#British colonial legacy

[mysterioushimachal]

The Story Behind Naldehra: Origin and History of Shimla’s Iconic Destination

[astro-inky]

british men of letters were so funny as a villain. like they were evil bc they had bad technology and they were british. maybe this was spn finally getting all that superwholock stuff off their chest.

[enbycrip]

Been digging into things on Canadian/British, United States/British and South American/Spanish history recently and the notable thing that has come up on both - in all three cases, the European settlers were the ones actively engaging in genocide of the indigenous population. It was not the active policy of the European government.

In all three cases the European government actually passed protective legislation for the rights of indigenous subjects at the request of either indigenous people themselves travelling to Europe to make these representations, or not-entirely-awful Europeans passing on what was happening to them. They weren’t *incredible* protections in any of the three cases, but they at least recognised that indigenous people were *people* with actual basic rights. Like “not being automatically murdered or enslaved”.

But then European settlers went *batshit* at this legislation. The entire idea of “No Genocide” policies provoked enormous settler backlashes in all three cases. It was even a material, if not enormous, factor in why the US declared independence.

And the European governments in question just…rolled over. Made no real attempt to enforce this protective legislation. And it *certainly* was *not* why Britain sent in troops when the US declared independence. The Founding Fathers just viewed even the fact they had been *asked* to not murder indigenous people as an outrage.

None of this is to excuse European colonial states today of our responsibility to pay reparations and lobby for protections for indigenous people (and BIPOC in general) in our ex-colonial states. We’ve benefitted so much, especially on mass resource plundering, that reparations are a responsibility we cannot shirk.

(I just finished a biography of Charles Hapsburg and how he frittered away *massive* silver imports stolen from South America on European wars. That huge resource injection was pretty vital to the beginning of European international capitalism in the 16th-17th centuries. Before that, states just kept coming up against insufficient metals for currency, especially ones with the intermediate value of silver that let a critical mass of lower-level transactions happen.)

What it is, however, is an examination of the different ways states can be responsible for genocide, eugenics, and other crimes.

It does not need to be active policy for a state to be responsible. Even passing protective legislation doesn’t prevent a state’s responsibility if they don’t take measures to enforce that legislation, and, particularly, *if they give in to loud backlash from privileged parties who see it as an infringement of their privilege for people they are oppressing to be given some basic rights.*

I am not a proponent of “history repeats itself”. Context *always* matters, and every different situation has a different context. However, history itself provides an incredibly important and *necessary* context for situations we face now. And these facts are *incredibly* relevant to *many* situations we are currently facing.

[trendynewsnow]

King Charles III's Visit to Australia Disrupted by Indigenous Protest

King Charles III’s Visit to Australia Interrupted by Protest Shortly after King Charles III delivered his remarks in Australia’s Parliament on Monday, an unexpected voice echoed from the back of the chamber. “You are not our king,” declared Lidia Thorpe, an Indigenous senator and prominent activist advocating for Aboriginal rights. “Return our land. Give us back what you have stolen from us.” As…

[blorbocedes]

.

[angelesse]

You will NEVER giess who this anon is....

This anon.... is not... throwing away her.... Shot....

sauteed.

[ladymazzy]

Barbados plans to make Tory MP pay reparations for family’s slave past

From the article:

'Barbados became a republic a year ago after it removed Queen Elizabeth II as head of state.

The Drax family pioneered the plantation system in the 17th century and played a major role in the development of sugar and slavery across the Caribbean and the US.

[reasoningdaily]

Though millions across the world mourned, many also saw the Queen’s passing as a bitter reminder of the British empire’s violent exploitation of countries throughout history, resulting in decades of economic and social devastation.

The death of Queen Elizabeth II revived longstanding criticism over the monarchy’s enrichment from the British empire’s violent colonization of African, Asian and Caribbean nations.

A lot of young Africans shared images and stories of their own elders, who endured a brutal period of British colonial history during the Queen's long reign. 

Travel was restricted for Kenyans under British rule

"I cannot mourn," one wrote on Twitter, posting an image of what she said was her grandmother's "movement pass": a colonial document which prevented free travel for Kenyans under British rule in the east African country

Men taken away from their families

Another wrote that her grandmother used to narrate to them how they were beaten and how their husbands were taken away from them and they were left to support their children alone during colonial times.

