In Anglo-Saxon academia, the colonialism it has become a taboo subject. The only accepted thesis is the one that supports the exploitation of blacks by white oppressors. The basis of “systemic racism” whose creators and those responsible are whites (all). Certainly colonialism was (also) that, but proposing other theses or at least with other nuances compared to the Vulgate is not recommended for those academics who do not want to become victims of the guillotine of “cancel culture”.
In fact, making uncomfortable assumptions can cause many problems. Robert Hughes, author of the best-selling essay The culture of whining (Adelphi), knows something of this, in which he recalls that the African slave trade, for example, the black trade, was a Muslim invention, “developed by Arab merchants with the institutionalized with the enthusiastic cooperation of their black peers and with the most ruthless brutality centuries before the white man set foot on the African continent and continued long after the slave trade had been definitively suppressed in North America.
Forbidden to talk about colonialism
As Giulio Meotti writes in Il Foglio, should now end up in the dock Nigel Biggar, Lecturer at Oxford University. The English publisher Bloombsbury approached the professor to write a book on colonialism. Terms were agreed and Biggar had delivered the book, titled Colonialism: A Moral Reckoning, by the end of 2020. The essay’s thesis is that the British Empire learned from its mistakes and was increasingly driven by humanitarian ideals and liberals, particularly through the abolition and suppression of slavery. In the past, Biggar had been publicly criticized by several colleagues when he launched an interdisciplinary project in which he proposed to review and examine the strengths and weaknesses of English colonialism.
A letter signed by more than 170 scholars from the United Kingdom, United States, India, South Africa and other countries argued that the university was wrong to support Biggar’s project called “Ethics and Empire” and was supported by the university’s McDonald Center. On this occasion, too, Biggar was accused of being “an apologist” for British colonialism. Now the same publisher that entrusted Biggar with the book on colonialism has decided to unload it and terminate the contract. Sarah Broadway, one of Bloomsbury’s bosses, explains that “the conditions for publication are not favorable”. When asked for more in-depth explanations, the publisher replied: “We believe that public opinion on the subject is currently unsupportive of the book’s publication and we will reevaluate it next year.”
The Case of Professor Gilley
Before Biggar, another lecturer had been treated similarly. This is the professor at Portland State University, Bruce Gilley, author of The Last Imperialist: Sir Alan Burns’ Epic Defense of the British Empire. The essay, due for publication in 2020, was to be the first in a series to be published by Rowman & Littlefield. As Il Foglio recalls, Gilley’s book had passed editing and revision by Lexington, part of Rowman & Littlefield, and received the approval of two princes in the field of colonial history, Jeremy Black and Tirthankar Roy. Result? It was picked up at the last minute even though the dispenser had already been sent. “I attribute the ease and speed of my recent cancellation to the moral panic created by Black Lives Matter. It has taken cultural totalitarianism to new heights,” he explained in the Wall Street Journal columns.
Previously, the professor had become the focus of controversy a few years ago when he wrote an academic article in which he argued that colonial rule also brought benefits to indigenous people. A triviality, if you will, but one that cannot be publicly repeated, the article did in fact provoke a storm of protest and outrage from the academic left. A few months ago, Gilley revisited the issue and published a book in which he argues that countries under German colonial rule benefited significantly. Academia should not treat colonialism as an “undeniable evil”: one can easily acknowledge its crimes without denying that there is always a flip side to the coin. Unfortunately, at Anglo-Saxon universities, the ideological approach – always in one direction – seems to dominate.