Philadelphia, PA

Dear Tamrat,

Good question. One, I suspect, which is best answered by third world scholars.

I'm familiar and sympathetic to the theme of "neo-colonialism" from my time teaching (for 2 years) at the university in Nigeria. The argument was that British colonialism employed a technique of "divide and conquer," which involved cultivating an elite drawing on the various ethnic groups and placing them in the colonial administration--and then setting the groups themselves against each other--so that no effective challenge to colonial rule could develop. Colonial-era trading relationships then persisted after independence involving the economic elite in continual relation to the former colonial master.

One might view this as a matter of leaving behind an elite economic oligarchy with special privileges of various sorts. In my view, the British-American War of 1812, often called "the second war for independence," substantially destroyed the political and economic power of the old (chiefly New England) colonial-era trading relations.

Given anything like this account of the matter, the question remains of responsibility for neo-colonial relations, say, 50 years after independence.

H.G. Callaway

The reality of Western domination and hegemony cannot be ignored especially in the developing countries. In the country where I live, we constantly feel and observe the cruel dominations of US political whims which she tends to cruelly exercise when a nation turns against her desires. The Us intervention in the global networks related to my country has crippled all aspects of life including health, aviation, education , etc. Ordinary people are feeling the sting of the imposed sanctions and all such policies have separated my people from the good people of America more than ever before.

Western has developed the base of development in eastern colonized country ! We can see the base of development in some south Asian countries like India, Pakistan, Srilanka.

It is true that colonialsim had negative effects such as aculturation, destruction of language, loss of independence, etc., along with some advantages of unifying warring tribes into one nation, economic develompent, etc. The leader of the liberated country along with the subjects need to make a determination on what parts of the colonized past they want to keep and what new ways they want to pursue including revitalizing older ways of life prior to colonization. Thus, often it is not a black and white type of decision.

While past cannot be changed and will continue to exert negative inertia, moving forward is the only way and will remind continuim what will or can happen if we fail. Learn from past to avoid mistakes in future.

Why won't blaming of colonialism and western domination be one of the most dominant discourse in third world scholarship when indeed the act persists in the modern international system? Just look at the current arrangement and power structures of most the prominent international institutions - the UN Security Council, the World Bank and IMF, etc. These institutions have a lopsided arrangement that tends to always favor the whims and caprices of some countries that were mostly colonial powers.

This notwithstanding, there is no need for third world countries to continue to dwell on the past (colonialism); they should rather focus on building strong, formidable and independent institutions that can withstand the pressures of the existing system (neocolonialism).

The sad reality is however that these third world countries are now populated mostly by a group of leaders who are mostly visionless and a people who cherish mediocrity. Hence the continuous blame on the past.

The time is long overdue for scholars from these third world countries to undertake researches and address questions that will effect true independence in the long run. Until the citizens of these third world countries change their mindset, they may continue to blame western domination, colonialism and its sister neocolonialism, but nothing will change for them.

Read The Case for Colonialism by Bruce Gilley. It was withdrawn from Third World Quarterly by the author, but an interesting and thought-provoking read.

Article The case for colonialism

Mark S. Cogan thanks for the reference. Unfortunately, though the paper is still available on RG, the publishers and the author have withdrawn/retracted the said paper.

I think it is important to read, regardless of our thoughts on the article. There are other web links. Today, even though an article is withdrawn, it’s often still available on the Internet.

Mark S. Cogan Yeah, I think so too. Just to be sure the information therein is not an ‘unduly‘ contested one since it is a retracted document.

What I understand from this interesting discussion is that it's more important to seek solutions than perpetuating the blame endlessly. Whose responsibility should it be to improve the situation and most importantly how? Should it be the roles of developing countries alone to get this right?

Dear Wondwosen Tamrat and readers,

No country or group of people can develop (at least to the best of my knowledge) by solely depending on others for solutions to their problems. That’s not to discredit the essence of globalization and interconnectedness, instead, the point is that third world countries have the primary responsibility for their own development - they know their environment better and can appreciate what will really work for them.

That been said, the already developed and advanced countries also have a role - they must first and foremost desist from manipulating the policies and leadership of the third world countries. Second, there’s the need to make necessary changes to the existing lopsided system that put obstacles in the way of third world countries. In areas that requires the application of equal but differentiated responsibilities, the advanced countries must bear their responsibility as expected. These and many more will be useful first steps for resolving the problem at hand.

