Hey there Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Time for British imperialism again, albeit on a much more moderate scale?

Announcements Posted on
    • 7 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Steevee)
    Europe isn't where we should be looking.

    There are quite a few African countries that could benefit from British rule, or at least intervention. We would help them move out fo perpetual cycles of civil war and poverty, put them on the road to being a functioning country, and for that we gain access to some of their natural resources and an obliging future partner on the world stage. Every one is a winner.
    I agree with this. It seems like the UK is doing this already with Somalia which is a good deal.

    I don't think British rule would work though, the government may allow it but the people won't even if it benefits them based on principle i.e. Europeans are colonialist and will **** us over. Africans would react automatically negatively to any sign of imperialism (unless it's from Chinese).
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chillaxer)
    it can solve the missing parts of the puzzle in Europe.?
    We should solve our own puzzle first, in my opinion anyway.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrHappy_J)
    :teehee:

    its not meant to be funny but that made me laugh.
    You're not disputing it are you?

    We killed more people in India alone than the Nazis did throughout their reign.
    • 11 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chainreaction)
    Yes mate, resources! But that is why I reminded you above about the Americans (eg Irak,, Libya, Somalia soon). These countries have what you need first of all: oil! You know very well you can't get into a country now just like that and pretend it's yours), you need to work in a team and share the pray, as well as knowing your place. So? Aren't you doing that already?
    It's funny, you are sliding perfectly into the pidgeon hole I put you in after your first post. Why, it wouldn't surprise me if you believe in the Illuminati/NWO :mmm:


    (Original post by Mysteries)
    Could you be anymore arrogant and nationalistic? "Oh we're so civilized and forward thinking. Let's help drag these poor savages out of their misery. Rule Britania!"

    You clearly know nothing about the world, probably have never traveled outside of Europe if that. You claim that South America is the third world yet Brazil has overtaken us in economic terms. You're just deluded mate. Living in the past. It's sad to be so jaded at such a young age.

    You are providing people with a good laugh though. So for that, I applaud you.

    Why not write to your MP with your brilliant new foreign policy proposals. I'm sure they could use a good laugh as well. :teehee:
    No my dear, not the people, the nations. Various African nations in particular. They suffer from constant civil war, corruption and poverty.

    Wrong South America in general, Brazil is pretty much the exception. And look at it's area and natural resources, they should be outstripping us in terms of pure GDP. They have not 'overtaken' us by any sense of the word, they turn over more money, quite a different thing.


    (Original post by Annoying-Mouse)
    I agree with this. It seems like the UK is doing this already with Somalia which is a good deal.

    I don't think British rule would work though, the government may allow it but the people won't even if it benefits them based on principle i.e. Europeans are colonialist and will **** us over. Africans would react automatically negatively to any sign of imperialism (unless it's from Chinese).
    I agree, this is rather the problem. Any attempt to help from a Nation, in any way other than 'no strings attatched' aid is seen as us being colonial or Imperialistic. And yet paradoxically, people still try to guilt us over the state of affairs in that area of the world. It's no wonder so little is done to help them. Although to be honest, I don't think most citizens of the DRC or Somailia care much about the politics of it, it's everyone else getting involved that is the problem.
    • 11 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mysteries)
    You're not disputing it are you?

    We killed more people in India alone than the Nazis did throughout their reign.
    Ssssssssssssssssssource please. I've asked once already.
    • 12 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mysteries)
    You're not disputing it are you?

    We killed more people in India alone than the Nazis did throughout their reign.
    I'm not disputing it, i just found it funny. dont know why, its not something we should be particularly proud of if it's true. it was probably just the way you put it.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Steevee)
    Ssssssssssssssssssource please. I've asked once already.
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007....randeepramesh

    And that's not even counting the 29 million people that died of starvation in the late 1800's as a result of our policies.

    Now answer my question: you've never traveled outside Europe or the UK have you?

