The British Empire

[CBC guy]

In the Abe Shinzo thread I noticed that quite a few posters were pouncing on Martino due to the fact that he happens to be British and many Asians (and Africans, middle easterners, etc) have an ax to grind with the UK as well. For us Chinese, this ax isn't as big as the ax seemingly always reserved for Japan (DON'T get into that topic here... its been done many many times in this forum and I don't want to turn this into a Japan-bashing thread. Yes I am Chinese and yes I love China but this IS NOT THE THREAD TO BASH JAPAN. Thank you.)

I have nothing against the British people or culture (or else I wouldn;t be typing in ENGLISH). I like fish and chips from time to time and I enjoy watching British soccer. I enjoy the dry British sense of humour and the way they can keep cheerful even in tough circumstances.

HOWEVER, the fact that their once "glorious empire" has led to many of the world's problems to this day is a point of contention. Africa is fragmented due partially to British rule. The Middle East is a hodge-podge of nations at each other's throats whose only unifying points are perhaps Islam (both moderate and extreme) and the destruction of Israel (of course not ALL Middle Easterners are like that but that's the common perception). In Asia, British colonialism led to the fracturing of India and Pakistan (creating two implacable enemies). In East Asia, British rule has proved somewhat more beneficial, as witness the status of Hong Kong and Singapore. (MUCH better fate than other British colonies)

Another contested fixture is the fact that the UK is seen as an American lapdog. I don't really believe this myself, but the two countries do share some common roots and language so that in itself is not surprising. Also the US, after all, DID help save the UK in its hour of dire need in WWII so there is a debt to the US there. I don't think they are completely in lock step with each other though, as witness the dislike for Bush by the British public.

Finally, I will say this. British imperialism has led to a lot of evil in the world as native cultures were subordinated at British commercial interests in a ruthless manner. However as far as colonizers go the British liked to co-opt their subjects rather than crush them. (Like so many other colonizers) The British used a lot of force to achieve their objectives, but to their credit they did establish hospitals and educated the people. Over time, British colonialism grew (after WWII) into a more mild administration which gave the colonials a lot of leeway. (I was thinking of Hong Kong and Malaya for these examples)

What do you guys think?

[Golden Monkey]

In Asia, British colonialism led to the fracturing of India and Pakistan (creating two implacable enemies).

Wrong. Islamic versus Hindu civilization and conflict long predates the British empire.

I personal don't like martino due to his personality and his politics. Not because he's british.

Although it could be argued that martino's arrogance and moralistic pc attitudes are reminicent of british colonial arrogance.

It's bad enough foreigners forcibly enter your nation, but to bring a personal arrogance and cultural bias is what can make for a revolt of the natives.

The Chinese in the capitalist world system will make deals without telling people how to live, what not to say, etc. As long as it is outside China.

The Chinese want to do business, not convert minds or "save souls".

[Woody]

Originally; I was going to give an even bigger and more insightful and rounded post. Alas, time is forever against us, so this is my best efforts on this topic for now! It is rather rambling and stubbed, but none-the-less; heart felt...


In the Abe Shinzo thread I noticed that quite a few posters were pouncing on Martino due to the fact that he happens to be British and many Asians (and Africans, middle easterners, etc) have an ax to grind with the UK as well. For us Chinese, this ax isn't as big as the ax seemingly always reserved for Japan (DON'T get into that topic here... its been done many many times in this forum and I don't want to turn this into a Japan-bashing thread. Yes I am Chinese and yes I love China but this IS NOT THE THREAD TO BASH JAPAN. Thank you.)



I would count myself as "British" as well, to the extent that I have long ago been naturalised as a UK citizen and hold a British Passport! However, no doubt, all the Chinese/Japanese, East Asian, Americans etc. out there have realised.
[What is written on paper does not show on your skin and face!]

Even if u r born in that country....

(For example: How many American-Born-Chinese still get asked patronisingly whether or not they can speak English by a casually mocking white American, especially if they have a mind to be bigoted!)

Since, you are a 'history major' and I had made a "gaff" on Nelson instead of Drake. And no doubt I have been severely chastised for it in many quarters. (Brownie point having been earned!) I feel I have an obligation to reward you with an insight into the 'Yellows' and particularly the substantial Chinese community in the UK.
(I love run on sentences...):biggrin:
And; in particular the main ‘Cantonese’ community in the UK....


Let’s start by saying that:

Every major city in the UK, London (Gerrard St.), Birmingham, Manchester has it's own Chinatown. Most UK towns (large or small) have a Chinese Takeaway/ Restaurant or two on its high street....

Japanese people; (generally the business and finance community) being largely economically much better off, tend to congregate in the home counties and London only...(since they r so rich!)

I have nothing against the British people or culture (or else I wouldn;t be typing in ENGLISH). I like fish and chips from time to time and I enjoy watching British soccer. I enjoy the dry British sense of humour and the way they can keep cheerful even in tough circumstances.


Well, I too can converse in Chinese (Cantonese). In text, I’d prefer un-simplified Han. Simply because, it is more natural for me! E.g. (Big5). I find it is to be more exclusive and private! I.e.(Fairly Troll resistant! And more Chinese!)

Fish and Chips is alright if cooked properly, but after the 50th time you have tried it; it gets a bit.... well.....dull.....(You may also like to try jellied eels (served cold), pie and mash with mushy peas, whelks and winkles, that is if u r a truly full-blooded, die-hard East-End, cockney!)

But to tell you the absolute truth, these 'poor-man' dishes r more-or-less dying out nowadays! And the much-vaunted national dish in the UK is now 'Curry'! This 'change' I suspect has more to do with appeasement and harmony with the increasingly vocal ethnic lobbyists, then actual fact!

British 'Football', (We/They never call it, 'Soccer'.) is actually very tribal, (watch the film 'Hooligan' or 'Green Street' as it is called in the UK!), very, very few East Asians attend these matches, and some clubs, used to be openly racists! Usually to black players (they used to throw bananas and even 'sharpened' 50 pence coins!)
The 'stiff-upper-lip' and 'jolly-hockey-sticks' attitude and image, etc. is an over-played and over-vaunted trait, perpetuated by the media. Believe me the Brits. are not as infallible as they like to make out. They are just good at "extenuating their successes" and "hiding their failures", which are actually very many! (E.g. Concorde, Octeca, Comet, Nimrod, Blue-streak, Westland, Titanic, HMS. Prince of Wales [unsinkable ship, sank in 30mins], HMS Sheffield [Aluminium Warships!], Sinclair-C5, HOTOL.)

(Please, do not believe their hype or propaganda!)

I do not agree with you that "us Chinese", (and I am one), donot have as big-er axe to grind with the British as with any other imperialistic colonialist nation!
(Even though any references to the British Empire is now definitely said in the past tense!)

Here is a current example of British blunder and obsession with secrecy; 50 years hence…

Commander: Buster Crabb RN. (deceased, minus head & hands!)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/hampshire/5068860.stm


HOWEVER, the fact that their once "glorious empire" has led to many of the world's problems to this day is a point of contention. Africa is fragmented due partially to British rule. The Middle East is a hodge-podge of nations at each other's throats whose only unifying points are perhaps Islam (both moderate and extreme) and the destruction of Israel (of course not ALL Middle Easterners are like that but that's the common perception). In Asia, British colonialism led to the fracturing of India and Pakistan (creating two implacable enemies). In East Asia, British rule has proved somewhat more beneficial, as witness the status of Hong Kong and Singapore. (MUCH better fate than other British colonies)

The British Empire was founded on one major factor…(Force of Arms!)
Guns, guns, guns….It’s as simple as that…Their; technological advantage in warfare allowed them to basically subjugate less tech. advanced peoples….(remove that advantage, they can have no claims to being superior in any other field, e.g. literature, philosophy, culture, arts, even medicine!) Remind u of any other nation, currently!

For example; 'conquering' Australia and New Zealand to make the Brit. Empire more bloated was hardly difficult at the time, since both territories were still in the stone-age! However; intimidating and gaining an advantage from China proved far more difficult!

So; to the Mid-East, double standards will always apply, e.g. the Israelis will always curry more favour with the West; even though it is an illegal state!

Another contested fixture is the fact that the UK is seen as an American lapdog. I don't really believe this myself, but the two countries do share some common roots and language so that in itself is not surprising. Also the US, after all, DID help save the UK in its hour of dire need in WWII so there is a debt to the US there. I don't think they are completely in lock step with each other though, as witness the dislike for Bush by the British public.

Without the US, the UK would be the mouthy and cowardly, 'sidekick' without the big bully in the playground. It had made a lot of enemies in the past and NEEDS, repeat NEEDS, the US as an ally! The Brit. public is pretty well-informed, and in their 'heart-of-hearts' knows their foreign policies (esp. Mid-East) are wrong, but cannot back down now because they have no choice but to perpetuate their reputation as a 'global-player'! However, their size and resources, suggests differently!

Finally, I will say this. British imperialism has led to a lot of evil in the world as native cultures were subordinated at British commercial interests in a ruthless manner. However as far as colonizers go the British liked to co-opt their subjects rather than crush them. (Like so many other colonizers) The British used a lot of force to achieve their objectives, but to their credit they did establish hospitals and educated the people. Over time, British colonialism grew (after WWII) into a more mild administration which gave the colonials a lot of leeway. (I was thinking of Hong Kong and Malaya for these examples)


Since, many of you are below the age of 30 or 40 and have not experience, (first-hand) direct 'rigid' British rule in Hong Kong before the Brits. gradually rescinded their 'grip' in the 80s and 90s under Thatcher.

Speaking of personal experience….

When I was a child there were 'special' shops (often discretely located in HK island near military barracks) specifically reserved for and catering for 'Whites-only!'.
I.e. 'de facto' English customers only! I remembered they would shoo… away us Chinese kids, and not allow us in! (Even though the shop assistants were Chinese themselves!)

This of course reeks of colonial bigotry and even thinly veiled apartithed. (And; to cap it all they had great air-conditioning in these shops, an expensive luxury at the time!)

In school also, only English 'First-names' were proliferated, such as John, Jane, Peter etc, were encouraged and English (much self promoting "and highly-glossed" applied...) history and Christianity encouraged. Where as 'natives', and I hate that word, since, it implies inferiority in our indiginous, culture, language, history and religions. Even speaking in Cantonese were frowned upon!

This was just the way it was back in the 60s and 70s in an English run school, even though nearly all the kids were Cantonese!

Furthermore; although, the Brits. loved to propagate the notion that the Cantonese were street-smart, resourceful, 'somewhat' cunning and devious. They would rarely acknowledge our 'solid' achievements in science, technology and medicine. E.g. (Traditional or Western) or even our skills and undoubted abilities in areas as diverse as the HK stock market!

Since they once though it would be too resoundingly complex for our tiny minds to understand the stock-exchange! This 'spat' on the stock-exchange was actually dramatised in a HK mini-series!

I.e. their stereotype of us were, we (Cantonese) were quick-witted (but un-trustworthy) and superficially bright but not deep-thinking and incapable of superior abstract thoughts like they (the Brits.) did!
(Believe me the Brits. love to patronize!)

For example; it has taken over 40 years for the West to acknowledge that the Chinese had an outright cure for Malaria i.e. "Artemisinin". While they stubbornly clung on to the notion that "Quinine" was the only effective treatment for this disease!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/1660158.stm

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/horizon/malaria_trans.shtml

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3681938

Once again, may I reiterate "Don't believe the hype!"....
HK and Singapore's successes are due more to the labours of the masses, than the administrative skills of their former masters!

[Napoleon Chynamite]

I have nothing against Chinese people....I enjoy a good dish of fried rice from time to time and kung fu movies are pretty entertaining.

[Woody]

This is a 'serious' thread Napoleon, I hope u can live up to your 'formidable' assumed name, if not stand down now, or the grown-ups will unleash!

[Napoleon Chynamite]

^ In that case, perhaps you could spend less time addressing the strengths and weaknesses of fish and chips, soccer, and other superficial aspects of British culture that really have no significance to any solid argument fit for this thread~

[Woody]

First, Don't say I didn't warn u! Nappy!

Then; do a word count of the script I have just posted for CBC Guy and not u!

Afterwards; give me a prompt of a single aspect of UK history u want me to expand on and I will gladly make you sorry, u ever asked!

This also goes for Cantonese culture and language!

Challenge accepted and in full effect....

Remember the Emperor's demise, youngman!

[CBC guy]

Well yes I know the success of HK and Singapore was due to the Chinese masses living there, NOT the British themselves. However the British administration (in its later years anyways) in HK and Singapore created an environment which allowed the Chinese there to work hard and get ahead. They ruled Hong Kong better than Mao ruled Mainland China, at least that's my opinion. I'm not justifying British colonialism, (there are many things I don't like about the British culture either, including its constant hypocrsiy and its patronizing attitude towards all non-whites. Now it may be unfair of me to say this in this manner but you know what I mean. ) Of course not every British person fits this stereotype but yeah.

As for soccer yes I know there is a tribal element to it but in recent years the word is that the FA (Football Association) has clamped down hard on racism and violence in recent years and this has led to more ethnic fans going to games. (or "matches" as they say in Britain) There are still cases of violence and racism in some games but the big clubs at least (Manchester United, Arsenal, the "elite") have made their stadiums relatively safe for foreign visitors, if a little "sterile". And not all football fans are hooligans, btw. I know some fans of Man U from HK who went to Old Trafford and said they had a great time there, no violence or anything like that. My final thought about football in Britain is that in a culture which emphasizes formality and protocol so much, this is where the British people go to let off steam.

And Woody, please stop being so short-tempered. Napoleon's post about chinese food was a joke. Don't British people usually have a sense of humour?

"butte yueh choe dai, yaam bui chaa, sic goe bao"

[Martino]

Finally, I will say this. British imperialism has led to a lot of evil in the world as native cultures were subordinated at British commercial interests in a ruthless manner. However as far as colonizers go the British liked to co-opt their subjects rather than crush them. (Like so many other colonizers) The British used a lot of force to achieve their objectives, but to their credit they did establish hospitals and educated the people. Over time, British colonialism grew (after WWII) into a more mild administration which gave the colonials a lot of leeway. (I was thinking of Hong Kong and Malaya for these examples)

What do you guys think?

The history of the British Empire, like all empires before and after it, is mercantile and based on pure avarice. Fuelled by several centuries of aggressive trade, war and colonisation, the British pretty much shaped a lot of the world we see today, troubles and all.

This particular empire's decline and fall is quite remarkable, not least of which because the Empire is still with us in an evolved form. The process of change began in the 1920s, when the enforced 'member states' of the Empire gained political and diplomatic independence from Britain with 'Dominion' status. Some states broke away entirely shortly after, severing all links with the British, but others remained, creating a Commonwealth.

Witness how many national flags around the world still bear the Union Jack.

Unbelievably, Queen Elizabeth II is still the queen of Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Jamaica, Barbados, the Bahamas, Grenada, Papua New Guinea, the Solomon Islands, Tuvalu, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Antigua and Barbuda, Belize, and Saint Kitts and Nevis, though obviously without real political power...

It would seem that for a lot of people, some benefit came out of the British Empire, again with an emphasis on trade, but the bottom line is that all empires are intrinsically evil, British included. They might bring along (or leave behind) a lot of benefits - better roads, balanced judicial systems, democracy, whatever, but nothing which the occupied country couldn't attain itself in time.

The wheel of history has turned since then, but sadly we're seeing the same model repeated. The Indonesians may have pulled out of East Timor and elsewhere, leaving behind great new roads and modern hospitals, but at too great a price for the occupied peoples. The Americans, too, now have their empire, powered by Haliburton and the US's business needs, and they are making an even worse mess of things.

Nothing really changes, does it?

[BeTheReds]

I like fish and chips and soccer too. Thanks Britain!

[yoMAMA]

I like fish and chips and soccer HOOLIGANS too. Thanks Britain!

ditto!

:wink:

[DragonKnight]

And Woody, please stop being so short-tempered. Napoleon's post about chinese food was a joke. Don't British people usually have a sense of humour?

Yeah, but it's usually quite dry...and cold like the weather.

[Martino]

Yeah, but it's usually quite dry...and cold like the weather.

Isn't that the Germans?

[CBC guy]

Isn't that the Germans?

Ahh.... European footie rivalries pop up again... :wink:

[CBC guy]

Chinese need to stop promote threads or discussions on European imperial glorious centuries and propagating senseless hatred toward Japan and Japanese.

Chinese guys need to stop behaving like " loose cannons " in internet forums,Japanese and Koreans don't ever indiscriminate or down talk themselves before foreigners in cyberspace.

Frankly,I am sick and tire of reading posts written by Chinese out of self-victimization due to low self-esteem epidemic among general Chinese population.


Its all about discussion. I wanted to get what other people (including non-chinese) think about the British empire. Martino answered, he's british, he didn't seem offended by this thread didn't he?

Did you just post this here to spite me because of my posts on Jref.com? I already told you, I'm not posting in their politics section anymore because I don't want YOU getting in on my ass. Its pointless getting mad about these things. Now are you going to follow me around and hound me as a "PRC-ass-kisser" just because I posted a bit on the Chinese viewpoint on ANOTHER forum? Are you going to follow me and hound me there because I am a "evil Chinese racist?" Are you going to do a google search on "CBC Guy" and broadcast loudly for all to hear that "CBC GUY is an EVIL Chinese racist?"

So NO ONE is allowed to post about certain topics JUST BECAUSE you said so? Its a free country, you know that.

BTW If you do a search of my posts here not all of them have to do with "EVIL JAPAN" or "EVIL BRITAIN" or anything like that. So no I'm not an obssessed Chinese "loose Cannon" as you described me.


Sorry for getting off topic guys.

[Martino]

Chinese need to stop promote threads or discussions on European imperial glorious centuries and propagating senseless hatred toward Japan and Japanese.

Chinese guys need to stop behaving like " loose cannons " in internet forums,Japanese and Koreans don't ever indiscriminate or down talk themselves before foreigners in cyberspace.

Frankly,I am sick and tire of reading posts written by Chinese out of self-victimization due to low self-esteem epidemic among general Chinese population.

Not sure what's going on between you two, but actually there is a strong historical link between Japan and the British Empire.

The Japanese empire of the 1870s through to the Pacific War was modelled on the British and other European powers. Japan built itself a modern navy with the help of the British, and even modelled its uniforms of those of another military nation of the time, Prussia. I think modern Japanese school uniforms still use that military motif?

Before WW II, the Japanese were closely allied to the British – formally so with the Anglo-Japanese Alliance. Japan entered the First World War on the side of the British specifically. . .

Japan wanted to be a superpower like the then British Empire. And, with the British already in decline by the 1920s, I guess stepping into the (imperial) shoes of the British seemed to be the next logical step.

When the European empires went to war with each other, Japan chose to ally itself to the Germans not out of support for Fascism, but because Germany was opposed to the British Empire. Japan wanted to acquire Britain’s assets in SE Asia and repeat the boon of WW I. Didn’t work out that way …

[CBC guy]

Not sure what's going on between you two, but actually there is a strong historical link between Japan and the British Empire.

The Japanese empire of the 1870s through to the Pacific War was modelled on the British and other European powers. Japan built itself a modern navy with the help of the British, and even modelled its uniforms of those of another military nation of the time, Prussia. I think modern Japanese school uniforms still use that military motif?

Before WW II, the Japanese were closely allied to the British – formally so with the Anglo-Japanese Alliance. Japan entered the First World War on the side of the British specifically. . .

Japan wanted to be a superpower like the then British Empire. And, with the British already in decline by the 1920s, I guess stepping into the (imperial) shoes of the British seemed to be the next logical step.

When the European empires went to war with each other, Japan chose to ally itself to the Germans not out of support for Fascism, but because Germany was opposed to the British Empire. Japan wanted to acquire Britain’s assets in SE Asia and repeat the boon of WW I. Didn’t work out that way …


Yeah if I recall Japan based their navy on the Royal Navy. And yes I know Japan entered WWI with the Allies. Good points.

As for the Kyopojin thing sorry about that guys. She's pretty ornery on me because I posted some stuff about China on jref.com and now she hates my ass and followed me HERE to spite me. I already told her I'm not posting in jref's politics section anymore because I don't want HER on my ass. She thinks I'm a "Chinese s***- youth" for posting about Japan and the war. She also wrote this to me:

"Chinese truly deserved to be treated as dirt
and no respect from other nationalities."

Ok.... so now she hates Chinese people, just because I "act stupid" on a forum. That is the sickest piece of racism I have ever seen in a PM.
Now she stalks MY thread here on YW and says I'm a "loose cannon". and how I talk of 'evil british " or "evil Japan" or whatever. Well, whoop de do. If she wants to believe me to be a loose cannon for China, so be it. I don't give a fuck what she thinks of me anymore. After that dirt comment, I don't respect her anymore.

[CBC guy]

Now that I've calmed down a bit, I'm sorry for bringing my beef with Kyopojin into this thread. I was really angry when I thought that she infiltrated my thread just to spite me. Everyone's entitled to their opinion. Anyways I'll ignore her from now on.

Anyways, back on topic. I found it interesting that people in hong kong still remember Chris Patten as one of the best Governors of HK ever. However, on the other hand as Woody has shown there was no real afinity towards the British rulers, but by the 1980s and 1990s there was no real animosity either. I found it ironic (and funny) that by the 1980s and 1990s the economy of HK and Singapore was doing so much better than the British themselves. i heard that Britain would take some of the money generated by the cash cow of HK and put it back into Britain, only to see it get swallowed up by welfare payments and union payouts. Would Martino help me out on this one? I'm just curious.

[Martino]

I found it ironic (and funny) that by the 1980s and 1990s the economy of HK and Singapore was doing so much better than the British themselves. i heard that Britain would take some of the money generated by the cash cow of HK and put it back into Britain, only to see it get swallowed up by welfare payments and union payouts. Would Martino help me out on this one? I'm just curious.

I don't know much at all about this aspect of Hong Kong. Maybe SunWuKong has some info?

I've not heard or know of any mechanism where wealth from HK could be siphoned off for 'welfare payments' or 'union payouts' (union payouts?). There is the matter of local taxation, but again I don't know how much of that would go the UK Treasury or how much would be kept by local government. I think HSBC and the Chartered Bank controlled the local currency rather than the Bank of England.

I would guess that the means and methods of any imperial 'profit' from HK changed from one decade to another, but I doubt HK could be viewed as financing the Welfare State in modern times.

[Woody]

A Slight Trivial Tangent, but here is a 'taster' of British sensibilities and stuffiness towards Fish 'n' Chips and Chinese Cooking....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/north_east/5346192.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/west_yorkshire/6126476.stm

Another example of Brit. prissiness and prudishness...

Normal service on Brit. Empire please resume...

[kyopojin]

Japan built itself a modern navy with the help of the British

Japan chose to ally itself to the Germans not out of support for Fascism.




Japan Navy was also built on British financing,a loan of some sort.

German Nazi-mastermind aristocrat Karl Haushoffer instrumentally facilitated the development of Germany and Japan ALLIANCE on what he perceived some " superficial " cultural similiarities between these 2 peoples.

You're Itailian descent ?

[BeTheReds]

All personal attacking and beef in this forum stops here..., or the thread is closed.

[Martino]

Japan Navy was also built on British financing,a loan of some sort.

Japan and Britain have long held the idea that there was some affinity between the two island nations, starting as far back as an official cultural exchange in 1870. In 1910, the Great Britain-Japan Exhibition literally set out to educate the British about Japanese arts and crafts (the first of many, with the most recent month-long Japan Festivals being held in London in 1993 and 2000).

In modern times, there are numerous cultural and economic initiatives between the two states, some detailed here on the Japanese Embassy website, but there have been many others, such as the Engineers to Japan scheme, and the large amount of inward investment between the two countries.

http://www.uk.emb-japan.go.jp/en/japanUK/action_agenda21.html#aa21a

It terms of the War, Goebbels had a hard time getting the Nazis to ideologically accept Japan into the Axis, and I think, historically, it was a close run thing that Japan joined the Axis. The Japanese Cabinet wasn't all hawks. Prince Saionji?

You're Itailian descent ?

Welsh. Martin O. O is the first letter of my familiy name.

[kyopojin]

"Chinese truly deserved to be treated as dirt
and no respect from other nationalities."




Oh .... You forget one obnoxious remark kicked you in the groin " spineless filthy stinky lowly Chinamen ".:smile:

As I've suspected,you're a " ranting " freakshow with IP address in Canada but PRETENDED to be tutoring in Chengdu China.Someone did looked up on you,get a life instead of acting like a " loose cannon " on an anti-Japanese rampage.

[CBC guy]

Didn't Germany have a tough time regarding Japan as an "ally" because of Japan being an Asian power? After Pearl Harbor Hitler was said to at first be elated, and then when he thought about it he was 'saddened" enough to say these immortal words: "A new age is dawning in the east, and the white race will end up the loser." I don't recall any istance of Germany and Japan cooperating during WWII. (I mean REAL help, not just sloganeering and propoganda)

Well both Japan and the UK are island nations with a large interest in the sea., so I'm not surprised there are ties between the two.

[otter p.]

In East Asia, British rule has proved somewhat more beneficial, as witness the status of Hong Kong and Singapore. (MUCH better fate than other British colonies)...The British used a lot of force to achieve their objectives, but to their credit they did establish hospitals and educated the people. Over time, British colonialism grew (after WWII) into a more mild administration which gave the colonials a lot of leeway. (I was thinking of Hong Kong and Malaya for these examples)

And, Japan also built hospitals and schools in Taiwan, Korea, and other countries it controlled. Japan also invested resources into those countries.That doesn't mean Japan should get a free pass for what it did, and neither should the British.

The British didn't treat the asian colonies any better, and exploited them as much as they did to their other colonies. UK treated the native Hong Kong citizens as second class citizens, and only just before handing HK over back to China did the British give those people more rights and freedoms. If HK wasn't going to be returned back to China, its doubtful that the British would have implement or allowed such changes.


Another contested fixture is the fact that the UK is seen as an American lapdog. Also the US, after all, DID help save the UK in its hour of dire need in WWII so there is a debt to the US there. I don't think they are completely in lock step with each other though, as witness the dislike for Bush by the British public.


And, the US saved France from the Germans and later poured billions of dollars into Germany after WWII. Yet, those countries didn't go into Iraq. Examine all the countries that were part of the "coaltion of the willing", and its clear that they were all countries that wanted to be on good terms with the US and so participated in Iraq even though they knew it was wrong.

Also, despite the historical ties of the US and UK, Eisenhower was willing to oppose the UK's colonial agenda when it tried to take control of the Suez Canal. The British didn't have to take part in an illegal invasion of Iraq, but did so anyways. They knew how faulty the intelligence was, and yet were more than willing to promote the faulty intelligence.

[CBC guy]

Hehe yeah in another thread I talked about how the British didn't give any real rights and freedoms to HK until it was almost too late.

[CBC guy]

All personal attacking and beef in this forum stops here..., or the thread is closed.

Yes, it will stop here. The person in question is on my ignore list until further notice. Now back on topic:

While we know Churchill as a staunch defender of freedom in WWII, what many people don't know about Churchill was that he was a big believer in the British Empire and he wanted to keep the idea of the Empire "on which the sun never sets" alive. He hated Gandhi and called him a "half-naked fakir". It would seem hypocritical of him to support freedom for Europeans while keeping millions of Indians under subjagation don't you think?

[kyopojin]

Hehe yeah in another thread I talked about how the British didn't give any real rights and freedoms to HK until it was almost too late.




Chinaman's idiocry at his best,what a shame.

British NEVER meant to give equal rights to their imperial subjects,period.Britain cunningly promoted " call for more freedoms " or " independence for HK " to stick their big-nose into Chinese internal affairs like an imperial power.

[yoMAMA]

It would seem hypocritical of him to support freedom for Europeans while keeping millions of Indians under subjagation don't you think?

not really paradoxical because churchill is a big believer in imperialism, and imperialism relies on the assumptions of racial superiority of white europeans to rule over "lesser" people.

[Martino]

British NEVER meant to give equal rights to their imperial subjects,period.Britain cunningly promoted " call for more freedoms " or " independence for HK " to stick their big-nose into Chinese internal affairs like an imperial power.

You can't really say 'Never', since the British did give these rights - intentionally or not, they did so in small increments, just as it gave rights to its own subjects in small increments (British women only got the vote in 1918, barely five years before the end of Empire) for the basest of reasons - a reaction to social and political pressures.

Empire clearly devolved politically into Dominions then into the Commonwealth - but the Empire increasingly yielded control to its subjects for ignoble reasons - the British were not being magnaminous or altruistic, they simply could no longer afford to maintain control.

[CBC guy]

Running an Empire and maintaining control takes a lot of money, and at the end of WWI the UK owed a lot of money to the US, so it probably had to loosen control somewhat in order to cut costs.

I read in a book "A Peace to End all Peace" that the British Empire was dedicated to the 'Great Game".... to keep the Crown Jewel of India safe at all costs. Towards this end the British moved into Afghanistan, Mesopotamia, and even Tibet to ensure its safety. Another key objective of the British Empire (according to the book) was to make sure the Suez Canal remained open. In WWII that was partially the reason why Rommel wanted to overrun the Suez Canal and why Britain was intent on holding it, almost at all costs.

Originally Posted by kyopojin
"British NEVER meant to give equal rights to their imperial subjects,period.Britain cunningly promoted " call for more freedoms " or " independence for HK " to stick their big-nose into Chinese internal affairs like an imperial power."

I would respond to this, but I said before that I wouldn't, so I wouldn't. Let me just say this: Martino was quite generous to allow you to call him a "big-nose."

[Martino]

I would respond to this, but I said before that I wouldn't, so I wouldn't. Let me just say this: Martino was quite generous to allow you to call him a "big-nose."

He didn't. And it is.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v201/unofficial_bdwongweb/moi.jpg

[CBC guy]

He didn't. And it is.

So you're saying that you do, in fact, have a bigger nose than most people? :biggrin: Quite a handsome nose actually! :wink: Not that it really matters. Anyways its not that important.

Have you read "A Peace to End All Peace?" Its a book written about WWI and the Middle East settlement, where the UK definitely had a lot to do with it.

[Martino]

So you're saying that you do, in fact, have a bigger nose than most people? :biggrin: Quite a handsome nose actually! :wink: Not that it really matters. Anyways its not that important.

I inherited my big nose from my Dad, and my hairy chest from my Mum.

Noses run in the family. I think everyone in my family has at least one.

[CBC guy]

I inherited my big nose from my Dad, and my hairy chest from my Mum..
:eek: :eek: Your mom had a hairy chest? :eek: :eek: Man that sounds pretty scary. :eek: I hope you mean your GRANDPA had a hairy chest, not your mom. :biggrin: That would be pretty freaky. :eek:

You are Welsh right? How independent do you think they are vis-a-vis the English? I mean, there were the "Marcher Lords" and the 4 great castles of Edward I. (Caernarvon, Harlech, Beaumaris and I forgot the last one) Also, the Longbowmen which people seem to think of as English were actually Welsh if I'm not mistaken. Medieval England rode their bodkin arrows to glory.

[Martino]

:Your mom had a hairy chest? :eek: :eek: Man that sounds pretty scary. :eek: I hope you mean your GRANDPA had a hairy chest, not your mom. :biggrin: That would be pretty freaky. :eek:

Freaky? Now you're insulting all the women of the family ...

You are Welsh right? How independent do you think they are vis-a-vis the English? I mean, there were the "Marcher Lords" and the 4 great castles of Edward I. (Caernarvon, Harlech, Beaumaris and I forgot the last one) Also, the Longbowmen which people seem to think of as English were actually Welsh if I'm not mistaken. Medieval England rode their bodkin arrows to glory.

Why look back so far in time? We've had the Union and devolution since then.

[CBC guy]

Ohh.... ok.... if all the women of your family had a hairy chest, then sorry about that comment.... :biggrin:

I don't know... I'm interested in pre-modern history a fair bit, and Medieval Europe is no exception. I play a fair bit of historically-themed strategy games (Medieval:total war 2 is gonna be awesome! :biggrin:) so yeah. Watched too much Braveheart probably. :biggrin: (I know Braveheart is hardly accurate: Edward I wasn't that bad, battle of Stirling was fought on a bridge, and a bunch of other incidents. Decent film though, IMO)

[colorred]

Finally, I will say this. British imperialism has led to a lot of evil in the world as native cultures were subordinated at British commercial interests in a ruthless manner. However as far as colonizers go the British liked to co-opt their subjects rather than crush them. (Like so many other colonizers) The British used a lot of force to achieve their objectives, but to their credit they did establish hospitals and educated the people. Over time, British colonialism grew (after WWII) into a more mild administration which gave the colonials a lot of leeway. (I was thinking of Hong Kong and Malaya for these examples)

What do you guys think?

British never apologized to china. Even when British returned HK to china, they cursed chinese leaders instead of apologizing for colonizations and invasions they perpetrated in all parts of asia.

[kyopojin]

WHY is " Martino " banned ?

[bluemonq]

i think it has to do with recent posts...check his post history. i'm under the impression that it isn't permanent.

...in reality, you shouldn't be asking about this sort of this thing here, and i shouldn't be replying. it's besides the point of the thread.

[BigLew]

i think it has to do with recent posts...check his post history. i'm under the impression that it isn't permanent.

...in reality, you shouldn't be asking about this sort of this thing here, and i shouldn't be replying. it's besides the point of the thread.

LOL you're both gonna die now.

[otter p.]

You can't really say 'Never', since the British did give these rights - intentionally or not, they did so in small increments, just as it gave rights to its own subjects in small increments (British women only got the vote in 1918, barely five years before the end of Empire) for the basest of reasons - a reaction to social and political pressures.

Empire clearly devolved politically into Dominions then into the Commonwealth - but the Empire increasingly yielded control to its subjects for ignoble reasons - the British were not being magnaminous or altruistic, they simply could no longer afford to maintain control.

You're trying to deflect, and distract initial criticism concerning British mistreatment of its minorities by trying to equivalize the two, where British women finally didn't get the right to vote in the early 20th century and a completey different situation where it denied those same rights to the Hk untill the 20th century had almost ended. Years earlier, the British gave its citizens the modern liberties they enjoy today but still denied fundamental, basic rights to HK.

The British only started to begin to give rudimentary rights to the HK, as fuck off to the Chinese to try to make the transition harder for both HK and China. Before then, the British had crushed any political dissent by the HK by making any criticisms of the British or protests illegal.

Japan deserves criticism concerning its textbooks glossing over WWII, but the British did the same thing with the HK educational system.

[Woody]

I have recently watched the first episodes of a new BBC series called
'Victoria's Empire' on British TV. "Victoria" being 'Victoria Woods'.
(‘A play on words’ on Queen Victoria and thus her inevitable 'late' imperial empire!).

Woods; a 'fairly' well know, if sporadic comedienne on British TV.
(Best know for her spoof drama series called 'Acorn Antiques'!)

She had an opportunity to update the seemingly endless colonial attitude the Brits. so love to perpetuate! But instead of coming up with anything new!
She falls into the age-old and tired trap of perpetuating the lazy idioms!

I.e:

Addressing HK as a 'small town' and not a city!
References to the very tired focuses on 'Dogs', Dog’s clinic, acupuncture to be precise on this occasion and the inevitable birds nest soup.

"A dog is for life and not just for dinner!" :- Her exact words!
Honestly; I ask you!

Also; the rich couple (millionaires) with the golden rooms and the ubiquitous story of the golden toilet.
(A piece first done on TV by: 'Alan Wicker' in the seventies!)

Chinese temples and animal horoscopes! Yawn...!

References to China only receiving HK via the 'backdoor' after 1997, and that if the Brits. didn’t come in all guns blazing in the 19th Century, HK would still be a small fishing village, wow great insight, NOT!

The inevitable numerous reference to opium dens!
the Chinese couldn't get enough of opium, etc, etc, etc!

In short she regurgitated the same old tired stories, wasted a lot of ‘air-time’ and ‘compulsory licence-fee’ money and reflected the still much aloof and condescending, typical White Anglo-Saxon attitudes!

Nuffings' changed!!!

And; it's nearly 10 years after the Handover!

[NextNoName]

The fame of Mahatma Gandhi and the British Empire are intertwined. Mahatma Gandhi was great but he would not have the chance to be so if the empire he was against was less enlightened than the British Empire, therefore the British Empire was also great in the same sense as Mahatma Gandhi was great, i.e. spiritually and morally.

[Woody]

To expand the discussion further; here are a few threads from the Beeb concerning it's former empire...

A 150 years anniversary had just been marked!

I am sure our south asian friends can give further details and prospective....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/6632961.stm

India marks uprising anniversary:

Thousands of Indians have started a march to commemorate the 150th anniversary of a revolt against British colonial rulers.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/6645457.stm

Indians mark revolt anniversary:

A ceremony has been held in India to commemorate the landmark revolt against the British.

Furthermore; on British TV's 'Channel 5', a new four-part series on China will be shown beginning 21st May 2007.
Hosted, surprise, surprise, by yet another comedian; Paul Merton.

I told you nuffin's changed!

[Gordman]

Well fact are facts, the point is: have some respect for the history, this is what i have learn so far...

[Woody]

What respect, and from who's, or from whom's prospective??!

What and who's precise and/or precious facts r u refering to?!!

History is both a subjective and objective entity...open to an infinite facet of prospectives and interpretations...

Respecting history for it's own sake is a fool's errand...
one must calibrate and nurture one's own select viewpoint
to be worthy of respect to one's opinion! (Of History....that is...)

[J Honcanese]

References to China only receiving HK via the 'backdoor' after 1997, and that if the Brits. didn’t come in all guns blazing in the 19th Century, HK would still be a small fishing village, wow great insight, NOT!Well, pre-colonial HK was an area dominated by the fishing, salt and pearl trades but it was by no means a major centre of trade. Even with the fine deepwater harbour, the terrain at the time - barren, mountainous and hemmed in by the sea - would have been far from ideal as the site of a major city. I reckon if HK was never colonised in the first place, it would eventually develop into a series of minor towns under the jurisdiction of neighbouring Shenzhen.

But more than anything I think HK's development into a major economic centre is a sort of 'happy accident' - a unique by-product of the historical events between the Opium Wars and the Handover in 1997. From my point of view HK's success was due to a combination of Chinese ingenuity/enterprise and the British rule of law.

HK's relative stability as a British colony was always going to attract refugees escaping the political turmoil in the Mainland. The rule of law and the laissez-faire economic system put in place by the colonial administration certainly did not make HK what it is, but they helped to create favourable conditions for businesses and industries to develop.

Cue in the influx of skills and capital from the Mainland (especially Shanghai) following the Communist takeover in 1949. Combined with postwar educational reform and a dedicated workforce, these would become the perfect ingredients for HK's rapid rise to economic success.


I think what the colonial administration was good at was providing for HK's basic needs, especially in the area of infrastructure. Electricity and gas, sewerage systems, road and rail networks - it can't be denied that the bulk of it was developed during HK's colonial days. Furthermore, the subsidised education system, the country parks and the highly-effective ICAC (Independent Commission Against Corruption) were all the administration's ideas.

Of course I must point out that HK has been reliant on Mainland China for its water supply since the water shortages of the 1960's. In a way I think this reflects the underlying role that the Mainland has played in HK's eventual success.


And before anyone begins to accuse me of being an Anglophile, I am fully aware of the racism and injustice that the people of HK suffered under colonial rule.

Central, with its relatively wide streets and good building/health/safety regulations, was originally planned as the European area of the city whilst the earliest Chinese neighborhoods (e.g. Sheung Wan) were allowed to develop haphazardly with fewer regulations in place. Overcrowding and disease became the norm in such areas.

And when the Star Ferry first began operating in 1898, the upper deck was reserved for European passengers whilst Chinese passengers were relegated to the lower deck. Similarly, the Peak Reservation Ordinance, active between 1904 and 1930, barred Chinese people from living on the Peak, the only exception being Eurasian millionaire Sir Robert Ho-Tung.

And of course the Brits imposed their own culture on the territory. My impression is that if any Chinese person wanted to go places, they'd have to have a proper English first name. And Cantonese wasn't made an official language until well into the 1970's.


So that's my two cents. Kudos to anyone who read through the whole lot.

[SunWuKong]

i welcome another HK history buff!

I reckon if HK was never colonised in the first place, it would eventually develop into a series of minor towns under the jurisdiction of neighbouring Shenzhen.

that's a big "what-if". if HK was never colonised, European powers would still have used it as a trading port just because of its deep harbours and because the Qing government was gradually losing central control in the mid to late 1800s. the Qing government limited foreign trade to be conducted in Guangzhou, so it wouldn't have developed its trade as early as it did, but Hong Kong would have been used as part of a trading route early on because of its deep harbours and i think it would have developed into a trading port in itself as the Qing government lose control over what happens in southern China.

Cue in the influx of skills and capital from the Mainland (especially Shanghai) following the Communist takeover in 1949. Combined with postwar educational reform and a dedicated workforce, these would become the perfect ingredients for HK's rapid rise to economic success.

right. i think HK's development into a trading port under British rule provided an important infrastructure. but its development into what it is today can really be attributed to the influx of migrants from mainland China in the 50s and 60s, and then subsequently the MacLehose administration's reforms in the 70s which allowed these migrants to integrate and also allowed HK to develop an educated middle class - which was important as trade with mainland China opened up in the early 80s and HK moved to high-profit service industries from light manufacturing.

And before anyone begins to accuse me of being an Anglophile, I am fully aware of the racism and injustice that the people of HK suffered under colonial rule.

absolutely. and beyond your everyday instances of Chinese being barred from certain places, the laissez-faire capitalism in HK really only benefitted the British ruling class and a few of their Chinese lackeys prior to the 70s. the government gave monopolies to big businesses that were naturally owned by the British, the banks were owned by the British, and it was the British that benefitted from land speculation. the laissez-faire system really only kept the poor labour force poor as it competed within itself to work for the British ruling class.

but the MacLehose administration changed that drastically. it introduced compulsory education for children, housing programmes, labour regulation, welfare, etc etc. in a sense, without these seemingly socialist policies, HK would have never became the financial centre that it is today - its workforce would have remained a poor working class that is only qualified to perform unskilled light manufacturing.

[Sunflare]

^Very interesting facts revealed in those recent posts concerning the history and politics of HK. I learned alot from that.

[J Honcanese]

that's a big "what-if". if HK was never colonised, European powers would still have used it as a trading port just because of its deep harbours and because the Qing government was gradually losing central control in the mid to late 1800s. the Qing government limited foreign trade to be conducted in Guangzhou, so it wouldn't have developed its trade as early as it did, but Hong Kong would have been used as part of a trading route early on because of its deep harbours and i think it would have developed into a trading port in itself as the Qing government lose control over what happens in southern China.Good point, I didn't of it from that perspective. Perhaps Hong Kong would've developed in a similar manner to treaty ports such as Shantou and Ningbo. It's pretty fascinating to think about the "what-if" scenarios.

[Napoleon Chynamite]

I got a quick overview of this history after watching Drunken Master 2 where Jackie fights the evil foreigners and the sellout locals that are helping them steal and ship valuable Chinese antiques to Britain.

[sageb1]

all i dont get is how white ppl think Canada has two official langauges (English and French) but do not realize that these are colonial languages!

yes we have two official languages, but you are allowed to speak whatever unofficial language you want, just as long as you retain some competency in either official language so as to better communicate with other people who don't speak your language.

however, the sticklers would rather everyone either spoke english or french.

as well, most white ppl are rather ignorant about asian people, and may mistake vietnamese for malaysian or laotian.

yet i can tell, both by watching and observing social customs as i showed in another post.

getting back to british colonialism, regarding english, it was not a civilized tongue in the UK until the germanic peoples conquered the civilized romano-celts.

even then, for some people who dont speak english, it can be a tough language too.

colonialism ruined a lot of nations by needless wars of attrition. africa's a good example.

and it's still being practised today, but governments are doing it for multinational corporations, the "heirs" of the houses and trading cartels of the past.

hence the war in iraq, afghanistan etc and the trouble in china, as well as in africa and north america.

as well, russia has substituted communism with putinism, a russified version of fascism.

and no nation is free of it.

not as long as the State can criminalize behavior protected by human rights legislation.