Has any hegemon had a worse long-term impact on the world than the evil British Empire?

[Slog]

Israel-Palestine issues
The messes in the Arab world (installing the hated Saudis, making artificial countries etc)
The mess in dozens of African states and regions (Sierra Leone, Rwanda etc etc)

Many, many other examples. These are the long term effects of their policies which the world is still suffering from today..

In the time they had colonies there were many instances of massacres, forced hunger bordering on genocide.

 

[CricketCartoons]

Wherever they set foot, they left lasting conflict. Most of the current conflicts are their gift to the world.

 

[DW44]

Spanish Empire is a close contender. Both caused different kinds of misery so which one was worse is debatable but they're both there and thereabouts.

 

[Slog]

Wherever they set foot, they left lasting conflict. Most of the current conflicts are their gift to the world.

This!

 

[Slog]

Spanish Empire is a close contender. Both caused different kinds of misery so which one was worse is debatable but they're both there and thereabouts.

theirs was largely restricted to one continent tbh so scale-wise no wehre close

and misery is not as elongated either

 

[DW44]

theirs was largely restricted to one continent tbh so scale-wise no wehre close

and misery is not as elongated either

Two continents, and the sheer scale of their atrocities makes them a legit contender. They essentially wiped all the native races on two different continents disappear. That alone is comparable to any atrocities committed by the Brits. In terms of long term impact, British empire shaped the world we live in so there's that but as far as immediate actions at the time go, Spaniards are not far off from the Brits with the French not far behind either.

 

[Slog]

Two continents, and the sheer scale of their atrocities makes them a legit contender. They essentially wiped all the native races on two different continents disappear. That alone is comparable to any atrocities committed by the Brits. In terms of long term impact, British empire shaped the world we live in so there's that but as far as immediate actions at the time go, Spaniards are not far off from the Brits with the French not far behind either.

Thread is primarily about 'worse long term impact'

But you do make a fair point about immediate impact

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Wherever they set foot, they left lasting conflict. Most of the current conflicts are their gift to the world.

I would replace that sentence with their gifts to themselves. The Brits were merely looking out for their own interests, which is no more than what most other jealous nations are now striving to do after all.

 

[the Great Khan]

Probably the Spanish but long term you cant beat the Brits. I'm currently in the process of reading a book about the decline and fall of the Empire. The downright blatant racism ingrained within the Empire even shocked me for a few pages!! I mean the standard word for all Indians (everyone from the subcontinent) was the N word. You had to bow your heads if a **** sahib came along on his tanga for goodness.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Probably the Spanish but long term you cant beat the Brits. I'm currently in the process of reading a book about the decline and fall of the Empire. The downright blatant racism ingrained within the Empire even shocked me for a few pages!! I mean the standard word for all Indians (everyone from the subcontinent) was the N word. You had to bow your heads if a **** sahib came along on his tanga for goodness.

I don't know why anyone would have such a problem with it, many brown sahibs who post on PP would insist you should be doing that anyway to show willingness to integrate.

 

[Madplayer]

Long term impact, no one comes close to Brits. One of their biggest gifts to the world is the borders which they created the borders which they drew is one of the primary reasons of conflict today. They showed no regard to ethnicity, tribal groupings, even religion in many places. They wanted to create infighting among the new nations so that they could continue exploiting them to the point of making them their satellite nations.

In short term impact i would like to know what PPers think about the Mongol Empire? Surely a contender for the most ruthless empire of all time.

 

[shortbread]

Israel-Palestine issues
The messes in the Arab world (installing the hated Saudis, making artificial countries etc)
The mess in dozens of African states and regions (Sierra Leone, Rwanda etc etc)

Many, many other examples. These are the long term effects of their policies which the world is still suffering from today..

In the time they had colonies there were many instances of massacres, forced hunger bordering on genocide.

Not bordering on, it was downright genocide. What riles one up is how conveniently they look the other way to their own doings but are quick to pounce upon sufferings elsewhere and shower fake sympathy.

What goes around comes around. The longer it takes, harder the fall!

 

[James]

Certainly not. It’s quite shameful to be honest, it needs to be openly discussed and learnt from. But I equally object to the “white guilt” mentality held by some British people about this, who are IMO just as unhelpful to the debate as the postcolonial melancholic Union Jack saluting types.

 

[kingusama92]

Even the long-term successes were built on the shoulders of genocide (i.e. Australia, Canada, USA, New Zealand).

 

[OoparCut]

What is the point of this thread. All hegemonic powers are bound to have a bad impact on the regions they manage to control. That's the point of hegemony.

Can you name a hegemon that did not have a bad impact? Heck, regimes usually have a bad impact on their own people as well. So foreign and 'other' peoples are bound to suffer a lot more.

 

[TQ89]

Present long term impact would definitely go to british.

All time there are so many contenders like spanish empire, dutch empire, french empire who ravaged continents like south america & africa. Their invasion there & subsequent cruelties changed the whole social structure of the proud folks who lived in those continents for thousands of years.

The Portuguese do deserve special mention for their cruelty in multiple continents just like the spanish & using the same tactics on their colonies.

 

[R3verse Swing]

American imperialism will have a worse long-term effect than the British Empire.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Present long term impact would definitely go to british.

All time there are so many contenders like spanish empire, dutch empire, french empire who ravaged continents like south america & africa. Their invasion there & subsequent cruelties changed the whole social structure of the proud folks who lived in those continents for thousands of years.

The Portuguese do deserve special mention for their cruelty in multiple continents just like the spanish & using the same tactics on their colonies.

I read an excerpt of a book about the Portuguese empire, that was very eye opening stuff. They would certainly put the British empire to shame for short term cruelty at any rate.

 

[OoparCut]

American imperialism will have a worse long-term effect than the British Empire.

You don't think it already has? Actual native americans have been genocided and robbed of their lands, reduced to living on "reservations". Mexico lost 50% of its territory, and has to quietly accept that. Go look at how the "banana republics" all over central america and south america have had their political and economic histories impacted due to American intervention.

That's just the way it is. If you are weak and allow external powers to interfere with your matters, you will suffer.

 

[OoparCut]

I read an excerpt of a book about the Portuguese empire, that was very eye opening stuff. They would certainly put the British empire to shame for short term cruelty at any rate.

Belgians would give them a run for their money. The Dutch and other scandinavians run around the globe playing peacemaker today, but they have a bloody past as well.

Colonialism and exploitation does not happen in a vacuum. There are always atrocities that come along with it.

 

[R3verse Swing]

You don't think it already has? Actual native americans have been genocided and robbed of their lands, reduced to living on "reservations". Mexico lost 50% of its territory, and has to quietly accept that. Go look at how the "banana republics" all over central america and south america have had their political and economic histories impacted due to American intervention.

That's just the way it is. If you are weak and allow external powers to interfere with your matters, you will suffer.

Not yet, but in the process of.

American Imperialism has yet to create the likes of Israel/Palestine; Pakistan/India.

At the moment, Americans are masters at installing and destabilising/establishing puppet governments.

 

[OoparCut]

Not yet, but in the process of.

American Imperialism has yet to create the likes of Israel/Palestine; Pakistan/India.

At the moment, Americans are masters at installing and destabilising/establishing puppet governments.

I would disagree. The entire North American continent was populated by native american nations. There were millions of native americans, with different languages, even ethnicities. Most of them are extinct today, or reduced to a handful of survivors. This in spite of being the rightful heirs to arguably some of the richest lands on the planet in terms of resources and fertility. They were exterminated by the "Americans".

American intervention in Vietnam directly resulted in the death of million of civilians.

You could make a sound legal argument that American invasion of Iraq after 9/11 was illegal and intentionally so. How many Iraqis have died as a direct result?

 

[ManFan]

I would disagree. The entire North American continent was populated by native american nations. There were millions of native americans, with different languages, even ethnicities. Most of them are extinct today, or reduced to a handful of survivors. This in spite of being the rightful heirs to arguably some of the richest lands on the planet in terms of resources and fertility. They were exterminated by the "Americans".

American intervention in Vietnam directly resulted in the death of million of civilians.

You could make a sound legal argument that American invasion of Iraq after 9/11 was illegal and intentionally so. How many Iraqis have died as a direct result?

Well, the Native Americans are now robbing the Americans through their casinos like Foxwoods.

 

[R3verse Swing]

I would disagree. The entire North American continent was populated by native american nations. There were millions of native americans, with different languages, even ethnicities. Most of them are extinct today, or reduced to a handful of survivors. This in spite of being the rightful heirs to arguably some of the richest lands on the planet in terms of resources and fertility. They were exterminated by the "Americans".

American intervention in Vietnam directly resulted in the death of million of civilians.

You could make a sound legal argument that American invasion of Iraq after 9/11 was illegal and intentionally so. How many Iraqis have died as a direct result?

I am not saying millions have not died as a result of America, but if you are just talking numbers then I would say British Empire wins. 30 Million died at the hands of the British in India alone.

https://www.independent.co.uk/voice...-truth-our-empire-killed-millions-404631.html

 

[OoparCut]

Well, the Native Americans are now robbing the Americans through their casinos like Foxwoods.

Native Americans have been robbed of Trillions. A few million is like a few drops in the ocean.

But I guess you were joking.

