Chapter 39 Chapter 7 The End of the Empire 1

1 At the turn of the nineteenth century, a handful of countries—mostly along the shores of the North Atlantic—conquered the rest of the world's non-European nations without much effort.Within the sphere of influence of these countries, they are not busy occupying and ruling the land of their subjects.However, relying on the political and economic system, coupled with its organization and technology, it has established a superior position in various places that is superior to direct rule.Capitalism and bourgeois society not only changed the world and ruled the world, but also became a model—before 1917, it was the only model for all mankind. Anyone who does not want to be swept away or crushed to death by the giant wheel of the times , all take it as a teacher. After 1917, although Soviet Communism provided another path, it was basically a model of the same nature. The only difference was that the Communist Party abandoned the private enterprise and the liberal system.Therefore, a few countries surrendered to many countries in the world in the 19th century and became the co-lords of mankind.For non-Western countries, and even more precisely, for countries outside the northern part of the Western world, their history in the 20th century is fundamentally determined by the relationship between them and the countries that are the co-owners of the era. relation.

Under such an interdependence theme, if historians want to observe the evolution of the short twentieth century from an international perspective, the geographical center of gravity in their writing will inevitably appear asymmetrical.However, there is no other way to deal with it.This approach is by no means an endorsement of any national or even racial superiority mentality, nor does it mean that historians agree with the complacency that those countries have not lost.In fact, I hereby declare that I firmly oppose what E.P. Thompson called the superior attitude of "incomparable favor" held by some advanced countries to backward and poor areas.But the facts are all there. In the short twentieth century, the history of most parts of the world was passively derived rather than proactively original.Outstanding elements in non-bourgeois societies everywhere have followed the example pioneered by advanced Western countries.The Western model is basically seen as representing a pioneering and progressive society.Its form is reflected in the richness of wealth and culture; its means are based on the "development" of economy and technology; and its organization is based on various variants of capital or socialism.Apart from "Westernization", "modernization", or whatever you like to call it, there is actually no second model for practical reference in the world.Conversely, euphemisms to subdivide "backward phenomena" into different levels appear only in politics for the sake of sound (Lenin once couldn't wait to draw a clear line between his own motherland and other "colonial backward countries").After the colonies became independent, international diplomacy was filled with such pretentious terms (such as "undeveloped", "developing", etc.).

The actual operation mode to achieve the purpose of "development" can go hand in hand with many different beliefs and consciousnesses, as long as the latter does not hinder the implementation of the former.For example, in developing countries, if you believe in Islam, it is not because it has not been recognized; or because you believe in Christ, it is not because the Bible has never allowed it; and it is not because it is contrary to the style of medieval knights or not in line with the Slavic spirit. build.Conversely, if a country's basic beliefs are against the "development" process not only in theory but also in practice, its development will be doomed to failure.Not afraid of a knife or a gun, but can turn the bullet back; no matter how fanciful and devout everyone believes in Qimen Dunjia's magical skills, unfortunately, the magical skills have never been effective.Telegraph and phone calls are much more effective than the telepathy of a psychic master.

However, to say this is not to underestimate the traditions, beliefs, and ideologies unique to each society itself.When the old society comes into contact with "development", the original concept may be revised, or it may remain unchanged, but it must be used as a basis to make value judgments about the new world.For example, whether it is traditionalism or socialism, both parties can see at the same time that while the capitalist liberal economy is shouting victory—including at the political level—the morality of life has disappeared, and the relationship between people All connections are lost, and the only relationship left is what Adam Smith called the "propensity to barter" of human beings, each of whom is only interested in his own gratification and self-interest.In terms of maintaining the moral system and reorganizing the order of life, and in terms of confirming the damage caused by "development" and "progress", the new ideas brought along with the powerful ships, priests and merchants, and colonial officials are often not as good as capital Before the advent of capitalism, or non-capitalist ideology and value systems were more valuable.Therefore, the latter mobilizes the masses of traditional society to fight against the modernization represented by capitalism or socialism—or, more precisely, to fight against the foreign invaders who import capital or socialist culture.However, although the power of traditional ideas is sometimes quite successful, in fact, before the 1970s, the freedom and liberation movements launched in the backward world were rarely inspired by or completed by traditional or new traditional consciousness.The only exception is the royalist movement launched by the Khilafat movement in British India (Editor's Note: Islamic regional rebellion between 1920 and 1922, aimed at opposing the exclusion of the Turkish sultan from the Treaty of Self).They demanded to retain the name of the Sultan of Turkey, as the Caliph of believers all over the world, the meaning of the Islamic king, and advocated maintaining the borders of the original Ottoman Empire in 1914, and the control of the Holy Places of Islam by Muslims (Holy Placesof Islam), including the Palestinian territories.Although short-lived, the movement was probably one of the main reasons that forced the Indian National Congress to resort to massive uncooperative civilian resistance (Mlilault, 1982).However, mass mobilization initiated in the name of religion—the influence of the “church” on ordinary people, after all, is still greater than that of secular “kings”—is mostly a defensive stance.Occasionally, however, religious armies charge forward and take the lead in resisting the enemy tenaciously.For example, farmers in Mexico, under the banner of "Christ the King", rose up to resist the movement of the separation of church and state in the Mexican Revolution (1926-1932).In his historian's pen, the feats of the peasants turned into an epic "Christian soldier" (Meyer, 1973-1979).In addition, the large-scale mobilization of forces with fundamentalists as the main force did not appear successful until the last few decades of the 20th century-among these new generation of intellectuals, there was even a return to tradition Strange phenomenon.The paradox is that what the new generation wants to return, in the eyes of their learned grandfathers and fathers, is probably the superstition and barbarism that must be eliminated.

Reflecting the local traditions, all these reform plans, even including the political organization and form-enabling those who depend on others to pursue liberation, and making the backward and poor strive for progress-all inspirations and ideas come from the West: Freedom of Thought , socialism, communism, statism, secularist, clericalism, and the forms by which bourgeois society conducts the affairs of public life—the press, public meetings, parties, Mass activities.All kinds of new ideas and new systems, although they sometimes have to be promoted under the guise of a religious tone that the public believes in, are fundamentally from the West.This phenomenon means that the people who initiated the transformation in the third world in this century are actually limited to a small number of outstanding local people, sometimes even so few as to count—because in these places, it is not to say that democratic politics is everywhere. system and the necessary educational knowledge, and even elementary literacy is limited to a very small number of strata.Before independence, 90% of the population in the Indian subcontinent was illiterate, and those who knew Western languages ​​(that is, English) were even rarer. Before 1914, among the 300 million people, only about 500,000 knew foreign languages, that is, every 600 people knew a foreign language. Only 1.Even in West Bengal, the most educated country, there were only 272 university students per 100,000 population at the time of independence (1949-1950).But this figure is actually five times as high as that in the heart of North India.However, although the number of this group of heaven's favored ones is small, the influence they exert is extremely astonishing.In Bombay Presidency, one of the most important administrative regions under British India, by the end of the 19th century, more than a quarter of the 38,000 Zoroastrian men in the region were proficient in English. No wonder all of them became active traders in the Indian subcontinent, Industrialist, financier.From 1890 to 1900, among the 100 lawyers approved by the Bombay High Court to handle cases, they included the two most important leaders in independent India in the future—Mahatma Gandhi (Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, 1869-1948), and the There was Vallabhai Patel, the first Deputy Prime Minister of Pakistan - and the future father of Pakistan, Muhammad Ali Jinnah (Seal 1968, P-884 Misra, 1961, p. 328).Under Western education, this group of elites played a full range of roles in the history of their country.The author himself knows a family, which can be used as a sufficient proof of this phenomenon.The father of the family was a landowner and well-established lawyer, as well as a prominent social figure under British rule. After India's independence in 1947, he served in the diplomatic service and was later honored as governor.The mother was the first female ministerial head of a local government established by the Indian National Congress in 1937. The four children were all educated in the UK, and three of them joined the Communist Party; one of them became the commander-in-chief of the Indian Army in the future, the second became a member of Congress of the Communist Party, and the third became Mrs. Gandhi's government after a turbulent political career. One of the chief executives, as for the fourth brother, is a show in the business world.

However, these phenomena do not mean that the outstanding elites who have been deeply baptized by the West accept all foreign value cultures without any objection.Although foreign things are the same model for them to learn from, the views of individuals are very different-everything from 100% assimilation to deep distrust of the West.However, between doubt and disbelief, they all firmly believe that only by adopting new Western systems and inventions can they maintain their own unique civilization.Among the modernization movements of various countries, the most powerful and successful example is Japan after the Meiji Restoration.However, Japan's Restoration, in fact, does not aim at the complete Westernization of Japan, but rather preserves the regeneration of traditional Japan.In the same way, what reformers in the third world rely on in Western planning consciousness is not in their superficial theoretical texts, but in their own implication.Therefore, in the era of independent colonies, socialism (that is, Soviet-style communism) was very popular with the new government that had just liberated from the colonial regime.Not only because opposing imperialism has always been the idea of ​​the urban left, but also because the Soviet model of planned industrialization has won its hearts.In their eyes, Soviet-style planning can make backward countries progress.The purpose of this project is far more important than emancipating the masses of the country - regardless of how the poor class of the country is defined (see Chapter 12).Similarly, although the Brazilian Communist Party has always been committed to Marx's theory and advocated labor unions that transcend national borders; since 1930, the "nationalism" that emphasizes construction and development has become a "main component" of the party's party program. The degree of attention, even conflict with the interests of labor is not hesitated (MartinsRodrigues, p. 437).All in all, these leaders who single-handedly changed the appearance of backward areas, whether intentional or not, and regardless of their goals, modernization—that is, imitating the Western model—is often an indispensable and necessary means for these people to achieve their goals.

The elites of the third world are very different from the general compatriots in terms of ideology, which shows the importance of westernization.The only commonality between Maharajas and Dalits is often a shared hatred of white racism (i.e. North Atlantic whites).However, as far as the psychology of being discriminated against is concerned, the feelings of being discriminated against by foreigners are not as deep as those of the upper class for the common people in the lower class (especially the "little women")—because the ordinary people of the lower class are more likely to be discriminated against in their own country. Social status has always been inferior to human beings, and has nothing to do with skin color.As for the Islamic world, there is a common belief that sustains all people—Islamists contempt for infidels—but in other non-religious cultures, there is little feeling of belief and unity.