I share your general attitude towards imperialism, but one could hardly consider the Zulus as "helpless and weak." We're talking about a people that, at its apex, conquered most of southern Africa through force of arms - most of that achieved within a remarkably short period of time under Shaka. Does this justify the British conquest? No, and I doubt even diehard jingos are eager to defend Bartle-Frere's chicanery. It does, however, place it in a proper perspective.
Based on your posts here (especially the "lower cultural life" bit), yours appears to be an idealized nonsense view of the world, where everyone not a Westerner is a defenseless victim. That's not only ignoring the fact that many of these nations could be vicious, cruel and imperialist in their own right. It also robs them of agency, as if the Zulus weren't themselves building a fairly sophisticated state, or even capable of making decisions, but were an inert mass peacefully toiling away until the British came. I doubt the Zulus themselves would be flattered by such an assessment.
"Do you know what lies at the bottom of the mainstream? Mediocrity!"
reply
share
nickm2
11 years ago
Superb, let me say that I sort of think the OP is trolling us but if he's (? I assume the gender) not, he also suffers from another sort of Racism: that condescending attitude that the helpless & uninformed 'wog masses' are in need of 'enlightened Westerners-IE: Whites-to help & guide them....I've run into many such folks who aren't Indian or African or IberoAmerican Mestizo Peasant but they seem to think those other folks are so 'broken down' they just can't fend for themselves;
reply
share