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

British people are proud of colonialism and the British Empire, poll finds Watch

    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    Slavery in the Arab world was certainly not the first African slavery - the Roman and Byzantine empires slaved extensively there. So the further back you go, the wider the net. Not to mention that slavery was widely practised internally in Europe up to the late middle ages, with Ireland, the Baltic and E. Europe and the Balkans all being sources of slaves.

    The truth is that slavery was endemic as an institution in all ancient and medieval societies. The innovation the British empire brought to it was a particularly intense form of industrial mercantilism and very organised slavery for resource production on a scale not widely practised before, although in the ancient world there were large agricultural slave farms, they were nothing compared to the massive plantings in the Americas.

    Even if the Arab world did practise slavery extensively (and there is no doubt that it did), that doesn't get us off the hook. It's not an excuse.
    Absolutely not, and I agree with that. The fact that we, ourselves were not slave owners is what lets us off the hook.

    If we place blame upon ourselves because people related to us merely by being part of the same cultural group(Probably not directly as it was the very wealthy who were involved in slaving and the vast majority couldn't afford it) and this is acceptable, what we're really saying is: "It is acceptable to place blame on groups based purely on their cultural association with some smaller group within that culture that did bad things."

    If that is the case, then it is perfectly reasonable to blame all refugees for the acts of the thousand in Cologne - Even moreso, since they are not separated by oceans of time. It would be reasonable to blame any particular group or subgroup for the actions of the few within it. Can we blame those specific slavers? Yes. Can we blame all of Europe? No. Can we blame Europe for slavery? Only if we blame every culture that practiced it(Which is practically everyone. There might be some small islands that didn't).

    Europe doesn't need to continue to pay for the mistakes of the past - Especially since those mistakes were made by almost everyone in history and it certainly doesn't need collective guilt applied. Logically, if we are guilty for the crimes committed by those who are only tangentially related to us then so is every other cultural group in the world.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlwaysWatching)
    Nope, wrong again. The main reason we joined is because Germany invaded Belgium. Tension had existed I agree, and that lead to an arms race which of course escalated tension along with nationalism, militancy and a whole host of other reasons. But you are, and have shown repeatedly throughout this thread, ignorant on colonialism.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_World_War_I

    Blaming it largely and solely on colonialism and fiscal markets between Britain and Germany is simplistic ignorance at best. Britain didn't even start the First World War, and it was Germany that declared war on Russia, which, because of their alliance with France, thus obliged the Germans to also go to war with the French. Because of the German military plans, this meant an invasion of Belgium, whom the British were obliged to defend.
    that's juts an excuse, The UK has a long history of playing the enemy of my enemy is my friend game and their words cannot be taken by lips. Declassified documents from USA during the cold war showed that the US wants britain to do away with empires because competition for market and monopoly for exports and raw materials caused tension between britain and germany.

    so the US made churchill agree to dismantle the empire (appearing willingly) in a secret meeting nearing the end of the second world war, a meeting that was meant to arrange up post war benefits, which churchill wanted to slice up the world into half, one for USA and one for UK, which the US outright declined. the US was more disgusted by imperialism so they favoured free trade.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    that's juts an excuse, The UK has a long history of playing the enemy of my enemy is my friend game and their words cannot be taken by lips. Declassified documents from USA during the cold war showed that the US wants britain to do away with empires because competition for market and monopoly for exports and raw materials caused tension between britain and germany.

    so the US made churchill agree to dismantle the empire (appearing willingly) in a secret meeting nearing the end of the second world war, a meeting that was meant to arrange up post war benefits, which churchill wanted to slice up the world into half, one for USA and one for UK, which the US outright declined. the US was more disgusted by imperialism so they favoured free trade.
    Okay, it is quite clear you have never studied the period.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlwaysWatching)
    Okay, it is quite clear you have never studied the period.
    oh i just read the link u gave me on wiki

    In explaining why Britain went to war with Germany, Paul Kennedy, in The Rise of the Anglo-German Antagonism, 1860–1914, wrote that it was critical for war that Germany become economically more powerful than Britain

    lololol
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlwaysWatching)
    Okay, it is quite clear you have never studied the period.
    from the same link

    The German invasion of Belgium was not important because the British decision had already been made and the British were more concerned with the fate of France
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    from the same link

    The German invasion of Belgium was not important because the British decision had already been made and the British were more concerned with the fate of France
    The point being that I have read around the subject, hence linking the wiki page to you, and I understand the arguments and you evidently do not.

    I never denied colonialism didn't have any part to play in the run up to the war.

    Read up and come back to me
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlwaysWatching)
    The point being that I have read around the subject, hence linking the wiki page to you, and I understand the arguments and you evidently do not.

    I never denied colonialism didn't have any part to play in the run up to the war.

    Read up and come back to me
    Thank you, i have been proven right then.

    i need go off to bed now, have a good read

    http://members.tripod.com/american_almanac/FDRlw95.htm
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Only non-white people are allowed to be proud of their heritage
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Observatory)
    Mass immigration looks a lot like in-sourcing empire.
    yep.

    A domestic Empire.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Empires are just that : phases of human political development

    however, to this day, you will find that Mongolians are proud of Gengis Khan, Italians of the Roman Empire, while Greeks enthuse about Alexander the Great, Muslims (of all nationalities) dream about the Caliphate, French still celebrate Napoleon's victories and Hungarians even frequently call their sons "Attila"

    It is absurd to ask yourself if any Empire was "good" or "bad". How do you even measure and compare the moral qualities of Empires ? in any case, those Empires which lasted for centuries - or even millennia - clearly had something going for them

    no, Empires are like all human creations : a mix of "good" and "bad". What is politically dangerous, however, is trying to overcome present-day frustrations by re-enacting past glories ... results are (usually) disastrous for everyone involved

    and colonialism clearly is not a workable political option anymore
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Copperknickers)
    People who grow up in the UK are instilled with a certain idea of British values and are given various advantages provided by Britain's historical experiences and actions, not to mention many of our ancestors participated in Empire and improved lives for thousands of people. I'd rather be British than German or North Korean and I'm sure most people would.
    Have you been outside the UK? Just wondering ...

    (Original post by TeeEm)
    I feel in another 50 - 100 years, if you were to ask the average German whether (s)he is proud of Hitler and the Nazis, (s)he would give a similar response.
    Ahem, nope.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nathanielle)
    Have you been outside the UK? Just wondering ...

    Ahem, nope.
    you are entitled to your opinion ...
    Online

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Yet the Brits won't take in the poor refugees like my friends since they don't like it when someone elses culture is being imposed on them. This is why I don't like Britain, it is too racist for me.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ThatOldGuy)
    Europe doesn't need to continue to pay for the mistakes of the past -.
    no, but, for those who would benefit, it's always worth a try. Nothing to lose, there.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the bear)
    so you are a member of Daesh ?

    :holmes:
    :turban::yep:
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by al_94)
    Wow British are racist
    to put things into perspective, the Islamic empires of over 600 years featured all the theiving, slavery and land grabbing of the british, without any of the benefits they brought.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nathanielle)
    Have you been outside the UK? Just wondering ...
    Of course. What's your point?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dima-Blackburn)
    While it introduced democracy and the principle of impartial justice to some parts of the world that were living in oppressive barbarism, the British Empire is nothing to be proud of. It violated the principle of self-determination, held hostage and exploited millions and took valuable resources out of poor countries and left them poorer, whilst enriching itself. It was responsible for many barbaric acts and atrocities over the centuries that it existed; it was an Empire soaked in blood.
    It didn't. The British empire didn't introduce democracy. Its the Americans who tried to shove it. Hong kong didn't have democracy, they still don't have now. Malaysia and Singapore didn't have democracy during British rule. British only made it a requirement for independence.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlwaysWatching)
    btw the rep was accidental

    Try reading the entire link instead of making yourself look like an imbecile and choosing random bits of texts that fits an irrelevant point you are making
    My notification says someone else rep it (not you)

    Every link you posted points towards my direction. And you ask me to read. I have nothing to argue tbh.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RegencyTwink)
    That's right. The money from empire accrued to individuals and wealthy families, it's not like the money from empire was used to build roads and hospitals in England that endure to this day.

    If anything, the average British person subsidised through their taxes the Royal Navy and imperial bureaucracy that allowed the British Empire to exist as a trading empire, which benefited the few.

    The idea that the only reason the UK is well-off today is because of stolen wealth is, unfortunately, part of an embittered tendency to make excuses in the third world for their own failures. They like to think the only reason they are poor in India, for example, is because of all this "stolen" money.

    In fact, Britain is a first world country today because like other developed countries it has an excellent education system, low levels of corruption, good infrastructure etc. And former colonies of the empire like Singapore have a GDP per capita that exceeds the UK because they learned the lessons of development.

    India, Kenya, Nigeria etc have to stop blaming their problems on the past and come to grips with the issues that exist in their own countries and particularly amongst their leaders
    Singapore was left a ****hole by the British. They were prosperous because they were more American leaning in its constitutional republic political system. Dont give artificial credits.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    How are your GCSEs going so far?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • 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

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