Blog Post 5 - Keri Gilligan
Over the course of the semester, we have looked at international politics from various angles where we aimed to understand why actors behave in the way they do and how this affects other actors, sometimes without us even knowing. At the very beginning of the course we looked at “Of the Culture of White Folk” by W. E. Burghardt Du Bois and the way states behave through exploiting others. It highlighted how international relations studies tend to provide a Eurocentric view with White Christian men in power. In the final discussion, we talked about Tzetan Todorov’s book, The Conquest of America: The Question of the Other. This touched Christopher Columbus’ journey to the Americas and the impact of his discovery.
As we take a closer look at history, there are evident differences such as moments being turning points in human history. Moments like Columbus being the first European to discover the Americas or the various political regimes that have taken place have a world that may not have otherwise been there. Nonetheless, there are stark similarities between the behavior in 1942 and in the 21st century. The world may look different with more advanced technology and wealth, but it is all still the same.
When setting sail in 1942, Columbus claimed that he wanted to spread Christianity and discover riches like gold. When he arrived in the Americas and was faced with Natives, he was brutal and treated them as less than human beings. Through this, he also used religion, specifically, Christianity as a means of justifying this.
Taking a look at what W. E. Burghardt Du Bois wrote in 1917, there are clear parallels of using religion to justify inhumane actions. Just as Columbus did, “in her forgein mission work the extraordinary self-depiction of white religion is epitomized: Solemnly the white world sends five million dollars worth of propaganda to Africa each year” despite not really helping Africa. This gets to the white savior complex that is seen by much of the Western world.
This same idea is shown elsewhere in W. E. Burghardt Du Bois’ essay to criticize countries that take on these roles. He writes that “it is curious to see America, the United State, looking at herself as a sort of natural pacemaker in this terrible time. No nation is less fitted,” to highlight America’s place in the world. In the same way, Columbus was doing the same thing while he was with the natives in the Americas. He wanted to save them from their own way of life to fit his western ideals. A modern example of this is when the US tries to provide aid in countries like Haiti and Afghanistan. The US is also about to inflict the same influence in control over developing countries through their monetary power in the United Nations.
It is clear that centuries apart actors behave inherently the same. We can use this knowledge to people able to predict the actions of states and their leaders and non-government actors to better understand the relationships between these groups. Without acknowledging this type of behavior, centuries to come will look like an alternate version of the present.
The ending of your response is a very interesting point of view. On one hand, I do agree in that certain trends have continued over time, such as one using their own beliefs as reasoning to justify the invasion and colonization of other countries. However, I feel as though it is still very tough to attempt to predict what actions people may take in an ever-changing world as of right now. I still think that is a difficult task.
ReplyDeleteI definitely hear your point because I see people as complex and dynamic actors that may act rationally and sometimes not. There are obviously so many factors that go into decision making, but some of the underlying ideology remains the same.
Delete