Was the British Empire a force for good?

...

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=UA0XGVjQtQM
youtube.com/watch?v=JKlSVNxLB-A
youtube.com/watch?v=Pt0qPqlURSM
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mysorean_rockets
twitter.com/AnonBabble

depends on your point of view and what time period

Yes. Whilst it is popular amongst liberals and revisionalists to bash the Empire it brought peace and stability to the world throughout the 19th Century.

The Navy made travelling across the globe to other lands incredibly safe by comparison and it brought many people OUT of abject poverty.

definitely
of course they done terrible things eg the famine,
but they are one of the few/only european powers that have had a lasting impact for good
on the world that has transended colonial rule

forgot to add
>world balace of power
>ended widow burning in india
>opened up world trade
>spread the rule of law
>civilised barbarous and backwards lands that otherwise would still be warring factions

The Empire never concerned itself with destroying populations or removing their cultures. Many religions and customs were left intact. What the Empire brought was the Rule of Law and industry.

Take India for example. India had never had and never will have it as good as when it was under British occupation.

Ask yourself this. Would the world have been a better place if it were the Chinese, the Russians, the Spanish that had an Empire so large?

Of course, now pajeets and pakis can almost freely get in England and make it 56%.

The USSR was good.

Beware. Some Celtic fan is going to call you a ‘West Brit’.

In your fucking dreams maybe

yes ,for every dead by the empire 10x were born with technologixal advanced that spread across the world
So unironically yes

There weren't poverty and HIV+ and similar. In terms of human rights, healthcare, education, science and so one, the USSR was much better than Russia nowadays.

Its only problem was that people were forced to be equal, if you work hard and learn hard as an assiduous smart Jew, you anyway will be at the same level as the others in terms of wealth.

Any Bongs passing through need to watch this
youtube.com/watch?v=UA0XGVjQtQM

Same as the American empire of today.

'good' is an arbitrary concept.

is progress good?

even progress is an arbitrary concept.

I suppose the unification of the thousand warring principalities could be considered 'good progress', from a strictly utilitarian perspective- because of course it couldn't be considered a pleasing development from the point of view of the princes themselves.

It was probably also advantageous in terms of the built environment of our British towns and cities, because all the wealth that was raped from India and wrung out f the slave trade etc went to building all those parks and peoples palaces and museums. And shit.

I think industrialisation its self might be the greatest achievement, that doesn't include space travel, in the history of mankind.

They made the US, Canada, Aussie, and NZ noble white countries unlike the Iberian race-mixed shitholes.

It was good until it served Jews during the world wars and lost all of it's empire and most of Ireland.

Do you really think we made much of an effect? Nigeria, Gambia and Sierra Leone have a lot of savage barbarians there, just like before the empire. Do you think the British empire changed any significant degree of civilisation mindframe to the indigenous people? Or did we just give them more technology and power while keeping their savage mentality?

In the case of Nigeria, Gambia and Sierra Leone, that might be open for discussion, but the two continents we opened up is pretty extraordinary.

you should've genocided them like Belgium did

india had the biggest benifit, being unified and gaining industry such as the railway,
but africa is basically unfixable. still, look at tribes and at nigeria for example, it is way better, there is less witch burning for example

There's no shortage of genocides in British history if that's what you're looking for.

niggers still exist, not enough

Most Indians I speak to everyday hate the British for the empire. Only a few high middle class Sikh Indians I know think it was a good thing for India. Of course this is all just my own experience in a city in England.

I tagged wrong post on my last post

kys

There's an excellent twitter account called 'Crimes of Britain' but I think of them as accomplishments. We killed a lot of variation of niggers and tribe monkeys.

kys

An an American living in England (my ancestral homeland) I dedicate this song to you dear Britannia
I Am A Rock

youtube.com/watch?v=JKlSVNxLB-A


t. The Yank

A winter’s day
In a deep and dark December
I am alone
Gazing from my window
To the streets below
On a freshly fallen, silent shroud of snow
I am a rock
I am an island

I’ve built walls
A fortress, steep and mighty
That none may penetrate
I have no need of friendship
Friendship causes pain.
It’s laughter and it’s loving I disdain.
I am a rock
I am an island

Don’t talk of love
Well, I’ve heard the words before
It’s sleeping in my memory
And I won’t disturb the slumber
Of feelings that have died
If I never loved, I never would have cried
I am a rock
I am an island

I have my books
And my poetry to protect me
I am shielded in my armor
Hiding in my room
Safe within my womb
I touch no one and no one touches me
I am a rock
I am an island

And a rock feels no pain
And an island never cries

>Pisas
I'm pretty sure pisa tests are done by mediocre and below-average white children here, hence the low score. Just to give you a heads up.

i cant say i can blame them, given how recently the bengal famine was,
but empires are just what countries do, and to be colonised by a country that is willing to develop things is a hell of a lot better than to be colonised by for example the spanish, who
not only plunder but then forget about it and let it fall back into dissaray.
also the education system may not be entirley balanced

>I'm an American living in England (my ancestral homeland)
The american part is believable at least.

Leave me be. I'm having a moment.

>t. Joseph Conrad
No, seriously, you guys did good, too bad you're throwing it away for 1984-type dystopian government.

>pondering over the notions of good and bad in the same sentence where you name an empire
>yfw jew

...

You're being a pillock. Go walk the dog.

>spread civilization worldwide
>turn South Africa into good prosperous place

Yes it was

uncontroversially

It was a tax and resources scam. All you need to set up is a postal service, central bank, and rail infrastructure and you can have any population enslave themselves.

It was done on the pretense that Britain gave a fuck about Zimbabweans.

No. They used to be the best goys until the US take their place.

For us it was, as you were ....

The British Empire was founded at a time when Jews were banned in England from Edward I's reign you utter cunt. Pick an era, it lasted centuries.

Pros:
--The English created the US and the Dominion nations
--Undoubtedly a force for global stability in the 100 years following the defeat of Napoleon
--Introduced the trappings of civilization to the infantile hordes

Cons:
--Spread classical liberalism and the parliamentary system around the globe
--London was and remains the seat of the Rothschild multi-trillion dollar empire. And let's not kid ourselves, when you have that much money, you can topple governments, nations, etc.
--An unhealthy obsession with keeping the Germans down

>--Spread classical liberalism and the parliamentary system around the globe
Not a con. And you forgot to mention the first mention of restricting the power of a monarch since the Roman Republic.

I don't believe in democratization though. You can certainly argue that the Magna Carta was good, but 19th century democratization in Britain (and subsequently globally) has been bad.

Magna Carta pre-dates the British Empire. I was more thinking of the Bill of Rights 1689 and Act of Settlement 1701 but Magna Carta is alright too. More English than British though. It took three civil wars and the overthrow of a king to make the former come true though.

Parliaments have done a load of good though. I don't know what the alternative would be.

>Pick an era, it lasted centuries.
The last one.
>banned the BUF
>participate in both world wars at (((their))) side

Is everything a cartoon in your head?

it's only reddit that hates the British. Most people in the real world either likes the British or have nothing against them.

It makes them feel inadequate, therefore they lash out.

Pretty much this.

I'd also add another con: It cultivated in the merchant Brit class a pathetic dewy-eyed sentimentality for wogs that still persists to this day. During the height of the Raj most white working-class Brits and Irish were either stuck up a chimney or down a coal-mine, and were perceived by the upper and middle-classes to be lower than vermin. They'd much rather be sipping tea on the lawn and chatting with Sanjit about cricket than sharing any racial solidarity with their ethnic-kin.

On what I'm wrong?

The reasons for the two biggest wars in history can be summed in a single sentence in your world for clearly.

I grew up in Singapore, which was a British Colony up to the 1960s. A lot of the national infrastructure such as military, law, education and police inherited the British system when Singapore gained independence, and even today, the system has not really changed much with the exceptions of a few tweaks here and there. Singapore is now a highly respectable country in South East Asia and the world, known to be highly efficient, clean and safe. It’s a shame that Britain itself has evolved to become a cuck nigger land and is going in the opposite direction of its former colonies.

If you ask a discerning Singaporean today, I doubt you will find that any of them hold grudges against the British for their time in Singapore. In fact, many are grateful that the British helped set the national infrastructure up, allowing the country to move forward and prosper when it gained independence. From what I know, the British let most of their colonies go when it was time to do so and supported the local governments every step of the way to become sovereign states. In fact, when Hong Kong was about to be handed back to China in 1997, many Hong Kongnese literally begged the British to stay in fear of losing their democratic freedoms under a communistic Chinese government, and as a result, Hong Kong is now a Self administrative region for the next 50 years. If the British were really that horrible, why on earth would Hong Kong beg them to stay?

It also was the sole driving factor that institutionalized a system of world economic control, and as a consequence later political control, by a very select few business men and their heirs. So there's that going for it.

