The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewPepe Escobar Archive
Empire of Clowns vs. Yellow Peril
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

It requires major suspension of disbelief to consider the G7, the self-described democracy’s most exclusive club, as relevant to the Raging Twenties. Real life dictates that even accounting for the inbuilt structural inequality of the current world system the G7’s economic output barely registers as 30% of the global total.

Cornwall was at best an embarrassing spectacle – complete with a mediocrity troupe impersonating “leaders” posing for masked elbow bump photo ops while on a private party with the 95-year-old Queen of England, everyone was maskless and merrily mingling about in an apotheosis of “shared values” and “human rights”.

Quarantine on arrival, masks enforced 24/7 and social distancing of course is only for the plebs.

The G7 final communique is the proverbial ocean littered with platitudes and promises. But it does contain a few nuggets. Starting with ‘Build Back Better’ – or B3 – showing up in the title. B3 is now official code for both The Great Reset and the New Green Deal.

Then there’s the Yellow Peril remixed, with the “our values” shock troops “calling on China to respect human rights and fundamental freedoms” with a special emphasis on Xinjiang and Hong Kong.

The story behind it was confirmed to me by a EU diplomatic source, a realist (yes, there are some in Brussels).

All hell broke loose inside the – exclusive – G7 room when the Anglo-American axis, backed by spineless Canada, tried to ramrod the EU-3 plus Japan into an explicit condemnation of China in the final communiqué over the absolute bogus concentration camp “evidence” in Xinjiang. In contrast to politicized accusations of “crimes against humanity”, the best analysis of what’s really going on in Xinjiang has been published by the Qiao collective.

Germany, France and Italy – Japan was nearly invisible – at least showed some spine. Internet was shut off to the room during the really harsh “dialogue”. Talk about realism – a true depiction of “leaders” vociferating inside a bubble.

The dispute essentially pitted Biden – actually his handlers – against Macron, who insisted that the EU-3 would not be dragged into the logic of a Cold War 2.0. That was something that Merkel and Mario ‘Goldman Sachs’ Draghi could easily agree upon.

In the end the divided G7 table chose to agree on a Build Back Better World – or B3W – “initiative” to counter-act the Chinese-driven Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).

Reset or else

The White House, predictably, pre-empted the final G7 communiqué. A statement later retracted from their website, replaced by the official communique, made sure that, “the United States and our G7 partners remains deeply concerned by the use of all forms of forced labor in global supply chains, including state-sponsored forced labor of vulnerable groups and minorities and supply chains of the agricultural, solar, and garment sectors – the main supply chains of concern in Xinjiang.”

“Forced labor” is the new mantra handily connecting the overlapping demonization of both Xinjiang and BRI. Xinjiang is the crucial hub connecting BRI to Central Asia and beyond. The new “forced labor” mantra paves the way for B3W to enter the arena as the “savior” human rights package.

Here we have a benign G7 “offering” the developing world a vague infrastructure plan that reflects their “values”, their “high standards” and their way of business, in contrast to the Yellow Peril’s trademark lack of transparency, horrible labor and environmental practices, and coercion methods.

Translation: after nearly 8 years since BRI, then named OBOR (One Belt, One Road) was announced by President Xi, and subsequently ignored and/or demonized 24/7, the Global South is supposed to be marveling at a vague “initiative” funded by private Western interests whose priority is short-term profit.

As if the Global South would fall for this remixed IMF/World Bank-style debt abyss. As if the “West” would have the vision, the appeal, the reach and the funds to make this scheme a real “alternative”.

There are zero details on how B3W will work, its priorities and where capital is coming from. B3W idealizers could do worse than learn from BRI itself, via Professor Wang Yiwei.

B3W has nothing to do with a trade/sustainable development strategy geared for the Global South. It’s an illusionist carrot dangling over those foolish enough to buy the notion of a world divided between “our values” and “autocracies”.

We’re back to the same old theme: armed with the arrogance of ignorance, the “West” has no idea how to understand Chinese values. Confirmation bias applies. Hence China as a “threat to the West”.

We’re the builders of choice

More ominously, B3W is yet another arm of the Great Reset.

To dig deeper into it, one could do worse than examining Building a Better World For All, by Mark Carney.

Carney is a uniquely positioned player: former governor of the Bank of England, UN Special Envoy on Climate Action and Finance, adviser to PM Boris “Global Britain” Johnson and Canadian PM Justin Trudeau, and a trustee of the World Economic Forum (WEF).

Translation: a major Great Reset, New Green Deal, B3W ideologue.

His book – which should be read in tandem with Herr Schwab’s opus on Covid-19 – preaches total control on personal freedoms as well as a reset on industry and corporate funding. Carney and Schwab treat Covid-19 as the perfect “opportunity” for the reset, whose benign, altruistic spin emphasizes a mere “regulation” of climate, business and social relations.

This Brave New Woke World brought to you by an alliance of technocrats and bankers – from the WEF and the UN to the handlers of hologram “Biden” – until recently seemed to be on a roll. But signs in the horizon reveal it’s far from a done deal.

Something uttered by B3W stalwart Tony Blair way back in January is quite an eye-opener: “It’s going to be a new world altogether… The sooner we grasp that and start to put in place the decisions [needed for a] deep impact over the coming years the better.”

So here Blair, in a Freudian slip, not only gives away the game (“deep impact over the coming years”, “new world altogether”) but also reveals his exasperation: the sheep are not being corralled as fast as necessary.

Well, Tony knows there’s always good old punishment: if you refuse the vaccine, you should remain under lockdown.

BBW, incidentally, accounts for a heterodox category of porn flics. B3W in the end may reveal itself as no more than toxic social porn.

(Republished from Asia Times by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: China, China/America, EU, Joe Biden, NATO, New Silk Road 
The China/America Series
Hide 92 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. G-String 7, all puppets of Jews

  2. Trinity says:

    They do look good in stripes.

    • Replies: @Malla
  3. tyrone says:

    Stab backs better.

  4. Another day,another dollar,and more BS from Escobar,i must admit the last bit of this drivel was strange ,you know about BBW,maybe its actually how Escobar spends most of his time,because it certainly isn’t spent doing the real job of journalism,if i was his boss I’d be reviewing his contract

    • Disagree: Ann Nonny Mouse
    • Troll: showmethereal
    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
  5. “our values”

    I am the lawyer of the G7 clowns and I can attest the following:

    1) 6 out of 7 members of this club are NATO members who have slaughtered millions of innocent people around the world since 1991. My clients are very blood thirsty and are hoping to add yellow blood to their new recipes.

    2) They created a bioweapon called “Spike Protein” that was inserted into a bat derived virus and is being tested as vaccine (mRNA) against the virus that they seeded in Wuhan.

    3) Between 1880 and 1996, one of my clients created residential schools for the native people and administered by Christian churches that slaughtered and buried 100s of thousands of kids in mass graves throughout the country.

    Above are some of my clients’ values.

    “autocracies”

    In totalitarian regimes you are not free, and you know it. In free democracies you are not free, and you don’t know it.

    Choose your poison!

    • Replies: @showmethereal
  6. Molip says:

    Then there’s the Yellow Peril remixed, with the “our values” shock troops “calling on China to respect human rights and fundamental freedoms” with a special emphasis on Xinjiang …

    The “liberal democratic values” the G7 espouse appear to include killing tens of thousands of innocents and displacing millions more in their war on terror.

    China re-educates people in its war on terror and the West has the gall to call this genocide.

    • Agree: showmethereal
  7. And why those seven countries do not use that enthusiasm and great projects with their own peoples and thus do not have to go out to bother in foreign lands.
    And for the sake of it, claiming that they are moved by their love of freedom and democracy is a joke in bad taste if history is reviewed.
    And fatality, in the charade number seven is shit.

    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
  8. @alwayswrite

    Escobar’s good repute only goes when poisonous pygmies like All Ways Racist attack him.

    • Replies: @alwayswrite
  9. @Liborio Guaso

    All seven represent corporatocracies in total charge of State power ie fascism by Mussolini’s definition. The USA, Canada, UK, France, Italy, Germany and Japan were all genocidal colonialists. The USA still rampages around the world like a rabid animated corpse, killing and destroying. Canada has just started digging up the bodies of hundreds of Indigenous children, murdered by the State in concentration camps. The UK’s record of pillage and genocide, world-wide, is unsurpassed. France was an enthusiastic colonial butcher, and Germany has just ‘apologised’ in mealy-mouthed fashion for the genocides in South-West Africa. Japan murdered thirty million Chinese in fifty years of aggression, invasion, genocide and biological warfare. Italy butchered its way across Libya and Abyssinia, but was a johnny-come-lately.
    And it is these rabid hyenas condemning China with outright LIES. Does Evil come any more diabolical than these creatures? With the running-chihuahua Austfailia yelping and snarling at their heels, and STILL locking up Indigenous men, women and children at the world’s highest rate, and stealing Indigenous children in numbers exceeding even the horrors of the ‘Stolen Generation’.

  10. Well, at least there wasn’t a Negro in sight, and thats an improvement.

    • Replies: @Jim Bob Lassiter
  11. Malla says:
    @Trinity

    They got the colour and setting wrong, should have been black stripes and they should have been in Maximum Security Prison.

    • Agree: Trinity
  12. Malla says:
    @Mulga Mumblebrain

    The USA, Canada, UK, France, Italy, Germany and Japan were all genocidal colonialists.

    What bullshit? Your Communists were the real genocidal colonialists. Killed 100 million people in one century. Nice. Fascism appeared as a response to the threat of these Communist butchers. And the Western banking elites funded all Communist movements. The Russian Revolution, Mao, Castro…you name it. The same Western elites who bomb the world.

    • Agree: GeeBee
    • Troll: Mulga Mumblebrain
  13. @Mulga Mumblebrain

    Great comment that came in from the mulga. Thanks!

    • Replies: @Malla
  14. Thanks Pepe,brilliant article as usual.

  15. @Mulga Mumblebrain

    Mulga why do you keep sounding like you’ve gone WOKE???

    Escobar isn’t a journalist,he’s a propaganda shill for unpleasant totalitarianism and Russian imperialism

    • Troll: Ann Nonny Mouse
    • Replies: @aon
    , @Moderate Rebel
  16. hillaire says:

    Not long now…. the precipice looms..

    has one ever seen such a collection of unappealing mediocrities, truly this is the final curtain call at the theatre of the absurd… old fat women and ungainly gamma males with dandruff ….

    chattering…

    passing comment on the assorted boorish miscreant hypocrites littering the cornish coast is like comparing cancers….

    thankfully though there is some good news..

    the gay 7 is terminal..

    when all that’s left to cover overt criminality and unfettered greed is fake moral posturing and totalitarian social engineering..

    it’s time to put the lid on the coffin…and bury it..

    NB: I would really like to see slow joe and micron fight to the death on a penzance beach.. now that would be fun..

  17. aon says:
    @alwayswrite

    Of course, journalists are just the ones who said that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and that Putin was paying the Taliban to kill American soldiers. All highly proven facts…
    And democracies are just regimes that serve American interests, like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Kazakhstan…

    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
  18. @alwayswrite

    Always WRONG.
    MI6 or MOSSAD or CIA troll.

    • Replies: @alwayswrite
  19. @Moderate Rebel

    Just a concerned citizen my friend,no need to go into conspiracy lala land there

    • Replies: @anon
  20. @Mulga Mumblebrain

    With the running-chihuahua Austfailia yelping and snarling at their heels…

    I disagree with this characterization – it gives Chihuahuas a bad name.

  21. Mefobills says:
    @Mulga Mumblebrain

    Mulga is prone to brain farts.

    Corporatocracy is the opposite of Mussolini’s definition of Fascism.

    The order in the hierarchy matters.

    Corporatocracies are corporations capitulated as head of the polity. Behind the corporations are self interested Oligarchs and bond holders….i.e. the string pullers.

    I’ve posted Mussolini’s definitions before. The Hierarchy is State power OVER corporations. The polity works to serve the general welfare, not oligarchy or bond holders.

