[P.O.E.]

Interesting debate in the comments section.

A Google search will reveal a plethora of background on the pros and cons of the article, so I'll leave that to the reader.

Disclaimer: I have no connection to the blog or any parties involved. Just thought it was interesting.

[freedomjusticeruleoflaw]

Blacks would and did benefit greatly when colonialism was a standard third world model. There is not one successful black-majority country in the world. If you point to South Africa you must also allow for its death spiral.

[IronJack]

Ask the wretches in Zimbabwe or the Congo how horrible it was to be a European colony. And how much better it is now that those brutal imperialists have been run out of the country.

[Louis Foxwell]

The reaction is typical of liberal unease with ideas that run counter to Politically Correct thought. The liberal mindset is based almost entirely on emotional commitment to ideology.
The inability to reply to the article on colonialism in a rational manner speaks volumes about the tyranny of liberalism. Any idea counter to the true belief system of liberalism is not to be considered. This is the behavior of fanatics. It is utterly anti-scientific and irrational. Proof of this fanaticism is found most clearly in the notion of “settled science.” There is, of course, no such thing in the scientific method. “Settled” simply means “dogmatically adhered to regardless of evidence.”
Liberalism is anti-intellectual and anti-scientific. It treats science as a rigid body of beliefs that cannot be challenged. Tat is the nature of religion, not science. Logic and philosophy are considered by liberals to be assaults on truth.
Liberal thought is dogmatic, closed minded, utterly bigoted, and dehumanizing.

[buwaya]

This is a very interesting question, that in my case goes back to the early 80s and the field of development economics under the patronage of the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank. Its basic purpose (of the whole field of study) was to figure out how to make poor countries rich, if necessary by forcing policies on them.

Colonialism under another name. There has been a very great deal of that, and its had a very mixed record.

[arthurus]

We could go a long way toward stifling the current phase of the Islamic War by colonizing all the oil in Moslem countries. We should have done that as a result of the 1990 Gulf War i.i. we should have established a major military base in Iraq and taken Basra to administer while taking over oil production in that country, giving only a tiny portion of the proceeds to the local government, if any at all. The same should have been done to Saudi Arabia and Iran in the same time frame. Jihad bursts forth inevitably when r a ruling unit in the Moslem World has attained sufficient resources to support the teensy ruling class in opulence and keep the general population at subsistence level and to support Jihad. everything above that survival level goes to Jihad. Wealth from banditry or conquest or foreign tribute and, in modern times, from western government aid (tribute) and oil wealth (theft because the Moslems discovered nothing; the oil was found and developed by Westerners).

[aquila48]

“Interesting debate in the comments section.”

I agree, It’s even better than the article itself.

I looked at a couple other articles in the site and they’re all thought provoking. Good place for the philosophically inclined.

I found the following one particularly interesting because it discusses an issue that is at the heart of today’s politics. The idea of “luck egalitarianism” which is at the bottom of today’s “social justice” movements.

http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2017/09/libertarianism-luck-egalitarians/

[Pontiac]

In a recent paper entitled “The case for colonialism” Bruce Gilley argued that “Western colonialism was, as a general rule, both objectively beneficial and subjectively legitimate in most of the places where it was found”. Gilley then argued that colonialism should be “recovered” “by reclaiming colonial modes of governance, by recolonizing some areas, and by creating new Western colonies from scratch”. These are highly controversial claims. But it is unlikely that Gilley anticipated the antipathy with which they would be received.

If he didn’t he hasn’t been paying attention these last ten years.

Obama has fanned the flames of racial animus so that the least show of disagreement with the grievance industry sparks a backlash of hatred and requirement that the offender immediately repent, make amends and then be punished and banished anyway.