 

[OoparCut]

I am not saying millions have not died as a result of America, but if you are just talking numbers then I would say British Empire wins. 30 Million died at the hands of the British in India alone.

https://www.independent.co.uk/voice...-truth-our-empire-killed-millions-404631.html

If America wasn't too busy with expanding on its own continent and fighting its civil war in the late 19th century, they would have been out there colonizing with the rest of the European powers. In fact, the annexation of Hawaii is an easy example that comes to mind.

 

[ManFan]

Native Americans have been robbed of Trillions. A few million is like a few drops in the ocean.

But I guess you were joking.

Yeah its a joke my friend.

 

[Slog]

American imperialism will have a worse long-term effect than the British Empire.

You don't think it already has? Actual native americans have been genocided and robbed of their lands, reduced to living on "reservations". Mexico lost 50% of its territory, and has to quietly accept that. Go look at how the "banana republics" all over central america and south america have had their political and economic histories impacted due to American intervention.

That's just the way it is. If you are weak and allow external powers to interfere with your matters, you will suffer.

That was more European doing
American Imperialism started post WW II.

 

[R3verse Swing]

If America wasn't too busy with expanding on its own continent and fighting its civil war in the late 19th century, they would have been out there colonizing with the rest of the European powers. In fact, the annexation of Hawaii is an easy example that comes to mind.

America is expanding through military bases around the world. America became a super power after it helped Europe out during the World Wars, plus we have NATO. So in a way, America has power and control over Europe.

America is however a full time bully that will never pick a fight with nations that can respond in kind. (China/Russia).

 

[Slog]

I would disagree. The entire North American continent was populated by native american nations. There were millions of native americans, with different languages, even ethnicities. Most of them are extinct today, or reduced to a handful of survivors. This in spite of being the rightful heirs to arguably some of the richest lands on the planet in terms of resources and fertility. They were exterminated by the "Americans".

Again. That is not American imperialim.

American Imperialism - if you want to label it that - began after 1950s. Vietnam crimes are yes a result of American imperialism

 

[Slog]

If America wasn't too busy with expanding on its own continent and fighting its civil war in the late 19th century, they would have been out there colonizing with the rest of the European powers. In fact, the annexation of Hawaii is an easy example that comes to mind.

Poor historical knowledge.

USA was isolationist till WWI. No reason to suggest they would have gone colonizing on a large scale.

 

[Slog]

America is expanding through military bases around the world. America became a super power after it helped Europe out during the World Wars, plus we have NATO. So in a way, America has power and control over Europe.

America is however a full time bully that will never pick a fight with nations that can respond in kind. (China/Russia).

However since they do not colonize, they cannot carry out genocides like the British in Bengal in that manner....

Iraq they have certainly made a mess.. South Koreans and Albanians give dua to them..Afghanistan was doomed anyway

 

[TQ89]

I read an excerpt of a book about the Portuguese empire, that was very eye opening stuff. They would certainly put the British empire to shame for short term cruelty at any rate.

Yup, they devised special torture devices to forcefully convert the people to christianity and also it was Portuguese priests who started of this whole god has made the black man inferior & white man superior myth which the rest of europe's ruling class starting using as well.

 

[R3verse Swing]

However since they do not colonize, they cannot carry out genocides like the British in Bengal in that manner....

Yup agree, British Empire will be the last of it's kind. I do not think we will ever see colonisation on that scale ever again.

Iraq they have certainly made a mess.. South Koreans and Albanians give dua to them..Afghanistan was doomed anyway

I wonder if the world was in a more dangerous state under the British Empire, or today under American Imperialism.

 

[ManFan]

Poor historical knowledge.

USA was isolationist till WWI. No reason to suggest they would have gone colonizing on a large scale.

Wrong. They believed in Manifest Destiny and expanded westwards taking over Mexican territories and annexed Hawaii and others Central American lands. After WWI, they were isolationists but were always behind the British as is evident by the Lend Lease Act. It was not until after Pearl Harbor that they sent in troops.

 

[OoparCut]

Poor historical knowledge.

USA was isolationist till WWI. No reason to suggest they would have gone colonizing on a large scale.

What year did US take over Hawaii? Go read wikipedia and get some "historical knowledge". Might want to look into the history of the Philippines and Cuba as well. When and Why did the "Spanish American" war take place?

Before you question or insult other's knowledge, one should do a bit of homework.

 

[mmkextreme_1]

If America wasn't too busy with expanding on its own continent and fighting its civil war in the late 19th century, they would have been out there colonizing with the rest of the European powers. In fact, the annexation of Hawaii is an easy example that comes to mind.

The annexation was more to do with its strategic location. The US never had any plans to expand/become an empire. As mentioned above, before joining WWII, the policy of the US was to remain an isolationist.

In saying this, the US has learned from history. Modern-day imperialism is not about taking a country over and stating that this is XY country's territory. The method the US uses is more subtle, the governments are controlled, putting leaders into power that are pro US, willing to support American policy. Indirect control of the people. Having military bases all around the world. In the end can you blame a superpower for doing this? I mean, this has happened throughout human history and it will continue to happen. In the end its all about controlling and maintaining one's interest globally through any means.

 

[TQ89]

Poor historical knowledge.

USA was isolationist till WWI. No reason to suggest they would have gone colonizing on a large scale.

You should do your research to gather basic facts right before criticizing other posters.

Phillipines and Puerto rico were conquered by the US prior to world war 1. And though US didn't become the power it was to become in WW2, it had made its ambitions pretty clear way before.

 

[OoparCut]

The annexation was more to do with its strategic location. The US never had any plans to expand/become an empire. As mentioned above, before joining WWII, the policy of the US was to remain an isolationist.

In saying this, the US has learned from history. Modern-day imperialism is not about taking a country over and stating that this is XY country's territory. The method the US uses is more subtle, the governments are controlled, putting leaders into power that are pro US, willing to support American policy. Indirect control of the people. Having military bases all around the world. In the end can you blame a superpower for doing this? I mean, this has happened throughout human history and it will continue to happen. In the end its all about controlling and maintaining one's interest globally through any means.

This is hindsight after the fact logic. If US wanted to remain isolationist, why did it get involved in the Philippines? They were just late to the game when it came to colonization, and since they could "colonize" on their own continent - manifest destiny and all that jazz, they didn't have the pressing need to go too far away for resources, unlike the other powers of the time.

 

[mmkextreme_1]

This is hindsight after the fact logic. If US wanted to remain isolationist, why did it get involved in the Philippines? They were just late to the game when it came to colonization, and since they could "colonize" on their own continent - manifest destiny and all that jazz, they didn't have the pressing need to go too far away for resources, unlike the other powers of the time.

Look, you can't compare eras of history. The US after WWI was different to before WWI. The US became a country after getting independence from Britain. The influence was there. Manifest destiny was a product of this influence.

Just like after WWI, it was different before/after WWII as well. Wars shape policy. The rise of the USSR, and in that case the US, both superpowers, ended up shaping the world in that time period. Different events lead to different policies which lead to different outcomes.

 

[OoparCut]

Look, you can't compare eras of history. The US after WWI was different to before WWI. The US became a country after getting independence from Britain. The influence was there. Manifest destiny was a product of this influence.

Just like after WWI, it was different before/after WWII as well. Wars shape policy. The rise of the USSR, and in that case the US, both superpowers, ended up shaping the world in that time period. Different events lead to different policies which lead to different outcomes.

US was 13 eastern states when it became a country. Its been expansionist and land-grabbing from Day 1. "Isolationist" only when it suited its purposes.

 

[Robert]

Certainly not. It’s quite shameful to be honest, it needs to be openly discussed and learnt from. But I equally object to the “white guilt” mentality held by some British people about this, who are IMO just as unhelpful to the debate as the postcolonial melancholic Union Jack saluting types.

I concur. But I am not ashamed, as I wasn’t there.

 

[James]

I concur. But I am not ashamed, as I wasn’t there.

Indeed, I am not personally ashamed either, but it is shameful for them that they did those things.

 

[mmkextreme_1]

US was 13 eastern states when it became a country. Its been expansionist and land-grabbing from Day 1. "Isolationist" only when it suited its purposes.

Bro, you are confusing what the Brits did and how the US went about it.

Most of the modern day US has been purchased, the Louisiana Purchase, Alaskan Purchase, and to an extent Florida purchase.

You need to read up on how the modern US came to be, how the US territory expanded. Yes, there was manifest destiny, but it's more to it than just that doctrine.

 

[OoparCut]

Bro, you are confusing what the Brits did and how the US went about it.

Most of the modern day US has been purchased, the Louisiana Purchase, Alaskan Purchase, and to an extent Florida purchase.

You need to read up on how the modern US came to be, how the US territory expanded. Yes, there was manifest destiny, but it's more to it than just that doctrine.

Bro, you need to go check what the boundaries of the Louisiana purchase were. Texas, California, New Mexico, etc were not purchased, they were snatched from Mexico.

History is more complex and a lot more interesting than what you read in your middle school and high school textbook.

 

[mmkextreme_1]

Bro, you need to go check what the boundaries of the Louisiana purchase were. Texas, California, New Mexico, etc were not purchased, they were snatched from Mexico.

History is more complex and a lot more interesting than what you read in your middle school and high school textbook.

Yeah, it is.

