Hello,
I am afraid, the leading question leads in a wrong direction. It is a
problem to measure moral of the past on the moral of the present. No
doubt that Britain (and Germany, France and the 'Arabic' states) at
that time were anti-human constructions of a inhuman moral based on
religion. And no doubt that even at that time their inhabitants were
able to see that (if one counts the writings and positions of (e.g.)
Thomas Muenzer or Thomas Morus as commonly available).
But the politics or - better - behaviour of the Empires beyond their
territories were based on their behaviour to its inhabitants. The
holocaust of the native Americans, the Slavery brought to Africa, the
killing and slaughter of the Aboriginals were very much in a tradition
starting in the early Medievals with the slaughter of slavian Nations,
of the process to transform free farmers to "Leibeigene" (some sort of
privat property to the landlords).
"Bad" is the wrong description. Finding a way out of track means to
analyze the basics which makes it possible that the empires of one
continent took the right to rule the world. This means very much to
analyze the economics, the base of the societies (which includes the
history of the religions) and to count the tremendous profits made.
Not an apology is what is needed, but to make clear that those nations
which were ruled, slaughtered and raped by European empires have the
right to be - beside all good and moral words - to be substituted with
the equivalent of the stolen past and of what was stolen in the past
in valid currencies.
Martin
***************************
Mac:> US Empire?
Bill:> [Britain was the biggest and baddest Empire
>> that ever stalked the Earth so if Tony Blair
>> wont apologise for slavery then I will in his
>> stead... Bill]
>>
>>
>>
--
Continue the struggle
Red Globe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe to our mailing list (language German and English):
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mailing-list Homepage: http://www.domeus.de/groups/communards
