It took 2 World Wars to Destroy Britain and the Empire

[el freako]

Originally posted by KaiserIsak
Let me tell you all one thing: Colonialism is´nt passed, it just changed form. The European Union and the US still have 100% economical controll of all the third world countries, and then it really does´nt matter much if they have their own flag and president.

Actually that was pretty much the state of affairs the Britian had during it's period of economic preminence (1820-1860).

If was only after serious challengers to British economic dominance appeared that colonialism really got going.

So maybe 'pure' colonialism could reappear in the future - maybe under the pretext of installing the 'societal infrastructure' (rule of law, democratic institutions, free press) in many third-world nations that have failed to develop them since independence.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by KaiserIsak
I read some of your posts, and i saw one of you writing about how europe conquered the world, just to loose it again in two bloody civil wars.
Let me tell you all one thing: Colonialism is´nt passed, it just changed form. The European Union and the US still have 100% economical controll of all the third world countries, and then it really does´nt matter much if they have their own flag and president. The money goes to europe/us anyways.

You overstate your point to the point of being wrong.
As someone who lives in the former British colony of Hong Kong (and now part of a third world nation), I can tell you that most of the money made here stays in the hands of local people. The same could be said of Singapore (a third world country when it gained its independence)and Malaysia. I would hazard a guess that most of the economy in India and Pakistan is locally owned. Vietnam still has limited foreign investment. The Phillipines has a lot of locally owned corporations.

It is true that there is foreign investment in all of these countries and that money flows back to Europe and the U.S., but don't forget that this foreign investment creates jobs and wealth in the local economies.

[The Andy-Man]

'And dont tell me britain let their colonies go peacefully, what do you guys think they really are fighting for in afghanistan and iraq? "They have weapons of mass destruction"'


erm, these werent britsh colonies, iraq was for a few yrs, but has nothing to do with today.

'Actually that was pretty much the state of affairs the Britian had during it's period of economic preminence (1820-1860).

If was only after serious challengers to British economic dominance appeared that colonialism really got going. '


this is the best point of all, before 1870, britains empire was largly informal, today, the US empire is totaly informal. but becoming less so as more challengers rise. its just the way power politics go, rise to power and become inchallenged lead to liberal ideas and peacful ways, as soon as challangers appear it is toaly forgoten how they became powerful and so they ironicly bring their opwn demise trying to keep the power.