Enoch Powell

It is usually forgotten that the state of the world today is the result of a history of colonial atrocities perpetrated by Europeans and North Americans.

Previous invasions of non-Western lands by European imperialists allowed them to gradually institutionalise the global dominance of their nation-states. Contrary to conventional opinion, the Western powers have managed to maintain this global dominance and influence on the affairs of non-Western nations despite a process of apparent decolonisation, thereby continuing to exploit their wealth and resources to this day.

Colonialism served fundamentally to shape these structures of contemporary society, to the extent that today’s international politico-economic structures are the logical culmination of colonial history. Though the Western academic world sometimes expresses shame and regret regarding these colonial exploits, their history has been more or less wiped out from the consciousness of Western society.

Western colonial exploits commenced around 1500AD. The now famous, and even much revered, colonial pioneers included personalities such as Columbus and de Gama, who ‘discovered’ the Americas and India respectively.

Before European merchants invaded and set up trading outposts in Africa, Asia and Latin America, these continents had in fact achieved high levels of cultural and economic development. Many were civilised to an extent which at least matched those of medieval Europe - and in some ways, could be seen as possessing a sophistication and civilisation that surpassed Europe - for instance, in terms of compassion, fraternity and community (e.g. the culture of the Native Americans). However, the common notion that they were hopelessly undeveloped prior to the advent of the Western invasion that began towards the end of the Middle Ages - and would remain that way - is inaccurate. In short, therefore, ‘pioneers’ such as Columbus and de Gama, advanced upon non-European territory with the objective of establishing European dominance.

Their superior military technology endowed the invading Europeans with the material advantage over non-European populations, allowing them to impose highly exploitive trading terms, and often opening up opportunities for them to indulge in undisguised looting. Imposed trading terms usually amounted in effect to loot and plunder. Indeed, in Latin America open looting of the indigenous population constituted a substantial source of profits. The overall result was that enormous amounts of wealth from Asia, Africa and Latin America were transferred to Europe. Consequently, in the wake of intense social oppression these continents underwent vast economic decline. European nation-states eventually established full control of these lands as their own, converting the indigenous populations into their colonies. They thereby occupied, governed and adapted these continents according to their own interests in extending European hegemony.

As a result, European nation-states imposed not only economic dominance, but also political and cultural dominance following their violent acquirement of overseas colonies via conquest. Gradually, a global structure - an international system - of generic economic and political relations developed in which European elites dominated and controlled non-Western populations, exploiting them for the formers’ material profit and it is this that is now in decline.

There is more of it if you want it.

Lots More...

http://www.mediamonitors.net/mosaddeq7.html

While I agree it was interesting to read the diatribe from that persons prspective one must not forget the cruel Moslimn Army who swept the Middle east and also the med countries during the Crusades their cruelty was extreme to the extent that they eventually lost.
During their subjugation of those countries they imposed their religion and other ways on the varied peoples of those lands.
While I agree the British did impose a lot of things on a lot of countries religious freedom was granted and many indians I spoke too years ago regretted the British leaving India, it has not been the same since they said.

The Post was about Enoch Powell a man with vision to say what was happeneing and as now people do not listen, but those that remember now say...he was right.
#The big question is What if anything can we do about it.

Astana, that is too long to read and digest for a forum post. Surely, you do not need to list all of the references. Anyway, once it mentioned 'colonial atrocities' in the same breath as Europeans, I knew all that is needed to understand the article.

Imperialism, and all the rest of it, did some harm, and did some good. It was practised by many societies, not all of them white.

What is most interesting about this page to me is that Khun Paul is posting as Guns again. Does this mean we will soon get dialogues between those two as we did in the past?

A long read....


Oh, let's paint all cultures imperalist from Egypt, Greece, Rome, to the Muslim conquests, to the Mongol invasion of Europe to the present day exploitation of third world resources (with long term planning !!) by the Chinese... This is how the world evolved and self-flagellation won't change history..

and.. if we're going to quote folks then ultra-Marxists like Chomsky that paint a totally one sided picture of an vicious imperalist west are surely the way to go!! Not much of a balanced picture in the strings writings.

On the "genocide" of indigenous peoples, particularly in the western hemisphere.. Certainly, few would believe that the Europeans infecting of Indidans in North/Central/South America was a planned event.. Medical science hadn't a clue at the time that measles, smallpox, various influenzas, and indeed the common cold would nearly wipe out the populations of two continents.. Read some history and find how stunned the Massachussetts Bay Colony was to find whole villages wiped out by the "Pox"..

On body counts.. I'm personally extremely skeptical of any shotgun blast of XXX millions existed, XXX millions died, XX were left.. Sociological extrapolations of what might have been are not fact.. We may be able to estimate with some certainty what populations were in Mexico and areas of south America after establishment of Spanish rule and subsequent tax censuses, but before that, it's pure guessing.

Africa and slavery.. Again, shotgun blasts of numbers "100 million died".. I don't buy that as a number and certainly don't accept European societies and economics of the times as being the sole driver of slavery. Arabs and indigenous tribal wars had instituted the practice of slavery long before European colonization of Africa.. Britain was the first country to find against slavery yet rarely receives credit for that..

Interesting string though that should generate some heated commentary..

FrazeeDK,,, "Arabs and indigenous tribal wars had instituted the practice of slavery long before European colonization of Africa.. "

And in fact,,,, should be given proper "credit" that they continue the practice of slavery to this day, along with female genital mutilation.

Also,,,., very interesting stats " x millions existed and x millions murdered" compared to the Nazis only being able to kill 6 million with the very best technology that German engineers could develop in the 30's and 40's. Yet the Spanish and others could wipe out millions with swords, crossbows and spears,,,,,,,, yeah, right. The bands of Cortez, Pizzaro and other Conquistadors etc, were very small yet were able to kill millions,,,,,, wait a moment,, that's right, they had very willing native allies helping them destroy the hated Inca, Maya, etc

interesting for me to read the comments here, and to see which members are descended from the colonizers, or from the colonized.
As a part Maori ( indigenous people of NZ ) who's family and extended family is currently seeking legal redress, compensation in the millions, and an apology from the Crown, for the loss of our ancestral lands, (and all that goes with that,) after the British colonized New Zealand, maybe I can throw some words in here of our story and plight.

I was asked some months ago by my extended family, who I had not seen for sometime, and who have already been researching thier case for the last 6yrs, and who have 3 of the top Maori lawyers in NZ in the family fronting this show, to help out with the historical research, but more importantly, to find the legal breach by the Crown, in order for the family to have a case. I was abit dubious at first. I am an environmental law advocate of some ten years, however I am schooled in maori, and indigenous peoples history, international treaties, and are good at unravelling knotty problems.

at first I said ' well you know our old chief signed the paper, and he must have known what he was doing"and "you no this was not a ' land confiscation claim" like what happened to most of the other tribes'. this was a sale and purchase agreement of a sorts between two parties..

where do you start when your 160yrs behind the eight ball, when you have lost your lands, your heritage, your language, your customs, when your nothing but an indian living in a cowboy world..you no the stories handed down from generation to generation, you know the family tree, but where was our sacred areas, our fortresses, our cultivation sites, how did we end up with nothing.

colonization seems to start off with a bunch of people setting out to look for a better life, for better work, better opportunites. I am sure thats all Columbus and his lot were looking for, and that is the same with the NZ Company when it sailed into our harbour in 1839..

The British Govt didnt want to colonize this place, didnt want to spend money on a Governor and troops to look after him, but there were those such as missionaries, and land spectulators, who saw that the savages needed to be given gods word, and that there was a buck or two to be made out of buying and selling land in the Antipodes, and it was these forces that in 1839, rounded up some of our chiefs and invited them for a party on thier ship anchored in the harbour, gave them blankets and beads, a rousing speech, and got them to put their mark on a piece of paper, and sent them on thier way.

a piece of paper that 100,000 acres of our ancestral land gone just like that, and our chief couldnt even read or write english, let alone speak it..oh there was an intrepreter of sorts, but later he admitted he didnt explain everything to those signing, and that the deed was only written in english, with no Maori version.

