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

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by player19)
    So, the British Empire was evil because nobody in Africa (unlike today) was hungry and tring to educate the people?

    Look, I think you should stop with this extreme political indoctrinisation. It is true the BE had some bad aspect but also some good thing.

    I bet if the people from Zimbabwe and other former states would have a choice to vote in a referendum wheter should they be again under the UK or continuing with the today situtation; they would choose to be again British citizens.
    BE did good things for brilliants.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DaniilKaya)
    British Empire - The Inventor of The Concentration Camping
    The concentration camps used in South Africa were exactly that: camps designed to get all the Boers in one place. They should NOT be compared to the Nazi concentration camps, where cold-blooded murder was the norm.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Umar1)
    I can give you many examples of where the British failed to do exactly the above. Notably in my country of ancestry Somalia. The Italian side was educated, developed both economically and socially. The British side was a feeding ground for troops in Yemen. The Bull**** about building cities, infrastructure is a fairy tale.


    The former Italian unexpectedly went on to dominate public life, something the people in the north did not like. Hence why "Somaliland" right now is on a quest for independence.

    There is also the giving odd bits of territory to countries to which it doesn't belong despite a plebiscite in which 97% of people in the NFD or the now northern region of Kenya wanting to the join Somalia, This area has always and still is exclusively somali area.

    And giving the Ogaden, an area which constitutes about a third of Ethiopia today to Haile Selaisse, again this area was and still is exclusively habited by somalis, and is a rich grazing area.


    The latter territorial dispute led to Somalia going to war with Ethiopia. It's armies were stopped 40 km outside Addis Ababa by 20,000 Cuban troops and the same soviet commander that trained and taught the Somali generals.

    The above led to the public becoming demoralized, half of the army was destroyed. The vast majority of Somalis supported the war (some of my family fought in it), overall this war marked the end of a golden era in Somalia, the leader became paranoid. Revolutions were attempted left, right and centre until they succeeded in 1991.


    .




    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I really dont see how that exactly have the Somalias disputes to do with British colonisations.

    Also, do you want to say Somalia was better under Mussolini than under the Brits? I personally heard completely different stories about the Italians...

    Look at Singapore or Hong Kong. They were fishiermans villages before the arrival of the british and now they are developed economic cities thanks to the introducing of capitalism from Brits.

    So yes the British empire has many goods sides, but it has Alot of bad sides
    But more better tsides than the positive. Look at Australia, Canada how developed they are.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Rating the most evil empire is a bit like trying to objectively select the cutest baby. It all depends on who you're asking.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by player19)
    But more better tsides than the positive. Look at Australia, Canada how developed they are.
    Well that is entirely arguable to be honest. Look at the previous African colonies and the terrible state some of them are in

    And we haven't even calculated the amount of Native Indians killed in Trail of Tears, etc... or the impact of "Black Catching" in Australia.

    Also what about the Opium wars? Forcefully, against the Qing Emperor's wishes, endorsed their habit of opium into the country. The stuff with the HIV tests in some place in Africa, and the Boers.

    Anyway, in every single empire, something bad has happened. To judge which is the worst is just impossible...something that's happened to your ancestors will obviously have more of an impact rather than something that happened half way across the world.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sitrix)
    Well that is entirely arguable to be honest. Look at the previous African colonies and the terrible state some of them are in
    African colonies where more economically developed when they were part of the British Empire. When they seceded they had their own welath but lost it with years due to theirself.

    I would be interesting to make a referendum there...
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SuperHanss)
    The British are the most 'evil' colonial empire by default, seeing as they're the only ones in modern history who have really had an 'Empire' - in terms of it being a dynasty which didn't just spread its legs around the immediate area or continent it was in.
    So not the French, Dutch, Spanish, Portuguese, Germans or Japanese then.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fezzick123)
    The concentration camps used in South Africa were exactly that: camps designed to get all the Boers in one place. They should NOT be compared to the Nazi concentration camps, where cold-blooded murder was the norm.
    I'm a big fan of Gordon, but I have to say that the Boer Concentration Camps - whilst not intended to be death camps - were just about as close as possible.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    I'd say the Japanese was the worst.
    Offline

    0
    (Original post by Clip)
    So not the French, Dutch, Spanish, Portuguese, Germans or Japanese then.
    The French never had an Empire because their ethos under Napoleon was just to disrupt the British and mainly colonise the countries only in their vicinity (and they didn't even do a good job of that). You can't classify yourself as an Empire when all of your fortunes go down the pan the moment one leader is defeated - Napoleons end was Frances too.
    As for the Dutch, they were more or less scared away by the British everywhere they admittedly go to first (New York and South Africa?). Plus, the Dutch mission was never to be imperialistic.
    The Spanish would've been the dominant Worldwide powerhouse had it not been for the might of the British Navy (Armada Invasion and Trafalgar the foremost prerequisites) and for a time were just pillagers who were irritated by British pirates (Drake). True they did have a great deal of land out in the new world but they never truly chartered it properly and didn't realise how much was at their disposal. The Spanish never fully colonised places like what is now California because it was barren and so any presence which was maintained in those places was minimal.
    Portugal had Brazil and a few islands.
    I'm not too sure what you mean by the German Empire. Hitler and the Nazis? Would've undoubtedly been the most tyrannic and evil if it hadn't been so short-lived haha.

