Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The British Empire Thread

Options
1…2122242627…29

Comments

  • Options
    #692
    mike65
    Closed Accounts Posts: 88,978 ✭✭✭✭mike65


    gurramok wrote: »
    Oh boy, does it affect you that a recent British hero purposely starved 3million Indians?

    Not remotely. Does it effect you?


  • Options
    #693
    gurramok
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭gurramok


    mike65 wrote: »
    Not remotely. Does it effect you?

    Yes, 3 million people died and you don't care?:eek:


  • Options
    #694
    brianthebard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,165 ✭✭✭✭brianthebard


    Threads merged.


  • Options
    #695
    mike65
    Closed Accounts Posts: 88,978 ✭✭✭✭mike65


    I never knew them nor did you, your faux concern is amusing.


  • Options
    #696
    ValJester
    Registered Users Posts: 329 ✭✭ValJester


    gurramok wrote: »


    The British didn't give a fluck about starving Indians as long as it served their own purpose. :mad:

    Same way as the US dosn't give a **** about Iraqi civilians, with disease and food shortage rampant in Iraq. I don't hear an awful lot of outcry over that.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #697
    gurramok
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭gurramok


    mike65 wrote: »
    I never knew them nor did you, your faux concern is amusing.

    Huh?

    The British Empire was responsible for 3 million deaths of Indians through starvation as recently as 1943 and you don't care at all?

    Perhaps if it was 3 million English people, you would care?


  • Options
    #698
    jonniebgood1
    Registered Users Posts: 3,577 ✭✭✭jonniebgood1


    ValJester wrote: »
    Same way as the US dosn't give a **** about Iraqi civilians, with disease and food shortage rampant in Iraq. I don't hear an awful lot of outcry over that.

    Indeed, with a death toll at 1.4 million and rising in 2010 in Iraq, this is relevent and a shame on the most powerful nation on earth.

    My opinion is that they (US) must wage war on such a regular basis to justify spending the amount of money they do on weaponry. I believe this is relevent due to Tony Blairs 'moral support' for the initial invasion. Interested in opinions on this?


  • Options
    #699
    blinding
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,466 ✭✭✭blinding


    Thankfully the british empire is pretty much disappearing into the rearview mirror of history.

    Hopefully the human race will learn not to repeat such an atrocity on the world again.


  • Options
    #700
    Judgement Day
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,549 ✭✭✭✭Judgement Day


    blinding wrote: »
    Thankfully the british empire is pretty much disappearing into the rearview mirror of history.

    Hopefully the human race will learn not to repeat such an atrocity on the world again.

    Do you think that the British Empire left any worthwhile legacy?


  • Options
    #701
    blinding
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,466 ✭✭✭blinding


    Judgement Day wrote: »
    Do you think that the British Empire left any worthwhile legacy?
    Its hard to see how an institution that had as its primary philosophy "divide and conquer" could have worthwhile legacy.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #702
    walrusgumble
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,062 ✭✭✭walrusgumble


    McArmalite wrote: »
    Rourkes Drift / Zulu's - check out my thread - The Epitome of British History and Military Lies :D. Surprised you forgot that one :)

    Any self respecting Republican is well aware that Fratton is correct on that one. ie many Irish born people went to war on behalf of the Empire, for whatever reason, and were renouned fighters. You also know full well that in Wolfe Tones time, many Irish Soldiers who fought against Tone were Irish, and even Catholic. The Irish made up a very large proportion of the army. I am sure you have been to Collins barracks.


  • Options
    #703
    walrusgumble
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,062 ✭✭✭walrusgumble


    Whether you like it or not, when you put the "evils" of what Westminister did to this country aside, and I do not say that flippantly,

    One of the significant legacies is has brought is their system of law ,the common law (excluding Scotland). Most of the laws and doctrines were hold so dearly today in Ireland came originally from Westminister or The English Courts, anyone aware of the Equity doctrines would be aware of this. It has influenced much of the laws in Canadia (well, the English ruled areas) many states in the US, Australia, New Zealand etc.


  • Options
    #704
    indioblack
    Registered Users Posts: 1,936 ✭✭✭indioblack


    blinding wrote: »
    Its hard to see how an institution that had as its primary philosophy "divide and conquer" could have worthwhile legacy.
    The Commonwealth.


