Today is the 250th anniversary of the Boston Tea Party. Stop rolling your eyes, this isn't a patriotic post! You know me better than that.
This is about spilling the tea... about the British East India Company's spilled tea, and what that had to do with Bengal, textile workers, and famine.
See, BEIC was using its private armies to open markets around the world to their trading policies, and to install local rulers who would keep the goods and money flowing. They did this in Bengal, one of the world's biggest producers of textiles in the mid-1700s.
Then, in 1768, drought hit Bengal and crops failed. People began to go hungry, but the BEIC's puppet rulers and agents just continued to collect taxes--and, in some cases, to profiteer off the sale of food. Over the next two years, these practices exacerbated the food shortages, leading to the Great Bengal Famine of 1770, in which 7 - 10 million people are estimated to have starved to death. That's at least 25% of the entire Bengali population of the time.
This put a big dent in the profits of the BEIC (oopsie, who knew famine profiteering could have negative economic impacts?), leading to a financial crisis in England. This is also why BEIC was unloading tea for cheap in the American colonies, to get some of those revenues back.
So yeah, "no taxation without representation" was the rallying cry, but isn't it interesting that we (USians, I mean) were never taught that the REASON colonists were worried about this is because they felt they had something in common with starving Bengalis: namely, the vulnerability to a multinational corporation which clearly demonstrated its depraved indifference to human suffering in pursuit of profit.
Today in Labor History December 10, 1861: Nguyễn Trung Trực, along with his militia, sunk the French lorcha L'Esperance. Nguyễn Trung Trực was a fisherman who organized and led a guerilla rebellion against French colonial forces in the Mekong Delta in southern Vietnam in the 1860s. They used snipers to assassinate isolated French soldiers and chased French soldiers around the countryside, attacking military installations that were left undefended. Their intimate knowledge of the territory and their skill in hit-and-run tactics allowed them to inflict substantial casualties on the European troops.
Description: Spain's new colonial empire endowed Europe's rising monarchy with an unprecedented economic windfall. In this episode, we find out how silver and other goods extracted from the Americas made the first truly worldwide economy possible at the cost of Spain's prosperity and long-term stability. #podcast #history #economics #colonialism #capitalism @histodons@econhist
(Free) Registration is now open for the IHC / Drexel University workshop "The Colonization of Portugal", which will take place at the National Library of Portugal on 13 and 14 December.
The challenge is to inquire the importance of colonial dynamics in the making of metropolitan Portugal.
🆕 Eight new research contracts were awarded to the IHC under by the FCT: six in the Junior Researcher category and two in the Assistant Researcher category, which will result in five new members joining the Institute. 🥳
"Museums, Heritage, Culture: Into the Conflict Zone" by Kavita Singh (2015).
"But think for a moment of the history of museums. Think of the way their collections have been built, and the purposes they have served. Think of the violent encounters that often lay behind the collecting of curiosities in the age of exploration; or think of the museums built by missionaries to display pagan gods wrenched away from natives. Think of the vast collections built (and the ways these were built) during the age of colonialism, with entire monuments transported across the seas and re-erected in museum galleries. Think of the nations transformed by revolutions, where treasures were violently wrested away from the church and presented as desacralized avatars in museums".
🔔 We are welcoming contributions for our project “Connecting Portuguese History. Digital Dictionary of the Modern World”, which will bring together articles from historians and social scientists from different national and foreign universities.
This is an excellent film. For an American production, they weren't afraid to depict the "evilness" or extremism of the Western world. It's a nod to the sins of the West during the Colonial era, which unfortunately continues to this very day.
No one country, no one regional power, should be given this much might and sway for it will eventually make them dictators and tyrants disguised as democracy, freedom, and human rights. Exactly what is happening in our world today.
The ones who pay are not the 1% or the politicians or the high ranking military officials. It is the 99% who suffer. They justify their actions as "peace" and "for the future of humanity" when in reality, they only created more reasons for hatred and wars.
Sure, this was about AI. Yes, it is fiction. However, we cannot deny the underlying message of the film. Anyone who denies it is lying to themselves or living in their own fantasy.
Again, a superb film. It is rare to see productions from the West with such a profound message behind it. Western productions are often about entertainment these days, and making tons of money. Not this one. It's all about the message.
