British Empire Society

so any change in international economic standing is a cime is it?the factwoth is that in the 19 and early 20 centuarys total global gdp went up massivly due to the industrial revolution which happened to be in britain and europe and later in the us.thus with this large growth taking place the countries which where the driving force behind it would have gained a larger share of international gdp.also it is worth noting that all economys go through periods of prosperity and hardship it happened to britain japan germany italy is happining to the us and it will happen to china someday.the differances are some economys adapt quicker and recover faster

Our Mascot

The Pax Britannica made the 19th century comparitively peaceful and safe compared

Mizzy87, are you seriously saying that the British deliberately sent Columbus the wrong way? Lol, where's the evidence for this please?

And for your information, industries did exist, just not in the nature that we perceive them today, they weren't regarded as national industries as there was no proper central government. Actually, one of the first industries relocated from India to Britain was textiles. Technology, designs, and raw cotton were initially imported from India and, in parallel, India's indigenous textile mills were outlawed by the British. They were de-licensed, heavyily taxed and regulated, making them virtually extinct. Hurrah, a success for the imperialists.

Another one was Indian rust-free steel. The British banned the manufacture of iron and steel in India, condemning them to rely on Europe for imports.

I can go on if you'd like?

On the basis of Adolf Hitler, how anyone can advocate not sterilising all human beings is beyond me...

Just like virtually every other country on earth, of course.

And you are the saviour because you are not one of these lowly sheep correct? So another way of saying you're better than everyone else.

The British Empire was based on racial prejudice. Any defenders of it at the time said they were merely 'culturing' the natives. Moral superiority they claimed. Yet they did more harm than good.

Humans do not rebel against rulers who do more good than harm.

I'm afraid facts just don't cut it here. You have to resort to personal insults and '**** off to another country' mentality. Clearly the benefits of the Empire were so blinding obvious that those who rebelled in colonies didn't know what they were missing out on.

look at my society's ....idiot

I don't buy into this egalitarian nonsense. Simple fact is, I am better than the vast majority of other people - and most are either too stupid or too lazy to even consider what is morally right or decent.

I assume you've drawn up an equation with every act of the British state during that time contained within it?

Moral superiority also has nothing to do with consequences, but rather intent.

That rather defies historical analysis.

I don't think you meant to quote me there.

the litmus test is whether any government does more harm than good.

I'm afraid facts just don't cut it here. You have to resort to personal insults and '**** off to another country' mentality. Clearly the benefits of the Empire were so blinding obvious that those who rebelled in colonies didn't know what they were missing out on.

I wasn't comparing it to Hitler and the Nazis, no.

Wrong.

"I'm better than you. So what you say is drivel to me." That's what you're saying, basically.

I speak primarily with respect to British India, yes, but that is not to say there were no other atrocities committed. http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,761626,00.html
And since India accounted for a large part of the Empire's wealth, it is built on oppression.

Intent is not impossible to prove. Read works by commentators from the Empire period and you will see all sorts of hideous justifications for Empire.

So the colonies rebelled without cause? They should have sat tight?

OK, lets simplify this. If a nation decides that it does not want to be ruled by a foreign power, the foreign power must swallow its pride and go back home. Or not whine when it is kicked out. No doubt you'll start protesting about nationalism's flaws. Well tough, because nationalism to the extent that foreign intereference is unwelcome is the status quo, and you will have to deal with it.

Not a non-argument because you were defending the British Empire but then said 'this level of economic control should not be assumed by a government'. Well that was the primary purpose of the Empire.

So why did you join the discussion when I was pointing out to someone else why there was little the empire did for the world. I was debating the second point. So perhaps you should have held your horses instead of charging in and changing the topic and further, claiming it was obvious what you were debating all along.

Your support of the Empire does worse - it casts yourself as some moral judge of natives in colonies. That they were somehow unfit to rule themselves and that the British were morally superior. The atrocities of the Empire point to exactly the opposite.

Impossible since--
(1) You cannot compare it to anything - even the state of being without government, since you have no idea what would then happen. This is the problem with consequentialism.
(2) You can no idea of all, or even most, of the actions of any government.

And of course, every government that has ever faced large-scale rebellions was wrong and the rebels were, of course, right.

Well, I was perhaps being a tad facetious in my initial point there.

No number of nodding assenters make your views morally justifiable.

And attrocities were the only things the British government ever did - even in India?

And some very good ones too.

Therefore it's not really a matter of empire, but a matter of where the limitations of the state over the individual are drawn.

No, government is not dependent on consent. Indeed, quite the opposite, its value is only where there is no consent. Which is why it is required at all - to exercise force.

I believe free trade is the primary purpose of many Empires. Not government regulation.

I have yet to say that I do support the previous British Empire.

What I wanted evidence for was what you said about the British apparently deliberately sending Columbus the wrong way in order to further their own Indian interests.

As far as I knew, Britain (or rather England, seeing as 'Great Britain' had not been created yet) turned down the opportunity to fund Columbus' voyage, and so how can they be held responsible for it?

Yes, I am aware of the British East India Company. It's a great shame they increased their influence.

India was perfectly fine before the British arrived. You're painting the picture that India was uncivilised, unindustrialised etc, but WHY then were the British so desperate to get there? They sent Colombus the wrong way, they set up base in South Africa on the way to India. They were well aware of the immense benefits India would have given to them. They must have been pissing their pants at the prospect of mass exploitation and plunder of weath they could achieve.

And for your information, industries did exist, just not in the nature that we perceive them today, they weren't regarded as national industries as there was no proper central government. Actually, one of the first industries relocated from India to Britain was textiles. Technology, designs, and raw cotton were initially imported from India and, in parallel, India's indigenous textile mills were outlawed by the British. They were de-licensed, heavyily taxed and regulated, making them virtually extinct. Hurrah, a success for the imperialists.

Another one was Indian rust-free steel. The British banned the manufacture of iron and steel in India, condemning them to rely on Europe for imports.

I can go on if you'd like?

I wasn't referring to the British people as a whole, you mindless idiot. Just those who participated and were involved in the Empire and those who actively supported it. And I'm not referring to Britain today. I can see you're quite deluded, but you didn't actually contribute to the Empire you know, no matter how enthusiastically you support it.