Comments by "Lynott Parris" (@DenUitvreter) on "Asianometry" channel.

The Dutch gave the world the concepts of religious tolerance, upward social mobility, free trade, modern capitalism, freedom of thought and print, international law, microbiology, art for and about ordinary people, equality, and they dominated all European trade. The Asian exploits had some dark pages, but in darker times anyway, and went togehter with genuine exploration and also fair trade in many places, while just being a tiny part of their economy. A few dark pages in a beacon of light, when there was mostly darkness all over the world, from the Arabs to the Chinese to the Africans. Don't claim you were any better than the Dutch.
2
@newbabies923 It's more that people who can't face their own past and present want the Dutch to face their self serving version of the past that is a lie. Most of Indonesia has only been colonized for a few decades when the Dutch invested rather than exploited, still the parts that have been colonized for hundreds of years fare much better. That doesn't fit the victim narrative and the excuse of 350 years of colonization for the state the country is in. They should face the collaboration and the cruelty of their own rulers. They should face their collaboration with the Japanese fascists, the racist massacres of Dutch, mixed race and Chinese in the Bersiap, the Javanese colonization of the Moluccas and the Papua's, the latter being 'the silent genocide' by a colonizer far more racist than the Dutch ever were. Contrary to the Dutch, many people can't handle their own past and their present. If they did both the Indonesians and the Americans would find out they are much more like the Dutch of centuries ago than they can handle emotionally.
2
That's not how it worked 'under' Dutch colonialism.
1
There is no reason to mention Dutch slavery as part of worldwide slavery because it was tiny and there is no reason to mention slavery in relation to the Dutch economy because it was tiny. The reason to mention Dutch slavery is because it's an interesting story of moraly corruption and hypocrisy after the Dutch Republic started out so well. But I feel that's not the nuance you are looking for.
1
What a load of BS. The jewish community was small and less than one percent of the traders. The Dutch had more merchant ships in the huge European trade than all of the others combined. The Dutch Republic was only early in the 80-years war for independence and religious tolerance with Spain and Portugal. The VOC was founded to attack the Portuguese Asian income and pay for it with it's own trade, it was given a monopoly East of the Cape for that reason. The stock was handled by the chambers of the VOC, which werer spread out over several cities to make it a national war entreprise. After the first succesfull trade missions, the VOC saw a lot more opportunity than just robbing some Portuguese ships and buying some silk, and profit needed to be reinvested. Since many shareholders were very ordinary people who couldn't wait long for ROI, they were offered the opportunity to sell their share at the De Keyser exchange and most shares ended up with the rich who had the patience and the maids and carpenter investors had their ROI in cash. Again, the Bank of Amsterdam had nothing to do with it. The Amsterdamse Wisselbank was the biggest in Europe because it made money reliable and functioned as the first central bank. It was in the biggest trading hub of Europe in the country of by far the biggest traders in Europe. That's also why the Dutch were already filthy rich when the VOC started to pay it's first dividends in 1633, 31 years after it's foundation. The whole VOC with it's lousy 200 merchant ships at it's peak was peanuts for the Dutch economy. Land reclamation had nothing to do with it either. This is really like 'I know (false) only 2 things about the Netherlands so they must be connected'.
1
@honor9lite1337 Don't believe every YT nonsense video.
1
@newbabies923 Nothing was hidden, we just see it as that progress has been made over time. A lot of which was made the Dutch themselves. Most people all over the world don't like the concept of progress though and prefer to make it about geography or race, or nationalistic propaganda of being victim like the Indonesians. These days education and media are woke though, so probably the racist massacres of the Bersiap and the complicity of the Indonesian rulers is ignored because brown people can't be responsible for bad things.
1
@newbabies923 I agree, but only few people really dare to. They prefer to be victim of the other, not accomplice or culprit.
1
@newbabies923 But not only a victim and not all victim. But you can't face that apparently.
1
@pjacobsen1000 Modern capitalism was invented by the Dutch and with the stock exchange of 1607 it was about completed. Capitalism is about the structures to get lots of capital together to invest and have more production. A merchant ship, build industrially already, a windmill, a land reclamation project, people couldn't afford such entreprises and risks by themselves. Capitalism was the great equalizer, it gave the working class and middle class opportunity to profit too, it created upward social mobility and in the Dutch case made the nobility completely irrelevant. Before capitalism no one would get rich that already wasn't by family, and the rich families didn't get much richer during their lifetime either.
1
They only were when they couldn't get it because the Ottomans blocked the Silk Road and the Portuguese blocked Lisbon. For the Dutch it was important because that is what the Chinese, Indians, Japanese took interest in. So they could be traded, they weren't interested in Dutch products so they didn't need to bring that much silver.
1