Bro, there is nothing naive about accepting an awful lot of good came out of imperialism. what i dont understand is... no one minds the chinese treating those they colonised like scum, or the turks, or the indians, or any other great people... and if they do theyh are muted about it... the europeans on the other hand supposedly did nothing but bad things... not true... indeed id suggest that was naive sir! but i respect ur opinion... after all, im european and its how ive been brought up! peace
What Melani actually means is... dont be fooled by a thought provoking analysis... heaven forvbid contemplating well thought through, well put suppositions hey? i mean, for goodness sake, what idiot would ever allow him/herself to ever change their perception of the world!?? yes melani the whole world should just bury its head in the sand whilst stabbing itself in the neck with a shame removing self loathing shank! good grief
@tooshlong You really are a troubled person and not only a self-loathing one, but a people-loathing. You do nothing but vilify me on every opportunity you can - why? Because I do not subscribe to your point of view. Because I am not a slave to imperialism. Because I believe in freedom and self-determination of people. Because I'd rather have a backward country, with no vaccinations, no "middle classes" but have self-rule., independence and dignity. No foreign rule is acceptable for any nation.
@TheMelani50 me and my people have ACTUALLY experienced the poverty of the slum and no you wouldnt prefer it u short sighted bafoon...try it and tel me whether u concur! u are one of those with an 11 year olds perception of the world... wake up woman! i am a capitalist cos i have seen the benefits it has brought me and the Indian people! its ok for u sitting 5000 miles away in ur comfy chair experiencing the fruits of 200 years of capitalism... come to the suburbs n say that u ignorant derelict
@tooshlong Again you presume so much about me. How do you know that I have not experienced poverty? How do you that I have not lived in 3rd world countries and known what a slum is? How do you know that I have not experienced capitalism at its ugliest face and known how it can betray those people who, like you, espouse it? I am not a socialist but I have lived longer than you and know that being enslaved is not my idea of happiness. You are ignorance personified and so childish with your rants.
@TheMelani50 but u havent lived in a developing country cos u wudnt call yur homeland '3rd world'. thats how i knew! is this honestly what u hinge ur defence on... i am presuming whether ur a man or woman?! ha, it dusnt have no affect on this subject so is irrelevent! iam not blind babe(im sure ur a woman) i live it. idont need to justreadbookslikeu...i live it!
@tooshlong ad i also can tell cos its a typical view of liberal europe... most toher people apart from the arabs (they should look closer to home)and africa (tho germany and belgium get the brunt of criticism as they shud!) u lot thinkthe same.. have the same views.. and are mostly to unintelligent to analyse hypothose properly so JUMP ON BAND WAGONS!
@tooshlong and you're a bloody liar, as you're not in India but in the UK. I just checked your profile. No wonder you rant about empire, and talk like a Brit. You're a fascist...probably a BNP supporter and hate Indians, so shut the f*ck up, go to hell and leave me alone. I will block you and do not want your bile and empty drivel in my in box. Enjoy crawling up Ferguson's arse, and crawl back under that rock you came from!
@TheMelani50 I have a profile called hloops from francce, ivo1985 from russia and sanjiv24 from india... not a liar man just multiple profiles dat allow me to streem. in india one account can only stream so many bits... U really are an idiot.... u cant argue facts... u play the man not the ball! pathetic... u hate ur country GB I LOVE my Indus brethren! whos in the more comfortable position?!
@TheMelani50 STOP CALLING DEVELOPING COUNTRIES 3RD WORLD ITS OFFENSIVE TO MILLIONS OF PEOPLE! And you havent lived in abject poverty... so whatsyour point???? Where in UKis there poverty on the scale of Asia?? you keep goin on about irrelevent presumptions. I amclearlyless ignorant than you.. your 50 odd? act your age then.. and your clearly anti capitalist, ergo prefer agrarianism or communism? no thanks
@tooshlong Shut your mouth you ignorant idiot. You're beginning to irritate me, and I don't give a damn about you and what you think. This discussion is over, as you're too offensive and moronic to have a civilized discussion. You may idolise the Brits for coloniSing you, but you have the manners of a backward peasant from a THIRD WORLD COUNTRY...like it or not! I don't give a shit if you find that offensive, Now f*uck off and leave me alone.
@TheMelani50 TOO OFFENSIVE?! STOP CALLING MINE AND OVER A BILLION PEOPLES' COUNTRIES 3RD FUCKING WORLD THEN! WHAT WAS OFFENSIVE? TELL ME. HMM LETS RUN THROO THE PARAGRAPH SHALL WE? HMMM... (10 seconds later) NO NOTHING OFFENSIVE YOU OVER SENSITIVE CHILD! you lost this argument ages ago mate... peace mr stupid
@TheMelani50 WHAT A NASTY PIECE OF WORK YOU ARE. I AM RETARDED COS I AM FROM A DEVELOPING COUNTRY? U ARE THE REASON HALF WORLD HATES THE WEST...WESTERNERS LIKE U. UR SO CLEVER U THEN ALIENATE THE OTHER HALF INTO HATING U TOO... WAT AN UTTER FOOL!
@TheMelani50 oh and please read something other than magazines, newspapers and books written by hippies. stop behaving like an overgrowchild with a childlike outlook of the worlds. and dont say i love the english.. your so ignorant... i respect them not love them... sadly u are doing a lot to undermine that respect. this isnt a black and white wrold were a country is either horrific or beautiful you utter utter utter vacuous ignorant self loathing loser
@tooshlong Here is some "meat": Imperialism drained India's wealth. The East India Trading Company sold processed goods at a steep rate while buying materials at a low one, similar to the American Colonies. Wars with Britain, and between leaders instigated by Britain, took money. Prices of goods made in India which keep money in India were too high to compete with imported goods.
Respond to this video... It destroyed India's previous economy and India's handicraft small scale industries. The traditional handmade cloth industry was felled by the manufactured cloth made in and imported from Britain. The cloth was much cheaper for it's quality and could be mass produced because it was made by machines. Many other handicrafts such as clock-making, carpentry, the metal industry, etc. were destroyed, again because of the superior and cheaper manufactured imports.
..India became dependent due to imperialism. The destruction of the previous industries meant that nearly all processed goods were imported from Britain. As India was a protectorate it was made to only trade with Britain. Goods/materials not found in India were imported by Britain as it had done in order to "get it's foot in the door" prior to it's annexation of India. India basically became unable to support itself anymore because of European, mostly British of course, interference and trade.
Respond to this video... There was widespread famine. Britain encouraged/forced farmers to grow cash crops like tobacco on their farms instead of food. The booming population was unable to afford the amount of food that was grown and thus starved.
just travelled around Europe btw.. spent 9 months in Portugal, Spain, Italy, Sweden, Germany, France and UK.... OK, the french didnt seem to like me much but the Brits have a massive indian community and treated me graciously as did everyone else... why do u think your own people are so dispicable?! really interesting
so the British did NO good? is this what you are getting at?.. serously?! dont just make assertions... back it up with some substance as opposed to resorting to insulting someone who has studies his subjest for decades.... disagree with him... dont disrespect
... All of which assisted in the increase of their populations and decreased infant mortality rate, provided stable environments from within which we could do business with ergo nsuring their countries development.... only a half wit can seriously suggest none of this was good
Ferguson's description of punctuated equilibrium is just slightly wrong. The main driver of punctuations in genetic evolution is the reproductive isolation of subsets of species. He also obfuscates the degree to which mass extinctions were caused by instances of "invasive species."
@Sh012222 wow! as repostes go... that has to be one of the worst... you really couldnt find a better combination of words? you inarticulate, logically derelict, lump of muck... at least he has some books to wank on you irrelevent intellectual paracite
@Sh012222 Love your comment. That idiot tooshlong talks out of his arse and has no clue. He's the most brain-dead commentator I have ever come across!
@humbrolenamel Hooray for some words of wisdom. Yes, he is an idiot. He's a neo-con, a supporter of Empire and thinks that the British Empire was a force for good, and various others spurious ideologies. He's an idiot.
@TheMelani50 so the British did NO good? is this what you are getting at?.. serously?! dont just make assertions... back it up with some substance as opposed to resorting to insulting someone who has studies his suggest for decades.... disagree with him... dont disrespect
@tooshlong I have disagreed with him for years now. But he continues to spout nonsense and insults people's intelligence. You need to do a comparative study of empire and look closely at what he is saying and why before you act as his advocate. I too have studied this subject for years. British imperialism did more harm than good, and this is from a Brit whose family benefited from the empire. You need to exercise objectivity, and not fawn over a celebrity.
Good for you Niall. Is it true that you are Gran used to come from Shettleston in Glasgow haha. I can;t believe that somewhere in your DNA is an east end glesca gene. God bless you, big man, ye've definitely done well fur yersel!!
Austrian economics would say the bubble is the problem: it is a time of
misallocation of resources. The collapse of that bubble is the cure, it reallocates resources to better places and wipes out the mistakes of those that misread the market.
@guninthewater One two buckle my shoe. Do you know that one? Try saying it while you go to sleep. It won't help with your problem but will keep you from being a problem to the people around you.
@equsnarnd May I say sir that never in all my years have I encountered such a goosebrained ninnyhammer!!! Your blimblamery is the HEIGHT OF TEDIUM!!!! Fling yourself out the nearest window...you.....YOU BALMY COCKEYED MOONCALF!!!!!
@guninthewater How would you possibly know? Like a fish in water you swim in pretentiousness. You've sent several messages and managed to say absolutely nothing worth listening to. Go peddle your garbage somewhere else.
@hyylo Do you think. I kept thinking this is an awfully bright guy who needs to read the Austrian economists to put this all together without holes. He just keeps missing things when he tries to explain the economy.
"...there are a number of different ways that (the state) can actually exploit financial institutions. It can monopolize the production of money, and then debase it...by printing more paper to finance its deficit. .."
He's got it backwards. Privately run central banks (US fed, bank of England) create currency, not the government. To gloss over this fact is so absurd that it makes me distrust just about everything else this professor has to say about financial institutions and their motives.
@TheMelani50 Shut your whole - You're allowed to have your opinion, but I think he has many interesting things to say. He's not perfect, All Human beings are flawed
Just because he supports policies you don't happen to like, and may even find morally repugnant does not mean that he's an idiot or that some or even alot of what he has to say is true. Maybe it isn't, but moralizing about it isn't going to make your case. Perhaps you should actually look at what he says a bit more objectively and not just emote all over the place?
@Pervyable I don't understand why this fascination with a man who extols the virtues of Imperialism? For me an idiot isn't someone who is necessarily obtuse and lacking in mental deduction. But it's someone who openly and unashamedly espouses notions and ideologies which have been proven over and over again to be repugnant to any decent thinking human being. It's like supporting the idea of slavery, and saying that it's a profitable and valid phenomenon. How can anyone justify that?
@TheMelani50 Mate... just because he tries to remind people that not everything about empire was bad doesn't make his views repugnant. typical liberal self loathing ignorance
@tooshlong I am not a liberal and I am certainly NOT self-loathing. But I certainly loath Ferguson and his obsession with empire, and those, like you, who are his apologists.
@TheMelani50 You obviously are self loathing if you canot drag your own withering perception of the world into the realms of logic. Displacement and manipulation was certainly a trait of British expansionist policies and this should never be forgotten and by the same token one cant wholly dismiss the foundations the UK laid in India's and other Asian states legislative, judicial, education and democratic institutions... nor can you dismiss the policies of vaccination and sanitation in Africa
@tooshlong "withering perception of the world into the realms of logic" is something you seem to need to apply to yourself. Consider many of the current conflicts in the world: India-Pakistan, Israel-Palestine, Sinhalese-Tamil, Fijian-Indian. The common element behind them all is British rule. Draw your own conclusion from that. I am British and have studied British imperialism extensively. Your ignorant and facile view of the world is cute but belongs to insular Americans, like you!
@TheMelani50 Ha, why would you say that? is that the best you can do... accuse me of being an American as if its akin to being a Nazi or something?like i should be ahamed of it if i was?i am actually from and live in Ahmadbad in India. and anyway, id be proud of being american if i was one. The Uk didnt cause the break up of india, the idea of muslim nationialism (Started in the 1930s) broke india up, not the brits... insular westerners should do more reading.
@tooshlong Ahh a servile Indian, ready to sell his own country to the West? I rest my case! Be proud of being Indian - an independent country, relying on its own abilities and capabilities, and not enslaved by imperialist powers who go under the guise of benefactors, when in reality they're out to milk their colonies. Come to the west and see how they look down on people like you! Wake up and don't be a fool!
@TheMelani50 You really aren't a very nice person are you... first i am a disgusting american because i disagreew tih you and then you patronise my peoples 5000 year history by calling me slavish... the indians had a thriving nation before the brits, dutch and french ever appeared thank you. they did milk my country but they also allowed a middle class to develop, allowing social mobility, developed methods of contraception, introduced my famiuly to medicices and vaccines and allowed my country
@tooshlong I don't think you have a clue what is a nice person and what is not, if you think that Ferguson is a "nice" person for supporting imperialism and me as a bad person for defending the rights of Indians. It is because the Indians had a thriving nation that parasitic imperialistic powers like mine, the British, occupied and exploited to the overall detriment of the Indians. How could you condone that, giving me the pathetic excuse of medicine and vaccines as a mitigating reason.
@TheMelani50 you have issues man! i didnt say he was nice.. when did i use that word? i dont care whether he is nice or not.. he may well be a dick! why play the man not the ball all the time?! use argument not vitriole! well as an indian i promise we dont need your patronising head patting. ok ok fine... explain how. explain how after everything the british did in india it was to the ultimate detriment of our people? and explain how dismissing medicine and vaccine as pathetic makes sense?
@tooshlong I think you're the one with issues. You're obviously a wealthy, well-to-do, educated Indian. Look at the rest of your country - the slums, the poverty etc. Had the British really been a benevolent influence, you would have seen a different India today. Don't just talk for yourself, because you have benefited from colonial rule. Talk for the millions who have not!
@TheMelani50 Why am I obviously wealthy?! once again you undermine your own baseless assertions with presumptious bile. i was brought up in Anduri slums in Guji ok? i worked my arse off for Siemans bolting chips for mobile phones for pennies before making my way up to nothing more than a management position and moved to a lower middle class neighbourhood... i am far from rich. what kind of india? democratic? developing at incredible rate? free press? how else would ya want it to have turned out?
@tooshlong Then why did India fight for its independence if the British were so benevolent? If I am presumptuous, imagine the thousands of British who ruled your country for hundreds of years....how presumptuous were they? Continue to be deluded. I am done with this silly argument.
@TheMelani50 you exploited us but were not raccist! why do u not want to see this? your generals and dukes marred our women you idiot! all i suggest is stop being so hard on yourself and be lucky to not havethe history of Turkey, China, Japan, Portuguese, German, Russian. We revolted when you forced us to use cow fat in our cartridges, ignorant and malicious? yes. hitleresque hatred? no. just get offf your high horse and do some reading before crying in my peoples' name. have u no dignity?
@TheMelani50 to develop an education system that matches the west's. gave me a chance to defend my self in a courts under teh presumption of 'innocent til proven guilty'. In the 18th/19th centruy India had a choice... look to China, France, Turkey, UK, Dutch and Germans.. only the frnch and british would have helped us to develop... india under the chinese, turks, germans and belgians would have been hprrendous and i count myslef fortunate it was the brith not them that won the battle of India!
@tooshlong Why would you assume that India needs to be colonized by anyone in order for it to develop? Do you have such little faith in the Indian nation that you give me the poor comparison of counties colonized by certain oppressive powers as opposed to a lesser oppressive power. You don't seem to have much pride or dignity to think that you need to be patronised by the British in order to develop. Why do you need the British to help you to develop?
u didnt answer me! we didnt need to be colonized by anyone but if you think that india would have remained independant you live in a parallel universe somewhere with a different concept of rationale. india was to be chewed over and spat out by someone, it was far too strategic an asset for the major powers to dismiss. id have prefered nobody but compared to other colonialists your people were the most moral! why do you find this concept of your people not being completely evil so uncomfortable?
@tooshlong Because being British, I know the British better than you and know that they were not a benevolent power. I know the racism, exploitation and victimization we inflicted on those we colonised. This discussion cannot be done here adequately, as I am unable to really give you a detailed analysis of history on a Youtube forum. You will continue to have your opinions whatever I say, so let's agree to disagree.
@TheMelani50 ok and beng Indian, i know the Indians better than you and know that the resentment here is more to do with your country's ignorance of our customs, customs you trampled on when you got here. thats as far as it goes. we admire british culture, language and history. I think our history of british empire is slightly more acurate than yours too.
so the turks: they would have done what they did the greeks, circassians and armenians... destroyed our cculture and language. the chnese would have done the same, the germans would have carried on their african policy of eugenics, the bellgians would have given us apartheid. the british didnt burn down my town, didnt rape our women, didnt kill our princes and at least made an effort to assimilate themselves into OUR culture and not the other way round. this is why i like the brits
@tooshlong It's like saying "Our house was burgled by a bunch of thugs, but at least unlike our neighbours who were killed and raped, our thugs only stole from us, humiliated and enslaved us. So, we have to be grateful for that because after all that, they gave us medicine before they left, and after all we were doomed to be robbed." You make me laugh, you poor, deluded man:D
@TheMelani50 yes but you still fail to actually say anything of substance. you just repeating your insight that imperialism is bad in all forms. i know... you keep saying! give me some meat to chew on and think about.. otherewse dont need to reply
@TheMelani50 deluded?! me?! haha mate, you think that the brits marrying our women, fathering india's new generation is racist! you my dear are definately deluded.