  • Options
    #705
    blinding
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,466 ✭✭✭blinding


    indioblack wrote: »
    The Commonwealth.
    Surprisingly for some one from my background and views I would not be totally hostile to Ireland being an associate of the commomwealth (a recognition of historical reality and as recognition of the british inclined in Ireland)

    I do still believe that the commonwealth is a sort of figleaf against the deeds of the empire throughout its history. Sort of, it can't have been that bad or would we still have the commonwealth (it pretty much was that bad)

    An argument that I have against empires having been a force for good is that I do not believe that there were many instances in history of one empire inviting(voluntarily) another empire in to do their "good work"

    Lets be honest, countries do not(especially historically) invade other countries expending "blood and treasure"(a phrase I detest) for the benefit of the invaded country.


  • Options
    #706
    Rabble Rabble
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,367 ✭✭✭Rabble Rabble


    ValJester wrote: »
    Same way as the US dosn't give a **** about Iraqi civilians, with disease and food shortage rampant in Iraq. I don't hear an awful lot of outcry over that.


    Lol. Of course that is massively documented, and by Americans too - in fact you probably would quote Chomsky on the matter, if pushed - but notice how little a genocide, clearly deliberate policy by the British Empire, and half the toll of the holocaust gets in British publications, education or anything else. My Lai is more famous - the US does wash it's linen in Public, the British Empire disappears down the memory hole.


  • Options
    #707
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    blinding wrote: »
    Lets be honest, countries do not(especially historically) invade other countries expending "blood and treasure"(a phrase I detest) for the benefit of the invaded country.

    The French may disagree, as may the Dutch, or the Belgians.


  • Options
    #708
    Rabble Rabble
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,367 ✭✭✭Rabble Rabble


    walrusgumble wrote: »
    Any self respecting Republican is well aware that Fratton is correct on that one. ie many Irish born people went to war on behalf of the Empire, for whatever reason, and were renouned fighters. You also know full well that in Wolfe Tones time, many Irish Soldiers who fought against Tone were Irish, and even Catholic. The Irish made up a very large proportion of the army. I am sure you have been to Collins barracks.

    So did the Gurkas. However the Empire is neither Gurka, nor Irish.

    Empires always use proletarian foot-soldiers from other countries. The Roman Empire was not german.


  • Options
    #709
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    gurramok wrote: »
    I wonder did any British people on this forum know about this complicit starvation?

    I'm surprised, this is one of the core chapters in the "Lets rant about the British" book. It is (at least by me anyway) relatively well known, thanks for your interest.

    What do i think about it?

    i think you are just trolling to be honest,


  • Options
    #710
    indioblack
    Registered Users Posts: 1,936 ✭✭✭indioblack


    I guess this is just another thread along the lines of "all imperialism, colonialism is evil, especially the British version - and we are morally superior because we didn't, and wouldn't, do it".
    So centuries ago the Brits set out to create an Imperial system to ensure that they would be reviled for all time.


  • Options
    #711
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    indioblack wrote: »
    I guess this is just another thread along the lines of "all imperialism, colonialism is evil, especially the British version - and we are morally superior because we didn't, and wouldn't, do it".

    Which would make the Irish somehow morally superior to every other country in europe.

    A somewhat naive and arrogant claim I believe.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #712
    indioblack
    Registered Users Posts: 1,936 ✭✭✭indioblack


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    Which would make the Irish somehow morally superior to every other country in europe.

    A somewhat naive and arrogant claim I believe.
    But isn't that what this is all about, Fred?
    "Look, this wandering round the world invading places is a bad thing"
    The Irish didn't do it so they clamber to the moral high ground.
    In my experience they tend to ignore other countries imperial histories - this is just about the Brits.
    As I've said they didn't do it - though a Victorian imperialist springs to mind - an Irish American one - Phil Sheridan.


  • Options
    #713
    blinding
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,466 ✭✭✭blinding


    indioblack wrote: »
    I guess this is just another thread along the lines of "all imperialism, colonialism is evil, especially the British version - and we are morally superior because we didn't, and wouldn't, do it".
    So centuries ago the Brits set out to create an Imperial system to ensure that they would be reviled for all time.
    Sure they did'nt know any better at the time.

    Mind you it can get a bit tiresome when you have people doing mental gymnastics with the odd somersault thrown in trying to portray imperialism as a good thing.


