History's most dangerous myth - Anneliese Mehnert
video description
Date: 2023-07-18
Related videos
Comments and reviews: 20
Antonio
It's very interesting and, strangely enough, this has some similarities to what happened in the past on my island, Sardinia, in Italy, Europe. During the middle ages, a set of local laws were developed by the inhabitants of the island, in a way that did not put lots of emphasis on the concept of private ownership of the land, and while there were landlords since the time of the Romans, most of the population shared the land in a distribution of the products it would give: some people would farm the forest cyclically for wood, others would graze in periodically open fields, others would collect fruits like many types of nuts and fed pigs with it, etc, etc; disputes were a thing, but said code of laws was built to settle them locally in a relatively efficient way.
After the island was acquired by the Duchy of Piedmont, a system of enclosures and private property was enforced, distributing the land to landlords already friendly with the new rulers or to new settlers, devastating the economy of the small villages depending on this ancient system of land sharing. The consequence of this was a strong tendency of those people to resort to banditry, a phenomenon that lasted until 60 years ago, together with a series of blood feuds between families, that couldn't be settled anymore with the old system of laws that was suppressed in favor of a law system written by rulers that had no idea of the social system of the territory.
Colonialism operates in similar manners everywhere. Apply an incompatible economic system to the land with the justification that the locals are uncivilized and lazy, creating poverty and social segregation.
reply
It's very interesting and, strangely enough, this has some similarities to what happened in the past on my island, Sardinia, in Italy, Europe. During the middle ages, a set of local laws were developed by the inhabitants of the island, in a way that did not put lots of emphasis on the concept of private ownership of the land, and while there were landlords since the time of the Romans, most of the population shared the land in a distribution of the products it would give: some people would farm the forest cyclically for wood, others would graze in periodically open fields, others would collect fruits like many types of nuts and fed pigs with it, etc, etc; disputes were a thing, but said code of laws was built to settle them locally in a relatively efficient way.
After the island was acquired by the Duchy of Piedmont, a system of enclosures and private property was enforced, distributing the land to landlords already friendly with the new rulers or to new settlers, devastating the economy of the small villages depending on this ancient system of land sharing. The consequence of this was a strong tendency of those people to resort to banditry, a phenomenon that lasted until 60 years ago, together with a series of blood feuds between families, that couldn't be settled anymore with the old system of laws that was suppressed in favor of a law system written by rulers that had no idea of the social system of the territory.
Colonialism operates in similar manners everywhere. Apply an incompatible economic system to the land with the justification that the locals are uncivilized and lazy, creating poverty and social segregation.
reply
Peteruspl
In South Africa's case European colonizers were using justifications, making up legal fiction and sometimes outright cheating and fighting. Meanwhile local or not so local tribes just muscled in without any of that. Including one big violent migration after Europeans were already living there in some numbers, which uprooted some of these colonizers and some of the previous tribes. The only most thing about this whole phenomena is that Europeans were already so painfully self aware and felt guilt about what every single other civilization did when in position of strength without blinking. This is why they needed so much myths to cover it up or tried to set up some real mitigation.
They were also usually not genocidal. Where many other civilizations conquered the previous population was decimated and survivors completely driven away, or enslaved and bread out (male slaves having no progeny, female slaves few kids and mostly mixed) eventually entire ethnicity diminished or died out. Where Europeans conquered, local population usually faced horrible abuses like all conquered peoples, but not a genocide. Those population would usually rebound and grow over the previous numbers.
reply
In South Africa's case European colonizers were using justifications, making up legal fiction and sometimes outright cheating and fighting. Meanwhile local or not so local tribes just muscled in without any of that. Including one big violent migration after Europeans were already living there in some numbers, which uprooted some of these colonizers and some of the previous tribes. The only most thing about this whole phenomena is that Europeans were already so painfully self aware and felt guilt about what every single other civilization did when in position of strength without blinking. This is why they needed so much myths to cover it up or tried to set up some real mitigation.
They were also usually not genocidal. Where many other civilizations conquered the previous population was decimated and survivors completely driven away, or enslaved and bread out (male slaves having no progeny, female slaves few kids and mostly mixed) eventually entire ethnicity diminished or died out. Where Europeans conquered, local population usually faced horrible abuses like all conquered peoples, but not a genocide. Those population would usually rebound and grow over the previous numbers.
reply
Kenster
All of this is well explained except that one part about the Medieval (i. e. pre-European) conquest of southern Africa by Bantu peoples migrating from central-western Africa, who subjugated, assimilated or displaced the indigenous Khoisan population.
So even if the focus here is European dispossession of African (Bantu + Khoisan) lands, I think the narrator could at least have given this a quick mention, as a matter of historiographic honesty.
For comparison, North Africa has a similar history of conquest by Arabs from southwestern Asia, who subjugated or assimilated the indigenous Copts and Berbers, many centuries before the European conquest in the Scramble for Africa.
reply
All of this is well explained except that one part about the Medieval (i. e. pre-European) conquest of southern Africa by Bantu peoples migrating from central-western Africa, who subjugated, assimilated or displaced the indigenous Khoisan population.
So even if the focus here is European dispossession of African (Bantu + Khoisan) lands, I think the narrator could at least have given this a quick mention, as a matter of historiographic honesty.
For comparison, North Africa has a similar history of conquest by Arabs from southwestern Asia, who subjugated or assimilated the indigenous Copts and Berbers, many centuries before the European conquest in the Scramble for Africa.
reply
Heinrich
It's odd, claiming that the empty land theory is a myth and an oversimplification, yet this video oversimplified a lot of complicated facts of our history.
I'm a South African. The sins of our forefathers will haunt this country for many generations to come. Yes, the apartheid laws were atrocious and human rights violations, but this video does nothing more than creating animosity and hate by making one group a villain only.
Some land was taken through brute force, but a lot of land was bought and negotiated through settlement.
Unfortunately, a lot of people will see this and not know any better.
reply
It's odd, claiming that the empty land theory is a myth and an oversimplification, yet this video oversimplified a lot of complicated facts of our history.
I'm a South African. The sins of our forefathers will haunt this country for many generations to come. Yes, the apartheid laws were atrocious and human rights violations, but this video does nothing more than creating animosity and hate by making one group a villain only.
Some land was taken through brute force, but a lot of land was bought and negotiated through settlement.
Unfortunately, a lot of people will see this and not know any better.
reply
education
For those who are still thinking Well I am sure it did happen and there actully were vast swabs of land they did honest capture or What about the white farmers in South Africa here is some points:
1. You can dispute how extensive the oppression colonization was. it still happened. Injustice is injustice. We should not normalize people being oppressed no matter how technology advanced the reigning regime is.
2. Yeah what happened to the white farms is very bad. But the whole point of this video is to specifically point out colonization during that certain period of time. It is a whataboutism.
reply
For those who are still thinking Well I am sure it did happen and there actully were vast swabs of land they did honest capture or What about the white farmers in South Africa here is some points:
1. You can dispute how extensive the oppression colonization was. it still happened. Injustice is injustice. We should not normalize people being oppressed no matter how technology advanced the reigning regime is.
2. Yeah what happened to the white farms is very bad. But the whole point of this video is to specifically point out colonization during that certain period of time. It is a whataboutism.
reply
Mark
For those who are still thinking Well I am sure it did happen and there actully were vast swabs of land they did honest capture or What about the white farmers in South Africa here is some points:
1. You can dispute how extensive the oppression colonization was. it still happened. Injustice is injustice. We should not normalize people being oppressed no matter how technology advanced the reigning regime is.
2. Yeah what happened to the white farms is very bad. But the whole point of this video is to specifically point out colonization during that certain period of time. It is a whataboutism.
reply
For those who are still thinking Well I am sure it did happen and there actully were vast swabs of land they did honest capture or What about the white farmers in South Africa here is some points:
1. You can dispute how extensive the oppression colonization was. it still happened. Injustice is injustice. We should not normalize people being oppressed no matter how technology advanced the reigning regime is.
2. Yeah what happened to the white farms is very bad. But the whole point of this video is to specifically point out colonization during that certain period of time. It is a whataboutism.
reply
Donald
The ancient romans didn't mess around with empty land myths. Conquering anyone you can and taking their stuff dates back to the dawn of humanity. It's just that at this point, the europians had invented firearms, making them much better at conquering.
Needing empty land excuses suggests there were some people starting to develop ethical rules against this. Many ancient civilizations would say yes we took their land and slaughtered them rather than being ashamed of their genocidal conquest and trying to hide it.
reply
The ancient romans didn't mess around with empty land myths. Conquering anyone you can and taking their stuff dates back to the dawn of humanity. It's just that at this point, the europians had invented firearms, making them much better at conquering.
Needing empty land excuses suggests there were some people starting to develop ethical rules against this. Many ancient civilizations would say yes we took their land and slaughtered them rather than being ashamed of their genocidal conquest and trying to hide it.
reply
uanime1
Claims all 3 arguments are completely false. Provided no evidence to support this. How exactly do they know how long the African tribes have lived in these areas?
It ignores that many regions were uninhabited when the Europeans arrived because the Africans couldn't grow enough food to have a large population.
Given how many Africans say they were better off under colonisation because the colonisers actually improved their country it seems European rule was better for many African nations.
reply
Claims all 3 arguments are completely false. Provided no evidence to support this. How exactly do they know how long the African tribes have lived in these areas?
It ignores that many regions were uninhabited when the Europeans arrived because the Africans couldn't grow enough food to have a large population.
Given how many Africans say they were better off under colonisation because the colonisers actually improved their country it seems European rule was better for many African nations.
reply
Liam
The Nguni Tribes did migrate from Equatorial Africa, and they displaced and massacred thousands of indigenous Khoi San peoples in their violent colonisation of eastern South Africa.
You re painting your own image of history, conveniently leaving out the complex intercultural exchanges that took place at that time, in favour of a neatly packaged but severely distorted version of history.
What s more, you re accusing those in the past of doing the same. You ve learnt nothing.
reply
The Nguni Tribes did migrate from Equatorial Africa, and they displaced and massacred thousands of indigenous Khoi San peoples in their violent colonisation of eastern South Africa.
You re painting your own image of history, conveniently leaving out the complex intercultural exchanges that took place at that time, in favour of a neatly packaged but severely distorted version of history.
What s more, you re accusing those in the past of doing the same. You ve learnt nothing.
reply
Lee
They took it even further with the Group Areas Act. My grandfather and many other coloured families in Cape Town were removed from places like District 6. Houses were bulldozed and people forcibly moved to the Cape Flats and other areas. The terrible thing is owning a house those same places today (District 6, Constantia, Glen Cain etc) would make you a multi-millionaire. Instead our people live in gang riddled neighborhoods.
reply
They took it even further with the Group Areas Act. My grandfather and many other coloured families in Cape Town were removed from places like District 6. Houses were bulldozed and people forcibly moved to the Cape Flats and other areas. The terrible thing is owning a house those same places today (District 6, Constantia, Glen Cain etc) would make you a multi-millionaire. Instead our people live in gang riddled neighborhoods.
reply
Snowman
It's so interesting to see the human nature, like how after being oppressed for so long, similar people can come together with a firm determination to get rid of that oppression. Humans have so much power when they work together. Makes me wonder how much humanity could achieve if the whole world worked together with the same goal to make thw world a better and advanced place.
reply
It's so interesting to see the human nature, like how after being oppressed for so long, similar people can come together with a firm determination to get rid of that oppression. Humans have so much power when they work together. Makes me wonder how much humanity could achieve if the whole world worked together with the same goal to make thw world a better and advanced place.
reply
Free
It's so interesting to see the human nature, like how after being oppressed for so long, similar people can come together with a firm determination to get rid of that oppression. Humans have so much power when they work together. Makes me wonder how much humanity could achieve if the whole world worked together with the same goal to make thw world a better and advanced place.
reply
It's so interesting to see the human nature, like how after being oppressed for so long, similar people can come together with a firm determination to get rid of that oppression. Humans have so much power when they work together. Makes me wonder how much humanity could achieve if the whole world worked together with the same goal to make thw world a better and advanced place.
reply
Ben
If Africans didn't have a written language and Europeans wrote everything down which corroborated the idea of empty land how do you prove that it is a myth?
Also the claim that the land was empty likely didn't mean there were exactly zero people living in south africa but that it was very sparsely populated. 2000 people in all of South Africa would feel uninhabited
reply
If Africans didn't have a written language and Europeans wrote everything down which corroborated the idea of empty land how do you prove that it is a myth?
Also the claim that the land was empty likely didn't mean there were exactly zero people living in south africa but that it was very sparsely populated. 2000 people in all of South Africa would feel uninhabited
reply
Abdelrahman
The same can be applied to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. All you have to do is to replace native Africans by Palestinians and colonizing Europeans by the Israeli Zionist settlers, whom most of them happens to be of European descent, and everything will fit perfectly.
reply
The same can be applied to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. All you have to do is to replace native Africans by Palestinians and colonizing Europeans by the Israeli Zionist settlers, whom most of them happens to be of European descent, and everything will fit perfectly.
reply
Sean
I've never heard anyone say the land was empty. At least in the long time I've been alive. This video is silly and you're making people out to be bad who weren't. They were normal people doing the same thing every other peoples were doing at the time. Stop with the propaganda.
reply
I've never heard anyone say the land was empty. At least in the long time I've been alive. This video is silly and you're making people out to be bad who weren't. They were normal people doing the same thing every other peoples were doing at the time. Stop with the propaganda.
reply
Michael
The reasons given in this video for the land not actually being empty were unconvincing. And even if they were occupied by natives, then they were conquered, which is the story of human history across all peoples. No need to invoke racism as the cause of the conquest.
reply
The reasons given in this video for the land not actually being empty were unconvincing. And even if they were occupied by natives, then they were conquered, which is the story of human history across all peoples. No need to invoke racism as the cause of the conquest.
reply
education
Today, these systems of land ownership and national sovereignty continue to be upheld as the rule of law and an international system, but are they actually myths meant to allow a certain group of people to maintain their stranglehold on power over others?
reply
Today, these systems of land ownership and national sovereignty continue to be upheld as the rule of law and an international system, but are they actually myths meant to allow a certain group of people to maintain their stranglehold on power over others?
reply
Jesse
The double talk is the most infuriating thing about this. Yes indigenous tribes fought and conquered each other but white colonists conquered then harp about the importance of freedom and justice. Barbarians with technology, it s as simple as that.
reply
The double talk is the most infuriating thing about this. Yes indigenous tribes fought and conquered each other but white colonists conquered then harp about the importance of freedom and justice. Barbarians with technology, it s as simple as that.
reply
Will
Or just think with me real quick they lost the land (not had it stolen) and that was the norm for thousands of years. Take over the land and you own it, has been the norm for conquest for all of time. Now people call it stealing the land. SMH
reply
Or just think with me real quick they lost the land (not had it stolen) and that was the norm for thousands of years. Take over the land and you own it, has been the norm for conquest for all of time. Now people call it stealing the land. SMH
reply
Sul
Okay, so? Humans have been stealing and conquering land since the beginning of time. Your issue with it is that the colonizers were Europeans, not that they stole land. Indigenous groups constantly conquered land from each other.
reply
Okay, so? Humans have been stealing and conquering land since the beginning of time. Your issue with it is that the colonizers were Europeans, not that they stole land. Indigenous groups constantly conquered land from each other.
reply
Add a review, comment
Other channel videos
