Originally Posted by
SealLion
Some of what you say is true, slik. However, I have to disagree with some of the other material there.
I'd like to point out as an example, Greenland which, since 1979 has been under Home Rule from Denmark.
Denmark is only responsible for security issues, foreign affairs, and I think also financial policies of the island.
The rest, Greenland is responsible for.
Basically, Greenland, as a country, runs itself ( with the few exceptions that I've made above. )
In 2008, Greenland had a referendum for greater autonomy from Denmark after leaving the EU.
naturally, there are many ways to accomplish different levels of independence & autonomy - the reason why Greenland had a 'peaceful' history during the colonization period is their lack of leadership with power that would have had to be defended from danish colonial power, which made it easy for the danish government to establish their rule over that region - if it can be done peacefully, why bother to wage wars
yet, through the very act of colonization they imposed various new values (economic/religious/governmental/intellectual/...) on the indigenous people, virtually turning them away from their traditional values towards a new 'capitalist' system, which through the following years changed the local society step-by-step into a modernized replica of the colonial originator system
i already mentioned the exploitation aspect before
basically, the danish have no right claiming that territory, it belongs to the inuit native/indigenous population, but ofc in the similar way every colonization agenda ends up - the new settlements are being made, populated with newcomers and after a few decades this new constellation of power & the situation is taken 'as is' and ratified as valid for the future generations to obey/acknowledge
a side effect of years of colonization is the mentality shift in the native people called 'internal colonization' where they accept the new values & system as the only possible or viable, ie. they were made to believe that without it, they wouldn't be able to live independently by themselves, yet their forefathers miraculously succeeded on their own - what a paradox (this is similar to the nwo methods as stated in the phrase: save us from ourselves)
an insightful article on greenland's colonialization history, its effects & realities behind political decisions can be read here:
COLONIALISM AS SEEN FROM A FORMER COLONIZED AREA
Robert Petersen
Abstract. The concept of colonialism and its effects are discussed from the point of view of Greenlandic experience. Problems arise when the ideology of the colonizers is adopted by the colonized peoples themselves, especially by the educated individuals who are more likely to be employed in positions of influence. Colonialistic attitudes and policies persisted in Greenland even after the end of the colonial period and the establishment of Home Rule. Neo-colonialism and internal colonialism are compared.
Code:
http://arcticcircle.uconn.edu/HistoryCulture/petersen.html
this would all be a small problem when the foreigners decided to form purely trade/commercial co-operation with the native people, but they were aiming at colonization, exploitation, territorial expansion, ruling & influence over the area and so on - this caused significant changes considering the indigenous people on many levels of their existence (personal/society-wise/spiritual/intellectual/...), so even if they gain increased levels of autonomy the damage has already been done during the previous decades of colonial reign - also, make no mistake, the ownership (land, companies, institutions,...) in the (former) colonized countries is never fully returned to the rightful owners, so their dependent status continues on a less visible level (and there may be other relics, like privileged trading with the former? master - a good general example is the commonwealth, or religious connection to lets say the vatican, or as absurd as it may seem, 'god save the queen' anthem relics - all british examples)
Full independence costs money too.
I dont' think that any of the islands could even afford it right off-the-bat.
it only does within the new established monetary/system paradigm enforced by the colonialists, thus the subservience seems inevitable, yet as said before, the indigenous forefathers miraculously succeeded to live on their own
incidentally, self-sufficiency is something the globalist powers fear the most as their influence cannot easily penetrate such a society - their goal is the perpetuating debt-plagued society & dependence on external entities concerning different levels (military, financial, economical,...) of the local system
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks