Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site watcgl.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!watnot!watcgl!jchapman From: jchapman@watcgl.UUCP (john chapman) Newsgroups: can.politics Subject: Re: Re: Better DEAD than RED Message-ID: <2101@watcgl.UUCP> Date: Tue, 25-Jun-85 09:57:08 EDT Article-I.D.: watcgl.2101 Posted: Tue Jun 25 09:57:08 1985 Date-Received: Wed, 26-Jun-85 05:30:59 EDT References: <893@mnetor.UUCP> <5642@utzoo.UUCP> <896@mnetor.UUCP> <5718@utzoo.UUCP> Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario Lines: 59 . . . > > I think the question we started with > > (if *that* event is well-defined) is something like, "Did western > > industrialization receive significant benefit by mistreatment of colonies?" > > Funny, I thought the question we started with was the all-too-common > assertion that the wealth of the Western world is fundamentally and > primarily the result of oppression of the colonies. And I don't recall > "industrialization" (as opposed to the more general issue of "wealth") > being part of the original question at all. One thing never agreed on in this discussion is: when do you start measuring from? Henry you seem to want to begin measuring before full scale colonization; but how far back? > > As I've said, I am willing to concede modest-but-significant benefits > to the later phases of Western growth from colonial oppression. What I > dispute is the silly notion that the West would have gotten nowhere without > other people to exploit. Proponents of that view seemingly have never How can you say where it would have gotten *without* colonial oppression? The chinese had technology, knowledge etc. but obviously didn't travel the same path as the "west". Would the west have done anything of major importance if they had limited themselves to, say, europe? The major force/power/whatever of the west today is the US, a direct result of colonial oppression. Without the relatively free and easy access to raw materials and resources, the slave labour for all sorts of work, the (at first) cheap furs etc. from indians and (later) the free land (once it was taken away from the indians) how far would things have gone? Perhaps the extra hour or more a day that someone had to cogitate because they had a slave resulted in all sorts of new knowledge, techniques etc. Would a similar european power have evolved with their limited (and somewhat exhausted) resources if north america had never been colonized? Would the european economies have survived without the influx given by colonization? All that technology etc. may have been completely useless *unless* it was used to dominate others. I don't know the answer to these; although I have some opinions I don't think anyone can say what would have happened or how important a single facet was. > grasped the concept of a non-zero-sum game. Sure it's a non-zero sum game thats not the point though. The point (for me anyway) is: given the wealth that exists at any given point in time - how is it distributed?, and - how does this distribution change with time? Do the rich always get richer (relative to the poor)? etc. etc. Where rich can mean education, health, access to information, ability to travel.... as well as material things. > -- > Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology > {allegra,ihnp4,linus,decvax}!utzoo!henry John Chapman ...!watmath!watcgl!jchapman