RE: ProgressiveMuslims digest, Vol 1 #392 - 1 msg

Naeem,

I'm not making the argument that they are better off and that is a good
thing.  You're drawing ocnclusion that don't follow.  My main point is that
argument is presented by others and that it is in itself apart from
morality.  I'm all for a world where peoples are left alone to evolve on
their own accord.

However, seeing as to how you brought it up. Left to their own devices, I'm
sure blacks would have been able to thrive...Yet of course, since when has
anyone left anyone alone.  I think you'd be hardpressed to deny that the
colonisers were technologically more advanced than those they were
subjugating.  This has nothing to say that those subjugated are inferior in
any way, except those areas were not as idustrialised...Each human has equal
capacity to be as createive/innovative, but regions have always had their up
and downs.  The Europeans had the Dark Agres.  Pointing out their
backwardsness at that point in time is not a racist argument.  Just as
pointing out the African world's backwardsnessin colonial times is not a
racist argument.  Colonialism is generally an evil thing, but it must be
recognized that to have been colonized, the people must have significantly
more 'techonologically' and industrially backwards at the time.  This
applies equally to pretty much all regions which faced colonization, arab,
indian, blacks, Native Americans...

Colonialism in Africa was a failure mainly because it was never completed
and the fact that Europeans genereally thought of Blacks as having less
potential than say their Indian counterparts.  Must of Asias success is a
result of being colonized by the ruling powers of the world.  Given that
success is largely related to being nice to ur imperial master...this is
another issue.

Yameen


> --__--__--
>
> Message: 1
> From: "na'eem jeenah" <[email protected]>
> To: [email protected]
> Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 05:21:42 +0200
> Subject: Re: [Progressivemuslimsnetwork] RE:
> ProgressiveMuslims digest, Vol 1 #390 - 8 msgs
> Reply-To: [email protected]
>
> salaam yameen
>
> the "are better off" argument actually has a tinge of racism
> to it (im not
> suggesting that you are racist; just saying that the argument - which
> I've heard many times before - does). Why do I say that? Because it
> suggests that were it not for oppressive white afrikaners,
> black people
> would not have been able to 'develop' South Africa. And that were it
> not for Jewish 'Israelis', palestinians would not have been able to
> 'develop' Palestine. As if, inherently, these 2 groups are
> unable to be
> creative, innovative, industrious, etc. Do you see how this
> could be a
> racist argument?
>
> I would like to recommend to people to read Walter Rodney's _How
> Europe Underdeveloped Africa_ to see how colonialism in africa
> actually did nothing good for its inhabitants.
>
> na'eem
>
> On 13 Feb 2004 at 15:57, y2 wrote:
>
> > Slaams Itrath,
> >
> > Obviously I don't think Gazans or those Palestinians in the
> West bank
> > are living a better life, but those arabs under Israeli
> rule are.  But
> > like I said, that is apart from morality.  Otherwise, we should just
> > accept our rulers for the sake of living a better life.  As
> Bush says,
> > are the Iraqis not better off?  The case of being 'better off
> > materially' is jsut a case often made by the pro-Israel side.
>
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> _______________________________________________
> ProgressiveMuslims mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://willo.nitric.co.za/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progressivemuslims
>
>
> End of ProgressiveMuslims Digest