🏅 We end the week by congratulating José Miguel Ferreira, whose doctoral thesis received an Honourable Mention in the 32nd edition of the Victor Sá Prize for Contemporary History, awarded by the Cultural Council of the University of Minho. 🥳
The paradox of the infamous "Blafour Declaration" (1917):
“The most significant and incontrovertible fact is, however, that by itself the [Balfour] Declaration was legally impotent. For Great Britain had no sovereign rights over #palestine, it had no proprietary interest, it had no authority to dispose of the land. The Declaration was merely a statement of British intentions and no more”.
Sol M. Linowitz. 1957. “Analysis of a Tinderbox: The Legal Basis for the State of Israel.” American Bar Association Journal 6 (43): 522–25.
#haaretz#editorial West Bank settlers are exploiting the “propitious moment” created by the war that #Hamas started to expel thousands of Palestinians from their homes and lands. They are terrorizing them through various means in order to drive them from their villages. Far from everyone’s eyes, the West Bank is changing almost irreversibly.
"As horrific as the massacre was, it does not absolve Israel of its past crimes against the Palestinians, does not justify the ethnic cleansing Israel is currently carrying out in both the Strip and the West Bank."
"When the very mention of context itself is considered anti-Semitic, then pretext takes its place. The massacre serves as a pretext for ethnic cleansing in the Strip and West Bank and an excuse to muzzle and intimidate the Palestinian citizens of Israel."
It's not always easy to take Professor Ilan Pappé for his word when it comes to vigorous historical research, but his commentary is always interesting, and in this case also reflexive.
====
The holy rage: the plight of the Israeli left
My heart goes out to Jewish-Israeli leftists these days. They vent their distress on the pages of #Haaretz daily newspaper, while directing their anger at the global left, or at least the Western left. They are in a reality I found myself in some 15 years ago: ostracized and alienated from Jewish society for my “betrayal” of it on the one hand, yet on the other hand, not accepted as a credible partner by Palestinian society, whose national movement I supported as a researcher and political activist. Luckily that stage of my life is behind me.
When you don't belong to any group of reference, you are in a societal and intellectual limbo. This is exactly the distress of the Israeli left. The massacre carried out by #Hamas on October 7 exposed the difference between it and the global left. The global left is an organic part of the solidarity movement with the Palestinian liberation movement.
This liberation movement is no longer as institutionalized as it was, and is much more fragmented and weakened compared to its heyday in the 1970s. But it remains robust and its solidarity movement remains as well. The concepts and language of the solidarity movement have always been different from those of the Israeli left. This movement has not supported the two-state solution idea for years, and has long defined #Zionism as a settler colonial movement and Israel as an #apartheid state.
The sins of this movement, as they appear in the righteous indignation articles of writers like Eva Illouz,, Ofri Ilany, Haim Levinson and many others, are mainly twofold: comparing #Israel to colonialism, and mentioning the historical context of the massacre carried out by Hamas.
But the global left does not talk about Israel as part of global colonialism, but as part of settler colonialism. It is worth recalling, even for a moment, what characterizes settler colonial movements. These are movements of European refugees, who sought refuge and shelter from a Europe that did not want them and even persecuted them. They arrived in countries inhabited by native populations, who the new settlers saw as a fundamental obstacle to their dream of building a new Europe of their own.
Destruction of the local population or its expulsion were a precondition for the success of this new settlement. This is the story of the founding of the United States, Canada and Australia. The Zionist movement was also such a movement, and like the other movements relied on an empire to gain a foothold in a foreign land, found religious justification for settlement, and engaged in the search for ways to get rid of both the empire that assisted it and the native majority population.
Indeed, this is the perception of the global left. It includes defining Israel as an apartheid state, and was not born on October 7. It does not prevent condemnation of Hamas' actions, but it certainly provides a much more convincing explanation for this terrible event than defining Hamas as a bloodthirsty #Nazi organization that seeks to kill #Jews for the sake of killing.
Israel reacted with rage to the mass killing in the Gaza Strip, yet the Israeli left still expected the global left to be outraged along with it and relate to the horrors of that Shabbat outside any context. This is the global left's second sin, and this is the sin of the #UN secretary general: mentioning the context.
The Israeli left demands focus on the event as pure evil without context. Mentioning the context does not justify it but explains it, and above all offers a different explanation than that adhered to by Israeli politicians, pundits and journalists. In vain, the Israeli left will ask people of conscience worldwide to focus on the horrors of October 7, and therefore forget about the horrors of the occupation and siege prior to October 7 and those of the days after October 7.
