The Empire - For Good or Ill?

[Sukerkin]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-12992540

This is a most fascinating look at our, Britains, Imperial past and it's legacy.

On the whole, while openly acknowledging the negative points made by Prof. Thompson, I am mostly of the opinion that matches Mr. Lloyd's.

 

[Empty Hands]

I do not have the knowledge to dispute either lecturer, but this: "While history has recorded that the ICS were aloof and disdainful of the "natives", in reality, the men who ran India were selfless, efficient and - most importantly of all - completely incorruptible." makes me doubt he has anything useful to say. It comes across like cheerleading. No entire group of powerful men is selfless and incorruptible.

Also, by focusing completely on India where the Empire invested the most ignores other, more troubling regions where the Empire didn't come out so well.

Lastly, the ends do not justify the means. Even if the Empire ended up granting the world eternal peace, plenty and happiness, that does not make their initial actions right. Especially since they would have no idea what long term effects their actions were to have, and that the acquisition of Empire was clearly based more on economic gain and power than it was the selfless uplift of the native peoples.

 

[Xue Sheng]

I have to admit that British history is rather fascinating. I got involved in a bit of study of England that covered from Henry VIII to Elizabeth I and I have to admit I was completely unaware of the levels of intrigue and spying and documentation of things that went on, particularly during the time of Elizabeth I.

But as to the posted articles

I do not completely agree here but I do not completely disagree either. This to me... is kind of like the original historical version of Custer’s Last Stand and the Little Big Horn that was completely devoid of any of the American Indians side of things…. It gets a bit different as well as a bit more confusing when you add in the American Indian POV and that of the surviving witnesses as to what happened.

I am not so sure either historian can look at this from an unbiased perspective. An justifying documented racism and atrocities in India with… well we gave them the English Language…sorry no... that one does not work any better than the USA is in the Middle East to give them Democracy

Is Britain responsible for all the current problems… well no… but did the British Empire play a rather large role in helping create them… well yes… just like the USA is now helping create future problems…. But as an American Historian 100 years from now will likely say… assuming there still is an America…. I am betting he/she will justify it by saying… “Well it was ok because we brought them freedom and democracy. For the record…Britain was not alone in helping creating some of these issues this...France, Spain and Russia helped too. But Britian was also justifying things with Social Darwinism as well and again I am not sure giving some one the English language is a justification of the application of Social Darwinism.

And Justifying some of the African Atrocities with...well they made us do it… is kind of telling the victim…well you brought this on yourself you know... so you did deserve it. And again the ugliness of Social Darwinism was originally at play in Africa too and no one seems to be mentioning that at all in the posted articles

Study the history of the Middle East and you will find that some in the Middle East are still talking about the Crusades and that is more the Catholic Church than Britain and it also tells you they have a long memory.. but then so does China and Russia but those are other historical stories and not as far back as the Crusdes. But fast forward to Pre WW I to WW II and all the conflicting promises Britain made to the Jewish people that wanted a homeland and the Arabs that were living in the Middle East and you can pretty much point the finger at Britain for a lot of the issues there. However again… they were not alone. There were a few other European nations involved in that mess. And in the end the USA kind of inherited that whole thing out of blind stupidity in a grasp to be a world power.

As for India and Africa… well you can’t say it was all bad in the end because they did leave behind some positives... but do those positive outweigh the negatives… I don’t know as it applies to India.. I am guessing if you ask a native Indian many will say yes and many will say no. Africa however I am less inclined to say the positives outweigh the negatives but then I am not as up on the British involvement in Africa past modern times.


EDIT

I should also add that if all was justifiable based on the articles given then Russia rolling tanks all over Europe after WW II was ok to because it was the longest continuous period in European history without a war…. But then we need to overlook a whole lot of atrocites and a gulag or two

 

[granfire]

well, you kinda left the opium wars out....