I haven't read the whole thing (net's going off soon), but I've got the gist.
I was going to start a thread on this (scarily similar idea), but a completely different approach. I wish this was in TNZ, because it has the potential to be viewed as paternalistic, racist, and imperialistic.
I started thinking about this some years ago when there was a story about the possibility of a Japanese based multinational in effect buying an African country - that is, giving a squillion to the then dictator, installing a puppet government, and turning the locals into their workforce. I didn't think that was such a good idea, and thought about what could be done.
The idea I came up with was... the old powers take back their colonies.
Why? They have a responsibility still to see them get on their feet,. Now, Rhodesia, Kenya, Uganda, a host of others, were heading this way, when they were derailed by greed and tribalism. So were they really ready or not? It's a difficult question to judge now. I'd certainly like to talk to revolutionaries who fought for the colonial powers to leave - do they still think it was a good idea?
I also remember something an Indonesian girl, a co-worker once told me. She said, with some anger, "I wish the British had controlled Indonesia instead of the Dutch". Which was food for thought. So it would have to be 21st Century colonialism, more caring and sharing, with more going back to the people instead of the home country (at one stage the British East India Company was paying more tax than
the rest of the UK put together). The colonial powers bring two things above all else: Rule of law and organisation. Okay, not always rule of law, but I bet they would these days. And organisation, so that money can't be skimmed off, is key.
One of my favourite writers was George MacDonald Fraser. He could be quite an old curmudgeon at times, but I think this was true, from his novel, Flashman and the Mountain of Light:
A word first, though. You'll have heard it said that the British Empire was acquired in an absence of mind - one of those smart Oscarish squibs that sounds well but is thoroughly fat-headed. Presence of mind, if you like - and countless other things, such as greed and Christianity, decency and villainy, policy and lunacy, deep design and blind chance, pride and trade, pride and trade, blunder and curiosity, passion and ignorance, chivalry and expediency, honest pursuit of right, and determination to keep the bloody Frogs out. And often as not, such things came tumbling together, and when the dust had settled, there we were [the Brits], and who else was going to set things straight and feed the folk and guard the gate and dig the drains - oh aye, and take the profit, by all means.
...
When I'm done, you may not be much clearer on how the map came to be one-fifth pink, but at least you should realise that it ain't something to be summed up in an epigram. Absence of mind, my arse. We always knew what we were doing; we just didn't know how it would pan out.
I can't find the other quote I wanted to apply here but it was something like this:
"And after the battles have ended, and the loot claimed, who else was going to rebuild the hospitals and schools, and straighten the roads, and temper the warlords, put together a government, and bring in the medicines? That's right, us. Damn little thanks we got, too".
And that's what needed in Africa now, along with OLPC, wireless networks and free AIDs medicines. Organisation. What doesn most of the continent have? Tyranny of one type or another, child armies, famine, other illnesses like Ebola, wars and revolutions, huge numbers of refugees, a terrible lack of clean water, and racism, of one African against another.
For all that colonialism is derided, and sometimes with good reason, I would ask you to compare the prosperity of Rhodesia in the 1950s and 60 compared to Zimbabwe now. Granted that's a worst case scenario, but I have a feeling things are going wrong in South Africa too, one of the strongest democracies on the continent, and for pretty much the same reasons. Overall, in terms of health, education, and simply more people alive at the end of the day, which works better - self government or colonialism?
It would be hard to persuade the locals that this would be a good thing. But if they look at the chaos around them, at their children not doing so well as they had done under colonial rule, I think it would be given serious consideration.
What would be in it for the colonial powers? Jobs, for one thing. Profit, but much reduced, instead recycling a large share of that profit back into the country, but a little profit nonetheless. And by bringing in technology common in the First World, it would rag the Third World out of the 19th Century.
In my mind, at the end of the day, it has
nothing to do with racism, conquest or greed, and
everything to do with humanity, and helping someone who's fallen down.
It could be done. But people and governments are far too greedy, lazy and/or power seeking. Sad, really, because it could work really well.
This is all a bit random, I know, I'll give it some more thought if anyone's interested, and get back to you later.
how are we supposed to take back our colonies?
