Why does France still maintain all of thee colonies?

It can’t be profitable.

Is it something to do with their sense of national identity? Do they still want to civilize the savages, to prove some ideological point?

Or is it just inertia?

Reuters:

Pro-independence protesters burned police vehicles and blocked roads in New Caledonia on Monday, authorities in the French Pacific territory said, as anger erupted over the extradition to France of jailed protest leader Christian Tein.

France’s High Commission in Noumea said in a statement that protesters had also set fire to the town hall in the Koumac commune, as well as destroyed areas in Paita.

Christian Tein is one of the main independence leaders on the island

The Dumbea municipal council said a firefighting vehicle was attacked, possibly by gunshots, and some schools were forced to close due to the protests, which began in May after France voted to approve reforms to allow thousands more French residents who have lived in the territory for 10 years to vote.

Indigenous Kanaks fear this reform will dilute their vote and make it harder for any future referendum on independence to pass, while Paris says the measure is needed to improve democracy.

Daniel Goa, president of Caledonian Union, the biggest pro-independence political party, said in a statement he was “astonished” at the deportation of Tein and six other party officials on Saturday night.

“All they have done has been to organise more peaceful demonstrations,” he said. He denied the prosecutor’s allegations that Tein and the others were sponsors of violence.

Police had arrested Tein, who leads an offshoot of Caledonian Union called Field Action Coordination Cell (CCAT) last week.

CCAT have set up barricades that have disrupted traffic for weeks, and Tein had met French President Emmanuel Macron during a visit to Noumea last month aimed at resolving the political impasse.

If I were the French, I’d probably be trying to get out of the colonialism game.

If you’re not willing to get really brutal, it just doesn’t work anymore.

MY LITTLE SISTER’S HISTORY TEACHER IS MAKING THEM LIST THE “POSITIVE EFFECTS” OF IMPERIALISM?????? pic.twitter.com/4kDo27gG5G

— Calla (@CallaWalsh) March 22, 2022

forcing students into the mental exercise of justifying/rationalizing genocide because of its supposed “positive effects” itself perpetuates genocide and indoctrinates them into supporting an imperial war machine.

my sister is @CeceWalsh3 btw <3

— Calla (@CallaWalsh) March 22, 2022

and to be clear, this is a public high school in one of the most “progressive” cities in the US — Cambridge, MA.

it’s not just Republicans banning CRT that are revising history — racist, imperialist revisionism it is a key objective of the *entire* US education system.

— Calla (@CallaWalsh) March 22, 2022

‘@CeceWalsh3 said she raised concerns about the assignment to her teacher…She said her teacher agreed & said he was teaching the text because it was part of the state’s curriculum, but he planned to introduce other texts with different perspectives soon’https://t.co/UEwvs9D6NY

— Calla (@CallaWalsh) March 22, 2022

schools in amerika are interested in brainwashing people with amerikanism, giving them a bit of education, & training them in skills to fill the positions the capitalist system requires. as long as we expect amerika’s schools to educate us, we will remain ignorant — Assata Shakur pic.twitter.com/ERXx8q7SXQ

— Calla (@CallaWalsh) March 22, 2022

This issue of “positive effects of colonialism” is coming up a lot in the UK lately, because a lot of brown people are saying that it is nonsensical to teach that everything about colonialism was evil.

In schools in every former colony, they teach that colonialism had “positives and negatives” like everything else that happens in history. Britain brought all of these brown people from foreign colonies into their country, now they’re kids are going to school and learning that colonialism was pure evil, and brown people are complaining.

The Nigerian “equalities minister” of the UK recently said that the portrayal of the British Empire is childish and dumb.

"There were terrible things that happened during the British Empire; there were other good things that happened and we need to tell both sides of the story."

Equalities minister @KemiBadenoch tells @tnewtondunn that young people shouldn't be taught to see themselves as victims. pic.twitter.com/zR5Rvsxfvy

— Times Radio (@TimesRadio) March 20, 2022

For white people though, everything that white people ever did in all of history was just pure evil.

You’re not even allowed to think about the possibility that white people ever did anything good.

New York Post:

A homework assignment at a Massachusetts high school has drawn outrage for being racist after it asked students to list the “positive effects of imperialism.”

Calla Walsh tweeted a photo of the history assignment early Tuesday to her 17,000 followers after her 15-year-old freshman sister, Cece, was tasked to read a text on the colonization of Africa and then list both the “negative” and beneficial effects of imperialism.

“Forcing students into the mental exercise of justifying/rationalizing genocide because of its supposed ‘positive effects’ itself perpetuates genocide and indoctrinate them into supporting an imperial war machine,” Calla Walsh wrote.

Cece attends Cambridge Rindge and Latin School, a public institution in one of the “most progressive cities” in the US, her sister said.

Calla’s initial tweet went viral, racking up more than 20,000 retweets and more than 180,000 likes as of Wednesday. Cece, meanwhile, showed her displeasure directly on the worksheet, leaving the “positive effects” section blank.

“I think that asking us to identify positives of imperialism, something that killed thousands and contributed to slavery, is extremely undermining and disrespectful to people whose ancestors were murdered because of colonization,” the freshman wrote.

Cece Walsh told the Boston Globe she got upset because the assignment appeared to downplay the killing of Africans and the pillaging of their lands and resources by using phrases about how the Europeans “obtained land” or merely “took control” of colonies.

“It was very biased and it didn’t really give us the truth,” Cece told the newspaper. “The positive effects are often only positive for the oppressors … Teachers need to be aware of what texts they’re choosing to present to students.”

The assertion that without colonialism, blacks would be doing anything different than they were doing 10,000 years ago is dumb and baseless.

Of course, you could argue that blacks were healthier in their natural environment, and white people were wrong to meddle with that. I would probably agree with that. But that is not what anti-colonialists are saying. These people will literally tell you that Africans – who never invented the wheel – would me MORE technologically developed now if it wasn’t for colonialism.

It’s just more nonsense.

Lia Thomas is a brave woman who just practiced really hard, the Ukraine is beating Russia, coronavirus is a deadly pandemic, and Africans were right on the verge of developing a highly technological society before white people came in and ruined everything.

The Third World Quarterly recently published “A Case for Colonialism” by Professor Bruce Gilley. Following a hostile reaction from the usual suspects, the article was withdrawn. But you can still read it on the web here.

Its essential argument is that colonialism was the best thing that ever happened to brown people.

The notion that colonialism is always and everywhere a bad thing needs to be rethought in light of the grave human toll of a century of anti-colonial regimes and policies. The case for Western colonialism is about rethinking the past as well as improving the future. It involves reaffirming the primacy of human lives, universal values, and shared responsibilities – the civilising mission without scare quotes – that led to improvements in living conditions for most Third World peoples during most episodes of Western colonialism. It also involves learning how to unlock those benefits again. Western and non-Western countries should reclaim the colonial toolkit and language as part of their commitment to effective governance and international order.

Brown people increasingly realise that life was better with Whitey in charge.

Sèbe has documented how the founding figures of Western colonialism in Africa (such as Livingstone in Zambia, Lugard in Nigeria and de Brazza in Congo) are enjoying a resurgence of official and social respect in those countries now that romanticised pre-colonial and disappointing postcolonial approaches to governance have lost their sheen. As one young man on the streets of Kinshasa asked Van Reybrouck (as described in his seminal 2010 book on the Congo): ‘How long is this independence of ours going to last anyway? When are the Belgians coming back?’

Even back in the day, brown people actually preferred living under Whitey’s control. The whole White Invasion/Brown Resistance narrative is a modern fabrication.

Anti-colonial critics simply assert that colonialism was, in Hopkins’s words, ‘a foreign imposition lacking popular legitimacy’. Yet until very late, European colonialism appears to have been highly legitimate and for good reasons. Millions of people moved closer to areas of more intensive colonial rule, sent their children to colonial schools and hospitals, went beyond the call of duty in positions in colonial governments, reported crimes to colonial police, migrated from non-colonised to colonised areas, fought for colonial armies and participated in colonial political processes – all relatively voluntary acts. Indeed, the rapid spread and persistence of Western colonialism with very little force relative to the populations and areas concerned is prima facie evidence of its acceptance by subject populations compared to the feasible alternatives. The ‘preservers’, ‘facilitators’ and ‘collaborators’ of colonialism, as Abernethy shows, far outnumbered the ‘resisters’ at least until very late: ‘Imperial expansion was frequently the result not just of European push but also of indigenous pull’.

Anti-colonialism is just another aspect of  the Blame Whitey hate narrative whose pernicious effects are now being felt in our own countries. But in the Third World, it has already cost millions of lives.

It is hard to overstate the pernicious effects of global anti-colonialism on domestic and international affairs since the end of World War II. Anti-colonialism ravaged countries as nationalist elites mobilised illiterate populations with appeals to destroy the market economies, pluralistic and constitutional polities, and rational policy processes of European colonisers. In our ‘age of apology’ for atrocities, one of the many conspicuous silences has been an apology for the many atrocities visited upon Third World peoples by anti-colonial advocates.

…A sobering World Bank report of 1996 noted: ‘Almost every African country has witnessed a systematic regression of capacity in the last 30 years; the majority had better capacity at independence than they now possess’. This loss of state capacity was no trifle; it meant the loss of tens of millions of lives.

The only successful ex-colonies are the ones that copied Whitey’s ways.

As Burton and Jennings note, ‘In the first decade or so after independence … East African governments often adopted or adapted both administrative structures and ideological concepts from their colonial predecessors in order to create quite successful forms of governance – certainly by regional standards’. In many cases, colonial bureaucrats and police were rehired by the newly independent governments.

The author argues that the best hope for brown countries is to be recolonised by De White Devil. But why would we want to do this since, as the author acknowledges, even back in the good old days,  brown people cost more than they were worth?

Despite cries of ‘exploitation’, colonialism was probably a money loser for imperial powers. The Stanford economist Richard Hammond coined the term ‘uneconomic imperialism’ to describe the ways that European powers embarked on ruinously costly and ultimately money-losing colonialism for largely non-economic reasons. That is why they gave up their colonies so easily, as Wu also showed with regard to the Dutch surrender of Taiwan.69 The benefits of empire were widely diffused while the costs were narrowly borne by the colonial power. As Kaplan wrote: ‘The real problem with imperialism is not that it is evil, but rather that it is too expensive and therefore a problematic grand strategy for a country like the United States’.

His answer is that brown people should pay us to colonise them again.

To solve the incentives problem, Hechter has called for a ‘market in transnational governance’ which we might call less euphemistically ‘colonialism for hire’. Colonial states would be paid for their services, an important motivator to be successful. The contractual motivation would also strengthen consent through periodic renegotiation of the terms.

His suggestion is that white people should be granted long leases on virgin soil territory in the Third World, where we can set up new colonies on the model of Hong Kong. Because of their superior governance, these colonies would act as magnets for brownskins in the rest of the country, acting as drivers of economic and cultural development.

White nationalists might say: Who cares if brown people are successful or not, happy or sad, alive or dead? I can see two practical advantages to this from our perspective:

1. Creating enclaves of civility in the Third World might stop brown people coming to our countries. They’d go there instead of here.
2. Once we had control of territories in the Third World again, we could use them as repositories for “asylum seekers” and encourage or force our domestic brown populations to go and live there.

Imperialism 2.0, yes or no?

Here is an interesting Chinese perspective on the phenomenon.

The Trump administration is finally giving their voters what we want. The so-called “Anti-Semitism Envoy” at the State Department was nothing more than pork barrel for (((billionaire donors))).

Traditionally, this position focuses on “monitoring” and using government power to engage in surveillance of First Amendment activity in the United States. Its primary objective was to use its clout to suggest aggressive action against countries that don’t do exactly what Jews say. According to the State Department, Anti-Semitism includes criticism of Israel, complaining about Jews racially abusing you, and asking how Zyklon-B killed 6,000,000 Jews but not 6,000,000 Mexicans.

Times of Israel:

The US State Department’s office to monitor and combat anti-Semitism will be unstaffed as of July 1, despite concerns from Jewish officials over the downgrading of the congressionally mandated post.

A source familiar with the office’s workings told JTA that its remaining two staffers, each working half-time or less, would be reassigned as of that date.

The Trump administration, which has yet to name an envoy to head the office, would not comment on the staffing change. At full staffing, the office employs a full-time envoy and the equivalent of three full-time staffers.

The State Department told JTA in a statement that it remained committed to combating anti-Semitism – and cited as evidence the tools, including the department’s annual reports on human rights and religious freedom, that existed before Congress mandated the creation of the envoy office in 2004.

“We want to ensure the Department is addressing anti-Semitism in the most effective and efficient method possible and will continue to endeavor to do so,” the statement said.

“The Department of State condemns attacks on Jewish communities and individuals. We consistently urge governments around the world to address and condemn anti-Semitism and work with vulnerable Jewish communities to assess and provide appropriate levels of security.

