As Western capitalism was built: the famine and mass murder in the colonies

Only four episodes of colonial history of many such — the West created his well-being at the expense of the colonies, not stopping the massacres of the native population and the destruction of the native economy, leading to outbreaks of mass hunger fighter.

I. Irish skeleton in the closet English[1]

Every Russian Anglomaniac certainly aware of the Magna Charta (which in fact was the only act-giving new privileges great feudal lords, not the dawn of freedom). But it would have cost to expand their horizons, learn and kilkeniyskim statute of King Edward III, whereby broken on the wheel alive all the British, who are Irish clothing, marry Irish and give their children Irish names. [2]

"The heads of killed per day, to whatever caste they are not treated, was cut off and bring to the places where he (the colonel) settled for the night, and put them on both sides of the road leading to his tent, and so that no one coming to it with any thing, do not fail to see them. Head to intimidate, do not lose anything from the dead and the living let horrified at the sight of heads of their fathers, brothers, children, relatives and friends, who will stumble, going to talk to the aforementioned Colonel "- such was the style of English rule in Ireland in the time of Elizabeth I. Since that time, is part of the ruin of the local population with the confiscation of his land — in favor of the English colonists. [3]

Cleaning the land from the local population for the subsequent transfer of its English colonists (planters) and included a fighter raids. So in 1575, the famous pirate and destroyer of Latin American cities Francis Drake scored and Ireland — in its raid on a per-Rathlin was carved 600 members of Clan MacDonnell.

With the suppression of the rebellion in Ulster British troops were given the following emoluments from the exiled and exterminated the Irish — Cavalier-Grunt to 240 morgues land grunt — to 120. [4]

When King James Stewart, British power in Ireland will be what is actively engaged and in England itself — the destruction of communal land tenure and related social forms, which was the basis for the subsequent dispossession of peasants. Chichester, Lord Lieutenant of Ireland issued a proclamation declaring clan members free from any subjection to the leader of the clan. After that suggested counting Ireland equivalent of America — and immediately began distributing the English Protestant Irish land, plots of 1,000 and 1,500 acres.

If the leader of the clan perished or fled — then immediately the whole land of all members of the clan became the property of the English crown. As if any Irish people were not there.

Ireland has become ground zero of British colonialism; similar style — assign ownership of the natives, if they do not exist, will be applied in other English colonies.

Soon the Ulster 195 thousand acres of land was taken over by the English and Scottish Protestant settlers, and the Irish have only 70 thousand acres. Moreover, landowners, Protestants were forbidden even to lease land to the Irish peasants — let swell and die of starvation. [5]

Not one British monarchs tried to ruin the Irish on the field, that's the British Long Parliament in 1642, takes an act of mass confiscation of Irish lands — to pay off its creditors.

Cromwell conquest of Ireland, which led to the death of half of the population of the island, 616 thousand people. [6] began with the words of the leader of the bourgeois revolution that Britain "will continue the great work to eradicate the bloodthirsty Irish and their cronies and well-wishers". [7] Residents of Drogheda, Wexford, and a number of other cities have been killed — even in cases where capitulated on conditions of preservation of their lives. 100 thousand Irish were sold as slaves to the West Indies.

An Act of Parliament in 1652, "On the dispensation of Ireland" completely deprived of the ground all the Irish, who participated in the anti-British uprising. And those who did not participate — and in fact deprived of everything. One third of the land they just took away, and instead of the remaining two-thirds, "provided" in a barren rocky areas Connaught in the west of the island.

An Act of Parliament of 27 September 1653 is truly demonstrated the triumph of capitalist rule of law — to May 1, 1654 Irish Catholics had to move out polls across the river Shannon, in Connaught. Who among the Irish, by that date, will remain on this side of the Shannon will be executed. Allowed to remain until a minor and farm laborers who worked in the home-British. For the capture or elimination of the Irish left in the wrong place, appoint a good cash reward. [8] (Compare this legislation on the degree of ruthlessness is possible only with the Indian Removal Act, adopted in 1830 by the U.S. Congress — then was made the mass deportation of the indigenous population of the Atlantic coast North. America in areas of extinction to a completely "legally"). [9]

Already in the 17th century. 85% of the land owned by the Irish, was confiscated and transferred into the possession of Protestant settlers from England and Scotland ("the sacred right of property" in the English version).

But then England ("the founder of Democracy") continued to "shine" in the field of humiliation and devastation of the indigenous population of Ireland. Irish Catholics were forbidden to carry arms, to hold any public office or public, to be a teacher or a lawyer, own land, take expensive apartment or have a good horse, to be guardians of children and send their children to study abroad. Police officer may at any time come into the house of the Catholic Irish and require presentation of children. If one of them was not at home — "Yeah, he is studying in France" — all of the family's property was confiscated. The priest who married a Catholic and a Protestant, a Catholic and a Protestant was subjected to the death penalty (Law 1725). [10]

In the 18th century. severed heads of the Irish have not spread along roads, as they were found to be more economical ways of exterminating the indigenous population of the island.

"One third of Irish rents is spent in England, which, together with the profits, pensions, and other income is a good half of the kingdom, all — net profit for England. This rent is squeezed out of the blood, vital organs, clothing and housing tenants, who live worse than English beggars "- Jonathan Swift wrote in the article" A brief review of the state of Irish. "

By the early 19th century. each year into the pockets of the Irish landlords living in England, pumps out more than a million f. Art. rent.

Irish industrial production was suppressed so as not to compete with English, Irish, even forbidden to trade directly with other British colonies. It was destroyed by the Irish shipbuilding and high export duties crushed the Irish wool production.

In the relatively fertile country with thousands of famine deaths became commonplace.

J. Swift in his "Letters clothier" wrote that "All roads, streets and doors of houses deposited destitute women, followed by 5-6 children, begging and praying passer on alms," and his contemporary, the Lord Lieutenant, reported in London that in the urban trenches lie the corpses of people, the mouth of which is covered with green grass, which they were trying to satisfy their hunger in the last minutes of life. [11]

After the cancellation in the early 1840s. Corn Laws, which stimulated the production of grain from landlords, starts cleaning their vast estates of small tenants. English landowners strongly emit the Irish from the ground, passing it under cultivation of forage grasses for livestock.

Externally innocent process of transition to a productive livestock will cost the Irish people.

Irish Catholic peasants remain with their tiny plots, where only the generous American guest potatoes will save them from starvation. From time to time.

When a guest in 1845 ruined a fungal disease, the Irish famine began — by 1851, the population of the island was reduced by almost a third. [12]

"… We went into the hut. In the far corner, barely visible through the smoke and covering their rags, lay embracing three children with sunken eyes, without vote, in the last stage of degeneration … Above the remains of burning peat crouched another figure, wild, almost naked, with almost superhuman mind. Plaintive moaning withered old woman begged us to give her something to show his hands, where the skin was hanging from the bones .. "- writes English author, who visited Ireland in 1847. And at the same time, "the huge herds of cows, sheep and pigs are sent … every hue, from each of our 13 ports course for England, and landlords receive rent and go spend it in England, and hundreds of poor people lie down and die along the roads from lack of food ". [13]

Even on the way to America to 30% of fleeing from starving Irish were dying of typhus and malnutrition.

The death of Ireland did not meet specific philanthropic feelings in London, where private foundations and the government are blaming each other's commitment to help the starving. Delaying this was done not without intent. "Mortality from starvation and emigration … cleared the land from unprofitable producers and made room for better agricultural enterprise." [14] Ironically, but the actual genocide of the Catholic population of Ireland has not caused much interest in the Catholic countries of Europe, for example, in France or Poland.

But the British propagandists worked out well, shifting the blame to the British ruling class to the fungus, which of course can not argue.

Today, the population in Ireland is far less than in the early 19th century. If, in 1840, on the island there were about 8,180,000 people., By the end of the 19th century. about 4.46 million, including the Anglo-Saxon minority, now 5.5 million, given his Ulster Protestant population. [15] A British propagandists of all famines are looking for anywhere, but not under the shadow of the British Crown. (For comparison, in Catholic Poland was ruled by the "tsarist" Russia, the population grew rapidly — from 2.7 million in 1815 to 9.5 million in 1897 [16] In the Russian "prison of nations" Catholics were multiplied and flourished in the British "citadel of democracy" is rapidly dying out.)

The masses of Irish, fleeing starvation in the English industrial city in the first half of the 19th century., Further down the price of labor. Their poverty evoked healthy laughter even in English intellectuals.

"The Irish are a dress from rags away and a delicate surgery that is undertaken only on holidays or special occasions." But Carlyle's humor was very much English when he spoke about the Irish are "pigs in human form". [17]

Most of the techniques that the British tried in Ireland, they have applied in their overseas colonies.

II. Famine in British India [18]

India for centuries been a country of dreams for the English bourgeoisie. The dream was of prey, the British wanted to get to her treasures. British themselves had nothing to offer to India. Its economy, though not kept pace with the English on technologies of mass production, however, has a variety of craft techniques and produce large amounts of high-quality goods. In terms of absolute size of the economy in India, given its huge population, ranked first or second place in the world — along with China.

The result of the Seven Years' War, and in particular, the Battle of Plassey (1757), was the transfer of Indian navabstva Bengal under the rule of the British East India Company. It is the richest state of Hindustan was up to 30 million people and almost not affected by the feudal wars that led to the destruction in other Indian regions. But now Bengal had to learn all the pleasures of British capital accumulation.

The troops of the Company and their commander personally R. Clive to start cleaned out the treasury of the country in the amount of 5.3 million pounds. Art. (It's hard to imagine that Suvorov and Kutuzov did something like that). The company then took possession of the fiscal apparatus of the country. [19]

The appetite of the Company was good: a sharply increased level of taxation of the population, including a two-fold increase in land tax.

The British rulers of Bengal gave the collection of taxes on short-term payoff — to employees of the Company and the lenders, and "assist" collectors gave the troops. During the collection of taxes applied sophisticated torture, the victims were women and children.

"Children timed to death in the presence of their parents. Father and son connected face-to-face and subjected to flogging so that the impact, if not accounted for the father, then fell on his son. The villagers pelted the field. They would run all of them, if not for squads of soldiers on roads that are grabbing these accidents. "(Edmund Burke, speech in the House of Commons). [20]

Local merchants were forbidden to engage in foreign trade, and in addition, the British introduced the domestic customs and monopolized the industry's most important trade vnutribengalskoy. Hundreds of thousands of Bengali artisans were forcibly attached to the factors of the Company, where they were to take their products at the lowest prices, and often they did not pay anything at all.

As the witness testified: "Commercial resident (chief factor) assigns all of them (artisans, weavers) some work for a small advance assigns them to work, denying them the right to use their skills for their own benefit." "Markets, marina, wholesale markets and granaries destroyed. As a result of the violence of traders with his men, artisans and Raiatea (peasants) and the others fled, "- is listed in the message Birbum Nawab district governor, who preserved the nominal power. [21]

In 1762, Robert Clive and other senior officials of the East India Company formed a society for the exclusive trade salt, betel and tobacco in Bengal, Bihar and Orissa. Zamindars and the direct producers were obliged to hand over the goods to this society by force low price. This led to the ruin of both Indian landowners and farmers with the artisans. [22]

Different types of robbery population have led to famine years 1769-1773., Which killed about a third of Bengal, from 7 to 10 million. [23]

Marx in his work on British rule in India, said: "In the years 1769-1770. British artificial famine organized by buying all the rice and refusing to sell it, except by the incredibly high prices ". [24]

However, after the disaster of English style rule has not changed. Communal lands under various pretexts given to companies from the tax collector was formed a new class of feudal landowners. [25]

The Governor-General Cornwallis reported the results of violent activity of its predecessor Hastings (1789): "Over the years, agriculture and commerce fell into decay, and now the population of these provinces (Bengal, Bihar, Orissa), except Shroff (moneylenders) Banyan Tree and quickly goes towards universal poverty and ruin. "

Imposed a heavy burden on the principality subordinate to the East India Company, the content of "subsidiary forces". [26]

In the 1780 — 1790-ies. Bengal famine continued to mow his victims was a few million people. The famine came as captured by the British in Benares, Jammu, Bombay and Madras. [27]

In the first half of the XIX century. British spent two successful wars against Maratha principalities, occupied the central part of the Indian subcontinent — Dean, in three wars defeated Mysore in North India, took control of the Mughal ruling in Delhi, zakogtili Nepal, bit off pieces of Oudh and Burma.

Creatively combining direct violence, bribery, graft and bleeding opponents, the East India Company was all on the north, north-west and north-east. The expansion was often masked by high words on the prevention of threats to British possessions: the Napoleon of France, and then — Russia. Like Genghis Khan conquered peoples forced to fight for themselves, the British fought blood and sweat of the Indian soldiers, sepoys, teamsters, porters, etc. subdued Indian state first of all signed contracts Default rules, according to which, instead of their armies, have pledged troops of the East India the company actually paying foreign yoke. Providing colonial troops to ravage the local population at least monopoly companies on different types of trading activities.

In 1839, the British attacked the government of Sindh (the territory of present-day. Pakistan), and after the bombing took the port of Karachi. Emirs of Sindh had to sign a contract and pay bonded tribute to the East India Company. In February 1842 the Company troops again invaded Sindh and defeating the emirs of Sindh and Baloch militia, annexed its territory. British Commander Charles Napier generously rewarded himself for the success of taking the spoils in the box at the 70 th f. Art. After this war, the British come to the border with Afghanistan, which will try to get their hands on — of course, to "protect" their Indian possessions.

In 1845 the British took up the Sikh state in the Punjab, where he died shortly before this energetic government Sardar Singh Rajya. The once-powerful Sikh army was swept democratic reforms. Were elected to command soldiers panchayats (councils). The result was not long in coming. As in 1845-1846. Anglo-Sikh sipayskaya army defeated in four battles. According to the contract signed by the regents minor Sardar, Sikh state received British administration.

In April 1848 the Sikh army tried to escape from the domination of the Company. However, the Sikhs were killed British buckshot near its capital city of Multan. And then forces the capital of the Company was subjected to intense bombardment and no less intense looting. There were repeated scenes typical of the colonial wars waged by "the founder of democracy." Drummers of the capitalist labor grabbed one only of gold and silver by 5 million pounds. Art. Among the captured British mining diamond was the Koh-i-Nur, the Mountain of Light is one of the largest in the world — he adorned the crown of Her Majesty.

After the defeat of the best Indian soldiers in British hands was three-quarters of India's population. Clean up the remnants of the Indian subcontinent it was a matter of technique. There are no more no strong opponent.

Meanwhile, the famine did their "successes", covering over and over again all the large territory of the colonial India. This was the result of a deliberate policy of the British authorities for the destruction of rural communities and the ruin of local handicrafts and thereby freed up the market for British manufactured goods. According to the British Governor-General from 1834: "The plains of India whiten the bones of the weavers'. [28]

On the Indian principality, robbed the East India Company, imposed a crippling service loans. The company followed the true liberal principles — and crushing the Indian community, I do not spend money to work in the public interest, for irrigation and reclamation, so important in Indian climatic conditions. From this field emptied faster than the direct robbery. [29]

Uncontrolled exploitation of Indian colonies was the most important source of accumulation of capital and the English Industrial Revolution in England, has provided up to a third of British investment. [30]

According to the calculations of the famous American historian B. Adams, in the first decades after joining the British in India were taken out of funds in the amount of 1 billion pounds. art. [31]

Going India after sipayskogo under direct control of the rebellion the British crown is not slowed the flywheel robbing the country.

