Would the world have been a better place If the British never existed?.

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth
Colonialism was happening globally, so if it wasn't British colonialism it would have been French /Spanish colonialism.

It is my opinion that colonialism, whilst debatable ethically, brought advancements to nations that they otherwise wouldn't have got, and seeing as they still use and strive for being first world nations, it appears that is the way many would rather.

As for slavery, it had been happening for thousands of years and not subject to race, Vikings and Romans had slaves, and the African trade was well established of it's own accord before the British were eventually persuaded by the African traders.

End of the day it was a hell of a lot better being a british colony than a french or spanish one.

a reply to: boymonkey74 I am not sure if the world would have been a better place. The only thing I do know is a good portion of the European population would not be here if the British had never existed. If the Island of Britain was not there then Scotland, and Ireland would not be there as well.

Mate i think this is a pretty unbalanced question,you cant blame it all on the people of the U.K.
The arisocratic elites lead by the monarchy had a plan and they stuck with it, humans below a certain class were garbage, it didnt matter what country you were from even england.

originally posted by: Ceeker63
a reply to: boymonkey74 I am not sure if the world would have been a better place. The only thing I do know is a good portion of the European population would not be here if the British had never existed. If the Island of Britain was not there then Scotland, and Ireland would not be there as well.

scotland and ireland would still be here just in thier original form, no history and culture corrupted and lost, allowed to evolve without mass oppression from the monarchy.

a reply to: hutch622

Sadly the pommy cricket team has declined as has their empire ,

You weren't saying that prior to the last series, we had won the previous three encounters!

Whilst I think you'll win again in this years series, however, I am certain we'll give a much better account of ourselves.

You should know not to under-estimate us and that we tend to be at our best when our backs are against the wall.

.....losing to Bangladesh in the make or break game at something called a world cup .

Not our greatest sporting moment....but we can only improve upon that.

a reply to: Freeborn

I wondered how long it would be . LOL

a reply to: boymonkey74

Humanity is filled with violence and warfare. If it wasn't the British invading and colonising locations, it was the French or the Dutch.

People can lambast Britain for its history as an empire, but how far back do they want to go? Are they going to criticise Italy for Rome? How about Persia or Mongolia?

The truth is, there will always be violence and warfare. It's what we are. We can't change history, and people shouldn't bash one country or its people unless they are prepared to do it to virtually every other nation on earth.

a reply to: boymonkey74

I don't think the average English individual is to blame from what GB/UK gets up to because of the part played by the monarchy and that institution's greed and lust for power. If you look at our history the way we were serfs etc its amazing we survived the housing, hunger, exploitation and sheer bullying by the local lords of the manor upwards and sanctioned by the crown. What's changed I wonder?

a reply to: boymonkey74


Ummm...YES...I truly believe that if my bloodline had never entertained it's incestuously pedophilic traditions...and poisoned every fruit it ever touched...it might have been the quaint little backwater it should have always been...

INSTEAD...we have the Hydra whose vile presence is found deep within the fabric of not just your wallet...but your trousers as well...

Sorry...You would have been so much better off if my ancestors hadn't existed...at the very least...now remove your tentacles from everyone's backsides...




YouSir

Has anyone mentioned there would have been no Dr Who? Seriously , the world would not have been a better place without our friends from across the pond. I know my history , but yes we have become close allies , especially when the chips were down per se. And some wars and conflicts are justifiable ( a necessary evil)

originally posted by: TrueBrit
A better question therefore, as far as I am concerned, is would the world be better off, if the British Empire had never existed, and I for one believe that it would. I believe Britain would be better for it, since we would have learned how to live off our own land, how to better look after our needs here at home, instead of going off, murdering and plundering, and profiteering all over the shop.

And then an army of Romanized Gauls-aka the French-would have come and kicked your asses (if they managed to not surrender to a passing farmer and his wife first).

I think the world is better that there was a British Empire, English Common and Civil Law (based on Roman Law) have proven to be the best systems over the course of recorded history.

On the contrary, like you say, we have given more to the progression of this world than the negative parts of our history suggests.

In the end I believe it all comes down to jealousy. I mean it can't be that bad can't it, if every man and his dog wants to live in our country...or so it seems.

originally posted by: DAZ21
In the end I believe it all comes down to jealousy. I mean it can't be that bad can't it, if every man and his dog wants to live in our country...or so it seems.

Yeah no, don't think its jealousy, I'm quite happy where I am, lol.

It is true though, British history has probably had more influence in progressing our world than any other. Its just always been pretty normal over here to give the English (rather than the British) a hard time in the context of harmless dry humour. It's probably been going on since before the 1901 Federation of Australia and probably has more to do with establishing our own identity, rather than some kind of genuine resentment.

Don't think I've ever even known any Aussies who seriously resents the English or the British (if you prefer), or really cares enough to blame them for anything.

I have met a fair few Irish people who seem to have a lot of anger towards English people though, lol.

a reply to: Subaeruginosa

I don't expect the Aussies to resent the British at all, you guys got an amazing country out of it. Some of my family are just about to emigrate from NZ to Australia soon too, so I'll be over there on holiday very gratefully.

what kind of world would we life in without football

a reply to: Misterlondon

I hear ya!! Go Patriots. woot woot !!!

a reply to: TrueBrit

And I believe other nations, such as India, most of the continent of Africa, and so on, would have had a better time of it over the last two hundred years

I'm from one of those nations, and I'm not so sure. However, I'll admit to bias: my country's experience of British imperialism was relatively benign (though it certainly wasn't all roses), and besides, I wouldn't be here myself, if my British forebears (mostly on the wrong side of the blanket) hadn't been and gone.

The way I see it is this: once industrial civilization got started, it was only a matter of time before it spread, and aggressively. Human nature being what it is, the power technology put in its wielders' hands would surely end up being used to conquer the world and seize its resources — human ones included. It was a matter of luck that it happened first in Britain, although the rest of Western Europe wasn't very far behind. On the whole, I think, it was good luck. What if it had been, say, the Russians?

Each set of world-conquerers learnt something from the mistakes of their predecssors. The Romans learnt from the Greeks, the Arabs from the (Eastern) Romans, the Spaniards from the Arabs, the French and Dutch from the Spaniards. The British learnt from them all. And since they came later, they had at their disposal all the new thinking in science, philosophy, ethics, political science and economics that had grown up since the Enlightenment. Western Europe had become a lot more civilized since the adventure began in 1491, so the British could be more civilized conquerers.

Before the British, my country had the Dutch and before that the Portuguese. Both were pretty awful, their rule not only exploitative but tyrannous and often arbitrary. When the British turned up, it was a great relief. So much so, in fact, that the nobles of the last remaining independent native state sold out their king and joined the rest of the country under British rule. Since their king was a despot of Indian origin, they didn't feel any great remorse about it.

Not a pretty story, but it reminds us that the dirty work wasn't confined to any one nation.

In addition to roads, railways and the entire apparatus of modern society (all of which were designed to benefit them first, and only incidentally their subjects), the British also gave us the world of modern ideas, the concept of equality before the law, and many other good things from which my people benefited both before and after independence. That's the good part. They also gave us alcohol, Christianity and prudishness, launched a strong attack on the established religions of the country that is still deeply resented and a cause of social unreest today, and perpetuated a great many traditional divisions by endorsing or at least tolerating them. That's the bad part.

Without exactly meaning to, they set off a massive social revolution in my country. They are long gone, but the issues they created remain largely unresolved. The upheaval continues. In well over a half-century since Independence, we've had regular race riots, an attempted military coup, two failed popular revolts, a generation-long civil war and numerous political assassinations. Of course the British aren't to blame for all our postcolonial troubles, but you will see the same story tellingly repeated in many former European colonies. The world has only lately begun to recover from the traumatic effects of the age of European colonialism. I must say the rise of the USA has not helped here, but has rather made things worse.

A FEW REPLIES TO SUNDRY OTHER POSTERS:

theabsolutetruth: 'The African (slave) trade was well established of its own accord before the British were eventually persuaded (to join it).' — yes, the Atlantic trade already existed in the time of Charles V of Spain. However, the British turned it into an industry. That was the real difference between the British and everybody who preceded them: they turned everything they touched into an industry. In this case, human misery was significantly multiplied as a result. But as much or more misery was caused by the industrial production of opium in Bengal and its export to China. In my view, this is the greatest crime of British imperialism, and it was heinous indeed.

romilo: 'if British did not exist... maybe someone else had taken their ways and deeds and succeed better or worse.'
I agree. And the prime candidates would have been France and Holland. The Dutch, as I say, were terrible imperialists — so bad the Indonesians actually preferred the Japanese to them, which must have taken some doing. As for the French, we can all see what a mess they made of their empire — in Africa, Indochina, even North America. So perhaps, on the whole, we were all better off with the Brits.

Shiloh7: I don't think the average English individual is to blame from what GB/UK gets up to because of the part played by the monarchy and that institution's greed and lust for power. If you look at our history the way we were serfs its amazing we survived.'
Serfdom began declining in England and Scotland from the fourteenth century onwards. The last English serfs were freed by Queen Elizabeth in 1547. The English had barely begun assembling their empire by then. They weren't even British yet.

The British empire was built largely by private enterprise, from its beginnings in Sir Richard Morgan's pirate 'free port' in the Caribbean to the British East India Company. The monarchy did little but hand out royal charters and help itself to a share of the profits. The empire-builders were mostly men like Robert Clive and Cecil Rhodes — middle-class chancers who wanted to make it big, and didn't they just.

And who, pray tell, fought in those all-conquering red-coated armies if not the ordinary working and farming men of England? Have you forgotten A E Housman's lines, written for Queen Victoria's jubilee?

Oh, God will save her, fear you not:
Be you the men you 've been,
Get you the sons your fathers got,
And God will save the Queen.

— A Shropshire Lad

originally posted by: PLAYERONE01

originally posted by: Ceeker63
a reply to: boymonkey74 I am not sure if the world would have been a better place. The only thing I do know is a good portion of the European population would not be here if the British had never existed. If the Island of Britain was not there then Scotland, and Ireland would not be there as well.

scotland and ireland would still be here just in thier original form, no history and culture corrupted and lost, allowed to evolve without mass oppression from the monarchy.

You mean warring tribes and living in hovels? Not trying to wind you up by the way, just pointing out the obvious. Or do you think those things are solely the preserve of the English?

a reply to: daaskapital

Actually, there is lot to be said for Mongol rule (after the messy battles were out of the way!). History has distorted the truth there, unfortunately. The Mongols didn't favor any particular religion, all were accepted and allowed (can't say the same elsewhere at the time). Trade boomed as did cultural exchanges. Knowledge was shared on a much larger scale. Even the lot of the average Chinese peasant was much better under the Mongols than under their own Emperors.

It seems almost anathema to say it but the Mongols were, basically, very tolerant. You just had to accept that they would slaughter you if you fought them!

I'm not sure about better or worse but it would be almost unrecognizable from the world we live in today.

a reply to: boymonkey74

no sir conan doyle! no j.r.r tolkien or c.s. lewis! jean luc picard! no shakespeare. no david bowie, or the beatles or the rolling stones. no peter cushing. no benedict cumberbatch. no dr. who. no douglas adams!


this could go on for awhile. hey, and no boymonkey74? i say it's a bad idea to have no more britain!