It's always seemed fairly surreal to me that the relationship between colonialism and capitalism has to continually be asserted, despite the fact that hundreds of millions of people were literally colonized and ruled by private for-profit companies.
-
But hundreds of millions of people were also colonized by states. Heck, many millions of people were colonized by *anti-capitalist* states (e.g. USSR in cent. Asia). So it is possible that the relationship is, "humans do colonialism, thus capitalist humans do colonialism."
Mind you, that's not an empty conclusion! It certainly suggests that capitalism is not some enemy to or solution for imperialism or colonialism! But it also suggests it isn't the cause...or potentially even 'a' cause. There may be a confounding variable here.
-
-
That's perfectly possible! What interests me though is, for instance, in the case of Britain, it seems fairly clear that resource extraction by a private corporation was absolutely considered part of the wider state colonial project, not some weird other thing.
-
I don't have the historical chops of either of you, but I'm wondering if a potential driver here is the existence of modern states, capitalist and otherwise, especially if we're considering colonialism as something distinct from pre-modern empire building?
- Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.