A yet even more simplified version of Poirot’s post:

Once upon a time all the peoples of the third world lived in peace.
Their lives were bright and full of fun games and they wanted for nothing ---even child birth was a blissful delight.

Then one grey day the big bad white man came and took all their goods away.
And told them they could play no more unless they romped the white mans way --- now all they do is labor and fight.

(Now everyone from the left please join in the chorus) : Boo Hoo ,Boo Hoo, Boo Hoo

Peoples
Poirot, by and large I agree with the thrust of what you say, but would suggest you are still showing some western bias.

I would suggest WE (white/western) don't just 'interrupt' their survival systems we 'destroy' them. The real crime is that we strip the people of their identities/cultures (world view) reducing them to 'superstition' expelled dark fissures of their subconscious' or (tourist) entertainment. In their place we impose a cardboard cut out of our 'better'(sic)system history/culture of which they are either passively or actively excluded (i.e. how many Black African/PNG multinationals, hedge funds etc can you name?).

IMO WE are either actively or passively engaged in the equivalent of large Valium dosed ethnic *'cleansing'(?)* as in making white.

It is monumentally disingenuous to attempt to claim anything less.It is our selfishness that makes us permit our governments/corporations/ churches to exploit the lesser well off for their and OUR wants. (as opposed to our needs):

- Who worries about buying cheap stuff from discount stores ultimately from exploited third world countries etc? it's our sense of a bargain.

- or the cost of those excessive Corp profits we rely on for more stuff?

- or the cultural cost of another conversion to our myriad of superstitious religions/denominations? etc.

Me Preaching? not at all, just years of objective observation of our colonial piratical behaviour in PNG. Remember, Aust got into trouble from the UN over how we ran PNG. Selfish is the right word.

BTW. We as humans have a predilection when confronted by something we neither understand or want to deal with we 'label' it.

What then follows the labeling we become preoccupied discussing the label whether is valid or not, not the problem or more importantly the solution.
Is it racist....who cares? what it is is unacceptable so what are we going to do about it......probably nothing.

Then one grey day the big bad white man came and took all their goods away.
Horus,

Idi Amin, Robert Mugabe, the various Raja's of India, the high priests of Central America, the Emperors of China & Japan, Egypt's Pharaohs etc. etc. wouldn't classify as big bad men ?
I only wish I could have lived in those days of milk & honey & just go walkabout with not a care in the world. My what a great life that must have been only being exploited by their own rather than the bad whites.

I just love the logic behind this.

>>'Then one grey day the big bad white man came and took all their goods away.'...Idi Amin, Robert Mugabe, the various Raja's of India, the high priests of Central America, the Emperors of China & Japan, Egypt's Pharaohs etc. etc. wouldn't classify as big bad men ?<<

If I read this correctly, individual, and please enlighten me if I haven't, this justifies the tawdry history of European colonization on the basis that Idi Amin, Robert Mugabe etc. did it, so it was all right for us to do it too?

This is similar to that classic "they don't allow us to build churches in Saudi Arabia, so why should we let them build mosques here?"

As my white-haired old granny used to explain to me when I was a child, "I'm just doing what they do" is never an excuse for bad behaviour.

Why do some people have such low aspirations by seeking to be just like that which they despise.

"They are a prat, we can be just as good a prat as they..nah nah nah..."

AlGoreIsRich,

Of course, I totally agree. They don't live in a perfect community where everyone is fair and loving and kind to each other. THey are human after all. But many tribes do live in what can be described as a communist-style system.

But my point was that Communism is anything but a materialistic ideology (especially when compared to capitalism). These tribal communities live there way of life the way they do out of a combination of tradition and necessity.

My point was that the basis of communism ideology is sharing. It is not evil in itself. It is just not compatible with human nature. Humans want more for themselves and their families than just 'a fair share'. So, for it to work, it has to be enforced. In the case of the small tribal communities, their version of communism is enforced mainly by tradition and necessity. But in larger communities, it can only be enforced by taking away the rights of individuals. It is at this point communism turns 'bad'.

PS thanks for the welcome