* 1800-1825 gg. died of starvation 1 million.,

* 1825-1850 gg. — 400 thousand,

* 1850-1875 gg., Struck Bengal, Orissa, Rajasthan, Bihar, died 5 million,

* 1875-1900 gg. — 26 million died

The victims of the "great famine" 1876-1878 gg., Hit in the first place, Bombay and Madras, were according to the British administration of about 2.5 million, and according to Indian estimates, about 10 million people. [32]

Since the early 20th century. British administration began to hide data about the victims of hunger in India. [33] In the official statistics indicate only the population of the areas affected by famine.

* In 1905-1906. famine struck areas with a population of 3.3 million people.,

* 1906-1907 gg. — With a population of 13 million,

* 1907-1908 gg. — With a population of 49.6 million people. [34]

Data on deaths from starvation were written off by an epidemic of cholera and the plague broke out in starving areas. In the years 1896-1908., According to the British administration in the famine-stricken areas, "the plague" 6 million people died. [35]

During the First World War, the colony India with a predominantly poor population should have put the English metropolis of food and equipment for 200 million to provide loans for 150 million (Not counting the multi-million dollar donations, wearing, as a rule, the coercive nature). Supplies of agricultural products produced under compulsion (in fact it was the requisitioning), Loans and supplies provided with higher taxes. A lot of farms went bankrupt, the peasants turned into collectors and disenfranchised laborers. Yields are significantly reduced. Working day in enterprises lasted up to 15 hours. By the end of the war, famine struck India, accompanied by epidemics — from these causes were killed 12-15 million people. [36]

In 1933, the Director of Medical Services, India, Major General John Mego reported "at least 80 million people in India starve". [37]

In the 1942-1943 biennium. territory of Bengal, east of India and north swept famine that killed 5.5 million people. [38] The famine was the result of requisition of rice and other grains, taken by the British administration and, according to some researchers, is a deliberate blow of England's Indian population, support the "August Revolution" in 1942 and anti-British movement led by Subhas Bos. [39]

III. Hunger in French Algeria [40]

In a previous article, "Famine in British India", I touched upon the operation of the British Indian colonies. Mastering the Indian subcontinent by the British was accompanied by large-scale looting of the state and there is community property, destruction of local small-scale farming, the destruction of public agricultural systems, such as irrigation — all this has led to the death from starvation of tens of millions of people. Similar happened in other colonies and semi-colonies of Britain, as well as in the colonial possessions of other Western powers.

Capital of the country, just like the English, leaving the world stage, and is entered in the societies, the leading non-capitalist economy, rapes and destroys them — in order to maximize profits and reduce costs.

"To hope that capitalism will ever be satisfied with only the means of production, it can be obtained by barter — then build the illusion … So capitalism considers it a matter of life forcible appropriation of the most important means of production in colonial countries … As the inaugural reception of capital follows a systematic systematic destruction and the destruction of the non-capitalist social organizations with which it faces in its expansion. We are dealing here not with primitive accumulation: the above process continues to this day. Any new extension of colonies of course accompanied by a bitter war of capital against the social and economic relations between Aboriginal people and the abduction of their means of production and labor power ", — said the researcher Rosa Luxemburg capital accumulation. [41]

By the way, something similar to what happened in the 19th century. in the colonial countries, and again in the late twentieth century — the last territory mastered the world capital in Russia …

Because of the bloody religious conflicts 16-17 centuries. France too late to join the fight for the colony. All her attempts in the 18th century. seize the lead from colonial Britain will fail. France remains a country with a large agrarian overpopulation, with advanced handicrafts and textiles, but with the weak development of factories — the effect of the lack of cheap colonial resources.

From the French Revolution begins the transition from an agrarian society to an industrial estates bourgeois, which took about 80 years. It was accompanied by a large bloodletting. France has not happened raskrestyanivaniya strong as in Britain. However, the surplus agricultural population were ground repression and wars that have lasted without interruption for 23 years. Tens of thousands of head lifted revolutionary guillotine. In the provincial cities remarkable views of the mass execution was drowning. In the Vendee alone destroyed about half a million people, mostly ordinary peasants. [42] The bourgeois democrats destroyed the social strata, who was detained in feudalism, with the scope and ingenuity. For example, during the "Republican weddings" were tied together naked priest and a peasant woman, and then drowned. [43]

Napoleon's campaigns have cost France the loss of two million people. [44] And on a soldier who died in battle, ten had died from disease and malnutrition.

While France did not start again to gain colonies, the common life has been scant. Fernand Braudel writes: "In the nine-tenths of the French poor and small farmer eat meat only once a week, and then the corned beef."

With the revolution of 1830 ended with the Restoration era, ended the dynasty of the Bourbons and the Orleans dynasty under the mask came to power, the financial oligarchy — Louis-Philippe seated on the throne of the major French banks Casimir Perier, Lafitte and others. It is no accident this time France starts a new acquisition of colonies and by jumping across the sea begins to conquer North Africa — from Algeria.