You need to go read up on how Manifest Destiny worked and how continentalism worked.

Louisiana purchase makes up ~23.3% of the current US and the Alaskan Purchase makes up 18.3% that is nearly 42% of the modern day US. Now add to this the original 13 colonies, which made up ~11%, that equates to roughly 53% just going by these 3. There is history involved obviously but your idea that the US never needed the imperialistic mindset as its European counterparts did because they expanded within the continent only. The US never had ambitions to do so at that point in time.

Texas wanted to be a part of the US. Because of this, the Mexican-American war was started, long story short, the outcome of the war was the US won and the treaty that was signed gave the US what is modern-day California, and a lot of what are today the southwest states.

 

[Slog]

Wrong. They believed in Manifest Destiny and expanded westwards taking over Mexican territories and annexed Hawaii and others Central American lands. After WWI, they were isolationists but were always behind the British as is evident by the Lend Lease Act. It was not until after Pearl Harbor that they sent in troops.

They didnt have plans for world domination and colonizing continents to use their resources in the way Britain or Spain did. Taking over lands of North America (westward expansion) imo isnt same as colonization.

 

[Slog]

Phillipines and Puerto rico were conquered by the US prior to world war 1. And though US didn't become the power it was to become in WW2, it had made its ambitions pretty clear way before.

Spain ceded Phillipines to the US at end of Spanish American war. To compare it to colonization carried out by the British is disingenuous.

 

[DeadBall]

I concur. But I am not ashamed, as I wasn’t there.

Indeed, I am not personally ashamed either, but it is shameful for them that they did those things.

K guys, the natives have admitted the faults of their ancestors or probably not. They seemed confused. My daughter goes to a different concentration camp each year to learn what the Nazis did but the British can't seem to accept their past and can just proclaim that they "weren't there".

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

My biggest hope is that the Indians never become a super power. There has been mumblings about wanting the crown jewels back which I've often mocked on here, but if their rise to world domination arrives by 2024 we are in big trouble. These Indians are a lot smarter than Pakistanis, they hide their real feelings much better. They are all friendly smiles and nodding heads at the moment, but once they get in a position to get some payback I fear we'll see their true faces.

 

[OoparCut]

Texas wanted to be a part of the US. Because of this, the Mexican-American war was started, .

That is such an ignorant statement. You have some reading to do so that you learn the facts of Texan history. Texas was under Mexican rule. "Americans" illegally immigrated into Texas because it was sparsely populated and land was available. A large chunk of the "Americans" that migrated into Texas were criminals, former or otherwise, i.e. mostly so-called "bad apples" who couldn't easily make it as settlers in other territories. After illegally squatting on mexican land, they "rebelled" against Mexico and declared independence, and after a few years ended up joining the American union. This history makes the current chest-beating by "americans" over illegal migration by mexicans, so ironic, that its LOL-worthy.

Btw, The US had absolutely zero interest in California and associated Mexican lands, right up until a few months before gold was discovered there. History has been re-written to claim that gold was discovered AFTER the Americans seized California, but you will find that's not really true once you study it further.

 

[OoparCut]

Spain ceded Phillipines to the US at end of Spanish American war. To compare it to colonization carried out by the British is disingenuous.

Question remains, Why did US want Phillippines from the Spaniards in the first place? Do you know why and how the Spanish American war started? Your brushing off the seizure of Hawaii by the Americans as "strategic" is what's disingenuous.

Go look up the history of Diego Garcia and you will get another lesson on how and what Americans will do once they decide they want something. Your claim that Americans are somehow less bad than Britain is an immature interpretation of history.

The only credit that the Americans deserve is their total support of the UN at the end of WW2 and the pressure they applied on the European colonial powers to stop their colonial exploitation. And they did so, knowing fully well, that they were at the helm of the new economic world order.

 

[OoparCut]

K guys, the natives have admitted the faults of their ancestors or probably not. They seemed confused. My daughter goes to a different concentration camp each year to learn what the Nazis did but the British can't seem to accept their past and can just proclaim that they "weren't there".

Majority of Britain is in pompous denial about the crimes of their "Empire". Self-righteous bombast comes easy for the Brits after all. Actual humility and owning up to mistakes is always difficult for pompous blowhards.

 

[OoparCut]

My biggest hope is that the Indians never become a super power. There has been mumblings about wanting the crown jewels back which I've often mocked on here, but if their rise to world domination arrives by 2024 we are in big trouble. These Indians are a lot smarter than Pakistanis, they hide their real feelings much better. They are all friendly smiles and nodding heads at the moment, but once they get in a position to get some payback I fear we'll see their true faces.

What does this nonsensical post even mean.

First off, India is no position to be a "super" or hyper power, for another 100 years if not more. And secondly, your post reeks of prejudice as a result of a brainwashed propaganda fed mind. Get Woke bro. Reality is a lot better, and a lot more complex and entertaining than you think!

 

[R3verse Swing]

I think some of you need to see the documentary series titled - How the States got their shapes.

 

[TQ89]

Spain ceded Phillipines to the US at end of Spanish American war. To compare it to colonization carried out by the British is disingenuous.

They were Spanish territories. And USA was meddling in them especially cuba long before the war which then bought the USA & Spain to war over them. It wasn't as peaceful as just handing over. Spain literally got their behinds kicked and had to concede to the US demands. So while US wasn't a big colonizer like British or Spain, it had aims of colonizing. Also you are forgetting those countries got a lot of time to colonize unlike USA which got pretty late in the game.

But it did not affect their future as they always had good strategy of wait & watch where they would just observe world events & modify their actions accordingly. This served them well in both world wars after which they became more inclined towards imperialism.

 

[James]

K guys, the natives have admitted the faults of their ancestors or probably not. They seemed confused. My daughter goes to a different concentration camp each year to learn what the Nazis did but the British can't seem to accept their past and can just proclaim that they "weren't there".

Majority of Britain is in pompous denial about the crimes of their "Empire". Self-righteous bombast comes easy for the Brits after all. Actual humility and owning up to mistakes is always difficult for pompous blowhards.

I was born in the 1980s lol, why is the British Empire my fault?

 

[mmkextreme_1]

That is such an ignorant statement. You have some reading to do so that you learn the facts of Texan history. Texas was under Mexican rule. "Americans" illegally immigrated into Texas because it was sparsely populated and land was available. A large chunk of the "Americans" that migrated into Texas were criminals, former or otherwise, i.e. mostly so-called "bad apples" who couldn't easily make it as settlers in other territories. After illegally squatting on mexican land, they "rebelled" against Mexico and declared independence, and after a few years ended up joining the American union. This history makes the current chest-beating by "americans" over illegal migration by mexicans, so ironic, that its LOL-worthy.

Btw, The US had absolutely zero interest in California and associated Mexican lands, right up until a few months before gold was discovered there. History has been re-written to claim that gold was discovered AFTER the Americans seized California, but you will find that's not really true once you study it further.

Again, your interpreting history the way you want to interpret it.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

That is such an ignorant statement. You have some reading to do so that you learn the facts of Texan history. Texas was under Mexican rule. "Americans" illegally immigrated into Texas because it was sparsely populated and land was available. A large chunk of the "Americans" that migrated into Texas were criminals, former or otherwise, i.e. mostly so-called "bad apples" who couldn't easily make it as settlers in other territories. After illegally squatting on mexican land, they "rebelled" against Mexico and declared independence, and after a few years ended up joining the American union. This history makes the current chest-beating by "americans" over illegal migration by mexicans, so ironic, that its LOL-worthy.

Btw, The US had absolutely zero interest in California and associated Mexican lands, right up until a few months before gold was discovered there. History has been re-written to claim that gold was discovered AFTER the Americans seized California, but you will find that's not really true once you study it further.

This is all true, also why American states close to Mexico all have a large Spanish speaking population. Even the names of the cities like Los Angeles reflect this. But winners write history, and the illegal immigrants from Mexico want to be in the USA because the US economy drives progress and rise in living standards. You might see similar in Pakistan as they gradually become a client state of Uncle China. Not on the best terms perhaps, but the upshot in the longer term might be in a raising of standards and practices imposed by the Chinese.

 

[OoparCut]

I was born in the 1980s lol, why is the British Empire my fault?

Nobody is saying it's your personal fault. But it's undeniable that the history taught in British schools gloss over the crimes committed by the empire to the extent that a significant majority are in denial about it ever happening.

 

[Markhor]

Ireland, Palestine, Kashmir, Yemen, the list goes on. Where the British left, they often left a trail of chaos and destruction.

 

[James]

Nobody is saying it's your personal fault. But it's undeniable that the history taught in British schools gloss over the crimes committed by the empire to the extent that a significant majority are in denial about it ever happening.

Absolutely 100% agree with what you have said here. I was (and am) just puzzled as to why I am getting lumped in with this ignorant group. I am well aware of the blood on the hands of our colonial history.

 

[New Yorker]

They were Spanish territories. And USA was meddling in them especially cuba long before the war which then bought the USA & Spain to war over them. It wasn't as peaceful as just handing over. Spain literally got their behinds kicked and had to concede to the US demands. So while US wasn't a big colonizer like British or Spain, it had aims of colonizing. Also you are forgetting those countries got a lot of time to colonize unlike USA which got pretty late in the game.

