Is there a definition of relevant that, for you, doesn’t include the impacts and effects of the thing in question?
Are you going to argue to me with a straight face that the only relevant aspects we should be concerned about with colonialism is whether ownership is current and active?
If you strip the land of resources when you owned it such that people can no longer use it, your colonization of that land – while in the past – is still relevant to the people now trying to eke out an existence on that land.
Playing prescriptionist with definitions isn’t going to absolve Europe of the still ongoing effects that their colonization has caused.
tomenzgg@midwest.social 1 month ago
Is there a definition of relevant that, for you, doesn’t include the impacts and effects of the thing in question?
Are you going to argue to me with a straight face that the only relevant aspects we should be concerned about with colonialism is whether ownership is current and active?
FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 1 month ago
Now you’re asking me how I might agree that not having any colonies can still count as colonization?
tomenzgg@midwest.social 1 month ago
If you strip the land of resources when you owned it such that people can no longer use it, your colonization of that land – while in the past – is still relevant to the people now trying to eke out an existence on that land.
Playing prescriptionist with definitions isn’t going to absolve Europe of the still ongoing effects that their colonization has caused.