- #1
Thallium
- 231
- 0
I have to questions:
1) Can imperialism be justified?
2) Can socialdarwinism be justified?
1) Can imperialism be justified?
2) Can socialdarwinism be justified?
In our time such jactitation can be found still very much alive and well in these forums…The pinnacle of Civilization, of course, was thought to be Victorian Society. This viewpoint is what we now call ethnocentric - that is, you had a small group of people saying that their own society was the best or most appropriate way for humans to live.
BoulderHead said:In our time such jactitation can be found still very much alive and well in these forums…
Again, I don't really see the relevance of "justification" - it either accurately describes what we see going on or it doesn't. It sounds like you are asking if imperialism is a Darwinian process and if that makes it ok. Well, imperialsim does seem like a Darwinian process to me, but that doesn't make it ok.Thallium said:Well how do the proponents of socialdarwinism justify it?
Imperialist countries typically view it as a good thing - everyone else tends to view it as a bad thing. That is its basic flaw.And does imperialism necessarily have to be viewed a negative?
I don't see how that follows - imperialism is conflict: one country taking over another. If EU members voluntarily sign up, it can't be imperialism.Does anyone think that the EU expansion boarders on imperialism? I do. The only difference is that now the countries have to apply for membership.
Why? The purpose of the EU is that through working together, its member countries can be a more powerful economic force than they can be individually. Its like a labor union, but with one difference - eventually, maybe everyone will be a member. I don't see how that's a bad thing.All other non-member countries have to abide by a range of EU-laws. It's dispicable!
russ_watters said:Again, I don't really see the relevance of "justification" - it either accurately describes what we see going on or it doesn't. It sounds like you are asking if imperialism is a Darwinian process and if that makes it ok.
Well, imperialsim does seem like a Darwinian process to me, but that doesn't make it ok. Imperialist countries typically view it as a good thing - everyone else tends to view it as a bad thing. That is its basic flaw. I don't see how that follows - imperialism is conflict: one country taking over another. If EU members voluntarily sign up, it can't be imperialism.
OK, I think I understand you now. I believe you were actually asking how people used their belief in social darwinism to rationalize to themselves that imperialism was acceptable.Thallium said:The imperialists used Darwin's theory of evolution and the socialdarwinism that derived from his theories of the weak and strong in nature, to justify the imperialists' cause.
Note that Russ highlighted the word voluntarily in his last post. As far as I know, no one is being forced to join the EU.So how do you define imperialism? I am thinking of the EU as a new form of imperialism. A seemingly "good" one.
Math Is Hard said:Is your argument that these laws are so restrictive and penalizing that this a method of forcing countries to join the EU? What are these laws?
Math Is Hard said:However, you did mention previously that "All other non-member countries have to abide by a range of EU-laws". Is your argument that these laws are so restrictive and penalizing that this a method of forcing countries to join the EU? What are these laws?
arildno said:The treaty can be summarized as follows:
As long as these 3 countries implement in their respective countries whatever (or close enough, anyways) laws EU decides upon to be valid in the EU-area,
EU has generously promised not to actively squeeze out these countries' products from the EU-market.
Since about 3/4 of Norway's exports end up in the EU-region, there isn't a realistic alternative for Norway to withdraw from this treaty.
That isn't imperialism, that's just competition. Otherwise, every trade negotiation is imperialism for both sides and Norway is being imperialistic by trying to apply its own rules to the EU.Thallium said:Many of these rules are being forced into my country and the Norwegian parliament can not protest. They have no other choice but to accept it. This to me is imperialism and quite a sneaky form of imperialism too.
Math Is Hard said:Wow - certainly sounds like one of those "offer you can't refuse" type of situations.
I quite agree with you that the term "imperialism" is not entirely appropriate here, russ.russ_watters said:That isn't imperialism, that's just competition. Otherwise, every trade negotiation is imperialism for both sides and Norway is being imperialistic by trying to apply its own rules to the EU.
Fair enough: I think the word you are looking for is EXTORTION .arildno said:I quite agree with you that the term "imperialism" is not entirely appropriate here, russ.
Doesn't mean that I have to like the situation, though..
Illegal use of one's official position or powers to obtain property, funds, or patronage.
Well, we could alway do the US vs EU thing: that's pretty much the reason the EU was created. Someone else brough Norway up though.SabbiS said:well nice turn of the table there russ_watters :)
This Norway vs EU discussion might seem to get a bit off-topic from the original thread, but what the heck, no ones crying right?
SabbiS said:Well just a question for Thallium,
Why where people in Norway so against joining EU from the beggining?
was it maybe because of your pretty high BNP and economics that could get a little push downwards?
You already have it good and stable, why try to fix somethin' that ain't broken.
Imperialism is a policy or practice of extending a country's power and influence through diplomacy or military force. It often involves the domination and exploitation of other countries or territories for economic, political, or cultural gain.
Social Darwinism is a belief that the principles of natural selection and survival of the fittest apply to human societies and justify the domination of certain groups over others. It emerged in the late 19th century and was used to justify imperialism and colonialism.
Imperialism was often justified by the belief in social Darwinism, as it was seen as the duty of stronger nations to dominate and "civilize" weaker ones. This belief also reinforced the idea of racial and cultural superiority of Western nations, leading to the exploitation and subjugation of indigenous peoples.
One example is the colonization of Africa by European powers in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, where the exploitation of resources and subjugation of local populations was justified by ideas of social Darwinism. Another example is the forced assimilation and displacement of indigenous peoples in the Americas by colonizing nations.
The legacies of imperialism and social Darwinism can still be seen in the unequal distribution of wealth and power between Western nations and the rest of the world. The exploitation and subjugation of certain groups based on race and culture also continue to be issues in many societies. Additionally, the effects of colonization and forced assimilation have had long-lasting impacts on indigenous communities and their cultures.