British colonialism killed 100 million Indians in 40 years

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is hard to compare the colonial experience in America with Indian. North America native population was reduced to a tenth of its population. You can look to Ireland. Clearly the British took to wealth and did not care what local populations.

Certainly the white settlers decimated the native tribes, but I don't think you can lay that at the feet of the British. Most of that happened after the US became an independent country.

[Anonymous]

What a ridiculous discussion. First colonialism is defended. What next--a defense of slavery?

[Anonymous]

Lots of apologists and whataboutism. Only colonizers benefited from colonization. Any rationalization for and claims of benefits for the colonized is utter rubbish.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Colonialism was bad. Other than a couple of dimwits here, is there really anyone pro-colonialism today? I don’t think anyone is power is pro-colonialism.

Are you serious? What does the word mean? It means to “colonize,” it does not mean some sort of Marxist fever dream. Colonialism worked out pretty well for North America. I.e., colonizing what is now the united states. Do you really think there is a scenario where no non American peoples would have come to this continent? Also, the democrats (and many republicans) are pushing the colonization of the United States today by foreign immigrants.

You realize that colonialism is different from colonization? The British didn't move into India (or other nations) and establish colonies, it subjugated its people, and exploited its resources, at the expense of the people that were living there.

British settlements in India had thousands of people, including families of British officials posted and various others. The reason the US did so poorly in Iraq and Afghanistan is that it did not follow this model.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What a ridiculous discussion. First colonialism is defended. What next--a defense of slavery?

Hey, the slaves got free room and board, no?

/s

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lots of apologists and whataboutism. Only colonizers benefited from colonization. Any rationalization for and claims of benefits for the colonized is utter rubbish.

Nonsense. The British have been one of the greatest forces for good in human history, and colonies of the British benefitted tremendously.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of apologists and whataboutism. Only colonizers benefited from colonization. Any rationalization for and claims of benefits for the colonized is utter rubbish.

Nonsense. The British have been one of the greatest forces for good in human history, and colonies of the British benefitted tremendously.

Oh yes. Our almighty white saviors to the rescue. Such altruism and benevolence.

Please list all the "good in human history" the British brought to the colonies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Odd claim. Britain brought India into the modern world. Moving from agrarianism to industrialism caused a lot of increased poverty in Britain as well when it was going through its own industrial revolution, that’s just how it works. The British empire was the most benevolent empire in world history. Are there any other contenders?

India was the industrial workshop of the world in the 17th and 18th century, before the British. How do you know that India wouldn't have come "into the modern world" if it weren't for the British? After all, the civilization there dates back thousands of years, and had some of the most advanced civilizations, well before Europe. I'm sure the British empire was "benevolent", if you were British; funny how none of the countries it colonized thought so, and the US actually fought a whole damn war to be rid of them.

Actually, British colonialism brought modern governance and administration to the feudal feuding system that was previously there, and that returned at various times especially during the time periods of the study.

And the British system of governance and administration is kept in India now because it is good.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Odd claim. Britain brought India into the modern world. Moving from agrarianism to industrialism caused a lot of increased poverty in Britain as well when it was going through its own industrial revolution, that’s just how it works. The British empire was the most benevolent empire in world history. Are there any other contenders?

India was the industrial workshop of the world in the 17th and 18th century, before the British. How do you know that India wouldn't have come "into the modern world" if it weren't for the British? After all, the civilization there dates back thousands of years, and had some of the most advanced civilizations, well before Europe. I'm sure the British empire was "benevolent", if you were British; funny how none of the countries it colonized thought so, and the US actually fought a whole damn war to be rid of them.

Actually, British colonialism brought modern governance and administration to the feudal feuding system that was previously there, and that returned at various times especially during the time periods of the study.

And the British system of governance and administration is kept in India now because it is good.

It has remained so in many former British colonies because it is a legacy institution, not because it is "good" or better than the previous system of governance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Odd claim. Britain brought India into the modern world. Moving from agrarianism to industrialism caused a lot of increased poverty in Britain as well when it was going through its own industrial revolution, that’s just how it works. The British empire was the most benevolent empire in world history. Are there any other contenders?

India was the industrial workshop of the world in the 17th and 18th century, before the British. How do you know that India wouldn't have come "into the modern world" if it weren't for the British? After all, the civilization there dates back thousands of years, and had some of the most advanced civilizations, well before Europe. I'm sure the British empire was "benevolent", if you were British; funny how none of the countries it colonized thought so, and the US actually fought a whole damn war to be rid of them.

Actually, British colonialism brought modern governance and administration to the feudal feuding system that was previously there, and that returned at various times especially during the time periods of the study.

And the British system of governance and administration is kept in India now because it is good.

It has remained so in many former British colonies because it is a legacy institution, not because it is "good" or better than the previous system of governance.

Not sure about everywhere, but in India, yes, better. And in the US.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Odd claim. Britain brought India into the modern world. Moving from agrarianism to industrialism caused a lot of increased poverty in Britain as well when it was going through its own industrial revolution, that’s just how it works. The British empire was the most benevolent empire in world history. Are there any other contenders?

India was the industrial workshop of the world in the 17th and 18th century, before the British. How do you know that India wouldn't have come "into the modern world" if it weren't for the British? After all, the civilization there dates back thousands of years, and had some of the most advanced civilizations, well before Europe. I'm sure the British empire was "benevolent", if you were British; funny how none of the countries it colonized thought so, and the US actually fought a whole damn war to be rid of them.

Actually, British colonialism brought modern governance and administration to the feudal feuding system that was previously there, and that returned at various times especially during the time periods of the study.

And the British system of governance and administration is kept in India now because it is good.

It has remained so in many former British colonies because it is a legacy institution, not because it is "good" or better than the previous system of governance.

Not sure about everywhere, but in India, yes, better. And in the US.

Not the same as the US.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Odd claim. Britain brought India into the modern world. Moving from agrarianism to industrialism caused a lot of increased poverty in Britain as well when it was going through its own industrial revolution, that’s just how it works. The British empire was the most benevolent empire in world history. Are there any other contenders?

India was the industrial workshop of the world in the 17th and 18th century, before the British. How do you know that India wouldn't have come "into the modern world" if it weren't for the British? After all, the civilization there dates back thousands of years, and had some of the most advanced civilizations, well before Europe. I'm sure the British empire was "benevolent", if you were British; funny how none of the countries it colonized thought so, and the US actually fought a whole damn war to be rid of them.

Actually, British colonialism brought modern governance and administration to the feudal feuding system that was previously there, and that returned at various times especially during the time periods of the study.

And the British system of governance and administration is kept in India now because it is good.

It has remained so in many former British colonies because it is a legacy institution, not because it is "good" or better than the previous system of governance.

Yeah, just look at how amazingly well the countries that were never subject to colonization are doing. Ethiopia sure is killing it right now

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of apologists and whataboutism. Only colonizers benefited from colonization. Any rationalization for and claims of benefits for the colonized is utter rubbish.

Nonsense. The British have been one of the greatest forces for good in human history, and colonies of the British benefitted tremendously.

What a weird blanket statement to make. Are some former British colonies better off than their neighbors? Sure. Are some former British colonies much worse off than their neighbors? Just ask Sudan and Somaliland.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Odd claim. Britain brought India into the modern world. Moving from agrarianism to industrialism caused a lot of increased poverty in Britain as well when it was going through its own industrial revolution, that’s just how it works. The British empire was the most benevolent empire in world history. Are there any other contenders?

India was the industrial workshop of the world in the 17th and 18th century, before the British. How do you know that India wouldn't have come "into the modern world" if it weren't for the British? After all, the civilization there dates back thousands of years, and had some of the most advanced civilizations, well before Europe. I'm sure the British empire was "benevolent", if you were British; funny how none of the countries it colonized thought so, and the US actually fought a whole damn war to be rid of them.

Actually, British colonialism brought modern governance and administration to the feudal feuding system that was previously there, and that returned at various times especially during the time periods of the study.

And the British system of governance and administration is kept in India now because it is good.

It has remained so in many former British colonies because it is a legacy institution, not because it is "good" or better than the previous system of governance.

Yeah, just look at how amazingly well the countries that were never subject to colonization are doing. Ethiopia sure is killing it right now

Ethiopia was colonized by Italy, just so you're aware.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Odd claim. Britain brought India into the modern world. Moving from agrarianism to industrialism caused a lot of increased poverty in Britain as well when it was going through its own industrial revolution, that’s just how it works. The British empire was the most benevolent empire in world history. Are there any other contenders?

India was the industrial workshop of the world in the 17th and 18th century, before the British. How do you know that India wouldn't have come "into the modern world" if it weren't for the British? After all, the civilization there dates back thousands of years, and had some of the most advanced civilizations, well before Europe. I'm sure the British empire was "benevolent", if you were British; funny how none of the countries it colonized thought so, and the US actually fought a whole damn war to be rid of them.

Actually, British colonialism brought modern governance and administration to the feudal feuding system that was previously there, and that returned at various times especially during the time periods of the study.

And the British system of governance and administration is kept in India now because it is good.

It has remained so in many former British colonies because it is a legacy institution, not because it is "good" or better than the previous system of governance.

Not sure about everywhere, but in India, yes, better. And in the US.

Yes just like the Soviet Union made Russia a modern country.