I don't understand how this is an argument against Ferguson, he simply gives a perspective about the influence the English-speaking world has on the rest of the globe, and it's definitely not American Exceptionalism. Personally I find his input valuable if not incomplete.
>>32391 Ignoring the fact that Tacitus basically annihilated the idea of the benevolent empire 2000 fucking years ago, the most damning thing you can say about the British Empire is that the 'civilising mission' failed. Since saying "oh loads of people were exploited and murdered" would be a positive for people like you, the next best thing is that the Empire failed even by it's own standards.
Anyway Niall Ferguson is basically your common-or-garden bourgeois historian who exists to defend white supremacy.
>>32460 >>32516 >>32391 But the British economy made great increases at this time. It's a game of national interests at which the British were much better than the Indians. Don't know why people get bent out of shape over the ethics of these things.
>>32460 >built railways >weakened the caste system >elevated the status of women >abolished slavery >introduced modern education and agricultural techniques >not good >implying India wasn't dirt poor like the whole world before contact with the west
>>32630 The railways which were made to cart resources around for the British. Also in quite a few cases the British actually reinforced the caste society. And we're all aware everyone in Britain was a millionaire during the Victorian period.
This is ignoring how the British caused a famine in Bengal. Twice.
>>32679 IDK what school you went to but even at pre degree level study of WW2 we read Irving, ofc with the caveat that he was a holocaust denier but nonetheless, we read him
>I was able to note down the bullshit in real time like what?
people like to write Ferguson off by just dismissing him as a racist or something, who thinks that the Empire was perfect when he has never atttempted to deny the crimes and failings of the British Empire. His point is simply that 1) the countries annexed by the UK were often no better before they became a part of the Empire than they were afterwards, 2) that the successes of Empire are ignored while the failings are broadcast
>"The moral simplification urge is an extraordinarily powerful one, especially in this country, where imperial guilt can lead to self-flagellation," he told a reporter. "And it leads to very simplistic judgments. The rulers of western Africa prior to the European empires were not running some kind of scout camp. They were engaged in the slave trade. They showed zero sign of developing the country's economic resources. Did Senegal ultimately benefit from French rule? Yes, it's clear. And the counterfactual idea that somehow the indigenous rulers would have been more successful in economic development doesn't have any credibility at all."
>>32747 He wanks over the British Empire and he once said "I think Marx is right, I'm just rooting for the Bourgeois." Being an athiest says nothing for your political beliefs. He's pretty firmly right-wing at least economically.
>>32957 >Best empire to wank over IMO. Why wank to any? See: Tacitus >What's wrong with rooting for the Bourgeoise? It's not like the proles are anything special. It's not a question of 'rooting' for anything. Marx wasn't saying "Oh the proles are lovely people and they deserve a revolution" because those ideas of being worthy or whatever is irrelevant, because Marx wasn't making a moralistic argument.
>>33066 >the war happened >Japan cuts off rice to bengal >the government chose to divert aid to people fighting the war >the british somehow caused the famine rather than choosing the lesser of two awful evils >>33085 I didn't mean it as an insult just a statement of facts.
it simply seems a little harsh to say in the least to criticise the British for diverting food to troops fighting the Nazis and the Japanese, unless you think that the world would have been better off had the British fed the Indians but lost the war
>>33311 pretty much yeah, do you have a problem with that? No-one here is pretending that war is a pleasant business, but the side that feeds its troops is probably going to win against the side that feeds a load of civilians on the other side of the world who are not contributing to the war effort
>>33355 >it simply seems a little harsh to say in the least to criticise the British for diverting food to troops fighting the Nazis and the Japanese, unless you think that the world would have been better off had the British fed the Indians but lost the war I just feel that considering that the war was basically won by Russia and India anyway, trying to pass off the British Cabinet's racism and ignoring >>33384 under the reasoning of 'tough war-time sacrifices' is complete bullshit.
I'm interested to see if you're this interested in defending the 1770 Bengal famine though, to be fair to you.
>>33527 It is almost as if (as Wallerstein wrote) there are two Marxes, a sentimental Marx who believes in species-being and sees the proletariat as the fulfillment of this, and a scientific Marx who sees only the production of complete alienation during the point of production, and so the immanent possibility of a complete overthrowing of all exploitative human relations.
You're confusing identification of immanence with desire.
>>33497 seriously he's married to a black african. >>33492 read this: http://historynewsnetwork.org/article/129891 also 1770 was before company rule was even solidified, not sure how you can blame that one on the British government
>>34283 >I've stuck my dick in a black woman's vagina but she isn't my slave >I have a mixed race baby with her >I've defended the British empire on the basis of the good it did for black and brown people all over the world >I support free immigration so black and brown people can come into the west, as long as they assimilate Yes, he's a racist all right
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from them. If you need IP information for a Poster - you need to contact them. This website shows only archived content.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content you can contact me at email@example.com with that post and thread number and it will be removed as soon as possible.