Neil Young makes a stand against misinformation

DurumGallico

DurumGallico

Well-Known Member
Roger A. Shrubber said:
you were asked to prove that conquered people didn't mind being conquered, because of all the "improvements" the conquerors brought....no one said anything about cost management analysis
Click to expand...
i never said "conquered" people didn't mind being conquered, at first we were talking about the myth of a beneficial colonization for european countries. And i proved it was a myth, so shut the fuck up a bit will you !
 
DurumGallico

DurumGallico

Well-Known Member
Budley Doright said:
No, you were asked to cite how colonization had good side effects and you have not in any way answered that. Were the colonized grateful for the infrastructure and new language thrust upon them? Again I doubt it as I’ve never heard them say that but I’m willing to listen to facts that prove they were. I’ll wait.
Click to expand...
Well since these infrastructures were made with awful work conditions, often forced work also, no at the time they surely were not grateful for this. But again, there's a difference between good side effects and gratitude towards colonizers.
Never said they were "grateful", just said we invested three times the marshall plan in their countries (net investment, we lost that amount), we build hundreds of hospitals schools etc., which is obviously a good thing for them on a long term.

Does not mean it was a good thing to do, does not mean they should be grateful toward colonizers, does not mean it's a reason to support this.
Of course it was completely wrong, i don't support french imperialism, not much than american imperialism if we speak about more actual things.
States and european populations saw billions and billions gone with no gain. While a few individuals got billions and billions in their pockets.
It weakened the state and made private owners richer. Complete bullshit.

So yes, although it was completely wrong and nobody gained anything at the time except a few individuals, it had good side effects like seeing these old "countries" (lot were even not unified countries as today) entering in the modern era with modern infrastructures and resource exploitations. Things that they still gain benefit today.
 
Last edited:
DurumGallico

DurumGallico

Well-Known Member
Budley Doright said:
Yup there was some “good side effects” there. And nope, no need for gratitude, they gots their freedoms. We know that the side effects were just peachy. I understand now, thanks!!!
Click to expand...
Well compare Haïti to Gadeloupe and Martinique. New-Caledonia said yes to remain with their conqueror with +96% in favor of the yes in december 21.
 
S

schuylaar

Well-Known Member
zeddd said:
The British stole most of their slaves and brought them to America, surely you wouldn’t hold me accountable for anything that happened in that period?
Click to expand...
FIFY

now you know how it sounded across the pond.

and yes we are accountable for the sins of our fathers.
 
Budley Doright

Budley Doright

Well-Known Member
DurumGallico said:
Well compare Haïti to Gadeloupe and Martinique. New-Caledonia said yes to remain with their conqueror with +96% in favor of the yes in december 21.
Click to expand...
FFS. Really? That’s you thinking your winning? Let’s hear from the indigenous, oh right their all gone, I wonder how the slaves felt that were brought there. You realize they were not conquered as much as settled and brought their slaves to work in the fields right? Just stop, god your like the energizer bunny of stupid arguments. Please show me where the majority of the indigenous people voted for French rule…… I’ll wait.
 
Budley Doright

Budley Doright

Well-Known Member
schuylaar said:
FIFY

now you know how it sounded across the pond.

and yes we are accountable for the sins of our fathers.
Click to expand...
I disagree that I’m responsible for my old man being a douche but I will not find excuses for his behaviour and work to change that legacy. That should be enough right? That’s how we get out of this shit IMO but those legacies live on.
 
DurumGallico

DurumGallico

Well-Known Member
Budley Doright said:
FFS. Really? That’s you thinking your winning? Let’s hear from the indigenous, oh right their all gone, I wonder how the slaves felt that were brought there. You realize they were not conquered as much as settled and brought their slaves to work in the fields right? Just stop, god your like the energizer bunny of stupid arguments. Please show me where the majority of the indigenous people voted for French rule…… I’ll wait.
Click to expand...
You obviously don't know shit about this, former french colonies are heaven for countries around that don't have all the modern infrastructures and supplies France has invested.
Again, not supporting colonization, just be realistic. Was it a good thing to do ? No. Is there good side effects ? Of course. Feel free to stand with your biaised opinion, absolutely don't give a shit about it. ;)
 
Budley Doright

Budley Doright

Well-Known Member
DurumGallico said:
You obviously don't know shit about this, former french colonies are heaven for countries around that don't have all the modern infrastructures and supplies France has invested.
Again, not supporting colonization, just be realistic. Was it a good thing to do ? No. Is there good side effects ? Of course. Feel free to stand with your biaised opinion, absolutely don't give a shit about it. ;)
Click to expand...
Well if you don’t give a shit then why continue with your nonsensical arguments. But thanks for the provided citation…….that clears it up.
 
Roger A. Shrubber

Roger A. Shrubber

Well-Known Member
DurumGallico said:
Well compare Haïti to Gadeloupe and Martinique. New-Caledonia said yes to remain with their conqueror with +96% in favor of the yes in december 21.
Click to expand...
New Caledonia was never really conquered in force, the french just sort of weaseled their way in, and started making rules. in the 1950s, the french started giving them a lot more autonomy, and a real voice in their own government, and in 1984 granted them full authority for local affairs ...
there was never really a period where the french came in and took what they wanted by force. they did try, for a short while, enforcing rules designed to make the locals interact more with the french, so they could have more direct control over them, but a few violent uprisings kind of ended those "rules"...but New Caledonia is pretty atypical as far as conquered countries go, no initial violent invasion, very few repressive policies, political autonomy very early, minimal french interference....not even close to a good example of "colonial occupation being welcomed by the conquered"
much more like "the french slide into power in a country ignorant of modern politics, and treat the people a lot better than they do in most instances, which is a very rare occurence"....
 
Roger A. Shrubber

Roger A. Shrubber

Well-Known Member
Budley Doright said:
Well if you don’t give a shit then why continue with your nonsensical arguments. But thanks for the provided citation…….that clears it up.
Click to expand...
because he wants someone, somewhere, to tell him he's right...he just doesn't realize it's not going to happen here yet...
he would do a lot better on a forum associated with oan or fox, like gab or gettr...we're just going to keep pointing out that he's full of shit and wrong
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top