hi, I think the world would be a better place if U.S. power was in the hands of The English. Seriously!
I can't see that the Britain handled its empire any more humanely or any less arrogantly and the Americans and I fully expect history to repeat itself with the Chinese in years to come. It's the nature of global hegemony....
American power is in the hands of the english , the queen and people like her rule the world . listen to alex jones he thinks americas ruled by european royalty and suchlike and he may well be right their mighty pesky and might well be in charge and not tell you
And mr phoenix we got rid of slavery, and you could have a good argument that much of the world was better off ruled by the uk, africa has gone downhill since the end of colonialism. Some countrys have done well since the end of colonialism but they may have done as well if the empire was still around . The main argument against colonialism is you have to give a damn about the countrys you run, and now we can exploit africa and its not our fault that their starving I wonder what would have happened if we had not taken over countrys I think we would have been richer , that was one of the arguments against colonialism at the time that it hurt the country doing the conquering , better to build more technology in the uk and less railroads in india or africa
You're really got to stop listening to these conspiracy nuts and start listening to more than just Alex Jones. All I ever hear from you is Alex Jones this, Alex Jones that, I love you Alex Jones, I want to bum you Alex Jones. Deary me....
Well, ok, that's fair, but it seems to me the idea that the Queen - who doesn't even hold legislative power in Britain - rules the world, is one of his crazier ramblings....
Alex jones is a whack job no offence to you but.. he thinks hilary clinton is a shape shifting reptillian.. ¬_¬ And on topic, hmm i sort of DO think there would be less problems if the british empire was still in power, we did look after our countries that we colonized or rules, though it seems abit to dictating-like for me personally. I think the best kind of leadership would probably be a buddhist type leadership, but that'd turn quite communist i guess? which usually collapses countries.. Sorry for my rambling haha and hey all, haven't been on theese forums in a little while
I think it would take much more than just The english! How about the British?! (sorry! I know picky picky!!!)
Except for the literally millions who starved in India and Africa and Ireland thanks to colonial mismanagement and our exploitation of their human and natural resources. Not to mention our brutal subjugation of dissent. Look at the Black and Tans in Ireland, or the massacres in India. Look at the Boer War. Do you think the Nazis invented the concentration camp? No, we did, to deal the the troublesome Boers. The way the Empire broke up might have been a shambles and it might have caused a great many problems, but let's never pretend that the Empire was a humane or benevolent excercise....
well what state of affairs did you have before the british , do you not have more mis-management and famine now ? if you take india you had the moghul invasion and the greatest act of genocide in history that no one talks about before the empire . Then you had the caste system and rule by some very dodgy kings and princes did the average poor indian have things that much better before the empire . you didnt have democracy before the raj or a train system or thousands of schools and hospitals . Most of the world had slavery before the empire , the british navy was the main force worldwide that wiped out slavery , it didnt just end because africans or arabs thought it was a good thing to stop it ,ended because if they didnt stop the navy came and killed them . And the empire to a lot of people was seen as a humane or benevolent excercise in that it got rid of many tyrants stamped out slavery and things like suttee or the thugee in india stopped many inter-tribal wars. the empire is not the best way to exploit people the humane aspects cost money . there is a marlon brando film called burn that looks at this issue how empire wasnt the best way to exploit people in that you need to be too humane . if you read economists in the period at the start of empire lots of them could see it was a mistake they lost the argument because people had these silly humane notions about getting rid of things like slavery . Imagine africa without colonialism you would have shaka zulu witch doctors smelling thousands of people out to see if the were witches and burning them alive today in south africa . You would have north africa controlled by the barbery pirates who by the way used to do slave raids on england and iceland ect ect and carry off whole villages way before the uk got a empire or got involved in the slave trade . most likely they would still be slaveing with far better weapons
The trouble with debating with you Jonny, is that you can never take a concept and discuss it for its own inherent merits or drawbacks, it always becomes a world history of what's worse and what's more, is often irrelevant. You do raise one good point though. You're right to say that Empire is not the best way to exploit people. Over time it breeds nationalism and fragmentation. The global economy is a much more effective, insidious and efficient means of exploitation....
Believe me Ezzie, she is! Just watch her sometimes. However really most if not all polititians are. :leaving: ramble all you like. Really great to see you back posting, you've been missed.
The English (and welsh scottish and irish) are remnants of a people that once populated western and southern europe (the modern relatives of these british ancestors being the basque of northern spain and the berbers of north africa)......the tuetonic/gothic tribes from the steppes displaced them during the early dark ages to become the modern continental celts and goths of spain france italy and germania...those 'basques' that survived are only slightly genetically watered down in the british with scandinavian stock in the form of danes normans vikings and saxons that sporadically invaded the British isles during the early and middle medieval period. This is why the British are a bit different from the continental europeans. They are descendants of those that are now called 'basque' that crossed the land bridge that once joined england and france during the retreat of the last ice age.
heyyyy i have a few politiciany friends... (we got bored and were making up parties) here are two: P.I.G.S. - Poitical Idiots Get Saucy (made for me by Peewee) The you-should-totaly-vote-me-because-I-am-way-better-than-The Sock Eating Snickerdoodle party What can i say? I inspire people LOL BTW Im The Sock Eating Snickerdoodle... My obsession and dream to live with a pig (not own cos they rock) provides much amusmant for them all. Specially since we were reading about a pig killing in English today...
Aye, let the Welsh rule. Mate, if Wales had an independent government they'd probably make weed legal as they need the money!
