Colonization for resources is Evil

[gabrielcannizzo]

I’m not buying it. Thanks anyway. God bless you

 

[exnihilo]

Capitalism is free trade. Imperialism is not capitalism. Resources will either be fought over or freely traded. I don’t see how you reject capitalism while at the same time condemning imperialism which is the alternative.

 

[ChunkMonk]

On the whole Africa has regressed since decolonization, though they are still better off than the pre-colonial era.

People need to stop watching Black Panther and start watching Empire of Dust.

 

[Regular_Atheist]

Capitalism and “free trade” are not synonymous, at least not in the sense I’m using the term. Capitalism is an economy based on the exchange (buying and selling) of commodities, the accumulation of value and the use of wage labour to produce new values. Capitalism was a driving force for imperialism across the entire globe, in the sense that it opened up new markets for new commodities and was a boon for metropolitan industrial and commercial industries in places such as Britain. The spreading of commerce was a very conscious aim for the British imperialist, who saw it as part of the civilising mission.

I also don’t really see how imperialism and free trade are opposed to one another. The British Empire was a free trade empire, particularly from the late 1800s, and supported very lax restrictions on commerce between its borders.

 

[HarryStotle]

Of course not, but to what level I don’t know. However if European culture is so much better on that issue, how about the contemporary Spanish Inquisition burning or killing people for religious issues. How about the killing of Jews throughout the centuries, again, simply on religious grounds. I should mention the the Spanish Inquisition had a special disdain even for Jews that converted or those of Jewish decent that grew up Catholic.

This is just a tad simplistic or misinformed. The Spanish Inquisition burned or killed only Catholics who were found to be intentionally undermining the faith and the authority of the Spanish realm which had fought for 800 years to regain its lands from Muslim conquerors. They were permitted to confess their errors and reform. Only those who refused were relegated to execution.

By the way, King Ferdinand had converso ancestors and relatives. You might want to read up on the nature of the so-called “disdain” and what initially triggered it. Also, where much of the misinformation regarding the Spanish Inquisition originated.

The numbers of victims were about 3500 killed over the hundreds of years of its existence. That number represents far fewer victims than the United States has executed by capital punishment in just the past 100 years. It could be argued that the Spanish rulers viewed those sentenced to death under the Inquisition as underminers of the social order in the same sense that American lawmakers view murderers or traitors.

This was, by the way, at a time when the British rulers would hang, or draw and quarter, individuals for infractions as small as stealing a loaf of bread or hunting for food on crown lands.

Yeah, we in largely ordered and law-abiding countries can look back on those times with contempt or our own brand of disdain, but maintaining the rule of law (its good and bad aspects) wasn’t an easy deal.

South Africa recently passed a law where it will confiscate land from white farmers without compensating them for it. Shall we discuss the justice of paying for the alleged sins of your forefathers? It isn’t just whites that have a monopoly on committing injustices and atrocities. Those are endemic to the human condition and come in all colours and shades, despite what the race-baiters say.

Ordered society doesn’t fall together of its own accord. Chaos and lawlessness are the more “natural” conditions.

 

[PJH_74]

This is just a tad simplistic or misinformed. The Spanish Inquisition burned or killed only Catholics who were found to be intentionally undermining the faith …

I really don’t know where to begin. Firstly, yes it was originally used persecute Jews who had converted to Catholicism. Hopefully you will consider Notre Dame as a good source. As you can see Inquisition approved 1478, first tribunals targeting conversos 1480; I really doubt there isn’t a coincidence there.

https://inquisition.library.nd.edu/timeline.RBSC-INQ:COLLECTION

By the way, King Ferdinand had converso ancestors and relatives.

I’m aware of this inconvenient truth for him.

The numbers of victims were about 3500 killed over the hundreds of years of its existence. That number represents far fewer victims than the United States has executed by capital punishment in just the past 100 years. It could be argued that the Spanish rulers viewed those sentenced to death under the Inquisition as underminers of the social order in the same sense that American lawmakers view murderers or traitors.

I generally agree on the number of 3500 killed, but we need to stop there. While I think the system is highly flawed and should be abolished because of that, modern US executions, in theory, have gone a proper trial by jury and an extensive review process. The Inquisition, not so much. I many cases you are guilty and confess under pressure or get a worse penalty than you would had you confessed (or maybe die). To say that hearsay, grudges, property disputes, land grabs, and sources of income did not play a significant factor in these tribunals. This was not the same more regulated system you and I lived in. By the 1700’s or so the British system of law, which the US inherited had become a much more regulated system, but Spain remind stuck in the past for about another 200-300 years or so after that. Remember Spain was a authoritarian (Fascist) society until about 1980. The whole point in this is that Spain did not necessarily come to the Americas a wholly superior and enlightened society that it imposed on the native populations.

South Africa recently passed a law where it will confiscate land from white farmers without compensating them for it. Shall we discuss the justice of paying for the alleged sins of your forefathers? It isn’t just whites that have a monopoly on committing injustices and atrocities.

No whites are not the only ones, but are prime beneficiaries of it. What is going on in SA is both a result of massive suppression to favor whites economically and in privilege plus a corrupt party (the ANC) attempting to cover for their ineffectiveness. In short the whites creative a massive bomb and the succeeding ANC government could well blow it up. Mind you in almost 25 years since the end of apartheid white land ownership has dropped only from about 85% to about 75%.

 

[HarryStotle]

While I think the system is highly flawed and should be abolished because of that, modern US executions, in theory, have gone a proper trial by jury and an extensive review process. The Inquisition, not so much. I many cases you are guilty and confess under pressure or get a worse penalty than you would had you confessed (or maybe die). To say that hearsay, grudges, property disputes, land grabs, and sources of income did not play a significant factor in these tribunals. This was not the same more regulated system you and I lived in.

You are either misinformed, uninformed or are intentionally fabricating what you have written.

 

[JanSobieskiIII]

The British Empire was a free trade empire, particularly from the late 1800s, and supported very lax restrictions on commerce between its borders.

Between its borders. In the empire. Not globally.

That’s called mercantilism not free trade.

 

[JanSobieskiIII]

in theory, have gone a proper trial by jury and an extensive review process.

represented defense, and innocent until proven guilty were literally formed in the canon law that oversaw the inquisition.

 

[Regular_Atheist]

That would still be protectionism. Britain was still often in favour of free trade in an inter-empire format, and made a lot of effort to move towards international trade with fellow European empires such as France.

Honestly though defining capitalism simply as “free trade” reduces it to an idealised economic system that is useless for any real attempt at historical analysis. When we talk of a move from feudalism to capitalism we clearly aren’t just talking of a move towards “free trade” - there is something more fundamental that defines capitalism. Protectionism is a way of managing a capitalist economy, just as free trade is.

 

[Arkansan]

While I think the system is highly flawed and should be abolished because of that, modern US executions, in theory, have gone a proper trial by jury and an extensive review process. The Inquisition, not so much.

The Inquisition (and canonical courts generally) had higher evidentiary standards than US courts. it required 2 witnesses who had no known motive for lying, US courts can convict on the word of a single biased witness (of fact) if the jury sees fit. You really should lknow what you;re talking about before speaking.

 

[HarryStotle]

While I think the system is highly flawed and should be abolished because of that, modern US executions, in theory, have gone a proper trial by jury and an extensive review process. The Inquisition, not so much.

http://www.catholicity.com/commentary/madden/03481.html

 

[Theo520]

I’m not buying it. Thanks anyway. God bless you

Read some history and educate yourself.
One example is the Philippines, where we had many excellent bases and significant forces. They asked the US to leave, and we did.

 

[Theo520]

Honestly though defining capitalism simply as “free trade” reduces it to an idealised economic system that is useless for any real attempt at historical analysis. When we talk of a move from feudalism to capitalism we clearly aren’t just talking of a move towards “free trade” - there is something more fundamental that defines capitalism. Protectionism is a way of managing a capitalist economy, just as free trade is.

This bother me as well, equating capitalism with unbridled free trade. Our capitalist system is non functional without appropriate regulation:

• measurement and standards
• contract law
• food safety
• etc. etc.

Capitalism devolves to monopoloy without regulations the define how things work and encourage competition.

 

[ChunkMonk]

Capitalism devolves to monopoloy without regulations the define how things work and encourage competition.

That is patently false. By the time anti-trust legislation was being first put into place in the United States, most of the “monopolies” had already lost much of their market share. Will monopolies sometimes come into existence in an unregulated market? Of course. However, those monopolies will also eventually suffer from the various market forces that destroy all monopolies.

Go read about Herbert Dow and his fight against a government subsidized, German monopoly on chemical manufacturing. Go read about the history of Standard Oil.

 

[SuperLuigi]

Colonization is an antique idea in East Asia in the West. Most people don’t want it as it doesn’t really work in the first place.

The fact is African borders changed frequently even before Europeans arrived. There were also many kingdoms outside of Western Europe that made alliances with the colonial powers for their own interests. It really is best if they try to move on from all of this.

 

[SuperLuigi]

This is ignoring an inconvenient truth, much of the scientific and philosophical information survived in Europe mainly because of Muslim Scholars.

Europe gained a massive advantage because Muslims cut them off from much of the Old World. They started to innovate and there is a huge differential that is present to this very day.

 

[Theo520]

That is patently false. By the time anti-trust legislation was being first put into place in the United States, most of the “monopolies” had already lost much of their market share. Will monopolies sometimes come into existence in an unregulated market? Of course. However, those monopolies will also eventually suffer from the various market forces that destroy all monopolies.

Go read about Herbert Dow and his fight against a government subsidized, German monopoly on chemical manufacturing. Go read about the history of Standard Oil.

I think you misunderstand my point, perhaps I made it too rashly.

My point is that some regulation is essential in facilitating competition, but not too much. For example, it’s much harder to trade when you haven’t regulated standards of measurement that are used by buyers and sellers. The NIST has been a great aid to our capitalist economy.

National Institute of Standards and Technology

 

[gabrielcannizzo]

I don’t think people in Middle East are very happy with you there, as the only thing you brought there is destruction and death. Someone corrected me above for saying you’re colonialists, but then you appear talking about your “bases and forces”. Just stop invading our countries militarily and culturally. The world doesn’t belong to the US you know?

 

[JanSobieskiIII]

You need to read this before you start trying to criticize US military installations.

You do understand the only thing keeping Russia from gobbling up the Baltics is the presence of US forces in that region correct?

You know what keeps Saudi Arabia and Iran from having a large scale war between them? The fact that the US would be involved.

We are living in the most peaceful period of recorded history, because the US is the sole super power on the globe and people don’t want to incur action against them. Pax Americana is a very real thing.

The only reason ISIS was able to gain the momentum they did was because Obama de-escalated our military presence in Iraq before the Iraqi’s could handle things themselves.

Status of forces agreement - Wikipedia

U.S.–Iraq Status of Forces Agreement - Wikipedia

U.S.–Japan Status of Forces Agreement - Wikipedia

U.S.–South Korea Status of Forces Agreement - Wikipedia