it was this deed / agreement between the NZ Company and my Maori ancestor that was my main focus. it was like trying to find a needle in a haystack, but it was found. more importantly it stated that our sacred sites, cultivations areas and fortress areas woulkd be ours forever, and furthermore that 1/10th of the land would be set aside as Native Reserves..however when the NZ Company drew up its design of its new city and suburbs it drew over the top of these areas, and when the Company sold the sections by balllot back in england, the new owners where unaware that we still worked the land and its was ours..

next The British Crown fearful that the French would colonize NZ, and with mounting pressure by the missionaries to provide a permant force to keep law and order of its own subjects, not Maori, sent in a Governor who in 1840 declared all those Native Reserves to be Crown land...a Treaty was signed which was later declared a nullify, and from there on in order to get us off our cultvated areas / new sections, we were forced onto other shite land, the laws were changed nearly every years to block us out left right and centre, land that wasnt being used was taken, land that came under survey could only have 10 owners, when really the whole tribe owned it..this saw some lay false claims to title, sell it and pocket the money..slowly year by year we ended up wih nothing, wasnt allowed to speak our own language at school, couldnt dress the old way, couldnt practise our beliefs..

it has only been in the last 20 yrs since the first land marches that we have all looked at the problem, govt, maori, whitemen and tried to find a way forward..it is coming slowly but it has been a bitter struggle..we will never get back what we lost as most of the land is now built upon, but there will be some redress, and I guess that is all indigenous people / colonized people can do is find any breach in treaty or law and work on it, but they must also never give up their language or culture...sorry I dribbled on.. you know it is easy to quote passages from books and things, but living it is a totally different matter. I guess thats why I fit into south east asia easliy, because most of them understand colonization and its effects. there is always someone trying to take over someone else..anyway dont let me stop the comments here..

What isn't being said is that The UK and other nations are destroying their people and culture through being replaced and diminished by immigrants.

Learn from the Thais and history. There should be no easy admittance to the UK of people having different cultures, religions or races. Short stays may be permitted for proper reasons.

At a minimum the general State policy should be somemthing like this: UK citizenship that makes one eligible to hold elected political office and UK government employment and to receive welfare should only be held by UK whites with a history of living many generaltions in the UK. Former colonials need not apply.

My apologies for posting under Guns482, an error, as for posting as both and arguing, that was in the past and not since repeated but may I personally thank you Tilokarat for having the foresight to remind everyone of my misdeeds just so that they can remember as well.
it was so kind of you, I must make a mental note to personally print all your posts for the next few weeks so I can ensure your reminded about a any mistakes you may make.

jackspratt wrote:Very interesting post Astana - or is it Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed?

http://www.mediamonitors.net/mosaddeq7.html

I think you will find that forum rules require attribution/links when are are cutting and pasting major chunks of the work of others - or so izzix was informed on numerous occasions.

Wouldn't want to abuse those rules eh! Some very interesting posts though don't you think Jack?

[quote="jackspratt"]Part of my general interest in posts is where the thoughts originate from, and whether people either deliberately or accidentally seem to claim them as their own.

As to my particular interest in "your" musings in this case, I concur with Tilo's first paragraph.[/quote

Thanks for the interest.

Don't know who Tilo is!

He means me.

Chomsky, by the way, is a very unreliable source. Noam is a sword-carrier for the radical left and often gets things very wrong.

For example, when the first atrocities by the Khmer Rouge under Pol Pot were reported, he discounted the stories as they came from people who had fled Cambodia, whom he labelled people whose words could not be trusted since they did not like communism and had escaped the Pol Pot (Saloth Sar) regime.

Later, he blamed the deaths of millions of Cambodians from starvation, torture, beatings, illness and so on not on Pol Pot and his henchmen He blamed the victims for not obeying Angkar and devoting their lives to the success of the murderous regime. When Chomsky finally acknowledged the truth of what had taken place under his beloved Pol Pot, he never did issue an apology for his earlier false statements, and his support for the Khmer Rouge 'experiment'.