But it did not affect their future as they always had good strategy of wait & watch where they would just observe world events & modify their actions accordingly. This served them well in both world wars after which they became more inclined towards imperialism.

That's a peculiar reading of history. The United States was a colonial enterprise from its inception. It has never known any history but colonial history. At the time of independence, The United States comprised 13 colonies covering what is today the Eastern Seaboard, not including Florida. And they were literally colonies, established on land stolen from Native Americans, not all of whom had yet been ethnically cleansed. As the colonists pushed westwards, wars between Native American peoples and the US government, the so called Indian Wars, what amounted often to little more than sanctified massacres, continued until 1924, approaching the high tide of modern revolt in the British Empire. Many of the US army staff who went to serve in the Philippines were veterans of the Indian Wars.

 

[Napa]

Israel-Palestine issues
The messes in the Arab world (installing the hated Saudis, making artificial countries etc)
The mess in dozens of African states and regions (Sierra Leone, Rwanda etc etc)

Many, many other examples. These are the long term effects of their policies which the world is still suffering from today..

In the time they had colonies there were many instances of massacres, forced hunger bordering on genocide.

Blaming others for your failings is not the way forward. It is not as if people in Africa, Asia and other parts of the world colonized by the British were living together in peace before the British arrived.

One has to understand why these wars still exist. Blaming the British will guarantee that these problems will never be solved.

The British Empire, like other empires, was about exploiting the conquered. They caused a large number of famines and other miseries when the ruled. Now that the colonies are independent, it is up to them to make their lives better, rather than finding someone else to blame.

 

[TQ89]

That's a peculiar reading of history. The United States was a colonial enterprise from its inception. It has never known any history but colonial history. At the time of independence, The United States comprised 13 colonies covering what is today the Eastern Seaboard, not including Florida. And they were literally colonies, established on land stolen from Native Americans, not all of whom had yet been ethnically cleansed. As the colonists pushed westwards, wars between Native American peoples and the US government, the so called Indian Wars, what amounted often to little more than sanctified massacres, continued until 1924, approaching the high tide of modern revolt in the British Empire. Many of the US army staff who went to serve in the Philippines were veterans of the Indian Wars.

What i meant by not a big colonizer was why its efforts were a bit slow in colonizing across continents which now the american government uses as an excuse to call its policies isolationist Pre-World War 1 which they clearly were not. Inside their own continent, they were a massive colonizer for sure.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Blaming others for your failings is not the way forward. It is not as if people in Africa, Asia and other parts of the world colonized by the British were living together in peace before the British arrived.

One has to understand why these wars still exist. Blaming the British will guarantee that these problems will never be solved.

The British Empire, like other empires, was about exploiting the conquered. They caused a large number of famines and other miseries when the ruled. Now that the colonies are independent, it is up to them to make their lives better, rather than finding someone else to blame.

Agree 100%. I think Pakistan and India also need to stop dwelling in the past and move on, whether that's bringing up Kargil, 1971 war, mosques allegedly built on former temples and so many other issues still stewing for decades. Nothing good can come of it.

 

[CricketCartoons]

Agree 100%. I think Pakistan and India also need to stop dwelling in the past and move on, whether that's bringing up Kargil, 1971 war, mosques allegedly built on former temples and so many other issues still stewing for decades. Nothing good can come of it.

Agreed 200%. All these palestinians and kashmiris should stop dwelling on what happened in the past and who did what. They should move on, get a job, a netflix account and just chill.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Agreed 200%. All these palestinians and kashmiris should stop dwelling on what happened in the past and who did what. They should move on, get a job, a netflix account and just chill.

Looks like you, me and Napa bhai all agree to move forward so that is 300% progress.

 

[Napa]

Looks like you, me and Napa bhai all agree to move forward so that is 300% progress.

All people, wherever they live, whatever religion they follow, should have the freedom to live their lives as they want and should have a government that works for them rather than exploits them. I think we can all agree on that 400%

 

[ManFan]

All people, wherever they live, whatever religion they follow, should have the freedom to live their lives as they want and should have a government that works for them rather than exploits them. I think we can all agree on that 400%

What about that small group who controls all the power and wealth who prevent that and in some cases give an illusion of it?

 

[Napa]

What about that small group who controls all the power and wealth who prevent that and in some cases give an illusion of it?

We of course need to oppose that and work for more equality. Unfortunately, even in the democratic western nations the current trend is towards less equality and the concentration of wealth and political power with the small group often referred to as the "Establishment".

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

What about that small group who controls all the power and wealth who prevent that and in some cases give an illusion of it?

What about them? When you get a dog fight, you don't expect the owners to jump in and start biting. Their job is to stand by and make some money, and maybe put the weaker dogs down when they aren't good for fighting any more.

