> It's been more than half a century. Sure, colonialism damaged us, but 50 years is also a lot of time in which change could have been made to help undo that damage. That change is ... largely absent.
First, I would disagree very strongly that this change is largely absent. India has made great strides in the last 50 years; it is undeniably a much stronger country in almost every way than it was 50+ years ago.
Secondly, it's been more than half a century since India's official independence from British rule, but it's certainly not been half a century since it was subject to immensely damaging influence from colonial powers. Just looking at Partition alone, the actions that the British took during Partition (and afterwards) are still being felt today, and there are many, many other ways in which India is still subject to external, colonial hegemony, just in a less overt and visible form.
There's lots of literature on postcolonial studies in India specifically, which explain it in far more detail than I could in this comment, but the fact is that colonialism has continued long after outright legal rule; it just exists in a different form.
To use 1947 as a benchmark is misleading, because that was only one stage of India gaining freedom from colonial rule. It's like saying that in the US the civil rights movement happened 50 years ago and slavery ended 150 years ago[0]. Yes, on paper, Black people are supposed to be treated equally under the law, but that undeniably is not the case in practice.
[0] Postcolonial pedants may point out that the relationship between Black people in the US is not strictly one of colonial subject-ruler in the exact same sense, but it's the closest analogy that non-pedants are likely to be familiar with.
We've made great strides, sure, but not in reversing the effect of colonialism.
Besides, I find it a bit disingenuous to put the full blame of a modern problem like pollution on colonialism, even when you account for continued influence way past 1947.
I completely agree that colonialism didn't stop at 1947. I'm just saying that it seems like a cop-out to just use it as an excuse for all our problems.
> Black people are supposed to be treated equally under the law, but that undeniably is not the case in practice.
Great example. Do you see any Americans blaming slavery or legal discrimination for the current situation, or are they blaming the modern times? Again, the past has a huge part to play here, but it's something that you should focus on trying to fix.
I don't see anyone go "meh, slavery" when the problems of the African American community are brought up. I do see people going "meh, colonialism" when India's problems are brought up, quite often. This is what I'm against. I'm not saying we should have fixed the problems by now, I'm saying we should have fixed them more than what our current state is, and we shouldn't just shovel all blame onto colonialism.
> I completely agree that colonialism didn't stop at 1947. I'm just saying that it seems like a cop-out to just use it as an excuse for all our problems.
I hardly, if ever, see people using it as a "cop out for all our problems", or people "shoveling all blame on colonialism". What I do see, though, is that this criticism is almost always made anytime someone makes mention of the actual continued effects of colonialism in the present day. It happens both on this thread and any other HN thread where the topic is brought up (though it's not limited to HN). In the aggregate, it becomes a way to dismiss these very real effects and ignore them altogether.
> Besides, I find it a bit disingenuous to put the full blame of a modern problem like pollution on colonialism, even when you account for continued influence way past 1947.
I don't (and neither would most postcolonial scholars), because the economic impact of 200+ years of outright exploitation takes more than 50 years to recover from. This aftermath of this economic destruction fundamentally changes the sorts of political and legal actions that are actually feasible (in practice). Even the US, the wealthiest country in the world[0], has outright refused to ratify the Kyoto protocol because of its effects on the economy[1]. In India, not only do you have to trade that off against the importance of economic growth in a developing economy, but also against the feasibility of actually implementing and enforcing policy changes[2].
> Do you see any Americans blaming slavery or legal discrimination for the current situation, or are they blaming the modern times?
Slavery and legal discrimination are responsible for the current state of the Black community in the US - that's the whole point. It's been 200 years and we still haven't been able to completely reverse its effects.
Incidentally, I do oftentimes see this same misguided criticism levied at the Black community, which essentially amounts to "you've had equal rights for 50 years now; it's up to you now to achieve success and end racial discrimination and inequality". While the situations are different (slavery vs. colonialism), this criticism is as misguided when applied to Black people in the US as it is when applied
[0] by raw GDP, and the wealthiest "large" country by GDP per capita
[1] ignore the political posturing in the rhetoric; this is very clearly the bottom-line reason
[2] Yes, inequality begets corruption and corruption begets inequality; it's a vicious cycle. This is why exploitative imperialism is so dangerous and exactly why fixing it is such a slow process.
> I hardly, if ever, see people using it as a "cop out for all our problems", or people "shoveling all blame on colonialism".
I have. Mostly amongst fellow students. Perhaps it's just different experiences then.
> it becomes a way to dismiss these very real effects and ignore them altogether.
Meh. I am okay with dismissing past issues when discussing present problems. Past issues cannot be fixed. I am less okay with dismissing present issues as a sole result of past problems.
Of course, I don't want to dismiss the effects of colonialism, but when it is used as an excuse (which I have seen often), I'd prefer to dismiss the past effects in an effort to avoid having present effects be dismissed.
> because the economic impact of 200+ years of outright exploitation takes more than 50 years to recover from.
You're talking in absolutes. I never said that we should have recovered by now. I'm asserting we ought to have made more progress than we have. This is a matter of opinion so I guess we should agree to disagree.
> Slavery and legal discrimination are responsible for the current state of the Black community in the US - that's the whole point.
Sure, but it's not used as an excuse either.
> Incidentally, I do oftentimes see this same misguided criticism levied at the Black community, which essentially amounts to "you've had equal rights for 50 years now; it's up to you now to achieve success and end racial discrimination and inequality".
Oh, this is not what I'm saying either. Perhaps I'm not being so clear; but I'm merely against the usage of colonialism as a cop-out. You're clearly not doing that here, so never mind :)
Do you think Indians themselves bear any responsibility for their public sanitation shortcomings? (Perhaps I shouldn't even assume you consider them shortcomings.)
First, I would disagree very strongly that this change is largely absent. India has made great strides in the last 50 years; it is undeniably a much stronger country in almost every way than it was 50+ years ago.
Secondly, it's been more than half a century since India's official independence from British rule, but it's certainly not been half a century since it was subject to immensely damaging influence from colonial powers. Just looking at Partition alone, the actions that the British took during Partition (and afterwards) are still being felt today, and there are many, many other ways in which India is still subject to external, colonial hegemony, just in a less overt and visible form.
There's lots of literature on postcolonial studies in India specifically, which explain it in far more detail than I could in this comment, but the fact is that colonialism has continued long after outright legal rule; it just exists in a different form.
To use 1947 as a benchmark is misleading, because that was only one stage of India gaining freedom from colonial rule. It's like saying that in the US the civil rights movement happened 50 years ago and slavery ended 150 years ago[0]. Yes, on paper, Black people are supposed to be treated equally under the law, but that undeniably is not the case in practice.
[0] Postcolonial pedants may point out that the relationship between Black people in the US is not strictly one of colonial subject-ruler in the exact same sense, but it's the closest analogy that non-pedants are likely to be familiar with.