The Tamil Singhalese problem was as much to do with Indian and Tamil intransigence of southern India than it was to do with the UK. Israel-Palestine is still a problem today becasue the UK wished to curry favour wit the Hashemite Abdullah tribe of the Hejaz by carving Iraq, Syria and Jordan amonfst them instead of proportioning the region of palestine between the jews and arabs... the Brits fukd everyone up the bum in the ME i dont disagree but it is far less black n white than u make out
@tooshlong The British rule in India had the same disadvantages that any colonial rule did. The Indians were not in control of their own country. It left them as 2nd class citizen. They could not profit from their natural resources. Their economic advancement was in the British hands. Their own language was secondary and their culture was stifled. Vast amounts of money were siphoned off by the East India Company and later by the British colonial administration.
@tooshlong Who is being presumptuous now? You are insulting, abusive and reactionary. You have a distorted vision of history and you're so blind about what the Brits did, that you can't see beyond the lies you've been reading. But the most presumptuous thing about you is that you said that I am a woman, when I am man, in my 50's and clearly have more insight and experience than you do. Melani is my wife's name.
@Kritikakis1968 Then clearly you went to the wrong schools and Ferguson is no great teacher - he's a flawed thinker and distorts history to fit his agenda. Don't be fooled!
See the 4 hour series "The Ascent of Money: The Financial History of The World." If is really informative and filled in a lot of gaps in my financial educaton and a understanding of international relationships, war and hatreds towards groups. It puts Communism in its place. No place in a civil world. Commanding Heights is another great series on what works. Milton Friedman is the man.
I think that distrust of finance he alludes to is related to or an extension of the distrust held for the educated or "Academia", and why there's always a token "dumb" guy in most television series. People hate those who are smart, or come across as smarter than they are..but love to feel smart around/among others.
Neither here nor there...just interesting, rarely acknowledged connection.
Which is another way of saying that those who fall under your "Academia" category, are in fact arrogant. Which is why it will be these very academia who will try to control others who threaten their so-called superior views and choices.
I would be more interested in learning about accounts of so called "insiders" and their direct minipulation of "outsiders'" behaviour. A few of the sloppy greedy have been locked up but I'm curious to know if some of the bigger fat cats have complex models of their own that allow them to get in on the action but minimize their exposure to public scrutiny.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Ferguson is just a sophomore who looks good and talks like a gentlemen. Thats why the Yanks fall for his patter. He's actually pretty right wing and is a natural Tory/Republican. He's certainly no intellectual and we Brits think he's a bit thick to be honest. No surprise the Yanks lap him up though!
Well his support for the Chilean economic "miracle" (in his TV series) really exposes him for what he his. In effect he justified the killing and horrific torture of thousands. Not only that, he neglected to point out the the gross inequality that is a core part of Pinochet's economy. Sure he looks good on TV, is sophisticated etc, but his work needs to be critically examined.
his costs and benefits of anglobilization is quite critical about military capitalism; and pointing out rapid growth in the chilean economy isn't a defence of a dictatorship, it's completely truthful to state, for example, that China has experienced an economic miracle raising billions out of poverty, but doesn't say anything about political freedom.
Alex, let's keep it real here - raising "billions" out of poverty is a huge exaggeration. Millions sure, even tens of millions but not billions. Regarding Ferguson's comments about Pinochet: I will look at that espisode again and get back to you on that.
I'll do my best to keep it real, probably the total amount of people isn't 1,000,000,000 people but the amount of people in china with higher standrards of living under Deng Xiaoping's China when compared to Mao's, is astronomical. My main point about your comment is praise for an economic system isn't a defence of a military dictatorship, and he has been very critical of other military dictatorships. Can I ask what exactly does his support for the chilean economic miracle exspose him as?
Oh, the curse of little knowledge. Pinochet's critics do not take into account the scenario he inherited. The violence under his regime was nothing compared with what went on during Allende - but it's not politically correct to discuss the human rights' violations of the left - right?
Claudioaa1947 - Are you telling me Allende murdered 3,000 people????(similar to 9/11 deathtoll) because that is the amount Pinochet murdered that's not counting the toture victims. Got any proof ?
What's this Ferguson guy about? Just go on and read his twisted version of world history that's both nationalist and politically motivated, and does not even make a pretence of objectivity and you'll really start to wonder why this guy is a Harvard professor. In his version the British empire is the great benefactor of mankind and Britain is the bastion of political liberty. And yet in 2009 they still have an unelected house in parliament. Huh?
India, for example, is the largest democracy in the world. They inherited the ideas of especially English liberty, in the spirit of John Locke and Thomas Paine. India would not be like this without the British Empire. Before the British Raj, India was run provincially by many rajas. Why can't it be argued that India benefitted from Empire? Arguing this does not mean that you are an imperialist, or that you approve of the non-representative nature of empire.
There are benefits about everything, so it is all a question of balance. Most westerners today view colonialism negatively, and for a good reason. It involved hostile attitudes of arrogance, racism and exploitation. Whatever benefits the subject nations derived from it, were mostly indirect. May I also remind you that it is difficult to find a writer more hostile to British monarchy than Thomas Paine who played an active role in both the American and French revolutions.
But to put indirect benefits in the periphery is a mistake. To assess the benefits of any historical event we might assess both what happened and what would have happened if the event had not occurred. If the British had not governed India, then it is very probable that the Germans or even the Japanese would have. Given the nature of these two particularly aggressive imperial powers, this would have shifted the geopolitical status into, what I assess to be, a worse state.
You can, but I was taking about the tradition of progress (what a great phrase) that the English embody. The Magna Carta, the adoption of Parliament, and the Glorious Revolution all represent the peaceful transfer of power from the ruling class to increasingly representational bodies. John Locke and Thomas Paine represent the continuation of this tradition to it's natural and logical conclusion.
What about the tradition of progress in the US and France. Or the tradition of German liberals such as von Humboldt? The problem with arguing for Britain as the bastion of liberalism is that it is 300 years out of date. As far as I understand, the revolution in England was followed by restoration. Contrary to this the US and France actually became republics and models for democratic government ever since. As you know, not many countries follow the UK model of parliament today.
The United States was in isolation. Germany was not unified during the time of von Humboldt, and his legacy was completely dwarfed by that of Otto von Bismarck, who put Germany on the path of militarization that really only ended after WWII. Bismarck was also the supreme enemy of France. In Britain there was no talk of "Iron and Blood."
You have beautifully illustrated my point (I admit, I hid it a bit) above. The fact that a country has liberal thinkers does not mean that it can be labelled as a bastion of liberalism. This applies to England as much as Germany (the two countries/regions fuelled the imperial game in Europe and tried to destroy the legacy of the French revolution). Surely the US and France should be regarded as more important for the spread of democracy.
Yes the United States, but no to France. The French Revolution remains a credible revolution in theory, but it was a failed revolution. Only the United States remains credible in this respect. As you know, the aftermath of the Reign of Terror brought forth the French Empire. Post Napoleonic France was barely more democratic as the dominant force in French-Parliament were the extreme, reactionary monarchists (not moderate monarchists, or reformists, but hard right-wing monarchists).
The outcome of the French revolution is that France today is a republic. Not only that, but the French revolution and the form of government that it entailed has been an inspiration to many of the nations in continental Europe. It failed, true, in short term (and partly due to the actions of other monarchist countries) but lives on long term. The Glorious Revolution, on the other hand, is barely even remembered outside the UK.
I think we can now return to my original problem with Ferguson. I hope this dialogue has illustrated that it is possible to argue for many alternatives even on tiny details of history. Ferguson's arguments are consistently one-sided. He and his supporters rarely expose themselves to opposing views and are a right-wing equivalent to Marxist historians. This is why I don't understand why he is in Harvard. His investigative standard is not high enough and he clearly does not care about truth.
Of course he has exposed himself to opposing views- he has simply taken a side. You are asking him to be more centrists, or maybe just not right wing. The reason Harvard and Yale have intellectuals like him is because they take on the best every field, and intellectuals at that level have specific outlooks and opinions on matters. Their opinions are debate-worthy and thus not entirely objective. Students simply have to make up their own minds and do their own research.
