Colonialism proper? Not as much as the UK, Germany, France, and the US, but over time they have come to enormously benefit from imperialism and neocolonialism, which is the modern form.
Yes, I by no means meant to downplay that. Just to highlight that even though they were not as heavily involved, neocolonialism and imperialism are still the driving force behind their safety nets, so anyone trying to point to them not being as heavily involved in old colonialism as a way to dismiss their modern neocolonialism and imperialism can be safely countered.
And to clarify my earlier point, colonialism proper is still around, just not as much as it was at the peak.
I’ll just link another one and elaborate.
While they didn’t have colonies as a nation they simply did it in a more hypocritical way and were actually heavily involved.
Swedes, Danes and Norwegians alike.
I get your point about the current neocolonialism but taking in to account the small numbers of their population compared to the big (but little known) role they played in the ‘old’ colonialism leads me to believe you underestimate their guilty past.
It was also unknown to me for a long time so let this be a good opportunity for everyone to look into it, especially this commenter you’re replying to.
These Nordics are not an example, as a matter of fact they could do a lot better considering their vast natural resources and don’t get me started on how their industrial expansion on Sami land, amongst other things, is only one aspect of their abundantly racist and anti-green attitude.
I’m aware that they played a critical and heavy role in colonialism, and am not trying to downplay that in any way. I appreciate the added context, but I don’t believe we are opposed in any way here.
Colonialism proper? Not as much as the UK, Germany, France, and the US, but over time they have come to enormously benefit from imperialism and neocolonialism, which is the modern form.
They actively took part in it as subcontractors, even if technically their nation wasn’t involved.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_soldiers_in_the_Congo_Free_State
Yes, I by no means meant to downplay that. Just to highlight that even though they were not as heavily involved, neocolonialism and imperialism are still the driving force behind their safety nets, so anyone trying to point to them not being as heavily involved in old colonialism as a way to dismiss their modern neocolonialism and imperialism can be safely countered.
And to clarify my earlier point, colonialism proper is still around, just not as much as it was at the peak.
I’ll just link another one and elaborate.
While they didn’t have colonies as a nation they simply did it in a more hypocritical way and were actually heavily involved.
Swedes, Danes and Norwegians alike.
I get your point about the current neocolonialism but taking in to account the small numbers of their population compared to the big (but little known) role they played in the ‘old’ colonialism leads me to believe you underestimate their guilty past.
It was also unknown to me for a long time so let this be a good opportunity for everyone to look into it, especially this commenter you’re replying to.
These Nordics are not an example, as a matter of fact they could do a lot better considering their vast natural resources and don’t get me started on how their industrial expansion on Sami land, amongst other things, is only one aspect of their abundantly racist and anti-green attitude.
I’m aware that they played a critical and heavy role in colonialism, and am not trying to downplay that in any way. I appreciate the added context, but I don’t believe we are opposed in any way here.
We certainly aren’t, figured some lesser known facts might be useful for lurkers.
Cheers friend
Cheers back!