Cecil Rhodes lived from 1852-1902 and was responsible for a large percentage of diamond and gold production in South Africa. He was highly involved in politics and became the premier of the Cape Colony in 1890. He even founded territory for his own country called Rhodesia (known as Zimbabwe as of April 1980). His ultimate goal is described in his will written before his twentieth birthday: “…the extension of British rule throughout the world … the colonization by British subjects of all lands where the means of livelihood are attainable by energy, labour and enterprise, and especially the occupation by British settlers of the entire Continent of Africa, the Holy Land, the Valley of Euphrates, the Islands of Cyprus and Candia, the whole of South America, the islands of the Pacific not heretofore possessed by Great Britain, the whole of the Malay Archipelago, the seaboard of China and Japan, the ultimate recovery of the United States of America as an integral part of the British Empire (8).”
The author writes in the next paragraph about how Cecil Rhodes believed that this type of worldwide empire was a prerequisite for world peace that would render wars impossible and promote the best interests of humanity. Popular belief at the time among the powers was that colonization activities were favorable to promote a more “civilized” way of life for all. That’s how large scale support was gathered in a nutshell.
How does this relate to my experience in South Africa? Basically all of the “economic growth” and many of the customs around me in South Africa is here because of primarily British/Dutch colonization.
Trains, Electricity, Automobiles, Television, Rugby, Cricket, Universities, Airplanes, Telephones, Pine Trees, Food Production Techniques, Christianity, Townships, etc are all a result of British/Dutch colonization. The South Africa I am experiencing is a combined experience of all of the groups that have been able to stake some type of claim in this area and the resulted interactions of all the various groups involved to this date. Inequality is rampant and socio-economic development has been at the forefront of government and NGO agendas since democracy/majority rule has begun in 1994.
A recent class discussion that relates to colonization and its inequalities is that of being born into a world where you have access to resources and services that maybe 75% of the rest of the world does not have access to. You might be starting the race “100 miles” ahead of others because you are a privileged minority. Some philosopher has written about this and I don’t remember who (If anyone knows and can comment that would be great). So what do you do? It wouldn’t be difficult to influence people to feel guilty about the things they have and take a more socialistic approach towards life by looking at the world through this lens because the situation is “unfair” – through a kind of Robin Hood lens.
What all of the students have learned on our trip in Cape Town that relates to the situation of making decisions that everyone may not agree with is the process of consensus decision making
Here in Cape Town the fourteen other students and I were engage the process of consensus decision making at least a few times a week (usually not by our own will unfortunately). House meetings, dinner planning, class group assignments are all conducted under terms that everyone must agree to. There is no voting – everyone must agree. I agree that the consensus decision making process helps solve problems, prevent problems, and fosters efficient, mature, and empathetic decision makers. I see the value of practice among small groups, but I discredit the process for working for millions of people. The process is time consuming and tends to actually reward the least accommodating group members. Relating back to the “100 miles ahead race” - if all of the decisions were made with consensus decision making process then the 100 mile gap would decrease (by undetermined means) since those behind would demand the gap decrease.
People like to look for something to blame when problems occur. During my time in Cape Town I’ve learned that many people actively spend their time looking for people and groups to blame for inequalities and ills in the world.
I’ve heard on more than one occasion that many of the problems that exist (gender inequality, racial discrimination, poverty) are because of the actions of governments, political parties, leaders, human greed, human nature, corporations, “those wealthy people on the top”, patriarchies, or capitalism.
Colonization and discrimination have caused countless problems for those who didn’t possess certain qualities. Is this enough to motivate people on a mass-scale to move away from self-interest activity to activity that promotes the welfare of complete strangers who share completely different cultural customs? I sound a bit cynic but if people aren’t going to profit from doing so then I don’t think much socio-economic development will occur for all groups or that any type of gap will lessen. The foundations for globalization are what people like Cecil Rhodes have labored their lives for and whose money past their death will continue to fund in the ways the individual saw fit. Views of globalization haven’t been agreed upon by all nations involved in the process – should they? Some have seen inequalities as being necessary to achieve equality in the future. Slightly intangible terms unless picked apart further and a bit of a paradox yeah? Pointing the finger, getting angry, and devaluing people, groups, and entire fields of study doesn’t help to reach a consensus either. The cycle of misinformation and refusal to understand the situation of the other side begins to repeat. These decisions are constantly being made and they do affect you – what role are you playing?
Kevin Bahr
