[ad_1]
Colonialism and slavery have been in recent weeks at the forefront of what has been called a large-scale cultural war in Swedish advertising (Expressen 7/10). The battle began in late September, when Timbro published the book "The Burden of the Black Man" by Fredrik Segerfeldt, Liberal Democrat. According to Segerfeldt, the intention is not to be controversial, it is exactly what the book is perceived.
The stated purpose may seem unquestionable: to spark interest in colonialism, racism and slavery as historical phenomena and to qualify the Eurocentric image that characterizes the debate on these issues in Sweden. To achieve this goal, Segerfeldt cites several examples of past abuses committed by non-European citizens and leaders around the world. Many are known to most readers, such as the ravages of the Mongols or the Aztec people, while others, such as the slavery of Ashanth Rock or the ravages of Idris Alawma in the Sahel, are less known.
Segerfeldt does not diminish at the same time the numerous violations committed by European settlers, for example the treatment of the German genocide in Namibia and the British extinction of the indigenous peoples of Tasmania. He does not make much effort to highlight the supposedly positive aspects of European colonialism. Segerfeldt stands out from the new conservative and state scientific historians such as Niall Ferguson, Max Boot and Bruce Gilley, who have pleaded in recent years for a return to some sort of colonial rule in troubled countries such as the United States. Afghanistan and Somalia.
Insofar as Segerfeldt emphasizes the positive effects of European colonialism, it consists mainly of administrative and legal institutions likely to have contributed to stability and economic development after independence, such as as Singapore and Botswana. These positive consequences of colonialism are unusual and Segerfeldt also takes note of the considerable negative impact that the colonial legacy has had on many former colonies. He notably spoke about the corrupt regime of Mobuto Sese Seko in Congo-Kinshasa, highlighting the tangible contacts with the brutal regime of King Leopold in the Frisian region of Congo around the turn of the century.
Segerfeldts can The production then described as a relativisation of European colonialism? Yes, to a certain extent this will be the result when Segerfeldt relates European and non-European abuses and makes sharp comparisons, for example between the size of different empires or the extent of the slave trade. At the same time, it is difficult to see how to write a Eurocentric story of colonialism and smaller slavery if you do not treat the phenomenon together and make no comparisons. However, it is a task for neighbors and Segerfeldt is far from convinced, especially when he tackles complex issues concerning, for example, the driving forces of colonialism and the relations between imperialism of the late nineteenth century. century and industrialism.
Truly problematic, when Segerfeldt's book is used for political purposes, individual statements and conclusions are taken out of context. For example, as Erik Helmerson points out in the DND leadership page (26/09), life remains pretty much the same for those who are oppressed after the European colonizers take power. On the contrary, it is difficult to overestimate the historical significance of European colonization, especially for millions of people who are victims of suicides, slavery, population displacement, genocide and many other disasters resulting from European expansion. .
To continue to say that There were more white Europeans killed by Muslim crucifixes than black African Americans sent from the Atlantic to the United States today, although statistically correct, but misleading, since the comparison excludes 95% of all slaves shipped across the Atlantic, especially to Brazil and the Caribbean.
For many, says Ivar Arpi (SvD 7/10), history is only interesting if it serves their political goals. This statement is apparently correct in Arpi himself, who, like Helmerson, chooses to see Segerfeldt's book primarily as an agreement with the postcolonial left, or "Western Marxist masochism," as Helmerson puts it.
Mattias Hagberg also read Segerfeldt's book as an attempt to settle (according to Hagberg's imaginary imagination) the postcolonial left, which allows him to link the book to an increasingly influential, even fascist, social climate. ". (GP 27/9). Thus, the discussion seems to have landed as far as possible from a nuance.
Despite their weaknesses are The book is welcome insofar as it can generate interest for more global and less Eurocentric perspectives of colonialism, slavery and racism in history. Nor is there a problem with postcolonialism. In his best moments, Segerfeldt shows a test of responsiveness and humility for different research results and perspectives, including postcolonial ones. In some places, the book could serve as a starting point for a constructive debate on colonial history and its consequences.
Unfortunately, reactions to date indicate the opposite. Clearly, in today's climate of polarized and narrow-minded debate in Sweden, it is not possible to discuss the importance of historical phenomena such as colonialism and slavery on an objective basis. . Instead, history is reduced to slogans and political habits in the struggle between right and left, where both sides do their best to crush and suspect the opponent. As a historian, I find at the hairdresser that such a simple ideology of history now seems to have become the norm not only in social media, but also in our leading newspapers.
Lecturer in History at Linnaeus University
Source link
