Talk:French law on colonialism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

not neutral[edit]

this article does not even mention the positive role colonialism supposedly had (increasing health care, infrastructure development, etc) how could this article be neutral with only the anti-law view exposed? not even the law... (check the French version). The French presence (not its imperialist rule) in Indochina and North Africa was supported by locals (BAWOUAN, Harkis) who joined the French ranks and fought the independence armies, so there must have been some positive aspects for these people to fight with their lives?! I mean focusing on the negative aspects can also be considered as revisionism and negationism. Shame On You 13:44, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree this is dreadful for the reasons you mention. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:French_law_on_colonialism&action=edit#

Why was this law repealed? Don't people want citizens of their country to feel good about it??? Otherwise how can they work constructively for their nation, like, if they think it's shit and immigrants are the best?

Sorry, that is all utter bullshit. Would you like to defend slavery? Shall we balance the Holocaust article with the Nazi "point of view"?

When you can find mainstream, accredited, peer-reviewed, professional historians and political scientists who have published on how French colonial rule was beloved by those colonized people, add references to their writing. That this article, which restates the most basic mainstream academic writing on the subject, is tagged as "biased" because it doesn't say enough nice things about colonialism is obscene, and evidence of something VERY wrong with Wikipedia's process.T L Miles (talk) 17:08, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

thinking with blinders on[edit]

Why was this law repealed? Don't people want citizens of their country to feel good about it??? Otherwise how can they work constructively for their nation, like, if they think it's shit and immigrants are the best?

It's a straw dog argument to say "...if they think it's shit and immigrants are the best...". How is that article saying that in way? It would seem that you did not give much thought to your arguments, nor to the effects of colonialism and imperialism on the world (not just French colonialism). Having a law to "...people want citizens of their country to feel good about it???" is like forcing people to be "happy": fake, and imposed. Imposed like colonialist attitudes and policies.

As for the repealment of the amendment (read the article again...), I would suggest you... ...read the article again.

As for "bringing in healthcare", to other cultures, I'd suggest that you step out of colonialist thinking for once and give a thought to what cultures other than your own have/had.

TBH, I suspect that the previous comments have some vested interest in this law staying like it was.


SimonRaven (talk) 10:13, 23 February 2008 (UTC)