George W. Bush passed the “Global Anti-Semitism Act” (2004) and invented this post from scratch against State Department wishes. After killing millions of people and wiping out our economy by wasting trillions, now you know why Jewish “liberals” now miss the first mentally challenged person to stumble into the Oval Office.

If Jews were seriously concerned about stopping “hate crimes” against their community, they would pass a law forbidding Jews from buying spray paint.

The most egregious anti-Semitic crimes in recent memory can be stopped by extraditing the Mossad operatives that were behind the “JCC Bomb Threats.” Jews once called this the “biggest threat” to their people “in years.”

Any takers? Israel refuses to extradite him, and the never ending list of anti-Semitism watch dogs are not making a peep. Yet another Jew at the State Department using our tax dollars to spy on us and infringe on our rights won’t change that.

Imagine if the Punisher was the American president…

While our representatives spend all their time crafting clever speeches and getting bribes, this Flip shitlord is just getting things done non-stop.

Then, he tells the press, as an afterthought.

“Oh, yeah, guys, I’m kicking out the US military.”

Military times:

The U.S. military’s growing alliance with the Philippines may be at risk after the Pacific nation’s president on Monday issued a stunning call for American troops to end their longstanding mission in the country’s southern region.

…

Duterte said in a speech in Manila that the 100-plus American special operations troops in the southern Mindanao region should leave, and he pointed to past abuses by U.S. forces during the period when the Philippines was an American colony before 1946.

“Duterte is putting in jeopardy the alliance,” said Patrick Cronin, director of the Asia-Pacific Security Program at the Center for a New American Security in Washington.

…

Military leaders view the Philippines as a key ally for containing China and its territorial ambitions in the South China Sea.

Guys, I have some bad news for you.

I don’t think Duterte cares one bit about your plan to encroach on Chinese territory.

In fact, he seems set to build closer bonds to China.

Looks like you’ll need a new country to put all those military bases, boys.

The new Filipino president is originally from the southern Mindanao region, a mostly Muslim patch in a majority Catholic country, and his comments may reflect personal or emotional sentiments about the region that has been racked by heavy crime and Islamic extremist activity.

“For as long as we stay with America, we will never have peace in that land,” Duterte said in the speech in Manila, according to The Associated Press.

“The special forces, they have to go. They have to go in Mindanao, there are many whites there, they have to go,” he said.

“I do not want a rift with America, but they have to go.”

You have to… Wait a minute, something’s off…

That seems like pretty plain language.

The reality is that these American bases are an obvious security threat for President Duterte. His move away from being an American client state is sure to make a lot of people angry and nervous. Those people might want to stage a coup – and what better place to plot it than an American base, where Duterte can’t intervene?

While the Filipino President is framing this like some kind of impulse decision based on emotion, this is clearly a critical move which marks the official start of his plan to move towards China.

This is a good move on his part. Dealing with the USA is currently made very unpleasant by the current administration’s obsession with meddling in other countries’ internal affairs. Duterte will be hampered in his efforts to rid his country of drugs and Moslem terrorists if the alliance with America is maintained.

China, on the other hand, won’t care one bit how he manages his own country.

A very beautifully edited and inspirational video from our top Nazi film maker, Omniphi.

In a short and powerful message, he glorifies our achievements and exposes the agenda of those who’d try to make us feel “guilty” for them.

Spread this around and cure your friends of their “White guilt”!

One popular rhetorical attack on white countries is that their wealth is a product of exploiting other countries. Now one way to evaluate this is to look at the “colonized” countries and how they fared.

But the Europeans-as-colonial-exploiters idea has another end of the equation—where the “exploitation” went. If the colonizers are exploiting all this wealth, there should be some wealth on the other end.

I took the population of a country in 1940, and the population of their empires in 1940, and the population of the empire divided by the population of a country is the “colonization index”. An index of 1 would mean there was 1 colonial subject for every citizen. The British empire, at 10.46, had 10.46 colonial subjects for every British citizen.

I then compared their per capita GDPs in 1970 (30 years later). I chose 1970 because it was the earliest year that West Germany appeared on the Wikipedia list of historical nominal per capita GDPs.

The countries I chose to compare to were all non-Communist European countries, “Communist” defined as being in the USSR, the Warsaw Pact, or being Yugoslavia or Albania. If you included Communist countries, sure, you would find that colonizers – all being non-communist – would be wealthier than the average of all European countries. But they’re not wealthier than other non-Communist European countries.

