by ERIC LOUW – FOREIGN Minister Penny Wong has discovered that while playing the colonial guilt card might work well with Left-wing audiences, the use of such finger-wagging on the international stage is a diplomatic failure.
Why Wong thought publicly shaming Britain over colonialism in London would be diplomatically sound is unclear.
- Like it or not, we are products of the Empire.
- We can choose to live in the past and claim victimhood – or we can recognise that history cannot be changed.
- Vladimir Lenin actually said convincing people they were victims was an effective way to make them angry – sparking violent revolution.
But unsurprisingly her call for Britain to share stories of its “uncomfortable” past with its former Pacific colonies was not well received.
In her speech, Wong portrayed her family as a victim of colonialism with her Chinese grandmother being a servant for British colonialists in Borneo.
DESCENT
Yet Britain’s foreign secretary was quick to respond pointing out that he was of African heritage, and that the United Kingdom’s prime minister and home affairs secretary were both of Asian descent.
It is noteworthy that during a parallel meeting in Paris, Wong did not attack France over its colonialism.
Perhaps she thought the tactic worked better in Anglo societies where “woke” ideologies have proliferated, especially on university campuses.
The way she delivered her speech gives us an insight into how she has personally internalised many progressive ideologies around decolonisation, victimhood and guilt.
She is after all from the Left faction of the ALP, which embraces many of these beliefs including simplistic villain-victim narratives.
Vladimir Lenin actually said convincing people they were victims was an effective way to make them angry.
Activists and politicians could then promise to rescue these (angry) victims by fighting the “villains.”
Once successful – normally using violent revolution – they can claim that they ended the people’s victimhood and achieved “social justice”.
Nowadays, saving victims has become an industry unto itself with taxpayers footing the bill.
And today there is an ever-expanding plethora of “victims” who apparently need to be rescued by an expanding cohort of activists and Left-wing politicians, including those that need saving from colonisation (indigenous peoples), from the patriarchy (women), racists (ethnic minorities) or greedy capitalists destroying the planet (all of the above and more).
It’s unsurprising to see so many groups claiming to be victims and the frequent “bidding wars” over government coffers.
Today’s activists are concerned with “decolonising” the West itself.
RACISM
They want to decolonise Australia, Canada the United States and New Zealand to “free” our minds from the lingering effects of “imperialism, colonialism and racism”.
We are to be re-educated and made to “think properly”. We are to be taught to feel “guilty” so that we can recognise the need to recompense victims of colonialism.
This involves treaties, recognising sovereignty for the indigenous, and possible reparations for imperialism and slavery.
Presumably, it will also result in Foreign Minister Wong approving bucket-loads of foreign aid to Pacific Island States that mobilise the victim card.
Wong’s victimhood story is based on how British colonialists brought Chinese labourers to Malaya, which resulted in her grandfather working in British mines, while her grandmother worked as a servant.
On a personal note, my victimhood story is a bit more intense.
My ancestors were caught up in the Boer Wars where their farms were burned to the ground and 26,000 Afrikaner women and children died in concentration camps built by the British Empire.
GOOD
My point is, we can choose to live in the past and claim victimhood over incidents that occurred 100 years ago … or we can recognise that history cannot be changed and that good things did come from the British Empire.
Indeed because of how the British developed many societies and economies, while also altering the local demographics – millions of people like me and Wong only exist because of colonialism.
We are products of the Empire whether we like it or not, so why not just get on with it and build on the good legacies that are already in place?PC
A new book by Eric Louw, “Decolonization and white-Africans. The ‘winds of change,’ resistance and beyond”, offers a deeper examination of the victimhood discourse and how damaging it can be to society.
Wong does a great disservice to the legacy of Sir William Hood Treacher, the first Governor of Borneo from 1881 – 1887. His profound opposition to slavery was incorporated into the founding charter of the North Borneo Chartered Company to which our Foreign Minister referred. Borneo had a brutal history of slavery, intertribal head-hunting and piracy. Slavery was sanctioned by the local
population and tribal chiefs.
The establishment of the North Borneo Company in 1881 paved the way for the ultimate extinction of slavery in Borneo and dealt the final blow to the piracy and kidnapping. It substituted a strong, liberal and just government for numerous weak, cruel and unjust ones. It introduced the rule of law and a justice system which did not distinguish between races and creeds, between rich and poor, or master and slave. It put a stop to the custom of head-hunting and brought law and order to outlying districts, opening the way for free trade and the investment of European and Chinese capital.
Ref: Menzies Research Centre
At the time of Native Land Title debates followed by legislation (Mabo) there were mostly similar to Uluru Statement demands being floated by Aboriginal activists and including “rent” to be paid by fellow Australians to the benefit of traditional owners. Nobody explained who they were or where they are buried.
A letter to the Age newspaper Editor was published: including …. “in 1066 in Hastings, England, my family’s lands were stolen, I am not asking for the lands to be handed back but I would appreciate the present owners paying me rent.”