One book I'm looking forward to reading is Sathnam Sanghera's book Empireland, a succinct and by all accounts very well written book about the British Empire and its effect on the modern day UK. The legacy of empire, whether you like it or not, is all around us and inescapable. The trouble is that way too many people view it through the rosy glow of nostalgia, as evinced by the utterly awful vitriol and abuse Sathnam has been subjected to on social media. It's also fuelled, of course, by his ethnicity: You can imagine the variants on the theme of 'Go back home, then'. Since he was born in, I believe, Wolverhampton, that's not too far.
But anyway, why get so worked up about history? And why insist that one single view of empire is correct? And why, when it comes down to it, be so racist, so fragile? For starters, IT IS HISTORY - there's nothing that anyone can do to actually change it, so the best that can be done is to study it carefully - and in its entirety. Turning Point UK (a rightwing movement, funded by some very unsavoury characters) put a video up on social media, talking about education and, surprise, surprise, the subject of empire came up, illustrated by a video of some WWII soldiers, a Spitfire and of course Winston Churchill. Now, it strikes me that we have some kind of patriotic equivalent of Schrodinger's Cat going on here - let's call it Schrodinger's Empire: One that is simultaneously the mightiest, most powerful empire the world has ever seen, and at the same time a plucky little underdog, standing alone against the terrible might of the Nazi Menace. It doesn't take much thinking to see the problem with that.
So what about those people going on about how the empire was a force for good, as per the 'What have the Romans ever done for us?' bit in Life of Brian? And, conversely, those who say the empire was a terrible evil? As ever, the truth lies somewhere in between. Do you think it's likely that England, some time back in the late 1500s, woke up one morning and said to itself, 'I know! Let's get out there, murder and pillage a load of other people in other countries, drag all their wealth home and oh yes, give them some REALLY NASTY communicable diseases at the same time'? Or that, later, gliding out of some sumptuous four poster, it suddenly declared 'I have a grand idea - Let's give these countries schools, aqueducts, trains and stuff like that, all for their benefit, because we're so bloody fantastic'?
Of course not. The benefits and banes of empire were the outcomes of the system itself - because that's what any empire is, a system. And systems don't give a toss for the joys or sorrows of any given individual. The outcomes arose and were not, by and large, intentional or deliberate - although that may well be strongly debated when it comes to the harm and atrocities done in the name of Empire.
If we look at the oft-cited examples of benefits of Empire - the provision of a train network, for example, or the development of an educational network - we can see that the benefits derived by subject peoples from these are, in fact, an unintended side effect. The development of a transport network is no more that efficient infrastructure investment, as any business concern will understand - in order to extract wealth, you need to move it round as efficiently as possible. The same goes with schools - you need educated people in order to run a massively complex system of government, so clearly schools, colleges and universities are necessary.
As for the atrocities, abuses and oppression committed in the name of Empire, this is more difficult - but I would argue that they are the inevitable outcome of the system itself, not the, as it were, raison d'etre of the people in charge of the empire. Quite simply, a political system that has, as its core philosophy, the deliberate intent of destroying and stealing is going to be pretty short-lived. However, one that, over time, as a course of habit, becomes inured to taking, to oppressing, to colonising, to inescapably altering the lives of everyone around it and in it - well, such empires often end up lasting a long, long time - and cast a long, long shadow.
Of course, we should also make a distinction between systemic exploitation and abuses and those that arise from individual attitudes from the dominant group - but again, these latter arise as a result of the imperial system: If you're born into Empire and you're indoctrinated into the belief that the system you live in is both Great and Good, and that everything else is inferior, then all sorts of attitudes and behaviours can be excused in the minds of those that believe that.
It's that warped belief in Empire that still clings on today: a distorted memory of what was, and a willing ignorance of the shadows. How can we combat this fairy tale version? Well, it all comes down in the end to education, as ever. Don't teach only the 'nice' bits of history - the big figures, the heroic tales, the satisfyingly 'complete' story, with well-defined Goodies and Baddies. The mythology surrounding WWII answers this narrative - the version where you have the definitively bad Nazis and the UK cast as the plucky little fighter is essentially just another retelling of Jack and the Beanstalk, or David and Goliath. Unfortunately, of course, history is never a simple case of Black and White, Light and Dark, Good and Evil - its convoluted, messy and often painted in shades of grey. And blood red.
Unfortunately, it serves the interests of certain politicians and populists (and certain Tabloid Newspaper owners) to peddle the myth and ignore the truth - which is why its crucial that we learn and understand about the whole story of our past, warts, shadows, light and all.
Comments
Post a Comment