcus Marulus]

Originally Posted by Llywarch Hen

And tell me this, what do you want me to feel about it all? Do you want grovelling and begging for forgiveness? Apologies, and guilt? That would only lead to the death of my nation.

You posit the whole question in terms of some simple opposites, like 1) either you are proud of something, or 2) you indulge in endless orgies in "grovelling and begging for forgiveness". Whereas there is also an option of being neither proud of something, nor feeling endlessly guilty, but just acknowledging that as part of your history.

Originally Posted by Llywarch Hen

This was moved from a thread on a separate matter, so don't interpret the thread title here as my own question!

The thread had gone too much off-topic, so I split it and moved the part of it here.

[M.R.]

Originally Posted by Llywarch Hen

Yeah yeah... If Slovenia had done the same, you'd feel the same as me.

What a stupid statement. Slovenia doesn't have any imperialistic past and I'm proud of that, the point is we didn't do it and it's insulting to judge me for something we didn't do. You know, not every nation has imperialistic mentality.

Atrocities happened, sure, but weren't the rule! Far from it.

Britons travelled to unknown lands, struggled in often small numbers in unfamiliar environments against opponents who knew the land intimately.

This is a crime itself, settling in lands where you are unwelcome and which are not yours. So much about atrocities being 'exceptions'. The only rule was to steal as much as possible by all means.

And they did very well on the whole. Blaming it all on technological superiority is simplistic, there was a very strong mental edge that we had, from our confidence in ourselves.

Not that it justifies anything, since the whole thing was unjust from the begining.

And tell me this, what do you want me to feel about it all? Do you want grovelling and begging for forgiveness? Apologies, and guilt? That would only lead to the death of my nation.

Something as Marulus said. Anyway I don't fell sorry for you just because your nation has shameful imperialistic past. Obviously when you commit such crimes you can't expect other people will just forget it, especialy if you talk about it as some kind of extra-achievment. Your ancestors should have thought about that.

I was just responding that a Briton now can have some legitimate pride in the Imperial achievements of the last few centuries, and needn't feel guilty about it all.

Even though it has nothing to do with nationalism? It would be like being proud of having first gay marriage in Europe or having the most tolerant goverment when it comes to immigration issues.

[M.R.]

I think English nationalists should distance themselves as further from Britain as possible and condemn it. In same way as Serbian nationalists feel about Yugoslavia.

[Llywarch Hen]

Originally Posted by Marulus

So were Genghiz-Khan's Mongol horsemen, Ottoman ghazis and sipahis etc.

The Mongols now are rightly proud of their intrepid ancestors. As for the Turks, well, I grudgingly can admit the same for them. We don't have to acknowledge as objectively good something that another people chooses to feel proud of.

Researches upon which the anthroplogists later based their theories were carried out both in countries controlled by the British Empire, in those controlled by other forces, as well as in those controlled by no colonial power.

The larger volume of information from controlled areas speaks for the fact that such work was easier to conduct with a little support from a colonial infrastructure.

That's no valid excuse, because colonialism/imperialism already forged some kind of bond between the colonizer and the colonized, which sooner or later leads to allowing some among the colonized to move into the country of the colonizer, if the power elite needs them, for economic or purely ideological or whatever other reasons. So the situation of today is direct result of the colonial enterprise.

There is some truth in this, naturally, but I will still advocate the teaching of history in a manner designed to instill pride in children. This is rather utilitarian, I freely admit, but quite necessary.

[Susi]

Originally Posted by M.R.

I think English nationalists should distance themselves as further from Britain as possible and condemn it. In same way as Serbian nationalists feel about Yugoslavia.

M.R.: It's impossible to distance ourselves from it and condemn it as you say because it is a part of our history whether we like it or not. You, as Llywarch so rightly put, have the privelege of living in a nation that doesn't have such a history. England, as a part of Britain, does. We cannot deny our past and the actions of our ancestors.

And on the same point as Llywarch, I see no point in grovelling for forgiveness.

[M.R.]

Originally Posted by Susi

M.R.: It's impossible to distance ourselves from it and condemn it as you say because it is a part of our history whether we like it or not.

Actualy you can, just like Serbs view on Yugoslavia. But the problem is that English somehow don't want to distance themselves from it but still use the flag, talk about their imperial past as it it was something you could be proud of etc. I guess they don't want to admit they simply don't have such famous history as they would like to think and that there's nothing heroic in imperialism.

You, as Llywarch so rightly put, have the privelege of living in a nation that doesn't have such a history.

Yep and proud of it. Having nationalist tradition instead of imperialist always pays off because no one can blame you for anything. I don't feel sorry for nations which have imperialistic past, because we experienced many of those imperialisms ourselves let them now carry the responsibility of their shameful past.

[Kernunnos]

Originally Posted by M.R.

Hahaha, yes very brave people - fighting against natives on the level of stone age, even Zulus made them trouble... Commiting horrible crimes against those people, stealing their land, destroying their culture etc - this is really something nationalist can be proud of.



You must be very proud of that. I mean destroying other peoples cultures and all that. Don't confuse those primitive coward savages with nationalism though.



You know as we nationalists say, their lands their rules. I don't want anyone to force me their culture and the other way around. It's not the same with British imperialism which you obviously praise though.



So they could slaughter them later... Really good people.



They're immigrants there and their opinion should not count. IMHO. Or maybe Germans should count the opinion of let's say Turks in Germany when it comes to German issues? It's not a religious thing anyway, you have Irish following the Protestant tradition of their ancestors which is the right thing to do.

As a nationalist I find this unacceptable, but then again it's not for me to decide, it is just my nationalist view point and beside I have all right to be anti-British after what Britain has done to Slovenia trough history.



They do? How? By being loosers with few percents of the vote and fighting against nationalism?

Any major euroepan country had a colonial past lie England's.

Portugal, Spain, France and on a smaller scale Italy and Germany.

And colonized people most often had not a crystal clear past, think of the Aztecs or the Moche etc.

The Zulus were not so backward and in turn they had previously enslaved a pre-existent black population.

As for the Arabs, before being colonized they had almost successfully enslaved southern Europe, while the Turks ceased to be a tremendous menace only after Lepant.

Small people can be called immune from colonialism only because they are small, when they are allied to big powers they can have their fair share of imperialistic attitudes as well.

England power system is reprehensible since it is the powerhouse of the destruction of Europe, but English patriots are the last ones to be blamed for this system.

As of Ireland, I don't think most of them couldn't recognize the rights of the indigenous Kelts to their land.

Northern Ireland host a sizable pro-England population and a fair solution there wouldn't be easy to attain.