Robert Hart (1777 – 1867), argued as having been the first English-speaking South African – a direct ancestor.
Why, since inception, have I deliberately used a blog identity which has become increasingly controversial and in some (ignorant) circles is regarded as being akin to ‘racist’?
I do it out of pride in my background.
Note that the meanings I ascribe to ‘colonist’ and ‘colonialist’ are the simple and clear-cut ones – the former denotes one of the original group or individuals who colonise a country, while the latter is a colonial resident and/or a proponent of colonists and colonialism.
My ancestors go back to any number of colonists and colonialists both, almost to the days of the first Dutch arrivals. In historical perspective, the actions of colonists in moving to countries like Africa, America or Australia were an inevitable part of the development of all of these places. With the benefit of modern thinking, one may well condemn many of the methods used to subdue and subjugate local populations; however if all of those now wailing in horror at the thought of it were to be translated back in time and circumstances they would behave no differently.
What I choose to admire and celebrate is the wealth of achievement of this group of people, no less my own direct ancestors. Often arriving with hardly any possessions, and faced with primitive conditions and incredible hardships, they used courage, enterprise and hard work to carve out a place for themselves, their descendants, and all inhabitants. Everyone living in former colonies who now enjoys the benefits of modern living, whatever race, colour, creed or persuasion they may be, undoubtedly owes a debt of gratitude to such ‘settlers’ and their offspring. Empty and populist rhetoric would have it otherwise, but such talk is aimed at those who allow emotion and myth to override logical thought.
P.S. Settling a bit of Extra Perspective:
This WP blog was opened to run concurrently with my first one, started in 2007 with 24.Com which became Letterdash, after the writing on the wall showed that the first platform was terminally ill (RIP). That blog was titled ‘Settler’s Perspective’ and ‘Colonialist’ was my avatar. My meerkat picture was carried over from that, and I have never felt the urge to change it.
Colonialist's Blog 
I hadn’t read that. Though I figured that was exactly your intention in naming the blog. I personally – for obvious reasons – love the title.
Be good Col.
LikeLike
I am pleased to meet you.
LikeLiked by 1 person
And I, you; or as would be said these days (incorrectly) me, too!
LikeLike
no offense, but why would you be proud of your ancestors being agents of imperialism?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Um … I thought I’d just explained that above? ‘Imperialism’ is another of the emotive catch-phrases with imposed connotations, just as is ‘Communism’. Seen in full historical context, and with proper understanding of underlying philosophies, these labels do not automatically have a negative quality.
LikeLiked by 4 people
imperialism has strong negative connotations because the basis of empire and the basis of colonialism is rooted in economic exploitation and the expansion of the state—as a small-c communist neither of those appeal, as a descendant of formerly colonised people I find it distasteful that you’d consider imperial rule to have equal positive and negative attributes when it is rooted in power imbalance. I have to wonder why you wish to embrace your specific heritage as a colonist whose ancestors most likely participated in overt violence against indigenous people or whose settlement was part of a wider violence against said people–that’s not meant to be a personal attack, by the by. In any case, this seems to be important to you for some reason.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Historical perspective is important, here, and any claim that no benefits accrued to countries occupied by other powers has to be ludicrous; whereas communists tend to believe that everybody should become communists so they become Communists.
Empires come and go. Some of my own forefathers were subjected to Roman and Norman colonialism. In the case of the former, at least, lasting benefits accrued. Are great Romans to be devalued because of the underlying dreams of empire? They conquered because they were superior. In due course, their standards lapsed and the conquered nations rose in stature, buoyed up by the legacy left, and supplanted them. Those standards would not have come into being without them, though.
Admittedly, those examples were direct invasion with aggression. More modern colonialism/imperialism, however, had roots in a mindset that it was to the advantage of the backward countries to be settled. Resistance was, of course, repelled, but there was not quite the same intention from the outset to take by force. Once again, the culture of the settlers was superior. Had it not been so, they would not have succeeded. Benefits of that culture were instilled as their lasting legacy.
Other than in respect of the usual quota of militant or immoral individuals — of which there were usually some on both sides — the intention was simply to make a better life, with participation by the indigenous peoples if they so wished. Much of the settlement was by negotiation, where a complicating factor was the fact that in many cases the indigenous people and the settlers turned out to be not quite on the same wavelength when it came to land ownership.
In short, however, I celebrate these ancestors and their ideals because of (a) an understanding (though not approval) of where they were coming from in their thinking; and, more importantly, (b) because of their outstanding achievements under often overwhelming difficulties.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Reminded me of a Pommy mate with whom I once shared a flat ,whenever an Australian called him a Pom he corrected them with ” I’m not a Pom, dear boy, I’m a colonial administrator?”
Naturally., though a Cockney like me, he’d been educated at Charterhouse and spoke real posh. Would you believe it, he actually left said Aussies dumbfounded, they could never think of a response!
LikeLiked by 2 people
I can imagine that would have seriously wrong-footed them! They are also highly sensitive to being reminded that their Pom ancestors probably did something very naughty to have been sent there.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Actually those with convict ancestors are very proud of the fact and the descendants of the convicts form the base and cream of “Aussie High Society”
LikeLiked by 1 person
That is an inverted snobbery to boggle the brain!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes but it’s fun XD
LikeLiked by 2 people
Intriguing. I never thought to question your blog name but fascinating to learn how we all pick our names on wordpress and how you chose yours
LikeLiked by 2 people
I have, without real thought, assumed yours came from a birthdate round October – or is there more to it than that?
LikeLiked by 1 person
hahaa no… i really do have a birthdate near october. i have this vague idea you do too
LikeLiked by 1 person
Indeed so!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I, too have always found Leslie’s blog-name thought-provoking and intriguing (in a creative way). Negative connotations are, to a great degree, in the mind of the beholder I think.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Valid, indeed. For most concepts there are the positive and negative aspects, and attitude is determined by the focus placed. In cases, of course, where the negative ones overwhelmingly outweigh the positive, positivism is foolhardy. In this case I don’t think such is applicable.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Bravo, Les. This thoughtful post deserves a wider readership – why not submit it to eg Spectator, or one of the National Sunday colour supplements in UK and specially US – where so many of their ancesters were colonists!
V
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you for kind remarks. I have yet to master the skills of such submissions, and perhaps I should work on it.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I take it that’s a joke?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Not really. I’m bad at knowing how, where and when to send stuff I’ve written – other than novels.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am astonished! Google some likely magazine titles eg Sunday Telegraph colour supplement, write a brief synopsis and potted biography into a letter, and post it with the article. If you’re lucky you may find one that accepts onlie submissions. Do you have an up-to-date Writers and Artists Yearbook? You will find editors’ names and addresses there.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks for tips – no Yearbook, though. Haven’t got round to getting one for years, one way or another.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Mine dates from 2005, so who am I to berate you?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Het nog altyd jou skuilnaam so verstaan – Natal is immers “the last outpost”…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Deesdaë het baie mense die gevoel dat ek probeer snaaks wees om dit te gebruik.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I agree absolutely!
LikeLiked by 1 person
It does make total sense, doesn’t it?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Honestly! I wish we would all learn to settle down and be gentler and kinder in the expression of our thoughts and understanding of things.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Human beings do not have a record of being much good at learning lessons like that.
LikeLiked by 1 person
we are such an embarrassment.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Perhaps the hand of Omar Khayyam’s potter did, indeed, shake.
LikeLiked by 2 people
one does wonder at times!
LikeLiked by 2 people
Humanity is forever on the move; it’s in the nature of our species. Nowadays I just wish that there weren’t quite so many of us. I fear for the long-term survival of those species that prefer to stay put.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Far too many, indeed. The ‘elsewheres’ that offer a better life have just about dried up – or, rather, become flooded!
LikeLiked by 2 people
What happened is what happened. History should be viewed in the context of the times. That was then. This is now.
As you say not to admire the struggles and the resulting benefits of their sacrifices and efforts is foolish and misguided.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Exactly so!
LikeLiked by 2 people