In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Chris
Burford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>IMO this particular British involvement is progressive and is part of the 
>developing process of world governance, so long as it assists the UN and 
>the West African peace keeping force to re-organise. I say that, conscious 
>at this moment, that the British government deserves strong criticism for 
>its interference in the developing land redistribution in Zimbabwe.

Well, its hardly surprising. Chris has lined up behind ever imperialist
venture in the post-cold war world by my recollection.

It is naive in the extreme to think that there has to be a bag of gold
being robbed at that moment to imagine that the impulse is simply
benign. Egypt and the Sudan were occupied and subordinated to British
rule by people who genuinely believed that they were fighting slavery.

It is not the subjective intentions of the imperialists that makes
imperialism, it is the objective condition of the subordination of small
states to 'mature economies'.
Jim heartfield

     --- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---

Reply via email to