-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Can we be proud of the British Empire?
- Thread starter TCRS
- Start date
- Status
Resident_UA
Member
Recently I realized how important it was that Britain set up infrastructure in the colonies, but their ignorance with respect to local culture did so much damage that it's hard to say it was worth it...
No.
And the same goes for basically any/every empire ever.
+ be proud for the technological advancements
+ be proud for the cultural advancements
- be forever, infinitely ashamed for the hundreds of thousands, probably millions, possibly billions (in the British empire's case) whose lives were ruined by it across the globe
Ah, no it's not? Unless you have some insight I don't, the British invented concentration camps in the Anglo-Boer war in the late 19th century.
There's nothing wrong with that at all – I live there and am a general fan, too - but the empire's many problematic acts have to be acknowledged.
Even ten years ago Britain invaded a country with little-to-no precedent and started a war in America's shadow, ruining the lives of hundreds of thousands of people.
However this is nowhere near as bad as stuff they've done in the past in Africa and India. Which benefited those people to a small extent, while messing shit up for them for the next 100+ years.
Did the same in Palestine/Israel.
'Sake. Nowadays Britain is far better, though, like most places in the world are.
And the same goes for basically any/every empire ever.
+ be proud for the technological advancements
+ be proud for the cultural advancements
- be forever, infinitely ashamed for the hundreds of thousands, probably millions, possibly billions (in the British empire's case) whose lives were ruined by it across the globe
Ah, no it's not? Unless you have some insight I don't, the British invented concentration camps in the Anglo-Boer war in the late 19th century.
There's nothing wrong with that at all – I live there and am a general fan, too - but the empire's many problematic acts have to be acknowledged.
Even ten years ago Britain invaded a country with little-to-no precedent and started a war in America's shadow, ruining the lives of hundreds of thousands of people.
However this is nowhere near as bad as stuff they've done in the past in Africa and India. Which benefited those people to a small extent, while messing shit up for them for the next 100+ years.
Did the same in Palestine/Israel.
'Sake. Nowadays Britain is far better, though, like most places in the world are.
Shake Appeal
Member
It's always been unseemly to me how otherwise sane English people harp on about the glories of their decrepit empire. Even reasonably smart liberals get seduced by the myth of their "civilizing force" or whatever.
Nationalistic pride, outside of a few sporting events, is a menace. Ever was it so.
Nationalistic pride, outside of a few sporting events, is a menace. Ever was it so.
jimbobsmells
Member
MarkMclovin
Member
Hey America, you can start thanking us now.
1. British.
2. BRITISH
3. BRITISH
Right....that over with.
I disagree on the menace of Nationalism, but it depends on how you view it.
I count myself as a British nationalist, but I'm going to qualify what I say there. I love my country, from the history and the tradition, down to the drizzly tuesday editions of test match special heard in a car park just off the A45. Now that doesn't mean I beat the war drum, nor especially proclaim my nation as inherently better than any other nation.
What it does mean is that I want the best for my country. I want us to TRY to be better, to improve, to lead the world where we can, to be compassionate, caring and accepting, not to knock the rest of the world down in the process but to bring them up with us in making everywhere better. I'm even a firm believer in the EU because we can do more there than we ever could on our own, which I realise is an unusual stance for someone describing themselves as Nationalist. Nationalism is so often portrayed as a negative force that people forget that outside of the overly jingoistic bullshit that pervades so much of what British Conservatism (and misunderstood Majorism), earlier Blairism there is a genuine passion amongs the British people to stay relevant on the world stage.
This in spite of the fact that so little of our education system for the last 30 years has taught anything relevant to our former Imperial position, good or bad. We've raised 2-3 generations for whom history skips from Tudors to the second world war, and then ends. No Imperial Conquest or atrocity for them, no mention of the Spring Uprising in Ireland and the Troubles that followed. None of the last days of the Empire, and the birth of the Commonwealth.
If you ever wanted to know why we're a nation of castles, silly costumes, and shops in the format "Ye Olde ____ Shoppe" it's because that's the version that not only tourists get, but that we're sold ourselves.
We ignore everything else because god forbid we might learn that we're now in a world where we teeter on the edge of irrelevance and dangerous idiots like UKIP sit firm to pounce on some sort of idea we could rebuild a miniature empire through the commonwealth and it will all be just fine.
Nationalism, it's about more than just waving a flag, and singing a song. Anyone who calls UKIP, the EDL, Britain First et al. Nationalist groups neglects the term "bigoted xenophobes" while denigrating a concept that has potential to change things.
The Albatross
Member
Bolded is the most ridiculous thing I've read today. Non-sequitur at best, historically ignorant and factually baseless at worst.
Listen, the Brits may be able to claim many things on the "invention" list... But "concentration camps" are not one of them.
They need to apologise first.
Shake Appeal
Member
Nah, I'll stick with English, as only those from England (and minorities in Northern Ireland) ever exhibit pride in their "heritage." Most of the remaining components of the "British" Empire simply don't identify as such, and I have no interest in propping up national mythologies.
jimbobsmells
Member
Damn right we should demand our tea back
Given how many of my Scottish ancestors died fighting in the army of the British Empire, please take this elsewhere.
Shake Appeal
Member
What an absolute joke. I live in Scotland and the pride up there for their heritage is overwhelming.
I never said that it was. I don't see how any of those empires are even relevant to this discussion.
My point being don't dismiss us as not part of it. My family, past and present, are proud to be part of Britain.
Utter rubbish.
Shake Appeal
Member
Yes, the overwhelming number of Scottish people try to distance themselves from their "British" heritage (although it's decreased since the referendum, disappointingly). I'm not exactly a fan of Scottish nationalism either, but at least they're not telling themselves yarns about their long dominion over the earth.Übermatik;175924116 said:
What a load of rubbish. Out of all the Scots I know, even most of the pro-independence ones are proud of their heritage, both as Scots and as part of Britain.
That's nice, but perhaps we can stick to something factually correct instead of mislabelling something historical?
I mean if we're going to be all technically correct you might want to call it the London Empire, as that's certainly where the beating heart and brain were, and decisions taken back then are why even today there's relatively little friendship to be had between the peoples of Birmingham/Manchester/Liverpool/Newcastle and the Capital. Maybe even the Westminster Empire.
But maybe...just MAYBE we'd like to be factually accurate. It's the British Empire.
Pointless. Only allows for one identity. I would choose Scottish, but I also identify as British.
SomedayTheFire
Member
Shake Appeal
Member
You have spent a long time responding to something I never did. I'm happy to call it the British Empire. All I said correctly, according to just about any poll you care to look at is that English people are more invested in "Britishness," the Union Jack, and all the faded trappings of Empire, than the rest of the Commonwealth.
I realise our education system is lacking in places, but yes, it's pretty obvious that the rather more successful Empire (I'm not saying that's a good thing) killed more people in 350 years than Hitler managed in 10. A lot of myths are told about the major participants of WWII, history tends to be written by the winners and gets simplified down in time, it's told very differently to US and commonwealth schoolkids for example, let alone others.
You're painting with a broad brush here. Do you have any understanding of British education at all, you seem to assume the worst of everyone, we've had a generation and a half of a relatively left-wing education system. The Empire is barely touched on in schools, we really aren't raised on myths of how wonderful it was and history education has a lot to cover in a few short years, considering it touches on ancient history, the romans and a dozen other flashpoints over the next two thousand years. I think I learned more about the Empire from reading books in my own time than I ever did at school.
GTP_Daverytimes
Member
As a Nigerian, the british empire can go fuck itself in more ways than one. And as an African the same goes for the Belgian and the French, especially the fucking French (what utter cunts they continue to be).
PeskyToaster
Member
We were trying to make the entire atlantic into tea. Can't you see, everything we've ever done was out of love for you.
The Albatross
Member
The one thing I'd like modern Brits to not be so smug about (and other Europeans for that matter) is when you try to wash your hands of American black slavery. When discussions of slavery, the Civil War, ante-bellum United States, and other issues related come up, Brits and Europeans are quick to take the high brow position that the British Empire had outlawed slavery a few decades before the United States fought a war over it.
Well, I'd like to lay this bare.
An overwhelming majority of black slaves in the United States were brought by Europeans to the American continents, and a high percentage of which were brought by the British from the late 16th century up until 1807. For nearly 250 years, the British brought black slaves to the Americas, and they did so at a rate of some thousand fold what they brought back to England and the near British isles. In those 250 years, the British brought 3.25 million black slaves from Africa to the Americas, a tiny fraction were brought to the British isles during this time (estimates range some 30,000 who large served as domestic servants).
The UK abolished slavery in the Kingdom in 1833, a point that many modern Brits laud their government for, given that it was some 30 years prior to Lincoln's emancipation proclamation. This is rubbish. The British crown maintained American slavery by providing a lucrative market for it. By 1860, nearly 90% of British cotton came from American slave owners. The British were talking out of both sides of their mouth, abolishing slavery with one hand while stoking slavery in the United States with the other, importing 88% of British cotton from cheap slave labor from the American south, turning around to sell it throughout Europe and the rest of the British empire.
Further, during the American Civil War, British merchants and aristocrats favored the Confederacy and without British trade and support, the Confederacy would largely have not mounted a serious opposition to the US Federal government. Public opinion supporting the United States did not sway until after 1863 when Lincoln announced his proclamation of emancipation, yet for three years prior, British subjects had provided monetary support to American slave holders who were financing a bloody war in the name of black slavery.
So when we read posts about Brits looking down on Americans for the torrid history of race relations in the United States, I want to take someone and shake them and say "Had your government brought 3.25million black slaves into England instead of into the Americas, and then financed the cause of slavery in a war in England then you'd have just as many -- if not more -- problems with race relations today as the United States does."
I don't want to throw too much shade on our Anglo cousins here, though, and I should make note that the Portuguese should be more ashamed of their legacy of slavery, as they account for nearly 40% of slaves brought to the Americas. And if you Spaniards and French are feeling good about yourselves, don't, you're just a couple ticks behind the British at 17.5% and 13.5% of black slaves respectively.
Well, I'd like to lay this bare.
An overwhelming majority of black slaves in the United States were brought by Europeans to the American continents, and a high percentage of which were brought by the British from the late 16th century up until 1807. For nearly 250 years, the British brought black slaves to the Americas, and they did so at a rate of some thousand fold what they brought back to England and the near British isles. In those 250 years, the British brought 3.25 million black slaves from Africa to the Americas, a tiny fraction were brought to the British isles during this time (estimates range some 30,000 who large served as domestic servants).
The UK abolished slavery in the Kingdom in 1833, a point that many modern Brits laud their government for, given that it was some 30 years prior to Lincoln's emancipation proclamation. This is rubbish. The British crown maintained American slavery by providing a lucrative market for it. By 1860, nearly 90% of British cotton came from American slave owners. The British were talking out of both sides of their mouth, abolishing slavery with one hand while stoking slavery in the United States with the other, importing 88% of British cotton from cheap slave labor from the American south, turning around to sell it throughout Europe and the rest of the British empire.
Further, during the American Civil War, British merchants and aristocrats favored the Confederacy and without British trade and support, the Confederacy would largely have not mounted a serious opposition to the US Federal government. Public opinion supporting the United States did not sway until after 1863 when Lincoln announced his proclamation of emancipation, yet for three years prior, British subjects had provided monetary support to American slave holders who were financing a bloody war in the name of black slavery.
So when we read posts about Brits looking down on Americans for the torrid history of race relations in the United States, I want to take someone and shake them and say "Had your government brought 3.25million black slaves into England instead of into the Americas, and then financed the cause of slavery in a war in England then you'd have just as many -- if not more -- problems with race relations today as the United States does."
I don't want to throw too much shade on our Anglo cousins here, though, and I should make note that the Portuguese should be more ashamed of their legacy of slavery, as they account for nearly 40% of slaves brought to the Americas. And if you Spaniards and French are feeling good about yourselves, don't, you're just a couple ticks behind the British at 17.5% and 13.5% of black slaves respectively.
Stilton Disco
Member
I'm British and proud of the Empire my tiny, cobbled together nation achieved, and I genuinely believe from studying history that we had an overall positive effect on the world today.
It was also responsible for some fucking abhorrent acts though, and there are many areas of the world we just plain fucked up.
It was also responsible for some fucking abhorrent acts though, and there are many areas of the world we just plain fucked up.
Yup. Cavemen, Romans (Taught badly), Egyptians, Tudors, Stuarts (glossing over the civil war), WW2, then back to the Norman invasion, bit of WW1, bit of the Industrial Revolution, bit more WW2 and the early cold war, then finally some French revolution. That's pretty much every historical area I was taught in British schools, from the mid 80s-2002 at the end of AS level.
No one comes out of that one looking good. No one. Yes, we're judging the past by current morals, but human beings are not a thing that should be owned, and any involvement with it lessens us all. We can be pour of ending it....but we could be even more proud if it had never been an element at all. Sadly if you go back far enough slavery pervades every society, and like anything like this it's society's job to keep slavery of any kind unacceptable in future.
