The Briland Modem
Online News & Information for North Eleuthera and Harbour Island, Bahamas
(It's much better in the Out Islands.)

Briland News Link (click)

 
NEWSWORTHY

 

roots

briland

marketplace

 

 

gallery

Exceptional Educational Outreach (Bahamas)

got questions?

 

"Briland sweet, eh?"

Coconut Notes
Review the earliest days of the Board [1999-2002]

Click the Ocean Button to sign in and post to the board.

A one-time registration is required, and your new ID will be automatically recognized the next time that you login.

Click Here to Post a New Topic
To Respond to a Posted Message,
Click the Message

Small Islands Voice: Colonialism in the 21st Century
Click here to return to the subject menu.


Search messages for:

in message text

in author name

Search subjects for:

in subject title

Search subject archives:
Month
Year

Page 1 of 1Total of 6 messages
Posted by:Jun 5th 2007, 12:45:32 pm
Fig Tree News TeamMore from today's mailbox:

"The former, actual or quasi 'colonial' status of small island territories
brought in several reactions. Extracts from three of them are here below.

Hawaii continues to be a colony of the US. Since the overthrow of the Kingdom
of Hawaii in 1893 to the current status of statehood imposed in 1959, the
citizens of the Kingdom of Hawaii have been subject to belligerent occupation,
benign condescension and cultural exploitation, writes Charles Kaaiai. In
1959, the US conducted a referendum on Statehood asking whether the residents
of Hawaii wanted Statehood or to remain a territory of the US. This vote was
portrayed as a popular vote to the UN to justify removal of Hawaii from the
list of territories to be decolonized. Just below the facade of a happy
wealthy tourist destination is militarization, racism and economic
stratification with native Hawaiians at the bottom of all indicators for
health, wealth, education and incarceration.

Thanks for circulating this email to us members of the small island states,
writes Willy Uan. Kiribati (Pacific) was once colonised by the British and all
I can say from the occupation period is that they used us or our islands to
get them the things they need. They made profit from us and when the resource
was finished then they decided to give us our political autonomy in which we
became an independent nation in 1979. A good example of such exploitation is
the phosphate on Ocean Island (Banaba Island) that was mined for decades and
prior to its exhaustion we were granted independence. Why? And would those in
other countries comprehend other things that happen in our region? No, so let
them not make generalisations.

The writer of "Remaining island 'colonies' fare better" ignored a large part
of the story when he paints a glowing picture, states Anthony Richards from
Antigua (Caribbean). There is no doubt that some of the remaining French and
British colonies in the Caribbean do relatively well economically.
Independence is definitely the hard road for tiny states, which can never
truly be independent of our continental neighbours. For some, it was the wrong
road during the twentieth century. It requires great ingenuity. The
Commonwealth of Dominica lies in a zone once ruled by France and its nearest
neighbours are still French colonies (Guadeloupe, Martinique). For a brief
period, Dominica entertained discussions with France regarding close political
and economic ties.

The UN Development Index aggregates many indicators, including economy, health
and education for 177 member countries. The independent Caribbean island
states such as Barbados, St Kitts & Nevis, Cuba, Trinidad & Tobago, Antigua &
Barbuda rank in the top third as having a high standard of living, along with
islands such as Iceland, Tonga, Malta, Cyprus and the Seychelles. Most of the
island 'colonies' are not shown (are they even eligible?). The Bahamas ranks
51st, below St Kitts & Nevis at 50th, Cuba at 49th, Seychelles (47th), Malta
(32nd) and Barbados at 31st place. The Marshall Islands and Micronesia
(highlighted by the previous post in this thread) have tended to fall near the
border of medium and low.

http://babelfish.altavista.com/tr allows for translation into other languages.
For those who prefer, you may react in Español, Français or Português.

Title: (In)Dependency
Author: C. Kaaiai, A. Richards, W. Uan
Date: Tuesday, 5 June 2007
Posted by:May 30th 2007, 02:10:42 am
BrilandkidPerfectly put Speech except the modern replacement word for colony is commonwealth.

Common: is for the imperialist ownership.

wealth: All valuable resources belong to them and at their disposal to deplete. It is also commonplace by such imperialist to do a snatch and grab, of citizens of smaller pee-on countries like the Bahamas. It is not surprising that the United Nations who totally ignore that this is commonplace occurrence with no respect to a pee-on’s sovereignty. Domination and control has not changed since the Romans and like Rome will fall too. Check Amnesty international on snatch and Grab kidnappings.

The following is from Amnesty International

Since the 1980s, the USA has been the largest supplier of arms to Haiti. However, following the military coup in 1991 the US government imposed an arms embargo on Haiti but allows for exceptions to be made for the authorization of transfers of some US arms on ‘a case-by-case-basis’. Since the appointment of Prime Minister Latortue in March 2004, there have been several of these transfers, including the supply in 2004 of 2,600 weapons to the HNP, which has been implicated in human rights violations. An additional sale to the HNP of pistols, rifles, and tear gas worth US$1.9m was also approved in 2005. (3)