    Remember: That's just India ALONE. Not even counting China, Australia, South Africa, North America, or the countless other nations we "civilized".
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrHappy_J)
    I'm not disputing it, i just found it funny. dont know why, its not something we should be particularly proud of if it's true. it was probably just the way you put it.
    You're right, it's not. Neither are the deaths of over 100,000 innocent civilians killed in Iraq. But the media doesn't want to talk about any of these things. They'd rather tell you where Kate Moss was seen walking her dog.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    [Quote] Steevee
    Wrong South America in general, Brazil is pretty much the exception. And look at it's area and natural resources, they should be outstripping us in terms of pure GDP. They have not 'overtaken' us by any sense of the word, they turn over more money, quite a different thing.[Quote]


    What about sorting out the Falkland Islands first there in SAmerica?
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    [QUOTE=Steevee;36552328]It's funny, you are sliding perfectly into the pidgeon hole I put you in after your first post. Why, it wouldn't surprise me if you believe in the Illuminati/NWO :mmm:[Quote]

    Sure mate, you want to help other nations and getting your modest return, ain't you? How noble! I definitely don't take you seriously. I just have some spare time around here.
    • 11 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mysteries)
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007....randeepramesh

    And that's not even counting the 29 million people that died of starvation in the late 1800's as a result of our policies.

    Now answer my question: you've never traveled outside Europe or the UK have you?

    Remember: That's just India ALONE. Not even counting China, Australia, South Africa, North America, or the countless other nations we "civilized".
    Ahh I see, a single book that has been robustly challenged by Indian and British historians alike. That is your source. And I'd invite you to take a look around the world. People were dying of starvation in a great many lands at the time, this was no Holocaust, no intentional cull. It was an unfortunate thing, but nothing like 'killing' Indians, as you imply.

    I've been toooo, Canada 3 times, the US 6 times, Australia, Switzerland, Spain, France, Germany, Belgium, Holland, Portugal, Greece, Cyprus and Singapore. Your move.

    Hong Kong is doing pretty well. India would have been, had they not had that unfourtunate foray into Socialism. North America? They seem ok. South Africa? Eh, the not so bright ANC aren't doing things so well down there, and of course you must understand the influence of the Afrikans people in that land. Australia? Can't remember the last time I saw them having a civil war or with millions starving.



    [QUOTE=chainreaction;36552474][Quote] Steevee
    Wrong South America in general, Brazil is pretty much the exception. And look at it's area and natural resources, they should be outstripping us in terms of pure GDP. They have not 'overtaken' us by any sense of the word, they turn over more money, quite a different thing.


    What about sorting out the Falkland Islands first there in SAmerica?
    What do you mean?
    • 6 followers
    Online

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Captainmal)
    Tehnically yeah, by the early 20th century Britain was operating an enormous trade deficit with nearly every colony. Only success was India which then operated a huge surplus with all those countries and Britain reaped some of the rewards of that but even then, factoring in the costs of security and administration it was not hat you'd call a benefit. The markets in the colonies were never develloped enough to become a market for British goods and so became net exporters which damaged Britain's (and every other imperial power's) industry in the long run.
    (Original post by gladders)
    Yes, as we didn't develop them. The money accrued went into private pockets and was only lightly taxed, and precious little infrastructure was developed beyond the minimum needed to make businesses profitable. Compare America before independence (lightly populated and agrarian) to America a generation later (increasingly heavily populated and slowly industrialising), or India before 1947 and now.

    Once India was made independent, the rest of the Empire lost purpose - it was occupied specifically as territory denial to other countries, and to guard India.
    How interesting, thank you very much, I didn't know about any of that.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    State Intervention, maybe. Imperialism..Hell no. I do not wish to disrupt their political, economic and cultural systems in order to benefit my Nation. Rather, it would be better to deal with issues of corruption and unfair methods that lie within the hands of the Dictators(Which should be the UN's job IMO). It is very sticky situation when you want to reform the social values and ethics of another country.

    The Caste System in India has created some significant social problems regarding the welfare of the poorer people, however wishing to disrupt a 500+ year old system that is engrained within the roots of the country would be problematic.
    • 11 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mysteries)
    x
    My dear, those were different times. Times when such acts were deemed acceptable by society at large. You cannot compare them to our standards now. Yes, I agree it was terrible, but we were acting by the standards of the time.

    And agin, I'd love to see your figures on slaughtering millions. And does 'we' mean all white people now, or are we still talking just British, because you seem to be quite confused.

    (Original post by Genocidal)
    How interesting, thank you very much, I didn't know about any of that.
    The poster is right about America, wrong about India though.

    India underwent rapid industrialisation after the British left because they became bosom buddies with the USSR who's only success came from rapid and aggressive industrialisation, and you'll see that actually, the economic policy through until the 70's actually held India back. Add to that the Empire building a vast network of rail, telegraph, postal services and so on, well, the point just doesn;t stand true about India. It is also worth a note on the era in which the US was lost, 1770-1780, which was not a time of great industrial growth anywhere but Britain really, with the very first parts of Industrialisation being seen through Europe towards the end of the war. Simply put, Britain did not have the resources to industrialise the Americas as well as Britain. It was not an objective decision to keep North America down, merely a case of Indpendence coming too soon for us to realise plans laid.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Steevee)
    My dear, those were different times. Times when such acts were deemed acceptable by society at large. You cannot compare them to our standards now. Yes, I agree it was terrible, but we were acting by the standards of the time.
    Imperialism in any form is not acceptable by society at large. What you're suggesting is not only immoral (interfering in the internal affairs of a sovereign nation) but highly illegal under international law. The US, China, Russia and other countries would bomb the hell out of us. Not to mention the fact that the people of whatever nation you invade would be slaughtering us as well.

    And agin, I'd love to see your figures on slaughtering millions. And does 'we' mean all white people now, or are we still talking just British, because you seem to be quite confused.
    There is no confusion here pal. I was referring to "us" as in British people. The Spanish and the Portuguese weren't half as cruel and ruthless towards the natives in their colonies in Latin America. Look it up if you're curious. I'm not your personal assistant.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chillaxer)
    You must have thought it too. Look at Spain, but more likely Portugal. European countries that are economically somewhat inferior to us, historically our best allies in Europe, and partners in trade etc. If Portugal, for example, became a basket case like Greece, what's to stop us wading in if they exit the Euro?
    Helping them out, but then could be something that leads to mutual sovereignity. It's a dream. We've got the pedigree, the instincts for it, but this time it can be benevolent, moreso, it can solve the missing parts of the puzzle in Europe. A two or even three tier Europe could be conducive to a few small countries beind ruled from London.

    What do you say peeps, let's get the old spirit back?

    I think the Portuguese might have something to say about that...
    • 11 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mysteries)
    Imperialism in any form is not acceptable by society at large. What you're suggesting is not only immoral (interfering in the internal affairs of a sovereign nation) but highly illegal under international law. The US, China, Russia and other countries would bomb the hell out of us. Not to mention the fact that the people of whatever nation you invade would be slaughtering us as well.



    There is no confusion here pal. I was referring to "us" as in British people. The Spanish and the Portuguese weren't half as cruel and ruthless towards the natives in their colonies in Latin America. Look it up if you're curious. I'm not your personal assistant.
    What point are you making? You seem confused again. I was talking about past IMperialism, and you'll notice how when talking of the present I did not advocate the same type of Imperialism, infact I explained myself already :lolwut:

    No, that's not how it works 'pal'. When making an argument you provide the sources to back your argument, I wont make your argument for you :rolleyes: So I take it you have no sources?
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Steevee)
    What point are you making? You seem confused again. I was talking about past IMperialism, and you'll notice how when talking of the present I did not advocate the same type of Imperialism, infact I explained myself already :lolwut:

    No, that's not how it works 'pal'. When making an argument you provide the sources to back your argument, I wont make your argument for you :rolleyes: So I take it you have no sources?
    No, sure, you're right. I have no sources. Obviously we didn't kill anyone. The natives just happily handed over their lands and fell to their knees in gratitude for the gift of civilization that we brought them. :rolleyes:

    We already give aid to impoverished countries. It's not our role to dictate how they should run their economies.

    I'm just glad that a person like you will never see his insane plan come to fruition.
    • 9 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gladders)
    ...

    Sorry, which war is this?
    I thought you were implying wars before WW2, because by WW2 the Empire was pretty much gone. Are you saying why did the Empire not help during WW2?
    • 36 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    The British Empire was one of the finest political institutions the world has ever seen. We selflessly used our resources and know-how to drag up ultra-poor foreign countries out of medieval practices, and gave them every chance to succeed after they gained independence. I advocate an adjustment period of 2-3 years so we can get the economy moving again after the disaster of New Labour, and then an immediate expansion of British colonial interests to safeguard undemocratic and war torn third world nations. Lets do our bit for least well off in the global village and give them a taste of British living.

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?

    this is what you'll be called on TSR

  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?

    never shared and never spammed

  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By joining you agree to our Ts and Cs, privacy policy and site rules

  2. Slide the button to the right to create your account

    Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: March 1, 2012
New on TSR

Naughtiest thing you did at school

Did you get away with it or were you punished?

Article updates
Useful resources
Reputation gems:
You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.