Wrong. Intellectuals do not have strong opinions or outlooks because they know the fallacy of such outlooks and opinions. That is how I always in my mind separate intellectuals from pseudo-intellectuals. In relativist fields such as history, any true intellectual can find the truth in many arguments, not just one. Ferguson is more provocative than intellectual. Of course he knows his views are controversial and plays it up, twisting facts as he goes along.
My problem is that I cannot read him, because as a layman in history, I cannot be sure when he is colouring things to suit his political motives. To read his books is thus a waste of time, unless I also read the counterpoint and I do not have time for that.
Well the problem is then that you don't know his arguments and the evidence he puts forth for them. It is intellectually dishonest to dismiss a theory without learning about it first.
On the contrary, it is a very useful ability to be able to tell from very little reading if somebody's writing is worth further study. This is an absolutely crucial skill if one wants to survive in the academia, which is flooded with different information and interpretations. I know enough not to read more of Ferguson and I can't recommend it to you either.
I'm sorry, I just realised that we are not talking about the same thing. By an 'intellectual', you seem to mean somebody who touts their personal political views as the 'truth'. I'm talking of intelligence. Interestingly, Chomsky and Russell have produced very respectable works in linguistics and maths, respectively. Touting their political views for them is only a side thing whereas for Ferguson it's the main act. Truly intelligent people are more measured than that.
Wrong. Ferguson's main act is economics and financial history. None of these people, including Ferguson, tout their views as fact. They simply know how to stick to an argument. I'm sorry that you don't have enough intellectual courage to create your own perspective for analysis.
And what is your world view? Let's hear it so I can throw the same accusation back to you.
Which fact that I have quoted you'd like me to substantiate? You will be able to check them yourself. Such is the wonder of modern internet. The debate is over interpretation. The point about not reading him is that even a layman can see his bias. It is relatively easy to find more measured writing of history.
"Which fact that I have quoted you'd like me to substantiate"
None, because you haven't "quoted" any facts, you have just espoused your opinion, as well as saying "Ferguson is more provocative than intellectual" or accusing him of being a " pseudo-intellectual". That's why he works at Harvard, and you spend your time debating on Youtube, your laughable.
I would like to point out that if you read this thread, you will notice that both myself and koreindian1 have illustrated our opinions with facts. I much preferred debating with him in fact. And what comes to debating on youtube, what are you doing here?
"Had it been up to Britain, the whole of western Europe would still struggle under the yoke of monarchy, elitism and classism."
Thats not fact, it's your opinion, and it's wrong to boot. Ever heard of the English Civil War? The Glorious Revolution? the Magna Carta?
We were revolutionizing politics long before the French, or indeed the American's. Moreover, you talk of elitism and classism? What different is that to your blatant socialist inspired - political/ moral elitism?
You can easily argue that the dysfunctions in Russian csarism were so blatant that they caused such outrage as to drive people to join the flawed communist movement. Had the regime been more flexible and allowed for representation earlier there may not have been a socialist takeover. Also to clarify, I'm not a socialist. I'm a liberal. I believe in the right of the people to govern themselves without interference by elitist "lords". To quote the bible, for me there's only one Lord.
@bettertobealive who's history are you reading? it's as though you've got an axe to grind, rather than a critical insight to share.
I feel a v strong case can be made that over the course of human history: monarchy, aristocracy, and plutocracy has starved a VASTER proportion of men & women of power, dignity, security, and equality under the law THAN 'socialist elitism'.
'Socialist elitists', in a strong sense, protect against plutocracy (eg B Russell, M Ghandi, J Rawls, Thurgood Marshall, etc)
I did not realise I'm a socialist. Actually, I think the American consitution and the accompanying documents are the greatest political achievement of human history. Which side were you lot on when the US was asserting that consitution? The fact that Britain itself is a monarchy today with an unelected house in its parliament is proof enough for the first point. It's no opinion, I'm afraid. And don't even get me started on the class issues...
Niall is a sissy and a bitch for the big banks.
ulaghchi 1 month ago
Thank you for all the effort
thantawa 2 months ago
Bro, there is nothing naive about accepting an awful lot of good came out of imperialism. what i dont understand is... no one minds the chinese treating those they colonised like scum, or the turks, or the indians, or any other great people... and if they do theyh are muted about it... the europeans on the other hand supposedly did nothing but bad things... not true... indeed id suggest that was naive sir! but i respect ur opinion... after all, im european and its how ive been brought up! peace
tooshlong 3 months ago
Ferguson is a very sharp man but his views on European imperialism are so naive.
zagat44 7 months ago
What Melani actually means is... dont be fooled by a thought provoking analysis... heaven forvbid contemplating well thought through, well put suppositions hey? i mean, for goodness sake, what idiot would ever allow him/herself to ever change their perception of the world!?? yes melani the whole world should just bury its head in the sand whilst stabbing itself in the neck with a shame removing self loathing shank! good grief
tooshlong 7 months ago
@tooshlong You really are a troubled person and not only a self-loathing one, but a people-loathing. You do nothing but vilify me on every opportunity you can - why? Because I do not subscribe to your point of view. Because I am not a slave to imperialism. Because I believe in freedom and self-determination of people. Because I'd rather have a backward country, with no vaccinations, no "middle classes" but have self-rule., independence and dignity. No foreign rule is acceptable for any nation.
TheMelani50 7 months ago
@TheMelani50 me and my people have ACTUALLY experienced the poverty of the slum and no you wouldnt prefer it u short sighted bafoon...try it and tel me whether u concur! u are one of those with an 11 year olds perception of the world... wake up woman! i am a capitalist cos i have seen the benefits it has brought me and the Indian people! its ok for u sitting 5000 miles away in ur comfy chair experiencing the fruits of 200 years of capitalism... come to the suburbs n say that u ignorant derelict
tooshlong 7 months ago
@tooshlong Again you presume so much about me. How do you know that I have not experienced poverty? How do you that I have not lived in 3rd world countries and known what a slum is? How do you know that I have not experienced capitalism at its ugliest face and known how it can betray those people who, like you, espouse it? I am not a socialist but I have lived longer than you and know that being enslaved is not my idea of happiness. You are ignorance personified and so childish with your rants.
TheMelani50 7 months ago
@TheMelani50 but u havent lived in a developing country cos u wudnt call yur homeland '3rd world'. thats how i knew! is this honestly what u hinge ur defence on... i am presuming whether ur a man or woman?! ha, it dusnt have no affect on this subject so is irrelevent! iam not blind babe(im sure ur a woman) i live it. idont need to justreadbookslikeu...i live it!
tooshlong 7 months ago
@tooshlong ad i also can tell cos its a typical view of liberal europe... most toher people apart from the arabs (they should look closer to home)and africa (tho germany and belgium get the brunt of criticism as they shud!) u lot thinkthe same.. have the same views.. and are mostly to unintelligent to analyse hypothose properly so JUMP ON BAND WAGONS!
tooshlong 7 months ago
@tooshlong and you're a bloody liar, as you're not in India but in the UK. I just checked your profile. No wonder you rant about empire, and talk like a Brit. You're a fascist...probably a BNP supporter and hate Indians, so shut the f*ck up, go to hell and leave me alone. I will block you and do not want your bile and empty drivel in my in box. Enjoy crawling up Ferguson's arse, and crawl back under that rock you came from!
TheMelani50 7 months ago
@TheMelani50 I have a profile called hloops from francce, ivo1985 from russia and sanjiv24 from india... not a liar man just multiple profiles dat allow me to streem. in india one account can only stream so many bits... U really are an idiot.... u cant argue facts... u play the man not the ball! pathetic... u hate ur country GB I LOVE my Indus brethren! whos in the more comfortable position?!
tooshlong 7 months ago
Comment removed
tooshlong 7 months ago
@TheMelani50 STOP CALLING DEVELOPING COUNTRIES 3RD WORLD ITS OFFENSIVE TO MILLIONS OF PEOPLE! And you havent lived in abject poverty... so whatsyour point???? Where in UKis there poverty on the scale of Asia?? you keep goin on about irrelevent presumptions. I amclearlyless ignorant than you.. your 50 odd? act your age then.. and your clearly anti capitalist, ergo prefer agrarianism or communism? no thanks
tooshlong 7 months ago
@tooshlong Shut your mouth you ignorant idiot. You're beginning to irritate me, and I don't give a damn about you and what you think. This discussion is over, as you're too offensive and moronic to have a civilized discussion. You may idolise the Brits for coloniSing you, but you have the manners of a backward peasant from a THIRD WORLD COUNTRY...like it or not! I don't give a shit if you find that offensive, Now f*uck off and leave me alone.
