"This inability to understand the adversary and thus to anticipate its reactions is typical of the colonial relation. It has been repeated in all colonial adventures in modern history. The colonized group—in the
case concerning us here, a group toward which the colonizer has a feeling of cultural superiority, as its constituents belong to a civilization whose characteristics and motivations have been determined in advance—no longer needs to be studied. The colonized group is what the colonizer says it is, unchanging and
predetermined by the traits that are part of the very nature of its status.
... On the opposite side, the colonized group, owing to its very weakness with respect to the colonizer, has had to make the effort to know its enemy in order to survive. In general, it manages to do so.
One need only see how Palestinians have learned to know the Israelis, their mentality, the contradictions within Israeli society. ... For their very survival, the colonized become wiser while the colonial
forces, sure of their superiority, let matters go. As a result, they are 'taken by surprise' and run more and more risks of failing in their undertaking.
Another error typical of colonial rule, repeated in Lebanon: Just rely on the big stick—in the case we are looking at here, thousands of bombs—and the adversary will learn to behave properly and accept
whatever we want them to do or refrain from doing. According to colonialist reasoning, the Lebanese people, subjected to a hail of bombs, could not help but rise up against Hezbollah, supposedly to blame for everything that happened to them. A grave error: the Lebanese people united against those who were destroying their country."
vaporwave
ellievsbear
pixelskylines
jbbartram-illu
dailybridgerton
gummygunk
dededos
2087
annaxmalina
yousharknotpass