  • Options
    #714
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    indioblack wrote: »
    But isn't that what this is all about, Fred?
    "Look, this wandering round the world invading places is a bad thing"
    The Irish didn't do it so they clamber to the moral high ground.
    In my experience they tend to ignore other countries imperial histories - this is just about the Brits.
    As I've said they didn't do it - though a Victorian imperialist springs to mind - an Irish American one - Phil Sheridan.

    that's exactly what this is about.


  • Options
    #715
    MarchDub
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,731 ✭✭✭MarchDub


    indioblack wrote: »
    I guess this is just another thread along the lines of "all imperialism, colonialism is evil, especially the British version - and we are morally superior because we didn't, and wouldn't, do it".
    So centuries ago the Brits set out to create an Imperial system to ensure that they would be reviled for all time.
    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    Which would make the Irish somehow morally superior to every other country in europe.

    A somewhat naive and arrogant claim I believe.

    It's called - The Empire Writes Back.

    Reading it might be good for you.


  • Options
    #716
    indioblack
    Registered Users Posts: 1,936 ✭✭✭indioblack


    blinding wrote: »
    Sure they did'nt know any better at the time.

    Mind you it can get a bit tiresome when you have people doing mental gymnastics with the odd somersault thrown in trying to portray imperialism as a good thing.
    It can't be portrayed as a 'good' thing - nor a wholly bad thing - it was too big and with too long a history. It didn't hit the ground running in it's entirety - it waxed and waned from different policies, changing circumstances, values and experiences from all over.
    It changed the world, until it became unsustainable and unpalatable abroad and at home.


  • Options
    #717
    indioblack
    Registered Users Posts: 1,936 ✭✭✭indioblack


    MarchDub wrote: »
    It's called - The Empire Writes Back.

    Reading it might be good for you.
    I'll look out for it.
    Try "The Rise and Fall of the British Empire". Fairly balanced I think.


  • Options
    #718
    MarchDub
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,731 ✭✭✭MarchDub


    indioblack wrote: »
    I'll look out for it.
    Try "The Rise and Fall of the British Empire". Fairly balanced I think.

    Actually, I somewhat agree. The older editions like the one I had at uni in England back in the 70s were really bad - but every year, every day, the newer versions get more and more balanced. Grim reality is setting in.


  • Options
    #719
    indioblack
    Registered Users Posts: 1,936 ✭✭✭indioblack


    MarchDub wrote: »
    Actually, I somewhat agree. The older versions like the one I had at uni in England back in the 70s were really bad - but every year, every day, the newer versions get more and more balanced. Grim reality is setting in.
    I agree. As for grim reality - well empire marched alongside anti- imperialists in Britain. Empire often gave the British an air of arrogant superiority. Britain changed the the imperial world, and that world changed Britain. And as Britain moved slowly along the road to becoming more democratic it's imperialism couldn't last. It sowed the seeds of it's own destruction. And as the world changed a few politicians saw the need to begin dismantling it. How well they did it is argueable.


  • Options
    #720
    brianthebard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,165 ✭✭✭✭brianthebard


    indioblack wrote: »
    I agree. As for grim reality - well empire marched alongside anti- imperialists in Britain. Empire often gave the British an air of arrogant superiority. Britain changed the the imperial world, and that world changed Britain. And as Britain moved slowly along the road to becoming more democratic it's imperialism couldn't last. It sowed the seeds of it's own destruction. And as the world changed a few politicians saw the need to begin dismantling it. How well they did it is argueable.

    What? Honestly what is that based on? The only real move by politicians in Britain to 'dismantle' the empire came after WWII when Churchill bankrupted (even further) the country in search of nuclear arms and Britain had to give up the remaining colonies. Even the British left was not strongly anti-Imperialist, there was virtually no internal protest or dissent about Britain's colonial 'properties'.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #721
    indioblack
    Registered Users Posts: 1,936 ✭✭✭indioblack


    brianthebard wrote: »
    What? Honestly what is that based on? The only real move by politicians in Britain to 'dismantle' the empire came after WWII when Churchill bankrupted (even further) the country in search of nuclear arms and Britain had to give up the remaining colonies. Even the British left was not strongly anti-Imperialist, there was virtually no internal protest or dissent about Britain's colonial 'properties'.
    Ouch!
    The war bankrupted the country.


Advertisement