Content deleted Content added
m →Colonialism: A Moral Reckoning: Link |
|||
Line 79:
The book has received both praise and criticism. [[Kenan Malik]] of ''[[The Guardian]]'' said that while ''Colonialism'' "claims to be a 'moral reckoning', moral questions are rarely taken seriously", and "in seeking to challenge what he regards as cartoonish views of imperial history, Biggar has produced something equally cartoonish, a politicised history that ill-serves his aim of defending 'western values'."<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/books/2023/feb/20/colonialism-a-moral-reckoning-by-nigel-biggar-review-a-flawed-defence-of-empire |title= Colonialism by Nigel Biggar review – a flawed defence of empire |first=Kenan |last=Malik|date= 20 February 2023|work=The Guardian}}</ref> [[Rudrangshu Mukherjee]] wrote in ''[[The Wire (India)|The Wire]]'' that ''Colonialism'' is an "immoral book" that ignores "the structural logic of empire" linking "the development of capitalism and prosperity in Britain with the political control, the economic exploitation and the impoverishment of the colonies," and that it fails "the most elementary test of scholarship".<ref>{{cite web |url=https://thewire.in/history/nigel-biggar-colonialism-review |title=An Immoral Defence of the British Empire|first=Rudrangshu |last=Mukherjee|work=The Wire |date=10 March 2023 }}</ref>
In contrast, [[Trevor Phillips]] in ''[[The Sunday Times]]'' said that it "carries the intellectual force of a [[FGM-148 Javelin|Javelin antitank missile]]", stating that he "find[s] it hard to disagree" with Biggar's thesis.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Phillips |first=Trevor |title=Colonialism by Nigel Biggar: don't be ashamed of empire |newspaper=[[The Times]] |url=https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/colonialism-by-nigel-biggar-dont-be-ashamed-of-empire-lp83ptqtd |access-date=6 April 2023 |issn=0140-0460}}</ref> [[Jonathan Sumption, Lord Sumption|Jonathan Sumption]] in the ''[[Literary Review]]'' described it as "an important book as well as a courageous one", and that "in general, [Biggar's] approach is objective and he fairly addresses the contrary arguments".<ref>{{Cite web |title=Jonathan Sumption – Cruel Britannia? |url=https://literaryreview.co.uk/cruel-britannia |access-date=6 April 2023 |website=Literary Review}}</ref> In ''[[The Daily Telegraph]]'', [[Tim Stanley]] considered the book "thoughtful" and "compelling", one that introduced facts, some of which he was unaware of, indicating that "much that is benign about our civilisation has been forgotten", but concluded that Biggar "is spoiling for a fight, and I fear he's going to get one".<ref name="stanley"/>
In a review for ''[[The Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History]]'', historian [[Alan Lester]] criticised Biggar for misrepresentations of sources that tend towards a favourable image of colonialism, describing Biggar's argument that anti-slavery dominated British policy during the second half of the empire's existence as "absurd", and sees a "persistent double standard" in how Biggar judges British versus non-British actions that "are hard to justify morally".<ref>{{cite web |title=On Colonialism: A Response to Nigel Biggar's Reply |url=https://blogs.sussex.ac.uk/snapshotsofempire/2023/06/02/on-colonialism-a-response-to-nigel-biggars-reply/ |website=Snapshots of Empire |access-date=14 June 2023 |date=2 June 2023}}</ref> Biggar replied in the same journal, accusing Lester of "[[political bias]], smearing by association, the erection of [[Straw man|strawmen]], careless reading, misrepresentation, misunderstanding, unsupported assertions, a disappointing absence of open thoughtfulness, and a striking lack of critical self-awareness".<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Biggar |first=Nigel |date=2 June 2023 |title=On Colonialism: A Moral Reckoning : A Reply to Alan Lester |journal=The Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History |volume=51 |issue=4 |language=en |pages=796–824 |doi=10.1080/03086534.2023.2209948 |issn=0308-6534|doi-access=free }}</ref>
| |||