SkipCaptcha, Automoderated users, edit
432
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 304:
Line 304: + + + +
Talk:Essay:Liberal Denials about History (view source)
Revision as of 04:03, October 22, 2012
, 04:03, October 22, 2012→colonialism: new section
90% of the stuff on this page is unsourced rubbish. either the 'liberal historians' don't deny whatever the allegation is, or else the allegation is true. There is also some stuff that's pretty subjective, so while the interpretation that this article gives is valid, it does not mean that competing allegations are false. [[User:Cmurphynz|Cmurphynz]] 20:39, 17 October 2012 (EDT)
90% of the stuff on this page is unsourced rubbish. either the 'liberal historians' don't deny whatever the allegation is, or else the allegation is true. There is also some stuff that's pretty subjective, so while the interpretation that this article gives is valid, it does not mean that competing allegations are false. [[User:Cmurphynz|Cmurphynz]] 20:39, 17 October 2012 (EDT)
== colonialism ==
colonialism was universally good? Have you read about the Belgian Congo? How about the war for Algerian independence? What was the native population of North America before colonisation and what was it afterwards? How did they live then, and how do they live now? Are there African countries that are better off now than they were before they were colonised? I think colonialism is definitely good for a number of people in the colonising country, it is usually good for the colonising government, but it tends to be quite bad for the native population. [[User:Cmurphynz|Cmurphynz]] 00:03, 22 October 2012 (EDT)