Sparked by  Sylvain's mentioning in the "soap" thread of Kipling's "White Man's Burden "






and recalling the former discussions on this board, especially with nordmann, about "colonialism" starting with "Tintin in Congo" from Georges Remi (Hergé)
And adjacent to that remembering a discussion with nordmann about "Social Darwinism", where I reffered to a discussion with him on the ex-BBC messageboard about Darwin a man of his time, and not so much differing from ideas of his time as the position about races.
https://reshistorica.forumotion.com/t1037-darwin-and-social-darwinism

First about the position and attitudes of Rudyard Kipling and his poem.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_White_Man%27s_Burden



I found this analysis relevant:
https://www.gradesaver.com/rudyard-kipling-poems/study-guide/summary-the-white-mans-burden
From the link:
"The racism and acclaim for imperialism cannot be ignored, but Kipling did not intend the poem to be viewed as unqualified support of the imperialist endeavor; in fact, a more careful reading will reveal that Kipling was offering warnings to those who sought to undertake such actions. He warns against allowing sloth and folly to take over; laziness and debauched behavior can quickly derail noble goals. He also cautions patience, and tries to make it clear that this work is difficult and burdensome – it is the “toil of serf and sweeper,” not the “tawdry rule of kings”. He tells them they will encounter resistance and hostility but must push through. Some of the most stirring lines are: “Take up the White Man's burden-- / Have done with childish days-- / The lightly proffered laurel, / The easy, ungrudged praise”. Those who worked in the colonies must grow up quickly and understand that they will work hard and perhaps not earn the frequent and unfettered praise they might have expected."

And the author (from whom I found no reference in the article!) mentions even "our" Hannah Arendth

"The German-American political theorists/philosopher Hannah Arendt wrote in her famous discussion of imperialism in The Origins of Totalitarianism (1951) that “the fact that the ‘White Man’s burden is either hypocrisy or racism has not prevented a few of the best Englishmen from shouldering the burden in earnest and making themselves the tragic and quixotic fools of imperialism.”

And as an introduction to the theme I read this afternoon the in my eyes excellent comments of the Britannica by
Charles E. Nowell Professor of History, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Author of The Great Discoveries and the First Colonial Empires and others.
The chapter: European expansion since 1763
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Western-colonialism#ref25867

I know that nordmann's thoughts in the past were not always on the same line as mine about this colonialism à là "the White man's burden".

In the past on the ex-BBC board, even a Dirk Marinus was corrected via an e-mail (as I  received also: your message is not cooping with the BBC rules and you have to rewrite it) about his comments about Colonialism. And I learned recently that Priscilla was writing to the BBC in defence of Dirk...and at the end Dirk left the BBC board...

And I remember his position and am still convinced that he is not completely wrong nor right...I remember also the position of Tasneem Khan, which is a bit in the same position as mine, but he never challenged the BBC.

That said I would try to reopen the discussion along the lines of what Hannah Arendth said in her "Origins of Totalitarism (1951)):

"that “the fact that the ‘White Man’s burden is either hypocrisy or racism has not prevented a few of the best Englishmen from shouldering the burden in earnest and making themselves the tragic and quixotic fools of imperialism.”"

Kind regards, Paul.

Can you explain what you meant by "new" in your title?

nordmann,

I had before already read about a new period in European colonialism starting around "The Scramble for Africa" from Pakenham.
And reading today I came again and again with terms as "new" starting in the Seventies of the 19th century

Some call it as here:

https://www.the-map-as-history.com/European-colonization-19th-20th-centuries
"Europe's colonial expansion, 1820-1939
European countries began exploring and seeking to dominate the rest of the world during the 15th and 16th centuries, thanks to their ability to control sea routes and to the exploration of the American continent. In the 19th century, energized by the industrial revolution and under pressure from a rapidly growing population, Europe launched a new period of colonial expansion, inspired by the discovery of new markets, new areas for the settlement of Europe’s poor migrants, and the desire to "civilize the barbarian nations "."
"Europe launched a NEW period of colonial expansion"


Or in wiki:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_colonialism

"new imperialism" 1870-1914
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Imperialism

Kind regards, Paul.

Ah, ok. So you meant when advances in industrial processes within "first world" societies meant that it was now more expedient to leave the slaves in situ and instead utilise their labour to extract their raw materials?

Where are you going with this thread that we haven't already been and discussed? You're even posting the same links to the same websites as before ...

nordmann wrote:

Ah, ok. So you meant when advances in industrial processes within "first world" societies meant that it was now more expedient to leave the slaves in situ and instead utilise their labour to extract their raw materials?

Indeed, nordmann

You said:
"where are you going with this thread?"

Perhaps the same as before...now with the Rudyard Kipling poem as example, that, even with all the negative results for the local colonized population, there were nevertheless "some" positive achievements.
And when one scrutinizes Kipling's poem
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=13&v=mikvj-BhtPE&feature=emb_logo
it was perhaps while some men and women took this poem as example...?

And I wanted to say, that despite what "our" Hannah said in her "Origins of Totalitarism:
"the fact that the "white man's burden is either hypocrisy or racism has not prevented a few of the best Englishmen from shouldering the burden in earnest and making themselves the tragic and quixotic fools of imperialism"

I agree with "hypocrisy" and "racism", but when she says "making the tragic and quixotic fools of imperialism" I don't agree...
Neither tragic, nor quixotic (searched for the word and in Dutch it has all the allure of the handling of Don Quichot)

No the men and women, were in my humble opinion, completely aware in what context they handled and what was the purpose of their deeds.
And as such they were not "quixotic", as they were realizing all what they did and even many times saw results of their actions.

I know from my former larger circle of acquaintances, that there were many of them in our former Belgian Congo and I think, Dirk Marinus overthere in the Rhodesia of the time, knows also such cases...

No, it is as in the time, trying to persuade you in the thread of "benefits of the religion" that there were at least "some" benefits...as from Britain in India...or perhaps even more "cru" (crude?): the English presence in Ireland...

Kind regards, Paul.