    Fascism arose as a response to the excesses of finance capitalism and its child – communism.

  22. Somewhere around 2014, I asked an American fund manager what he thought about OBOR, and he told me it was propaganda that would ultimately deliver little of meaningful value.

    He’s employed by one of the oligarchs wholeheartedly on the B3W bandwagon. They’re currently asset-stripping the middle class of the Anglo-American world by driving masses into poverty and further debt serfdom. That is B3W in a nutshell.

    We’d all be well advised to resist the reset at all costs.

  23. Mefobills says:
    @Mefobills

    Mussolini on fascist hierarchy. The key statement is bolded below.

    https://www.unz.com/article/how-america-went-from-mom-and-pop-capitalism-to-techno-feudalism/#comment-4678499

    http://www.worldfuturefund.org/wffmaster/Reading/Germany/mussolini.htm

    We are, in other words, a state which controls all forces acting in nature. We control political forces, we control moral forces we control economic forces, therefore we are a full-blown Corporative state

    Corporative state is a term that does not equal Corporatocracy. They are two different things.

  24. @Carroll Price

    A lady after my heart, but you can bet your bloomers there was a Negro voice coming through Uncle Joe’s micro ear buds and running his chitlin’ hole.

  25. Nancy Pelosi just announced that she can’t wait any longer and the investigation of the people who visited the Peoples House on Jan. 6 must proceed. Now, when Eric Swalwell, democrat congressman California, was found out on having a Chinese spy as a girlfriend who is was getting, shall we say, “hot” with Pelosi said it would “not prevent him from doing his job”.

    Conclusion:

    Anyone who claims to care about the U.S. but supports the democratic party, is as bat shit crazy as the democratic party leaders are./ PEACE.

  26. @aon

    Or, as cane-toad Pompeo said, of his time at the CIA, ‘..we lied, we cheated, we stole..’, yet the presstitutes swallow the ‘intelligence community’s’ lies, EVERY TIME.Even a planarian worm cut in two has memory, but not the vermin of the Free Press.

  27. Containment is futile. Durocher covered this in January.

  28. @Mefobills

    Yes, Mefitic, but what of the case, as in the USA, where the corporations control State power, completely? What would ye call that? Kakistocracy does it for me. By the way, don’t knock cerebral flatulence-I just dislodged a fine wad of ear-wax, and delicious it was.

  29. G7 economic output 30% of world total. Canada shouldn’t even be there, as it has less than the population and GDP of California.

    The only way the so-called G7 could catch up is to strip mine the environment and create a serf economy for labor. This is B3W.

  30. anon[368] • Disclaimer says:
    @alwayswrite

    Your rants make conspiracy look kosher, constitutional, self-evident , god-given ,and pure unvarnished truth man. It does.

    1- US seen as global threat to democracy that Russia or China, global poll finds- Guardian(UK) May 5,2021

    2-In January ,Vladimir Norov former foreign minister of Uzbekistan and current ben real secretary of SCO blamed USA for shifting its ISIS fighters from Syria to Afghanistan in a delivered speech to a policy research institute of Pakistan.

    * I guess one is lucky that nobody that Hillary knew died so far from this reverse rat line

    3 Col Wilkerson- We use terrorism as an excuse to be [in] places or to do things when in fact ,it has little to do with terrorism and everything to do with great power ,economics, and the finances .. 4th May ,2017 The Real News network.

    4 USA needs to stay in Afghanistan to confront China .In case we decide to confront China over Taiwan ,we need to have power to pummel China from Western flank- paraphrasing Mike Waltz (GOP Congressman) . Fox News ,May 6th 2021

    5

    • Replies: @alwayswrite
  31. @anon

    ….and 5 ?????

    Well no need to bother because all your go to people on your little list are mad ,biased, or shit stirring lefty idiots

    The Guardian thing is interesting though as its a report is about an organisation with a chairman who was former NATO boss!

    The Guardian report is a trojan horse to help maintain democracy as a human right,in other words a weapon to attack Russia and China,spreading all those international ‘ norms’

    I do wish you folks would wake up and understand whats happening,its like the whole LGBT thing,its being weaponized to attack recalcitrant countries,built into trade agreement and international treaties

    All of this stuff is to maintain the status quo

    • Replies: @anon
  32. Malla says:
    @Ann Nonny Mouse

    How is that a great comment? USA (Wall Street) destroyed all the European + Japanese Empires, Third Reich, fascist states while funded Communist movements.
    Sure they also repressed some Communist movements when it suited them just like they did with Islamic movements (created, supported and destroyed).

  33. Malla says:
    @Mulga Mumblebrain

    The USA, Canada, UK, France, Italy, Germany and Japan were all genocidal colonialists.

    Speaks the idiot.

    https://www.standardmedia.co.ke/kenya/article/2000144722/freedom-and-independence-are-not-synonymous

    Senior Chief Kasina at Migwani made plain his views, and probably those of most of the older generation of Akamba, at the end of my baraza at Migwani as he delivered a wringing endorsement of Britain’s 60 odd years of running Kenya. Several younger men had put points to me after I had spoken, fair enough points in their way, but considered impertinent by Kasina. Finally he lost his patience and leapt up beside me, and, in his curiously high pitched voice, said: “Do you know what Uhuru is? I’ll tell you what Uhuru is. When I was young there were those of the Akamba who still remembered Arab slave raiders. The British came and stopped that. I remember as a boy the Maasai raiding our land to try to take our cattle. Then the British came and stopped the tribes from fighting each other. The Kikuyu, Embu, and Meru combined and caused the barbarous Mau Mau rebellion. The British stopped that. The British brought us education, showed us how to improve the use of our land, brought us water supplies, and much else. What did we do for the British? We gave them Askaris for the KAR and the Kenya police. We fought for them as our friends in their wars. We can be proud of that. Today we have peace and improving conditions. Do you see that? (pointing at the Union Jack flying above his office). That is Uhuru!”

    Word. Dats rite.

    • Replies: @JohnnyWalker123
    , @anon
    , @Malla
  34. Malla says:
    @Mulga Mumblebrain

    Boohoo Mulgi Mumblebrain

    https://www.indiatoday.in/magazine/nation/story/19970818-indians-profoundly-dissatisfied-with-politics-but-have-touching-faith-in-democracy-poll-831925-1997-08-18
    Politicians are perceived as deceitful and ineffective, and there is lack of confidence in the police and administration. Even the system of caste-based reservations is seen as iniquitous and unworthy. The despair over the present has even led to a growing nostalgia for the efficacy of the British Raj.
    According to a poll, the SAME number of Indians in 1997 thought law and order was worse in India compared to the British as those who thought law and order was better (36%)
    Or put another way, 36% thought the British were better, 36% worse, and 11% the same!
    The most relevant quote in the paper
    More important, even British rule, against which Indians fought doggedly, does not seem un-appetising. For the above – 60s – those who actually lived under the Raj – the past was certainly more peaceful and less turbulent than the present.

    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
  35. @Malla

    • Replies: @Malla
  36. Brilliant, Pepe, just brilliant.

    The best geopolitical analyst on the planet.

    Acumen, style, wit, erudition.

    Stay safe, and keep pulling back the curtain.

  37. anon[123] • Disclaimer says:
    @alwayswrite

    5 is the reversal of Teddy Roosevelt’s advice
    :carry a big stick but speak softly.

    Now USA speaks violently enjoying each alphabet of the words ,verses and chapters while the stick is broken, mutilated, and the handle is missing .

    • Replies: @antibeast
  38. Anon[322] • Disclaimer says:

    There is something brewing in Mynamar . There is no return to status ante quo. The country will stay paralyzed with public resistance , ethnic challenges ,and suspension of any meaningful cross border economic activities . The country’s integrity might suffer if military loses . Ethnic groups in north , east , west will demand autonomy or independence .

    India and China both have a big problem . India will face ethnic rebellion on north eastern states who share ethnic religious and linguistic roots with the western states of Mynamar .
    China’s headache is BRI which might at worst get delayed .

    Siding with USA ,India is now trying to extricate itself from anti -Junta position .But the dangerous optic is not lost in Mynamar .

    Bangladeshi will benefit by reaching out to China . Best would be if China creates its own base in that country among various segments – military , police , academic and business groups .

    China is definitely raking up some bad video footage in S E Asian countries .
    But the new findings by the reality based diplomats is the losing appeal of USA across Asia and reorientation to Chinese way of diplomacy and economic platforms .

    USA can’t win Neither UK air Israel alone or in combination .

    It’s good for the world .

    Now it seems that the lies used and promoted by McCain , Trump, Fox , CNN , GOP , Democrats and neocons about Russia and China have influenced some westerns public into believing those disinformation and half truths including the thoughts that China’s rise was due to American honesty , absent-mindedness , and corporate opportunism .

    America could have delayed China development at best by 5-10 years if USA did not outsource . In that case , USA would have remained stuck into 1970 economically and militarily also . We wouldn’t have faced what has transpired on the world stage since 1980. Israel would have become a pariah even among the Evangelical and aid would have stopped years ago .

    West is now trying to understand from left and from right : How could we end up where we have ! It could as well consult astrology . Some has done that by blaming black and Mexican .

    • Replies: @antibeast
  39. anon[340] • Disclaimer says:
    @Malla

    There are Afghn who think USA has brought peace , porpseroty ,freedom ,and hope to Afgahistan after a gap of 40 years and now therse are at risk of getting vaporzied by Taliban .
    Soem Africans from Kenya think alomg same bamdwidth shaped by the legitimizing forces of the Euroepans. Theu have even some famous peopel certufying the factoid .

    Even the native Mexicans were taught how they were delivered by the Spaniards from child scrafice and ritualistuc cannibalism. There is some truth to these assertions and it might find resonance in the thought process of the Afgan translators and Kenyan tribesmen .
    May be Pussyrioter in Moscow should take a leaf out of it and try to chant : freedom ,freedom, and no to slavery imposed by revanchism of Russia . What did happen again from 1990 to 1998 in Russia ? USA borught old British values that was suspended by some years of unfirtunate turmoil . Does the Irish still speak the alnguage tahtbthey used to some few hundred years back ? Did famine happen in Ireland ? I guess that is the projection of Indians who have not still been fulllyn edcuated about the past famine and mass stravation before British had showed up .

    May be Blacks were better off under Botha government of S Africa. and Rhodesia has started yeraning after that name .

  40. Malla says:

    There are Afghn who think USA has brought peace , porpseroty ,freedom ,and hope to Afgahistan after a gap of 40 years and now therse are at risk of getting vaporzied by Taliban .

    If you compare shitty American rule in Afghanistan to British rule in India or Kenya, you are smoking weed. Wall Street Empire is a disaster as it was meant to be. American rule in Philippines and Haiti before WW2 were good. After WW2, American Empire became disaster Empire.

    USA borught old British values that was suspended by some years of unfirtunate turmoil .

    USA today is nothing like British values. The Cultural Marxist Murican elites has done everything to destroy traditional Western culture. Promoting invade the World and invite the World. A culture of gangsta rap and twerk, globo-homo.

    What did happen again from 1990 to 1998 in Russia ?

    Looting of ex Soviet world by leftist first “black” President Clinton with some Jewish friends like Larry Summers.

    I guess that is the projection of Indians who have not still been fulllyn edcuated about the past famine and mass stravation before British had showed up .

    This bullshit myth needs to stop. Famines before the British showed up were far worse and more frequent. Indeed it was the British Raj which started to bring this phenomenon under control by building railways and irrigation projects and by having famine codes and famine Commissions.

    May be Blacks were better off under Botha government of S Africa. and Rhodesia has started yeraning after that name .

    Actually they were.

    Even Julias Malema from revolutionary EFF (Economic Freedom Front) has to admit from frustration that healthcare by the earlier National Government (Apartheid) was better than the Marxist ANC regime.

    • Troll: Mulga Mumblebrain
    • Replies: @anon
  41. anon[352] • Disclaimer says:
    @Malla

    In Mike Davis’ book Late Victorian Holocausts: El Niño Famines and the Making of the Third World, he argued that “Mogul India was generally free of famine until the 1770s. There is considerable evidence, moreover, that in pre-British India before the creation of a railroad-girded national market in grain, village-level food reserves were larger, patrimonial welfare more widespread, and grain prices in surplus areas better insulated against speculation.” The Mogul state “regarded the protection of the peasant as an essential obligation,” relying on “a quartet of fundamental policies—embargos on food exports, antispeculative price regulation, tax relief and distribution of free food without a forced-labor counterpart—that were an anathema to later British Utilitarians.” The Marathas, another major pre-British power in India, forced local elites to feed the hungry during famines. The British were horrified, calling this the “enforced charity of hundreds of rich men.” The Sikh Empire ruled in Punjab, where many of the protesting farmers are from. Its rulers enacted land reforms even while fighting the Mughals and the British.

    • Replies: @Malla
  42. anon[352] • Disclaimer says:

    Davis’ book highlights that “[a]lthough the British insisted that they had rescued India from ‘timeless hunger,’ more than one [district] official was jolted when Indian nationalists quoted from an 1878 study published in the prestigious Journal of the Statistical Society that contrasted 31 serious famines in 120 years of British rule against only 17 recorded famines in the entire previous two millennia.” The British imposed new humiliations: “Requiring the poor to work for relief, a practice begun in 1866 in Bengal under the influence of the Victorian Poor Law, was in flat contradiction to the Bengali premise that food should be given ungrudgingly, as a father gives food to his children.”

    As H.H. Khondker noted, British writer W.H. Moreland in the 1923 book From Akbar to Aurangzeb “made a distinction between” “work famines” under British imperialism and precolonial “food famines.” During the pre-imperialism period, people starved because of actual food shortages. Under imperialism, people starved because they were poor, had no employment, and therefore couldn’t be fed under a Victorian morality that said you couldn’t get something for nothing”

    An Economist article published in 1883, which was quoted in Dan Morgan’s 1979 book Merchants of Grain: The Power and Profits of the Five Giant Companies at the Center of the World’s Food Supply–Mass death through starvation was the price of enabling the British Empire to build a truly global, militarized economy in grain, under which agriculture in all reaches of the globe could serve imperial designs and food itself could become a weapon. Food insecurity for the colonies purchased food security for the metropole.
    German poet and playwright Bertolt Brecht once wrote, “Famines do not simply occur; they are organized by the grain trade.”

  43. Malla says:
    @anon

    Mike Davis is one of the biggest lying piece of Marxist shit, I have ever come across. He blatantly lies. How can someone lie so blatently is beyond me.

    Third World, he argued that “Mogul India was generally free of famine until the 1770s.

    Mike Davies is a lying monkey. More on this stupid claim later.

    prestigious Journal of the Statistical Society that contrasted 31 serious famines in 120 years of British rule against only 17 recorded famines in the entire previous two millennia.”

    FAMINES IN THE INDIAN SUBCONTINENT, 1500 to 1767 with historical references.
    http://www.vinlandmap.info/india-famine/

    It is the most latest updated information. The fact is before the Europeans came, records were not well kept. But famines have been happening In India way before the British came, it were the British who stopped famine in India.

    From 1500 AD to 1700 AD we have records of food carcity and famine all these years
    1509, 1520, 1521, 1525, + 1526, 1527, 1528, 1539, 1540 to 1542, 1544, 1550, 1555-1556, 1557
    1550-ish, 1551 1552 1553 1554 1555 + 1556 1557 1558 1559, 1564, 1572 – 1573,1574-5, 1575, 1576, 1577, 1578, 1579, 1582+3, 1583,1585 etc. 1586 +7 1587, 1588, 1590, 1591, 1595, + 1596-8, 1597 + 1598, 1607-9, 1613, 1614 + 1615-6, 1616 + 1617, 1618, 1619, 1620s, 1622

    1626, 1628, 1629, 1630, 1631, 1632, 1634, 1635 1636, 1638, 1640, 1641 or 2, 1642, 1644, 1646-8 1647, 1648 +9, 1649, 1650-1, 1651, 1658-61, 1659, + 1660-1, 1661 1662-3, 1663, + 1664, 1665, 1668, 1669-70, 1670-71, 1671, + 1672-3, 1673, + 1674, + 1675, 1677, 1678, + 1679, 1681, 1682, 1684, 1685, + 1686, to 1687-9, 1688, + 1689, 1690, 1694, + 1695-6, 1696, + 1697, 1698, 1699-1700.

    From 1700 AD to 1757 AD (Battle of Plassey when the British took nominal control of Bengal there have been records of famines or food scarcity in some part of India EVERY YEAR except 1714, 1716 and 1726. Let that sink in. Out of 56 years from 1700 to 1756 (pre-British period) there have been food scarcity or famine recorded in India for 53 years!!.

  44. Malla says:
    @anon

    The Mogul state “regarded the protection of the peasant as an essential obligation,” relying on “a quartet of fundamental policies—embargos on food exports, antispeculative price regulation, tax relief and distribution of free food without a forced-labor counterpart—that were an anathema to later British Utilitarians.” The Marathas, another major pre-British power in India, forced local elites to feed the hungry during famines

    LOL LOL LOL What bullshit? What blatant lies!!
    The Tughlaq Dynasty under Muhammad bin Tughluq held power during the famine centered on Delhi in 1335–42. The sultanate offered no relief to the starving residents of Delhi during this famine. Pre-colonial famines in the Deccan included the Damajipant famine of 1460 and the famines starting in 1520 and 1629. The Damajipant famine is said to have caused ruin both in the northern and southern parts of the Deccan. The 1629-32 famine in the Deccan and Gujarat, was one of the greatest in India’s history. In the first 10 months of 1631 an estimated 3 million perished in Gujarat and one million in the Deccan. Eventually the famine killed not only the poor but the rich as well. More famines hit the Deccan in 1655, 1682 and 1884. Another famine in 1702–1704 killed over two million people.

    Mughal officials took no long term measures to fight famines in Kashmir, and the land tax system of Mughal India often contributed to the scale of famines by depriving Indian peasants of much of their harvest in the good years, denying them the opportunity to build up stocks.

    During Mughal Emperor Shah Jahan’s reign, we had the appalling famine of 1630-1631. In India a failure of the seasonal rains had always meant famine, in the precise sense of a deficiency of food throughout the area affected. From time to time the Moslem chroniclers record the horrors of famine in one region or another, but their descriptions are rhetorical rather than precise, and now for the first time we are in a position to check their rhetoric by the observations of Europeans on the spot. The monsoon of 1630 failed almost completely over a tract comprising Gujarat and Ahmadnagar, with portions of Bijapur and Golconda, and before the end of the year the local stock of food was exhausted. Supplies were available elsewhere, but it would have been impossible to bring them to the heart of the affected region, because transport animals need food and water along their routes, while the country was bare of grass, and the streams and ponds were dry. The choice before the population thus lay, as the chronicles show it always lay, between flight and starvation. The former alternative was chosen by the more energetic, and the country was largely depopulated ; many of those who remained died of starvation, sometimes evaded by suicide, or postponed by robbery and by cannibalism. The official record of the reign tells us that ‘ men began to devour each other, and the flesh of a son was preferred to his love ’ ; a Dutch merchant, who lived through the calamity, noted that ‘ men lying in the street, not yet dead, were cut up by others, and men fed on living men, so that even in the streets, and still more on road journeys, men ran great danger of being murdered and eaten.’

    The famine of 1631 does not stand by itself. The sources of information are very incomplete, but we know that famine conditions prevailed with varying intensity in one part of India or another in 1636, in 1643, in 1645, in 1646, in 1648, in 1650, in 1659, and, over an exceptionally wide area, in 1661. The extent and intensity of the calamity of 1631 stand out ; but the record we have given forbids us to think of famine as something outside the ordinary experience of the time. We must regard it rather as a spectre in the background, always visible to peasants, labourers and artisans, and coming forward from time to time to wreck the social and economic life of one region or another.

    An Indian account of what is now the western portion of the United Provinces (where my ancestors come from) , written about the year 1788, tells of the inhuman measures taken to extract money from the peasants in a period of famine by the officers of Hindu Maratha King Mahadji Scindhia, who then dominated that region. One of his tax-collectors, we read, ‘ tied rags to the bodies of the rich and poor alike, and, pouring oil on them, set them on fire. . . . Crowded rows of men arc seen streaming from one place to another in search of food. Famine and robbery have enhanced their agony, and a third evil, viz., Mahadji’s tax-collectors, has now been added to the other two.’

  45. Malla says:
    @anon

    Compare and Contrast Pre-British with British period in India.
    Pre-British period of India
    From
    Travels in the Mogul Empire, François Bernier, Oxford University Press, 1916, p. 226-7, 230.

    [MORE]

    Bengal, he thinks probably “the finest and most fruitful country in the world.” But of the other regions François Bernier writes “As the ground is seldom tilled otherwise than by compulsion, and as no person is found willing and able to repair the ditches and canals for the conveyance of water, it happens that the whole country is badly cultivated, and a great part rendered unproductive from the want of irrigation»…The peasant cannot avoid asking himself this question: “Why should I toil for a tyrant who may come tomorrow and lay his rapacious hands upon all I possess and value?”…The Governors and revenue contractors, on their part reason in this manner: “Why should the neglected state of this land create uneasiness in our minds?
    and why should we expend our own money and time to render it fruitful? We may be deprived of it in a single moment and our exertion would benefit neither ourselves nor our children. Let us draw from the soil all the money we can, though the peasant should starve or abscond, and we should leave it, when commanded to quit, a dreary wilderness.”

    “Evul”British Period of India
    http://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/irrigation/irrigation-development-in-india-during-british-rule/60643
    Irrigation Development in India During British Rule

    During British rule, the canals of Ancient India were subsequently remodeled, renovated and converted into perennial canals in the first half of the nineteenth century during the British rule. This was followed by a large number of diversion works with extensive canal systems. Important among them are the Upper Ganga Canal, the Upper Bari-Doab Canal, the Godavari delta system, the Krishna delta system, the Sirhind canal on the Sutlej River which were constructed towards the middle of the nineteenth century.
    Then started an era of storage reservoirs. The storage dams like the Khadakwasala near Pune with the Mutha canal system and the Periyar dam in the erstwhile Travancore State to divert the west flowing Periyar waters towards the east were constructed in the later half of the nineteenth century.

    During the closing decades of the nineteenth century the country was stalked by successive famines. It led to setting up of a series of Famine Commissions. As a follow up, schemes like the Betwa canal in Uttar Pradesh, the Nira left bank canal in Maharashtra and the Rushikulya system in Orissa were executed.

    At the turn of the twentieth century First Irrigation Commission was set up to take stock of the existing irrigation facility and to make recommendations for its furtherance. As a result of the findings of the Irrigation Commission special attention was given to the development of irrigation in the country.

    The Godavari canal, the Pravara canal and the Nira right bank canal in Maharashtra, the Sarda canal in Uttar Pradesh and the Gang canal in Rajasthan were some of the important works constructed in the pre-independence period of the twentieth century…….

    ALSO

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punjab_Canal_Colonies

    The Punjab Canal Colonies is the name given to parts of western Punjab which were brought under cultivation through the construction of canals and agricultural colonisation during the British Raj. Between 1885 and 1940, nine canal colonies were created in the inter-fluvial tracts east of the Beas and Sutlej and west of the Jhelum rivers. The Punjab underwent an agricultural revolution as arid subsistence production was replaced by the commercialised production of huge amounts of wheat, cotton and sugar.[1] In total, over one million Punjabis settled in the new colonies, relieving demographic pressures in central Punjab.[2]

    …snip….

    In the 19th century, the vast majority of the population was settled in the fertile regions of central and eastern Punjab. In the western Punjab rainfall was too low for large scale agriculture and resulting in large tracts of barren land.[3] Most of this land had been assigned as Crown land and lay unused.[5] In the 1880s the British Punjab administration of Charles Umpherston Aitchison began the process of engineering a vast irrigation scheme in the mostly uninhabited wastelands. The two stated motives for the project were:[6]

    To relieve the pressure of population upon the land in those districts of the Province where the agricultural population has already reached or is fast approaching the limit which the land available to agriculture can support and to colonise the area in question with well-to-do yeomen of the best class of agriculturists, who will cultivate their own holdings with the aid of their families and the usual menials, but as much as possible without the aid of tenants, and will constitute healthy agricultural communities of the best Punjab type.

    The British Indian government hoped to “create villages of a type superior in comfort and civilisation to anything which had previously existed in the Punjab”,[7] which in turn would increase productivity.[8] This increased productivity would then boost revenues for the government. To finance this ambitious project, capital was raised through the sale of governmental bonds in Britain, offering investors the chance to benefit from the interest charges remitted by the provincial government.[9]

    …snip….

    To improve the economic position and standard of living amongst Punjabi agriculturalists, the British Indian government had passed a series of farmer friendly measures. The Punjab Land Alienation Act, 1900 removed the zamindar’s right to sell or mortgage his land without the approval of the district officer. These officers usually only approved a zamindar’s request if he belonged to a tribe designated as an agricultural tribe by the government. The restrictions were designed to halt the flow of land outside of the agricultural community, and prevent further indebtedness towards moneylenders by curtailing cultivator’s credit. Although the Act drew protests from the commercial tribes and money-lenders, they were unable to garner support from the cultivators whose interests had been protected. In the following years, encouraged by the lack of agitation further farmer friendly measures were introduced by the British Indian Government, such as the Punjab Pre-Emption Act which stated agriculturalists had first claim on any land sold by a villager.[4]

    …snip….

    Prior to the establishment of the colonies, many farmers in the Punjab were in debt to money-lenders. However, with the increased incomes in the colonies, the proportion of debt owed to traditional money-lenders was considerably less than in other non-colony areas.[57] Furthermore, by obtaining the grants at nominal prices, the settlers were able to enjoy the vast capital appreciation of their land as it grew increasingly productive.

    • Replies: @Malla
  46. Malla says:
    @Malla

    BTW I just remembered from the Largest irrigation project in the World in British Raj India to help Punjabi farmers, the French Empire had a huge irrigation project in Mali to develop that region. One of the largest irrigation schemes in Africa.

    https://theconversation.com/big-irrigation-projects-in-africa-have-failed-to-deliver-whats-needed-next-160360?
    “In 1938, French colonial authorities in what is today Mali started on an ambitious infrastructure plan to transform the desert into an area of agricultural production. Water was diverted from the Niger River through a canal system to enable irrigation on over one million hectares of fertile land. Eventually covering over 100,000 hectares, this project is still one of the largest irrigation schemes in Africa
    The Malian project, known as “Office Du Niger”, has had a profound influence on agricultural water management and planning across Africa since the mid-20th century. By the 1960s African governments saw it as a model for rural development.”

  47. Malla says:
    @Malla

    What happened in East Africa happened in West Africa too in the Glorious British Empire.

    from the book ‘Equality, The Third World, and Economic Delusion’ by P.T.Bauer

  48. antibeast says:
    @anon

    Now USA speaks violently enjoying each alphabet of the words ,verses and chapters while the stick is broken, mutilated, and the handle is missing.

    The USA still has the biggest swords on the planet but the world wants plowshares not swords. The USA is now saying that China is a ‘threat’ to world peace, progress and prosperity because China is offering plowshares not swords to the world.

    • Agree: nosquat loquat
    • Thanks: showmethereal
  49. antibeast says:
    @Anon

    China’s rise was due to American honesty, absent-mindedness, and corporate opportunism.

    China’s rise was due to Chinese discipline, hard-work and competence while America’s decline was due to American ill-discipline, laziness and incompetence. And it’s not just China that is ‘rising’ but the entire non-Western World which has narrowed its economic, technological, industrial and military gap with the Western World. Those growth trends will continue until that gap disappears altogether sometime before 2050.

    The non-Western World has the so-called ‘Late-Comer’s Advantage’ of developing countries which allows them to ‘leap-frog’ the developed countries in the Western World by building up their infrastructure using the latest and greatest technologies of the 21st century instead of being stuck with legacy infrastructure built with obsolete technologies of the 20th century. A good example of this phenomenon is the telecommunications industry which allows developing countries to lay down fiber-optic cabling instead of copper-cabling. Another example is the adoption of smartphones running over 4G networks which has spurred all kinds of mobile Internet startups in the non-Western World. The biggest Fintech/e-commerce startups today can be found in the non-Western World as their new Internet-based business models disrupt the industry structure of old brick-and-mortar establishments. As Jack Ma once said: e-commerce in the USA (and the West) is like deserts while e-commerce in China (and the non-West) is like the main course. Same with mobile payments using smartphones which has already seen mass adoption in the non-West but has yet to make inroads in the West.

    • Replies: @Malla
  50. @anon

    The rations provided by the English for forced labour for famine victims were less in caloric terms than those granted prisoners in Belsen, by the Nazis.

    • Replies: @Malla
  51. @Malla

    Sixty years ago was 1961, fourteen years after England left India, after centuries of the greatest looting in history, leaving behind the hideous Chaos of Partition. Any India with any, childish, recollection of English rule would be above 80. And, if they saw English rule as good, suffering from dementia.

    • Replies: @Malla
    , @Malla
  52. Malla says:
    @Mulga Mumblebrain

    Sixty years ago was 1961

    The article is from 1997.

    And, if they saw English rule as good, suffering from dementia.

    Why so? British Empire brought a lot of good things. How can it be dementia? It is common sense.

    greatest looting in history

    what rubbish? I have proven this is bullshit several times yet you keep jabbering this nonsense. Taxation during British rule was far lower then the earlier Mughal and Maratha rule. Indians were one of the least taxed people on Earth per capita obviously because the people were poor due to exploitation of earlier Marathas and Mughals. When the British left India, India was one of the biggest creditor nations on earth while Britain after the war, one of the biggest debtor nations.

  53. Malla says:
    @antibeast

    while America’s decline was due to American ill-discipline, laziness and incompetence.

    The deterioration started in the 60s but accelerated after the 80s. Cultural deterioration eventually affects everything. From being a lady & wife to a salaried man to twerking butt to thugs LOL. It was a long slide through the decades.

    The non-Western World has the so-called ‘Late-Comer’s Advantage’ of developing countries which allows them to ‘leap-frog’ the developed countries in the Western World by building up their infrastructure using the latest and greatest technologies o

    Very good point. Also can learn from mistakes made by the first world too. More case studies to look at. Late development has its advantages.

    • Replies: @antibeast
  54. Malla says:
    @Mulga Mumblebrain

    forced labour

    Here comes more crackpot theories by crackpot Mulgi. Forced labour? There were free loaders coming to take free food even if they had food and those who really needed food was not getting it. Shit like that happens in Indian Subcontinent even today. If the government gives anything free, even rich people go and take it. There were even cases of women buying children to take more food for themselves and get ahead in line during those famines during the Raj.
    Thus to keep freeloaders away, there was labour done, not to shine Englishmen’s shoes and build houses for the rich but to repair irrigation tanks, drainage etc..
    Problem: Freeloaders coming. If food given in return for work, freeloaders would run away. Only the needy would get food. And this is only for able bodies men and women. The sick, children, old people were not worked. There were strict orders on this. Those who could not come for voluntary labour for food but were truly needy were provided food in their houses. Many a times those of lower castes could not approach, so separate provisions had to be made for them.
    Opportunity: Because of drought, tanks are empty, drainage are dry. What better time to repair them before the rain appears. This is after all community work. So that is why labour was used, to keep greedy free-loaders off and to get the repairing of irrigation systems of villages which are dry in one go. Food in return of work. Not forced labour.
    As far as giving low calorific stuff, that is again Marxist propaganda. During the famine in Madras and Bombay/Mysore, when Sir Temple followed Viceroy’s Lord Lytton’s advice to keep food provisions low (and keep free-loaders off) less people died. When Sir Temple left Madras, the provincial administration increased the food allowance attracting freeloaders in crowds and thus many truly needy people got trampled upon. We are dealing with huge populations here. And the mortality actually increased, so much that Lord Lytton had to personally visit Madras state. i.e. the Supreme Government had to intervene as it deemed that the Madras Provincial Government had failed. But when Lord Lytton went in many villages, the rains finally fell and the villagers considered Lord Lytton a good omen.
    In Bombay province/Mysore region, where this advise of low rations was maintained, there was far less mortality as the free loaders were not attracted. Your Marxist lying crackpot childish professors in their AC rooms could not run a village in a Third World country. They would be eaten alive. this explains why all those wokes are so childish, people need experience on the ground to handle problems, not reading crackpot books in AC rooms.

  55. Malla says:
    @anon

    Mass death through starvation was the price of enabling the British Empire to build a truly global, militarized economy in grain, under which agriculture in all reaches of the globe could serve imperial designs and food itself could become a weapon.

    More crackpot leftist bullshit. Most of that export of food was done by private traders both Indian and Europeans, not the Government of India, a private trade, which the Government did not want to touch and the reason is explained below. The Government of India (British Raj) purchased its own grain for famines while allowing private trade to continue. Why? One British parliament debate on a famine in Bengal will illuminate us.

    https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/commons/1876/apr/28/india-the-bengal-famine-motion-for-a
    INDIA—THE BENGAL FAMINE.—MOTION FOR A SELECT COMMITTEE.
    HC Deb 28 April 1876 vol 228 cc1838-77
    British Parliamanet House of Commons Debate on the Bengal Famine

    LORD GEORGE HAMILTON:
    “The greatest difficulty lay in the inaccessibility of this district, which was accessible only from the south, and it contained very few Government officials to cope with the impending famine. The statements made by the Secretary for India in the other House in some measure re-assured public opinion, but very great anxiety was still manifested, and for the next two months a perfect torrent of questions was showered upon him (Lord George Hamilton) with the view to see if he could give any further information as to the intentions of the Indian Government. The Government were pressed to increase their exertions and enlarge their expenditure, and that expenditure was incurred quite as much with the sanction and at the request of the House as the Government. Now what was the policy of Lord Northbrook? He saw that the Famine threatened to attain dimensions which the Indian Government unaided could not hope successfully to meet, and it was accordingly desirable not to deter private traders from assisting the Government. Lord Northbrook was of opinion that if at the commencement of the Famine he had stopped the export of rice, such a measure would, to a certain extent, have paralyzed private trade, and if this had been done it would have been very difficult to rely on private traders for assistance. One of the tests, and the greatest, of the soundness of Lord North- brook’s policy was, that he obtained a great deal more assistance from private traders than had been anticipated, and for that reason alone the preparations of the Indian Government were, as it ultimately proved, in excess of the requirements of the case. The result of the operations of Lord Northbrook was that the Indian Government obtained one of the most complete successes on record. So complete, indeed, was its success that a certain number of persons now doubted whether there was any Famine at all.”