The global left has always focused in the past - both in its historical perception and moral viewpoint - on contexts that gave birth to difficult actions of those who rebelled against Western oppression. Therefore, those who supported the abolitionist movement did not see the terrible massacre of whites led by Nat Turner in 1831, an event that harmed the struggle to abolish slavery, as an uncontextualized evil. Those who supported the Algerian liberation movement did not demand constant condemnation of the terrible massacre carried out by the rebels in July 1962 of white settlers in the city of Oran as if it had no historical context of over a hundred years of French abuse and oppression of the Algerian people.
These contexts explain the event, they do not justify it. They certainly clarify for us why the chorus of the Israeli left is shocked by what it defines as an insufficient response from the global left, and why its prominent spokespeople accuse the global left of anti-Semitism and immorality. As horrific as the massacre was, it does not absolve Israel of its past crimes against the Palestinians, does not justify the ethnic cleansing Israel is currently carrying out in both the Strip and the West Bank.
Moreover, and perhaps most importantly. As terrifying and horrible as it is, this is not a constitutive event: Israel will remain a settler colonial state, with features of an apartheid regime, Palestinian resistance will continue, global civil society will continue to support it, and Israel will rely solely on the support of Western elites. This is a clear recipe for continued bloodshed, with no winners, only losers, a reality in which calling for a ceasefire, which could lead to the return of the kidnapped, is considered treason, and the continuation of fighting and abandoning the kidnapped to their fate is preferred.
When the very mention of context itself is considered anti-Semitic, then pretext takes its place. The massacre serves as a pretext for ethnic cleansing in the Strip and West Bank and an excuse to muzzle and intimidate the Palestinian citizens of Israel. It also serves as a pretext for the United States to return its army to the region, from which it was expelled in disgrace after the failed attempt to impose democracy by force. It serves as a pretext for Western governments to severely undermine freedom of expression and opinion in the name of fighting terror.
Moral compass and awareness of contexts exposes the pretexts and their disaster-laden results, and above all focuses on what matters now: recognizing again that Palestinians and Israelis have only two options: mutual destruction or living together.
Professor Ilan Pappé, at the Centre for Palestine Studies, University of Exeter, is the author of "The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine."
It's not always easy to take Professor Ilan Pappé for his word when it comes to vigorous historical research, but his commentary is always interesting, and in this case also self-reflective.
====
The holy rage: the plight of the Israeli left
My heart goes out to Jewish-Israeli leftists these days. They vent their distress on the pages of #Haaretz daily newspaper, while directing their anger at the global left, or at least the Western left. They are in a reality I found myself in some 15 years ago: ostracized and alienated from Jewish society for my “betrayal” of it on the one hand, yet on the other hand, not accepted as a credible partner by Palestinian society, whose national movement I supported as a researcher and political activist. Luckily that stage of my life is behind me.
When you don't belong to any group of reference, you are in a societal and intellectual limbo. This is exactly the distress of the Israeli left. The massacre carried out by #Hamas on October 7 exposed the difference between it and the global left. The global left is an organic part of the solidarity movement with the Palestinian liberation movement.
This liberation movement is no longer as institutionalized as it was, and is much more fragmented and weakened compared to its heyday in the 1970s. But it remains robust and its solidarity movement remains as well. The concepts and language of the solidarity movement have always been different from those of the Israeli left. This movement has not supported the two-state solution idea for years, and has long defined #Zionism as a settler colonial movement and Israel as an #apartheid state.
The sins of this movement, as they appear in the righteous indignation articles of writers like Eva Illouz,, Ofri Ilany, Haim Levinson and many others, are mainly twofold: comparing #Israel to colonialism, and mentioning the historical context of the massacre carried out by Hamas.
But the global left does not talk about Israel as part of global colonialism, but as part of settler colonialism. It is worth recalling, even for a moment, what characterizes settler colonial movements. These are movements of European refugees, who sought refuge and shelter from a Europe that did not want them and even persecuted them. They arrived in countries inhabited by native populations, who the new settlers saw as a fundamental obstacle to their dream of building a new Europe of their own.
Destruction of the local population or its expulsion were a precondition for the success of this new settlement. This is the story of the founding of the United States, Canada and Australia. The Zionist movement was also such a movement, and like the other movements relied on an empire to gain a foothold in a foreign land, found religious justification for settlement, and engaged in the search for ways to get rid of both the empire that assisted it and the native majority population.
Indeed, this is the perception of the global left. It includes defining Israel as an apartheid state, and was not born on October 7. It does not prevent condemnation of Hamas' actions, but it certainly provides a much more convincing explanation for this terrible event than defining Hamas as a bloodthirsty #Nazi organization that seeks to kill #Jews for the sake of killing.
Israel reacted with rage to the mass killing in the Gaza Strip, yet the Israeli left still expected the global left to be outraged along with it and relate to the horrors of that Shabbat outside any context. This is the global left's second sin, and this is the sin of the #UN secretary general: mentioning the context.
The Israeli left demands focus on the event as pure evil without context. Mentioning the context does not justify it but explains it, and above all offers a different explanation than that adhered to by Israeli politicians, pundits and journalists. In vain, the Israeli left will ask people of conscience worldwide to focus on the horrors of October 7, and therefore forget about the horrors of the occupation and siege prior to October 7 and those of the days after October 7.
The global left has always focused in the past - both in its historical perception and moral viewpoint - on contexts that gave birth to difficult actions of those who rebelled against Western oppression. Therefore, those who supported the abolitionist movement did not see the terrible massacre of whites led by Nat Turner in 1831, an event that harmed the struggle to abolish slavery, as an uncontextualized evil. Those who supported the Algerian liberation movement did not demand constant condemnation of the terrible massacre carried out by the rebels in July 1962 of white settlers in the city of Oran as if it had no historical context of over a hundred years of French abuse and oppression of the Algerian people.
These contexts explain the event, they do not justify it. They certainly clarify for us why the chorus of the Israeli left is shocked by what it defines as an insufficient response from the global left, and why its prominent spokespeople accuse the global left of anti-Semitism and immorality. As horrific as the massacre was, it does not absolve Israel of its past crimes against the Palestinians, does not justify the ethnic cleansing Israel is currently carrying out in both the Strip and the West Bank.
Moreover, and perhaps most importantly. As terrifying and horrible as it is, this is not a constitutive event: Israel will remain a settler colonial state, with features of an apartheid regime, Palestinian resistance will continue, global civil society will continue to support it, and Israel will rely solely on the support of Western elites. This is a clear recipe for continued bloodshed, with no winners, only losers, a reality in which calling for a ceasefire, which could lead to the return of the kidnapped, is considered treason, and the continuation of fighting and abandoning the kidnapped to their fate is preferred.
When the very mention of context itself is considered anti-Semitic, then pretext takes its place. The massacre serves as a pretext for ethnic cleansing in the Strip and West Bank and an excuse to muzzle and intimidate the Palestinian citizens of Israel. It also serves as a pretext for the United States to return its army to the region, from which it was expelled in disgrace after the failed attempt to impose democracy by force. It serves as a pretext for Western governments to severely undermine freedom of expression and opinion in the name of fighting terror.
Moral compass and awareness of contexts exposes the pretexts and their disaster-laden results, and above all focuses on what matters now: recognizing again that Palestinians and Israelis have only two options: mutual destruction or living together.
Professor Ilan Pappé, at the Centre for Palestine Studies, University of Exeter, is the author of "The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine."
❗️The applications for a Junior Researcher position for the project "KNOW-AFRICA - Knowledge networks in 19th century Africa", coordinated by Sara Albuquerque at the University of Évora, closes on 20 November.
🗣 We have an open call for communications for the workshop "The gains of their sorrow: Slavery, the slave trade, and the rise of capitalism in the other South", which seeks to open a debate on bridges connecting research focused on the Middle Passage and the one focused on mines, plantations, urban jobs, etc.
📗 The book “Portuguese Colonialism and Islam. Mozambique and Guinea, 1930 –1974: From Repression to Religious Seduction”, authored by Mário Machaqueiro, will be presented by Susana Trovão (CRIA) and Pedro Aires Oliveira (IHC) on the 15th of November.
There are two forms of nuclear colonialism. The extraction of natural resources from traditional indigenous and colonized lands. And the colonialism of treating a place as empty, as "no place" where there is "no one" and there are no consequences for nuclear testing. Nuclear weapon states have always very intentionally "selected the irradiated." Read, Nuclear Bodies: The Global #Hibakusha.
🆕 The IHC has opened a call for contributions for its project “Connecting Portuguese History. Digital Dictionary of the Modern World”, which will bring together articles from historians and social scientists from different national and foreign universities.