    I don't count Japan because, as with the others, they were overshadowed by a country (Britain) which was geographically smaller than them and, in this case, in their own backyard!

    Don't rip into this as uneducated or ignorant please, I'm preoccupied and tried to put it in as basic of terms (although slightly biased ones) as possible...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    It's very hard to determine WHICH is the most evil empire.

    BUT I can tell you, they are either:

    Britain, France, Spain or Japanese empires.
    Japan and Britain is probably on par, because although Japan did not reign that long, their atrocities (Unit 731, Nanking Massacre, Comfort Women, etc...) is just beyond the realm of insanity and demoralised.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    well Britain was taking food out if Ireland during the Irish famine...
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by wortandbeer)
    Many people say the British Empire was the most evil colonial empire, IMO though I'd say the Spanish Empire was worse.

    They almost decimated the native Americans, and were amongst the first slave traders. They also had the Inquistion, which is something the British Empire never had on that scale.

    Yes, the British Empire didn't treat India well and massacred Aboriginies in Australia, but it signed treaties with native Americans securing their protection, and didn't massacre them as the Spanish did.

    Also, all of the other empires committed atrocities. What about the Belgian Congo, or experimenting on natives in Namibia? Or even starting the slave trade, which the British never did?
    Belgians were the worst in the Congo, but Spain wasn't great either as you stated, but the British are also pretty bad, think about the Opium War, India, etc. Japan was horrible, murdering millions and "comfort women" aka sex slaves. I think the better colonialists were France and Germany.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    A lot of Indian like what the British did for their country. It's surprising, but I've been there and heard it from many.

    Still, I don't really like the concept of imperialism because I'm a massive soft hippy type so meh.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SuperHanss)
    The French never had an Empire because their ethos under Napoleon was just to disrupt the British and mainly colonise the countries only in their vicinity (and they didn't even do a good job of that). You can't classify yourself as an Empire when all of your fortunes go down the pan the moment one leader is defeated - Napoleons end was Frances too.
    So Louisiana, Canada, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia and Indochina (amongst many others) do not constitute territories of the French Empire? At its height, the French Empire was the second largest in the world. Hmmmm
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Clip)
    I'm a big fan of Gordon, but I have to say that the Boer Concentration Camps - whilst not intended to be death camps - were just about as close as possible.
    The term 'death camp' implies a murderous intent behind the construction of the camps, which the British certainly did not posses. While tens of thousands did die, this was a result not of British malice but of negligence.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    has there ever been a nice empire? british certainly did its fair share of extermination of indigenious peoples in Australia and the Americas (also the Spanish). British deilberalty spread Smallpox to the native American tribes in order to wipe them out/take their land. Think about the West indies, a beautiful holiday destination, but all indegineous peoples were originally wiped out from those islands so the English and French could send their African slaves over to grow them sugar cane. Even before this - Crowells genocide of the Irish. Quite depressing but when you look at history their have been more murdererous empires - the Monogls probably killed the most in history, Maoists in china? ottomans and Islamic empires of north Africa propping up the African slave trade for centuires? Turkish genocide of Armenians? Dutch boers in south Africa? Belgian central Africa ?Portugeuse slave colonies in brazil?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sitrix)

    And we haven't even calculated the amount of Native Indians killed in Trail of Tears, etc... or the impact of "Black Catching" in Australia.
    The Trail of Tears is the name given to the forced removal of Native Americans by the Indian Removal Act of 1830, passed by the United States Congress. Nothing to do with Great Britain.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    i understand that they are most certainly not an empire
    but in todays age i would genuinely say that israel and its abuse of weaponry and power is disgusting, i guess they are being funded by america though....

    as far as empires go i would say the Japanese were pretty atrocious and the british not far behind
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by stuart_aitken)
    A lot of Indian like what the British did for their country. It's surprising, but I've been there and heard it from many.

    Still, I don't really like the concept of imperialism because I'm a massive soft hippy type so meh.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I think india got off lightly (comparatively) from colonialism only because I think the british and portugeuse that came here found some mututal recognition of long indian history of civilisation that somewhow fascinated them. this is not to say that they didn't go there in the first place to theive gold and lucravtive tea and spice trades, becuase they did, nor that they treated indian people well, but they didn't treat them as bad as the Africans or native americans certainly, who in the eyes of the Europeans, didn't have what they regarded as worthwhile heritage.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: July 18, 2013
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.