Empire umpire

During the colonial times, there was an immense demand for an intelectual justification of imperialistic policies. An ideological reason was needed. Of course, christianity played a major rol, so did the capitalist and racist ideas. For the western countries, heavily militarized, there was a lot of money to be made in colonialism; but they needed a moral justification for invading, enslaving and exploding people in a way they would never do in their own territories.

One of this ideas was that the white european men had an evolutive and cultural advantage over everybody else, and therefore a moral obligation to bring ‘true civilization’ to what they called primitive societies, whether they wanted it or not. This twisted idealism was based on the notion that it was acceptable to destroy the native’s culture; as adopting the western ways would make them happier. In some cases, the native ways were not even considered a culture, they were seen as savage or animalistic behaviors, and a “shame to the rest of mankind”.

For the evangelist, it was somewhat similar. The destruction of local’s culture and religion was a noble thing to do, as pagans are not allowed in heaven. Oppresion was then seen as a mean to achive eternal salvation of the soul. Whether they trully belived this, or they just pretended to to escape their guilt, we’ll never know. Most early studies by europeans in central Africa are full of cultural subjetivism and prejudice.

In the middle of this mess, there was Rubyard Kipling, who we all recall only as the author of The Jungle Book. Born in British colonial India, he knew the ways of an empire. It was in 1899 when he published what is perhaps one of the most polemic poems ever, The white’s man burden. What is the white man’s burden? In the poem, it is refered to as the moral obligation of the white man to impose his ideas on others. Kipling (I think) was being sarcastic; for there is a lot of hipocrecy in the neverending quest for power. The poem is divided in seven verses, and the first one reads:

Take up the White Man's burden —
Send forth the best ye breed —
Go, bind your sons to exile
To serve your captives' need;
To wait, in heavy harness,
On fluttered folk and wild —
Your new-caught sullen peoples,
Half devil and half child.

After the challenge to take up the burden, the motherland makes the sacrifice of sending the young to a faraway land, to serve an endevour that may take their whole lives. The colonicer is victimiced and redeemed, as he is ‘serving his captive’s need’ by enlightning them with the western culture. The colony is descrived as a exotic, thrilling scenario where everything is possible, and great power is to be obtained. The natives are ‘half devil and half child’ as, even if they are not truly evil, they act in evil by differing from the european standard because of the childish and immature nature of their ways.

Many of the ideas of the colonial period are long out of fashion, and yet some remain. Now, theres an interesting view of all the historical wrongs the white man is responsible for. Being of white european ethnicity in a once colonial country is a good example of a delicate situation. Quite a big proportion of the habitants of the American Continent have some amount of european heritage, and yet I have never met anyone proud or nostalgic for the colonial era.

The opposite is true, even the people of Iberic ethnicity here regard the Spanish Colony as a time of great cruelty, genocide and disrespect for others point of view of others. To some extent, this leads to an over idealization of the invaded, but that is partially due to a guilt reflex. And in the specific case of México, we know very little of the pre-colonial America, since the Spanish were both quick and effective at destroying native culture. But something happened, Spanish culture was also lost in a way, as they got mixed over time, giving birth to a completely new ideosincrasy.

It is true that the imperialistic ‘ideal’ failed, though, as post-colonial territories face a hard and uncertain future. And also, it was proven to be hoax, for if there was a true desire to end poverty and ignorance (which today is, for the most part, a concecuence of colonialism) the developed countries would still be trying to find a way to make things equal for all peoples.

So what must be the role of the first world countries today?