So, uh...

So, uh, this country basically got away with two centuries' worth of atrocities and then got to have everyone forget about them when they lost their empire. Why did we all just agree not to talk about Britain's horrible history? They're ten times worse than any modern protester's idea of what America does in the world.

Because the UK managed to (just about) win any war that could result in their cultural demonization.

Napoleonic Wars
WW1
WW2

Every time someone tried to challenge the Eternal Anglo they ended up getting away with it. And now they've simply been irrelevant for too long for anyone in the future to care about bringing historical British perfidery to light.

Have you stepped foot in academia lately? That's all they seem to want to talk about. . .

See all empires

Britain was bad but I'd argue no worse than any empire of its day.

Britain was way worse.

France, Austria, Germany, the Ottomans. None of the other 19th-early 20th century powers have shit on Britain when it comes to committing atrocities and ruthlessly exploiting indigenous people.

No one would give a shit about Germany did if it weren't literally the 4th Reich right now. No one except Koreans and Chinese cares about what Japan did. People forgive you when you have been toppled. When you're still reaping the benefits of historical exploits, yes, people get mad.

>No one except Koreans and Chinese cares about what Japan did
South-East Asians are also mad as fuck.

Belgium says hi.

Go away SEA no one likes you.

To be fair Belgium didn't actually run the Congo """Free State"""". Leopold II did and pretty much owned the entire country as his private property.

What the hell are you talking about? Denizens of the British Empire enjoyed a higher standard of living than almost anywhere else in the world. They even fought wars to end slavery. If you want to see how terrible an Empire can be, go look at the Ottomans.

> Denizens of the British Empire enjoyed a higher standard of living than almost anywhere else in the world.
t. Nigel Nigelson

pic related for how nice it was to live in the British empire.

>If you want to see how terrible an Empire can be, go look at the Ottomans.
The Ottomans were by no means good. But they were leaps and bounds more enlightened than the British when it came to how they treated their subjects. The worst thing they ever did was the Armenian genocide, and it just barely surpasses the Irish famine in death toll.

The idea that the British empire was more enlightened than the rest is probably the biggest lie we've been fed in recent history.

Refusing to prop up a failing territory is a far cry from actively trying to eradicate an ethnic group.

This is the thing about the British. They simply did not give a fuck. It didn't matter if people were starving in their millions, they were simply out to exploit their territories for all they could get. Even today your defence of it, and the similar arguments made by other British apologists, mirrors the attitudes of British imperial authorities. They had absolutely no love or concern for their subjects, all they cared about was how to most efficiently make money.

You can make the moral judgements you want to make. But don't try and say "denizens of the British empire enjoyed a higher standard of living than almost anywhere else in the world".

But they did. Famines happened in other parts of the world, too. They still do. Life in the Empire was better than life outside of it, unlesd you were a white English speaking protestant, in which case you might be better of in the USA.

I'm interested to know how much food the British Empire requisitioned from the Indians.

Can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs.

Famines did indeed happen in other parts of the world. And when a famine happened in Russia whilst the Russians gave no support and continued to take food we rightly call that a genocide. When a famine happened in the British empire and the British gave no support and continued to take food we call it a natural disaster. This is the hypocrisy of the mainstream assessment of Britain.

>Life in the Empire was better than life outside of it
It wasn't. If you were Irish you didn't have to worry about being oppressed for being Catholic in say France or Austria. The Dutch provided much more support to the Indonesians than the British did to the Indians. The Portuguese did not put people in concentration camps like the British did with the Boers.

Speaking of the Irish notice how they emigrated in massive numbers away from the British empire. Clearly they didn't think life in the empire was better than outside it.

Literally any other empire with the possible exception of Russia was better to live in than Britain.

>The Portuguese did not put people in concentration camps like the British did with the Boers.
>Internment camps intended for COIN
>A substantial portion of the camp guards died along with the inmates
>America and Spain had used concentration camps earlier than the British

The British and French Empires were probably the best to live in during the 19th century.

>Why did we all just agree

Define "we all". Otherwise, I won't keep reading.

>What is banning the slave trade
Other empires did just as bad particularly frances slavery in the caribbean and Belgiums racial tensions leading to the rawandan genocide.

that also arguably makes it worse.
Its kinda based to own a nation as your personal property though

>Life in the Empire was better than life outside of it
>

This
You could argue the spread of ideas and civilization memes has done more good than harm.

>Australia Canada New Zealand America

>Morally comparing a 19th century empire to modern America
Dumb shitskin children pls go and stay gone

>So, uh,
>>>/reddit/

If you were British or French. If you're going to brag about living status in an empire, you don't cite the conquerors but the conquered.