Skip to content

I wish Niall Ferguson would shut up with his pro colonial, pro slave trade, pro genocide, pro explotation and pro ignorance views

February 21, 2011

I do not know what is wrong with The Guardian. It is getting more and more middle class with every article. Now it is responsible for allowing right wing, inaccurate and hateful rhetoric to be promoted in its pages

Never before have I read comments that make the title of this blog so apt. 

Fergusons new book is called Civilization: The West and the Rest. He thinks young people in this country are not taught history properly.They don’t have the big picture”, he moans.  “They get given these chunks, usually about Adolf Hitler, so I wanted to write a book that would be really accessible to them”. 

Niall is going to inform the ‘youtdem’ of the big picture by presenting the development of the modern world using youth speak. To a professor who does not know much about young people, this amounts to explaining the triumph of the ‘west’ over the ‘rest’ through the possession of ‘killer apps’. Killer apps are character traits like ‘work ethic’ and ‘science’ – things he claims Europeans inherently have in abundance over the rest of the world. 

He should have thought of a better name than ‘killer apps’ – unless he literally wants to refer to the millions globally that died at the hands of violent and aggressive European expansion. 

Ferguson is obsessed with western power and white supremacy (let’s not beat around the bush, this is what he thinks should be fundamentally acknowledged by history books). 

“Why, beginning around 1500, did a few small polities on the western end of the Eurasian landmass come to dominate the rest of the world?” he asks. He does not answer this question by looking at the world before 1500. Instead, he focuses on absolutely everything that happened afterwards. 

Before 1500 Chinese states ruled the world through science, mathematics and literature. Before them, Islamic states ruled the world through science, mathematics and literature. Before them came another Chinese dynasty, preceded by Barbarians, Romans, Greeks, Africans – all excelling in and advancing knowledge at their time. 

But this is not part of the big picture Ferguson thinks our young people should learn. Native Americans should be remembered for ‘killing a lot of buffalo’ and Britain should proud of ‘civilising’ the planet. Apparently it was not civil enough until we got involved.  

His attempts to create a big picture for people only serve to shrink the picture even further. He contracts history to fit his ‘us and them’ philosophy. His history draws a line in the sand that puts Europe on an ‘advanced’ side and everyone else on what he clearly considers to be the ‘backwards’ side. 

“I think it’s hard to make the case, which implicitly the left makes, that somehow the world would have been better off if the Europeans had stayed home”, he says. I have never heard anyone, left or right leaning, say people and nations should reject their natural urges to divide and conquer. Only Neo conservatives want to halt history. 

I have heard the left say that the costs of colonialism needs to be acknowledged. That the suffering whole of generations needs to be accounted for. That much inequality in the world can trace its roots, not down to western nations being better, but having an unrelenting sense of entitlement, an inability to recognise difference without wielding cruelty and an insatiable appetite for sugar

Ferguson is a self confessed ‘materialist’ and measures the benefits and disadvantages of everything by measuring what is tangible – what can be counted, catalogued and claimed as an asset. His intepretation of history refuses to incorporate humanity. Funny, that is exactly how the 17th century Europeans interpreted the world, too. I repeat: they had no humanity.

The study of history is plagued by an inability of people like Ferguson to study and interpret more than one kind of history.  It is ignorant to say Europeans are ‘better’ than Native Americans because now the former have been erradicated and replaced with new buildings, roads and iPhones. He neglects to ponder the fact that Europeans failed to build these in every country they plundered.

He also neglects proportionality; he dismisses civilisations that ruled for many centuries more than the British Empire managed or the United States is yet to manage. Neo conservatives love protesting that Africans were complicit in the slave trade as well as Europeans – it’s a trite arguement. Participation was never on the same scale (Europeans literally repopulated countries with blacks!) and without freedom or choice, it mostly through coercion and manipulation. His claims for European supremacy do not fit with the current economic and developmental trends of the BRIC nations.

If he could comprehend social and anthropological ideas I would ask him to ponder better questions than ‘why are Europeans so fantastic?’ My suggestions: 

If the British Empire was so great, why did it crumble?

If 18th century Liberals were so ‘liberal’ why did they scientifically conclude people of African descent were less than human?

If colonialists left countries in a better state than they were found in, why do we have to put up with Comic Relief every other year?

If China was left so far behind, why are American and British leaders now crawling to China, cap in hand? 

Countries can economically conquer the world and still be really thick, they can steal the wealth of other nations and call themselves ‘rich’ and they can start wars in a quest for peace. This is not power, it is  privilege. This the history that should be taught in schools, not facts and figures devoid of morality and debate.

“Something that’s seldom appreciated about me,” he declares, “is that I am in sympathy with a great deal of what Marx wrote, except that I’m on the side of the bourgeoisie”. What a wanker.

"I'm not racist, my girfriend is black!"

Advertisements
One Comment leave one →
  1. April 1, 2011 06:29

    When words copulate with words they produce more words and a ‘factual’ but non-fecund history. But the history so encamped often leaves out the moral questions of righteousness and the ‘historian’ assumes that material winner is morally right for it is said ‘victory itself is its own legitimacy.’ I rebut lock stock and barrel Niall Ferguson’s book for presenting a fabric of fabrication. I quote but little from my book ‘Mona Lisa does not smile anymore'(ISBN 978-81-8465-512-4)
    “The voyages of exploration were the dawn of Racialism and Colonialism. In the year 1600, the Indian economy amounted to 22.54 per cent of the world GDP, while Britain and Western Europe’s combined economies amounted to 21.82 per cent. By 1870, India’s share was down to 12.25 per cent, while in Western Europe it increased to 32.71%. At its prosperous best Mughal Empire produced 24.5% of world GDP in the year 1700. By the time British colonists occupied India and other nations their GDP rose to 23.8% of the world in 1870.” (page 137)

    “If I had to choose between an erudite Aristotle and an unknown ‘soulless’ black slave I would choose the latter. The ascendancy of the West was on a heap of bodies of slaves and trampled humanity through colonization.” (page 135). The complete lack of moral unease of subjugating so many and killing so many through slave shipping, indentured labour, Colonization and a Church that helped in these grand ventures of the West is what Ferguson’s book tries to white wash. The writings of likes of Ferguson are unabashed neocolonial drivel in the garb of (partisan) academics of the West. His arguments smack of blatant superiority of the West and in a subtle whisper of ‘Christianity’ and by implication inferiority of the Rest. But so much is historically dark and gory under the white loaded brush of West that Ferguson can not whitewash it, even with the biggest brush.

    My book is about the morals of the West when Portuguese put Indians on stake under Inquisition in Goa, it is about the Colonial Jizya tax imposed by the British on Hindus, it is about 30 million Indians who perished under British Colonialism engineered famines and above all my book is about Humanism of India against the atrocities of the West of the time on the Rest.
    My maternal grandmother Subhadra Devi valiantly fought against the Colonial Portuguese seeking their eviction from Goa. (Charles Dellon in his book Inquisition of Goa (1687) has this to say about Indian prisoners of Inquisition “Some of these poor wretches …were so pressed by hunger as to be compelled to devour their own excrements” (page 28) quoted by me in my book at page 113.Naill Ferguson dreams of replicating such a world. His thoughts will come to grief. No East or West should try to be the fascistic moral godfather of humanity and this applies to all–to emerging China and India, or West or USA.
    For has not the West killed 70 million in II World War and this alone should be the reason enough for West or any among the Rest to not talk of civilizational superiority. One has to be wary, for Hitler was not a person but was an idea that was sold to millions of innate superiority of some in relation to the Rest.
    The question is not of the West or the East it is of respecting the truth of the suffering of millions across continents.
    Truth is humble like Gandhi but lofty in ideal

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: