Nicole, I completely agree with you, and would add the example (eg.
colonial/neocolonial ventures) of white missionaries/religious groups here
in the US vis a
vis Native American populations (such as, for one, the practice of the
Mormon church during the 40s and 1950s of taking/stealing Native American
children from thier families in order to "civilize them". And, I would
add the Witch burnings -- These examples,
embody a similar kind of colonial, racist, sexist "missionary
mentality" and exemplify exercizes in "power-over" (See for example,
Starhawk's work).
Also, my work as of late has focused upon the Western/US
discourse on veiling and female circumcision/genital mutilation, which (I
have found) have served
to reinscribe (neo)colonial constructions of the "other" and has been used
to justify Western neocolonial efforts in "other" countries.
This is particularly with respect to "Islamic countries" and is
reflected in both Western
geopolitical discourse and US foreign policy efforts toward so called
"Islamic countries".
Jessica
On Tue, 9 Mar 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In a message dated 3/8/1999 11:47:21 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> << I mean the point of colonization was to take over the land and cultures of
> indiginous populations, but I dont think missionaries are out to do that.
> Foreign policy may have something to do with the 'neocolonial' conquering of
> third world nations far more detrimentally than any religious missionary (and
> this is coming from an atheist who doesnt believe in any form of religious
> practice!) could possibly assert. >>
>
> Missionaries were often sent in to advance colonial (government) pursuits and
> were seen as part and parcel of colonial activities in most cases.
> Missionaries most certainly had the ability to subvert the cultures of the
> people by impressing upon them that no only were they worshipping the wrong
> "God" but that they were worshipping in the wrong way - and they therefore
> needed to follow the blonde-haired, blue-eyed, white skinned Jesus Christ
> image - which coincidently looked like the missionaries and the colonizers.
> Vary rarely did the missionaries ever provide any difficulty for the colonial
> governments - most often they were extremely helpful.
>
> When you convince a people that God's son is a white man, and by linkage that
> God must be white (or prefer white) then of course people who are white are
> then seen as closest to God, therefore better - pure and white as snow......
> This is mental preparation for the acceptance of colonialism. The height of
> implanting white supremacy and darker subservience.
>
> Missionaries did not just preach religion, but they linked "God wants you to"
> with the manner of dress, the way of marriage, the manifestation of art and
> music, the language spoken, the naming of children, etc. They focused strongly
> on removing the "pagan" culture and remaking the people into "good christians"
> who dutifully worshipped both the missionaries and the colonizers - the same
> people - thus fully integrated in the goals of colonialism. People were told
> to stop worshipping their ancestors, to ignore the traditions of their elders
> and follow "God's way", to sever all ties with their pasts and accept the way
> of the missionaries (and the colonizers) to become civilized and holy.
>
> Later archaeologists and anthropologists would later go to these places and
> bemoan how much the people had forgotten of their original languages,
> cultures, art, etc!
>
> Missionaries were massive culture destroyers. Seen around the world today are
> vestiges of communities that were wiped mentally clean of their culture by
> missionaries.
>
> Land was often "seized" by missionaries, in the name of God of course, as well
> as again the encouragement for the population to submit to colonial control of
> land while being "good christians" to colonial authorities.
>
> Sexual abuse of males and females, boys and girls was fairly common, as was
> requiring financial or property "offerings" from the indigenous people to the
> missionaries.
>
> In the United States, missionary pursuits among the slaves taught that that to
> be a good and obedient slave was what God wanted from black people - and those
> who fought against slavery fought against God. They taught that to get into
> heaven you had to be a pleasant and hardworking slave - basically that life
> was to be spent in service to whites, and your reward would come in heaven.
>
> Bob Marley addressed this "teaching" often in his music, especially in "Get
> up, Stand" - where he sang "If you know what life is worth, you would look
> for yours on earth" - he stressed to black people not remain locked in that
> teaching - which contributed to passivity and acceptance, rather than fighting
> for "your rights".
>
> As to manifest destiny in modern times, I strongly know it exists, because I
> see it in the field of international affairs on a consistent basis - the idea
> that the west is the natural leader of the world. Perhaps they don't say (at
> least out loud) that God has ordained that Euro people lead the world, but for
> many it remains in their hearts that their civilizations are just naturally
> superior and have proven that by how they have conquered - which some feel
> would not have happened had (1) God not willed it or (2) God not willed them
> with superior culture/attributes
> - and many are unwilling to give up this belief which pervades NGO and
> government activity - donor attitudes, peace corp work, feminist
> outpourings,etc.
>
> Divide and conquer was (and is) a well-used colonial and neo-colonial tactic -
> from the way slave ships often made sure to mix ethnic groups feeling that if
> you put one ethnic group together they could organize to fight back, but if
> you mixed the groups up, then they would focus on fighting among themselves
> AND be limited by language barriers which would keep them from uniting against
> their slavers. The partition of Africa was a good example of how europe while
> refusing to divide itself to fight over Africa - instead sought to divide up
> Africa and conquer it for themselves. France currently is extremely good at
> promoting francophone unity to prevent coalition in Africa with anglophone
> countries. They have put up over the years numerous obstacles to make sure
> francophone african countries remain focused only on France.
>
> Nicole
>