Cruelty and economic deprivation

Karen Attiah, an African-American journalist tweeted: “Black and brown people around the world who were subject to horrendous cruelties and economic deprivation under British colonialism are allowed to have feelings about Queen Elizabeth”.

Decades of violent upheaval

Harvard University history professor Maya Jasanoff wrote in the New York Times that the Queen’s stoic presence in life as a “fixture of stability” underlied a “solid traditionalist front over decades of violent upheaval”.

The Mau Mau uprising

Jasanoff pointed out that months after Elizabeth II learned of her father’s death and became queen, British colonial authorities in Kenya suppressed a rebellion against the colonial regime known as Mau Mau.

No apologies from the Queen

Cornell University professor Mukoma Wa Ngugi pointed out on Twitter the Queen never apologized for slavery or colonialism or urged the crown to offer reparations for “the millions of lives taken in her/their names.”

An “absurd theater”

“As a Kenyan, I feel nothing. This theater is absurd”, Wa Ngugi added.

The British monarchy represents inequality

University of Cambridge postcolonial studies professor Priyamvada Gopal said on Democracy Now news broadcast that the British monarchy has come to represent “profound and grave inequality”.

Parallels between the British monarchy and the US

She drew parallels between the British monarchy and the concentration of power in other places like the United States.

Colonization of Puerto Rico

Before its independence, the US was once ruled by the British monarchy and now effectively colonizes Puerto Rico and other island nations.

Concentration of power

Gopal added that “power, privilege and wealth are in the hands of a few, which the rest of us are then invited to worship and think of as perfectly normal”.

The future of the Commonwealth

Melissa Murray, a law professor at New York University whose family is from Jamaica, tweeted that the Queen’s death would “accelerate debates about colonialism, reparations, and the future of the Commonwealth”.

Head of state for 32 countries

The Queen was head of state for as many as 32 countries in her 70-year reign, but by the time of her death, just 14 other than the UK remained.

Change underway

While Barbados’ decision to become a republic last year was the first such exit in almost 30 years, the accession of Charles III has many of his subjects across the Commonwealth asking if the time is right to install a less remote head of state.

Antigua and Barbuda

Gaston Browne (pictured), Prime Minister of Antigua and Barbuda, said on Saturday that his plan for a referendum was not an act of hostility, but “the final step to complete that circle of independence���. 

Jamaica

The removal of the monarchy appears more straightforward in Jamaica, where a simple majority would be enough, a threshold which polls have indicated would probably be met.

Independence for Jamaica

The prime minister, Andrew Holness (pictured), told William and Kate last year that Jamaica intended to be “an independent, developed, and prosperous country”.

Saint Vincent and the Grenadines

In Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, where protesters called for slave trade reparations during William and Kate’s visit, the prime minister, Ralph Gonsalves, proposed a referendum in July but said it could only go ahead with bipartisan support.

Possible change in the Caribbean

The Bahamas, Saint Kitts and Nevis and Saint Lucia all require a simple majority, while Grenada requires a two-thirds vote.

Racism in the royal family

While the Queen’s role in colonialism continues to gnaw at many, the latest generation focused on the racism that stems from the royal family.

The first mixed-race royal member

Particularly through the Queen’s relationship with her mixed-race daughter-in-law Meghan Markle.

Meghan Markle’s accusations

In 2021, Meghan Markle, said in an interview with Oprah Winfrey that “someone” in the royal family had expressed concern about her child’s skin color.

Ethnic minorities were banned from office roles at Buckingham Palace

Shortly after, a set of documents discovered at the National Archives by The Guardian, revealed that the Queen banned “coloured immigrants or foreigners” from serving in office roles in the royal household.

Ethnic minorities were only allowed servant roles

This racist rule was in place until, at least, the late sixties. However, ethnic minorities were always  allowed to work as servants.

No response to the BLM movement

Furthermore, a year before, people in the UK and everywhere, complained that the Buckingham Palace had no official response to the murder of George Floyd and the global Black Lives Matter Movement.

The Queen failed to address racism

“It’s hard to imagine the Queen showing support for BLM and anti-racism in general”, wrote a journalist for Insider in 2021.

Racism in the institution of the royal family

“In her 69 years on the throne, she has failed to address the racism that undeniably exists in the institution of the royal family,” she noted.

[darjeelingheritage]

(via Role of the British in the Darjeeling hill station) 

Learn about the rich history of Darjeeling as a hill station and sanatorium for the British during colonial times. Discover how the British pioneers were attracted to Darjeeling's lofty mountains with snow-covered peaks, bracing climate, and magnificent forests, which prompted them to establish a sanatorium and market there. Establishing a sanatorium and immigration led to the growth of employment opportunities and population. The article also delves into the tea plantation industry and the British educational legacy sustained in the Darjeeling hills. Additionally, the article provides insights into the development of transport and communication systems, such as the Darjeeling Himalayan Railway and Ropeways, which played a crucial role in economic progress in the region.

Read more by following the link-

https://darjeelingheritage.com/role-of-the-british-in-the-darjeeling-hills/

[metamatar]

Since the early days of British involvement with Zionism, Churchill sanctioned the dispossession of non-Jewish Palestinians by assuring that they have no voice in the affairs of their own land. “In the interests of the Zionist policy,” he stated in August 1921 as the government minister in charge of Britain’s colonies, “all elective institutions have so far been refused to the Arabs.”

A snapshot of Churchill’s stances on Palestine and race is found in the records of the 1937 Peel Commission hearings, convened to address a major revolt in Palestine. [...]

Horace Rumbold [...] asked whether Zionist policy is worth “the lives of our men, and so on.” And did it follow, he asked Churchill, that having “conquered Palestine we can dispose of it as we like?”

Churchill replied to that and similar questions by invoking commitments given when Britain captured Palestine toward the end of 1917. “We decided in the process of conquest of [Palestine] to make certain pledges to the Jews,” Churchill said.

Apparently skeptical, the head of the commission, William Peel, asked Churchill if it is not “a very odd self-government” when “it is only when the Jews are a majority that we can have it.”

Churchill responded with a blunt argument of might: “We have every right to strike hard in support of our authority.”

The historian Reginald Coupland nonetheless told the hearings that the “average Englishman” would wonder why the Arabs were being denied self-government, and why we had “to go on shooting the Arabs down because of keeping his promise to the Jews.”

Peel, similarly, asked Churchill if the British public “might get rather tired and rather inquisitive if every two or three years there was a sort of campaign against the Arabs and we sent out troops and shot them down? They would begin to enquire, ‘Why is it done? What is the fault of these people?… Why are you doing it? In order to get a home for the Jews?’”

“And it would mean rather brutal methods,” added Laurie Hammond, who had worked with the British colonial administration in India. “I do not say the methods of the Italians at Addis Ababa,” referring to Benito Mussolini’s Ethiopian massacre of February 1937, “but it would mean the blowing up of villages and that sort of thing?” The British, he recalled, had blown up part of the Palestinian port city of Jaffa.

Peel agreed, and added that “they blew up a lot of [Palestinian] houses all over the place in order to awe the population. I have seen photographs of these things going up in the air.”

But when Peel questioned whether “it is not only a question of being strong enough,” but of “downing” the Arabs who simply wanted to remain in their own country, Churchill lost patience.

“I do not admit that the dog in the manger has the final right to the manger,” he countered, “even though he may have lain there for a very long time.” He denied that “a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America, or the Black people of Australia,” by their replacement with “a higher grade race.”

[patricia-taxxon]

another annoying fake hypocrisy dunk ive been seeing a lot is some horrible nationalist propaganda account spouts some great replacement shit, but they're also british, so the QTs are like "oough, pretty ironic that a colonial power is complaining about being invaded" and my issue is twofold

immigration isn't actually comparable to the legacy of colonialism, i think. like it isn't comeuppance for like, genocide? hot take i guess

this isn't hypocrisy, they think their culture is better and they have more of a right to "invade" than their racist mental conglomeration of africa and the middle east does. it's internally consistent, please have an opinion for once in your life.