I have quite a different opinions:

- UK got super comfy position, be on a island, and in a corner of the continent, you got no real threats. By example my country got endless wars with islamic lunatics who wanted to conquer all Europe. Basically you got time to develop more.

- ALL British colonies was in low developed countries/societies, you got no real resistance from where you gone. Is easy to be superior from all points and invade. Let's be honest.

- You sent back resources (gold/whatever). Nice resource boost over other European countries. I actually have no problem with that, after all, you made the effort so is your reward. But is not like a fair advantage.

- You made biggest mistake in history that affected all Europe, you assumed your colonies natives can integrate into Europe or adopt our values. Big mistake. We see this today.

The UK has had soldiers in every country in the world bar 17. If your second point isn't the understatement of the year, I don't know what is.

On balance probably yes.

Yes, the British Empire pulled many nations out of poverty and opened them up to the modern world. The industrial revolution and the advent of freight shipping connected many countries and allowed them to specialise in their most efficient activities, paving the way for a modern economy.

Similarly, Britain did not discriminate where it spent its capital. For instance, central Scotland, southern Wales and parts of northern England were more heavily industrialised than the regions surrounding London. Britain also spent a lot of money developing railway and infrastructure in her colonies, e.g. in Ireland and India.

>- UK got super comfy position, be on a island, and in a corner of the continent, you got no real threats.
You have nailed it. Islanders worry about invaders from the sea only, so we build boats, but if they get though we fight them, we have to and there is nowhere to run so you better make sure if you invade us you wipe us all out.

I see Bongs and Japs in a similar way for this, both nations whether they like it or not live in a cage or sorts.

..Think of the mad dog locked in a parked car that smashes its face at the window at any passers by, that's how i see the Brits somtimes

English wont admit it, but the Irish and Scots were the backbone of the Empire

To add to that, the homogenisation of language allowed greater idea sharing and technological advancement.

Additionally, English law allowed nations to advance by allocating property rights etc. Those countries which had good legal systems were the ones who afforded their population the best standards of living and prevented savagery in many regions.

>Similarly, Britain did not discriminate where it spent its capital.
Aye, we sank more into South America than anywhere else, they called it Empire though the back door, we were trying to help the local people and protect them from the Spanish, but we couldn't win.

Shut up you absolute cunt. Due to circumstance, luck and 1000 years of history, England became the right place at the right point in time for the development of the British Empire and its central point. I don't take away from the contribution of either the Scots or the Irish but you know exactly what you're doing.

Whoa easy there James, I'm just saying that a lot of our local man power came from Ireland and Scotland, they were always the most eager to gtfo at any cost, and made up a lot of our navy

Things like the arrival of Dutch financial institutes to London after the Glorious Revolution, the Glorious Revolution its self, the East India Company, etc, they all made the Empire plausible. We can't pretend England wasn't central to the British Empire. The Highlanders in the early days wouldn't have been very happy to hear they're lumped in with the 'British Empire' today too.

Of course. We saved the paddies by supplying them with potatoes because they could not do it by them selves. Then the potato blight came and they all died because they were too dependant on us. Really the paddies fault, but it was going to happen eventually.

In many ways yes. Northern Ireland had some of the best linen factories in the world and even the famous H&W ship factory. Wales provided the coal and iron industries and Scotland had tonnes of great factories.

Ireland had good brewing companies such as Guinness and also provided the English with food produce, beef and even leather for English wars. Unfortunately, Ireland was not able to compete with NI or Scotland in many manufacturing industries and hence we had to focus on agriculture which is why so many Irish went to England/Scotland to work as there wasn't enough employment here.

A lot of Irish people also fought in the Battle of Waterloo and WWI.

Northern Ireland also had the best shipyards and shipbuilders and no one is denying that, but it's not either//or which it will instantly become the second any cunt starts breaking it down into the Irish did this, the English did that, and so on.

Aye you're right about the Dutch, allowed us to build our Navy and beat off the Spanish.
India is another story though, what a fascinating time it must have been to live in that period when you could still claim parts of the world.
Its almost like the game has been played and won already, we are late to the show

>the famine

WE GAVE YOU POTATOS SO YOU WOULD NOT STARVE AND THEY GOT ALL BLIGHTED AND THEN YOU ALL STARVED BECAUSE YOU IDIOTS CAN'T LOOK AFTER YOURSELVES AND EXPECT US TO SPOONFEED YOU COMPLETELY!