TheMelani50 7 months ago
@TheMelani50 TOO OFFENSIVE?! STOP CALLING MINE AND OVER A BILLION PEOPLES' COUNTRIES 3RD FUCKING WORLD THEN! WHAT WAS OFFENSIVE? TELL ME. HMM LETS RUN THROO THE PARAGRAPH SHALL WE? HMMM... (10 seconds later) NO NOTHING OFFENSIVE YOU OVER SENSITIVE CHILD! you lost this argument ages ago mate... peace mr stupid
tooshlong 7 months ago
@TheMelani50 WHAT A NASTY PIECE OF WORK YOU ARE. I AM RETARDED COS I AM FROM A DEVELOPING COUNTRY? U ARE THE REASON HALF WORLD HATES THE WEST...WESTERNERS LIKE U. UR SO CLEVER U THEN ALIENATE THE OTHER HALF INTO HATING U TOO... WAT AN UTTER FOOL!
tooshlong 7 months ago
@TheMelani50 oh and please read something other than magazines, newspapers and books written by hippies. stop behaving like an overgrowchild with a childlike outlook of the worlds. and dont say i love the english.. your so ignorant... i respect them not love them... sadly u are doing a lot to undermine that respect. this isnt a black and white wrold were a country is either horrific or beautiful you utter utter utter vacuous ignorant self loathing loser
tooshlong 7 months ago
@tooshlong Here is some "meat": Imperialism drained India's wealth. The East India Trading Company sold processed goods at a steep rate while buying materials at a low one, similar to the American Colonies. Wars with Britain, and between leaders instigated by Britain, took money. Prices of goods made in India which keep money in India were too high to compete with imported goods.
TheMelani50 7 months ago
@TheMelani50 well googled
tooshlong 7 months ago
Comment removed
tooshlong 7 months ago
Respond to this video... It destroyed India's previous economy and India's handicraft small scale industries. The traditional handmade cloth industry was felled by the manufactured cloth made in and imported from Britain. The cloth was much cheaper for it's quality and could be mass produced because it was made by machines. Many other handicrafts such as clock-making, carpentry, the metal industry, etc. were destroyed, again because of the superior and cheaper manufactured imports.
TheMelani50 7 months ago
..India became dependent due to imperialism. The destruction of the previous industries meant that nearly all processed goods were imported from Britain. As India was a protectorate it was made to only trade with Britain. Goods/materials not found in India were imported by Britain as it had done in order to "get it's foot in the door" prior to it's annexation of India. India basically became unable to support itself anymore because of European, mostly British of course, interference and trade.
TheMelani50 7 months ago
Respond to this video... There was widespread famine. Britain encouraged/forced farmers to grow cash crops like tobacco on their farms instead of food. The booming population was unable to afford the amount of food that was grown and thus starved.
TheMelani50 7 months ago
Comment removed
tooshlong 7 months ago
just travelled around Europe btw.. spent 9 months in Portugal, Spain, Italy, Sweden, Germany, France and UK.... OK, the french didnt seem to like me much but the Brits have a massive indian community and treated me graciously as did everyone else... why do u think your own people are so dispicable?! really interesting
tooshlong 7 months ago
so the British did NO good? is this what you are getting at?.. serously?! dont just make assertions... back it up with some substance as opposed to resorting to insulting someone who has studies his subjest for decades.... disagree with him... dont disrespect
tooshlong 7 months ago
... All of which assisted in the increase of their populations and decreased infant mortality rate, provided stable environments from within which we could do business with ergo nsuring their countries development.... only a half wit can seriously suggest none of this was good
tooshlong 7 months ago
Niall needs some new clothes
Houseofthe7gayboys 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The so called "Palestinians" of today
do not represent a nation or people,
merely a bunch of Wannabe-Nazis.
ThePrideOfIsrael 8 months ago
Ferguson's description of punctuated equilibrium is just slightly wrong. The main driver of punctuations in genetic evolution is the reproductive isolation of subsets of species. He also obfuscates the degree to which mass extinctions were caused by instances of "invasive species."
CalvinHume 9 months ago
@humbrolenamel Yes, and you are a genius we already heard you ! Niall Ferguson is staring down at you!
panhandlepatriots 10 months ago
Niall Ferguson, the Dickhead puppet of Jewish - NWO. Fucking go and wank on your British Empire books.
Sh012222 10 months ago
@Sh012222 What an intelligent comment ! You must be a leftist regressive !
panhandlepatriots 10 months ago
@panhandlepatriots and you must be a rightist fascist!
TheMelani50 8 months ago
@Sh012222 Lol, so true ;)
TheMelani50 10 months ago
@Sh012222 wow! as repostes go... that has to be one of the worst... you really couldnt find a better combination of words? you inarticulate, logically derelict, lump of muck... at least he has some books to wank on you irrelevent intellectual paracite
tooshlong 7 months ago
@tooshlong FUCK YOU LIITLE SCUMBAG. GO AND SUCK HIS COCK.
Sh012222 7 months ago
Comment removed
tooshlong 7 months ago
@Sh012222 hahahaha thats even worse!! you need to add a few more words to your child like lexicon. you febrile mong
tooshlong 7 months ago
@Sh012222 Love your comment. That idiot tooshlong talks out of his arse and has no clue. He's the most brain-dead commentator I have ever come across!
TheMelani50 7 months ago
@humbrolenamel Hooray for some words of wisdom. Yes, he is an idiot. He's a neo-con, a supporter of Empire and thinks that the British Empire was a force for good, and various others spurious ideologies. He's an idiot.
TheMelani50 10 months ago
@TheMelani50 And all of you must be geniuses!
panhandlepatriots 10 months ago
@panhandlepatriots Indeed ;)
TheMelani50 10 months ago
@TheMelani50 Hoorayyyyyyyyyyy wisdom at last,,,,he is a total idiot and so glad someone here agrees:)
TheMelani50 8 months ago
@TheMelani50 Agreeing with yourself how sad.
RedTyphoon1 8 months ago
@RedTyphoon1 It would be indeed very sad if I didn't agree with myself ;D
TheMelani50 8 months ago
@TheMelani50 so the British did NO good? is this what you are getting at?.. serously?! dont just make assertions... back it up with some substance as opposed to resorting to insulting someone who has studies his suggest for decades.... disagree with him... dont disrespect
tooshlong 7 months ago
@tooshlong I have disagreed with him for years now. But he continues to spout nonsense and insults people's intelligence. You need to do a comparative study of empire and look closely at what he is saying and why before you act as his advocate. I too have studied this subject for years. British imperialism did more harm than good, and this is from a Brit whose family benefited from the empire. You need to exercise objectivity, and not fawn over a celebrity.
TheMelani50 7 months ago
Spot the charlatan.
squeeth 10 months ago
Good for you Niall. Is it true that you are Gran used to come from Shettleston in Glasgow haha. I can;t believe that somewhere in your DNA is an east end glesca gene. God bless you, big man, ye've definitely done well fur yersel!!
Ry26100 1 year ago
Nice I like the term he uses "Ninja Loans"
Setzer 1 year ago
Niall is a God
TheCameo86 1 year ago
@TheCameo86 He's the god of the underworld. An idiot! He supports the British Empire and imperialism generally. Don't be fooled by his eloquence.
TheMelani50 10 months ago
Comment removed
tooshlong 7 months ago
Austrian economics would say the bubble is the problem: it is a time of
misallocation of resources. The collapse of that bubble is the cure, it reallocates resources to better places and wipes out the mistakes of those that misread the market.
equsnarnd 1 year ago
Comment removed
guninthewater 1 year ago
@guninthewater Sorry - I need more context?
equsnarnd 1 year ago
Comment removed
guninthewater 1 year ago
@equsnarnd BUGGER OFF, YA NINNY!
guninthewater 1 year ago
@guninthewater One two buckle my shoe. Do you know that one? Try saying it while you go to sleep. It won't help with your problem but will keep you from being a problem to the people around you.
equsnarnd 1 year ago
@equsnarnd May I say sir that never in all my years have I encountered such a goosebrained ninnyhammer!!! Your blimblamery is the HEIGHT OF TEDIUM!!!! Fling yourself out the nearest window...you.....YOU BALMY COCKEYED MOONCALF!!!!!
guninthewater 1 year ago
@guninthewater A credit to your heritage.
equsnarnd 1 year ago
@equsnarnd My heritage!? WHAT!!??!?!? WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
guninthewater 1 year ago
@equsnarnd Go ride your horses, YA SPOILED DANDY!!!! GO SIP YOUR MIMOSAS AND EAT FINE CHEESES, YOU SILLY FOP!!!!
guninthewater 1 year ago
@guninthewater You really are an ass.
equsnarnd 1 year ago
@guninthewater Try doing some reading. A good start would be The Road to Serfdom by F. von Hayek. Nial would do well to read it as well.
equsnarnd 1 year ago
@equsnarnd That book is rancid gibbajabba!
guninthewater 1 year ago
@guninthewater You've read it then?
equsnarnd 1 year ago
@equsnarnd You are a pretentious ninnyhammer.
guninthewater 1 year ago
@guninthewater How would you possibly know? Like a fish in water you swim in pretentiousness. You've sent several messages and managed to say absolutely nothing worth listening to. Go peddle your garbage somewhere else.
equsnarnd 1 year ago
@equsnarnd Be quiet! I ORDER YOU TO BE QUIET!!!
guninthewater 1 year ago
@guninthewater :)
equsnarnd 1 year ago
I thought the first bubble was in 16th century Holland with Tulip bulbs.
equsnarnd 1 year ago
What a way to end the interview.
sjkdec18 1 year ago
Niall Ferguson simply copied what ron paul and peter schiff said in their books which were out in 2006. lol
hyylo 1 year ago
@hyylo Do you think. I kept thinking this is an awfully bright guy who needs to read the Austrian economists to put this all together without holes. He just keeps missing things when he tries to explain the economy.
equsnarnd 1 year ago
"...there are a number of different ways that (the state) can actually exploit financial institutions. It can monopolize the production of money, and then debase it...by printing more paper to finance its deficit. .."