[froody]

why do French people take themselves so fucking seriously like I have never met a more culturally butthurt group of people in my fucking life. I’d maybe get being so sensitive about preservation of your “language and culture” if you were like the Greeks and you’d spent 500 years under Ottoman rule and had the British holding some of your most culturally significant artifacts hostage. but you’re not Greek, you’re French, you were a massive colonial power and you still hold overseas territories, there are 274 million French speakers worldwide because you brutalized 1/3rd of the planet. your cultural legacy is surrendering during wars, pissing in Parisian streets, arguing, sleeping with people’s wives and eating snails. those practices are not on the brink of extinction

[fatehbaz]

British ships carrying plants and seeds from around the world arrived in Botany Bay on January 20 1788. This story is overshadowed by convict ships and Royal Navy vessels, but the cargo on board also had a lasting impact. Colonists, convicts and Indigenous Australians were all affected [...]. Some of these plants [...] were food sources [...]. Others were attempts to expand the British Empire. Could the new territory be exploited as a tropical plantation? In the parliamentary debate over destinations for convict transportation [considering potential locations for sending prisoners], Sir Joseph Banks and James Matra, both members of James Cook’s 1770 expedition [to the South Pacific], spruiked the potential of the new colony as an extension of the empire. Matra claimed the colony was “fitted for production” of “sugar-cane, tea, coffee, silk, cotton, indigo and tobacco”. Banks claimed Botany Bay was an “advantageous” site, with fertile soil [...].

Two plants carried by the First Fleet stand out as examples of botanical imperialism: prickly pear cactus (Opuntia) and sugarcane.

Banks, as head of the Royal Society of London [and as a close adviser to King George, and also as a plant-collecting botanist who turned the Royal Botanic Gardens at Kew in London into the world's leading botanical garden], selected these species as experiments to compete with European trade rivals. His goal was to break a Spanish monopoly in producing fabric dye and to expand British cultivation of sugar outside the West Indies.

Prickly pear cactus was imported because it is the preferred food of the cochineal insect.

Dried cochineal were crushed to make a vibrant, colourfast scarlet dye for textiles. Discovered in the New World by Spanish colonists, cochineal replaced kermes, another insect that had provided red dye since antiquity. Cochineal dye was ten times stronger than kermes or vegetable dyes.

From cardinals’ capes to British officers’ red coats, cochineal was a product for elite consumers signifying power, wealth and prestige.

New Spain, based in Mexico, had a monopoly on cochineal. Banks wanted to break the stranglehold on the scarlet dye by establishing production in New South Wales.

Plants infested with the precious insects were imported from Brazil in 1788. The project soon failed when the cochineal died, but the cacti survived. Colonists used cacti as natural fences and drought-resistant animal fodder.

Without insects to feed on them the plants spread, uncontrolled, to cover more than 60 million acres of eastern Australia by the 1920s. Poison, crushing and fire failed to stop the cactus. [...] Opuntia cacti remain an environmental hazard. [...] The roots of these early imperial projects are deeply embedded in Australian culture and history, with an enduring legacy.

---

All text above by: Garritt C. Van Dyk. "The botanical imperialism of weeds and crops: how alien plant species on the First Fleet changed Australia". The Conversation. 25 January 2024. [Some paragraph breaks/contractions added by me. Italicized text within brackets added by me for clarity and context.

[blackhistorystoryteller]

ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT THE HEAD OF OBA

THE BENIN KINGDOM

THE LOOTED TREASURES BY THE BRITISH EMPIRE

BLACK HISTORY IS DEEPER THAN SLAVE TRADE

The head sculptures of the Oba of Benin, also known as the Benin Bronzes, are a collection of intricate bronze and brass sculptures created by the Edo people of Nigeria. These sculptures typically depict the reigning Oba (king) of the Benin Empire and were produced over several centuries, with some dating back to the 13th century.

They are renowned for their artistic and historical significance, representing the cultural heritage and power of the Benin Kingdom. These sculptures often portray the Oba wearing coral beaded regalia, symbolizing his divine status and authority.

Many of these artifacts were taken from Benin during the late 19th century by British colonial forces, and they are now scattered in museums and private collections worldwide. There have been ongoing discussions and negotiations regarding their repatriation to Nigeria to restore their cultural heritage.

The head sculptures of the Oba of Benin remain a testament to the rich artistic and historical legacy of the Edo people and the Benin Kingdom.

HOW THE BRITISH STOLE FROM THE EDO TRIBE

1. British Punitive Expedition: In 1897, a British expedition, led by British officials and soldiers, was sent to the Benin Kingdom (in what is now Nigeria) with the stated objective of punishing the Oba of Benin, Oba Ovonramwen, for resisting British influence and trade in the region.

2. Sacking of the Royal Palace: During the expedition, the British forces entered the royal palace in Benin City, where many of these intricate bronze and brass sculptures were housed. The palace was looted, and numerous artifacts, including the Benin Bronzes, were taken.

3. Confiscation and Dispersal: The looted artifacts were then confiscated by the British authorities and later distributed to various individuals, museums, and institutions. Many of these artworks ended up in European museums and private collections.

The theft of the Benin Bronzes remains a contentious issue, as these artworks are considered cultural treasures of the Edo people and Nigeria as a whole. There have been ongoing discussions and demands for the repatriation of these artifacts to Nigeria, which has gained momentum in recent years as part of broader efforts to address historical injustices related to colonial-era looting.

The head sculptures of the Oba of Benin, like many traditional African artworks, hold deep symbolic significance within the context of the Benin Kingdom and its culture. Here are some of the key symbols and meanings associated with these sculptures:

1. Royal Authority: The Oba's head sculptures symbolize the authority and divine status of the reigning monarch, who was regarded as a sacred figure in Benin society. The elaborate regalia, such as coral beads and headdresses, worn by the Oba in these sculptures signifies his royal and spiritual power.

2. Ancestral Connections: The sculptures often depict the Oba with distinctive facial scarification patterns and detailed facial features. These features can represent specific ancestors or dynastic connections, emphasizing the Oba's lineage and connection to past rulers.

3. Historical Record: The sculptures also serve as historical records, documenting the appearance and regalia of the Oba during their reigns. This provides valuable insights into the history and evolution of the Benin Kingdom over the centuries.

4. Spiritual Protection: Some sculptures may incorporate elements like beads and cowrie shells, which were believed to have protective and spiritual qualities. These elements were worn by the Oba not only for their aesthetic value but also for their symbolic protection.

5. Cultural Identity: Beyond their specific symbolic meanings, the head sculptures are integral to the cultural identity of the Edo people and the Benin Kingdom. They represent the rich artistic traditions and heritage of the kingdom and its rulers.

It's important to note that the symbolism of these sculptures is deeply rooted in the cultural and historical context of the Benin Kingdom, and their interpretation can vary among different individuals and communities.

[ladymazzy]

1948 Riots which triggered Ghana’s independence - Ghanaian Museum

From the article;

'Veterans of world war two, who had fought with the Gold Coast Regiment of the Royal West African Frontier Force, organised a peaceful demonstration marching to Christiansborg Castle, Accra, Gold Coast (Ghana), to hand in a petition to the colonial governor, demanding that they receive end of war benefits and pay which they had been promised.

As they marched towards the Governor’s residence at the Christianborg Castle in Osu, the colonial police stopped them. The British head of police, Superintendent Imray, ordered his officers to shoot at the protesters, but they shot in the air.

Imray, who was getting frustrated, grabbed a gun from one of the officers and shot into the crowd, killing three of the ex-servicemen – Sergeant Adjetey, Corporal Attipoe and Private Odartey Lamptey.

Some other protesters suffered varying degrees of injuries.

Angered by this unwarranted violence, against unarmed men, and continued injustices suffered by the population in general, people in Accra and other towns and cities took to the streets, attacking European and Asian businesses and property.

Aftermath of the Riots 

The 1948 riots lasted five days. By 1st March,  the colonial governor had declared a state of emergency and put in place a new Riot Act.

On 12th March the governor ordered the arrest of “The Big Six,” leading members of the UGCC, which included Kwame Nkrumah, as he believed they were responsible for orchestrating the disturbances.

The Big Six were incarcerated in remote northern parts of the country. They were detained but released a month later.

A year later, Kwame Nkrumah broke away from the UGCC and formed his own party – the Convention People’s Party (CPP) With the party’s motto of “self-government now” and other activities, the party won the admiration of many voters.

The 1948 riots marked a turning point in the political history of Ghana. In March 1957, less than a decade after the 1948 riots, Ghana gained her independence.'

[reasoningdaily]

The British Museum is full of stolen artifacts