“My grandfather was a sophisticated man, but in some ways a very embittered man. He never wanted me to go to America, because he recalled the injuries and humiliations that had piled up during British rule, and he held these against the white man. From this I realized something quite startling. I realized that although colonialism had been bad for the people who had lived under it, such as my grandfather, it had been good for me. As a consequence of colonialism, I was exposed to the ideas and traditions that inform the Western understanding of freedom. I learned about separation of powers, democracy, human dignity, and equal rights. I learned the English language. Much of what I am and believe today has evolved out of the benefits I received from the colonialism that injured my grandfather.” – Dinesh D’Souza
It’s 2008 and “no one has taken the slightest interest in South Africa, apart from a handful of botanists and zoologists who reckon that the country’s flora and fauna rank as one of the largest unspoilt areas in a polluted world….”
h/t
[deleted – ED]
What did I miss about the article that makes what Edgar just said make sense?
Anyway, back to the article as I read it, what is the argument? It’s true.
Edgar, stay on topic, or don’t comment.
South Africa could have been a contender in the
powerhouse of the world. Apartheid was, I believe, the better way to go until the natives had time to modernize their life and learn western ways.
South Africa is a shell of it’s former self due to
the changes forced upon it by the world’s politically correct attitudes. One only has to look at Zimbabwe and Uganda as examples of the sewer that that continent has become.
It only stands to reason that a group that has only recently come down from the trees and still believes in witchcraft can ever govern properly.
So why do journalists who tell the truth keep getting fired? Is the deadtree industry that afraid? Or that f***ed up? And why isn’t our own Nazi hunter suing this guy under the CHRC,even if he is from another country? Don’t socialist leftards believe in one world country? So many questions on a cold,snowy global warming Saturday.In April. In Canuckistan!
It is not our job or our right to go to the ends of the earth to convert peoples to our ways. They may like the lives they live, as different as they may be from ours, and they may have good reasons.
It is a legitimate goal, however, if we believe in our way of life, to protect it *here* from internal and outside enemies, and to work to be prosperous and successful enough that people wish to emulate us.
That process won the Cold War; it’s not quick, but it is effective. Understand this, though: we do not protect our best principles by shoving them aside for expedience.
Ratt…we westerners have plenty of folks of our own who believe in superstition and such; there are big, elegant, buildings in most cities and towns where the various sects worship.
So, the crux of this article is that South Africa was “better off” being dragged into the 20th century by the British then as opposed to the Chinese now?
Perhaps, but it needs to be noted that the “British then” had a lot of room for improvement in the way they handled the colonization South Africa.
It only stands to reason that a group that has only recently come down from the trees and still believes in witchcraft can ever govern properly.
So, are all of you knuckle-draggers out there OK with that kind of blatant racism?
And yes, the talking snake people preaching about superstition. It is to laugh.
Manny, I didn’t read that particular sentance in the article. Where did you invent it?
Rat stated “It only stands to reason that a group that has only recently come down from the trees….”
Wow, I am a bit of a knuckledragger and I have a problem with that. Very snotty comment. We all came out of the trees at the same time or thereabouts. The Rat could have phrased it differently to get across his point that tribal Africa was primative compared to European standards.
Scary stuff: one tells the truth—just what the politically correct brownshirts (like Barbara Hall), enforced by the jackboots of the state here in Kanadastan, won’t stand for—and one gets clobbered.
I’m an Anglophile and rejoice in the civilization the British exported to what became free democracies, before they started to go tribal in the late 20th century. In fact, we now seem to have “reverse colonialism”: our stable, prosperous, low crime countries—I grew up in Canada in the 50s—are now negatively affected by a critical mass of parasitic and uncivilized newcomers, who are conquering us via the politically correct “racism of low expectations” that the left has foisted on us.