He's got it backwards. Privately run central banks (US fed, bank of England) create currency, not the government. To gloss over this fact is so absurd that it makes me distrust just about everything else this professor has to say about financial institutions and their motives.
bipbibop 1 year ago
@bipbibop Absolutely. He does not deserve his title of "professor". His thinking is more than flawed.
TheMelani50 10 months ago
@TheMelani50 Shut your whole - You're allowed to have your opinion, but I think he has many interesting things to say. He's not perfect, All Human beings are flawed
RedTyphoon1 8 months ago
@RedTyphoon1 shut my whole? what whole is that? the whole truth and nothing but the truth? lol
TheMelani50 8 months ago
@TheMelani50 I meant hole.
RedTyphoon1 8 months ago
@RedTyphoon1 well, my "hole" is shut but my fingers are doing the typing, so no argument there my friend ;D
TheMelani50 8 months ago
@TheMelani50
Just because he supports policies you don't happen to like, and may even find morally repugnant does not mean that he's an idiot or that some or even alot of what he has to say is true. Maybe it isn't, but moralizing about it isn't going to make your case. Perhaps you should actually look at what he says a bit more objectively and not just emote all over the place?
Pervyable 7 months ago
@Pervyable I don't understand why this fascination with a man who extols the virtues of Imperialism? For me an idiot isn't someone who is necessarily obtuse and lacking in mental deduction. But it's someone who openly and unashamedly espouses notions and ideologies which have been proven over and over again to be repugnant to any decent thinking human being. It's like supporting the idea of slavery, and saying that it's a profitable and valid phenomenon. How can anyone justify that?
TheMelani50 7 months ago
@TheMelani50 Mate... just because he tries to remind people that not everything about empire was bad doesn't make his views repugnant. typical liberal self loathing ignorance
tooshlong 7 months ago
@tooshlong I am not a liberal and I am certainly NOT self-loathing. But I certainly loath Ferguson and his obsession with empire, and those, like you, who are his apologists.
TheMelani50 7 months ago
@TheMelani50 You obviously are self loathing if you canot drag your own withering perception of the world into the realms of logic. Displacement and manipulation was certainly a trait of British expansionist policies and this should never be forgotten and by the same token one cant wholly dismiss the foundations the UK laid in India's and other Asian states legislative, judicial, education and democratic institutions... nor can you dismiss the policies of vaccination and sanitation in Africa
tooshlong 7 months ago
@tooshlong "withering perception of the world into the realms of logic" is something you seem to need to apply to yourself. Consider many of the current conflicts in the world: India-Pakistan, Israel-Palestine, Sinhalese-Tamil, Fijian-Indian. The common element behind them all is British rule. Draw your own conclusion from that. I am British and have studied British imperialism extensively. Your ignorant and facile view of the world is cute but belongs to insular Americans, like you!
TheMelani50 7 months ago
@TheMelani50 Ha, why would you say that? is that the best you can do... accuse me of being an American as if its akin to being a Nazi or something?like i should be ahamed of it if i was?i am actually from and live in Ahmadbad in India. and anyway, id be proud of being american if i was one. The Uk didnt cause the break up of india, the idea of muslim nationialism (Started in the 1930s) broke india up, not the brits... insular westerners should do more reading.
tooshlong 7 months ago
@tooshlong Ahh a servile Indian, ready to sell his own country to the West? I rest my case! Be proud of being Indian - an independent country, relying on its own abilities and capabilities, and not enslaved by imperialist powers who go under the guise of benefactors, when in reality they're out to milk their colonies. Come to the west and see how they look down on people like you! Wake up and don't be a fool!
TheMelani50 7 months ago
@TheMelani50 You really aren't a very nice person are you... first i am a disgusting american because i disagreew tih you and then you patronise my peoples 5000 year history by calling me slavish... the indians had a thriving nation before the brits, dutch and french ever appeared thank you. they did milk my country but they also allowed a middle class to develop, allowing social mobility, developed methods of contraception, introduced my famiuly to medicices and vaccines and allowed my country
tooshlong 7 months ago
@tooshlong I don't think you have a clue what is a nice person and what is not, if you think that Ferguson is a "nice" person for supporting imperialism and me as a bad person for defending the rights of Indians. It is because the Indians had a thriving nation that parasitic imperialistic powers like mine, the British, occupied and exploited to the overall detriment of the Indians. How could you condone that, giving me the pathetic excuse of medicine and vaccines as a mitigating reason.
TheMelani50 7 months ago
@TheMelani50 you have issues man! i didnt say he was nice.. when did i use that word? i dont care whether he is nice or not.. he may well be a dick! why play the man not the ball all the time?! use argument not vitriole! well as an indian i promise we dont need your patronising head patting. ok ok fine... explain how. explain how after everything the british did in india it was to the ultimate detriment of our people? and explain how dismissing medicine and vaccine as pathetic makes sense?
tooshlong 7 months ago
@tooshlong I think you're the one with issues. You're obviously a wealthy, well-to-do, educated Indian. Look at the rest of your country - the slums, the poverty etc. Had the British really been a benevolent influence, you would have seen a different India today. Don't just talk for yourself, because you have benefited from colonial rule. Talk for the millions who have not!
TheMelani50 7 months ago
@TheMelani50 Why am I obviously wealthy?! once again you undermine your own baseless assertions with presumptious bile. i was brought up in Anduri slums in Guji ok? i worked my arse off for Siemans bolting chips for mobile phones for pennies before making my way up to nothing more than a management position and moved to a lower middle class neighbourhood... i am far from rich. what kind of india? democratic? developing at incredible rate? free press? how else would ya want it to have turned out?
tooshlong 7 months ago
@tooshlong Then why did India fight for its independence if the British were so benevolent? If I am presumptuous, imagine the thousands of British who ruled your country for hundreds of years....how presumptuous were they? Continue to be deluded. I am done with this silly argument.
TheMelani50 7 months ago
@TheMelani50 you exploited us but were not raccist! why do u not want to see this? your generals and dukes marred our women you idiot! all i suggest is stop being so hard on yourself and be lucky to not havethe history of Turkey, China, Japan, Portuguese, German, Russian. We revolted when you forced us to use cow fat in our cartridges, ignorant and malicious? yes. hitleresque hatred? no. just get offf your high horse and do some reading before crying in my peoples' name. have u no dignity?
tooshlong 7 months ago
@TheMelani50 to develop an education system that matches the west's. gave me a chance to defend my self in a courts under teh presumption of 'innocent til proven guilty'. In the 18th/19th centruy India had a choice... look to China, France, Turkey, UK, Dutch and Germans.. only the frnch and british would have helped us to develop... india under the chinese, turks, germans and belgians would have been hprrendous and i count myslef fortunate it was the brith not them that won the battle of India!
tooshlong 7 months ago
@tooshlong Why would you assume that India needs to be colonized by anyone in order for it to develop? Do you have such little faith in the Indian nation that you give me the poor comparison of counties colonized by certain oppressive powers as opposed to a lesser oppressive power. You don't seem to have much pride or dignity to think that you need to be patronised by the British in order to develop. Why do you need the British to help you to develop?
TheMelani50 7 months ago
u didnt answer me! we didnt need to be colonized by anyone but if you think that india would have remained independant you live in a parallel universe somewhere with a different concept of rationale. india was to be chewed over and spat out by someone, it was far too strategic an asset for the major powers to dismiss. id have prefered nobody but compared to other colonialists your people were the most moral! why do you find this concept of your people not being completely evil so uncomfortable?
tooshlong 7 months ago
@tooshlong Because being British, I know the British better than you and know that they were not a benevolent power. I know the racism, exploitation and victimization we inflicted on those we colonised. This discussion cannot be done here adequately, as I am unable to really give you a detailed analysis of history on a Youtube forum. You will continue to have your opinions whatever I say, so let's agree to disagree.
TheMelani50 7 months ago
@TheMelani50 ok and beng Indian, i know the Indians better than you and know that the resentment here is more to do with your country's ignorance of our customs, customs you trampled on when you got here. thats as far as it goes. we admire british culture, language and history. I think our history of british empire is slightly more acurate than yours too.
tooshlong 7 months ago
so the turks: they would have done what they did the greeks, circassians and armenians... destroyed our cculture and language. the chnese would have done the same, the germans would have carried on their african policy of eugenics, the bellgians would have given us apartheid. the british didnt burn down my town, didnt rape our women, didnt kill our princes and at least made an effort to assimilate themselves into OUR culture and not the other way round. this is why i like the brits
tooshlong 7 months ago
@tooshlong It's like saying "Our house was burgled by a bunch of thugs, but at least unlike our neighbours who were killed and raped, our thugs only stole from us, humiliated and enslaved us. So, we have to be grateful for that because after all that, they gave us medicine before they left, and after all we were doomed to be robbed." You make me laugh, you poor, deluded man:D
TheMelani50 7 months ago
@TheMelani50 yes but you still fail to actually say anything of substance. you just repeating your insight that imperialism is bad in all forms. i know... you keep saying! give me some meat to chew on and think about.. otherewse dont need to reply
tooshlong 7 months ago
@TheMelani50 deluded?! me?! haha mate, you think that the brits marrying our women, fathering india's new generation is racist! you my dear are definately deluded.
tooshlong 7 months ago
The Tamil Singhalese problem was as much to do with Indian and Tamil intransigence of southern India than it was to do with the UK. Israel-Palestine is still a problem today becasue the UK wished to curry favour wit the Hashemite Abdullah tribe of the Hejaz by carving Iraq, Syria and Jordan amonfst them instead of proportioning the region of palestine between the jews and arabs... the Brits fukd everyone up the bum in the ME i dont disagree but it is far less black n white than u make out
tooshlong 7 months ago
@tooshlong The British rule in India had the same disadvantages that any colonial rule did. The Indians were not in control of their own country. It left them as 2nd class citizen. They could not profit from their natural resources. Their economic advancement was in the British hands. Their own language was secondary and their culture was stifled. Vast amounts of money were siphoned off by the East India Company and later by the British colonial administration.
TheMelani50 7 months ago
@tooshlong Who is being presumptuous now? You are insulting, abusive and reactionary. You have a distorted vision of history and you're so blind about what the Brits did, that you can't see beyond the lies you've been reading. But the most presumptuous thing about you is that you said that I am a woman, when I am man, in my 50's and clearly have more insight and experience than you do. Melani is my wife's name.
TheMelani50 7 months ago
Another sophisticate who doesn't understand that the crises is fundamentally caused by the government and nothing else.
Vodka2389 1 year ago
Simple rule: Never trust a book on whose cover the author's name is in larger print than the title of the book.
jjkrause84 1 year ago
I have learned from Ferguson's videos and his new book/DVDs more than all my years in school and in the market.
Kritikakis1968 1 year ago 13
@Kritikakis1968 Then clearly you went to the wrong schools and Ferguson is no great teacher - he's a flawed thinker and distorts history to fit his agenda. Don't be fooled!
TheMelani50 10 months ago
@TheMelani50 Don't be fooled yourself!
panhandlepatriots 10 months ago
@TheMelani50 yes cos if you disagree with melani's liberal world view then u must be evil
tooshlong 7 months ago
@Kritikakis1968 Then I pity the education you got. Ferguson is no brain!
TheMelani50 7 months ago
Yes,ascent of money was amazing, that guy got a real good knowledge.
hammad313 1 year ago
See the 4 hour series "The Ascent of Money: The Financial History of The World." If is really informative and filled in a lot of gaps in my financial educaton and a understanding of international relationships, war and hatreds towards groups. It puts Communism in its place. No place in a civil world. Commanding Heights is another great series on what works. Milton Friedman is the man.
itisaduck 1 year ago
I think that distrust of finance he alludes to is related to or an extension of the distrust held for the educated or "Academia", and why there's always a token "dumb" guy in most television series. People hate those who are smart, or come across as smarter than they are..but love to feel smart around/among others.
Neither here nor there...just interesting, rarely acknowledged connection.
CSRealist 2 years ago
@CSRealist
Which is another way of saying that those who fall under your "Academia" category, are in fact arrogant. Which is why it will be these very academia who will try to control others who threaten their so-called superior views and choices.
modonaut 1 year ago
excellent worker!
1888junkteam 2 years ago
I would be more interested in learning about accounts of so called "insiders" and their direct minipulation of "outsiders'" behaviour. A few of the sloppy greedy have been locked up but I'm curious to know if some of the bigger fat cats have complex models of their own that allow them to get in on the action but minimize their exposure to public scrutiny.
seplrm 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Ferguson is just a sophomore who looks good and talks like a gentlemen. Thats why the Yanks fall for his patter. He's actually pretty right wing and is a natural Tory/Republican. He's certainly no intellectual and we Brits think he's a bit thick to be honest. No surprise the Yanks lap him up though!
Rentaghost76 2 years ago
Other than a slight tone of disingenuousness, Ferguson is a decent enough educator and finance historian.
BenderJJJ 2 years ago
americans should take heed of Niall's warnings. Taxes have to go up and peoples consumpion must decrease or th U.S.A will lose it's postions on top.
andykrin 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
.
I warned you Christians, the kingdom of God is about to take over this world, prepare yourself, be holy, be like Christ.
.
conceil8 2 years ago
St Andrews, old boy
maxwellreid 2 years ago
who r u???
khurramkamaal 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Someone send this fuck to Oxford.
Antiks72 2 years ago
Financial Enlightment! wow! =O
joeovip 2 years ago
You Rock! The Awesome Mayor of awesometown, that's who you are. We would like to make you a website, to show our love.
GorillaAgent 2 years ago
Well his support for the Chilean economic "miracle" (in his TV series) really exposes him for what he his. In effect he justified the killing and horrific torture of thousands. Not only that, he neglected to point out the the gross inequality that is a core part of Pinochet's economy. Sure he looks good on TV, is sophisticated etc, but his work needs to be critically examined.
jerrytomo 2 years ago
his costs and benefits of anglobilization is quite critical about military capitalism; and pointing out rapid growth in the chilean economy isn't a defence of a dictatorship, it's completely truthful to state, for example, that China has experienced an economic miracle raising billions out of poverty, but doesn't say anything about political freedom.
alexgmartin111 2 years ago
Alex, let's keep it real here - raising "billions" out of poverty is a huge exaggeration. Millions sure, even tens of millions but not billions. Regarding Ferguson's comments about Pinochet: I will look at that espisode again and get back to you on that.
jerrytomo 2 years ago
I'll do my best to keep it real, probably the total amount of people isn't 1,000,000,000 people but the amount of people in china with higher standrards of living under Deng Xiaoping's China when compared to Mao's, is astronomical. My main point about your comment is praise for an economic system isn't a defence of a military dictatorship, and he has been very critical of other military dictatorships. Can I ask what exactly does his support for the chilean economic miracle exspose him as?
alexgmartin111 2 years ago
Oh, the curse of little knowledge. Pinochet's critics do not take into account the scenario he inherited. The violence under his regime was nothing compared with what went on during Allende - but it's not politically correct to discuss the human rights' violations of the left - right?
claudioaa1947 2 years ago
Claudioaa1947 - Are you telling me Allende murdered 3,000 people????(similar to 9/11 deathtoll) because that is the amount Pinochet murdered that's not counting the toture victims. Got any proof ?
jerrytomo 2 years ago
What's this Ferguson guy about? Just go on and read his twisted version of world history that's both nationalist and politically motivated, and does not even make a pretence of objectivity and you'll really start to wonder why this guy is a Harvard professor. In his version the British empire is the great benefactor of mankind and Britain is the bastion of political liberty. And yet in 2009 they still have an unelected house in parliament. Huh?
Darngyt 2 years ago
Comment removed
koreindian 2 years ago
India, for example, is the largest democracy in the world. They inherited the ideas of especially English liberty, in the spirit of John Locke and Thomas Paine. India would not be like this without the British Empire. Before the British Raj, India was run provincially by many rajas. Why can't it be argued that India benefitted from Empire? Arguing this does not mean that you are an imperialist, or that you approve of the non-representative nature of empire.
koreindian 2 years ago
There are benefits about everything, so it is all a question of balance. Most westerners today view colonialism negatively, and for a good reason. It involved hostile attitudes of arrogance, racism and exploitation. Whatever benefits the subject nations derived from it, were mostly indirect. May I also remind you that it is difficult to find a writer more hostile to British monarchy than Thomas Paine who played an active role in both the American and French revolutions.