Mark S. Cogan and readers,

Thank you once again for the recommended (retracted) material. I have done a careful reading of the material and sincerely believe it deserves to have been retracted (it in fact, should not have been published in the first place).

Since you did not author the said paper, and given the fact that it has been retracted by both the Publisher and Author, I reserve my comments - maybe until when I shall one day meet the author and have a candid discussion with him on the subject matter.

I sincerely believe that ResearchGate should also remove the material from its site if the Publisher and author have deemed it appropriate to do so.

Thomas Prehi Botchway That's another debate entirely. Bruce Gilley is a noted scholar. That paper was surely controversial, (and some thought it racist) but academia has a process for dealing with controversy--a thoughtful rebuttal or an even better argument. Was it good scholarship? Yes? No? Write a reply. Write your own. I personally don't know if the text should be removed, but I still wanted to read it because I wanted to determine for myself article's merit.

Dear Mark S. Cogan and readers,

Your point well noted. However, notwithstanding the Author might be a good scholar, the article in question is not just controversial or racist, it is actually dehumanizing and full of misrepresentations.

As I indicated earlier, I don’t intend to stress the argument on the merits or otherwise of the paper.

Colonialism and its attendant policies are worst than some events the world has ever witnessed but which events have been given much attention and prominence to the extent that writing such papers to justify those events would be deemed a global taboo and all the so-called civilized world coming after you.

Just imagine the paper in question was an attempt at justifying the Holocaust or the Nanjing Massacre.

We as researchers must be very objective in our analysis and sometimes not seek to give undue reasons for people to doubt our credibility as well as through our works cause unnecessary hatred and pain among people.

Interesting sub debate. I had earlier commented on different topic that freedom of expression should be preserved no matter how undignified it sounds . But that freedom is implicit to protect rights of other as well. Hence I wont contradict my self and say the paper put forward its authors view and withdrawn by them once it was deemed unsuitable or inappropiate by all involved. It should then be removed by Rg as no good will come by everyone queuing up to savor an offending dish i.e I do not see any benifit or usefullness it will serve that every Rg member must read it to agree back to general consenses. This is not Novel review. I agree fully above with Prehi.

Philadelphia, PA

Dear all,

Readers of this thread may find he following paper of interest: "The War of 1812 as the Second War for Independence."

See:

Conference Paper The War of 1812 as the Second War of Independence

I would emphasize the internal political struggle involved in overcoming the colonial era trading relations and the dominance of the wealthy elite based upon it. The Anglophile Federalist party was set on a course of decline and eventual extinction, because of its opposition to the war.

It is not, of course, that I would recommend new wars in our times. History never repeats itself exactly, and there are always fascinating and engaging disanalogies.

H.G. Callaway

Thank you all for your enlightening contributions!

This is an interesting discussion.

As it happens I am a friend of the editor of Third World Quarterly that published the article in praise of colonialism to spark debate. The protests from the TQW editorial board meant he had to withdraw the piece eventually but I do not think the author agreed to this.

Are apologias for colonialism/slavery/racism/fascism/sexism etc protected by 'academic freedom' as some above suggest? I think not. The only decent thing any thinking person can do is oppose these scourges of humanity. Here I am with Thomas and others above.

My only reservation about the original question is that it is posed in terms of 'blaming' colonialism as though it is a moral question. The facts are clear: colonialism distorted the economic/political/social/cultural development of the once colonised world. And in ways that still have an impact today.

We need to analyse these patterns and not defend the indefensible

I can't agree more, Ronaldo, though it is not clear to me how the author got published in the first place if people like you had clear and strong position on the matter.

I think it originally was a Commentary. You know the author is rather receptive. You could ask.

The editor did indeed ask for it as a commentary.

He knew it was provocative but thought the view should be heard

Not sure if he thinks that now

But its a general issue now. See recent case with New York Review of Books

See https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/sep/20/metoo-new-york-review-books-editor-ian-buruma-twitter-conviction-claim

I am not taking a side in THIS dispute nor saying they are the same. But is interesting yes?

Thanks, Mark and Ronaldo.

