Drawing lines: Colonialism and the creation of borders by Sweta Kannan

[Narayanan Kannan]

Drawing lines: Colonialism and the creation of borders by Sweta Kannan

 

The keynote panel at Culture Shock 2009 was presented yesterday by Radha D 'Souza, who discussed the rise of border conflicts in the wake of British  colonialism. Hosted by SSMU and QPIRG, Culture Shock's week-long events

 

deconstruct the myths surrounding Canada's immigrant communities.  D'Souza, an Indian lawyer, social activist, and a current reader for law at Westminster University in London, shed light on the impact of the border conflicts that followed

 

Indian and Pakistani independence in 1947. The Daily sat down with her to discuss the emergence of border conflicts in the post-colonial  era.

 

 

McGill Daily: What role has colonialism played in the contemporary border conflicts that afflict ex-colonial states?

 

Radha D'Souza: The past 500 years of modernity have shown that capitalism intrinsically is linked to forms of colonialism. As capitalism has changed, so  have forms of colonialism -from a mercantile form of capitalism which created colonies

 

in South America to large-scale imperialism perpetrated by  industrializing nations. By forcibly bringing different communities together, colonialism created the pretext for contemporary conflicts. Look at the Malaysian example: different

 

ethnicities were brought into Malaysia to work in different economic sectors - the Tamils to work on rubber plantations, the  Malays to till the soil, et cetera. As soon as one of these sectors experienced a downturn, the issue became one of

 

ethnicities. So, you see how  colonialism, albeit in a different form than the British imperialism, still has a continued influence.

 

 

MD: Do national or international governments have an obligation to resolve these conflicts?

 

RDS: The idea of legal obligations suggests an assumed notion of legal objectives, a certain normative order that obliges people to act. Instead, we need  to step back from these kinds of assumptions. We tend to look at conflicts at an

 

empirical level; we perceive them as conflicts between Hindus and  Muslims killing each other. With any social phenomenon, it is never that one-dimensional. We should start looking at what lies behind the forces that make people suddenly

 

take up violence, particularly people who, centuries before, managed to live peacefully next to one another.

 

 

MD: Do you think that the way border conflicts are portrayed in the media can be seen as a form of ongoing colonialism? What do you think of Angela  Davis' notion of a "racialization of the media"?

 

RDS: Eisenhower spoke of a "military industrial complex" when in fact it is a "military industrial media complex". We should not forget that the media is  intrinsically bound to and evolved with the development of technology for warfare. Huge

 

amounts of money have been put into psychological research by  the government; the results are equally used by the military and the media. Furthermore, it is important not to forget that it is the victors who write history.  The notion that the UN

 

still is a truly "international" body - although the Security Council to this day is dominated by the victors of the Second World War -  demonstrates the power of this discourse. Who is the "international community"? The UN was created without

 

the consent of the colonies. Can it be seen as truly representative?

 

We have to understand that the coverage of conflicts that we see is very much projected in a specific way by this "international community" and the same goes for the democracy discourse. There are a lot of myths about democracy which

 

show a prevalent distaste for analytical thinking. We do not ask why certain conflicts are happening. Never before has so much money been around as today. A large part of this is bound to be channelled into sustaining conflict due to the

 

power of the media as well as states. Although we talk about the importance of putting democratic systems in place in Afghanistan, we neglect the people on the ground. Instead, we focus on individuals such as [Hamid] Karzai and [Abdullah]

 

Abdullah. This demonstrates the power of discourse, as we have stopped questioning such representations and do not recognize the disconnect between not acknowledging the people and wanting to see "democracy".

 

 

MD: To what extent does colonialism still live on in countries such as India and Pakistan? Do you find that elements of it have been appropriated by the respective governments and continue to be perpetrated with a new face?

 

RDS: What we forget, however, is that although the modalities of colonialism may change, the substance has remained the same. Colonialism is a living thing; the governments [of India, Pakistan] may have changed. However, the

 

bureaucracy and the rulers essentially have remained the same. The notion of "legacies" is a powerful one, especially because we like to think that former colonies now are independent. This, however, is not necessarily the case. With the

 

transformation of the character of capitalism to finance monopolies, the character of colonialism and therefore all the nuts and bolts which hold it together have changed as well.

 

 

—compiled by Sweta Kannan

 

[karthi]

Kannan,

 

The following from Sweta's piece is especially true:

 

Quote:

MD: To what extent does colonialism still live on in countries such as India and Pakistan? Do you find that elements of it have been appropriated by the respective governments and continue to be perpetrated with a new face?

 

RDS: What we forget, however, is that although the modalities of colonialism may change, the substance has remained the same. Colonialism is a living thing; the governments [of India, Pakistan] may have changed. However, the

 

bureaucracy and the rulers essentially have remained the same. The notion of "legacies" is a powerful one, especially because we like to think that former colonies now are independent. This, however, is not necessarily the case. With the

 

transformation of the character of capitalism to finance monopolies, the character of colonialism and therefore all the nuts and bolts which hold it together have changed as well.

 

End quote.

 

This explains many things that we find problematic in these countries. You can include Malaysia and Singapore in the cluster as well.

Remember  we discussed why we cannot get away from using English for teacing and practicing science and technology in Tamil Nadu.

This is it.

 

Sweta is growing up to be quite an intellectual young lady, isn't she? Congratulations.

 

Re.Ka.

 

 

[Narayanan Kannan]

On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 7:06 PM, karthi <karth...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Sweta is growing up to be quite an intellectual young lady, isn't she? Congratulations.

Thank you, Re.Ka.
Canada has pushed her one step further ;-)
I forwarded your mail to her.
She would be happy.

Kannan