• @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      47 months ago

      It’s definitely accurate to say that they had very little colonial involvement compared to the big powers.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          2
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Completely forgotten that you wanted to talk about Sweden and Germany in particular, did you?

          As to size comparisons, you could, for example, dunno, look at maps. Hint: Sweden’s only notable colony has been Finland. Germany was a bigger player but came very late to the game.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            1
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            I’ll try replying differently.

            Completely forgotten that you wanted to talk about Sweden and Germany in particular, did you?

            Not at all. You maid a claim, I asked for links. Then I provided 2 that are in relation to the way I see meaningful approaching european colonialism, as a whole since the basis is the same: white supremacy.

            As to size comparisons, you could, for example, dunno, look at maps.

            There are many criteria on colonial varieties and impact, borders is just one of them. For many more, please see relevant link above (Analysis of Western European colonialism and colonization).

            Sweden’s only notable colony has been Finland.

            Because you say so? Also, this statement undervalues the many Swedish overseas colonies (see relevant link above - Swedish overseas colonies) as well as the swedish participation in slave trade, both legal and illegal. A couple of examples among many.

            Germany was a bigger player but came very late to the game.

            Germany was a big player, not a bigger player, since late 1800. (see relevant link above - German colonial empire)

            several military and genocidal campaigns by the Germans

            Also, you talk about big powers, big players, bigger players so vaguely that I find it hard to follow.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              17 months ago

              You maid a claim, I asked for links. Then I provided 2 that are in relation to the way I see meaningful approaching european colonialism,

              Wasn’t me who made that claim. You provided one link that showed Sweden’s colonial empire, tiny in comparison to the big powers (UK, France, Spain, Portugal, Russia), and one to DDG.

              There are many criteria on colonial varieties and impact, borders is just one of them.

              You might have an argument with Belgium, there. Sweden, ehhh not really. Germany is a bit of a mixed bag, let’s just say be sure to also ask Samoans. The Herero and Nama was a genocide, yes. Not something you could single Germany out for, though.

              participation in slave trade, both legal and illegal

              By that account Nigeria has been the primary colonial power. Or better put native-run empires in the rough area.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                3
                edit-2
                7 months ago

                Wasn’t me who made that claim.

                You are so right about that, my bad.

                The Herero and Nama was a genocide, yes. Not something you could single Germany out for, though.

                I don’t have someone else in mind? Any relevant link? (Yep, I like links a lot) I only know of the Herero and Nama genocide that was waged by the German Empire.

                For the rest you mention about Nigeria, and since the article posted here is about Europe, I will kinda stick to the point I mentioned previously: It is important to be able to approach european colonialism as a whole, since it has the common ground of white supremacy.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  07 months ago

                  Things like the trail of tears don’t come to mind? The Native American genocide is generally quite well-known. But there’s a thousand all over the place, random example Tasmania. If you now say “But that was the result of an uprising and a war, not premeditated as genocide”: Same goes for the Herero and Nama one.

                  since it has the common ground of white supremacy.

                  It has the common ground in technological and military supremacy flanked by the native, European that is, population being really into the enlightenment, insisting that there be a distinction between power and justice, and the feudal powers that be then sought new people to oppress abroad, also due to a relative power stalemate among empires/alliances in Europe, everything that could be conquered at home already had been conquered. That’s like multiple centuries summed up but it’s the main forces. Scientific racism was invented to rationalise the whole endeavour to the less power-focussed but at its core it’s plain ole feudal imperialism. Which is why the continent is so up in arms about Ukraine: Russia wants to re-start that shit, re-conquer some of its previously ill-gotten possessions. As if it didn’t have plenty still.

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    2
                    edit-2
                    7 months ago

                    Ah ok. I thought when you said

                    The Herero and Nama was a genocide, yes. Not something you could single Germany out for, though.

                    you meant that others where responsible for this genocide, not only the Germans.

                    It has the common ground in technological and military supremacy flanked by the native, European that is, population being really into the enlightenment,

                    Ouch. That’s a colonial narrative. Scary.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          17 months ago

          I wonder how you could back this claim. Any link in mind?

          Sure man.

          Compare for example the extent and duration of the Swedish and German colonies

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_overseas_colonies#/media/File:SwedishColonialEmpire(FIX).png Wtf is that even, you have to zoom in to properly see most of it lol

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_colonial_empire#/media/File:German_colonial.PNG

          To the, what I called, big powers of colonization.

          The Dutch While they’re in terms of territory best comparable to Germany, they had their colonial possessions for several hundred years compared to the, not even, 40 years of German control.

          For the others, it’s not even close:

          Spain

          Portugal

          France

          Britain

          Always happy to help out!

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            17 months ago

            Summing up the conversation that took place here before your comment, I’d say the following and copy-paste a couple of things.

            Of course there have been different levels of colonization coming from Europe. But in some cases, saying for example Sweden has little colonial involvement is like saying Sweden was a little Nazi in WW2. Should we applaud Sweden then?

            So, it is also important to be able to approach european colonialism as a whole, since it has the common ground that whites are superior to everybody else.