Re Dinesh D’Souza’s comment: this afternoon, I listened to the Metropolitan Opera’s performance of Philip Glass’s opera about Mahatma Gandhi, “Satya Graha”. From the Satya Graha Forum:
‘ “Satya” is the Sanskrit word for “Truth.” The word “Graha” means “holding to.” Satya Graha, commonly translated as “Truth Force,” is the name that Mahatma Gandhi gave to his movement of social change through non violence. Gandhi, born in India in 1869 AND EDUCATED AS A LAWYER IN ENGLAND, first used civil disobedience to change race laws against Indians in South Africa. He later applied the same tactics to win Independence for India from British rule. He was assassinated in 1948. Martin Luther King Jr. remains Gandhi’s most outstanding heir; many of Gandhi’s Satya Graha strategies were used by Dr. King in his civil rights movement for racial equality and social justice.’ (emphasis mine)
Reading the above paragraph in juxtaposition with this thread, it occurred to me, with due respect, that, without his British legal education, Mr. Gandhi would never have achieved the success he did. Likewise, for Martin Luther King Junior: isn’t it fortunate that his ancestors were not enslaved by African, animist tribes or Muslims? The fact that his ancestors ended up in the United States, became Christians, and, via the influence of Wilberforce and Lincoln, were freed from slavery and became educated, ironically, contributed significantly to both the Rev. King’s motivation and success. (God bless Gandhi and Dr. King.)
If I dared to exercise my “free speech” Charter rights and mention publicly what I’ve just written, I’d be in deep trouble, just like David Bullard, the journalist fired for stating the politically incorrect obvious. And that idiot, Commissar Barbara Hall, hasn’t the decency to recognize the irony of her weasel words, in today’s National Post: “Ultimately, I believe that none of us are [sic] free, unless all of us are free . . . ”
My words for her and her ilk are unprintable.
A wealth of objective wisdom in that article. The most pertinent being:
“Multiculturalists insist that we change how we teach our children, in order to reshape how they think. Specifically, they must stop thinking of Western and American civilization as superior to other civilizations. The doctrine underlying this position is cultural relativism — the denial that any culture can be said to be better or worse than any other. Cultural relativists take the principle of equality, which in the American political tradition is applied to individuals in terms of rights, and apply it instead to cultures in terms of their value.”
Multiculturalism = cultural Relativism = identity group politics = cultural Marxism
” Prior to 1500, China was the preeminent civilization and Western civilization—then called Christendom—was a relative backwater. How did this backwater conquer the world? Multiculturalists explain it in terms of oppression. Western civilization, they say, became so powerful because it is so evil. The study of Western civilization, they insist, should focus on colonialism and slavery, the distinctive mechanisms of Western oppression. But colonialism and slavery are not distinctively Western at all. They are universal.”
Multiculturalism = historic revisionism = social deconstructionism = Fabian socialism
“I should point out in passing that there is room in American education for an authentic multiculturalism. Reading lists can be anchored in Western thought and culture, but include the great books produced by non-Western cultures as well. This, however, is not what the multiculturalists want. For one thing, the great books of non-Western cultures reflect beliefs and prejudices that are anathema to multiculturalist ideology. To cite just two examples, the Koran embodies a strong doctrine of male superiority and The Tale of Genji, a Japanese classic, celebrates social hierarchy. So it is misleading for multiculturalists to say they support the expansion of curricula to include the great works of non-Western cultures. What they really support is tailoring education to promote the ideas and objectives of the political left”
Multiculturalism = mandated narrow political indoctrination of youth = Stalinism.
P.S. I too find rattfuc’s hyberbole offensive and not at all helpful. (That said, I’ve heard far worse opined and depicted about Christians. The difference is the lefties don’t care a fig about that. Right, certain disrespectful posters on this thread?)
However, rattfuc has the right to his opinion and is now, IMO, getting the feedback his unfortunate words deserve. Maybe, in future, he’ll decide to be more circumspect.
Rat: “It only stands to reason that a group that has only recently come down from the trees and still believes in witchcraft can ever govern properly.”
Canuckguy: “The Rat could have phrased it differently to get across his point that tribal Africa was primative compared to European standards.”
Don’t try to explain Rat’s offensive remark, Canuckguy. Sounds too much like Obama apologists explaining away his remark.
Rat’s comment was inappropriate, period.
The really amazing thing here is that of all the content of the two articles, the only thing that manny could find worthy of comment were the words of a moron.
Anything on the actual articles manny?
What am I saying, you never read em did ya?
P.S. to my 6:36 post: 1) I wrote, “I’m an Anglophile and rejoice in the civilization the British exported to what became free democracies, before they started to go tribal in the late 20th century.”
Another word for “go tribal” is “multiculturalism”.
2) Re the civilizing effect of the British in India: During the days of the British Raj, the British were faced with the practice of “suttee” — the tradition of burning widows on the funeral pyres of their husbands. General Sir Charles Napier responded to those who argued for their cultural customs: “You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours.”
Jolly good show, chaps!
Following up on Mr. D’Souza’s thoughts, and the thoughts of others on this thread.
“Out Of America: A Black Man Confronts Africa” by Keith Richburg.
Amazon.com Review: “From 1991 to 1994, Keith Richburg was based in Nairobi as the Africa bureau chief for the Washington Post. He traveled throughout Africa, from Rwanda to Zaire, witnessing and reporting on wars, famines, mass murders, and the complexity and corruption of African politics. Unlike many black Americans who romanticize Africa, Richburg looks back on his time there and concludes that he is simply an American, not an African American. This is a powerful, hard-hitting book, filled with anguished soul-searching as Richburg makes his way toward that uncomfortable conclusion.” –This text refers to the hardcover edition.
The New York Times Book Review, William Finnegan: “To his credit, Mr. Richburg lays out his own confusion and guilt about saying some of the things he does . . . he is candid about his gratitude that his ancestors made it to America. Mr. Richburg lambastes whites in the West who, for fear of appearing racist, hesitate to place responsibility for Africa’s woes on African shoulders, and then he extends this criticism to white Americans who are allegedly afraid to hold black Americans responsible for their own woes.” –This text refers to the hardcover edition.
The only countries fit to live in are the former British colonies and not all of them anymore.
There are other countries that one can live comfortably in, but that would required being well connected to the government of the day or that one is fabulously wealthy and paying off the right people. Both actually is what it is.
steyn’s blog has a link to a very recent ferrigno satire on william jefferson after barry obama wins the presidency….it’s hilarious and i believe au point with a couple of ideas being expressed in this thread.
i especially enjoyed the ‘im sorry’ buttons.
and as always..’demn those drums carruthers’
From the “Africa Action” website:
“Due primarily to the impact of the HIV/AIDS pandemic, life expectancies for African children have dropped significantly over the past ten years. Life expectancies for children born in Africa in 1999, shown in the WHO report, are far below those even in most other developing countries. Only 9 of the 53 African countries for which the WHO shows data have life expectancies of 50 years and over, as compared to 130 of the 138 countries outside Africa. Among the 52 countries with life expectancies less than 50 years, 44 are African and only 8 are outside Africa.”
This is the fruit of the moral relativism sewn by Rod Good (nice irony there) and his ilk – millions of African women and children dying from a horrible disease in pain and agony. So where do you stand, Mr. “Good” -do you advocate that we stand by and do nothing, since “we have no right.. to convert people to our ways”? Are you planning to contribute privately to ‘Doctors without Borders’ or the like to help offset the suffering? Or, like most leftards, are you going to harass the federal government to send more “aid”, much of which ends up in either Swiss bank accounts or the private armies of the various dictat.. er, democratically elected presidents, said aid of course coming from the taxes the government takes from me? Please share us with your diligent actions to prevent what some experts say is a potential *50%* decline in African population over the next 25 years. (That’s from disease only; it doesn’t include the on-going self-inflicted slaughters of Rwanda, Darfur, etc.)
