French-British colonial differences were style, not structural quality

Evidence

The manner of conducting the project was one of style, but not a differentiated quality of a structure of thought. The French colonialists are generally seen as more bloodletting and more vicious than their British counterparts, but this is a mode of instrumentalism, not a different quality of it. The oft-made argument that the British went the “smarter” way than the French about running and managing their respective colonies means little other than this: the British were more efficient in translating that structure of thought into reality. Given the right conditions—that is, optimal colonialist efficiency plus total seizure and control of Latour’s Stone—that reality would come into existence through the shortest route and in as full a manifestation as possible. — Wael Hallaq, Restating Orientalism, 426 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Creole emerged only in French colonies, not British or Spanish ones — Édouard Glissant, Poetics of Relation, 504; French versus British colonial brutality was a style difference, not a moral one — Wael Hallaq, Restating Orientalism: A Critique of…, 426; French colonial officials contrasted their mass-conciliating rule against Britain’s preserved aristocratic systems — Alice L. Conklin, A Mission to Civilize_ The Republican…, 661 (+9 more)

Broader Connections

• French versus British colonial brutality was a style difference, not a moral one #corroborates (0.95) — Wael Hallaq, Restating Orientalism, 426