My Father's Confession From The Colonies

British invaders stole from the colonies leaving the inhabitants to rebuild their shattered nations. Agree or disagree?

The two main indicators I'm aware of are firstly the guilty-looking do-gooders, eager to show charity anywhere but home. This type, often seen on some self-glorifying charity pedestal of their own making, are frequently descended from those who did steal from the colonies. They experience genuine and understandable guilt.

Those of us descended from farmers, fishermen and foresters don't share this guilt. This is the second indicator, showing how British workers gave to the colonies. People like my father. He considered himself well-off as a child because he had two shirts and a pair of shoes. Some of his friends had one shirt and wore plimsolls winter and summer. These people had none of the comforts bought with wealth plundered from other nations.

My father is old now and has reached the stage where the barriers are down and the secrets are tumbling out. This is his confession from the colonies. Judging from the shocked expression on my mother's face when he said this a few weeks ago, he may never have talked about it before.


His job was to explain to farmers why traditional farming practices should be replaced with newer, science based methods. He worked in several different countries doing this. In one country he was taken out once week on a confidential visit. There were no notes to be taken, no photographs, and no talking about it afterwards. He was shown the old practice, and then had to explain why the new practice was better.

One day he was taken to a distant farm where planting was about to begin. They showed him the old practice. A dead baby was buried under the first plant. They told him, "There's usually a stillborn somewhere in the area, but if there isn't we make one available."

His job then was to explain the use of fertiliser instead of this type of magic.

My father experienced this around 1950.

This quote is from The Golden Bough.

In spite of the vigilance of the British Government these sacrifices are said to be still secretly perpetrated. The victims are poor waifs and strays whose disappearance attracts no notice.

www.bartleby.com...

To keep this balanced I'll say I know traditional magic for good and evil is carried out here in Britain. I was once warned, "If you don't shut up you'll be the next sacrifice. It's always made to look like an accident and anyone who tries to say it wasn't is made the laughing stock". We haven't stamped it out here yet and probably never will, we aren't morally superior.


The point I want to make in this thread is many older British workers know how much they gave to the colonies. We cannot allow their efforts to be ignored. Their story has to be told to give balance.

That's the way things were run back then.
The home British population wasn't treated any better.

www.independent.co.uk...

a reply to: Kester

I do think that British Royalty carries a lot of the blame for this and not the British public most of whom were too poor and busy trying to work long enough hours to keep food on the table and the landlord paid.

I did read about Wellington and Rothschild grabbing the gold rights in South Africa which incurred the deaths of many Africaans and their women and children just so one man could count his gold.

The trouble is that when you look back you don't relate to conditions then only what you live in now. Today many would be in uproar about what queen and country set about doing. Blair had very little support in this country for his wars abroad, neither did cameron so we can fairly say for the public, albeit not the elite, we have learned and try our best. On learning about Fair Trade and the conditions of the farmers being exploited recently, many of us now make choices on this which help farmers abroad get a decent living for their efforts.

a reply to: Kester

The guilty looking do gooders, the British monarchy's armys slaughtered hundreds of thousands across the world and you are blaming guilty looking do gooders

You pohms havnt learned a thing in 200 odd years, meaning you went into India and stole its wealth for your own economy, stole it's trade, stole it's pride

You complain about guilty do gooders and then complain about baby's being used as fertilisers, what's with that

a reply to: Raggedyman

You've completely missed the point. There are those here who benefitted from the crimes. The guilty-looking do-gooders are their descendants. Then there are the workers who had no part in the criminal part of the exercise, yet some of them worked hard to improve life in the colonies. Showing how to build grain stores that protected the grain better than the traditional stores for example.

a reply to: Raggedyman

If it was not for britain India wouldnt exist.

It would be like africa, a collection of irrelevent tribal states, ruled by tinpot dictators and warlords trapped in a perpetual state of famine and civil war.

Britain pretty much formed modern India.
The india today thats a regional power and has a fast growing economy.

originally posted by: Kester
a reply to: Raggedyman

You've completely missed the point. There are those here who benefitted from the crimes. The guilty-looking do-gooders are their descendants. Then there are the workers who had no part in the criminal part of the exercise, yet some of them worked hard to improve life in the colonies. Showing how to build grain stores that protected the grain better than the traditional stores for example.

