Originally Posted by
Bob's World
Colonialism, like slavery, did not fall "out of fashion." Both simply became unprofitable.
The costs exceeded the benefits. If that had not happened I suspect we would today continue to morally rationalize both, just as humans did for the thousands of years.
Does anyone think that humans today are morally superior to those of all other times???
So, the question is, what changed the business model?
For Slavery, the advent of mechanization of the industrial age was a major factor in making it much cheaper to hire freemen at low wages to do the work that required many to do previously. Or to enable men to do work that simply physically was too demanding and dangerous to attract people to sign up for willingly in the past.
For Colonialism I will link the primary factor to the same factor I see driving major eras of insurgency, revolution and social change: Advents in Information Technology. An informed and connected populace is an empowered populace. An empowered populace is far more expensive to hold in collective servitude to some colonial master. It simply takes too many troops, too much effort to hold such an outrageous imbalance of power in place. As the American Colonists were fond of saying "An Island should not rule a Continent!!"
For the United States today there are lessons to be learned. Our own role is in many ways a de facto empire. Empires keep evolving over time. The Brits were less intrusive than the Romans; the Americans are less intrusive than the Brits. All, however, disrupt the relationship between a populace and their government by inserting a stronger, external power into the mix. We see today in many places where the US has emplaced control measures following WWII to implement Containment and to secure sea lanes and vital resources, a belt of shady governments and restless populaces.
Once again, the Cost/Benefit equation is shifting. The US must not "cut and run" as so many who see things in all or nothing terms might suggest. The US must, however, devise and implement a less controlling, and therefore less expensive, approach to servicing its interests in these vital locations. My belief (as I have shared here once or twice) is that such an approach will still work with governments, but will be much more cognizant of and sensitive to the will of the affected populaces; and will be much more willing to work with whatever government those people select for themselves. Selecting or artificially extending the reigns of governments that come to act with impunity toward their own people is no longer cost effective.
I agree with the morality of Wilson and FDR in calling for an end to Colonialism. The Pragmatism of Lincoln in dealing with Slavery is probably more accurate. At the end of the day, these matters always come down to a question of if the Juice is worth the Squeeze.
Cheers.
Bob
