80
Imperialism Reading Group - How Europe Underdeveloped Africa, by Walter Rodney - Week 1
(hexbear.net)
This is a weekly thread in which we read through books on and related to imperialism and geopolitics. Last week's thread is here.
The book we are currently reading through is How Europe Underdeveloped Africa. Please comment or message me directly if you wish to be pinged for this group, or if you no longer wish to be pinged.
This week, we will be reading Chapter 1: Some Questions On Development.
Next week, we will be reading the first section, "A General Overview", of Chapter 2: How Africans Developed Before The Coming Of The Europeans - Up To The Fifteenth Century.
I would've been much more respectful if it wasn't both dismissive and misquoting. That combo doesn't deserve any more than that. Why did the original poster try to dismiss Rodney, a scholar and well respected Marxist, based on a misquoted intro to a book which goes in depth into the topic?Disagreement I will be very respectful and constructive with, but that comment wasn't that. I gave them the benefit of the doubt and asked them to humble themselves instead of jumping to these conclusions, nobody can expect nicer than that in this situation
Imo a theory discussion should be a safe place to be wrong and ignorant because one is showing their willingness to learn. Telling someone that something they misunderstood is "clear" or "obvious" is just insulting without informing. Everyone comes to this shit from their own place and not everyone has done what you consider to be the required prerequisite reading.
I haven't read or even heard of this book until I saw this thread and became curious about it, and this is the only comment chain that isn't "I haven't read it yet", left a bad taste in my mouth.
My stance is that in circles like this one who perceives an information gap should seek to inform before disparaging the viewpoint, it is only going to drive people away. U may take my internet words or leave them
I'll take your words about using "clear" and "obvious" to heart. For third persons not involved that can be very demeaning, and I apologize for that to you, and will adjust them to be more pointed and use terms like "with investigation, it can be found that..."
But directing them at the OP is warranted, because, again, they seemingly willingly lied about the book to dismiss it. The best interpretation I can think of is that they were just super not careful with the reading, in which case scolding for speaking authoritatively without any investigation is warranted. The worst case is willful misinterpretation because they disagree but don't want to pinpoint why (most likely because their disagreement is wrong and they're aware in some way). So I still feel entirely justified for that, but the language would've been better for a personal message, I guess.