The White Man's Burden

In this episode, Rik from Planet Vulcan draws a straight line from the mindset and the actions of white European colonialists in the 19th Century to the mindset and the actions of would-be intelligent designers in our own time, particularly within the Progressive movement that began in the late nineteenth century and continues to this day.  Rik notes that in these two cases, and in any agenda based on intelligent-design thinking, the outcomes seldom match the intentions, and actual outcomes in many cases have been appalling.

Earthlings are not generally schooled in the thinking that emerges from a study of evolutionary processes, especially as it applies to your socioeconomic systems;  you seldom question the idea that intelligent design is necessary; and many of you are surprised, even disbelieving, when they are exposed to the idea of spontaneous emergent order, how much it explains and how it opens the door to better thinking.

Prepare to be exposed.

Transcript

The White Man’s Burden

 Good day to you, and welcome to Fascinating!  I am your host Rik, from Planet Vulcan.  My continuing mission on Planet Earth:  to search for signs of intelligence and to encourage its spread.

 An old and wise saying among Earthlings is that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.  The truth of this adage could not be better illustrated than it is with what European colonialists, and their intellectual heirs, have done to spread their version of civilization to the more “backward” parts of Planet Earth.

 Towards the end of the 19th century the English writer Rudyard Kipling published a poem with the title “The White Man’s Burden”.  

 It encapsulated views that were dominant within the European nobility and the European diaspora, which said that white Europeans had a duty to lift up the benighted non-European people of Earth from their supposedly “less advanced” state by sharing their technology and by imposing their supposedly “more advanced” cultural norms.  

 Kipling’s poem refers to the benighted inhabitants of other lands as “half devil and half child”.

 Europeans truly did have advanced technology.  The rest was hubris.  And what Europeans actually have perpetrated in the name of uplift, in contrast to their intentions, can only be described as appalling.

 A cynic might say that the avowed good intentions of the European nobility as they explored the planet during the modern era were just a cover for imperialist intentions that were not so benign.  

 The truth is even sadder than that – many if not most white Europeans did have good intentions.  They just failed to recognize that good intentions do not necessarily lead to good outcomes.  

 We can even observe analogs in earlier times of what are today called self-congratulation and virtue-signaling.

 Colonialists and the early progressives who adopted the same attitudes often used moral or humanitarian rhetoric to frame their activities as noble, enlightened and beneficial for society, while glossing over the harm they caused.  Colonial administrators, missionaries, and intellectuals often reinforced each other’s belief in the righteousness of their mission.

 And they seemed to feel that their good intentions gave them the standing to judge and condemn as morally deficient those who disagreed with them.

 European powers, particularly in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, saw and presented their imperial projects as a moral obligation.  They publicly emphasized their role as bearers of civilization and protectors of the native populations. 

 This virtue-signaling was intended to display their supposed moral superiority and to justify brutal policies like forced labor, forced cultural assimilation and military conquest.

 The progressive movement of the late 19th and early 20th centuries in the United States was marked by a similar sense of arrogance and self-congratulation. Many early progressives saw themselves not as perpetuators of medievalist thinking, but as the vanguard of social reform, working to uplift society through science, rational planning and government intervention. 

 Reformers like Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, and others of their ilk framed their efforts to expand government regulation, improve public health and reform labor conditions as morally righteous acts.

 Early progressives were often keen to signal their virtues to one another and to the public. They promoted themselves as enlightened crusaders against social ills like poverty, poor working conditions and political corruption. 

 However, their interventions often came with a paternalistic attitude, where they viewed themselves as morally and intellectually superior to the people they were "helping”, just as European nobles and royals had regarded themselves in feudal times.  

 Their reforms were often aimed at controlling or “improving” the behaviors of immigrants, working-class people and people of color, rather than at empowering these communities.

 Let’s look at the consequences of this medievalist intelligent-design ideology in practice:

 The Scramble for Africa (Late 19th Century)

 The European powers met at a conference in Berlin which took place in 1884 – 1885, and agreed on how to partition the African continent amongst them.  They claimed that they were bringing civilization, Christianity and development to what they referred to as the “Dark Continent”.  

 The actual outcome of the partition and colonization of Africa was catastrophic for the Africans. European powers exploited Africa’s resources, imposed arbitrary borders that disregarded ethnic and cultural boundaries, and subjected native populations to forced labor, land dispossession and violent repression. Colonization decimated indigenous economies, disrupted social systems, and led to long-term instability.

 2. The British Raj in India

 The British justified their colonization of India with the belief that they were bringing stability, good governance and economic development to a chaotic and divided land. Reformers argued that their rule would eliminate outdated practices like widow-burning, improve women’s rights, introduce Western education and modernize Indian society. They saw themselves as enlightened rulers.

 The actual outcome of British rule in India was massive economic exploitation. India’s traditional industries, particularly textiles which competed with the British textile industry, were destroyed as British policies forced India to become a supplier of raw materials and a market for British manufactured goods. 

 Famines became more frequent under British rule due to the prioritization of cash crops for export over food production, and millions of Indians died in these famines.  

 The economic drain, combined with racial discrimination and suppression of Indian culture, sparked widespread resistance, culminating in the Indian independence movement. 

 British policies also exacerbated religious tensions between Hindus and Muslims, which contributed to the violent partition of India and Pakistan in 1947, leading to millions of deaths and displacements.

 3. French Colonialism in Algeria

 France saw its mission in Algeria (colonized in 1830) as part of its broader “civilizing mission”. French colonial officials claimed that they were modernizing Algeria by introducing European law, building infrastructure and by spreading French culture. They argued that French rule was bringing enlightenment and prosperity to a "backward" land.

 The actual reality of French rule in Algeria was one of brutal repression and exploitation. Indigenous Algerians were subjected to forced labor, land confiscation, and legal inequality under the French colonial system. Native Muslims were even denied citizenship unless they converted to Christianity and renounced their religious and cultural identity. 

 Whatever economic benefits there were of French rule were concentrated in the hands of European settlers, while the native population remained impoverished. These conditions fueled the Algerian War of Independence (1954-1962), a bloody conflict in which hundreds of thousands of Algerians were killed. 

 4. The United States in the Philippines

 After the Spanish-American War of 1898, the U.S. acquired Spanish possessions, including the Philippines. American policymakers, influenced by the ideology of the “White Man’s Burden,” believed they were liberating Filipinos from Spanish rule and bringing them democracy, education, and true Christian values. The U.S. presented itself as a benevolent overseer, guiding the Philippines toward self-governance and modernity.

 The actual outcome was quite different from the ideal. The Philippine-American War (1899–1902), which began when Filipinos resisted U.S. control, led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Filipinos, both combatants and civilians, due to warfare, disease and famine. 

 The United States employed brutal tactics in this war, including scorched-earth policies and concentration camps, to suppress the resistance. The promise of self-governance was delayed, and the Philippines remained a U. S. colony until after World War II. 

 5. Settlers in North America 

 "Manifest Destiny", an idea originally trotted out to support the annexation of Texas, and later the Oregon Territory, by the United States was rooted in the belief that American expansion was not only inevitable but also divinely ordained. It reflected a mixture of nationalism, religious fervor and a sense of racial superiority.

 The actual outcome of the settling of North America was the displacement, cultural destruction and near-extinction of Indian populations. Indian lands were confiscated, treaties were broken, and the surviving members of the Indian nations were forced onto reservations. 

 6. Australia’s Stolen Generations

 In Australia, from the late 19th century through the 1970s, government policies aimed at "civilizing" Aboriginal children resulted in the forced removal of mixed-race Aboriginal children from their families. The rationale was that these children could be better integrated into white society by being placed in missions or foster homes, where they would receive education and training.

 The actual outcome of the policy of removing Aboriginal children from their families and communities, known as the Stolen Generations, caused unimaginable trauma for the victims. Children often faced neglect and abuse in the institutions in which they were placed;  and they were discouraged, or even forbidden, from speaking their native languages. 

 *   *   *   *   *

 The Progressive Movement in early twentieth-century America “graciously” accepted the white man’s burden, and promoted policies such as Indian boarding schools, eugenics and alcohol prohibition - stark examples of how well-intentioned reforms can result in significant harm. 

 Let’s explore these three examples in more detail:

 Indian boarding schools, beginning with the Carlisle Indian Industrial School founded in Pennsylvania in 1879, were supported by progressives as a way to assimilate Indians into mainstream American society. 

 The idea was to "civilize" Indian children by educating them in English, Christianity and European-American cultural practices. The phrase "Kill the Indian, Save the Man" was a common mantra.

 The actual outcome was that these schools became sites of widespread abuse, cultural destruction and trauma.  Indian children were forcibly taken from their families, forbidden from speaking their languages or practicing their traditions, and often subjected to physical, emotional, and sexual abuse. Many children died in these schools due to neglect, poor living conditions, and disease. 

 The people who founded and operated the schools for American Indian children, with the aim of cutting them off from their roots and grafting them onto European roots, honestly expected those children to thrive.

 And it is reliably reported that doctors working for America’s Bureau of Indian Affairs would perform hysterectomies on Indian women not only without their consent, but without even informing them that they had been sterilized - for their own good and the good of their families, of course.  

 As many as 25% of Indian women were subjected to sterilization during this era, and this practice continued into the 1970’s.

 The eugenics movement, widely supported by American progressives in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, aimed to improve the genetic quality of the population by promoting desirable traits and discouraging reproduction among those deemed "unfit." 

 This idea was rooted in then-popular beliefs about heredity and human improvement, and progressives saw it as a way they could intervene and reduce poverty, criminality and mental illness. 

 The actual outcome of the eugenics movement was forced sterilizations, particularly targeting poor, disabled, minority and immigrant communities.  Laws allowing forced sterilizations were passed in many states and upheld by the United States Supreme Court; tens of thousands of people, including many Blacks, Indians, and those with disabilities or supposedly deficient intellect, were sterilized without their consent. 

 Progressives were key supporters of alcohol prohibition, which aimed to curb the social ills associated with alcohol consumption, such as crime, poverty, domestic violence and health problems.  

 They believed this intervention, enabled by the 18th Amendment to the Constitution, which was ratified in 1920, would create a more moral and orderly society.

 The actual outcome of alcohol prohibition, rather than reducing crime and improving public health, was to give rise to organized crime syndicates, which made enormous profits from the illegal production and distribution of alcohol. 

 The law was widely disregarded as unjustified meddling, and this undermined the ideal of the rule of law.  And it led to a culture of lawlessness and corruption among law enforcement officials.  The black market for alcohol led to production of unsafe products, resulting in deaths from tainted liquor. 

 Alcohol prohibition was quickly seen as a failure and was repealed in 1933, but prohibition of other forms of recreational drugs continues to this day, with similar outcomes.

 *   *   *   *   *

 The progressive movement in more recent times has produced additional intelligent-design schemes, again with outcomes that have been predictably less-than-ideal.  Here are a few examples:

 Ignited by concerns over police brutality, especially after the videotaped murder of George Floyd in 2020 by Minneapolis police, and with the flames of indignation fanned by the use of intentionally misleading statistics, progressives advocated for reallocating police funding toward social services such as mental health support, housing and education.  The stated goal was to reduce the reliance on policing for social issues and instead address what were seen as the root causes of crime like poverty and inequality.

 Otherwise intelligent people argued that violent crime in black neighborhoods would subside in short order if only governments would spend more money on social services and less on policing.  

 Black Americans themselves, however, were generally calling for more, and not less, policing in their neighborhoods.

 Another example:  the city of San Francisco has implemented policies aimed at providing services and support for the homeless population, such as free housing, food, and medical care. The benevolent intention was to tackle the housing crisis and offer compassionate solutions to homelessness.

 The actual outcome has been that in spite of huge amounts of public spending on these programs, the homelessness crisis in San Francisco has worsened, in large part because the life of Riley, comparatively speaking, that was created for the homeless in the city has created a Mecca for the homeless, and attracted homeless people from elsewhere. 

 The situation has led to rising public frustration, as homelessness remains visible and the city’s streets are plagued by open drug use and sidewalks covered in shit, broken glass and used hypodermic needles.

