1
   

British Empire

 
 
donzo
 
Reply Mon 16 Jan, 2006 04:32 pm
Im just enquiring about the British Empire after watching Zulu last night, the downfalls of an Empire are for all to see and in some cases still exist in the world today. Palestine for example, but what good did an empire such as the British one bring to the native people?
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 2,151 • Replies: 37
No top replies

 
Asherman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Jan, 2006 06:35 pm
Well, the British Empire spread British values and points of view across the world. The British tried very hard to stamp out slavery in all of their dominions. To be under British rule was to be relatively secure from warfare from outside the Empire, and free from the irrational, brutal rule of native warlords. The economies of British colonies tended to be more stable and filled with opportunity than those outside the Empire. British Common Law brought a sense of enlightened Justice where usually nothing similar had pre-existed. Railtoads, telegraph, modern medicine and other modern wonders were introduced into places where technology hadn't progressed in a thousand years. In India the Sutte was forcefully outlawed.

On the other hand, the British were didn't bother reforming many native customs. Subject Peoples were secure from organized violence, but any hint of rebellion would be forcefully put down. British rule itself was often carried out by vain chauvinistic govenors who knew and cared little about native traditions, customs and wishes. British merchants often took unfair advantage of the natives they dealt with, and it was the British who fostered the opium trade in India and China. Wealth flooded into Britain from the colonies, while most colonized people remained relatively poor. The British Courts, though theoretically fair, tilted strongly in favor of those born and bred in Britain. Most of the wonders of modern (18th and 19th century) technology were introduced for the good of the Empire, not specifically for the uplifting of the colonized ... though that often happened.
0 Replies
 
Louise R Heller
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Jan, 2006 06:52 pm
With due respect the "uplifting of the colonized" (sic) is nonsensical per se, as a concept.

The opium trade had to be brought to China because there was no other way to finance the tea purchases.

I'm Austrian and I know our empire ended after WWI. The British empire ended after WWII. The countries involved are doing much worse since their imperial overseers left, even though both we and the British are well rid of these pests.

You got questions, keep them!!!
0 Replies
 
Jock
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Feb, 2006 01:53 am
That , from a member the nation who wormed itself out of responsibility for its part in initiating WW2 .

WE in New Zealand are doing quite well thanks , As are most of the ex Brit Empire , now know as the Commonwelth .
0 Replies
 
Lord Ellpus
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Feb, 2006 06:36 am
Great post, Asherman. As usual, you have covered it all.




Well, nearly............Cricket....you forgot Cricket.

Everywhere that used to be a part of the British Empire, plays Cricket.
With the exception of the USA, who sneakily booted us out before we had the chance to teach them the rules.


Oh, and Canada. Well, you can't play Cricket in Canada. Too many trees, you see.
0 Replies
 
J-B
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Feb, 2006 08:03 am
Are Hongkongers playing cricket? Too little space right? :wink:

And yes, great and well-balanced post by Asherman, indeed.
0 Replies
 
syntinen
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Feb, 2006 08:19 am
George Orwell (by no means an unqualified admirer of British imperialism) suggested: if you want to know what the British did for the Empire, look at the railway map of India [he was talking pre-Partition, so these days that wouldf include Pakistan and Bengal] and compare it to the rail network of the rest of Asia.
0 Replies
 
Francis
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Feb, 2006 08:25 am
Tell me about Bengal being parted...
0 Replies
 
syntinen
 
  1  
Reply Wed 8 Feb, 2006 07:10 am
is that a serious question. Francis?
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 8 Feb, 2006 04:09 pm
The eastern Bengalis were, many of them, Muslim--so after 1947, that portion of Bengal became East Pakistan. The 1971 war created Bangladesh out of the former East Pakistan.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Wed 8 Feb, 2006 04:14 pm
I'm glad, I live in a part of the world that wasn't really part of the empire, only an occupied zone.

Thus, cricket was only played behind thick walls of some barracks and couldn't threaten us.
0 Replies
 
beeblebroxin
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Feb, 2006 05:56 am
I think the british suceeded because of much better technology, and ofcourse the due to the prevailing conditions in india, the british raj obvioulsy ruined the region, helped by the religious conflicts in India for almost 300 yrs prior to the british. Well "India" of today never existed. What the british managed to do was an economic exploitation of princely states ( all of whom were at loggerheads with each other ), backed by the east india company .

To most indians at that time , a concept of unified India was totally unthinkable due to different religious beliefs and spiritual practices. The states themselves were very well governed before the british, to think of liberating them at the hands of the brits is fancy. Yes the brits very much made complete use of the prevailing confusion towards their own benefit. The british raj came about after intense resistance which did not bear fruit due to more advanced military on the british side.

To me the british were no different from the Germans during WW2, except that they did not make their genocides a known agenda. In fact i think the advent of WW2 changed everything, when they realised that they couldnt go on with the same **** for long.
0 Replies
 
beeblebroxin
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Feb, 2006 06:05 am
I think Asherman is referring to "Sati ". It was a misconception prevaling among certain people in Bengal, but it was not the british, but Indian reformist thinkers led by Raja Ram Mohan Roy and Ishwar chandra Vidyasagar to help curtail the practice..takin credit for something the british cannot or did not care is again wishful claim.

Dont tell me that England never had to face such times..It was India's dark ages, true that Europe came out of it earlier than Indians could.
0 Replies
 
shapone
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Feb, 2006 10:38 am
I think we are losing sight of the question- it is widely known that the Empire did some bad stuff, as did each and every empire did before and since. We look at the ancient Empires with rose tinted glasses. But we mustnt forget the cruelty and barbarism enflicted on the subjects (feeding of Christians to the lions etc or the sacking of Troy), More recent, the soviet empires of complete genocide and wiping countries off the face of the earth, Tibet for example. And the only empire left in the world today- the neocolonialst superpower of the USA (Iraq, Guantanamo, etc) The point is for there to ever be an empire by de facto there are unsavory elements. The older these empires become, the more we forget about the negative and concentrate on the positive. As the height of Imperialism was only just over 100 years ago, we still have a very postmodern view of this period. I argue, whilst not trying to justify any of of injustices done by the British Empire, that in 1000 years it will be seen as the most important in history. The reasons for this being- the first empire to spread free trade worldwide- maybe not fair trade, but with it set up the highways for the trade of culture and ideas, above all this being the English language,as well as the points raised by Asherman.
0 Replies
 
DiggsUK
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Mar, 2006 05:30 pm
One could argue that if it wasn't for the British Empire, what is now called the USA would still be governed from London... It was after all the demands of fighting the French in other parts of the world that determined the low level of political interest in 'the colonies' on the part of the British.

Just a thought...
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Mar, 2006 05:54 pm
shapone wrote:
I argue, whilst not trying to justify any of of injustices done by the British Empire, that in 1000 years it will be seen as the most important in history. The reasons for this being- the first empire to spread free trade worldwide- maybe not fair trade, but with it set up the highways for the trade of culture and ideas, above all this being the English language,as well as the points raised by Asherman.
Britain has a claim to have laid the foundations of the modern world.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Mar, 2006 11:31 pm
That certainly is so, but ... this jumping something makes me nervous!
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Thu 23 Mar, 2006 05:17 am
Jumping? You mean jumping up and down waving the Union Flag and singing Rule Brittannia?

Well of course if we ever did, we dont do it now. We leave those sickening displays of nationalism and mawkish sentimentality to the Americans, Irish, Scots Welsh...even Aussies at times, in fact just about anyone who can trace connections to England or the British Isles, a place they are now only too keen to denigrate.

Did you know btw that 1st March is St Davids Day..and the Welsh celebrate their patron saint...daffodils etc

17th March is St Patricks day...and the Irish have a holiday and go mad

30th Nov. is St Andrews day and the Scots go equally mad get drunk and fight each other (actually a normal day for them...perhaps they stay sober...)

Anyway St George is the Patron Saint of England. No one knows who he was. Very few know what day is St Georges Day, its a normal working day, there are no celebrations, and the few people who wear the red cross tend to be condemned as football hooligans or fascists. Why?
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 23 Mar, 2006 06:52 am
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:
Anyway St George is the Patron Saint of England.


Correct. In exactly one month ... I'm thinking of wearing my hair like you did on this photo from last year:


http://www.bayraider.tv/images/stgeorge.JPG
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Thu 23 Mar, 2006 08:31 am
Walter Hinteler wrote:
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:
Anyway St George is the Patron Saint of England.


Correct. In exactly one month ... I'm thinking of wearing my hair like you did on this photo from last year:


http://www.bayraider.tv/images/stgeorge.JPG
You promised never to post that picture!
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

HAPPY ANNIVERSARY, EVERYONE! - Discussion by OmSigDAVID
WIND AND WATER - Discussion by Setanta
Who ordered the construction of the Berlin Wall? - Discussion by Walter Hinteler
True version of Vlad Dracula, 15'th century - Discussion by gungasnake
ONE SMALL STEP . . . - Discussion by Setanta
History of Gun Control - Discussion by gungasnake
Where did our notion of a 'scholar' come from? - Discussion by TuringEquivalent
 
  1. Forums
  2. » British Empire
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 09/30/2024 at 04:36:17