There is much in the blame that indicates the way out and it is an ongoing condition...this is true. But what about the scholarship that adds the third part? Building an exit route, a plan for the future, fostering salutogenesis? Native Americans, and my band in particular, went after education and took back the responsibility for education, preserving our native language, restoring enculturation. It wasn't 100% successful, because nothing ever is in complex systems, but it was a self-driven initiative that made a tremendous difference in the attitudes of the young toward their culture. We are, by that arbitrary definition, a "fourth world" population. If we can take back vital institutions and manage them, the third world can do it - if they stop arguing and develop cooperative initiatives, even when occupied by vestigial colonial systems. Gilley's main contentious point, I think, had more to do with Paolo Friere's inciting indigenous populations to pursue their rights, only to result in their mass slaughter. And that, too, is the brand of elitism, and no, we don't need more "help us to death" advocates. If you say that your entire world is constructed by colonial systems, then, it is. It will remain that way until you bring out a new system to supplant the old, and that takes time and willingness and resources. The longer everyone argues about it, the longer it will take to accomplish.

Dear Lourdes, thank you for your insightful contribution. I wonder if you could say more about the successful experiences of native Americans in terms of 'the way out'.

Admittedly, we don't have a lot of successes, but, whenever we do, it is always that we took an independent initiative, learned how to represent ourselves and our legal rights as occupied sovereign citizens, and made things we needed for ourselves instead of going through colonial systems for "permission." It's when we realize that those systems actually do not dictate our lives, that we need to live outside of those boxes, that we begin to show progress. Monetary dependence on those systems is what keeps us all down and deluded abour our own self-worth. We basically just...stepped out of the government welfare box and went on about our business without dealing with colonial institutions. Then, we remembered what we were always capable of when we were free. It is a big risk, but, you must do it.

Thanks again!

Me permito aportar con mi opinión pensando que la crítica al colonialismo y neo-colonialismo occidental no es una cuestión de culpa, más que señalar con el dedo culpables, es un proceso de reconstrucción histórica, pues para buscar salidas, primero hay que situarte y saber en donde estas en el tiempo y el en espacio geográfico al cual perteneces, además, hay que tomar en cuenta que de un proceso de colonización de 500 años no se sale en 50 años, debe ser un tiempo bastante largo, entonces si veo necesarios "eruditos" o académicos del Tercer Mundo que estén recordando a los privilegiados del sistema que tienen esa deuda pendiente con los excluidos, por que sin memoria no se descoloniza.

Hi Diego,

I wish I understood your messages in English. Can you or anyone translate the essence of your opinion?

I allow myself to contribute with my opinion thinking that the criticism of Western colonialism and neo-colonialism is not a matter of fault, rather than pointing fingers guiltily, it is a process of historical reconstruction, because to look for solutions, you must first situate yourself and know where you are in time and the geographical space to which you belong, in addition, we must take into account that a colonization process of 500 years does not come out in 50 years, it must be a long enough time, then if I see necessary "the erudition"or academics of the Third World who are remembering the privileged of the system who have that outstanding debt with the excluded, because without memory it is not decolonized. I am very sorry, I read your post in Spanish because I have an automatic translator, however, I wrote in Spanish because English is not the only language of science

Thank you, Diego. I completely agree with what you said but I don't have a translator and that was why I had to ask. I appreciate your contribution.

Though I found this lately, you might still be interested to read it.

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/09/20/much-third-world-quarterlys-editorial-board-resigns-saying-controversial-article

I would like to submit this extensive report on a project to decolonize educational institutions.

This overwhelming! The way out as I understand from your contribution is to acknowledge what went in the past and move to the future-together!

Nayan, you should work with me on a decolonization of education project ;)

Wondwosen, I believe Rwanda faced this exact realization. It has to be the whole truth, or everything that comes after is like a genetic fallacy based on faulty premises.

Definitely, Lourdes. It is only the true realization of our weaknesses and admitting past wrongs that can take us together to the next phase.The human race has more than enough experiences to learn from but how much we can move ahead will simply be determined by how much we want learn and how fast.

That is exactly the case. D'accord.

If we wish Africa to change first we should accept our mistakes and not shifts our wrongs toward others. 60 years for Gods sake is much than enough to change ourselves. for this tome around africans have played a big role in their failures