 

[PakFan2011]

what about the arabic/muslim empire. im sure its rise was not peaceful with vast amounts of land and people captured and converted. No other religion spread primarily through the sword, as Islam has done.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

what about the arabic/muslim empire. im sure its rise was not peaceful with vast amounts of land and people captured and converted. No other religion spread primarily through the sword, as Islam has done.

Wasn't the Islamic empire quite successful for those regions where it spread? The Ottoman empire was at least, don't know about others without reading up.

 

[TQ89]

what about the arabic/muslim empire. im sure its rise was not peaceful with vast amounts of land and people captured and converted. No other religion spread primarily through the sword, as Islam has done.

That is propaganda & no we didn't just spread through the sword. The blood that they spilled is mostly wars & few examples where they had to kill folks fand every rising empire throughout history had to beat the existing empires for gaining new territory. The then muslim rulers beat a lot of folks including byzantine empire, the sassanian empire (Persian ruling family back then). All the north african countries that are now muslim were part of byzantine territory then. So the muslims of that time had good martial skills & were smart generals.

Those rulers no matter how cruel they were, weren't genocidal maniacs. They allowed the minorities to exist although under heavy taxation. They were very good at administration & economically very shrewd, bringing in lot of trade to their conquered areas. So while the truth is very much different what we have been taught it wasn't as bad as you would expect from spanish empire, the british, the french or the mongol empire.

 

[PakFan2011]

allowing minorities to exist with heavy taxation, hmmm how did natives become minorities in their own country? and taxing them heavily due to their beliefs is discrimination. imagine if the British, american or Canadian governments started taxing muslims more due to being muslims.

islam is expansionist by nature, i mean muslim countires are now weak, but when they were strong they had no issues with invading their neighbors in the name of spreading the faith. India is a prime example of this.

imperial powers such as Britian, Spain and France may have controlled vast parts of the earth, however when their empires ended their former colonies had not been made into an image of Britain or France. in contrast, Islams grip of countries they conquered remains to this day.

 

[ManFan]

allowing minorities to exist with heavy taxation, hmmm how did natives become minorities in their own country? and taxing them heavily due to their beliefs is discrimination. imagine if the British, american or Canadian governments started taxing muslims more due to being muslims.

islam is expansionist by nature, i mean muslim countires are now weak, but when they were strong they had no issues with invading their neighbors in the name of spreading the faith. India is a prime example of this.

imperial powers such as Britian, Spain and France may have controlled vast parts of the earth, however when their empires ended their former colonies had not been made into an image of Britain or France. in contrast, Islams grip of countries they conquered remains to this day.

The jizya tax was in most cases less than what Muslims paid for.
Imperial powers laid the foundations for WWI and WWII which caused about a hundred million deaths. Not to mention, they plundered their colonies of entire populations be it the Americas, Australia, and treated them literally like dogs in places like the Congo and Belgium. The Berlin Conference was literally a race to take control over Africa. These empires were considered with wealth which is why they did not enforce their religious beliefs. Even than, the likes of the Spanish empire are the reason for why much of North America is Christian now. All empires committed warfare and still do. To blame one empire for seeking to expand or protect its borders is a pretty misinformed view of history. The Muslims gained fame in Europe for not killing the prisoners of war, such as Salahuddin, when the Frankish knights severed the heads of every man, woman, and child to the point the blood was up to the length of a horse’s legs.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

allowing minorities to exist with heavy taxation, hmmm how did natives become minorities in their own country? and taxing them heavily due to their beliefs is discrimination. imagine if the British, american or Canadian governments started taxing muslims more due to being muslims.

islam is expansionist by nature, i mean muslim countires are now weak, but when they were strong they had no issues with invading their neighbors in the name of spreading the faith. India is a prime example of this.

imperial powers such as Britian, Spain and France may have controlled vast parts of the earth, however when their empires ended their former colonies had not been made into an image of Britain or France. in contrast, Islams grip of countries they conquered remains to this day.

Forgot to welcome you as I always do to new(ish) posters, your views are very interesting considering you have the Pak flag in your profile. Hopefully we can interact in many more debates like I did with a certain Kashmiri/Bangladeshi new arrival who left suddenly then reappeared delivering oopar cuts. Carry on.

 

[PakFan2011]

jizia tax being less then what muslims pay is propaganda. you only need to refer to the quran about jiza tax and how it is to be collected from non muslims.

all empires had good and bad, im merely pointing out that one of the largest empires on earth doesnt have a skeaky clean history as many imagine.

 

[PakFan2011]

thank you for the welcome, im an oldish poster, I havemt frequented the forum much but will do now.
looking forward to some great discussions