The Great British Empire.

just joininf the discussion so forgive me for back tracking a bit but this statement i couldn't let pass

They were tyrannical.....Do you really understand the history?...Spain, Italy, Portugal, everyone was exploring.....England just wanted it all.

spain etc were "exploring" were they?

i'm sure if you ask the natives of southern and central America they would disagree...the spanish conquistadors decimated those countries

as for who would be more advanced...the arguement speaks for itself

look at the US and Canada which was under British rule

then look at south america and mexico which fell under spanish and portuguese rule...which countries are better off?

Yes, but the initial view that was put forward is that the British Empire was some kind of altruistic entity that spread "freedom and fraternity" and that the indigenous peoples were better off under British rule - which to my knowledge is inaccurate.

i understand that...but to call the spanish etc as "explorers" is total nonsense..they were murderers and plunderers...they conquered in a more destructive way than the british empire did

the british also spread an education system throughout the world that is the basis for the rising economies of countries like india today...the main issue of poverty in india is part of their own history and culture and is the caste system...a barrier which prevents people from helping themselves out of poverty

Originally posted by finti
To believe that Britain didnt extrort and was all goody goody in their colonies and land they governed is to fool yourselves, they had and empire and they rule by our way is the law........obey or whip whip whip

Again, perpetuating the idea of rule by sheer force- I repeat, that could not be done. Britain did not have enough whips- we left that mainly to the locals.

I'll repeat, it was held together by greed and money. It could not have worked without the connivance of local rulers.

And yes a lot, of indigenous people were better off in terms of facilities and services. But they weren't free to choose their own Government, which many would say was the important point. The parts of the Empire that covered areas like India and Africa- as in, not placed we had colonised, but places we had taken over- had the possibility of true democracy removed because the authorities were designed to refer all decisions up to London.

Originally posted by finti
To believe that Britain didnt extrort and was all goody goody in their colonies and land they governed is to fool yourselves, they had and empire and they rule by our way is the law........obey or whip whip whip

Originally posted by finti
To believe that Britain didnt extrort and was all goody goody in their colonies and land they governed is to fool yourselves, they had and empire and they rule by our way is the law........obey or whip whip whip

Again, perpetuating the idea of rule by sheer force- I repeat, that could not be done. Britain did not have enough whips- we left that mainly to the locals.

I'll repeat, it was held together by greed and money. It could not have worked without the connivance of local rulers.

And yes a lot, of indigenous people were better off in terms of facilities and services. But they weren't free to choose their own Government, which many would say was the important point. The parts of the Empire that covered areas like India and Africa- as in, not placed we had colonised, but places we had taken over- had the possibility of true democracy removed because the authorities were designed to refer all decisions up to London.

Again, perpetuating the idea of rule by sheer force- I repeat, that could not be done. Britain did not have enough whips- we left that mainly to the locals

Originally posted by finti
even if it was left to the locals it was the British way that was enforced

It was the 'British way' that meant progression DEVELOPMENT! As someone previously said- look at British rule in North America and Spanish rule in South America...
South America = corrupt and poor
North America = corrupt and rich 😆

It was the 'British way' that meant progression DEVELOPMENT! As someone previously said- look at British rule in North America and Spanish rule in South America...

Originally posted by finti
and India?

...and all of the island colonies?

Considerably better off after British rule than before.

Do you accept the evidence displayed in N. America, Australlia, India, S. Africa and New Zealand?

Ask the Irish too

Originally posted by Britannia
Considerably better off after British rule than before.
Do you accept the evidence displayed in N. America, Australlia, India, S. Africa and New Zealand?

Originally posted by finti
yeah the country divided is way better off

South Africa? wasnt really much there in the first place, neither was Austrailia and New Zeland, but ask the original innhabitance of those places about if they feel better off after British rule than how they lived before it.....also ask Native Americans the same even though USA must take responsibility for actions taken after they gained independence.

Ask the Irish too

I'm afraid that I've never spoken to any indigenous peoples... have you? I do know, however, that in N. Ireland most people vote for the Ulster Unionists.... In case you are unaware that is the party (DEMOCRATIC PARTY) which represents the want to remain under British rule.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
If you're referring to the indigenous people of N. America, Australia, New Zealand, S. Africa. No.

Have you ever even spoken do indigenous people?

I have to go for a bit, I'll read your comments later.

I live in New Zealand. I visit Australia. I have friends who are Maori, and I have indeed spoken to Australian Aborigines. Satisfied?

May I ask you the same question?

I'm afraid that I've never spoken to any indigenous peoples... have you?

however, that in N. Ireland most people vote for the Ulster Unionists.... In case you are unaware that is the party (DEMOCRATIC PARTY) which represents the want to remain under British rule.

Originally posted by finti
yes I have, I have spoken to many Native Americans

Ireland is more than Northern Ireland

We are talking about British rule, correct? Northern Island is the part under British rule... What do these native americans say about British rule? I am sure that you have had many detailed discussions about it.

Ireland*

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
I live in New Zealand. I visit Australia. I have friends who are Maori, and I have indeed spoken to Australian Aborigines. Satisfied?

May I ask you the same question?

Same question goes to you...
I have spoken to Irish people, I have a South African friend and I know many from India. Oh, and a Canadian.