Topic: The British soldiers actually prevented the Zulus from further conquest and genocide.
Anonymous A started this discussion 1 month ago #133,898
The Zulus had killed more than a million black Africans in their empire building.
And then the British held the line:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=a4Vfq4YaWJ0
And then the British held the line:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=a4Vfq4YaWJ0
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 1 month ago, 10 minutes later[^] [v] #1,426,703
The British are the reason the caste system in India was weakened. When they left, and hindu nationalism began another rise is when castes began regaining their place in institutions.
Unfortunately "anticolonialists" will throw away progress, peace, and wealth to wallow in racism. If they could learn to love all people, even pale foreigners, they would have kept making rapid progress.
Unfortunately "anticolonialists" will throw away progress, peace, and wealth to wallow in racism. If they could learn to love all people, even pale foreigners, they would have kept making rapid progress.
(Edited 12 seconds later.)
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 1 month ago, 2 hours later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,426,716
That has to be one of the most retarded things I’ve heard in a while seeing as black people are the majority of the population of South Africa. Sometimes I wonder if white people even believe the stupid things they say.
Anonymous C double-posted this 1 month ago, 4 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,426,718
@1,426,703 (B)
> Unfortunately "anticolonialists" will throw away progress, peace, and wealth to wallow in racism. If they could learn to love all people, even pale foreigners, they would have kept making rapid progress.
There’s no way you actually believe what you just said. There’s no way you’re this stupid lol
> Unfortunately "anticolonialists" will throw away progress, peace, and wealth to wallow in racism. If they could learn to love all people, even pale foreigners, they would have kept making rapid progress.
There’s no way you actually believe what you just said. There’s no way you’re this stupid lol
Anonymous C triple-posted this 1 month ago, 46 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,426,719
I don’t understand, how do you say stuff this self serving and say lies this obvious and not feel embarrassed at yourself? Isn’t this kind of degrading in some way?
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 1 month ago, 2 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,426,720
The sheer futility of trying to salvage Dr. Moreaus research.
Anonymous D double-posted this 1 month ago, 34 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,426,721
Anonymous C replied with this 1 month ago, 16 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,426,722
If the British were such great people, why did the Irish hate British rule so much they were blowing themselves up until the 1980s over it? If the British Empire was treating white people so bad that white people wanted to blow themselves up to fight the British, why would anybody ever believe that the British Empire was good for Africa? That’s so fucking retarded you shouldn’t be allowed to speak lol
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 1 month ago, 41 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,426,736
@1,426,703 (B)
> The British are the reason the caste system in India was weakened. When they left, and hindu nationalism began another rise is when castes began regaining their place in institutions.
>
> Unfortunately "anticolonialists" will throw away progress, peace, and wealth to wallow in racism. If they could learn to love all people, even pale foreigners, they would have kept making rapid progress.
The British also stopped suttee (widow burning), enforced the peace in a multiethnic society, and engaged in an anti-malaria campaign that stopped excess deaths in India.
> The British are the reason the caste system in India was weakened. When they left, and hindu nationalism began another rise is when castes began regaining their place in institutions.
>
> Unfortunately "anticolonialists" will throw away progress, peace, and wealth to wallow in racism. If they could learn to love all people, even pale foreigners, they would have kept making rapid progress.
The British also stopped suttee (widow burning), enforced the peace in a multiethnic society, and engaged in an anti-malaria campaign that stopped excess deaths in India.
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 1 month ago, 2 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,426,738
@previous (E)
They also starved millions of Indians to death while they were fighting against the holocaust at the same time.
They also starved millions of Indians to death while they were fighting against the holocaust at the same time.
Anonymous F double-posted this 1 month ago, 1 minute later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,426,740
I don’t get why white people have to lie to yourselves that the British empire wasn’t that bad. Nobody who isn’t British thinks the British empire was a good thing.
Anonymous F triple-posted this 1 month ago, 39 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,426,741
If you ask an Indian or an African or an American or an Irish person if the British empire was good or bad, they’ll say it was tyrannical.
Anonymous E replied with this 1 month ago, 1 hour later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,426,752
@1,426,722 (C)
> If the British were such great people, why did the Irish hate British rule so much they were blowing themselves up until the 1980s over it? If the British Empire was treating white people so bad that white people wanted to blow themselves up to fight the British, why would anybody ever believe that the British Empire was good for Africa? That’s so fucking retarded you shouldn’t be allowed to speak lol
Whataboutism. Different conflict with different context, a struggle to control Northern Ireland since Cromwell’s conquest. There’s also the Irish Protestant minority and their rights.
England was better for Africa certainly than France or Belgium. General Gordon died in 1892 trying to stop slavery in Sudan in the Khartoum battle.
Infrastructure, medicine, British-style education. Nobody wants to be ruled from without but the British left a useful legacy. It’s not their fault if the lazy, corrupt “liberators” who followed simply jumped on existing infrastructure and export economies.
> If the British were such great people, why did the Irish hate British rule so much they were blowing themselves up until the 1980s over it? If the British Empire was treating white people so bad that white people wanted to blow themselves up to fight the British, why would anybody ever believe that the British Empire was good for Africa? That’s so fucking retarded you shouldn’t be allowed to speak lol
Whataboutism. Different conflict with different context, a struggle to control Northern Ireland since Cromwell’s conquest. There’s also the Irish Protestant minority and their rights.
England was better for Africa certainly than France or Belgium. General Gordon died in 1892 trying to stop slavery in Sudan in the Khartoum battle.
Infrastructure, medicine, British-style education. Nobody wants to be ruled from without but the British left a useful legacy. It’s not their fault if the lazy, corrupt “liberators” who followed simply jumped on existing infrastructure and export economies.
Anonymous E double-posted this 1 month ago, 2 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,426,753
@1,426,738 (F)
> They also starved millions of Indians to death while they were fighting against the holocaust at the same time.
Lies. The Hindu grain merchants jacked up prices and Japanese subs deterred relief. Hindu nationalists and Communists spread lies about the famine.
> They also starved millions of Indians to death while they were fighting against the holocaust at the same time.
Lies. The Hindu grain merchants jacked up prices and Japanese subs deterred relief. Hindu nationalists and Communists spread lies about the famine.
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 1 month ago, 17 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,426,754
@previous (E)
> spread lies about the famine.
How could they spread lies about the famine if you claim there was no famine? 🤔
> spread lies about the famine.
How could they spread lies about the famine if you claim there was no famine? 🤔
Anonymous G double-posted this 1 month ago, 4 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,426,756
@1,426,752 (E)
> England was better for Africa certainly than France or Belgium. General Gordon died in 1892 trying to stop slavery in Sudan in the Khartoum battle.
Imagine if Africans talked this way about Europe. "It was far better for England that the Kenyans came in with guns and told them what to do instead of the Nigerians or the Ethiopians."
It’s not a great selling point, it kind of makes me want to punch you in the face.
> England was better for Africa certainly than France or Belgium. General Gordon died in 1892 trying to stop slavery in Sudan in the Khartoum battle.
Imagine if Africans talked this way about Europe. "It was far better for England that the Kenyans came in with guns and told them what to do instead of the Nigerians or the Ethiopians."
It’s not a great selling point, it kind of makes me want to punch you in the face.
B l a c k M a n replied with this 1 month ago, 18 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,426,779
I SURE LOVE BIG WHITE COCK THO.
Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 1 month ago, 14 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,426,796
@1,426,754 (G)
> > spread lies about the famine.
>
> How could they spread lies about the famine if you claim there was no famine? 🤔
I didn’t claim that, or deny a famine existed. The causes of the famine were extortive Hindu grain merchants, hoarding, and a Japanese naval blockade. Not a deliberate policy by Churchill to starve Bengalis. That came later when Sheikh Mujibar Rahman presided over a famine in the 1970s that mixed malice with political ineptitude.
> > spread lies about the famine.
>
> How could they spread lies about the famine if you claim there was no famine? 🤔
I didn’t claim that, or deny a famine existed. The causes of the famine were extortive Hindu grain merchants, hoarding, and a Japanese naval blockade. Not a deliberate policy by Churchill to starve Bengalis. That came later when Sheikh Mujibar Rahman presided over a famine in the 1970s that mixed malice with political ineptitude.
(Edited 2 minutes later.)
Anonymous G replied with this 1 month ago, 1 minute later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,426,797
@previous (H)
It’s interesting how the British were such great rulers who were doing such good for the people they colonized according to you while they were also not responsible for anything going on in their own colonies at the same time!
It’s interesting how the British were such great rulers who were doing such good for the people they colonized according to you while they were also not responsible for anything going on in their own colonies at the same time!
Anonymous H replied with this 1 month ago, 3 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,426,803
@previous (G)
> It’s interesting how the British were such great rulers who were doing such good for the people they colonized according to you while they were also not responsible for anything going on in their own colonies at the same time!
Nobody wants to be ruled from without. They’d rather be robbed by their own. I’m saying the British did do good as well as bad. The “West evil” nonsense resolves to academic trends and Edward Said.
The modern framing pretends only Europe was imperialist and neglects the Mongols, Ottomans, Arabs, and ethnic nationalists that have nothing to do with Europeans.
> It’s interesting how the British were such great rulers who were doing such good for the people they colonized according to you while they were also not responsible for anything going on in their own colonies at the same time!
Nobody wants to be ruled from without. They’d rather be robbed by their own. I’m saying the British did do good as well as bad. The “West evil” nonsense resolves to academic trends and Edward Said.
The modern framing pretends only Europe was imperialist and neglects the Mongols, Ottomans, Arabs, and ethnic nationalists that have nothing to do with Europeans.
Anonymous G replied with this 1 month ago, 2 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,426,806
@previous (H)
So if you don’t like that people hate Europe because of imperialism why are you trying to justify the imperialism instead of talking about a country like Ireland instead that didn’t do any imperialism? I would be less pissed off at you if you said nothing at all.
So if you don’t like that people hate Europe because of imperialism why are you trying to justify the imperialism instead of talking about a country like Ireland instead that didn’t do any imperialism? I would be less pissed off at you if you said nothing at all.
Anonymous G double-posted this 1 month ago, 7 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,426,807
Instead of trying to turn everything into a who’s worse competition accusing everybody else to feel better about European empires, why not just talk about one of the European countries that never had a colonial empire? Why not talk about Ireland, Poland, Ukraine, Finland, etc.
(Edited 1 minute later.)