Agnostic.com

6 2

Why Britishers are still proud of their past ?

Britishers killed more people than Nazis could ever kill. And yet they don't have any remorse for that. US has a lot of people who are ashamed of their government's foreign policy, but very few, almost none of the britishers are ashamed of their past !

sourceofdesire 6 Dec 1
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

6 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

Because they believe kings and queens were vested by god and they have soooo many of them.

Excuse me, I'm English and have no such belief.

1

I am proud of my countrys achievements(too many too list)......."what did the romans ever do for us ...eh"
History is full of attrocities committed by almost every nation/creed/religion...choose another nation ...we can pick on that one...

4

rolls eyes It's obvious that this has come from an Indian. Wherever I go, there are always Indians out to spread vitriol against the UK.

As for an actual answer to the question, many British people are proud of their country's past because, despite being a more humanitarian empire than many of its contemporaries (French, Spanish, Dutch, Belgian etc) the United Kingdom rose from being a series of islands off the coast of Europe to commanding the mightiest empire the world has ever seen. Thanks to that legacy, 52 countries are now part of the Commonwealth, and many former colonies are now the most powerful and wealthiest nations in their region (Australia, USA, Canada, New Zealand, Kenya, South Africa etc).

I find myself deeply impressed by the exploits of the British Navy; a navy which projected influence around the entire world and remains to this day a formidable fighting force.

Is this to say that the British Empire didn't have its downsides? Of course not. The famine in Ireland was severely mismanaged, and the impact could have been mitigated significantly by more potent action from Westminster; that's just one example. Yet, for all that, the British Empire was the first major power to make any attempts to stop the slave trade and, unlike other former imperial powers, the UK granted independence to its colonies in a peaceful manner, installing democratic governments, the rule of law and modern economics. It's not for nothing that the UK leads the world in soft power.

Finally, like it or not, without British rule for a century, India would not now be a united country and a rising superpower. Don't forget what your country was like before Wellesley's conquests; divided between petty warlords who constantly fought each other.

@sourceofdesire My favourite leader? Certainly not, Churchill was a dick. Despite being so, he had an iron will. Unfortunately, that was what we needed to get through the Second World War.

Unlike most of the world outside Europe, Japan was modernised under very unique circumstances, circumstances that would have been hard to mirror anywhere else. Commodore Perry forcibly opened Japan up to foreign trade, and the Boshin war forced both the Shogun and Emperor to modernise their factions by importing new weaponry and machinery; it was essentially an arms race. After the Second World War, Japan was annexed by the Allies, who then rebuilt Japan and catapulted it into the democratic world.

The partition was a pretty rubbish decision, granted; but what would you have done? Kept the colony whole? Are you sure the two parts would have coexisted peacefully?

At the turn of the 19th century, India was mostly ruled by the Mahratta Confederacy; as I said, which was divided between rajahs and maharajas which fought each other constantly. The Mughal and Maurya empires did indeed unite India, but always to be broken up later.

As I said, the British Empire made mistakes. It was often cruel to its colonial subjects. But is it any more guilty of that than the other colonial powers? No one seems to be asking the French or Spanish if they're proud of their countries' pasts. No one's telling the American people they should be ashamed of themselves. Most people aren't even aware of the human rights abuses committed in the Indian-controlled part of Kashmir; rape, murder and torture. No nation's history is without its black spots.

@sourceofdesire Don't I? I mean, I don't feel personal remorse, just as I don't take pride; my ancestors' actions are not my own. I find myself impressed by some things the British did and disgusted by others. My pride is with the nation we are now; for good or ill, today's democratic, free, powerful country was formed in part by the empire it once ruled. Do you feel personal remorse for what Indian soldiers are doing in contested territory? I wouldn't expect you to do so.

1

How far back are you going? Before America existed and their ancestors were part of those to be held to account? I'm not quite sure what you're referring to - the British Empire? I do regret Cain killing Abel, although how he managed to go on and reproduce stumps me. I only mention this because, as we all know, God was British 😉

0

The US has been at it a lot less than they have. Per year, Americans rule this category along with educational ignorance among advanced civilizations and confidence. That's a great combination to have if you plan on carrying out atrocious activities.

0

You know that the ‘British’ would never use the term Britisher? Being raised and educated in Britain i almost find it hard to answer this question with the term Britisher. It is an interesting point you make that I’ll have to mull over before giving a more complete answer. But there are many cultures that have committed atrocious genocide even on their own populations, Russia and China for two examples, so maybe the question needs to be broader in some format?

I think "Britisher" is an adjective to describe someone who is more British than someone else 🙂

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:6139
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.