tonyh29 Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 Blimey. I thought I would have to explain some of the negatives associated with imperialism but you did it all by yourself. So what if it has been done since the dawn of time, it does not make it right, and saying that if we didn't act like rocket polishers then someone else would is no excuse whatsoever . It wasn't our right to impose our values on other nations no matter how you dress it up. Yeah how dare we impose our values on others and end the practise of Sati for example Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 am I right in thinking that very little else has changed since Thatcher's days for workers' rights? The current government is certainly trying to weaken rights, so that employers can take a greater share of profits and workers less. And the vastly increasing amount of private debt coupled with deliberately high unemployment, part-time and casualised work means that more people are more dependent than ever before on paid employment, which does a lot to hold down wage demands, and make people reluctant to stand up for rights. The increased ability of employers in many industries to shift elsewhere is a further way of disciplining the workforce. And of course union membership is lower than in times past. Taken together, these things mean that workers are in a weaker and more precarious position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brumerican Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 Yeah how dare we impose our values on others and end the practise of Sati for example Clutching at straws there. Our imperialism was a purely selfish endeavour. If you genuinely believe that stopping a few strange customs in the lands we invaded justifies our arrogant behaviour then I am at a loss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 (edited) Yeah how dare we impose our values on others. I think it's a precarious position to take even if there were some universal judgement that said 'our values' were/are of a higher standing that anyone else's. Edited January 2, 2013 by snowychap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colhint Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 Well I believe without conquest, from whichever nation you decide, and all the resource and sharing of knowledge, the world would have been about 200 years behind where it is now. I mean most medicine and drugs originated in the rainforest. Should we have just waited until the tribes decided to share them with us? Would England have ever been the same without the battle of senlac ridge. Certainly we benefited afterwards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 A watch maybe? A much wittier suggestion than mine. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brumerican Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 Well I believe without conquest, from whichever nation you decide, and all the resource and sharing of knowledge, the world would have been about 200 years behind where it is now. I mean most medicine and drugs originated in the rainforest. Should we have just waited until the tribes decided to share them with us? Would England have ever been the same without the battle of senlac ridge. Certainly we benefited afterwards But why did it have to come via conquest rather than exploration ? Sometimes good things can emerge from bad times for sure . There are are countless cliches based upon this (every cloud ...etc) but that no way justifies the bad. Britain is responsible for transporting 3.5 million slaves to the Americas, but its ok because we got rich from it and stopped some Indian women committing suicide in the process ? That is such a **** up view imo . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted January 2, 2013 Share Posted January 2, 2013 Has Britain's lax immigration policy down the years been a net positive/negative? "Lax" is an interesting word in that context. Evidence suggests it has probably depressed wages at the lowest end, but has been of overall economic benefit, and with declining childbirth and an ageing population it is required if we're to avoid some big problems. Socially, migrants tend to cluster together for all the obvious reasons, and some communities therefore feel that there's been a marked impact on their own community, so that things feel very different to how they were before. Nothing remotely on the scale of the relocations required for land clearances or industrialisation, but still something which can cause tensions in the short term. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted January 3, 2013 Share Posted January 3, 2013 I think it's a precarious position to take even if there were some universal judgement that said 'our values' were/are of a higher standing that anyone else's. I'm out in the Middle East at the moment Women are covered and have to walk 1 step behind the men (Some don't but a heck of a lot still do ) If you are caught stealing you have your hand chopped off and some crimes result in you being stoned to death Now I like the Middle East and its people , but their practises belong in the dark ages in many instances and yes our values are of a higher standard in some instances ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted January 3, 2013 Share Posted January 3, 2013 But why did it have to come via conquest rather than exploration ? Sometimes good things can emerge from bad times for sure . There are are countless cliches based upon this (every cloud ...etc) but that no way justifies the bad. Britain is responsible for transporting 3.5 million slaves to the Americas, but its ok because we got rich from it and stopped some Indian women committing suicide in the process ? That is such a **** up view imo . Britain didn't start the slave trade , it did however end it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brumerican Posted January 3, 2013 Share Posted January 3, 2013 Britain didn't start the slave trade , it did however end it After it became very wealthy upon the back of it and only after thousands upon thousands of slaves died in transit . I am seriously lost for words that you can genuinely look back upon those dark days with some kind of twisted fondness. The British Empire was built on the exploitation of lands and people that were not ours to exploit . We had no right whatsoever to impose our "higher" standards upon anyone , especially when it involved lowering 3.5 million people to the level of farm cattle , stealing land and committing piracy on a global scale. The mind boggles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted January 3, 2013 Share Posted January 3, 2013 Some classic (and untrue) lies being spouted here by the usual Tory supporters. Funny how (using AWOl as an example) the selling off of many of the publicly owned bodies is only seen as a bad thing in certain threads. Tell you what Drat, if you can find an example of me saying that selling off the publicly owned critical national infrastructure underpinning the country - begun by the Tories and continued by Labour - was a good thing then please link to it. Until then please don't blatantly call me a liar and then not bother to provide any evidence. It's not very civil and more than a little bit snide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr_Pangloss Posted January 3, 2013 Share Posted January 3, 2013 With the erosion of workers' rights, I have a really shit job that gets paid below the national average and I have all the rights in the world I could ask for, in fact there are people I work with who utterly take the piss. In fact I find the whole thing about unions not needing half the members to vote in order to go on strike completely bizarre. I know Labour brought in the minimum wage but am I right in thinking that very little else has changed since Thatcher's days for workers' rights? I think we're all pretty cushty even considering we're in a double dipper, Britain's not in decline any more than any other country. Much of the world economy was built on money that never existed and it is righting itself, that's all. The fact is that the UK has amongst the lowest employment protection metrics in the OECD (according to their data of course) and I do agree that this government is looking to erode them further. The goal is to make this country like the US as far as employment protection is concerned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted January 3, 2013 Share Posted January 3, 2013 The goal is to make this country like the US as far as employment protection is concerned. ...as far as everything is concerned, it seems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted January 3, 2013 Share Posted January 3, 2013 The American model is shit. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choffer Posted January 3, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted January 3, 2013 After it became very wealthy upon the back of it and only after thousands upon thousands of slaves died in transit . I am seriously lost for words that you can genuinely look back upon those dark days with some kind of twisted fondness. The British Empire was built on the exploitation of lands and people that were not ours to exploit . We had no right whatsoever to impose our "higher" standards upon anyone , especially when it involved lowering 3.5 million people to the level of farm cattle , stealing land and committing piracy on a global scale. The mind boggles. It's interesting though that this isn't how it is viewed in a lot of the countries we subjugated though. Take Calcutta as an example. I was there fairly recently and arrived ready to feel somewhat apologetic for our transgressions during our time as overlords in the subcontinent. I spent a fair amount of time discussing the empire with some of the locals who surprised me in their stance that the worst thing that ever happened it India was us giving them their country back. Many Calcuttans refuse to recognise the name Kolkata and look back with only fondness on he days of The Raj. I'm not saying that the empire was not built on exploitation and I can't suggest that there isn't a great deal for us to be guilty about but suggesting that we could only be guilty about the empire is not something I could agree with. It was a different time in the history of the world and if we hadn't built an empire, someone else would. Sure there's lots of it that is hugely regrettable but there is still much to be proud of. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted January 3, 2013 Share Posted January 3, 2013 (edited) Tell you what Drat, if you can find an example of me saying that selling off the publicly owned critical national infrastructure underpinning the country - begun by the Tories and continued by Labour - was a good thing then please link to it. Until then please don't blatantly call me a liar and then not bother to provide any evidence. It's not very civil and more than a little bit snide. You really do not read any of the posts do you? I stated that you conveniently admitted in another thread that selling off the the utilities etc was a bad thing, something that you conveniently fail to mention (or consider) when economic policies are talked about on here. I have not called you a liar so please don't that silliness as it does not help matters. Blatantly? - laughable The reference to lies was some of the other BS that is often quoted as being the root cause of the problems - OK? Edited January 3, 2013 by drat01 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted January 3, 2013 Share Posted January 3, 2013 You really do not read any of the posts do you? I stated that you conveniently admitted in another thread that selling off the the utilities etc was a bad thing, something that you conveniently fail to mention (or consider) when economic policies are talked about on here. I have not called you a liar so please don't that silliness as it does not help matters. Blatantly? - laughable The reference to lies was some of the other BS that is often quoted as being the root cause of the problems - OK? I do read people's posts before replying to them, even yours. As for the rest the post above, it's like watching a maggot wriggling on a hook. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brumerican Posted January 3, 2013 Share Posted January 3, 2013 It's interesting though that this isn't how it is viewed in a lot of the countries we subjugated though. Take Calcutta as an example. I was there fairly recently and arrived ready to feel somewhat apologetic for our transgressions during our time as overlords in the subcontinent. I spent a fair amount of time discussing the empire with some of the locals who surprised me in their stance that the worst thing that ever happened it India was us giving them their country back. Many Calcuttans refuse to recognise the name Kolkata and look back with only fondness on he days of The Raj. I'm not saying that the empire was not built on exploitation and I can't suggest that there isn't a great deal for us to be guilty about but suggesting that we could only be guilty about the empire is not something I could agree with. It was a different time in the history of the world and if we hadn't built an empire, someone else would. Sure there's lots of it that is hugely regrettable but there is still much to be proud of. Like I said , some positives may have arisen from colonialism but it can't possibly be used as any justification for some major transgressions. We stole lands that were not ours , we enslaved millions of people for profit and exploited the poor to increase our wealth and power. It was in no way a golden age . In fact it was quite the opposite , regardless of whether some of the colonies did indeed become better off somehow in the aftermath. You really can't defend immoral behaviour on such an epic scale like that let alone look back at it out with pride . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted January 3, 2013 Share Posted January 3, 2013 I do read people's posts before replying to them, even yours. As for the rest the post above, it's like watching a maggot wriggling on a hook. :-) - sorry AWOL but I don't agree with you and still find your reply funny . So why not just agree to disagree on this and move on, eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts