Completely forgotten that you wanted to talk about Sweden and Germany in particular, did you?
As to size comparisons, you could, for example, dunno, look at maps. Hint: Sweden's only notable colony has been Finland. Germany was a bigger player but came very late to the game.
I'll try replying differently.
Completely forgotten that you wanted to talk about Sweden and Germany in particular, did you?
Not at all. You maid a claim, I asked for links. Then I provided 2 that are in relation to the way I see meaningful approaching european colonialism, as a whole since the basis is the same: white supremacy.
As to size comparisons, you could, for example, dunno, look at maps.
There are many criteria on colonial varieties and impact, borders is just one of them. For many more, please see relevant link above (Analysis of Western European colonialism and colonization).
Sweden’s only notable colony has been Finland.
Because you say so? Also, this statement undervalues the many Swedish overseas colonies (see relevant link above - Swedish overseas colonies) as well as the swedish participation in slave trade, both legal and illegal. A couple of examples among many.
Germany was a bigger player but came very late to the game.
Germany was a big player, not a bigger player, since late 1800. (see relevant link above - German colonial empire)
several military and genocidal campaigns by the Germans
Also, you talk about big powers, big players, bigger players so vaguely that I find it hard to follow.
You maid a claim, I asked for links. Then I provided 2 that are in relation to the way I see meaningful approaching european colonialism,
Wasn't me who made that claim. You provided one link that showed Sweden's colonial empire, tiny in comparison to the big powers (UK, France, Spain, Portugal, Russia), and one to DDG.
There are many criteria on colonial varieties and impact, borders is just one of them.
You might have an argument with Belgium, there. Sweden, ehhh not really. Germany is a bit of a mixed bag, let's just say be sure to also ask Samoans. The Herero and Nama was a genocide, yes. Not something you could single Germany out for, though.
participation in slave trade, both legal and illegal
By that account Nigeria has been the primary colonial power. Or better put native-run empires in the rough area.
Wasn’t me who made that claim.
You are so right about that, my bad.
The Herero and Nama was a genocide, yes. Not something you could single Germany out for, though.
I don't have someone else in mind? Any relevant link? (Yep, I like links a lot) I only know of the Herero and Nama genocide that was waged by the German Empire.
For the rest you mention about Nigeria, and since the article posted here is about Europe, I will kinda stick to the point I mentioned previously: It is important to be able to approach european colonialism as a whole, since it has the common ground of white supremacy.
Things like the trail of tears don't come to mind? The Native American genocide is generally quite well-known. But there's a thousand all over the place, random example Tasmania. If you now say "But that was the result of an uprising and a war, not premeditated as genocide": Same goes for the Herero and Nama one.
since it has the common ground of white supremacy.
It has the common ground in technological and military supremacy flanked by the native, European that is, population being really into the enlightenment, insisting that there be a distinction between power and justice, and the feudal powers that be then sought new people to oppress abroad, also due to a relative power stalemate among empires/alliances in Europe, everything that could be conquered at home already had been conquered. That's like multiple centuries summed up but it's the main forces. Scientific racism was invented to rationalise the whole endeavour to the less power-focussed but at its core it's plain ole feudal imperialism. Which is why the continent is so up in arms about Ukraine: Russia wants to re-start that shit, re-conquer some of its previously ill-gotten possessions. As if it didn't have plenty still.
Ah ok. I thought when you said
The Herero and Nama was a genocide, yes. Not something you could single Germany out for, though.
you meant that others where responsible for this genocide, not only the Germans.
It has the common ground in technological and military supremacy flanked by the native, European that is, population being really into the enlightenment,
Ouch. That's a colonial narrative. Scary.
you meant that others where responsible for this genocide, not only the Germans.
Nope. I meant that Germany isn't the only country to have committed colonial genocides.
Ouch. That’s a colonial narrative. Scary.
That's a) out of context quoted like that and b) historically accurate. Colonial expansion pre-dates scientific racism. If you want earlier evil motives try Christian missionaries, universalist in their own twisted way. Though going back in history on that one I think we'd need to start with Charlemange and the christianisation-by-genocide of the Saxons.
To the, what I called, big powers of colonization.
The Dutch While they're in terms of territory best comparable to Germany, they had their colonial possessions for several hundred years compared to the, not even, 40 years of German control.
Summing up the conversation that took place here before your comment, I'd say the following and copy-paste a couple of things.
Of course there have been different levels of colonization coming from Europe. But in some cases, saying for example Sweden has little colonial involvement is like saying Sweden was a little Nazi in WW2. Should we applaud Sweden then?
So, it is also important to be able to approach european colonialism as a whole, since it has the common ground that whites are superior to everybody else.
Was this a joke?
German colonial empire - wiki
Swedish overseas colonies - wiki
It's definitely accurate to say that they had very little colonial involvement compared to the big powers.
I wonder how you could back this claim. Any link in mind?
Please take a look at the following articles and maps:
Map: European colonialism conquered every country in the world but these five
Analysis of Western European colonialism and colonization - wiki
Completely forgotten that you wanted to talk about Sweden and Germany in particular, did you?
As to size comparisons, you could, for example, dunno, look at maps. Hint: Sweden's only notable colony has been Finland. Germany was a bigger player but came very late to the game.
I'll try replying differently.
Not at all. You maid a claim, I asked for links. Then I provided 2 that are in relation to the way I see meaningful approaching european colonialism, as a whole since the basis is the same: white supremacy.
There are many criteria on colonial varieties and impact, borders is just one of them. For many more, please see relevant link above (Analysis of Western European colonialism and colonization).
Because you say so? Also, this statement undervalues the many Swedish overseas colonies (see relevant link above - Swedish overseas colonies) as well as the swedish participation in slave trade, both legal and illegal. A couple of examples among many.
Germany was a big player, not a bigger player, since late 1800. (see relevant link above - German colonial empire)
Also, you talk about big powers, big players, bigger players so vaguely that I find it hard to follow.
Wasn't me who made that claim. You provided one link that showed Sweden's colonial empire, tiny in comparison to the big powers (UK, France, Spain, Portugal, Russia), and one to DDG.
You might have an argument with Belgium, there. Sweden, ehhh not really. Germany is a bit of a mixed bag, let's just say be sure to also ask Samoans. The Herero and Nama was a genocide, yes. Not something you could single Germany out for, though.
By that account Nigeria has been the primary colonial power. Or better put native-run empires in the rough area.
You are so right about that, my bad.
I don't have someone else in mind? Any relevant link? (Yep, I like links a lot) I only know of the Herero and Nama genocide that was waged by the German Empire.
For the rest you mention about Nigeria, and since the article posted here is about Europe, I will kinda stick to the point I mentioned previously: It is important to be able to approach european colonialism as a whole, since it has the common ground of white supremacy.
Things like the trail of tears don't come to mind? The Native American genocide is generally quite well-known. But there's a thousand all over the place, random example Tasmania. If you now say "But that was the result of an uprising and a war, not premeditated as genocide": Same goes for the Herero and Nama one.
It has the common ground in technological and military supremacy flanked by the native, European that is, population being really into the enlightenment, insisting that there be a distinction between power and justice, and the feudal powers that be then sought new people to oppress abroad, also due to a relative power stalemate among empires/alliances in Europe, everything that could be conquered at home already had been conquered. That's like multiple centuries summed up but it's the main forces. Scientific racism was invented to rationalise the whole endeavour to the less power-focussed but at its core it's plain ole feudal imperialism. Which is why the continent is so up in arms about Ukraine: Russia wants to re-start that shit, re-conquer some of its previously ill-gotten possessions. As if it didn't have plenty still.
Ah ok. I thought when you said
you meant that others where responsible for this genocide, not only the Germans.
Ouch. That's a colonial narrative. Scary.
Nope. I meant that Germany isn't the only country to have committed colonial genocides.
That's a) out of context quoted like that and b) historically accurate. Colonial expansion pre-dates scientific racism. If you want earlier evil motives try Christian missionaries, universalist in their own twisted way. Though going back in history on that one I think we'd need to start with Charlemange and the christianisation-by-genocide of the Saxons.
Sure man.
Compare for example the extent and duration of the Swedish and German colonies
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_overseas_colonies#/media/File:SwedishColonialEmpire(FIX).png Wtf is that even, you have to zoom in to properly see most of it lol
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_colonial_empire#/media/File:German_colonial.PNG
To the, what I called, big powers of colonization.
The Dutch While they're in terms of territory best comparable to Germany, they had their colonial possessions for several hundred years compared to the, not even, 40 years of German control.
For the others, it's not even close:
Spain
Portugal
France
Britain
Always happy to help out!
Summing up the conversation that took place here before your comment, I'd say the following and copy-paste a couple of things.
Of course there have been different levels of colonization coming from Europe. But in some cases, saying for example Sweden has little colonial involvement is like saying Sweden was a little Nazi in WW2. Should we applaud Sweden then?
So, it is also important to be able to approach european colonialism as a whole, since it has the common ground that whites are superior to everybody else.