Tuesday, 4 September 2007
Two angles on Rule by Others
A quick thought - why is it that the same people who protest most vehemently about the possible takeover of British sovereignty by Brussels, sanctimony itself in their defence of a Nation's Right to Choose, are also the ones to defend the idea of the British Empire having been a great thing?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Because everyone was doing it in the 19th century. If you were African or Asian, then to have been conquered by the British was to have drawn first prize.
Look at the bits of the Third world which are still functioning democracies or at least had a decent stab at it post colonialism and you see a tight correlation with the colour pink.
I wouldn't support it now, just as I didn't support the Soviet Union, I don't support the EU.
I'm British and proud. And despite abuses, for many of its Indian and African subjects, the Empire was a good thing.
Sorry, jackart, but that is nonsense. The parts of the Third world that really have done best are: Japan, Korea, other East Asian areas that suffered little British involvement. India was the slowest growing large economy of all over 1845-1945 - going from being a huge force in the world economy to a supine provider of primary products. There are many other causes, to be sure. But being "conquered by the British was to have drawn first prize" is shamefully ahistorical.
Post a Comment