 Similar efforts in Portland and Seattle - led by city council members who likewise misdiagnosed the problem and subscribed to the same intelligent-design policies - have produced similar results.

 Another example:  rent control laws and affordable housing initiatives have been designed with the benevolent intention of protecting low-income renters from being priced out of their homes in expensive housing markets like New York City, San Francisco, and Los Angeles.

 This diagnosis for high rents was wrong, and unsurprisingly the prescriptions do not work.  The diagnosis was rooted in the archaic class-struggle thinking promoted by the disciples of Karl Marx, who characterize property owners as exploiters and class enemies.  Disciples of Marx understand almost nothing about economic science, and the crucial importance of price signals in coordinating economic activity.

 When housing becomes expensive, economic science, as opposed to Marxist religious dogma, leads to the conclusion that high rents are a signal that the supply of housing has been restricted.  If you look for the source of the restriction, you will discover that the source of the problem has been regulation and intervention.  

 Regulators and interveners are still telling the unfortunate Earthlings who live under their jurisdiction that they need ever more regulations and interventions to counter what are actually the pernicious effects of earlier regulations and interventions.

 Another example:  in response to the COVID-19 pandemic beginning in 2020, many progressive-led school districts adopted strict policies, including extended school closures, mask mandates, and remote learning. These measures were ostensibly to protect students, staff, and their families from the virus.

 These policies were based on a problem-solving approach, where those who wished to be regarded as the saviors of humanity focused their tunnel vision on “solving the problem” to the exclusion of all other considerations, rather than by taking a tradeoff approach which acknowledges the existence and the importance of other problems, and the fact that resources are scarce.

 The extended period of remote learning and school closures had significant negative impacts on students, particularly those from low-income and minority backgrounds. And even after it was demonstrated that younger people were not particularly vulnerable to serious infection, the school closures remained in effect for a long time.  

 It seems that Earthlings who attain positions where they can exercise authority are all too often reluctant to give it up.

 A final example:  modern progressives have been advocating climate policies rooted in intelligent design thinking rather than in evolutionary thinking, such as the imposition of mandates to spur the transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy, as the means to meet the challenge of climate change by reducing carbon usage. 

 In states like California, aggressive moves toward renewable energy, along with restrictions on new oil drilling and fossil fuel usage, have led to higher energy prices and electricity shortages during peak demand. The infrastructure for renewable energy has not yet caught up to the state’s energy needs, leading to blackouts and economic pressure on low-income households who are disproportionately affected by rising energy costs.

 And the promotion of all-electric vehicles is not going well.  You can pass laws mandating the end of gasoline engines, but you cannot mandate the necessary improvements in battery technology that would make this practical, nor can you mandate the massive increases in the generation and transmission of electricity and all the support infrastructure.

 And the argument that electric vehicles are non-polluting is a lie, since pollutants are produced when the electricity that powers the vehicles is generated.  Electric-powered vehicles just have longer tailpipes than gasoline-powered vehicles.

 A less medievalist approach, and one that would be far more effective AND efficient, would be to rely on pricing mechanisms that would incentivize decentralized mitigative responses to the problem of carbon dioxide emissions.

 These examples illustrate one more time how delusional it is to believe that, by making the intelligent design just a little more intelligent, and by employing increasing levels of coercion, Earthlings are ever going to succeed in “making it so” – trying to force outcomes into being just doesn’t work.

 Earthlings need to adopt a new mindset, and to cultivate the natural evolution of outcomes rather than trying to replace evolved outcomes with designed outcomes.  

 After observing the historical record of what has actually happened with well-intended attempts at regulation and intervention, I believe the message Earthlings need to send to well-meaning white people of the intelligent-design persuasion is:  “Please, we beg of you, stop helping”.

 I invite you to have a listen to the next Fascinating! podcast and a look at the next video on our YouTube channel, Fascinating@pregodenada.

 Please recommend Fascinating! to your friends if you find the lessons from nature in these essays personally valuable.

 Theme music:  Helium, with thanks to TrackTribe

 Live long and prosper.

 Savor your experiences.

 Treasure your memories.

 Anticipate a happy and rewarding future.

 And respect nature’s wisdom.