Darngyt 2 years ago
But to put indirect benefits in the periphery is a mistake. To assess the benefits of any historical event we might assess both what happened and what would have happened if the event had not occurred. If the British had not governed India, then it is very probable that the Germans or even the Japanese would have. Given the nature of these two particularly aggressive imperial powers, this would have shifted the geopolitical status into, what I assess to be, a worse state.
koreindian1 2 years ago
You can, but I was taking about the tradition of progress (what a great phrase) that the English embody. The Magna Carta, the adoption of Parliament, and the Glorious Revolution all represent the peaceful transfer of power from the ruling class to increasingly representational bodies. John Locke and Thomas Paine represent the continuation of this tradition to it's natural and logical conclusion.
koreindian1 2 years ago
What about the tradition of progress in the US and France. Or the tradition of German liberals such as von Humboldt? The problem with arguing for Britain as the bastion of liberalism is that it is 300 years out of date. As far as I understand, the revolution in England was followed by restoration. Contrary to this the US and France actually became republics and models for democratic government ever since. As you know, not many countries follow the UK model of parliament today.
Darngyt 2 years ago
The United States was in isolation. Germany was not unified during the time of von Humboldt, and his legacy was completely dwarfed by that of Otto von Bismarck, who put Germany on the path of militarization that really only ended after WWII. Bismarck was also the supreme enemy of France. In Britain there was no talk of "Iron and Blood."
koreindian1 2 years ago
You have beautifully illustrated my point (I admit, I hid it a bit) above. The fact that a country has liberal thinkers does not mean that it can be labelled as a bastion of liberalism. This applies to England as much as Germany (the two countries/regions fuelled the imperial game in Europe and tried to destroy the legacy of the French revolution). Surely the US and France should be regarded as more important for the spread of democracy.
Darngyt 2 years ago
Yes the United States, but no to France. The French Revolution remains a credible revolution in theory, but it was a failed revolution. Only the United States remains credible in this respect. As you know, the aftermath of the Reign of Terror brought forth the French Empire. Post Napoleonic France was barely more democratic as the dominant force in French-Parliament were the extreme, reactionary monarchists (not moderate monarchists, or reformists, but hard right-wing monarchists).
koreindian1 2 years ago
The outcome of the French revolution is that France today is a republic. Not only that, but the French revolution and the form of government that it entailed has been an inspiration to many of the nations in continental Europe. It failed, true, in short term (and partly due to the actions of other monarchist countries) but lives on long term. The Glorious Revolution, on the other hand, is barely even remembered outside the UK.
Darngyt 2 years ago
I think we can now return to my original problem with Ferguson. I hope this dialogue has illustrated that it is possible to argue for many alternatives even on tiny details of history. Ferguson's arguments are consistently one-sided. He and his supporters rarely expose themselves to opposing views and are a right-wing equivalent to Marxist historians. This is why I don't understand why he is in Harvard. His investigative standard is not high enough and he clearly does not care about truth.
Darngyt 2 years ago
That is inaccurate.
Of course he has exposed himself to opposing views- he has simply taken a side. You are asking him to be more centrists, or maybe just not right wing. The reason Harvard and Yale have intellectuals like him is because they take on the best every field, and intellectuals at that level have specific outlooks and opinions on matters. Their opinions are debate-worthy and thus not entirely objective. Students simply have to make up their own minds and do their own research.
koreindian1 2 years ago
Wrong. Intellectuals do not have strong opinions or outlooks because they know the fallacy of such outlooks and opinions. That is how I always in my mind separate intellectuals from pseudo-intellectuals. In relativist fields such as history, any true intellectual can find the truth in many arguments, not just one. Ferguson is more provocative than intellectual. Of course he knows his views are controversial and plays it up, twisting facts as he goes along.
Darngyt 2 years ago
My problem is that I cannot read him, because as a layman in history, I cannot be sure when he is colouring things to suit his political motives. To read his books is thus a waste of time, unless I also read the counterpoint and I do not have time for that.
Darngyt 2 years ago
Well the problem is then that you don't know his arguments and the evidence he puts forth for them. It is intellectually dishonest to dismiss a theory without learning about it first.
koreindian1 2 years ago
On the contrary, it is a very useful ability to be able to tell from very little reading if somebody's writing is worth further study. This is an absolutely crucial skill if one wants to survive in the academia, which is flooded with different information and interpretations. I know enough not to read more of Ferguson and I can't recommend it to you either.
Darngyt 2 years ago
"Intellectuals o not have strong opinions or outlooks"
What?!
Edward Said did not have strong outlooks?
Noam Chomsky does not have strong outlooks?
You're not even just talking about historians now, you are talking about "intellectuals?"
Bertrand Russell did not have strong views?
What are you talking about?
koreindian1 2 years ago
I'm sorry, I just realised that we are not talking about the same thing. By an 'intellectual', you seem to mean somebody who touts their personal political views as the 'truth'. I'm talking of intelligence. Interestingly, Chomsky and Russell have produced very respectable works in linguistics and maths, respectively. Touting their political views for them is only a side thing whereas for Ferguson it's the main act. Truly intelligent people are more measured than that.
Darngyt 2 years ago
Wrong. Ferguson's main act is economics and financial history. None of these people, including Ferguson, tout their views as fact. They simply know how to stick to an argument. I'm sorry that you don't have enough intellectual courage to create your own perspective for analysis.
koreindian1 2 years ago 2
Comment removed
Darngyt 2 years ago
And you call Ferguson provocative?
Your the one making completely unsubstantiated, practically ad-hominem claims, just because observations don't fit your world view.
bettertobealive 2 years ago
And what is your world view? Let's hear it so I can throw the same accusation back to you.
Which fact that I have quoted you'd like me to substantiate? You will be able to check them yourself. Such is the wonder of modern internet. The debate is over interpretation. The point about not reading him is that even a layman can see his bias. It is relatively easy to find more measured writing of history.
Darngyt 2 years ago
"Which fact that I have quoted you'd like me to substantiate"
None, because you haven't "quoted" any facts, you have just espoused your opinion, as well as saying "Ferguson is more provocative than intellectual" or accusing him of being a " pseudo-intellectual". That's why he works at Harvard, and you spend your time debating on Youtube, your laughable.
bettertobealive 2 years ago
I would like to point out that if you read this thread, you will notice that both myself and koreindian1 have illustrated our opinions with facts. I much preferred debating with him in fact. And what comes to debating on youtube, what are you doing here?
Darngyt 2 years ago
" pseudo-intellectual!"
bettertobealive 2 years ago
"Had it been up to Britain, the whole of western Europe would still struggle under the yoke of monarchy, elitism and classism."
Thats not fact, it's your opinion, and it's wrong to boot. Ever heard of the English Civil War? The Glorious Revolution? the Magna Carta?
We were revolutionizing politics long before the French, or indeed the American's. Moreover, you talk of elitism and classism? What different is that to your blatant socialist inspired - political/ moral elitism?
bettertobealive 2 years ago 2
In fact, in it's short history, socialist elitism has caused far more deaths and suffering than that of the monarchy or the aristocracy.
bettertobealive 2 years ago 8
You can easily argue that the dysfunctions in Russian csarism were so blatant that they caused such outrage as to drive people to join the flawed communist movement. Had the regime been more flexible and allowed for representation earlier there may not have been a socialist takeover. Also to clarify, I'm not a socialist. I'm a liberal. I believe in the right of the people to govern themselves without interference by elitist "lords". To quote the bible, for me there's only one Lord.
Darngyt 2 years ago
@bettertobealive not in term of population ratio.
iaf000 1 year ago
Comment removed
doIsoundlikeicare 1 year ago
@bettertobealive who's history are you reading? it's as though you've got an axe to grind, rather than a critical insight to share.
I feel a v strong case can be made that over the course of human history: monarchy, aristocracy, and plutocracy has starved a VASTER proportion of men & women of power, dignity, security, and equality under the law THAN 'socialist elitism'.
'Socialist elitists', in a strong sense, protect against plutocracy (eg B Russell, M Ghandi, J Rawls, Thurgood Marshall, etc)
doIsoundlikeicare 1 year ago
Comment removed
guninthewater 1 year ago
I did not realise I'm a socialist. Actually, I think the American consitution and the accompanying documents are the greatest political achievement of human history. Which side were you lot on when the US was asserting that consitution? The fact that Britain itself is a monarchy today with an unelected house in its parliament is proof enough for the first point. It's no opinion, I'm afraid. And don't even get me started on the class issues...
Darngyt 2 years ago