Importantly, Moses argues that terms like “colonization” have fluid rather than fixed definitions, especially in their discursive usage, and stresses that the meaning of such terms as “colonization” and “imperialism” have rather been adapted in recent decades in order to facilitate a political agenda — to condemn European nations and to question Western moral legitimacy.(2008), Moses contends that conquest and occupation are human universals rather than the preserve of uniquely evil European peoples and their culture.
He writes that “‘Empire,’ ‘colony,’ and ‘genocide’ are keywords particularly laden with controversial connotations,” but that “few are the societies that were not once part of empires, whether its core or periphery.
This jarring incongruence between rhetoric and reality requires an interrogation of what is meant by terms like “colonize,” “empire,” and even “genocide,” particularly in regard to the political uses they have come to acquire, and also an interrogation of what we understand by historical processes of colonization.
It is argued here that the growing clamor for ‘decolonization,’ like Whiteness studies, exists only to encourage and facilitate an aggressive anti-White discourse.
In doing so, they behaved much as men of power have always behaved in any vigorous civilization.
What was different was just that they had so much more power than any earlier conquerors, and even more convincing grounds for feeling they were entitled to use it.
Today, White nations are being demonstrably colonized by non-Whites, White culture is increasingly marginalized (or dismissed as non-existent), and White history is being rewritten to support and advance the agenda of contemporary multiculturalism.
Whites are thus abused as colonizers while simultaneously being subjected to an unprecedented and multifaceted colonization.
Several years ago I had the opportunity to attend a conference on ‘genocide studies,’ during which I was introduced to the work of the leading academic in this field, the Australian scholar A. Despite his last name (which apparently is also English and Welsh as well as Jewish), Moses evidences no discernible Jewish ancestry, his father John Moses being a notable Anglican priest and his mother Ingrid a full-blooded German from Lower Saxony.
Moses has built his career around broad explorations of the themes of colonialism and genocide, and the relationship between the two.
Perhaps best encapsulated in Kipling’s poem “The White Man’s Burden“(1899), written in response to the Philippine-American War, the European experience of expansion and empire has always been double-sided, combining a love of exploration and glory with uneasy introspection prompted, as Kipling put it, by “the judgment of your peers.” It is particularly telling that in the course of hundreds of conversations with figures at all levels of the Alt Right (according to all media hype, a bastion of aggressive ethnic chauvinism), I have yet to come across a single individual advocating an expansionist or colonial policy — the preferred option being a total segregation from non-Whites and a policy of non-interference in their affairs.
Of course, one of the main reasons for our contemporary aversion to colonialism is that the collapse of empire has been catastrophic for us as a people — not in terms of lost resources, but because we immediately became subject to reverse colonization.
These ambitions have of course been nurtured in the West’s non-White populations for some time by the same cliques in academia, the media, and the wider culture.