I fully expect a deafening silence in return.
I don’t have a dog in this fight.
However…
It is worthy of note that most (probably ALL) the railroads in Africa were built by the colonial powers, back in the colonial days.
Odd that there aren’t any new ones, yes?
The only counties fit to live in are the former British commonwealth countries, not all of them.
There are other countries where life can be pleasant, but only if you are well connected to the government of the day and have lots of money to buy your privilege.
Blatant racism’s one thing – and only to be expected here at SDA – but the level of drivelling idiocy displayed by Lookout is truly noteworthy.
His point is that Gandhi and King were both fortunate to benefit from Western education – Gandhi in Britain, and King in America – so that they could become the ‘successes’ they were.
The fact that Gandhi and King were successes because they both resisted – and won – against barbaric and uncivilized regimes – the very regimes Lookout thinks they were both lucky to have benefitted from, largely escapes Lookout.
As Lookout grouses about “uncivilized newcomers” (hmmm, now who could he be thinking of…?) he might want to think about how civilized the attack dogs King faced in the 1960s were, or how civilized the lynchings were in the ’50’s when Lookout was living in his “low crime” paradise.
How “fortunate”, Lookout says, that King’s forefathers were slaves in a country that allowed him to get educated and combat the racism that caused untold death and suffering for hundreds of years! Fortunate indeed!
D’Souza makes a similar point to one I’ve often tried to make in conversation with all those demanding their “rights”. I put it in the form of a question: “Okay, it’s 06:30 in the morning the day after you got all your rights. The alarm clock goes off. Now what are you going to do?” Likewise D’Souza makes a point that opportunities are exactly that, opportunities. There seems to be an utter lack of understanding of the fact that rights and opportunities and entitlements are only half the equation of success. The other half lies in what the individual choses to do with those rights and opportunities. Yet few within the supposedly disadvantaged groups seem to ever address that individual responsibility. No amount of opportunity can ever compensate for a lack of individual initiative or effort.
Oh, and ratwhatever, when I was a juvenile, I used to try to shock/impress people by showing them a mouthful of half-chewed food. But I grew up. Try it . . . the growing up part.
zolik says, “Blatant racism’s one thing – and only to be expected here at SDA – but the level of drivelling idiocy displayed by Lookout [sic] is truly noteworthy.” I’m flattered.
zolik also says that England and the USA were “barbaric and uncivilized regimes”.
Compared to the extreme chaos and squalour of Africa, these democratic countries were/are a veritable paradise. (I have an African friend. He rues the day the British left his country. When they were gone, his brother-in-law, an army officer, was called out of his home in the middle of the night and shot. My friend says, “When the British were in my country, we had peace and prosperity. I was educated. That’s gone now.”)
And India? It’s a democracy, with a parliamentary system of government and the rule of law, both legacies of British rule.
What, zolik, do you not understand about this?
You need to smarten up. (Whoops! One has to have a working brain to do that.)
furthermore in my same vein i remember Moynihan i think commenting after some new york scandal on crime or wall street that the original indians traded manhattan for 5 dollars worth of wampum..
he said it looks as tho the Powhatans got the better of the deal…(self loathing applause)
well…nuff said…daniel WAS a democrat of course…but as far as Canada is concerned i reckon open heart surgery..no taxation….free medical dental and education(just for starters) is a fair trade..in fact i would argue that it’s a real kiss in the ear from the big bad oppressing euronazis….and anyway as far as i can remember from my christian bros of ireland education God was NOT a real estate agent.
but i still have to wear my “i’m sorry’ button….why IS that ?
“It is not our job or our right to go to the ends of the earth to convert peoples to our ways. They may like the lives they live, as different as they may be from ours, and they may have good reasons.”
Ronald,
I am all for leaving most of the rest of the world happily burning twigs in their mud huts, however, why is it that the moment they get a glimpse of our lives here in the West they line up to sneak in?
Zolik falls into exactly the trap described by D’Souza. He compares the US of the 1960s and the English rulers of the Indian Raj to a utopian standard. The mistreatment of Martin Luther King, Mahatma Ghandi and other members of civil rights movements was cruel and wholly unjustified — unjustified that is by a democratic, egalitarian standard. However, it was exactly those standards, the “better angels” of those regimes to which Ghandi and King were appealing i.e. pointing out the inherent incompatibilities of those regimes’ creeds, constitutions and institutions with the treatment being meted out. The most potent force for change was publicity — forcing the bodies politic of the respective countries to confront their own hypocrisy.
Such a tactic could not have worked on most of the regimes governing throughout human history. What Roman emperor would have tolerated such dissent or would have long remained in power if he had? The senate and citizens of Rome would have perceived such tolerance as abject weakness threatening the security of the empire. Mass crucifixion would have been a more likely response. Likewise most of the dictatorships ruling in our time would feel no compunction with mass executions and torture in the interests of maintaining the status quo.
It is precisely those traditions of egalitarian, popular, democratic government derived from English tradition which allowed King and Ghandi to succeed with degrees of suffering and sacrifice which were low by historical and indeed many contemporary standards, without demeaning in any way the foresight, courage and eventual sacrifice exemplified by King and Ghandi and for which I have the utmost admiration.
I really wish we (meaning the West) would disengage from Africa. There is nothing that can be done to help that place from outside. They have to reach the point when either they kill each other off in tribal wars, or they realize that they need to work together to survive.
It’s not like there is no oil there, or gold, or diamonds, or other sources of wealth. They have the tools to make a continent that works, but not the culture. And we cannot impose that culture.
Creating a “welfare continent” there serves no purpose. It’s money poured down the toilet, and in my opinion actually makes things worse.
Bring a tiny fraction of them here just spreads the misery around. It does not really help significantly.
Where is manny? Couldn’t hook you so she is gone.
manny ?…bugger manny….the one i want in the hurly burly of open honest debate here is the poseur doctor hangdawg.
manny ol’ buddy ol’ pal, whatshissname john begley aka dr dawg. frickin rats..one and all
re: KevinB’s: This is the fruit of the moral relativism sewn by Rod Good (nice irony there) and his ilk – millions of African women and children dying from a horrible disease in pain and agony. So where do you stand, Mr. “Good” -do you advocate that we stand by and do nothing, since “we have no right.. to convert people to our ways”? Are you planning to contribute privately to ‘Doctors without Borders’ or the like to help offset the suffering?
You might want to find out a thing or two about me before you prattle on like that. Linking me with “leftards is simply ignorant, as a quick blog search woulda told ya–but, hey, have at ‘er. I’m sure you think jumping to conclusions has served you adequately in the past.
Citizens of other countries and cultures have rights as well–they have all the rights (as opposed to legal permissions) we have. That means I can certainly properly try to convince people of things–but I have no right to force them if they choose differently, except when and where they are being explicitly aggressive.
I am a laissez-faire, free market libertarian, quite conservative in my private life, and I always support private, voluntary solutions before I support government interventions. Feel free to do what you think will work, or not, but kindly keep your hands off my wallet; there are other problems in the world as well, many of them closer to home, and I have my own priorities.
…and it’s Ron, not Rod.
John V: re I am all for leaving most of the rest of the world happily burning twigs in their mud huts, however, why is it that the moment they get a glimpse of our lives here in the West they line up to sneak in
Because it’s so obviously better here.
The thing to do is *keep* it better here, and protect what we’ve accomplished–and I don’t mean by that “our stuff“. I specifically mean our principles, or (for the most part) what I’d term British Classical Liberalism.
The folks in the rest of the world might realize the connection between our affluence and our principles some day. Heck, even the Soviets figured that out.
It did take some time, I grant.
By the way: I *don’t* mean close our borders. I *do* mean protect the best of our laws and principles and (this might surprise KevinB) “to h*ll with cultural relativism”.
A thread-appropriate H/T to Samizdata:
I am pleaed that many of you found my comments to be offensive. Yes, I could have worded it differently but that’s the whole point. We have been so conditioned not to offend anyone that our natural thought is to couch our opinions in politically correct jargon. I still maintain that
the indigineous people of South Africa have not
yet progressed to the point of effectively running
the country in a modern democratic fashion.
Rat, I hear you and agree with your last statement: well said too!
Ron Good:
First, I apologize for mis-spelling your name. Second, I apologize if I misunderstood your first post, which I clearly thought was another of the seamlessly endless “blame white people for everything that’s wrong in Africa” posts. We are probably more in agreement than not.
It might help if you understood that my wife is from the Philippines, which I have visited many times. Her brothers run a chain of stores there, and at one point, the school commissioner came to Toronto on an “education” trip. Most of that trip consisted of me driving him around Toronto, taking him to expensive restaurants, and watching while he bought $400 Gucci shoes, at a time when the average Filipino was earning about $200/yr. Why did I do this? This jerk controlled about half a million dollars of school-book sales, and the brothers wanted to be sure they won it. This petty corruption is rife in most of the “third world”.
What all the third world needs is the rule of law. As others have pointed out, this is the most significant legacy of the British Empire. Where the rule of law has been respected, people have prospered; where it has been ignored or debased, people have suffered.
I wish I was in some magical world where I could instantly change wrong to right, but I’m not. I want to make sure all our efforts are directed to a few simple things: rule of law, independent judges, clean elections, and stated property rights. A concerted effort on these four goals would save millions of lives, and billions of dollars.
“I still maintain that
the indigenous people of South Africa have not
yet progressed to the point of effectively running
the country in a modern democratic fashion.”
Rattfuc I’ll go further and tell you they never well.
South Africa survives today only because of the infrastructure (roads, telephones, etc.) and systems (education, law, etc.) that were put in place by the so-called “evil colonialists”. Well-built countries have a certain inertia that allows them to keep going for quite a while even though they might be rotting from within.
Born and grew up in Zimbabwe (then Rhodesia), saw this very thing happen. When Mugabe took over everything worked. After he took the reins it was one big illusion, Mugabe was great, the world thought “Look what a great job he is doing running the country”.
The truth was that from day one Mugabe was a crook, it just took him a while to wreck the country.
And when things started to go sour the liberals refused to accept that it was Mugabe’s fault. We heard all the excuses, it was drought, it was the western world, it was this, it was that.
And even now most liberals refuse to truly accept that Mugabe has wrecked the country.
South Africa is going down the toilet – just look at Mbeki’s approach to Mugabe if you want to see writing on the wall.
Give it time and the ANC will wreck the country.
A related read for those who are interested:
http://zimbabwemetro.com/2007/11/24/ian-smith-is-a-true-hero/
A friend who spent 40 yrs of his life in Africa retired to South Africa – to a beautiful place, a jewel. But their dream was quickly shattered and they returned to Scotland to live out their lives. The surprise is that any whites remain.
KevinB: all apologies happily accepted, and I likewise withdraw my snides 😉
Everything you listed is worth accomplishing, and is what’s needed to be sure–but I’m not sure that stuff is exportable in any usual way.
Sometimes I think the only way out of typical kleptocracies is *through*, by which I mean–like the Soviets–I think some countries/cultures have no option in reality except to fail brutally before they will seriously consider the ethical/political framework that is actually required for progress, which is: freedom and (as you seem to be saying) the rule of objective law based on individual property rights.
What we have is the result of a process–and right now my concern is that we protect and refine what we have, more than we try to export it. In other words, we should lead by example and by a firm maintenance of our own standards here.