British Empire in a 1000 years
Discussion
350GT said:
Bushmaster said:
350GT said:
Of course if you treat them like s
t, and keep them in the fields, you'll be seen as oppressive. It's a lose/lose situation.
Somebody's got to grow the cotton, sugarcane, etc. Can't have them all off singing hymns and st, and keep them in the fields, you'll be seen as oppressive. It's a lose/lose situation.t.Bushmaster said:
350GT said:
Bushmaster said:
350GT said:
Of course if you treat them like st, and keep them in the fields, you'll be seen as oppressive. It's a lose/lose situation.
Somebody's got to grow the cotton, sugarcane, etc. Can't have them all off singing hymns and st, and keep them in the fields, you'll be seen as oppressive. It's a lose/lose situation.t.s2art said:
Bushmaster said:
350GT said:
Bushmaster said:
350GT said:
Of course if you treat them like st, and keep them in the fields, you'll be seen as oppressive. It's a lose/lose situation.
Somebody's got to grow the cotton, sugarcane, etc. Can't have them all off singing hymns and st, and keep them in the fields, you'll be seen as oppressive. It's a lose/lose situation.t.Bushmaster said:
s2art said:
Bushmaster said:
350GT said:
Bushmaster said:
350GT said:
Of course if you treat them like st, and keep them in the fields, you'll be seen as oppressive. It's a lose/lose situation.
Somebody's got to grow the cotton, sugarcane, etc. Can't have them all off singing hymns and st, and keep them in the fields, you'll be seen as oppressive. It's a lose/lose situation.t.I think it depends which historians you're talking about. I'm sure there will be those who have a particular interest and it will probably go down as the last of the big European empires, but in world terms I'm not so sure.
Sorry to a bit unpatriotic but I think we will be a fairly minor area of study. We were a fairly brief empire, it was only really the 19th century that we could be said to have dominated militarily and economically and militarily as the premier superpower and we already had challengers in Germany and the US before that finished.
Our big contributions were industrialisation and the common language, but the language will probably be attributed more to TV and internet which will be done in next week's lesson on the Americans. Industrialisation will probably be the real thing of note in 1,000 years time as this was the basis for our empire and probably the defining legacy in the places that we colonised.
I'm not trying to do Britain down, but in terms of the military and political aspects of our rise and fall and the intellectual and technological achievements it was more steady progress than a massive break through in the way the Greeks or Romans were.
Unless we have a second crack at it? Bagsy China!
Sorry to a bit unpatriotic but I think we will be a fairly minor area of study. We were a fairly brief empire, it was only really the 19th century that we could be said to have dominated militarily and economically and militarily as the premier superpower and we already had challengers in Germany and the US before that finished.
Our big contributions were industrialisation and the common language, but the language will probably be attributed more to TV and internet which will be done in next week's lesson on the Americans. Industrialisation will probably be the real thing of note in 1,000 years time as this was the basis for our empire and probably the defining legacy in the places that we colonised.
I'm not trying to do Britain down, but in terms of the military and political aspects of our rise and fall and the intellectual and technological achievements it was more steady progress than a massive break through in the way the Greeks or Romans were.
Unless we have a second crack at it? Bagsy China!
s2art said:
Bushmaster said:
s2art said:
Bushmaster said:
350GT said:
Bushmaster said:
350GT said:
Of course if you treat them like st, and keep them in the fields, you'll be seen as oppressive. It's a lose/lose situation.
Somebody's got to grow the cotton, sugarcane, etc. Can't have them all off singing hymns and st, and keep them in the fields, you'll be seen as oppressive. It's a lose/lose situation.t.s2art said:
bosscerbera said:
The old adage 'sell not tell' might have been a better way. Then equip to choose, rather than ram it down people's throats. Lots of Indians did choose to adopt some English customs, and fought for the English in the Indian Mutiny. There were English settlers in India who were quite taken with Indian customs too.
The chauvinism of the West persists. Our own dogma, for instance, led us in more recent times to be horrified by the USSR determining the future professions of people at birth. We think choice is great, the best thing ever. Ordinary Russians suddenly presented with "choice" saw it as a loss of certainty, rather than any kind of gain. Our culture is different to others, we're inclined to defend it. Why would any other culture be any different? Who has the right to rank differences? Why are we so surprised/horrified when, after hurling jet fighters at foreign lands, they respond with 'atrocities'? WTF does a low flying bomber look like to an Iraqi/Afghan if not an 'atrocity'?
And that is what we did. Educate the natives to allow them to make their own choices.The chauvinism of the West persists. Our own dogma, for instance, led us in more recent times to be horrified by the USSR determining the future professions of people at birth. We think choice is great, the best thing ever. Ordinary Russians suddenly presented with "choice" saw it as a loss of certainty, rather than any kind of gain. Our culture is different to others, we're inclined to defend it. Why would any other culture be any different? Who has the right to rank differences? Why are we so surprised/horrified when, after hurling jet fighters at foreign lands, they respond with 'atrocities'? WTF does a low flying bomber look like to an Iraqi/Afghan if not an 'atrocity'?
There was a concerted effort to Anglicize and Christianize Indians in the 19th century. When the Indians resisted, it sparked a bloody war with some pretty grim vengeance from the Brits. Contemporary intellectuals thought the problem was "not enough Christianity early enough", and sent more missionaries to try harder! Meanwhile, Dr Livingstone was promoting the idea that Christianity and commerce must be spread simultaneously in Africa, rather than commerce first. Queen Victoria, in 1858, decreed that imposing English customs on overseas subjects was to stop.
Edited by bosscerbera on Tuesday 31st March 19:21
bosscerbera said:
s2art said:
bosscerbera said:
The old adage 'sell not tell' might have been a better way. Then equip to choose, rather than ram it down people's throats. Lots of Indians did choose to adopt some English customs, and fought for the English in the Indian Mutiny. There were English settlers in India who were quite taken with Indian customs too.
The chauvinism of the West persists. Our own dogma, for instance, led us in more recent times to be horrified by the USSR determining the future professions of people at birth. We think choice is great, the best thing ever. Ordinary Russians suddenly presented with "choice" saw it as a loss of certainty, rather than any kind of gain. Our culture is different to others, we're inclined to defend it. Why would any other culture be any different? Who has the right to rank differences? Why are we so surprised/horrified when, after hurling jet fighters at foreign lands, they respond with 'atrocities'? WTF does a low flying bomber look like to an Iraqi/Afghan if not an 'atrocity'?
And that is what we did. Educate the natives to allow them to make their own choices.The chauvinism of the West persists. Our own dogma, for instance, led us in more recent times to be horrified by the USSR determining the future professions of people at birth. We think choice is great, the best thing ever. Ordinary Russians suddenly presented with "choice" saw it as a loss of certainty, rather than any kind of gain. Our culture is different to others, we're inclined to defend it. Why would any other culture be any different? Who has the right to rank differences? Why are we so surprised/horrified when, after hurling jet fighters at foreign lands, they respond with 'atrocities'? WTF does a low flying bomber look like to an Iraqi/Afghan if not an 'atrocity'?
There was a concerted effort to Anglicize and Christianize Indians in the 18th century. When the Indians resisted, it sparked a bloody war with some pretty grim vengeance from the Brits. Contemporary intellectuals thought the problem was "not enough Christianity early enough", and sent more missionaries to try harder! Meanwhile, Dr Livingstone was promoting the idea that Christianity and commerce must be spread simultaneously in Africa, rather than commerce first. Queen Victoria, in 1858, decreed that imposing English customs on overseas subjects was to stop.
There was, of course, a problem with the God botherers. But we learned to stop them.
Just for the record, I am definitely a British Imperialist, but having been educated abroad and lived outside the UK for a lot of years I have an 'outside perspective' and I have to say that most johnny foreigners a) don't know and b) don't care about the BE. Thus I cannot see it being well known in 1000 years.
bosscerbera said:
s2art said:
Yes, I think so.
There was, of course, a problem with the God botherers. But we learned to stop them.
There was, of course, a problem with the God botherers. But we learned to stop them.
Yeah, I guess we did... but by then the Empire was financial burden on Britain....
350GT said:
As someone who has worked all over the world, I'd suggest that the folks who don't know about the BE are either stupid, or dead.
Well, we certainly taught some of them. For example in one battle during the Matabele War, 50 British soldiers employed by Cecil Rhodes taught some 50,000 Matabele tribesmen the advantages of the machine gun over the spear, allowing Belloc to coin the famous phrase:Whatever happens, we have got
The Maxim gun, and they have not
Talk about the topic at hand. Bring that up during the current topic of education shows you have an agenda of some sort. And no, maybe if those guys had an education, they would have figured out what the machine gun was. Presumably you would have found it perfectly acceptable for 50 soldiers to die against overwhelming odds? It's called technology. Would you argue the toss against siege towers, undermining a castle, battle formations? tactics of any sort?
No agenda, other than disagreeing that the BE will be well-thought of in 1000 years, and, as a separate issue, disagreeing that education is necessarily a good thing for some undeveloped societies.
Example, there are some tribes that have managed perfectly well (in their terms) in a stone-age existence deep in the rainforest. Would you argue that parachuting-in some educator with an armful of Western textbooks is always a good thing?
Example, there are some tribes that have managed perfectly well (in their terms) in a stone-age existence deep in the rainforest. Would you argue that parachuting-in some educator with an armful of Western textbooks is always a good thing?
350GT said:
Talk about the topic at hand. Bring that up during the current topic of education shows you have an agenda of some sort. And no, maybe if those guys had an education, they would have figured out what the machine gun was. Presumably you would have found it perfectly acceptable for 50 soldiers to die against overwhelming odds? It's called technology. Would you argue the toss against siege towers, undermining a castle, battle formations? tactics of any sort?
The fact that Colonial natives were regularly educated at Sandhurst says a lot also.Bushmaster said:
350GT said:
As someone who has worked all over the world, I'd suggest that the folks who don't know about the BE are either stupid, or dead.
Well, we certainly taught some of them. For example in one battle during the Matabele War, 50 British soldiers employed by Cecil Rhodes taught some 50,000 Matabele tribesmen the advantages of the machine gun over the spear, allowing Belloc to coin the famous phrase:Whatever happens, we have got
The Maxim gun, and they have not
Edited by BruceV8 on Tuesday 31st March 20:32
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff