Today in World History

[BrownBaron]

Britain and her Commonwealth, collectively, with all things considered, are probably the most democratic and stable states on the face of the planet. That's no accident, bruv.

Yes, that is, basically, what I said.

Of course, I'm sure if their former subjects hadn't become weary of their sub-citizenships, the Empire would still retain them as just that, sub-citizens. They did not as a whole seek to liberate and empower the natives, but exposed them to their ideas, which seem to have taken extremely well, giving birth to the US, Canada, India, et cetera.

[Motherland]

India's natives, for example, were made citizens of the British Empire, but with out many of the rights that a white member of the government that presided over them enjoyed. The English did not as a whole seek to liberate and fully empower the Indians, but umimtemtionally introduced their ideas to the population. Had the natives not grown weary of their captivity in their own lands, I am sure the Brits would still keep them in that state today.

Yes, the entire world has been liberalized over the past 100 years, including the (former) British Empire. That's beside the point.
Today India is one of the most stable states in that region, and is still a member of the Commonwealth, and is well on its way to becoming a superpower.

[BrownBaron]

Yes, the entire world has been liberalized over the past 100 years, including the (former) British Empire. That's beside the point.
Today India is one of the most stable states in that region, and is still a member of the Commonwealth, and is well on its way to becoming a superpower.

That is not besides the point. I felt they were not actively trying to grant liberties to their colonies, while you disagree. We both agree that today the former British Empire is, comparatively, very stable.

[Karnak]

I very much prefer the English ideas of liberty to the French ideas of Liberty and am rather happy that the English exported it as well as they did.

As to colonialism, it was a bad thing, yes.  However, the English (British) were by no means the worst of the lot and of the messes left behind when colonial powers withdrew, the British left a good deal more functional states than did the French, Germans or Belgians.

[Motherland]

That is not besides the point. I felt they were not actively trying to grant liberties to their colonies, while you disagree. We both agree that today the former British Empire is, comparatively, very stable.

No one actively grants liberties to anyone. Who's going to share power if they already have all of it, unless they're forced to?
India and Pakistan got independence from Britain before racial minorities in the United States got the right to vote. Slavery in the Empire was outlawed LONG before it was outlawed in the US (for the sake of comparing the lasting British sphere to one of its colonies that forcefully removed itself). In no cases are rights just 'given out', those who wanted them had to fight very hard to get them. It's the same everywhere.

[Westy]

Damned pommey bastirds and their malicious and eVile Magna Carta.
Piece of crap parchment that had the misfortune of influencing a
group of rebels in creating their <patooey> Bill of Rights several
hundred years later.

[BrownBaron]

No one actively grants liberties to anyone. Who's going to share power if they already have all of it, unless they're forced to?
India and Pakistan got independence from Britain before racial minorities in the United States got the right to vote. Slavery in the Empire was outlawed LONG before it was outlawed in the US (for the sake of comparing the lasting British sphere to one of its colonies that forcefully removed itself). In no cases are rights just 'given out', those who wanted them had to fight very hard to get them. It's the same everywhere.

This is true, and I'm not attacking the British Empire for their practices, either. We are in agreeance here.