Did the British Imperialism improve the world?

[Ted Striker]

read up on Rhodesia if you want to learn about raping and pillaging ppl

[Sandman]

IMHO, Western civilization, with its respect for human rights, democracy and the family, and its emphasis on education for all, is worth spreading to more "primitive" cultures.

Western interest in human rights and democracy is very recent development. Furthermore, family is not at all strong in Western culture, compared to the extended families found in other cultures.

I think that had Africa, India and China been left alone to a greater extent, they would have eventually found a way to work Western ideas into their cultures, whilst retaining enough cultural uniqueness to keep them happy.

[Shi Huangdi]

British imperialism led to the creation of the USA, so yet overall it was good for the world.

[yavoon]

oh goodie I will so quickly read up on it then I'll come back and agree w/ u cuz it invalidates all my points.

or maybe not.

=D tho, even tho ur kind of a hater.

[Ted Striker]

dont player h8 congradulate

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by yavoon
wut a random useless comment ted. so the african continent was only held back by the fact it didnt have a bigger gun? sounds like a great place to me.

Not bigger guns. A complete overhaul of the political structure which has let the Africans clueless, and prone to do much, much ****. How can you expect a continent whose most important leaders had a few hundred people under their authority to become managed like a modern country, where leadership is highly abstract ?
The newly appointed presidents have acted like tribal chiefs (and not necessarily skilled), and have shamelessly favored their home tribe at the loss of everyone else.

It took Millenia to European to learn living with an abstract power structure, yet the Africans should have mastered it overnight.

We don't have given them better guns. We have completely destroyed all their reality, and left them clueless in a de facto "modern world" they knew nothing about. They'll eventually learn how to rule a modern country, but it will take several generations, at best.

[Ted Striker]

Spiff knows his stuff.

[Kirnwaffen]

yes the british imperialism sucked for lots of reasons, but when its all sed and done the british did a few things that have had long term benefits.

the idea of order, the introduction of education, and the obvious introduction of labor. that have had risidual effects that weren't planned but it doesn't make them ne less nice.

realize the places that spain/the dutch imperialized in general turned out considerably worse. since they were more about raping/pillaging. the british definitely had a moral mandate to their imperialism, whether its looked on kindly now or not.

British 'education' was largely an attempt to destroy the culture of the African people and mold them into archetypical subjects of the British empire. They viewed African culture similarly to the way you do: barbaric and backward. They therefore attempted to get rid of it.

The 'introduction of labor' that you speak of was hardly necessary. Most, if not all African tribes had some concept of this (agriculturally, anyway).

In terms of 'raping and pillaging', they did, just in a more sereptitious fashion. The British were able to identify and arrest key dissenters within the tribes, thus preventing rebellion. In addition, they were expert at providing the tribes with just enough to keep them content. In this way, they were able to extract most of a country's resources without appearing overly brutal.

edit: added quote to clarify.

[Spiffor]

Monkspider :
All European colonialism has been a major disaster for mankind. The British one is the most important, but the Spanish, French and Dutch didn't do any better, and often did worse.

Shi :
Was that a troll or genuine bigotism ?

[yavoon]

it seems to me its a lot like it was before only now the weapons are a lot better and ppl realize they can be more power hungry.

I hardly feel bad that what was holding them back before was merely the opportunity.

[Spiffor]

Yavoon :
You have obviously understood nothing to what was Africa before the colonization. If the only thing you are able to put up against my arguments are one-liner misconceptions, I think it is time to end this argument.

[yavoon]

kirn I hardly think the british were altruistic, nevertheless they were inadvertently given some of the basic tools needed to survive in todays world.

I think one pt to make clear is I'm not all that big of a cultural relativist. this is to include the way western culture use to be. but the thing is western culture purposefully or not had built in it ways to change. others usually did not.

and I am not gna condone repression or abuse on either side just cuz one was doing it longer or it is supposedly part of their tradition

[yavoon]

k bye spiffor=D

[Kirnwaffen]

I wasn't challenging British altruism; I was challenging your assertion that the British provided the Africans with anything useful. Technology, perhaps, but not the necessary moral guidance to use it in a constructive way. The same sort of pattern can be seen in the occupation of Germany by Napoleonic France. Sure, Germany industrialized and unified afterward, but the Nazis were a direct result. I'm not talking about cultural relativism either. The effect is cross-cultural.

[yavoon]

didnt I just hear that the british attempted to impose their morality on the tribes? and weren't their lots of missionaries in british colonies? they subsequently brought some concept of literacy which is of course one of the singular most important things to a functioning society.

I mean generally we dont like either I understand, but I dont think that constitutes lack of moral guidance. gotta be careful I'm not condoning the british in imposing their will. I'm just pointing out it had benefits.