Hacker News Reader

Comment by nutcracker46 | Hacker News Reader

Mishra argues from a perspective aligned with the Marxist-socialists we have all heard before.

WTF, it is too simplistic to assert that the West (yes, I capitalised it) opted to rely on a racial caste system and colonies to support liberal democracy for Whites. Also, I point to ethnic groups in the Far East who saw themselves as master races, civilised above all others in the world. These others did plenty of looting and colonizing too.

Instead, think of the USA Civil War, WW1, WW2, the Cold War, and the coming WW3 as a contest: liberal democracy / represrntative government versus monarchies, autocracies, and oligarchies.

View on HN

Please don't turn HN discussions into predictable ideological flamewars. Those are tedious and therefore off topic.

There is interesting historical material in this article, which most of us probably didn't know. (I didn't.)

That is just wrong. Just take WW2, you have dictatorships on both sides (e.g Germany and USSR) and democracies on both sides (eg. the US and Finland). In WW1 you have monarchies on both sides and various levels of representative governments on both sides. In the cold war you have monarchies on the same side as democracies, and dictatorships and oligarchies on both sides.

> Instead, think of the USA Civil War, WW1, WW2, the Cold War, and the coming WW3 as a contest: liberal democracy / representative government versus monarchies, autocracies, and oligarchies.

To talk to this frame is to talk to support the rhetoric which has led to destruction of many countries in the name of liberating them while at the same time supporting other regimes practicing exactly what they are supposed to be condemning. It's a bullshit rhetorical tactic that no one believes anymore.

The imperialism you speak of is alive and well and that's why it's the target of condemnation. When it's no longer practiced you can bring up the old canards of whataboutism to justify it as nothing out of the ordinary historically.

It doesn’t take much brain cells to conclude Europe was supported at expense of rest of the planet. It’s failing in today’s economy for exactly the same reason. Globalization and current economic systems transfers wealth by merit instead of force. Many right wing conmen are reminiscing a past that will never be possible as there will never be colonies again

EU GDP: 18.8 trillion -- India GDP: 2.5 trillion

India has almost three times the population of the EU. If that is "failing" I think we can fail a bit more.

Anyone can prop their GDP by borrowing and making their children under debt. Also, anyone can get rich by looting their neighbors. That's exactly what happened in colonial times. And former is underway. So not sure what you are on about?

How do you explain the fact that many European countries who had marginal or no colonial empires are among the richest countries in the world today? (Germany, Sweden, etc.)

That's easy. Concentration of looted wealth in a region and regional internal trade with barriers for external entities. Why do you think there are so many voices against WTO? It challenges the status quo built by force.

Most wealth in most European nations depends on local production and expertise.

Why is e.g. the Norwegian fisherman richer than the Bangladeshi fisherman? It is not because he gets more money for each fish he sells.

It is because the usage of modern fishing vessels and technology allows him to fish a lot more fish. In Norway we tried to give Bangladeshi fishermen modern Norwegian fishing vessels in the 70s. If failed because they do not have the skill and infrastructure to maintain and support a modern fishing fleet.

Value lies in better both superior equipment and the knowledge of how to use it effectively. That advantage exists in Europe regardless of whether Europe gets to exploit other nations or not.

Even in colonial times, most economic activity happened locally. Tobacco, sugar and spice does not grow the core of the economy. What mattered most was intensified farming locally. The usage inanimate power, labor specialization and cheaper transport to increase production of food, clothes, tools, furniture, housing etc.

Even without actually exploiting the colonies Europeans would have benefited hugely from the maritime explorations. New crops such as potatoes benefited European agriculture greatly.

Sure..

That's only because Germany lost in the race for Africa and also lost all its colonies post ww1

Some people seem to somehow wish that us Europeans are furious that we don't have colonies anymore and that we are deeply nostalgic about it. Now I am not from a European country that had colonies, but I think it is pretty universal in Europe that, people are not missing the colonies.

European are happy about where we are today. We are fighting less among each other than ever before. A continent of violence and become a continent of peace.

Europe tops pretty much all worlds statistics on happiness, health, well-being and prosperity.

I have no problems with the right wingers in Europe being angry about us not dominating the rest of the world. Let them be angry, it only brings me schadenfreude.

Besides I don't think Europeans honestly care that much about it. I see American fretting much more about the position in the world. They are afraid of not being number ONE anymore. I think most of us Europeans have long accepted that reality.

IMHO Europe's future is brighter than most other places. Global climate change will affect us much less than the rest. Unlike Asia, we don't have the same demographic time bomb. China, Korea and Japan will suffer major setbacks as their populations gray far too quickly.

The middle east will be screwed when the world no longer runs on oil.

I am hoping for a better future for Africa, but it will take a VERY long time for Africa to catch up with Europe.

The US has a pretty bright future as well I think, but it will likely suffer a lot from political polarization and economic inequality and social problems. Yet the US has been through the same so much of its history.

India will be a lot better off than today, but most Indians have a very long time to go to get anywhere near European levels of prosperity. That could take another 60-100 years.

I am not against a prosperous Europe. Neither do I believe in living in the past. Simply stating the facts that Europe’s wealth is because of world looting. And it would be better that everyone understands where money comes from. Everyday that passes results in less exploitation

I largely agree with what you said. But either of us don’t understand how large complex systems change

There's this strange hint of Europe doing better than everyone else in your message. I assure you, that won't be the case.

> Simply stating the facts that Europe’s wealth is because of world looting

I'd like to see some sources for those "facts". What exactly happened? Europeans came into Africa and Asia and stole all the factories, leaving Africans and Asians to revert back to agricultural societies?

Or Europeans went to Africa, Asia, and the Americas and extracted as much of the natural resources as possible at the expense of the indigenous populations and without a thought to the future sustainability of the lands. Some examples that spring to mind:

* Spanish silver mining in the Americas. 150,000 tonnes of silver were extracted between 1500-1800 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_silver_trade_from_the_1...). It isn't hard to understand who benefited from that silver, Spain or the South American colonies.

* African slave trade which exported 10-15 million people from Africa. In 1850, Africa had about 50 million people when it should have had closer to 100 million, when accounting for lack of reproduction, if it weren't for the slave trade (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_history_of_Africa#Atl...)

> Europeans came into Africa and Asia and stole all the factories, leaving Africans and Asians to revert back to agricultural societies?

How about actively passing laws to make sure that the colonies could not survive without the mother country by restricting trade. Maybe start reading about these colonial times a bit more. What you find may surprise you

The Spanish silver mines actually ended up bankrupting Spain by causing runaway inflation. Not really a good example!

yes, but that was years down the line. And the point was replying to your earlier rebuke of this:

> Simply stating the facts that Europe’s wealth is because of world looting

I would say my example actually makes my point very well in that context.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com