01724nas a2200253   4500000000100000008004100001260001200042653002600054653001800080653002700098653002200125653001200147653001300159653002300172100001500195700001700210700001400227245008800241856007200329300001200401490000700413520103600420022001401456       2021                            d  c05/202110aDutch colonial empire10acolonial gaze10acompulsory segregation10alabour management10aleprosy10aothering10aplantation economy1 aSnelders S1 avan Bergen L1 aHuisman F00aLeprosy and the Colonial Gaze: Comparing the Dutch West and East Indies, 1750-1950.  uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8162854/pdf/hkz079.pdf  a611-6310 v343 a<p>This article is looking at colonial governance with regard to leprosy, comparing two settings of the Dutch colonial empire: Suriname and the Dutch East Indies. Whereas segregation became formal policy in Suriname, leprosy sufferers were hardly ever segregated in the Dutch East Indies. We argue that the perceived needs to maintain a healthy labour force and to prevent contamination of white populations were the driving forces behind the difference in response to the disease. Wherever close contact between European planters and a non-European labour force existed together with conditions of forced servitude (either slavery or indentured labour), the Dutch response was to link leprosy to racial inferiority in order to legitimise compulsory segregation. This mainly happened in Suriname. We would like to suggest that forced labour, leprosy and compulsory segregation were connected through the 'colonial gaze', legitimising compulsory segregation of leprosy sufferers who had become useless to the plantation economy.</p>  a0951-631X