Imperial countries were forced to leave their colonies in some cases, but left without any real revolutionary threat in other cases. Where was the revolutionary threat in Jamaica in 1960? Where was the revolutionary threat in The Philippines in 1934? I can believe that France saw the writing on the wall in Morocco, but there was actually some violence there (albeit short of a revolution). But there are some cases where there was no significant violence, and where there was no one who would have obviously forced them out.
Painting these events with a broad brush gets sloppy fast. "Bernie Sanders is just another flavor of fascist" isn't going to move anyone who isn't already a communist, anyway.
Well said. The fact that most of these "peacefully" freed nations still are largely economically ruled to the benefit of their "former" colonizers is telling. It always comes with implicit threats. Connolly said as much when talking about Ireland
If you remove the English army to-morrow and hoist the green flag over Dublin Castle, unless you set about the organisation of the Socialist Republic your efforts would be in vain.
England would still rule you. She would rule you through her capitalists, through her landlords, through her financiers, through the whole array of commercial and individualist institutions she has planted in this country and watered with the tears of our mothers and the blood of our martyrs.
England would still rule you to your ruin, even while your lips offered hypocritical homage at the shrine of that Freedom whose cause you had betrayed.
Nationalism without Socialism – without a reorganisation of society on the basis of a broader and more developed form of that common property which underlay the social structure of Ancient Erin - is only national recreancy.
It would be tantamount to a public declaration that our oppressors had so far succeeded in inoculating us with their perverted conceptions of justice and morality that we had finally decided to accept those conceptions as our own, and no longer needed an alien army to force them upon us.
As a Socialist I am prepared to do all one man can do to achieve for our motherland her rightful heritage – independence; but if you ask me to abate one jot or tittle of the claims of social justice, in order to conciliate the privileged classes, then I must decline.
Such action would be neither honourable nor feasible. Let us never forget that he never reaches Heaven who marches thither in the company of the Devil. Let us openly proclaim our faith: the logic of events is with us.
I get that you aren't going around telling libs that Bernie Sanders is basically a fascist, but this isn't a private forum, not everyone is as careful as you, and leftists sliding into "One True Leftist" territory at the expense of anything resembling a mass movement is a real problem. Entertaining stuff like this doesn't do any good and might do some bad.
And I don't think France getting their asses chased out of Algeria and Indochina explains the British turning over Jamaica (where there was no threat of anything like those French imperial wars), and it definitely doesn't explain the U.S. deciding to grant independence to The Philippines 20-30 years earlier.
deleted by creator
Imperial countries were forced to leave their colonies in some cases, but left without any real revolutionary threat in other cases. Where was the revolutionary threat in Jamaica in 1960? Where was the revolutionary threat in The Philippines in 1934? I can believe that France saw the writing on the wall in Morocco, but there was actually some violence there (albeit short of a revolution). But there are some cases where there was no significant violence, and where there was no one who would have obviously forced them out.
Painting these events with a broad brush gets sloppy fast. "Bernie Sanders is just another flavor of fascist" isn't going to move anyone who isn't already a communist, anyway.
deleted by creator
Well said. The fact that most of these "peacefully" freed nations still are largely economically ruled to the benefit of their "former" colonizers is telling. It always comes with implicit threats. Connolly said as much when talking about Ireland
I get that you aren't going around telling libs that Bernie Sanders is basically a fascist, but this isn't a private forum, not everyone is as careful as you, and leftists sliding into "One True Leftist" territory at the expense of anything resembling a mass movement is a real problem. Entertaining stuff like this doesn't do any good and might do some bad.
And I don't think France getting their asses chased out of Algeria and Indochina explains the British turning over Jamaica (where there was no threat of anything like those French imperial wars), and it definitely doesn't explain the U.S. deciding to grant independence to The Philippines 20-30 years earlier.