Would the world be a better place if Britain had retained its Empire?

[Passing Time]

19 hours ago, The Bastard said:

I thought not...

[The Bastard]

1 hour ago, Passing Time said:

I thought not...

I'm sorry, you need a source for the thousands of casualties of IOM servicemen in WW1 and WW2 ?

There's something wrong with you.

Source 1 : The Roll of Honour from "The Isle of Man and the Great War" by B.E. Sargeaunt.

This is the first page, and it's headed with : 

"This list of names of members of His Majesty’s Forces who gave their lives in the Empire’s cause"

http://www.isle-of-man.com/manxnotebook/fulltext/gw1922/apx1.htm

 

Edited January 19 by The Bastard

[The Voice of Reason]

Would the world be a better place if Britain had retained its Empire?
 

Without a shadow of a doubt “ no” is the answer. It would be unconscionable in this day and age.

Maybe a better question would be “did the world become a better place when Britain ( and others ) were empire building”

There are arguments for and against, both valid. But the past is the past, it can’t be undone.

[The Bastard]

Saw this on FB today. Makes the point very well about the loss of generations in the name of the empire.

Edited February 16 by The Bastard

[manxman1980]

@The Bastard where is that plaque?

[La_Dolce_Vita]

On 1/17/2024 at 2:35 PM, Max Power said:

Just got me wondering whilst watching another of TV's obsession with Nazi's and sharks.

Assuming that Britain and France had followed Churchill's warnings and invaded Germany in the early part of Hitler's reign, putting a stop to him and his Nazi party, which Hitler was sure that they could have. We may never have seen such a rapid rise in American power and our standing in the world would have been assured.

If Britain had evolved its Empire into a benign trading community whilst assisting those countries which needed help in setting up administrations, would it be seen as a more benevolent force in the world. This was Prince Albert's vision for the Empire, but Victoria wasn't exactly a visionary and loved being an Empress. Would the world be a better place? 

My own feeling is that nobody wants to be 'ruled' by another country and Britain adopted completely the wrong approach when insisting that they had colonised their Empire. The use of force to protect interests may still have been required in certain situations but I think a huge opportunity was squandered. I think that dealing with the many different cultures presented a challenge which we were not capable of at times.  

What do you mean by British standing being assured? Britain and France would have declined in power in any case. WW2 only accelerated the decline.

Britain wouldn't have been able to hold on to it's empire much longer than it did, I think. Although it would have had more funds to fight againsr resistance to rule, the scope of resistance would only have increased as nationalism would have strengthened.

The idea of a benign trading system is very radical. Even if Britain didn't colonise, Britain was not a benign power.  Look at the Opium and Arrow Wars.  A capitalist nation seeks to advance it's interests above all others with the interests of private power being paramount.

Or if you mean that the so-called benevolence of an imperialist presence shouldn't have singular then the problem with that is that it is based upon a racist understanding of other cultures. All the European countries saw themselves as superior in how they lived and managed their affairs.  There certainly were terrible injustices and practices in many regions around the world and many of these were made illegal but these regions didn't need to be 'lifted up'. 

Maybe you could say that Britain or another country could have imposed democracy and liberalism but then that would never have happened. 

And I think part of the reason why imperial possessions were abandoned wasn't just about the cost of armed forces and governance and fighting to retain governmental control but because it wasn't necessary.  If you can control trade by having a compliant trading partner then that's the most important thing for your country.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

If WW2 never happened then it's impossible to predict what the world would have looked like. Without a replacement of the League of Nations and without an European collective, Germany would quickly became the dominant European power.  It would have wanted to be a greater international player. That would have conflicted with British and French desires so maybe a world war would have been inevitable.  And the United States would have edged Britain and France out of the way as world policemen, despite American isolationism.  Who knows. Maybe the United States and Britain could have gone to war.  Who knows.

[The Phantom]

14 hours ago, La_Dolce_Vita said:

but these regions didn't need to be 'lifted up'. 

Being the child of a 'British Empire Colonial' and having travelled extensively across Africa; if often ponder is the above is really the crux of it all.  

What would these countries have done if they weren't colonised (by any European developed country)?  Would they want to be brought more inline with modern developed societies?

It's like those handful of tribes in the Amazon or Sentinel Island that remain more or less untouched by the modern world.  Are they really living in some sort of Garden of Eden Utopia; who gets to decide what is best for them?  Surely modern medicines and farming/hunting technology would make their lives less arduous and dangerous?  Although in both these society cases, it now seems to be more Religious Missionaries who seem most keen to infiltrate their worlds and convert them. 

Nonetheless, many of the African countries seem to be making a pretty good attempt to drag themselves back into the stone age. 

[La_Dolce_Vita]

There are few who would take an interest in these societies other than missionaries and anthropologists.  Back in the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries, the gifts of European of culture, religions and scientific advancement were all largely incidental to the economic reasons for why the Europeans were there. 

I suppose these African countries have a lot running against them in allowing their nations to be viable.

[The Phantom]

1 hour ago, La_Dolce_Vita said:

I suppose these African countries have a lot running against them in allowing their nations to be viable.

Their huge amounts of natural resources?  Vast areas of fertile agricultural land?  Large young populations keen for employment and betterment?

All things that most European countries don't have. 

[Anyone]

I miss the old days of the empire. All those servants , pink gin and loose morals and lording it over the locals. Those were the days. Bring ‘em back I say , sooner rather than later. 

[The Phantom]

Seems like a good enough place to put this. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-68402362

Anyone else who hasn't spent some time in Southern Africa heard of the term 'Hottentot'?

Funnily enough this cropped up during the Rugby World cup.  I was chatting to a Saffa and I mentioned one of the Boks wingers looked a lot like he was San or Khoi - "Ah, you mean Hottentot bru".

 

 

[manxman1980]

On 2/22/2024 at 4:43 PM, The Phantom said:

Their huge amounts of natural resources?  Vast areas of fertile agricultural land?  Large young populations keen for employment and betterment?

All things that most European countries don't have. 

And those African countries don't have strong economies or much money so the young populations of those countries seek to move to Europe for a better life where they are met with racism and hatred.

[The Phantom]

1 hour ago, manxman1980 said:

And those African countries don't have strong economies or much money so the young populations of those countries seek to move to Europe for a better life where they are met with racism and hatred.

Or they go to the most developed 'Western' economy in the continent, South Africa.  Further compounding their economic woes.  They've got a serious immigration problem there too now. 

Although Nigeria's economy is bigger, it's virtually solely based on Oil and it's even sketchier than South Africa. 

[Andy Onchan]

23 hours ago, The Phantom said:

Seems like a good enough place to put this. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-68402362

Anyone else who hasn't spent some time in Southern Africa heard of the term 'Hottentot'?

Funnily enough this cropped up during the Rugby World cup.  I was chatting to a Saffa and I mentioned one of the Boks wingers looked a lot like he was San or Khoi - "Ah, you mean Hottentot bru".

 

 

Yes, my father used to talk about the hottentots during his time in North Africa during WW2, they were ammunition and ration bearers. As far as I remember he never used the hottentot word in a derogatory way at all, he referred to them simply as tribesmen from Southern Africa who were more than capable, when required, to walk/run long distances across the desert with messages/orders etc.