The one thing that's funny to me about this thread is how many British people really want to argue, not that they're proud of the British Empire, but that it was actually a liberalizing force for good.
Like, you know it probably wasn't, right? That's how empires work, they rule over people who would rather rule over themselves. You can't democratically rule an empire, just ask Athens. If you let them vote they'd vote you out!
Sure, all the countries that Britain colonized are democracies now, but in case you didn't notice, so are all the other countries in the world. Even the ones that are actually dictatorships are theoretically democracies! But that doesn't have much to do with British colonization so much as it has to do with the French Revolution and the overall victory of democracy over monarchy.
Speaking of which, of course, if the primary goal of the British was to advance the cause of liberalism and freedom, you guys failed to do the number one thing that might have done that, which was allow Napoleon to conquer Europe. You should've taken that L at Waterloo in the cause of progress. Sorry guys. Everything that happened after that is kind of on you.
Like, you know it probably wasn't, right? That's how empires work, they rule over people who would rather rule over themselves. You can't democratically rule an empire, just ask Athens. If you let them vote they'd vote you out!
Sure, all the countries that Britain colonized are democracies now, but in case you didn't notice, so are all the other countries in the world. Even the ones that are actually dictatorships are theoretically democracies! But that doesn't have much to do with British colonization so much as it has to do with the French Revolution and the overall victory of democracy over monarchy.
Speaking of which, of course, if the primary goal of the British was to advance the cause of liberalism and freedom, you guys failed to do the number one thing that might have done that, which was allow Napoleon to conquer Europe. You should've taken that L at Waterloo in the cause of progress. Sorry guys. Everything that happened after that is kind of on you.
Can someone explain to me, or point me to a post where this has already been explained, why people are "proud" of something they had no influence over and no relation to other than randomly being born in a certain place?
They can be happy, in awe, amazed, glad, supportive... but proud? Doesn't that go against the meaning of the word itself?
They can be happy, in awe, amazed, glad, supportive... but proud? Doesn't that go against the meaning of the word itself?
It really isn't covered in schools. Lots on the medieval, iron age, bronze age, the Romans, Norman conquest the plague always gets good coverage, the English civil war and then it mostly focuses on WW1 and WW2.
Nealand Liquor
Member
Nope, it is not possible. Just like people can't be proud of Egyptian, Roman, Greek, Ottoman, Nok, Oyo, Mongolian, ect, ect.
It's complicated. Certain aspects sure. But overall most influential and dominant countries (and I include US as a more recent example ['cause you are my US cousins]) have blood on their hands and are built on the exploitation of others so technically I'd hesitate to say any country can be 100% proud of itself (I'm sure there's a few small, fun loving places where people just chill out but mostly history is about various groups of people fucking over other groups of people for their own individual gain or for the gain of their group.
I will note, as a UK citizen, that it is amazing the dominance extended by the British Empire and how it was achieved and I've no shame being British. Shame about the negative side of course.
I will note, as a UK citizen, that it is amazing the dominance extended by the British Empire and how it was achieved and I've no shame being British. Shame about the negative side of course.
Strobelite.Bunny
Banned
As an Haitian with African roots, this is possibly one of the most offensive threads I have ever seen.
I think that part of Britains past should be forgotten. it's pretty much the most evil thing you can know about.
I think that part of Britains past should be forgotten. it's pretty much the most evil thing you can know about.
Then surely you should be pissed at the French? Haiti as far as I'm aware was a Spanish and then French colony?
I have it rubbed in my face by an American friend how America 'owns' the British, and often get reminded of the American Revolution and, of course, how they dumped all our beloved tea in the harbour.
As thanks, I remind how America begged us for help in Iraq and that without us, they wouldn't have 1D. Which I also apologise for.
Do you have a point?
Fucking septics, what a waste of air
One of the most dangerous comments you can ever make.
History should never be forgotten, it should be cast in stone, especially the parts that show humanity at their worst. If we don't learn from history then how do we prevent the self same mistakes from happening again in the future?
I'm sorry that you feel that way about this topic, and I'm guessing it's a reaction to colonialism is general rather than as a specific, as Britain wasn't directly involved in Haiti as I recall.
Uh oh! Looks like somebody's got a sticky wicket!
Seductivpancakes
Member
Luca Brasi sleeps with the fishes.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked