Customer Discussions > History forum

Why British people did not resist their decolonisation?


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 56 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on Nov 11, 2012 9:16:34 PM PST
OldAmazonian says:
"Chair" needs a good caning.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 11, 2012 5:19:12 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 11, 2012 5:21:46 PM PST
L. King says:
The Indian economy is doing fine. Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper was just there announcing a whole bunch of trade deals. The complainers are those saying he hasn't done enough. We'll have to see how far and how fast the benefits spread out. No comment at this time as I don't know more than what I've read in the paper.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 11, 2012 5:09:22 PM PST
Suet says:
It's just been announced that British foreign aid to India will be phased out by 2015.
They don't want it.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 11, 2012 5:04:18 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 11, 2012 6:28:31 PM PST
L. King says:
I see that you are anxious about the situation of minorities in Great Britain. Basically the British are decent people. I don't think they intend to invoke the Algerian model, aka Libyan Model, aka Saudi Model, aka Sudanese Model, aka Qatari Model, aka Emerati Model.... and create an ethnically pure monotheistic State.

Or is that what you were hoping for?

Colonialism was given a bad rap by the Soviets in their attempt to impose an ideological hegemony on the developing world. Historically one of the most revealing success and moral failures of the concept was in 1956 when India's V.K. Menon supported the Soviet invasion of Hungary on the basis that colonialism only existed when white people intruded on brown people. He changed his mind about 3 weeks later when he was in Budapest and saw tanks and soldiers everywhere, but by then it was too late - the revolution for a free Hungary was lost.

Besides, why else did Allah create so many different peoples, if not so that we should come to know each other. Bookish - one day I hope your realize this, and can come to know yourself, if you haven't already. ;-)

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 11, 2012 4:22:06 PM PST
Suet says:
"The only legacy ... from the British Empire is the English language."

Common law.
Parliamentary democracy.
Thinking it's clever to bad-mouth one's own.
Stuff like that.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 11, 2012 1:59:58 PM PST
patrick says:
American missionaries came to do good. They did well

thats a good one.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 11, 2012 4:59:52 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 11, 2012 5:02:55 AM PST
ipsofacto says:
Yup, Niall Ferguson certainly outed himself as a neocon in Colossus: The Rise and Fall of the American Empire . It's as if he feels that the British Empire was just a general rehearsal for world domination and America should continue the job. He can't hide his annoyance with US wishy-washiness in this respect.

That said, I do have to agree with Ferguson that the British Empire, despite its excesses, had an overall benign influence on most if not all of the ex-colonies. We can question their motives, but the British imperialists did leave a functioning judiciary and civil service behind. It stands those countries in good stead to this day.

Posted on Nov 9, 2012 11:17:02 AM PST
briefcandle says:
Look at India. There never was a concerted or even half hearted government effort at conversion. The point was to control the subcontinent with the minimum of resources and not to make interferences ( ie conversion) which were counter to the political/military task.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 9, 2012 9:56:50 AM PST
[Deleted by Amazon on Jul 15, 2013 7:16:49 AM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 8:52:16 PM PST
ipsofacto says:
I'm inclined to agree -- Niall Ferguson in his book Empire: The Rise and Demise of the British World Order and the Lessons for Global Power suggests that after WW2, the home isles no longer had the stomach nor the money to maintain the Empire. I have a bit of trouble swallowing Ferguson's claim that the British Empire nobly sacrificed itself in order to beat the Nazis. Maybe it did, but not quite willingly.

Empires must rise and fall. At least the Brits did it with style.

Cameron is not alone. When I told an American friend, old money himself, about my visit to an immense Del Monte pineapple plantation in the Philippines, he curtly responded: "American missionaries came to do good. They did well".

Posted on Nov 8, 2012 1:41:29 PM PST
Britain didn't resist because the doctors said they had decolonization cancer, and they needed to biopsy. You can play around with decolon, but it's safer to not goof with decancer.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 1:34:27 PM PST
[Deleted by Amazon on Jul 15, 2013 7:16:46 AM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 2, 2012 10:38:56 AM PDT
ipsofacto says:
Well spotted. At least they're not doing the Benny Hill salute.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 2, 2012 6:06:15 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Nov 2, 2012 6:09:37 AM PDT
Bubba says:
There is a 5 minute chunk of it at

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEW4HGALZ5o

I think that they had a Boy Scout teach the actors how to salute.

Another minute and a half; the acting looks quite good.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbQiCzvvnhA

Posted on Nov 2, 2012 4:46:58 AM PDT
kind of surprised no one is speaking of Churchill's "naughty document" or secret "Percentages" Agreement as applied to eastern europeans. i grew up knowing about this due to my parents' disgust with how Churchill (without Roosevelt's knowledge) divvied up eastern europe to the communists. after my parents' soviet incarceration and after my sister and I were born, they believed they no longer had a country (since turning communist) and we came to the US. we were one of so many poles who were not communist, but there were many polish communists. this is so very personal to me due to the suffering of my family by the soviets, their incarceration, something that is not discussed a lot. Don't mean to go on, sorry, but i did want to point out Churchill's role and how it affected millions of people.

thank you

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 1, 2012 11:00:34 PM PDT
ipsofacto says:
It's a known fact that the Soviets pressed Polish POWs into the Red Army (after murdering their officers in Katyn first). Even so, their contribution to the war effort was justifiably lauded -- the Soviets even flew the Polish flag on the Reichstag following the fall of Berlin. Not sure how all that would've gone unnoticed in the West.

I can't vouch personally for the Poles, but I've dealt extensively with Estonians, before and after Estonia regained independence. None appeared brainwashed, and none needed to be educated about the wrongs inflicted on them by the Soviets. I can't think of a reason why the Poles would be different in this respect.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 1, 2012 9:50:49 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Nov 2, 2012 9:25:14 PM PDT
Juggernaut says:
" It was a decision by Roosevelt and Churchill - Roosevelt because he trusted the bastard Stalin, and Churchill because he had no choice."

I don't think so.At the time the Red Army was the most powerful army in the world and its forces were at the Oder River facing the bulk of the Wehrmacht , which , although technically defeated, was still capable of inflicting heavy losses (the final drift towards Berlin cost, at least, one hundred thousand of soviet lives and neither Roosevelt nor Churchill wanted to pay such a heavy loss of lives for the final kill of the nazis).

Roosevelt was also dependent of Soviet help to defeat the Japanese.Stalin acquiesced to that request made by Roosevelt in Yalta and promised to declare war on Japan after the German defeat.
Of course Roosevelt was aware at the time of the building of the atomic bomb but no one knew when it would be available.

Posted on Nov 1, 2012 12:40:17 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Nov 1, 2012 12:40:54 AM PDT
DarthRad says:
Yes, the book T-34 Mythical Weapon does mention that Polish TV series.

The Polish Army units that fought with the Soviets blended seamlessly into the post WWII Warsaw Pact armies that helped support the Soviet Union during the Cold War.

So Western WWII history talks only of the Free Polish forces who fought with the Western Allies, but since most of those forces ended up settling in the West post-war, I think the Polish people are much more familiar with their armed forces that fought with the Soviets. That TV show was set in 1944 and 1945 and was very popular in Poland, so it undoubtedly made the Polish people think that it was natural that the Polish people would be fighting with the Soviets during WWII.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 31, 2012 8:32:13 PM PDT
ipsofacto says:
Not quite true. In the sixties, there was a popular series on Polish TV that featured a Polish T-34 crew fighting the Nazis with the Soviets:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Czterej_pancerni_i_pies

Amazon even sells the DVD box:

Four Tank Men and a Dog (Czterej Pancerni i Pies)

Not understanding the political backdrop, I enjoyed watching the series as a child. As a tank buff you could do worse.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 31, 2012 5:54:51 PM PDT
Suet says:
What do present-day Poles think of them?

Posted on Oct 31, 2012 5:17:57 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Oct 31, 2012 5:20:38 PM PDT
DarthRad says:
Poles also fought with the Soviets during WWII. There were entire brigades of Polish T-34 tank forces for example. These pro-Soviet Polish forces are NEVER discussed in Western literature about WWII. You have to go to some of the newest post-Soviet literature written by the Poles themselves to find out about this stuff. Here's where I first read about this:

T-34 Mythical Weapon

Outstanding must-read book, BTW, for tank nerds.

It's not as one sided of a picture as you might think. Many Poles were pro-Soviet.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 31, 2012 3:00:53 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Oct 31, 2012 5:06:21 AM PDT
OldAmazonian says:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Keelhaul

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn called this operation "the last secret of World War II." He contributed to a legal defence fund set up to help Nikolai Tolstoy, who was charged with libel in a 1989 case brought by Lord Aldington over war crimes allegations made by Tolstoy related to this operation. Tolstoy lost the case in the British courts but the award against him was overturned by the European Court of Human Rights.

Tolstoy described the scene of Americans returning to the internment camp after having delivered a shipment of people to the Russians. "The Americans returned to Plattling visibly shamefaced. Before their departure from the rendezvous in the forest, many had seen rows of bodies already hanging from the branches of nearby trees."

In 1957 a Polish anti-communist writer Józef Mackiewicz published Kontra, a narrative account of this event.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 30, 2012 6:12:00 PM PDT
Suet says:
"they got no problem selling people like those ... WW2 Poles out"

But they DIDN'T, patrick:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_Resettlement_Act_1947

If you're referring to Poland being ceded to the Soviet "sphere of influence" at Yalta, that was Roosevelt's doing. Attlee wasn't even PM then.

As for "not liking uniforms", Attlee himself spent four years in uniform in WWI, serving in Gallipoli, Mesopotamia (where he was badly wounded), and France. He finished the war as a major.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 30, 2012 5:44:39 PM PDT
patrick says:
the Western socialists do not like uniforms, Sue..

after all, theyre all reactionary counter-revolutionaries, war-mongers, baby killers, and Fascist cops who 'over -react/ heavy handed/excessive force" to everything..
they got no problem selling people like those often decorated WW2 Poles out..the old Hey Hey Ho Hos..

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 30, 2012 12:58:56 PM PDT
Suet says:
"all adds up"

Maybe in your mind, patrick, but not in the real world.
‹ Previous 1 2 3 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Discussion in:  History forum
Participants:  16
Total posts:  56
Initial post:  Jul 18, 2012
Latest post:  Nov 11, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 2 customers

Search Customer Discussions