Sunday, November 25, 2007

Who's an "imperialist"?

It's disappointing to hear the Archbishop of Canterbury talk like this: "He went on to suggest that the West was fundamentally adrift: “Our modern western definition of humanity is clearly not working very well. There is something about western modernity which really does eat away at the soul.” Williams suggested American leadership had broken down: “We have only one global hegemonic power. It is not accumulating territory: it is trying to accumulate influence and control. That’s not working.”

Hmmm. What kind of society does he think Al Qaeda and other Islamofascist types seek to foist upon the world? What about the elections the U.S. has sponsored in Iraq?

Further: "He contrasted it unfavourably with how the British Empire governed India. “It is one thing to take over a territory and then pour energy and resources into administering it and normalising it. Rightly or wrongly, that’s what the British Empire did — in India, for example."

What do the people of India think about that these days, one wonders...