  56. Malla says:
    @anon

    LORD GEORGE HAMILTON further says:
    The success of Lord North- brook’s policy was soon demonstrated, the largest harvest known for many years was gathered in the Punjab, and nearly the whole of this surplus grain was sent down to the districts suffering from scarcity. On the other hand, Lord Northbrook sent up vast quantities of food from Calcutta, and thus there were two continuous streams of supply poured into the famine-stricken districts; one from the North-West, the result of private enterprize, another from the South-East, being the food purchased from Burmah and elsewhere by the Government. That the preparations of the Indian Government were somewhat in excess of the necessity was frankly admitted by them. The amount of grain which had been purchased was 470,000 tons; but 260,000 tons of this were stored in three districts alone, and of this 182,000 tons were consumed in September alone. The only reason why the Government efforts had been in excess of the requirements was that private trade had so much expanded itself. It should be recollected that in making preparations to deal with the Famine it was absolutely essential that the grain should be stored in certain places, and during that period of the year when transportation could go on. The measures that had been taken had not only prevented the extent of mortality which must otherwise have occurred, but the general productive power of the country had not been allowed to deteriorate, and there was no reason to believe that any demoralization had resulted from the relief that had been administered. It was necessary that the Indian Government should run a certain amount of risk in anticipating the requirements of the Famine. If they had not taken the course which they did, they would have exposed themselves to the danger of not being able to supplement the probable deficiencies of private trade. Preparations were made in excess of the Famine, but that excess was owing to circumstances which no one could have forseen. The hon. Member for Tynemouth had stated that nobody knew what became of the grain; but a book which was published in 1874 gave full and elaborate information on that subject. It stated exactly the quantity of the grain and the mode in which it was distributed. The hon. Member further said that only a very limited number of persons were in receipt of relief from the Government. Half a million, he (Lord George Hamilton) thought, was the number mentioned by the hon. Gentleman. Well, he (Lord George Hamilton) had Sir Richard Temple’s Report in his hand, and he found that the number of persons who were in receipt of relief on the 15th of August was upwards of 4,000,000. Then the House had been told that the arrangements as to transport were so defective that certain persons made large fortunes out of contracts with the Government. Well, of course, they made money. Did any one suppose that any war broke out without a certain number of unscrupulous persons making profit out of the Government, and why should we expect that in a case of famine such persons would not avail themselves of the opportunity of making profit out of the Government? The hon. Gentleman also said that £500,000 had been advanced without voucher. What Sir Richard Temple said about the advance was, that he did not know how many persons derived subsistence from it, which was a very different thing from saying the money had been advanced without voucher. An hon. Gentleman said the wages paid by the Government in the Famine district were ten times higher than the wages in neighbouring parts. Ten times higher! Well, that he (Lord George Hamilton) confessed was new information to him.

  57. Malla says:
    @anon

    LORD GEORGE HAMILTON further says:
    “It was a Famine such as had not occurred for 100 years, and it might fairly be expected not to recur for that period. No doubt there would be droughts in different parts of India, but year by year the country was being guarded against these visitations by the extension of railways and other means of communication, as well as by the construction of works of irrigation. This Famine caught the country in a somewhat transition state, for the population of India, being no longer liable to be carried off by intestine war or by periodical famine to the same extent as in old times, had greatly increased, and thus famines were more difficult to deal with than in old times. It was true that the productive power of India had increased. The great difficulty, however, was transport. The means of transport were now becoming more complete every year, and it would be possible to deal far more cheaply and effectually with future than with past famines.”

    Malla: Get this in your thick head. One of the biggest problems rulers had faced in famines in Indian subcontinent is failure of rainfall or drought. And earlier the problem was transportation over large areas. You can have all the grain you have but how to you transport them to remote areas in a large area? Remember Indian Subcontinent is a large area. Bullock carts would mean the bullocks would eat more grain , a commodity in short supply and there is no grass around due to drought. The rivers are mostly dried up which removes the possibility of water transport. You can fart all about how “pre-British rulers believed in giving like father to son” or whatever fake bullshit propaganda (Hindu nationalists, Islamic nationalist, Marxist lies) and even if we believe this gas fart propaganda, how the hell do you transport that “great fatherly loving” food to the regions? Have they thought about that? Your A/C living Western/ Indian Marxist professors are shitheads, all they do is get huge salaries writing mind numbing rubbish in University rooms. These shitheads would pee in their panties when they had to face such real logistical problems and run away sobbing. These are problem British colonial officers had to face on the ground. This logistical problem I have described above was solved by railways, British built railways. Locomotives did not need grain (short supply) or grass (non existent) like oxen or buffalo or horses, they “ate” coal. The British built one of the largest railway networks in the world to fight famine in the Indian subcontinent (not to “loot resources”, one more crackpot lie). Have some shame before pointing your polluted fingers. Don’t your lying Marxist shithead professors have no shame?

    • Replies: @anon
  58. antibeast says:
    @Malla

    Very good point. Also can learn from mistakes made by the first world too. More case studies to look at. Late development has its advantages.

    The telecommunications industry is a good example. The West built up its telecom infrastructure during the post-war period using copper-cables and circuit-switched technologies that are now obsolete. Fiber-optics was invented only in the 70s before its first commercial deployment for telecom networks in the 80s. But it was only in the 90s during the dot-com boom that a packet-routing technology called IP combined with an optical communications technology called DWDM — ‘Dense Wave Division Multiplexing’ — made fiber-optic communications the most cost-efficient way of transmitting information by multiplying its capacity by several orders of magnitude using packet routing rather than circuit-switching. That technology is called IP DWDM which is deployed globally by every ‘developing’ country today without the need to rip out any legacy infrastructure unlike in the ‘developed’ countries of the West.

    In short, just because a country is ‘developing’ does not imply that its infrastructure is inferior to that of a ‘developed’ country in the West. In the telecom industry, the opposite is true: ‘developing’ countries get to deploy state-of-the-art technologies of the 21st century which bypass obsolete technologies of the 20the century which was deployed long ago in ‘developed’ countries in the West. That’s called the ‘Late-Comer’s Advantage’ which applies to a late-comer such as China ‘leap-frogging’ the West by adopting and deploying state-of-the-art technologies of the 21st century.

    • Replies: @Malla
  59. anon[108] • Disclaimer says:
    @Malla

    Churchill and the events surrounding the starvation of Germany were not isolated instances but the continuation of the same projects that worked so fabuloously for the rest of world from Kenya to Malayasia and from India to Argentina .

    Concentration camp and eugenic movement were 2 other interesting gifts .

    Let list a few

    1 “Churchill who has been present during the butchery at Omdurman, sent troops to shoot down striking miners in 1910, ordered the RAF to use poison gas against Kurdish rebels in British-ruled Iraq,”

    2″ in 1942, plans were already being made in Whitehall to reclaim parts of the empire, with the examples of Burma, Malaya, Hong Kong and Nigeria being the most notable. Churchill even drew up a plan, vetoed by the US, of taking over Thailand ”

    Elliot Murphy of University College, London.
    ———

    Churchill: “I do not admit for instance, that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more worldly wise race to put it that way, has come in and taken their place.”

    ————-

    Britain’s Gulag: The Brutal End of Empire in Kenya. by Professor Caroline Elkins,– will be a good book for Kenyans to start .
    ——-

    https://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/aug/18/uncovering-truth-british-empire-caroline-elkins-mau-mau
    —————-

    Winston Churchill clarified in 1914, while First Lord of the Admiralty, that the goal with Germany was “to starve the whole population—men, women, and children, young and old, wounded and sound—into submission.”

    by 1919 excess civilian death toll was somewhere between 475,800 and 800,000.

    Targeting Civilians in War
    By Alexander B. Downes

    One more ,before you get down to knees for your spiritual project of worshipping the Britush empire ,

    here is –https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/worst-atrocities-british-empire-amritsar-boer-war-concentration-camp-mau-mau-a6821756.html
    “43 per cent believed the British Empire was a good thing”

    you have fellow faithfuls [ addition to some renowned apologists ( great British novelist cum historain so loved by mass murderer George Bush ) ]

    **

    Empire was so bad for UK and so good for the rest ,that in 1942 UK was trying to preserve at any cost and local were fighting to death to destriy the same empire .

  60. Malla says:
    @anon

    So the British Empire is reduced to just Churchill. Now I am no fan of Churchill but know as a fact that he was a far better person than Stalin who in turn was a better person than US President FDR. But a lot of bullshit is been written about him, I wonder it is worth defending him. But lies are lies, I guess.

    Winston Churchill clarified in 1914, while First Lord of the Admiralty, that the goal with Germany was “to starve the whole population—men, women, and children, young and old, wounded and sound—into submission.”

    Yes very true. You also fail to mention that during WW2, Churchill asked the RAF to start attacking civilian targets in Germany. Before that the German Luftwaffe only attacked military targets in Britain and this was becoming hard for Britain to bear. So Churchill ordered targeting civilian targets so that he knew that this would infuriate the German nationalist, who loved his people, Adolf Hitler who would so the same to Britain. This would give breathing space to the RAF and rile up the British people further for the war as German bombers bomb British cities. And the plan worked. Included the genocide in Dresden (one of the most beautiful and cultured cities int eh World), hamburg etc… And exacrly that is what happened, gave breathing space to the RAF to later win the Battle of Britain. So Churchill did not even care for British people who would be now targeted by the Luftwaffe in response of Churchill’s order for targeting German civilians!

    worked so fabuloously for the rest of world from Kenya to Malayasia and from India to Argentina .

    I do not know what you write, but when did Churchill starve India? India was not an enemy country. It was part of the British Empire.

    Britain’s Gulag: The Brutal End of Empire in Kenya. by Professor Caroline Elkins,– will be a good book for Kenyans to start .

    Didn’t you read what the Senior Chief Kasina at Migwani said in the post above “Then the British came and stopped the tribes from fighting each other. The Kikuyu, Embu, and Meru combined and caused the barbarous Mau Mau rebellion. The British stopped that.” The Mau Mau was a very brutal terrorist organisation who killed far more black people than White people. It was a organisation dominated by Kikuyus and two other tribes and did not represent all other Kenyan tribes. Any government would take steps to suppress such a murderous secret society terrorizing all of Kenya including killing loads of Kikuyu. Mau Mau’s commited a lot brutality. Like the Lari massacre, attack on the settlement of Lari, on the night of 25–26 March 1953, in which they herded black Kenyan men, women and children into huts and set fire to them, hacking down with machetes anyone who attempted escape, before throwing them back into the burning huts.The attack at Lari was so extreme that Black African policemen who saw the bodies of the victims . . . were physically sick and said ‘These people are animals. If I see one now I shall shoot with the greatest eagerness’”. Aside from the Lari massacres, Kikuyu were also tortured, mutilated and murdered by Mau Mau on many other occasions. Mau Mau murdered thousands of their fellow native Kenyans as well as Kenyan Indians.
    Not only that, the Kikuyu dominated Independent Kenya itself used the same tactics used by the British to suppress the Mau Mau to suppress the Kenyan Somali up north who wanted to join greater Somalia. On 26 June 1960, four days before granting British Somaliland independence, the British government declared that all Somali-inhabited areas of East Africa should be unified in one administrative region. An informal plebiscite demonstrating the overwhelming desire of the Somalis in Kenya population to join the newly formed Somali Republic, and the fact that the NFD was almost exclusively inhabited by ethnic Somalis. On the eve of Kenya’s independence in August 1963, British officials belatedly realized that the new Kenyan regime was not willing to give up the Somali-inhabited areas it had just been granted administration of. Led by the Northern Province People’s Progressive Party (NPPPP), Somalis in the NFD vigorously sought union with their kin in the Somali Republic to the north. In response, the Kenyan government enacted a number of repressive measures designed to frustrate their efforts in what came to be known as the Shifta War
    In response, the Kenyan government enacted a number of repressive measures designed to frustrate their efforts:
    Somali leaders were routinely placed in preventive detention, where they remained well into the late 1970s. The North Eastern Province was closed to general access (along with other parts of Kenya) as a “scheduled” area (ostensibly closed to all outsiders, including members of parliament, as a means of “protecting the nomadic inhabitants”), and news from it was very difficult to obtain. A number of reports, accused the Kenyans of mass slaughters of entire villages of Somali citizens and of setting up large “protected villages” – in effect concentration camps. The government refused to acknowledge the ethnically based irredentist motives of the Somalis, making constant reference in official statements to the shifta (bandit) problem in the area.
    Even today ethnic Somalis face torture from Kenyan Military and Police
    https://www.justice.gov/eoir/page/file/1249016/download
    Kenya Police and Military Abuses against ethnic Somali.
    The British Government paid compensation in respect of 5,228 claimants, as well as a gross costs sum, to the total value of £19.9 million for suppression of the Mau Mau terrorists. How much did the Kenyan state compensate the Kenyan Somalis it suppressed?

  61. Malla says:
    @anon

    Churchill who has been present during the butchery at Omdurman

    I do not know about the others. but Ordurman!!! Sudan!!! Butchery, you know what they were dealing with? A crackpot Mahdi who wanted to conquer all of the Islamic world. That so called “butchery” stopped more butchery to come and saved many lives.
    Butchery at Orduman? Are you mad? It was a war and the British-Egyptian side had superiority in technology and the enemy they were fighting were brutal barbarians who constantly attacked their neighbours as well as killed Major General Gordon. What were the British to do? Give their enemy their advanced technology? Drink tea with them? Are you guys nuts?
    Britain did not even want Sudan, it was Egypt who claimed Sudan and Britain got it as part of its rule in Egypt. Already in 1821, the Ottoman ruler of Egypt, Muhammad Ali of Egypt, had invaded and conquered northern Sudan. This was way before Britain was even involved, we see Turko- Egyptian imperialism. Although technically the Vali of Egypt under the Ottoman Empire, Muhammad Ali styled himself as Khedive of a virtually independent Egypt. Seeking to add Sudan to his domains, he sent his third son Ismail to conquer the country, and subsequently incorporate it into Egypt. This was all before British rule and involvement. The Egyptian policy of conquest was expanded and intensified by Ibrahim Pasha’s son, Ismail, under whose reign most of the remainder of modern-day Sudan was conquered.

    Ismail was later replaced by his son Tewfik Pasha in his place. Tewfik’s corruption and mismanagement resulted in the ‘Urabi revolt, which threatened the Khedive’s survival. Tewfik appealed for help to the British, who subsequently took control of Egypt in 1882. Sudan was left in the hands of the Khedivial government, and the mismanagement and corruption of its officials. During the Khedivial period, dissent had spread due to harsh taxes imposed on most activities. Taxation on irrigation wells and farming lands were so high most farmers abandoned their farms and livestock. During the 1870s, European initiatives against the slave trade had an adverse impact on the economy of northern Sudan, precipitating the rise of Mahdist forces. Muhammad Ahmad ibn Abd Allah, the Mahdi (Guided One), offered his followers (ansars) and those who surrendered to him a choice between adopting Islam or being killed. The Mahdiyah (Mahdist regime) imposed traditional Sharia Islamic laws.

    From his announcement of the Mahdiyya in June 1881 until the fall of Khartoum in January 1885, the Mahdi led a successful military campaign against the Turco-Egyptian government of the Sudan, known as the Turkiyah. Regional relations remained tense throughout much of the Mahdiyah period, largely because of the Khalifa’s brutal methods to extend his rule throughout the country. In 1887, a 60,000-man Ansar army invaded Ethiopia, penetrating as far as Gondar. In March 1889, king Yohannes IV of Ethiopia marched on Metemma; however, after Yohannes fell in battle, the Ethiopian forces withdrew. Abd ar-Rahman an-Nujumi, the Mahdi’s general, attempted an invasion of Egypt in 1889, but British-led Egyptian troops defeated the Ansar at Tushkah. The failure of the Egyptian invasion broke the spell of the Ansar’s invincibility. The Belgians prevented the Mahdi’s men from conquering Equatoria, and in 1893, the Italians repelled an Ansar attack at Agordat (in Eritrea) and forced the Ansar to withdraw from Ethiopia. So the Mahdi was not only brutal, he was expansionist, attacking Christian lands like Ethiopia. The battle of Battle of Omdurman was part of a campaign to relieve Pasha Gordon of Khartoum, (Major General Gordon).

    By the early 1890s, British, French, and Belgian claims had converged at the Nile headwaters. Britain also feared that the other powers (France and Belgium) could take advantage of Sudan’s instability to acquire territory previously annexed to Egypt. Britain also wanted to increase security along the Nile to safeguard a planned irrigation dam at Aswan.

    Kitchener’s campaign was also revenge of the killing of Gordon. Major General Gordon worked very hard to stop slavery and brutality in India. He was very much respected in China earlier where the Emperor of China himself sent him gifts, a very high honour even if Gordon was a lowly “White barbarian demon” (Xi Yang Gui Zi / Yang Gui zi).
    More about what he had done in Sudan
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_George_Gordon

    Moreover, considerable progress was made in the suppression of the slave trade.[104] Gordon wrote in a letter to his sister about the Africans living a “life of fear and misery”, but in spite of the “utter misery” of Equatoria that “I like this work”.[105] Gordon often personally intercepted slave convoys to arrest the slavers and break the chains of the slaves, but he found that the corrupt Egyptian bureaucrats usually sold the freed Africans back into slavery, and the expense of caring for thousands of freed slaves who were a long away from home burdensome.[106]

    During this period Gordon grew close to the Anti-Slavery Society, an evangelical Christian group based in London dedicated to ending slavery all over the world, and who regularly celebrated Gordon’s efforts to end slavery in the Sudan.[84] Urban wrote that: “Newspaper readers in Bolton or Beaminister had become enraged by stories about chained black children, cruelly abducted, being sold into slave markets…”, and Gordon’s anti-slavery efforts contributed to his image as a saintly man.[84]

    Gordon had come into conflict with the Egyptian governor of Khartoum and Sudan over his efforts to ban slavery.

    …snip….

    Governor-General of the Sudan
    As governor, Gordon faced a variety of challenges. Besides working to end slavery, Gordon carried out a series of reforms such as abolishing torture and public floggings where those opposed to the Egyptian state were flogged with a whip known as the kourbash made of buffalo hide

    Slavery was the basis of the Sudanese economy, and Gordon’s attempts to end the slave trade meant taking on very powerful vested interests, most notably Rahama Zobeir, known as the “King of the Slavers” as he was the richest and most powerful of all the slave traders in the entire Sudan. An insurrection had broken out in Darfur province led by associates of Zobeir and Gordon went to deal with it.. The insurgents were numerous, and he saw that diplomacy had a better chance of success. On 2 September 1877, Gordon clad in the full gold-braided ceremonial blue uniform of the Governor-General of the Sudan and wearing the tarboush (the type of fez reserved for a pasha), accompanied by an interpreter and a few bashi-bazouks, rode unannounced into the enemy camp to discuss the situation.[115]

  62. Malla says:
    @anon

    https://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/aug/18/uncovering-truth-british-empire-caroline-elkins-mau-mau

    Guardian newspaper really? All they write is truth? No propaganda?
    Are these truths too?
    https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/aug/07/why-uighur-muslims-across-china-are-living-in-fear
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/12/uighur-xinjiang-re-education-camp-china-gulbahar-haitiwaji
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/03/chinese-labour-schemes-aimed-to-cut-uighur-population-report-reveals

    here is –https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/worst-atrocities-british-empire-amritsar-boer-war-concentration-camp-mau-mau-a6821756.html

    I have already covered the Amritsar incident before.

    https://www.unz.com/tengelhardt/beijings-bid-for-global-power-in-the-age-of-trump/?showcomments#comment-2479360
    https://www.unz.com/tengelhardt/beijings-bid-for-global-power-in-the-age-of-trump/?showcomments#comment-2479454
    https://www.unz.com/tengelhardt/beijings-bid-for-global-power-in-the-age-of-trump/?showcomments#comment-2479512

    And what did Churchill say about the Amritsar incident in the British Parliament?

    Our reign in India or anywhere else has never stood on the basis of physical force alone, and it would be fatal to the British Empire if we were to try to base ourselves only upon it. The British way of doing things, as my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for India, who feels intensely upon this subject, has pointed out, has always meant and implied close and effectual co-operation with the people of the country. In every part of the British Empire that has been our aim, and in no part have we arrived at such success as in India, whose princes spent their treasure in our cause, whose brave soldiers fought side by side with our own men, whose intelligent and gifted people are co-operating at the present moment with us in every sphere of government and of industry. It is quite true that in Egypt last year there was a complete breakdown of the relations between the British and the Egyptian people. Every class and every profession seemed united against us. What are we doing? We are trying to rebuild that relationship. For months, Lord Milner has been in Egypt, and now we are endeavouring laboriously and patiently to rebuild from the bottom that relation between the British administration and the people of Egypt which we have always enjoyed in the past, and which it was so painful for us to feel had been so suddenly ruptured. It is not a question of force. We had plenty of force, if force were all that was needed.

    What we want is co-operation and goodwill, and I beseech hon. and right hon. Gentlemen to look at the whole of this vast question, and not merely at one part of it. If the disastrous breakdown which has occurred in a comparatively small country like Egypt, if this absolute rupture between the British administration and the people of the country had taken place throughout the mighty regions of our Indian Empire, it would have constituted one of the most melancholy events in the history of the world. That it has not taken place up to the present is, I think, largely due to the constructive policy of His Majesty’s Government, to which my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for India has made so great a personal contribution.”

  63. Malla says:
    @anon

    in 1942, plans were already being made in Whitehall to reclaim parts of the empire, with the examples of Burma, Malaya, Hong Kong and Nigeria being the most notable. Churchill even drew up a plan, vetoed by the US, of taking over Thailand ”

    Why would they not retake their Empire if Japan was defeated? And why did the USA veto it? Because the Wall Street dominated US Government considered the British Empire and the other European Empires a major threat to their looting operations around the world. That is why Wall Street funded “freedom struggles” against the European Empires. The moment the honest colonial officers went, replaced by corrupt incompetent brown, black leaders, looting operations began. I have covered this before. Wall Street bankers (and their controlled USA) became an enemy of the British Empire and worked behind the scenes to get it dissolved. Maybe that is why they fund these Lefty professor in post Colonial “Studies” nonsense in universities, so that this fact can be covered up.
    https://www.unz.com/aanglin/how-is-the-g7-going-to-counter-china-when-they-dont-even-make-anything/#comment-4721074
    https://www.unz.com/aanglin/how-is-the-g7-going-to-counter-china-when-they-dont-even-make-anything/#comment-4721079
    https://www.unz.com/aanglin/how-is-the-g7-going-to-counter-china-when-they-dont-even-make-anything/#comment-4721564
    https://www.unz.com/aanglin/how-is-the-g7-going-to-counter-china-when-they-dont-even-make-anything/#comment-4721565
    https://www.unz.com/aanglin/how-is-the-g7-going-to-counter-china-when-they-dont-even-make-anything/#comment-4721649
    https://www.unz.com/aanglin/how-is-the-g7-going-to-counter-china-when-they-dont-even-make-anything/#comment-4721726
    https://www.unz.com/aanglin/how-is-the-g7-going-to-counter-china-when-they-dont-even-make-anything/#comment-4722858

  64. Malla says:
    @anon

    Also your Marxist professors would find this interesting about Churchill.
    Leo Amery, British Conservative politician and Secretary of State for India (he was born in, Gorakhpur , United Provinces, India, my home state) records Churchill as saying that the British Empire needed Soviet style collectivization in India and the peasant life needed to be improved.

  65. Malla says:
    @anon

    Thomas Sowell on Colonialism and Wealth.

  66. Malla says:
    @anon

    Empire was so bad for UK and so good for the rest ,that in 1942 UK was trying to preserve at any cost and local were fighting to death to destriy the same empire .

    Really? How much did the UK fight to save its Empire. With the same intensity it fought against Third Reich Germany or Japanese Empire? The BE could have easily held on to India if it wanted. To Kenya, to Gold Coast, to Nigeria, to Ceylon. Nowhere did they lose any battle to native forces. They always defeated the native militant groups and then left the colony marching out, heads high. The British economy boomed more it lost its Empire and the difference in between per capita income in between bankrupt Britain and the ex-colonies increased with time till the 90s.
    Also there were plans to further rigorously industrialize India after WW2 in certain sections of the British Government. But the left winged Labour PM Clement Attlee had other plans, socialist plans for Britain itself, you know NHS healthcare and all that. He did not have money to spare after WW2 to India. So he accelerated the process of giving Independence.

    • Replies: @anon
  67. Malla says:
    @antibeast

    The telecommunications industry is a good example. The West built up its telecom infrastructure during the post-war period using copper-cables and circuit-switched technologies that are now obsolete. Fiber-optics was invented only in the 70s before its first commercial deployment for telecom networks in the 80s

    Yes exactly. This phenomenon played out in India where the Indian telecom operator Jio owned by Reliance industries of the Indian billionaire Mukesh Ambani, out-competed its rivals, many of them international players who were in the Indian telecom market earlier. It came out of nowhere and took over. Indeed before Jio, Vodafone of Britain was the largest telecom provider along with Airtel (Indian company, is present in most African countries, where it keeps on making huge losses), Idea etc… All those legacy companies had built millions of traditional telecom towers all over India. So when 4G came, all of them had to upgrade each of their telecom towers in the vast country. Add to that the fact that most rural Indians are poor and miserly and thus spend less but India is a vast country, making this operation very expensive to the traditional players. While Reliance Jio (which came out of nowhere) just bought up an Indian fiber optic company and did not need to spend vast amounts of money all this upgrade. Soon it became the largest telecom provider, driving away Telenor of Norway, Maxis of Malaysia, MTS of Russia etc… out of the Indian market, bankrupting inefficient loss making Indian Government public sector telecom companies like MNTL & BSNL (Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited) and and forcing British company Vodafone (it was the giant in the Indian telecom sector before Jio, so it at least survived) to merge with Indian company Idea to survive (to make Vidi). Interestingly telecom provider Idea belongs to the Birla Indian tycoons who had funded Gandhi (and the Indian Independence Struggle) against the British Raj to capture the Indian market at that time, they were into cloth mills at that time.
    But to be honest, the it is believed that behind the scenes Reliance Jio has the support of the Central Government as the Ambanis are very close to Modi and the Government probably wants to clandestinely drive foreign players out of India as well as privatize the state run telecom companies, selling assets on the cheap to Reliance. All those gigantic state run telecom operators (MNTL and BSNL) & their huge assets, built up on national tax payer money for decades, to be sold off for pennies to Reliance and Government bureaucrats get some fat cut too.. Whata loot.
    One more interesting point is Jio is the mirror opposite of oil, if the ‘l’ is written like an inverted J. Reliance is big in the Petroleum industry, it has the largest refinery in the World in Gujarat, India. A slimeball company par excellence, there is a book worth reading called the ‘Polyester Prince’ about how this company (and this oligarchic family) slimeballed up to become so big. Very interesting.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Polyester_Prince
    Reliance Industries and the Ambani clan got the book banned in India, but you get illegal copies.

    In short, just because a country is ‘developing’ does not imply that its infrastructure is inferior to that of a ‘developed’ country in the West.

    Very true, the later you develop, you get some advantages. One is you can get newer technological infrastructure from scratch, as you mentioned. Also your poor population keeps on growing and you have cheaper labour to attract investments while the earlier developed societies reach below replacement TFR’s earlier.
    Actually if one goes to Tokyo, the city is space age, clean, top notch but a lot of the infrastructure are a bit dated. Clean, efficient no doubt. But still dated. The infrastructure in other Asian countries who developed later, are more new and shiney and using more later technologies. Japan developed earliest and it takes money to upgrade and people wait for the infrastructure to run its course.

    • Replies: @antibeast
  68. antibeast says:
    @Malla

    One is you can get newer technological infrastructure from scratch, as you mentioned. Also your poor population keeps on growing and you have cheaper labour to attract investments while the earlier developed societies reach below replacement TFR’s earlier.

    It’s a double whammy: the ‘developed’ West retains its legacy infrastructure because it is costlier to replace them while the ‘developing’ non-West gets to build state-of-art-infrastructure more cheaply due to lower costs of labor which also attracts foreign investors.

    Actually if one goes to Tokyo, the city is space age, clean, top notch but a lot of the infrastructure are a bit dated. Clean, efficient no doubt. But still dated. The infrastructure in other Asian countries who developed later, are more new and shiny and using more later technologies. Japan developed earliest and it takes money to upgrade and people wait for the infrastructure to run its course.

    All the big cities of the ‘developed’ West such as NY, London, Paris, Berlin, etc. are much older than Tokyo. So everything they have built up over the last century is now obsolete in terms of technology. All you need to do is take their subway and you can see how old they are.

    In contrast, the new cities of the ‘developing’ non-West are built up with state-of-the-art technologies. Here’ a video of Hyderabad City which is an upcoming hi-tech city in India:

    So not only are new cities like Hyderabad better in terms of infrastructure but also cheaper in terms of labor costs. How can the old cities of the ‘developed’ West with their outdated infrastructure and high-labor costs compete against the new cities of the ‘developing’ non-West with their state-of-the-art infrastructure and low-labor costs?

    • Agree: Malla
  69. Malla says:
    @Mulga Mumblebrain

    Yo Mulgi, check this out.
    —————————
    https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/22506045
    Indians cry: Bring back the British Raj
    Freedom is a Nightmare.

    8 September, 1947

    “Bring back the British Raj” is the popular slogan of thousands in refugee camps in India and Pakistan when a Westerner appears, says the New Delhi correspondent of the New York Herald-Tribute.

    Last week flowers decked the statue of Queen Victoria in Lahore (Pakistan). The correspondent gives a grim general picture of the savagery, intolerance, fear and chaos in India and Pakistan adding: “Equally disturbing, although certainly understandable, is the tendency on the part of the humble and unhappy masses to cry for a return of British rule, and to imply that they have been forsaken by the protecting father”.

    The correspondent states that, three weeks after the young flags of India and Pakistan flew for the first time over the two Dominions, the people have concluded that their dream of freedom has turned into a nightmare.

    “Independence Day should be written not in letters of gold, but in letters of blood,” said a bitter doctor in Lahore (Pakistan); while a young army officer in Amritsar (India) declared: “Freedom has brought us nothing but mob rule.”
    Their remarks, the correspondent says, are echoed by thousands of voices of homeless and wounded in the Punjab and Calcutta.
    ——————————-
    LOL Of course this was way back in 1947, during the troubles of the partition and things have turned out all right now. But the description of the masses of the British Empire is important: “protecting father”. And flowers decking a statue of Queen Victoria. And this is an American newspaper, definitely not pro-British Raj.

    • Replies: @JohnnyWalker123
  70. anon[383] • Disclaimer says:
    @Malla

    Lets throw some more history and see if you can connect the lines and see the contours of the map of the British imperialism

    —1879 Chile’s war on Bolivia was at every step of the way backed and armed by the British Empire as English industrialists took control of the vast natural resources of the Bolivian coastal region.

    From the start of the war began an aggressive media operation in London to portray Chile as advanced and civilised, and Bolivia as backward hordes, one newspaper labeled Bolivia a “Semi-barbarous country that doesn’t know civilization

    Ever since the fall of the Spanish Empire in the Americas, Britain was quick off the blocks in establishing informal control of Latin American natural resources

    Britain was rigidly against Simon Bolívar’s vision of a united Latin America, (‘Gran Colombia’ as he called it), Eduardo Galeano summed it up thus, “For U.S. imperialism to be able to “integrate and rule” Latin America today, it was necessary for the British Empire to help divide and rule us yesterday. An archipelago of disconnected countries came into being as a result of the frustration of our national unity.”
    .

    Galeano, ‘Open Veins of Latin America’(1997)

    ——

    In between a lot of water passed under London Bridge

    —- Did we hear the echo of those British media voices again in Iran in 50s? Did seombody say that Saudi Arabia and its misogynist ,auticratic fanatuc royal traditions were chapereoned and ushered by British forces on the back of secualr nationalistic , anti – zionsist stances of two other more broad based independent movemnts .?

    Can somebody help you understand the British attaempts to throw Syrian secular nationalistic goverement in 1950s was no aberration but the expression of the same British traditions of expanding ,building and mainatining imperialism for control of resources to fill the coffers and the jewelry boxes of the queen ? 1990’s back door manipulation to get USA attack Iraq was also the same mindset’s product but this time joined by the neocons of Thather cabinet with more open and disntuct visibilty.

    1942 was no different . British thought it can reoccupy,maintain,and even gain new territories .

  71. Meena says:

    1 “In Nairobi, nine days before Kenya became independent, four packing crates of sensitive papers were hustled into a plane and flown to London Gatwick, where a government official supervised their transfer into storage. These, along with thousands of other colonial files, ended up stashed behind the razor wire of Hanslope Park, in Buckinghamshire, an intelligence facility dedicated to communications security—that is, to keeping secrets.”

    2-“Britain’s imperial retreat was “Best we forget.” In one colony after another, as the former Guardian journalist Ian Cobain details in his 2016 book, “The History Thieves,” the British went down in a blaze of documents. A reporter in Cairo during the Suez Crisis recalled standing on the lawn of the British Embassy “ankle deep in the ashes of burning files.” Twelve days before Malaya’s independence, in 1957, British soldiers in Kuala Lumpur loaded trucks with boxes of records to be driven down to Singapore and, a colonial official reported, “destroyed in the Navy’s splendid incinerator.”

    3 “Scratch almost any institution with roots in Britain’s era of global dominance and you’ll draw imperial blood—from the Rhodes Trust, established by the fervent expansionist and white supremacist Cecil Rhodes, to the British Museum, whose founding collection was funded by profits from Jamaican plantations worked by slaves, and the Booker Prize, launched by a food company once notorious for its exploitative practices in the cane fields of British ”
    Guiana.https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/11/02/misremembering-the-british-empire

    • Replies: @Malla
  72. Meena says:

    A March, 2020, poll found that a third of Britons believed that their empire had done more good than harm for colonies—a higher percentage than in other former imperial powers, including France and Japan. More than a quarter of Britons want the empire back.

    Unlike most other European countries, Britain stops requiring students to study history when they reach the age of fourteen, which leaves little room for nuance in a national curriculum designed to showcase “our island story.”

    The public narrative about Britain’s imperial past matters because it is keenly felt to license present injustice.

    https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/11/02/misremembering-the-british-empire

    • Replies: @Malla
    , @Malla
  73. @Nostradamus

    2) I keep resisting the idea that this virus was man made… But when I see Republicans calling for compensation – when no one has a real clue how it started (officially) it makes me wonder if maybe this wasn’t just to get out from that $1 trillion debt the US owes China..???

    • Replies: @Nostradamus
  74. @anon

    That guy is pretty scary… He will defend the British to know end. And the amount of references and their slant is mind boggling… You can never convince him that the British weren’t angels incarnate.

    • LOL: Malla
    • Replies: @anon
    , @Malla
    , @Malla
  75. @showmethereal

    It was made in the US and deployed to Wuhan by the US military. It was a false flag attack.

    https://www.unz.com/mwhitney/the-covid-bioweapon-made-in-the-usa-aimed-at-china/

    Obama did the same thing in West Africa and the attack was contained in that region. This time it followed trade routes and ended up in all countries!

  76. @Malla

    • Thanks: Malla
  77. anon[860] • Disclaimer says:
    @showmethereal

    Yes,he is also very thick in addition to being a Raj ass-licking miracle .

    • Replies: @Malla
  78. Malla says:
    @anon

    Thick? I gave you a good spanking and debunked loads 0f your shameless lies
    Asslicker?–Typical psychological tactics to shut down truthers. Does not work, try it on someone else

    • Replies: @anon
  79. Malla says:
    @Meena

    Meen Meena Meena, you should find this interesting. Dedicated to you.

    https://www.dailyo.in/politics/emperors-of-extraction-rana-safvi-the-mughals-did-not-make-india-rich-claims-of-their-welfarism-only-buttress-a-political-agenda/story/1/31483.html
    Emperors of Extraction: The Mughals did not make India rich. Claims of their welfarism only buttress a political agenda
    by Abhishek Mitra Iyer
    A riposte to Rana Safvi’s argument on how the Mughals apparently strengthened India, while, in fact, Europe grew by paces just then and India’s poverty shocked visitors.

    A small snippet
    “Add to this the point that almost 1/4th of the Mughal state’s revenue was the emperor’s personal property, that 1/3rd of the revenues went into maintaining the Omrah (or court) and that between 60% to 70% of revenue was concentrated in the hands of just 655 nobles — that tells you all you need to know.

    The same Thomas Roe that Safvi quotes, for example, was shocked at the levels of poverty he encountered in India. The Mughal empire, like any medieval feudal empire, and the entire Islamic period in India was a period of economic stagnation — one that saw Europe steadily overtaking it even in the 1500s and reaching a massive power differential by the 1700s.”

  80. Malla says:
    @Meena

    Meena Meena more
    https://www.sundayguardianlive.com/opinion/imperial-loot-india-myth
    Imperial loot of India is a myth
    Ravi Shanker Kapoor
    Pre British Mughal India
    It is best to begin with eyewitness accounts. There is an excellent series called The India They Saw: Foreign Accounts 18th-19th Centuries. The volume is edited by Meenakshi Jain, a Delhi University academic. Francisco Pelsaert, the merchant with Dutch East India Company who stayed at Agra during 1620-27, wrote about “the utter subjection and poverty of the common people—poverty so great and miserable that the life of the people can be depicted or accurately described only as the home of stark want and the dwelling place of bitter woe.”

    For the workman, wrote Pelsaert, there were two scourges, the first of which pertained to low wages. The second scourge comprised the governor, nobles, the Diwan, the Kotwal, the Bakshi, and other royal officers.

    The condition of peasants was worse. Another Dutch, Wollebrand de Jongh Geleynssen wrote about Gujarat in 1629 that “the peasants are more oppressed than formerly [and] frequently abscond”. Fray Sebastien Manrique (1590-1669), a Portuguese missionary and traveller, also made similar observations: “[The peasants have] no possessions or assets from which to pay…[and are] beaten unmercifully and maltreated… They are carried off, attached to heavy iron chains, to various markets and fairs [to be sold], with their poor, unhappy wives behind them carrying their small children in their arms, all crying and lamenting their evil plight.”

    Jerome Xavier (1549-1617), the Spanish Jesuit missionary in the courts of Akbar (1542-1605) and his son Jahangir (1569-1627), wrote about the conditions in Kashmir in 1597 that “it is very much uncultivated and even depopulated from the time this King [Akbar] took it and governs it through his captains, who tyrannize over it…and bleed the people by the their extortions…”

    Jean-Baptiste Tavernier (1605-89), a French gem merchant and traveller, also painted a grim picture of the countryside: “I should say en passant that the peasants have for their sole garment a scrap of cloth to cover those parts which natural modesty requires should be concealed; and they are reduced to great poverty, because if the governors become aware that they possess any property, they seize it straightway by right or by force.”

    Francois Bernier (1620-88), a French physician who stayed in India for 12 years (1658-70), was doctor to Dara Shikoh and then Aurangzeb. He also described the dilapidated dwellings of the poor, their miserable lives, the glaring disparities between a small number of rich people and the indigent masses, and the rapacity of the Mughal state. The tax collector was universally detested, for he grabbed half of what the farmer produced and any belonging of traders he could lay his hands on. While merchants and shopkeepers hid their wealth, it was the peasant who bore the brunt of the predatory state.

    It is important to note here that the accounts of foreigners are generally regarded accurate by prominent historians. Even Satish Chandra, a Marxist who has done much to downplay the bigotry and barbarity of Muslim rulers, had to accept: “Foreign travellers who visited India during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries present a picture of a small group in the ruling class living a life of great ostentation and luxury, in sharp contrast to the miserable condition of the masses—the peasants, the artisans and the domestic attendants. Indigenous sources do not disagree; they often dwell on the luxurious life of the upper classes, and occasionally refer to the privations of the ordinary people” (The Cambridge Economic History of India, Vol I, 1200-1750).

    Chandra’s Marxist fellow historian Irfan Habib also wrote: “To astute observers like Bernier, the Indian peasants, laboureurs, appeared an undifferentiated mass, all living miserably under a blind and increasing oppression.”

    The oppression and exploitation knew no bounds. As Abraham Eraly wrote in The Mughal World: Life in India’s Last Golden Age: “Mughal society was starkly unequal and pitilessly exploitative. In the reign of Shah Jahan…at least about a quarter of the gross national product of the Mughal empire was appropriated by less than 700 persons out of a population of over 120 million!” Yes of GNP, not revenue!

    • Replies: @meena
  81. Malla says:
    @showmethereal

    Scary?– False beliefs getting shattered by facts can be a scary experience. I understand. As far as British being angels? Don’t be ridiculous. I never said that, sure there there was some few bad with the great good. There is place for only one angel people on Earth, the CCP. Thats it.
    References you say? My fingers itch again. Here we go.

    MALLA: Slaves in uncolonised Ethiopia fled to the “evul” British Empire for protection. Oy vey

    This is from the time of Governer General Warren Hastings from way back when, late 1700s.

    [MORE]

    MALLA: British helped the Dalits and poor backward castes people, discriminated for millennia How evul?

    MALLA: Rabha (below) are a tribal people of India. They sez British Sahibs were better than today’s Bangla sarkar (sarkar = Govt)

    MALLA: These poor innocent tribals (not Rabha but some other forest tribe somewhere else in India) are waiting patient for British rule to come back so that they can get their forests back. How innocent they are?

  82. Malla says:
    @showmethereal

    Some more reference you would like, showmethereal.

    Something for the Belgian Empire.Telling the poor Hutus not be slaves to the Tutsi overlords. What Evul Whitey???

    http://dspace.library.uu.nl/handle/1874/399805
    The abolition (of slavery by European navies) caused trade to decline and domestic slavery to rise, putting a downward pressure on wages. Only when Britain slowly extended its domain over the entire Gold Coast did living standards start to rise. The British abolished domestic slavery and brought peace and stability to an otherwise violent region, ushering in a period of unprecedented growth for the Gold Coast (Ghana).
    https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1018322908007
    I find that colonies that were held for longer periods of time than other countries tend to perform better, on average, after independence.
    https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/499510
    Conversely, for the British colonies, level of colonialism is positively associated with postcolonial development, and the correlations are very strong: .86 and .88 for HDI 1975 and 2000, respectively

  83. Malla says:
    @Meena

    Meena Meena Meena check dis out. What the Muslim League, which led to the creation of Pakistan, think about the British Empire. What had Nawab Waqar-ul-Mulk sez in Aligarh? That after 800 years of ruthless exploitation, rape, slavery and plunder of the lowly, idol worshiping, Kaffir Hindu “monkeys”, the lowly “monkeys” may want revenge. No? Only the mighty, glorious British can save the Muslims from lowly Hindu kaffir revenge and keep peace. So the Muslims of the Indian subcontinent would become an extra British Army for service to the glorious British Empire. Meena, learn something from the wise Nawab.

    And guess what, Meena, the British left India and eventually what happened? The lowly kaffirs Hindus want revenge. Meena they Hindus want revenge for those 800 years of Islamic rule and the British Empire is not here to save the Muslims in India, to balance and keep peace in Pax Britannia. Nawab Waqar-ul-Mulk was sooooo right.

    • Replies: @meena
  84. anon[222] • Disclaimer says:
    @Malla

    No you did not moron. I gave youn enough latest data to chew on and I helped you how to think .
    Rememeber again – Churchill was not an aberration neither in 1914 or in 1920 nor in 1956.

    • Troll: Malla
    • Replies: @Malla
  85. meena says:
    @Malla

    Nawab? Thats your source?
    Its like MbS talking about democracy ,terrorism, womans rights and offerrimg supports to Indian position on Kashmir .
    Why is he ?
    First of all he gets his reading material from the intricate networks of American hegemon ( Althiugh Nawab can say : I am basing my polemics based on what British have taught Indian from 1858. I have no other unbiased reliable sources . ) and doesnt read anything from other sources . Second his vetsed inetrest tells him to lick the butt of the powers that matter.

    Nawab was doing same .

    • Replies: @Malla
  86. meena says:
    @Malla

    And only a British apologist will say that improved under the Raj.

    • Replies: @Malla
  87. Malla says:
    @meena

    No facts say it improved under the Raj. British taxation rates on farmers was much less than during Mughal-Maratha rule.

  88. Malla says:
    @meena

    Nawab was doing same .

    Nope, he was a member of the Muslim League. No proof he got any material from “someone”. Comparing him to MBS is stupidity. And his predictions came true.

  89. Malla says:
    @anon

    It is so idiotic I cannot even start. British helping US Imperialism? LMFAO back in the 1800s. What? They were mostly enemies. And I am talking about Colonial officers on the ground be excellent men in general, not some banker elites, most of them mostly Jews masquerading as “British” like today’s Wall Street Empire called American. LOL. James Joyce was told in England in the 1920s (before the holohoax) , “you can criticize the King, but you cannot criticize Jews”. That showed who were the guys in power, royal family is just a front.. So banker Jews use these countries as bases of operations to loot others, then their Communist Jew cousins go and teach darkies to hate Whitey who looted them!!! Somehow the descendant of some British doctor or mine workers is sinner while Jews go Scot free? Wow.

    Check out the little England Policy
    During the late 18th and 19th centuries,this Little England policy was followed by members of the Liberal Party who was opposed to expansion of the British Empire, as well as many traditionalist conservatives who wanted England to extend no farther than the borders of the United Kingdom. The term was also used for English people who saw the British Empire’s colonies as economically burdensome and wanted them to be granted independence as quickly as possible.

    Now lets cut out all that bullshit and lets go to the core of the issue of all this bullshit. All this propaganda against colonialism, or hyping up the “bad done and covering up the good done as well as inventing new fake bads” etc… about colonialism common for some time, is because these Western European countries + USA +Japan did not go Communist as Marxs the fat monkey (who never worked as a worker a day in his life) had predicted highly Industrialized Capitalist countries would do. And there were attempts using the trade Unions there to bring about such revolutions before even the banker Jacob Shiff funded “Russian revolution”, and yes these revolutions too funded by Globalist elites. They did not succeed. And hence this particular hostility to these countries in history. And especially the British Empire as Britain Industrialized the first in the world and was the largest Empire. Many of the empires that preceded these colonial Empires were even worse,but Marxists even lie and show them as better. LOL. This is also why Imperial Russia is not targeted much, even if it expanded into Siberia and Central Asia. Russia has gone through Communism, its “sins” are forgiven. But not Japan or Britain. The same reason why the more brutal Ottoman Empire is not targeted much. Turkey was not as Industrialized back then and Turks do not take much guilt anyways unlike Northern Europeans.
    Marx’s theories failed anyways as Russia, though industrializing very fast under the Tzar was not still an industrialized nation and should not have been the place for Communism to be established. Same with China. Massive industrialization In Japanese Machukuo and a little in KMT areas and European settlements but still largely an agrarian society. Instead of highly Industrialized nations like Britain, Western Europe USA , Japan etc…, Communist regimes were established in Russia and China. So Marx failed there and then already.
    So, all for the sin for not falling for brutal Communism murder regimes and super rich banker Rothschild’s relative, Marx’s idiotic failure theories. So if Britain had gone Communist, and its people suffered brutality and mass murder by sadists and psychos and taken up Marx’s failure economic policies, somehow its “historic sins” would have been forgiven. Same with Japan. Same with the rest. All that propaganda of “imperial loot” propaganda would slowly disappear from academia then.

  90. Malla says:

    https://jamaica-gleaner.com/article/commentary/20170810/devon-dick-most-jamaicans-want-jamaica-be-british-colony
    Devon Dick | Most Jamaicans want Jamaica to be a British Colony, 2017

    Almost twice as many Jamaicans believe Jamaica made a mistake to break from the British Empire in 1962, as against those who don’t. According to the Gleaner-commissioned Bill Johnson poll, 49 per cent of Jamaicans believe the country would be better off if it had remained a colony of Britain. Only 27 per cent of Jamaicans disagreed. Oy Vey.

    • Replies: @showmethereal
  91. @Malla

    Simple because of control of capital and resources. Jamaicans aren’t stupid. It’s not because they actually liked British rule. Many thousands hold their nose and migrate to the US every year too… It’s not because they actually want to go.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
$
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Pepe Escobar Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World
Becker update V1.3.2
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement