Immigration France to revise teaching of "colonial benefits"

[Maciamo]

BBC News : Chirac plans end to colonial law

French President Jacques Chirac has said a controversial law on the teaching of France's colonial past will be overturned.

The law requires teachers to stress positive aspects of French colonialism, especially in north Africa.

But during a New Year address, Mr Chirac said the law was "dividing the French" and should be rewritten.

MPs from the Socialist and Communist parties say rewriting the law is not enough and it should be scrapped.
...
The colonial history law was passed by the conservative-led parliament in February last year.

I think that history classes at school should teach both the positive and negative apsects of colonialism, in a relatively balanced way according to the reality in each colonised region. It is obvious that colonialism did not have the same connotation in Algeria as in French Polynesia. The attitude of the colonisers and the colonised was very clearly different in each case, and the feelings of these people nowadays still has no resemblance.


The article also talks about the stance of the French government toward slavery in history :

Mr Chirac, who plans to run for re-election in 2007, also announced the establishment of a slavery remembrance day in France - on a date to be announced later this year.

"The question of slavery is a wound for a large number of our fellow citizens, in particular overseas," he said.

"France has set an example by being the first country in the world - and still the only one today - to recognise slavery as a crime against humanity. I have decided to establish a day of remembrance in France."

 

[osias]

I think that history classes at school should teach both the positive and negative apsects of colonialism, in a relatively balanced way according to the reality in each colonised region. It is obvious that colonialism did not have the same connotation in Algeria as in French Polynesia.

I agree, but if you say this in Japan, some people (esp. China and Korea) will accuse you of being a "revisionist". There are so many good stories of the colonial past in Taiwan, which most Japanese people know nothing of. (http://www.taiwanheadlines.gov.tw/20000505/20000505s3.html)

I'm sure there were some good contributions in China and Korea too, but most Chinese and Koreans seem to deny that. History is not objective, but selective and interpretive, if 10 things happened in one series, historians may pick only 2 or 3 of them to make one coherent story. It all depends on how you select the materials. Japan keeps apologizing for its past, because Japan's history says that Japan was THAT BAD....(Yes, Japan certainly did bad things, but that's from the modern point of view, after deconolonization started.)

Some British people, in contrast to the Japanese, are so much proud of their past colonial rule...Hong Kong was just a small fishing village in China, but now it's called the Pearl of Asia..

 

[yukio_michael]

<opinion>The fact of the matter is that some countries were better off colonised, and would have never seen the technilogical advancements that they did as soon as they did, had they not been... It's when they fought against colonial rule that their respective societies fell apart, & while they ousted their would-be opressors, they also went solemnly back to a land stricken of starvation and a pittance of real industry.

Viet Nam is a perfect example of a country that was better off colonoized by the French... They got rid of the French, and the Americans (who won the war by all popular reason, simply because they destabalized the region enough such that Communism never spread or even looked appealing to neighboring countries)... Afterwards which, Minh remarked upon how the country was free, but starving.

After that, they realised nobody wanted to do business with a country where your property rights weren't garunteed.</opinion>

That said... Yes, I think the positive and negative aspects of colonialism should be taught in schools.

 

[osias]

<opinion>The fact of the matter is that some countries were better off colonised, and would have never seen the technilogical advancements that they did as soon as they did, had they not been... It's when they fought against colonial rule that their respective societies fell apart, & while they ousted their would-be opressors, they also went solemnly back to a land stricken of starvation and a pittance of real industry.
Viet Nam is a perfect example of a country that was better off colonoized by the French... They got rid of the French, and the Americans (who won the war by all popular reason, simply because they destabalized the region enough such that Communism never spread or even looked appealing to neighboring countries)... Afterwards which, Minh remarked upon how the country was free, but starving.
After that, they realised nobody wanted to do business with a country where your property rights weren't garunteed.</opinion>
That said... Yes, I think the positive and negative aspects of colonialism should be taught in schools.

Before Hong Kong was handed over to China in 1997, many Hong Kong people (particularly wealthy ones) immigrated to other countries....There are indeed some who are better off colonized.