Again great summary “Speech.”
Posted by:May 28th 2007, 08:44:57 am
speechi would only add for now that Montserrat has not been mentioned. When the volcano made half of the island uninhabitable, the British refused initally to host the displaced islanders in the uk, while they went to war and spent millions to protect the white faulkland islanders in 1982, while todays vestiges of british colonialism are certainly not equal to the victorian days, there are problems, also citesens of these colonies have to pay international fees for higher educatation in the uk, £10,000($20,000) a year, while other uk citezens mus only pay £3000($6000). However our most serious issue in terms of colonialism in the region is with out question th neo colonial and imperialist approach of the U.S interfering in mutuall beneficial economic agreements between soveriegn nations such as the petrocaribe agreement an accord between caricom nations and venezuala providing cheaper energy with delayed payments. Or when overnight an elected leader can be whisked away by the US military and taken to the cenrtal african republic,forced into exile from his own country as happened in Haiti in 2004. In the Bahamas some of you will remember earlier this year, several baggage workers from nassau were effectivly Kidnaed by us forces when the were assigned to work in miami and arrested as soon as they set foot in america on rug trafficking charges, and we all know the story of ninety knowles. jus some thoughts
Posted by:May 27th 2007, 06:27:42 pm
Fig Tree News TeamPilot Paul Johnson writes:

"Kim,

In my travelings as a pilot all over the Caribbean it is hard to compare any other independent Caribbean nation to our great nation of the Bahamas. Our location nearest the U.S. and Canada gives us such great financial succes within our tourism industry.

I can say that the British run islands contain a certain organized feel to them that we have lost but we have gained so much more in our freedom that it was probably worth the
loss. I also feel that as a nation in a whole there are no independent Caribbean nations that I have seen with as much financial opportunity as the
the Bahamas has endured. As for Turcs and Caicos, during my multiple trips there the one thing I have learned is that they are nothing like the Bahamas nor do they want to be. I felt more out of place there then in some of the
Spanish and Dutch speaking nations of the Caribbean.
This excerpt looks very one sided.

In my census of Turcs & Caicos is that the people will fit in just fine as a Canadian colony."
Posted by:May 27th 2007, 06:24:45 pm
Fig Tree News TeamOne Briland.com reader notes:

"The view expressed by Tony de Brum is a very narrow.
We should remember that Turks and Caicos is also
interested in becoming a Canadian Province, so the
'Pro-Colonial' slant is not surprising. If his
argument pertained to very small places like T&C and
the BVI, I could be a bit more sympathetic to these
views ... but on the other hand many other small
islands seem just fine.

By his logic he assumes that Jamaica, Guyana, The
Bahamas, Trinidad and Tobago, Barbados and many others
would be better off had they remained British. This is
a very uninformed and condescending view ... To me it
is very strange reasoning ... Even the British are
having a hard time being British, Scotland wants to
secede!

I have been to the BVI ... it is a very nice place,
but it has a very very small population much like T&C.
Furthermore I do not think their economy is better
than that of the Bahamas. The standard of living is
great, but it is a small place, they are dependent to
some degree on the USVI, and the currency of the BVI
is the US Dollar. So the argument that T&C and the BVI
are better is subjective.

While there are challenges in all developing nations,
they are completely capable of managing their destiny
... One need is for greater links between Caribbean
Island states by creating more airline hubs (Nassau,
San Juan) and creating ferry services."

- AO
Posted by:May 22nd 2007, 12:17:42 pm
Fig Tree News TeamThe present article follows up on the 'Colonialism in the 21st century'
contribution by C. Corbin of the Virgin Islands (Caribbean) at
http://www.sivglobal.org/?read=188 . Several reactions were received, two of
which are given below.

From the Marshall Islands, Tony de Brum writes: Your observations fail to
recognize three glaring examples of neocolonialism in the world: The Republic
of the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, and the Republic
of Palau. The Territory of Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas
are generally accepted as colonies of the United States by most Pacific
observers.

Today's colonies operate much closer to the idea of 'associated state' than
they do to the old-fashioned idea of a colony, according to a writer from the
Turcs & Caicos Islands (Caribbean). The 'colonial yoke' of the old days is
long gone. Modern British Caribbean territories are (by-and large)
self-sustaining territories that appreciate the tie with the UK for a number
of economic and security reasons. The economies of the remaining British
'colonies' in the Caribbean are the strongest in the West Indies. Bermuda,
Cayman, Turks & Caicos, British Virgin Islands, Anguilla all have higher
standards of living (and a lot less corruption and criminal activity) than any
other Caribbean territory and better than some European countries. They are
all attracting more investment and up-scale migration than any independent
island state. Think it might be the stability and good reputation attached to
that Union Jack symbol that's in the corner of each of these country's flags?

As for most 'colonial citizens' of the UK, it's important to remember that the
vast majority of them prefer the present status of their countries. After
having witnessed the disastrous economic and political events of many
Caribbean and African territories that went to independence in the 1960s and
70s, these small island states appreciate the economic and political stability
that is afforded by their connection to the UK.

The UN's anti-colony committee has got to come to realize that their original
premise of freeing the 'poor benighted oppressed colonial serfs of their
wicked colonial masters' is a fantasy in this era and the 'new colonials' just
may be better off than their contemporaries in independent, but economically
failing ex-colonial states. In fact, the Committee's premise might even be
considered paternalistic and insulting. Do politicians from Mongolia and Ghana
and Uruguay (or wherever they come from) really think they know something
about the present day realities of life in a small island state?

http://babelfish.altavista.com/tr allows for translation into other languages.
For those who prefer, you may react in Español, Français or Português.

Title: Remaining island 'colonies' fare better
Author: T. de Brum and writer from Turcs & Caicos
Date: Tuesday, 22 May 2007

Contact us online at
info@briland.com

administration