Interesting article - unfortunately it also illustrates that the non-White population of Africa played a large role in the enslavement of their companions - look at the two unchained guys with guns, guarding the slaves about to be transhipped, presumably, to the Americas or Caribbean. Arabs often were the traders here. This issue of 'who are the slavers' as well as 'who are the enslaved' persists today. The whole slavery thing was a complex knot of war, PoWs, economics, the selective application of Islamic, and Euro-Christian, ethics (who was allowed to get the benefit of these ethics and who wasn't). For example in the 1537 Pope Paul III threatened to excommunicate slave traders, and in 1688 the Quakers declared slavery to be a sin. Shame that the vast majority of White Christians ignored these lofty ideals.
http://fooddeserts.org/images/000RaceEquality.htm
Dr Hillary J. Shaw
Director and Senior Research Consultant
Shaw Food Solutions
Newport
Shropshire
TF10 8QE www.fooddeserts.org
-----Original Message-----
From: Andueza Justiniano, Luis <[log in to unmask]>
To: CRIT-GEOG-FORUM <[log in to unmask]>; hillshaw <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Sat, Sep 16, 2017 10:33 am
Subject: Re: "The case for colonialism", outrage and response
From: A forum for critical and radical geographers <CRIT-GEOG-[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Hillary Shaw <0000004f24593c23-dmarc-[log in to unmask]> Sent: 14 September 2017 12:54:10 To: CRIT-GEOG-[log in to unmask] Subject: Re: "The case for colonialism", outrage and response
Precisely. That was my intial concerns with the article (as a geographer interested in the history, development, economy, spaces, of Europe generally - specifically of its food and general retail and consumption systems). The concepts of
governance were loosely used/glossed over - said in an earlier CG email, the 'governance issues' he mentions re postcolonial developing states have also occurred in Europe, e.g. Ireland, Scotland, Catalonia, Czechoslovakia, and especially Yugoslavia. And these
governance issues can be blamed on the artifical national boundaries created especially in Africa, but also in S America, by those European colonisers.
You've got to love the spatially incompatible aims of the French in creating a continuous east-west bloc from Senegal to Djibouti with the British aims of a north-south bloc from Egypt to S Africa. Maybe, at Fashoda, they could have built
an underpass or flyover? Then tossed a coin as to who got the ground level route? OK enough frivolity.But I did get a laugh out of his description of Britain, without the Roman occupation, as a 'backward Druid state'. One might walk from the City of London
to the Isle of Dogs and think.....if only.
Dr Hillary J. Shaw
Director and Senior Research Consultant
Shaw Food Solutions
Newport
Shropshire
TF10 8QE www.fooddeserts.org
-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen Linstead <[log in to unmask]>
To: CRIT-GEOG-FORUM <CRIT-GEOG-[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thu, Sep 14, 2017 10:54 am
Subject: Re: "The case for colonialism", outrage and response
It also expects us to understand the meaning of the term before we use it.
On 14 Sep 2017 10:46 am, "Willis N. Churnocht" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
What could be more critical and radical than putting forward a case defending colonialism?
Bravo to this chap for being brave, breaking the mold and transcending the confines of left-wing thinking.