AS IF WE SOMEHOW CAUSED THE BLIGHT! AS IF WE CURSED THE POTATOES! FUCKING POTATO NIGGERS OMG NO THANKS IN YOU FUCKERS AT ALL!

Didn't cause the blight but forcing starving Ireland to keep exporting massive amounts of food was a pretty shit move tbqhfamalam.

>GIB ME DEM FOODS ANGLO! ALL YOUR FOODS IS MINE! WE ARE ENTITLED TO ALL YO FOODS CUZ WE TOO LAZY TO MAKE OUR OWN! LET HARDWORKING BRITS STARVE INSTEAD!

Good evening, brother.

Aye you're spot on again. I think with BREXIT you might be best place to be right now, may hold the key to the negotiations, play hard ball with everyone like NI will
christ the EU and UK are about to start negotiating with the hardest most ruthless negociaters in the business, Irish suffer no fools and take no shit, especially from the English, Arlene Foster and the DUP we hope to serve as Mays attack dogs in these talks lad, but we are worried they might turn on May, its a short leech.

>produce grown in Ireland belonged to Bongistan, not Ireland

I'm pretty sure you're just trying to get a rise out of people so this is your last (you) from me, but even if you're not you really are impressively stupid aren't you?

Yeah I see where you are coming from but I was mainly referring to the events which occurred following the Act of Union in 1801 which created free trade between Ireland and mainland Britain. This period was shortly followed by the advent of steam-ships and railways, which made the shipment of goods between the two countries cheaper and quicker.

The single market meant that Irish industries which were inefficient by British standards would be wiped out. However those
industries in which Ireland was relatively more efficient would prosper and therefore what resulted was regions focusing on what they were best at.

>produce grown in Ireland belonged to Bongistan, not Ireland

Yes it was not grown for paddies, idiot. It was grown by us for us. Does not matter where it was grown because all was under the UK. We actually gave paddies food to grow and we could not afford to just keep handing food out.

Some in our govt is hoping that the DUP and Ireland play hardball and expose the cracks
Some hope we can convince you to leave the EU by 2025

Yeah I don't think they will make it too hard. I think they mainly want to ensure there is no hard border between ROI and NI. We don't want to go back to policing the border as it may stir up conflict as well as create a barrier to trade/logistics.

That said yes, we are in a good position as the UK voted to leave meaning we are a good place to be located within the EU market. Unfortunately, that's going to be a decision which might hurt the UK unless you are able to negotiate a good deal. Some companies are already jumping ship and coming here, but the next 2 years or so we will have a bit more clarity on the situation.

Yes

>Some companies are already jumping ship and coming here, but the next 2 years or so we will have a bit more clarity on the situation.

That's as much because of Ireland's being a tax haven than anything else though.

Yes it was. I fucking want it back, user!

start with your own country

We need the UK back as a whole at the least.

Yea it brought third worlders out of poverty while driving white christians into slavery, either to communist or to international capital

True yeah, but some companies can't afford to take a gamble and they need guaranteed access to the EU market. For instance lots of banks and financial companies are thinking of moving here. Also the EU is thinking of introducing a flat EU corporate tax rate to stop us low-balling other countries, which triggers the French etc.

youtube.com/watch?v=Pt0qPqlURSM

Why do Ireland disavow their roots? They are a mixture of English and Scottish. Not very "nationalist". I never understood the term "Irish Nationalist".

We need to come back as a nation and stop fighting amoung ourselves.

Yes.
There must be a way of using the commonwealth to get something like the Empire back

Majority of people here don't want to leave the EU. I think it will be very unlikely that we will ever leave unless they keep accepting boatloads of Africans and shit-skins which could bring the whole thing crashing down.

>- ALL British colonies was in low developed countries/societies, you got no real resistance from where you gone. Is easy to be superior from all points and invade. Let's be honest.
This is wrong, certainly regarding the Raj (Indian subcontinent) -- Indians were using rockets against us en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mysorean_rockets
We ruled using classic D&C. There were only ever a few thousand British/commonwealth troops on the subcontinent at any given time.
Pretty amazing when you think about it.

Yes.

Absolutely. Of course.

They were very important and are represented by some key figures, but so were the Welsh and English. (Family of Nations)

The bongpire was a community project.

If we could reinstall British pride in the Irish with our intelligence agencies it may do the trick. We need to make the Irish proud of who they are and proud of their roots instead of hating themselves and trying to run away from themselves.

>this thread
I want it BACK bros. What can I do?!