Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

The British Empire!
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 3456>
Author
  Share Topic Share Topic  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Celestial View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 24-Sep-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 28 		  Quote Celestial Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: The British Empire!
    Posted: 29-Sep-2006 at 16:39
Yeah right.For ages. What the hell that kid is thinking? It lasted a little more than a century. However it was the second greatest empire in history after the Roman empire.
Back to Top
Vivek Sharma View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 22-Aug-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1775 		  Quote Vivek Sharma Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Sep-2006 at 00:54
Originally posted by malizai_

Originally posted by Vivek Sharma

Originally posted by malizai_

The making of modern india i think started from the onward legacy of alaudin khilji who was followed by Sher shah Suri and The period of Akbar.

More on the empire later.



Look back deeper in the history. The earliest documented records of this nation in the modern context is the Mauryan empire founded by Vishnugupta Bhatta or Chanakya, whose first king was Chandragupta Maurya in 320 B.C. around.

I am not taking ancient religious history into account, only modern history otherwise the dates would go much earlier.
 
modern india


Did you want to reply, but forgot to ?
PATTON NAGAR, Brains win over Brawn
Back to Top
Aster Thrax Eupator View Drop Down
Suspended
Suspended

Suspended

Joined: 18-Jul-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1929 		  Quote Aster Thrax Eupator Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Oct-2006 at 12:37
Then I presume the whole world including France & Germany & China & Russia got their trains from the British when they ere all colonised by them !!!
 
Just what is the aid of that?
Back to Top
Bulldog View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800 		  Quote Bulldog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Oct-2006 at 13:35
The Train was invented by the Brittish, its a fact.
 
Unfortunately some people who don't happen to be fans of certain Empires/States try to deny that they ever did anything positive, create anything, advance or discover anything. They blur bitterness with logic and realities. If somebody doesn't "like" the Brittish Empire or any other Empire fine but don't deny what they have contributed.
      What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine

Back to Top
TeldeInduz View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 07-Mar-2006
Location: Paraguay
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 857 		  Quote TeldeInduz Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Oct-2006 at 14:09
It's an interesting enough topic. My point of view is that the British messed up Pakistan at the very least. By 1947 it was just a raw materials producer. Though the British did develop some cities within modern day India. Bengal for one was a lot more developed than Pakistan by the end of the colonial period. I would have to agree that one or two positives were done, like railroads, but many more negatives were done. Literacy was especially the problem in 1947 for Pakistan (7%), now it's 60% - still some way to go, but things are improving. The only really good thing that the British did was create Pakistan Clap. 
 
Also Vivek is wrong when he says that the British did not unite India. It was the partition agreement under the British that gave the independent states the choice of India or Pakistan. This is not to say that the Indian Army would not have taken all the princely states by force, like they did Hyderabad.
Quoo-ray sha quadou sarre.................
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Oct-2006 at 15:45

the best thing about the BE in india was , that the english language gave them all a even playing field, not caste or religion, . not that it dosnt still go on.

 
the british empire made the modern world.and all its problems, america took them over at the end of ww2, and didnt rearly understand the cultures it picked up as payment for fundinng the UKs war effort againts that old foe.
Back to Top
Aster Thrax Eupator View Drop Down
Suspended
Suspended

Suspended

Joined: 18-Jul-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1929 		  Quote Aster Thrax Eupator Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Oct-2006 at 07:43

Originally posted by Vivek

You yourself say "The plain fact of the matter is that they did not really care what the individual Indian thought". How on earth do you expect a people who don't give a damn to what the individual thinks to contribute greatly to their nation.

That is a completely ridiculous point- there are hundereds, if not thousands of empires that have had this attitude and many of them have helped their subjects.
 
Also,
 
Originally posted by Vivek

Then I presume the whole world including France & Germany & China & Russia got their trains from the British when they ere all colonised by them !!!
 
Now thats' just being thourghly immature. You know the answer to that as well as I do! That remark has no historical context and does not help this discussion in the least. You disgrace youself, Vivek.
 
...Not trying to be offensive, but how does that help?
Back to Top
malizai_ View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan

Alcinous

Joined: 05-Feb-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2252 		  Quote malizai_ Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Oct-2006 at 20:28
Originally posted by Vivek Sharma

Originally posted by malizai_

Originally posted by Vivek Sharma

Originally posted by malizai_

The making of modern india i think started from the onward legacy of alaudin khilji who was followed by Sher shah Suri and The period of Akbar.

More on the empire later.



Look back deeper in the history. The earliest documented records of this nation in the modern context is the Mauryan empire founded by Vishnugupta Bhatta or Chanakya, whose first king was Chandragupta Maurya in 320 B.C. around.

I am not taking ancient religious history into account, only modern history otherwise the dates would go much earlier.
 
modern india

Did you want to reply, but forgot to ?
 
No, i had forgotten and therefore was going to reply.
 
Back to Top
malizai_ View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan

Alcinous

Joined: 05-Feb-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2252 		  Quote malizai_ Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Oct-2006 at 22:05
The british empire was capatilism, naked. Afterall it was about the rush for resources and the British were the Last to join the race, the basis was the East India trading company, a private venture i must say.
 
Having said that i dont think that the shortcomings of Indian rulers be placed squarely with the Crown.
Back to Top
Vivek Sharma View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 22-Aug-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1775 		  Quote Vivek Sharma Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Oct-2006 at 00:56
Easter, Why don't you list out the things contributed by the british, instead of making cague generalisations & those points can be debated poin by point. Why do the colonists still find it hard to accept the truth that they had established colonies for the purpose of plundering the lands they conquered, unlike say even the mongols, who mixed woith the civilisations & becama a part of the land where they lived. Don't get emotional easter, but you need to get out of this "Colonist is God,others are barbarians" mentality.
PATTON NAGAR, Brains win over Brawn
Back to Top
Aster Thrax Eupator View Drop Down
Suspended
Suspended

Suspended

Joined: 18-Jul-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1929 		  Quote Aster Thrax Eupator Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Oct-2006 at 04:09

Easter, Why don't you list out the things contributed by the british, instead of making cague generalisations & those points can be debated poin by point. Why do the colonists still find it hard to accept the truth that they had established colonies for the purpose of plundering the lands they conquered, unlike say even the mongols, who mixed woith the civilisations & becama a part of the land where they lived. Don't get emotional easter, but you need to get out of this "Colonist is God,others are barbarians" mentality.

How dare you state that I am a colonialist. I find that deeply offensive. If you must know, Vivek, my political stance is left and liberal, not one of right wing capitalist imperialsm. All my point was that the British empire did help instate and make India. That is undeniable. I do not deny the atrocities commited by British troops in the 1857 mutiny, I do not deny the appalling actions commited by brigadeer rex dryer in the amritsar massacre. You have no right to make those kinds of accusations about my political ideals based on a few posts on one topic.

Why do the colonists still find it hard to accept the truth that they had established colonies for the purpose of plundering the lands they conquered

Not once have I claimed contrary to this quote. I know this full well. I am just using obvious historical evidence to claim that just ONE part of the British empire did later gain a lot from being under its' hedgemony.

I have had to deal with speaking with some colonialists, imperialists and racists in Britain, and they are thourghly unpleasent people.

"Colonist is God,others are barbarians" mentality.
 
Don't you dare insunate that i am ignorant when i have been around the world with my family as my father works for the foregin office. So i have seen a lot of the world, I am not the ignorant colonialist that you think me to be. This is a public forum- we don't know eachother and so you have no right to claim ANY of this stuff about me.

I demand an apology from you, Vivek. I have not made this ridiculous deductions about you!

...Also, my name is Earl (as in the title) Aster, not easter.

 
Back to Top
Vivek Sharma View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 22-Aug-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1775 		  Quote Vivek Sharma Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Oct-2006 at 04:35
Dear Earl,

First about the name, Here it's considered respectable to call a person by his second name, I got the A wrong, I shall call you Earl henceforth.

Please don't don't consider anything in the post as a personal attack. It's just a general statement, never meant to hurt anyone, sorry if it did.

Regarding your statement about the attroicites in 1857, they were not bigger than the numerous other cases enacted by other invaders earlier. In this sense the British were far better than most other invaders.

Regrding general Dyre, the above holds true in this case also. It was bad, but not nearly as bad as so many other incidents with other invaders.

Nice to know about your political leanings. I have the same leanings, so we are a lot similiar.

As you rightly said, Tipu's destruction was a great contribution to India buy the British empire as also its defeat fo the numerous Nawabs always querralling amongst themselves for attaining the crown.
PATTON NAGAR, Brains win over Brawn
Back to Top
Leonidas View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 01-Oct-2005
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4613 		  Quote Leonidas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Oct-2006 at 08:37
i think we may want to seperate legacy from the actual claim of helping others, or nation building. The british empire by it very nature as a chauvinistic colonialist (and as archetype international capitalists) helps itself not its subjects. That goes for almost all empires.

everything else that helps a former colony to become a nation is just a legacy that is just left behind when the british are gone. When australia, india, canada or any other deamed 'successful' nation that comes out the empire is touted as some kind of  proof of the british contribution, but there are many other failed states that get ignored. Success of a former colony dpends on how the locals can make the most of, learn or adapt what was left and how they handled independance. So any success is a measure of the locals not the british
Back to Top
Aster Thrax Eupator View Drop Down
Suspended
Suspended

Suspended

Joined: 18-Jul-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1929 		  Quote Aster Thrax Eupator Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Oct-2006 at 10:12
I fully appreciate that the British empire were fundamentally out for their own selfish racially driven gains, and that they treated the people like cattle. I understand this, I am just saying that their legacy has left some good, not that they and their ideologies are good at all!
 
...Sorry for any offending remarks to you, Vivek
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Oct-2006 at 11:38
i think the spainsh empire, would of been so more frienldy and enlighting for the masses.
 
Back to Top
Aster Thrax Eupator View Drop Down
Suspended
Suspended

Suspended

Joined: 18-Jul-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1929 		  Quote Aster Thrax Eupator Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Oct-2006 at 14:41

...The conquistadors? ...The Caribbean slave farms?

Look, I'm not claiming that they were any better an alternative to the British Empire, but they were hardly

so more frienldy and enlighting for the masses.

 
Back to Top
Leonidas View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 01-Oct-2005
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4613 		  Quote Leonidas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Oct-2006 at 06:18
i might heap sh*t on the british but OMG the spanish were just as bad, the've got genocide written all over their conquests and loot fests. The only difference betwen the spanish (and portugese) colonisers and the english-dutch ones is that they actaully mixed with the survivors, but thats about it.

im anti emperialist not anti british for anyone that thinks ive got a bone to pick, BTW Earl my post wasnt aimed at you
Back to Top
Paul View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar
AE Immoderator

Joined: 21-Aug-2004
Location: Hyperborea
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 952 		  Quote Paul Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Oct-2006 at 07:31
Originally posted by Vivek Sharma


News to me. I thought it was an Indian Punjabi dish. So does the whole world.
 
Punjab is a long way from Banagladesh. And even further from Bangladeshi chefs living in the UK.
 
 
 


Edited by Paul - 04-Oct-2006 at 07:32
Light blue touch paper and stand well back

http://www.maquahuitl.co.uk

http://www.toltecitztli.co.uk
Back to Top
Vivek Sharma View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 22-Aug-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1775 		  Quote Vivek Sharma Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Oct-2006 at 08:16
What makes you think that Tikka Masala is a Bengali dish ?

It has been in India since ages.

By the way the chefs making it in UK may be Bengali, but in India, it is not even popular amongst the Bengalis.

By the way, I read in wiki link above that most chefs there are bengalis. Any reasons for this ?
PATTON NAGAR, Brains win over Brawn
Back to Top
Aster Thrax Eupator View Drop Down
Suspended
Suspended

Suspended

Joined: 18-Jul-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1929 		  Quote Aster Thrax Eupator Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Oct-2006 at 08:31
Vivek- my I ask you a cusine question? That is, do any of the British indian dishes actually taste like the traditional food of your country?
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 3456>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.141 seconds.