Don’t be limited by me; pick different years if you want. In fact, most of my sources have data for various years.

Colonial vs. Non-Colonial European countries in 1970:

Exactly how much wealth one could extract from a dirt-poor African—if indeed that’s what these countries were doing—seems like it wouldn’t be worth the effort.

Germany, with no empire, was able to drop France, Britain, Belgium and Holland combined in WW2. And in World War 1, Germany was able to almost knock out Belgium and France, who was only saved by the British outside Paris.

Now in WW2 it was a matter of military strategy, not necessarily industrial power, but even in 1939, Germany could produce more of any military equipment than France, and any non-naval military equipment than Britain. And Germany had few colonies in its history relative to its size, and none since 1918. Otto von Bismarck certainly thought colonies were a waste.

From 2013:

At 2013 the story is the same, so it’s not like the “benefits of colonialism” kicked in later. There’s still no relationship between colonialism and wealth, and one of the colonizers – Portugal – is even falling behind some former communist countries.

We can briefly compare the per capita GDP of Sub-Saharan Africa to two racially African countries that were independent since at least 1804 – Haiti and Ethiopia:

Haiti achieved its independence from France in 1804, and 209 years later is as poor as the continent of Africa. Haiti is the smaller of the two countries on the island of Hispaniola.

The Dominican Republic is on the same island as Haiti but is not a racially African majority. Jamaica is a racially African island country in the Caribbean that remained under UK rule until 1962.

Ethiopia evaded any European rule except by Mussolini’s Italy from 1936 to 1942. Ethiopia’s war with Italy and their liberation by Britain killed 290,000 Ethiopians out of a population of 17.7 million, or 1.6% of the population.

By comparison, Japan lost 4.1% of its population, Germany lost 10.46% of its population, Yugoslavia lost 8.8%, the USSR lost 16%, Romania 3.1%, Poland 17%, Italy lost 1.00%, France lost 1.4%, and the United Kingdom 0.9% in World War 2.

To blame Ethiopia’s current economic issues on the effects of that war after 72 years would betray a great ignorance about the history of other countries.

Within Africa, by far the most “colonized” country was South Africa, in terms of proportion of the population that was European. If colonization impoverishes the colonized people, we should expect the blacks in South Africa to be especially poor, but we don’t see that at all:

South African blacks are well above the average for blacks in Africa.

To recap:

1. White colonizing countries were no wealthier than non-colonizing white countries—that weren’t Communist. None of the colonizing white countries were Communist. The “colonial exploiter” narrative should predict that these countries should be wealthier than non-colonial white countries that weren’t Communist.
2. Black countries that entirely (Haiti) or almost entirely (Ethiopia) escaped colonization were no better off than the rest of Africa.
3. The blacks in the most colonized African country – South Africa – are over 3x as wealthy per capita as the blacks in less colonized African countries.

This is not to justify the denial of sovereignty that conquest makes. It is merely to say that the “whites exploited Africa” narrative is probably false.

South Africa numbers:
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/12/06/chart-of-the-week-how-south-africa-changed-and-didnt-over-mandelas-lifetime/

Per capita GDPs of specific countries:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ListofcountriesbyGDP(PPP)per_capita

Per capita GDP of black Africa:
http://data.worldbank.org/region/SSA

Historical GDP per capita:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ListofcountriesbypastandprojectedGDP(nominal)percapita#WorldBankestimatesbetween1960and1969

British Empire:
https://books.google.com/books?id=x2JwBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA71&lpg=PA71&dq=british+empire+population+1940&source=bl&ots=zlDeVTF2tO&sig=iHZBV6ulHSIeYM4Fek2jzb1uzLs&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwimypn07bvJAhUBXj4KHcE1CpgQ6AEIZzAN#v=onepage&q=british%20empire%20population%201940&f=false

French Empire:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frenchcolonialempire

Portuguese “Empire” population:
http://www.populstat.info/Africa/mozambic.htm
http://www.populstat.info/Africa/angolac.htm
http://www.populstat.info/Asia/easttimc.htm
http://www.populstat.info/Asia/macauc.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goa#Population

Dutch Empire:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DutchEastIndies http://www.tradingeconomics.com/indonesia/population

Belgian Empire:
http://www.populstat.info/Africa/congokic.htm

Italian Empire:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ItalianEastAfrica http://www.populstat.info/Africa/libyac.htm

Populations of European countries in 1939:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WorldWarII_casualties