Well then I am sorry, I don't understand your post

How could the descendants be guilty

Anyway I know a Phillipino who wished the Phillipines were colonized by the English, not the Spanish or the US who did
He recons most country's colonized by Britain moved forward, most country's colonised by Spain and Portugal, France, not so much progress

Catholic country's were not as good

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: Raggedyman

If it was not for britain India wouldnt exist.

It would be like africa, a collection of irrelevent tribal states, ruled by tinpot dictators and warlords trapped in a perpetual state of famine and civil war.

Britain pretty much formed modern India.
The india today thats a regional power and has a fast growing economy.

I know Indians who would argue that, also Indians who would agree

China was a group of tribal states who formed without help, India may have

Anyway, I didn't understand the op's post, Britain did bad things and some good things.
I don't think the British are as altruistic as some would make out, then I also know they have shaped country's for the better

This white guilt thing is getting waaay out of hand.
Let me ask you this, do you as an Englishman feel triggered or upset at the colonisation of the Romans in England
that began around 43 AD. it took away your celtic culture, taught your ancesters new science in farming, building, education and warfare. the Romans gave you civil structure and shaped you into the country then the empire you became. now i dont know about anybody else here but being a colony on the outer fringe of arguably one of, if not the greatest empire of all time seemed to work out A OK for the brittish which in turn worked out ok for everyone she colonised.
now people can sit around and dribble about how bad they had it when they were young or they can actualy look at it for what it is, humans have been getting colonised and recolonised and attacked and taken over since before history was written difference is now we are so PC it's absurd. look back through your DNA structure, pick your time line you want to get triggered by.

Who can argue history? It is written by the winners-who do receive the spoils including raping women who have "hybrid" offspring.

What matters is the present. There is plenty of so-called altruistic support that ends up in the dictator-leaders hands. Look at Haiti.

Arguments can be made and finger-pointing as to why certain country's wealth and education prosper and others like Somali waste away.

Didn't we form the United Nations for the benefit of all? What a joke.

No easy answers but trying to place "blame" for the past serves no purpose.

a reply to: Justso

And yet tax payers pay for it and are reminded of it on a daily basis.

Why the hell should I feel guilt for something that happened 200 years ago anyway?

The English were invaded multiple times, I don't see them demanding apologies and handouts for it...

a reply to: Raggedyman
Bloody British what did they do for India?

The Social and religious reforms,
such as the abolishment of Sati (when a widow was burnt on the husbands funeral pyre), stopping child marriages.

Education,
The British opened schools across the continent.

Transportation and Communication,
The Indian railway system, the Indian postal system and the telegraph.

The Indian Census,
British started the census to get the statistical data of the age, caste, religion, occupation, education, and infirmities of the population in the year 1871.

The Geological survey of India,
This institution made maps of India . Believe me on not , many places & villages of India still uses the maps made during British time!!.

Democracy,
The democratic system was introduced in India.

OK! apart from
Social & religious reforms
Education
Transport
Communication
The Census
The Geological Survey
and
Democracy

Just what did the bloody British do for India

a reply to: redchad

Don't forget the aqueducts...

originally posted by: redchad
a reply to: Raggedyman
Bloody British what did they do for India?

The Social and religious reforms,
such as the abolishment of Sati (when a widow was burnt on the husbands funeral pyre), stopping child marriages.

Education,
The British opened schools across the continent.

Transportation and Communication,
The Indian railway system, the Indian postal system and the telegraph.

The Indian Census,
British started the census to get the statistical data of the age, caste, religion, occupation, education, and infirmities of the population in the year 1871.

The Geological survey of India,
This institution made maps of India . Believe me on not , many places & villages of India still uses the maps made during British time!!.

Democracy,
The democratic system was introduced in India.

OK! apart from
Social & religious reforms
Education
Transport
Communication
The Census
The Geological Survey
and
Democracy

Just what did the bloody British do for India

Hey redchad, your argument so solid and sound but
There are Indians who don't appreciate the British in India

It is like that life of Brian skit, some people will never like people who colonise, invade another country

And the British didn't stop al those things, they did try, but arnt you inferring your way was better than theirs, is that right and why

a reply to: Raggedyman
The popular view of colonial rule, spanning some 200 years, is routinely depicted as the systematic plundering of a nation. That the Empire stripped India of its natural resources and gave little in return, leaving the place all but destitute when independence was finally granted in 1947.

"When in reality the girders for every bridge, the track for every mile of railway and the vast array of machinery required for India's infrastructure were all carried there by the same ships that helped exploit a land thousands of miles away. The engineers who laid the cornerstones for India's development from Third World nation to burgeoning industrial superpower were British.
The 'sins' of the Empire have been widely and frequently written about while the other positive side of the imperial coin, of which Britain can be proud and which laid the foundations for modern-day India, has always been overlooked."
The making of India Dr Kartar Lalvani,

Recently I was fortunate to be able to spend seven week travelling across this amazing country and found most Indians in the cities and in rural areas consider Britain's contribution to India's social, civil and physical infrastructure the launch pad for the countries future wealth.

Yes there are Indians critical of the British but in my experience I didn't meet many in fact quite the opposite it seems to be media generated and another urban myth.

You said some people don't like being colonised or invaded and your right but you have to look at India on arrival of the British it wasn't a country as such, it was a continent with many many tribes religious beliefs and war lords. The British basically wiped the slate clean and civilised it. Do I think the India we handed over was better than the mess we discovered definitely.

a reply to: crazyewok

Well we can see how the wealth acquired by the Brits over the last 300 years around the world has"trickled done" to the common man. Who exactly are you defending?

a reply to: redchad

is routinely depicted as the systematic plundering of a nation

Tell that to the current Australians who have to pay for wrongs done to Aboriginals. I don't see the Queen dipping in to pay for some of the wrongs in the last 200 odd years, the benefits securly tucked away.

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: redchad

is routinely depicted as the systematic plundering of a nation

Tell that to the current Australians who have to pay for wrongs done to Aboriginals. I don't see the Queen dipping in to pay for some of the wrongs in the last 200 odd years, the benefits securly tucked away.

I don't think you really understand what the Brits have done
Yeah they had their issues but they did help, they helped those country's more than your posts on the Internet
Your complaining and attitude of I am the best person ever

a reply to: Raggedyman

Thats the thing.

Ok invadeing and colonisation was wrong.

But on the whole Britain tended to leave the countrys better off than we found them.
At least compared to the Portuguese, Spanish, french and Even the USA.

Plus the country's that stayed part of the empire the longest or who left the empire more gradually have faired pretty well. Canada, Australia, singapore, hong kong, the Bahamas. ...... they are aome of the richest countrys with some of the higest standards of living in the world! Even better than the UK.

The countrys that decided to leave quickly or gain there independence through violence didnt fare as well but still did better than there french and Spanish countrtparts.

Even the USA nearly failed in its first 100 years cause of it sudden independence.

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: Raggedyman

Thats the thing.

Ok invadeing and colonisation was wrong.

But on the whole Britain tended to leave the countrys better off than we found them.
At least compared to the Portuguese, Spanish, french and Even the USA.

Plus the country's that stayed part of the empire the longest or who left the empire more gradually have faired pretty well. Canada, Australia, singapore, hong kong, the Bahamas. ...... they are aome of the richest countrys with some of the higest standards of living in the world! Even better than the UK.

The countrys that decided to leave quickly or gain there independence through violence didnt fare as well but still did better than there french and Spanish countrtparts.

Even the USA nearly failed in its first 100 years cause of it sudden independence.

I don't think invading and colonising was wrong
I think there were aspects of the colonisation that were wrong

I don't think it is black and white

a reply to: Raggedyman

Well, the Filipino is an idiot. It already happened. It was called the US. Go check out Phillipine-US war. White race is the biggest deceiver in history. Once they get their hands on China, don't expect free land. All Asian and Native race will disappear first with history erased. Black/Indian race will be next.

en.wikipedia.org...

Only reason Phillipines isn't as affected as Hawaii or North American continent is because of Japan WW2. It was also too far out of reach. Phillies was this close to become a US state. Knowing US they cannot do this, just yet because of UN and Asia needs to go. Russia is no longer playing their game since the 8 nation alliance against China in the past. The Bear is not willing to waste men power on China or India. It has figured out its mistake since WW1-WW2.