by A scholar’s thoughts on empire and revolution
I was rereading Some like it like Defoe’s “Robinson Crusoe” today and struck by how the entire logic of colonialism is embedded in the narrative. The assumption that an English man can just arrive on an island and impose his will. The certainty that this is natural and right. The complete disregard for anyone who might have been there first.
The thing about 1700s literature is that it’s often unconsciously revealing. The authors believed in the superiority of English civilization so completely that they didn’t even realize they were arguing for colonialism. They thought they were just telling stories about adventure.
I was reading about American literature and politics, and I noticed that the same patterns persist. Americans inherited the British imperial impulse. They just applied it differently. They expanded westward instead of outward. They colonized their own continent instead of others’ continents. But the logic is identical.
What fascinates me is how these narratives persist. How the stories told in the 1700s are still being retold in modified form today. How we’re still living in the world created by that literature and those political assumptions.