In February 1848 the monarchical antics with the rule of the big bourgeoisie in France were thwarted. Political power is easily passed into the hands of the Provisional Government, dictatorial military power in the hands of General Cavaignac Mason — just in case the lower strata of society perceive the democratic slogans too literally.

With the revolution of 1848 will be canceled direct slavery in the French colonies, however, various forms of forced labor will be there until the end of colonial rule. (For example, in West Africa, the French authorities forcibly gained blacks as porters loads. During much of the work was dying of starvation and exhaustion. And to the rest did not run away, their wives were sent to the camps, where guards amused, raping defenseless women.)

And tens of thousands of members of the French lower classes, make a slip to the capital, were sent across the sea to hard work. From prison in tropical French Guiana, in particular on Devil's Island, returned a minority. [45]

With the lost work on the ground, proletarianize peasants, whose number is to ser. 19th century reached 9 million, the French bourgeoisie did not stand on ceremony.

The immediate cause of the proletarian speech in June 1848 was the closing of the liberal government of "national workshops" — public works employed more than 100 thousand people. Unmarried workers 18-25 years uncomplicated sent to the army, and the rest — for excavation work in the province. Workers naturally rebelled — they were superfluous at the festival every freedoms.

The massacre of the liberals over the rebels wore utterly brutal.

The total number of workers killed by the liberal bourgeoisie in 1848 was estimated at 11 million people. — Shot in Paris without a trial .. [46]

After the victory of the bourgeois-liberal revolution of 1848 and the defeat of the proletarian performances of Louis-Napoleon, who was elected president of France (then he had become emperor), begins full-scale capitalist modernization. The first phase will end its crushing defeat in the Franco-Prussian War and the shocking scenes of fratricide after the suppression of the Paris Commune of 1871

Thousands of people were killed only because they did not look that way, as a good bourgeois. "It was bad that day turn out to be much higher, dirtier, cleaner, older or uglier their neighbors'. [47] Thirty thousand Frenchmen from the lower strata of society were shot and twice as many to refer to the disastrous overseas hard labor. [48]

However, the English bourgeoisie, discarding the old enmity, gave the French bourgeoisie of the colonial lot of pieces of the pie in Africa and Indochina, shared control of China — it helped to get out of France and of the bloody whirlpool of class conflict, and from the depths of the Prussian indemnities. England wary of excessive weakening of France — it was necessary to maintain the balance of power and constant hostility continental powers …

By the beginning of the French conquest of Algeria in 1830 and the communal tribal undivided family property which is the predominant types of land ownership among the Berbers and Arabs, which, in large part, was due to the climatic conditions of the region. In most of the country's arid climate forced the population engaged in extensive cattle or conduct agricultural economy with the use of irrigation systems created by collective labor.

French government began with the fact that most of the assigned conquered lands, and those that were under the control of the former rulers of the country — Deev, and those that were in the possession of the Arab and Berber delivery, but not under the agricultural processing: pastures, forests, grasslands , "pair" and the reservoir. The confiscated land is transferred and sold under the settlement of French colonists — cantonnements. Was not left konfiskatorov attention not only communal but also private land — if it is required for the establishment or expansion of settlements in Europe, or in the interests of fisc. Seizure of land from the Berber and Arab births took place regularly — mention of the decision of the colonial authorities in 1830, 1831, 1840, 1844, 1845, 1846.

Law of 16 June 1851, took all the forests in the property of the French state, the indigenous people on it lost 24 million hectares of grassland and land overgrown with low bushes — that actually killed the native cattle. [49] The local population is consistently crowded out in marginal mountain and desert areas. But the system of confiscation and subsequent sales not only led to the strengthening of the European colonization of much excited speculation and usury. Algerians redeemed their land back, but ran into crippling debt.

For comparison, the so damnable in the West, "the Russian tsarist government" never resorted to such methods — all native tribes who find themselves in the vast spaces under its authority, as were extensive pastoral, agricultural or assigns farm, and remained with their lands, with their lands. Sucked russophobes cases of resettlement Caucasian births from the mountains to the plains were designed to eradicate the causes raiding activity and only led to improved economic conditions for them. Therefore, even in the Russian Caucasus is quite the opposite to that commonly observed in the colonial possessions of the Western powers …

After the suppression of the resistance of the Algerian tribes of Kabylia, the onset of the French capital in the social and economic foundations of the local population has increased — in 1863 a law was passed to section coercive community property between families and family members.

From 1863 to 1873. was divided into 400 of the 700 communal possessions. Chaos intensified, smallholders were rapidly losing their land without having to raise capital management; small farmers lost access to grazing land, irrigation systems were dying, lenders seized the land, European land speculators bought and sold land. Along with land speculation and the ruin of small proprietors intensified hunger.

But the French capital was stubborn. In 1873, the law was set mandatory private ownership of the Algerian land. [50] has come a feast for the land speculators and usurers, and there was a new phase of the economic ruin of the natives. Arabs and Berbers had fled starvation in possession of the Turkish sultan, who could not escape — were killed. [51] Not really go well, and European colonization, has accumulated a lot of land in the hands of large landowning stock companies and landowners — so-called. "One hundred and seniors." About a third of the land chosen for the French colonists, was in the hands of two companies, lease it by the same natives — that is, money is made on the basis of the previous robbery. Another quarter "Frenchified" of the land was left completely untreated, the new owners do not bother to invest in its capital — but it did not return the natives. [52] When the property comes into the hands of the capitalists, even inveterate speculators, it has become a "sacred."

Brockhaus encyclopedia in the late 1890s, wrote a significant reduction of the native population of Algeria. [53] The historian D. Lefeuvre reported reduction of the population of Algeria only from 1830 to 1872. by 875 thousand people, from 3 million to 2 million 125 thousand [54] Thus, from a quarter to a third of the Algerian population died as a result of the arrival of Western capitalism. And we can say if the British came to Algeria with their racism and cold ruthlessness Protestant — the result would have been even worse. Suffice it to recall the fate of Ireland, where the population is much less today than in the early 19th century — there was also produced the destruction of communal ownership of land and the confiscation of land masses in favor of the colonists and the British Protestant landlords, accompanied by dispossession of the indigenous population .. [55] Or remember the indigenous people of Australia, which just destroyed both animals damaging herds of English colonists … [56]

However, is it any wonder that the anti-colonial struggle that unfolded in Algeria since 1954, was of an extremely brutal on both sides, and in the struggle against the French army lost about half a million Algerians, the population of hundreds of villages were deported, about 2 million people. sent to concentration camps. [57]

In a future article series "How to build capitalism," I will try to highlight the "civilizing" the activity of the Belgians in the Congo, and evolved more densely populated part of black Africa in huge labor camp — for the first thirty years of colonial rule, the country's population has fallen by half, down 15 million people. [58]

IV. Exemplary American War

The Spanish-American War of 1898 and the subsequent conquest of the Philippines for her. That this war has launched a long line of predatory campaigns of U.S. forces beyond the bounds of the Americas — there seems to be the motto, "Do you have what we need — wait for us to visit."

Most of its colonial possessions of Spain lost in the 1820s.

During the previous session gutting the Spanish overseas possessions was England, which had a Latin American rebels all necessary support, including military, transport and information. For example, the English fleet under the command of the rebel army has deployed Kokreyla de San Martin from Chile to Peru. And Simon Bolivar, after the start of the rebellion visiting London, was able to generous subsidies Whitehall recruit a legion of mercenaries from among the Europeans. Freed from the Spanish, Latin America has become is not in an independent state, as is (perhaps) the dream of Bolivar, and a gathering of banana republics. For their republican and democratic facades hiding English, and then the American diktat, the rule of the British and then the American monopolies, the sharp class stratification, the genocide of the indigenous population (the apex of which was the Paraguayan War), congestive poverty ruthlessly exploited peasants, peons, open or lightly camouflaged slavery in the plantations and mines, raw nature of the economy, lawlessness perpetrated by private armies of landowners; dominance in the elected bodies comprador, landowners and agents of foreign companies.

And such "liberation" has become the template for many other "exemptions" — is outside of Latin America …

However, after all amputations in the Spanish crown jewels left several overseas — beautiful island with a variety of resources that are important for oceanic communications.

U.S. to an interesting period of time completely overpowered the Native Americans — on the order of decreasing their number by deportations and genocide. In the 1860s and 90s. land still belonged to the Indians in the west of the continent was divided into squares and passed at the disposal of the colonists, farmers, and then immediately began the process of consolidation of land ownership. Of small-scale farms were ruined and through the hands of banks fell into the possession of large capitalist bonanza farms. Cities were awash Displaced farmers and immigrants; industry grew rapidly, protected by very tall protectionist tariffs. It is on the protectionist Bill took a career then U.S. President William McKinley. (Liberal talk about the great benefits of unfettered competition — this is only for external use, when Western companies are taking other markets and kill another industry.) American capital needed in a diverse cheap raw material, secure markets for manufactured products, and in the sea lanes provided military naval bases …

Started the Spanish-American War after intense newspaper campaign about the "Spanish atrocities." This prelude to the American aggression later will become the standard.

February 15, 1898 raid on Havana exploded battleship "Maine". No motive for this kind of sabotage have obviously weaker Spaniards had — really they wanted to speed up the U.S. attack? On the background of a dirty terrorist evidenced by the fact that almost all the officers of the ship were on the shore. The Americans immediately accused of blowing up the Spaniards demanded that the Spanish Crown to abandon Cuba and April 21 without a declaration of war, hostilities began. Such a casus belli became the model for most of the wars fought by the Americans up to this day.

For a hundred years the scheme was run-up to perfection:

"A certain country is suffering terribly from a lack of freedom, democracy, the rule of law, human rights violations, etc. (the U.S. government needs the resources and capital of the country) — The enemy is cruel and horrible (future victim is weak and lacks powerful allies) — Sinister enemy has already committed attack on our citizens, we must defend (the U.S. government killed a portion of its citizens [modern version, a few native "fighters for democracy"] and put the blame on the future victim) — An American soldier is invincible, the public rejoicing ("GI" to destroy his the way everything that moves and breathes) — We brought this country of freedom, democracy, rule of law, human rights, etc. (America got the resources of this country and do not give them as long as they have not used in full). "

In August, the resistance of the Spaniards in Cuba, the Philippines and Puerto Rico was broken. And the patriotic movement in the Philippines actually defeated the Spaniards themselves, so that the only remaining American soldiers proudly enter in Manila.

December 10, 1898 Treaty of Paris issued the results of aggression. Spain "officially" handed States Philippines, Puerto Rico and Guam. And the expenses for the attack on the U.S. itself — $ 25 million. Cuba, formally declared independent, was also occupied by the Americans.

The President McKinley outlined the status of the occupation as a "benevolent assimilation" and "soft mode of justice and the rule of law" (then, as we can see, the U.S. government is not so hung up on the slogans of "freedom and democracy", as it is today). By the way, McKinley died in office of a bullet fired "anarchist" — may, in fact heavenly retribution overtook the organizer of predatory war.

February 4, 1899 the Americans began fighting against the Government of the Philippine Republic, formed patriots. Philippine Republican side will soon become a guerrilla fighting the intrusive "liberators" — the First in Asia guerrilla.

Over two years, 120 thousand American soldiers destroyed the hard guerrillas and anyone suspected of supporting guerrilla groups.

Along the way, the Americans strongly supported the differences in the Philippine leadership, as President E. Aguinaldo (son of a wealthy landowning family-bureaucratic) ousted prime minister Mabini and obviously supported the conspiracy against the chief of the moon ended his murder.

In 1901, Aguinaldo was captured by the Americans and the captivity urged his compatriots to lay down their arms. However, guerrilla fighting continued in some areas until 1913. During the fighting, lay down their heads 4200 "GI" and 16 thousand guerrillas (very bad for Philippine Patriots ratio, given the huge difference in service in comparison with the enemy).

During the conquest of the Philippines were killed, according to official figures, 200,000 civilians. Given that the carpet-bombing of the U.S. command had not yet been carried out (due to lack of military technology), it can be assumed that most of the non-combatants were killed by the Americans is quite old-fashioned way — with a bayonet, a knife, a bullet.

Only in Balangiga on the island of Samar Americans in 1901 cut about 10,000 people, and on the very same principle of "kill all, who is above telejnoj axis", which was used by Genghis Khan. There were bayoneted or shot all men older than 10 (!) Years. [59]

News about the mass executions and torture of prisoners of war as well as peace of Philippine population reached the United States, but there the "free press" is not specifically attended to, as well as the liberal community in other Western countries. England in this period was creating roughly the same in South Africa and Sudan, Belgium in the Congo, France in Madagascar, Germany in South-West Africa, with machine guns was good and nice to fight against the bow and arrow. Where the stage ended with a military conquest of colonies began squeezing all the juice out of them. The plundering of natural resources, the expropriation of communal property and the elimination of social and economic systems (such as irrigation) — which led to outbreaks of famine Fighter (typical at the time for British India and French Algeria), forced labor with fierce penalties for "negligent natives." That's what nourished and developed "democracy" in Western metropolises. So that the solidarity of the Western powers in colonial matters was indestructible. "The horrors of the tsarist" — that it was more appropriate topic for the Western press. In Russia itself, that the left that the right audience was in a kick-ass of Western progress and only chewed that zabugornye newspaper wrote.

And what happened then in the Philippines? The islands have become a full-fledged U.S. colony, a supplier of cheap raw materials and, besides, they have played an important role in military planning — an American military base, built up on the island of Korehidor in Manila Bay, was nearly invincible. Americans spend a cultural revolution in the Philippines, quickly replacing Spanish to English — natives should understand their owners.

But, interestingly enough, in 1942 the Philippines Americans suffered perhaps the most humiliating defeat in its history. May 6 U.S. troops in Manila, a fortress on the island of Korehidor and on the Peninsula of Bataan surrendered three times smaller in the number of Japanese units — prisoner went 50 thousand "GIs" and twice as many native soldiers who were under the control of U.S. NCOs and officers. Surrendered to U.S. forces, and in the rest of the Philippines. This surrender has clearly shown how to actually fight the American army, not having huge advantages in armaments, in aviation, ships, having the main line of defense against enemy armies — the oceanic expanse. But if the heroic defense of Port Arthur showed the "rottenness of the tsarist regime", the shameful capitulation of Americans in the Philippines … yes, yes, of course, has demonstrated "the power of American democracy."

After the surrender of the American Army brunt of the struggle against the Japanese invaders were carrying communist guerrillas from the organization "Hukbalahap", Americans have returned to the Philippines only in October 1944. Since, during the war, the Japanese have already established in the Philippines puppet "independent republic" that the Americans could not refuse to provide Filipinos the same sort of "independence" (1946). And "independent" Philippines boldly marched on Latin American banana path. For a start, however, the army of President Roxas, armed and trained to the Americans, to crush the resistance of the peasants of central Luzon and the former guerrillas' Hukbalahap "- during the five-year merciless war (1948-1953). The characteristic features of the new republic were American dominance of monopolies and large-scale U.S. military presence, conservation status of the raw material, the inevitable nature of the economy in such a rabid corruption, lawlessness, hosted by the private armies of oligarchs. As was often the case in Latin America, Banana Republic for a long time has turned into a banana dictatorship (1972-1986) — to replace the "death squads" has come to resolve a situation the army. However, the president-dictator Marcos spent several popular activities to reduce social tensions — the land was transferred from the landowners to the peasants, were disarmed private armies, limited activities of the U.S. military. When the need for the dictatorship of the disappeared, due to a fatal weakening of leftist movements by the end of 1980, was again restored banana "democracy" and to their normal jobs back "death squads." Already-tion in 2000, under President Macapagal-Arroyo, the Philippines were more than 800 political murders (it only officially documented).

Alexander Tyurin


1. Philippinen. Muenchen: Nelles Verlag, 2009.

2. "US-Philippine War of 1899-1901" / / TSB.


4. Hobsbawm, E. The Age of Revolution. Europe 1789-1848. Rostov-on-Don, 1999.

5. Luxembourg R. The accumulation of capital. Third Division. Moscow-Leningrad, 1934.

6. MM Kovalevsky communal land ownership. Part I. M, 1879.

7. Die Geschichte der Indianer Nordamerikas. Paletti, 2004.

8. Philippines / / Encyclopedic Dictionary Brockhaus and Efron. St. Petersburg, 1890-1907.



Scenes from the book by Alexander Tyurin. The truth about Nicholas I. Slandered the Emperor. Moscow, 2010.

Afanasyev GE Destiny Ireland. In: Notes of the University of Novorossiysk. V.46. Odessa, 1888 p. 76.

Ibid, p.81.

Ibid, p.81.

Ibid, p.82.

Ibid, p.85.

Curtis Liz. Nothing But the Same Old Story (The Roots of Anti-Irish Racism), London, 1985. (Liz Curtis. Same old story: the roots of racism antiirlandskogo. Eng. Lane.: Internet publ.)

Afanasiev, p.85

Die Geschichte der Indianer Nordamerikas. Paletti, 2004. P.31

10 Afanasiev, p. 88.

11 Ibid, c. 90.

12 Mitchel J. 1869. The History of Ireland from the Treaty of Limerik to the Present Time. V. 2, p. 244-247

13 Curtis

14 Sarkisyants M. English roots of German fascism. St. Petersburg, 2003. P.16

15 Fitzgerald G. 1973. Towards a New Ireland. Dublin, p.67

16 Eberhardt P. Geography of the Russian population. Per. from Polish. St. Petersburg, 2003.

17 Sarkisyants, English roots of German fascism. St. Petersburg, 2003. p.15.

18 Scenes from the book by Alexander Tyurin. The truth about Nicholas I. Slandered the Emperor.

19 World history. The period of the British conquest. M.-Mn. 2000. P.307.

20 There, s.310.

21 In the same place, c.307

22 There, s.308

23 There, s.310; Antonov KA, Bongard-Levin, GM, Kotovskij GG History of India. Moscow, 1979.

24 Marx's Capital. — In: K. Marx and F. Engels, Soch., V. 23., Moscow, 1954, p. 762-763.

25 Luxembourg R. The accumulation of capital. Moscow-Leningrad, 1934. Third Division, MM Kovalevsky communal land ownership. Part I. M, 1879

26 World History, p.311

27 Antonova, Bongard-Levin. History of India.

28 Nehru D. A look at the history of the world. T. 2. M. 1981.

29 Kovalevsky

30 E. Hobsbawm, The Age of Revolution. Europe 1789-1848. Rostov-on-Don, 1999.

31 Adams B. 1898. The Laws of Civilizations and Decay. An Essays on History. NY, p.305.

32 Nehru

33 Bhattaharyya B. A History of Bangla Desh. Dacca. 1973.

34 Antonova, Bongard-Levin. History of India.

35 Ibid

36 World History, p. 332, 333

37 Ghosh KC Famine in Bengal. M. 1951.

38 Antonova, Bongard-Levin. History of India; Ghosh

39 Tarasov Empire and its "goodness."

40 Scenes from the book: Alexander Tyurin. The truth about Nicholas I. Slandered the Emperor.

41 Luxembourg, p. 261


43, D0% 92% D0% 90% D0% 9D% D0 % 94% D0% 95% D0% 99% D0% A1% D0% 9A% D0% 98% D0% 95




47 Daily News 309, June 8, 1871. In: K. Marx and F. Engels, Selected Works in 9 vols 4. Moscow, 1986.


49 Luxembourg, Kovalevsky

50 Ibid

51 E. Hobsbawm, The Age of Empire 1875-1914. Rostov-on-Don, 1999. P.76

52 Luxembourg

53 Algeria, a French colony / / Encyclopedic Dictionary Brockhaus and Efron. St. Petersburg, 1890-1907

54 Lefeuvre Daniel. Pour en finir avec la repentance coloniale. Flammarion, 2006.

55 Curtis

56 Sarkisyants

57 Algeria, the State / / The Great Soviet Encyclopedia

58 Zaire / / TSB; Hochschild A. Schatten ueber dem Kongo. Rowohlt Tb, 2002.

59 Philippinen. Muenchen: Nelles Verlag, 2009, p.36

Like this post? Please share to your friends: