The Student Room Group

Would Britain have had an Empire without slavery?

Scroll to see replies

Reply 20
Original post by NJA
These programs show how the slave trade over 200 years generated wealth for many Britons, (you can check your own family here). Some of which was invested in other industry some of which went into country houses or expensive townhouses and personal wealth that would never have been attained through their own hard work or ingenuity.

.

I'd be curious to see where the proceeds of the opium trade went. A far more profitable, and arguably far deeper moral stain, on the nation.
Reply 21
Original post by Napp
I'd be curious to see where the proceeds of the opium trade went. A far more profitable, and arguably far deeper moral stain, on the nation.

Curious enough to do some research and let us know?
Reply 22
Original post by NJA
Curious enough to do some research and let us know?

It's entirely possible :biggrin: Not entirely sure where to start on it though aha
Reply 23
Original post by Napp
It's entirely possible :biggrin: Not entirely sure where to start on it though aha

just google "proceeds of the British opium trade"
Reply 24
Original post by NJA
just google "proceeds of the British opium trade"

I was more talking about academic books on the matter, not so much wiki and co.
Original post by NJA
I was thinking that of the commodities that slaves produced ,obviously sugar was a luxury good people might actually have been healthier without, less black teeth , and they could have farmed beehives in colonies. Tobacco obviously better off without, lastly cotton which was obviously a huge cash crop ship to cross to Lancashire for manufacturer and sale in the eighteenth-century equivalent of Primark again not a huge cat drop except for a few industrialists maybe they could have developed flags and wall in the Lights of New Zealand and instead

Wow. I just had a mad existential thought. If the British Empire didn't use slaves to pick cotton then I wouldn't have been born.
I'm from a town in Manchester that only sprung up to build cotton mills, my ancestors wouldn't have come exactly here over from Ireland and so my grandma wouldn't meet my grandad. ****ing hell.
Reply 26
Original post by georgeparasol12
Wow. I just had a mad existential thought. If the British Empire didn't use slaves to pick cotton then I wouldn't have been born.
I'm from a town in Manchester that only sprung up to build cotton mills, my ancestors wouldn't have come exactly here over from Ireland and so my grandma wouldn't meet my grandad. ****ing hell.

Working in the cotton mills for low wages and being stuck in poor accommodation was better than slavery, but not much, so there were a few enlightened employers who cared for their employees even providing nice accommodation.
Reply 27
Original post by Napp
I was more talking about academic books on the matter, not so much wiki and co.

I think you give up too easy you might find articles like this which have references to other works
Reply 28
The Empire persisted and indeed continued to grow for over a century after slavery was abolished, so in short, yes. Military prowess, strategy and technology is what really builds empires. Most nations at the time had slavery in one form or another, but only a handful were capable of building and maintaining vast global empires.
Reply 29
Original post by georgeparasol12
Wow. I just had a mad existential thought. If the British Empire didn't use slaves to pick cotton then I wouldn't have been born.
I'm from a town in Manchester that only sprung up to build cotton mills, my ancestors wouldn't have come exactly here over from Ireland and so my grandma wouldn't meet my grandad. ****ing hell.


Some of us have a noble beginning as a result of a loving relationship others such as those that were adopted, myself included, were the results of less noble things, we have no control over our beginning though we can be thankful that we exist, but we do have control over what happens next . . . .according to what we select to believe concerning ourselves
Reply 30
Original post by Wōden
The Empire persisted and indeed continued to grow for over a century after slavery was abolished, so in short, yes. Military prowess, strategy and technology is what really builds empires. Most nations at the time had slavery in one form or another, but only a handful were capable of building and maintaining vast global empires.

yes, I'd say the British was the last great empire, the Age of Empires is over
Though there are what you might call corporate empires
Original post by NJA
yes, I'd say the British was the last great empire, the Age of Empires is over
Though there are what you might call corporate empires

I think China will be the next empire.
Reply 32
Original post by Wired_1800
I think China will be the next empire.

They will certainly increase their influence over Hong Kong and Taiwan but I can't see how they can advance be on that that they've already tried it on with India they probably won't poke Russia.
Original post by NJA
They will certainly increase their influence over Hong Kong and Taiwan but I can't see how they can advance be on that that they've already tried it on with India they probably won't poke Russia.

I think China will seek for a wider reach than their nearest neighbours. They have a good move into the UK infrastructure and are buying up influence in the Americas and Africa.
Reply 34
Original post by Wired_1800
I think China will seek for a wider reach than their nearest neighbours. They have a good move into the UK infrastructure and are buying up influence in the Americas and Africa.

and Australia, and they are in the likes of Zambia and Papua New Guinea collecting raw materials, many Chinese people have poor quality lives and hard-working conditions producing the stuff we want cheap.
Original post by NJA
I would include the horrible lives of many factory workers in the UK, working for long hours in poor conditions for a pittance...

I mean, that inclusion completely changes the question. It was pretty normal to, for example, have a 12 year old work 16 hours per day down a coal mine. They were also paid according to results, so no slacking off down there if you wanted to eat! Without that insane amount of hard labour it is hard to see how everything else of the industrial revolution would be possible, with the same speed anyway.

Also, you're singling out the UK? I assume that means that in this scenario we're allowing this "slavery" in other nations? Because any slight loss in competitiveness in the UK, presumably just means we are out-competed by other nations. Are we including the terrible conditions on warships? Because without them we presumably cease to exist as a nation at some presumably quite early point.

The slave trade persisted in a lot of North Africa and Arabia right up into the second half of the twentieth century, a good hundred years after it was abolished by Europe/US. Didn't seem to do them much good, in terms of empire building. So clearly far from the only factor.
Original post by Napp
Almost certainly. Slaves were but one commodity among many. We only really came into trading them through our search for spices and minerals after all.
Might have had a mildly detrimental effect on our plantations without them but given the empire could find vast quantities of workers willing to work for a song, well.

we would have consumed far less sugar as a result and our current epidemic of tooth decay and obesity might never have happened.
Reply 37
Original post by the bear
we would have consumed far less sugar as a result and our current epidemic of tooth decay and obesity might never have happened.

People wanted tea.and coffee with or without cakes. These drinks were unpalatable without sugar and were considered healthier than alcohol, in that respect nothing has changed, pre slavery they used honey I wonder if they could have got enough supplies that if they put their mind to it?
Reply 38
Just finished watching the programs I mentioned above, the compensation money to 46,000 slave owners is traced, obviously a lot goes into the Great Estates they built for themselves, the rest is invested in railways, banks, insurance Co.s and some into institutions - museums, galleries etc.

To start repaying this debt the Treasury raised consumption taxes as there was no income tax.
As well as being regressive ( hitting the poor hardest) ithis also biggest effect on demand for manufacturers because the poor tend to spend a higher proportion of their income on Industrial products so the whole business slowed Britain's economic expansion, there is no reason why the government could have publicly funded the things which these wealthy private individuals invested in.
(edited 3 years ago)
Reply 39
Original post by NJA
I think you give up too easy you might find articles like this which have references to other works


What have i given up on sorry?

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending