Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

See how sneaky the language being used is crafted to not put blame on the UK:

"Britain took control of the Chagos Islands, of which Diego Garcia is part, from its then colony, Mauritius, in 1965. It went on to evict its population of more than 1,000 people to make way for the military base." -- BBC

They "took control" (sound quite nice) and "evicted" (probably also the nicest word they could find). The intend is also clear: kick out the natives to make a military base in a place of the world far from their home-island.

See how this language changes when Russia "takes control" of the Donbas. At least Russia claims to step up to rescue the Russian population of Ukraine that lives in a bordering region that Russia controlled not too long ago.

Hence I consider the BBC to be tax paid UK state propaganda, not much better or worse than RT.com in Russia.



there weren't any natives as the islands were uninhabited when European explorers first encountered them


At some point no humans existed on earth.

But when the UK "took control" (a.k.a. invaded) there were inhabitants that apparently had to be "evicted" (a.k.a. expelled or forcefully kicked out).

I believe the people that inhabit a place should have some say in their future.


The 'local' people were workers brought to the island by the British, and then forced to leave the island once the job ended.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chagossians says "The Chagossians are a mix of African, Indian and Malay descent.[4] The French brought some to the Chagos Islands as slaves from Mauritius in 1786. Others arrived as fishermen, farmers, and coconut plantation workers during the 19th century."

The slaves brought there by the French predate British control.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expulsion_of_the_Chagossians adds that before 1835, the "workers brought to the island by the British" were not really "workers" but forcibly transported slaves, in the same sense that the slaves the English brought to Jamaica were "workers."


> The 'local' people were workers brought to the island by the British, and then forced to leave the island once the job ended.

You are using exactly the kind of positive wording for horrible things that I was making a point against.

Slavery = job.

Slave = worker

Brought to = forcefully shipped to as slaves

"local" = more local than the policy makers that decided they had to make place for a military base

Human Rights Watch called it a crime against humanity. And it takes quite a bit of evil for them to do so wrt a western countries crimes.


Whataboutism


I respond instead of reflexively downvoting. This is not an argument. And even if that one line could be considered one, it is lazy and does not address the point OP is making.


Launching an attack on the authors of the article rather than joining the discussion about the topic appears to be a diversionary tactic.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: