Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

When the sun will literally set on what's left of the British Empire

oikofuge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 356 posts

Re: When the sun will literally set on what's left of the British Empire

#291

Post by gizajob »

arethuza wrote: post #288
gizajob wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well half of Northern Ireland would happily burn your ISO rulebook to the ground. Plus nobody says “I’m from GB” when abroad, we all say “I’m from the UK”. Country is called UK.

I thought most people would say which part of the UK they are from: England, Scotland, Wales or NI?

Yeah that happens too. I generally say UK. In Europe I’m maybe prone to saying England/English perhaps, like in Italy “Io sono Inglese” but in the UK my parents are welsh and I was born in England so don’t really identify with either very strongly. Particularly because I’m a scouser, like you’d identify yourself to other British people by your accent if you have a strong obvious one. Regardless though nobody says “GB”.

Re: When the sun will literally set on what's left of the British Empire

#292

Post by Waterluvian »

jccalhoun wrote: post #284
Waterluvian wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be satisfyingly pedantic, my King isn’t the same King. Mine is the King of Canada. It just happens to be the same person as the King of England and the King of Australia ;)

Exactly. Isn't it strange that the Queen of England, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia ALL died on the same day? WAKE UP SHEEPLE!!!!

Right?! Listen, I know this sounds like a conspiracy… but I think the monarchy has historically been a mechanism used to centralize tremendous global power under a single banner. We ought to be mindful of that and, perhaps, construct checks and balances against this concentrated power.

Re: When the sun will literally set on what's left of the British Empire

#293

Post by olddustytrail »

bluecheese452 wrote: post #283
jahewson wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where do you guys get this nonsense from? Is there some sort of conspiracy theory factory? Do you have any idea how the rest of the world behaved during this time period? You are aware that the Muslims literally had multiple empires?

No no, the ottoman empire was also obviously the fault of the west. The ongoing genocide in Sudan too.

Sudan is a terrible example for your argument as it's practically a textbook example of Western colonialism, maintained by divide and conquer, and leaving a horrific mess when they wash their hands of the place.

Re: When the sun will literally set on what's left of the British Empire

#294

Post by recursivecaveat »

lifeisstillgood wrote: post #112
Waterluvian wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be satisfyingly pedantic, my King isn’t the same King. Mine is the King of Canada. It just happens to be the same person as the King of England and the King of Australia ;)

Is that true? “”” Charles III, by the Grace of God, King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of His other Realms and Territories, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith. “”” So in my head canon, he is the King of the UK and Canada … the same person and the same office. Ie there is no King of Canada officially - the title is always King of UK (first) and of other places as well … i…

If you're wondering how it's relevant: the titles can end up separating again. The most straightforward way is if the territories have different rules for who inherits the crown on death.

Re: When the sun will literally set on what's left of the British Empire

#295

Post by lyu07282 »

bluecheese452 wrote: post #282
lyu07282 wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The caste system itself is wildly considered to be exacerbated and promoted by British colonial rule in post colonial studies, not unlike the US empire promoting sectarianism in the aftermath of the Iraq war. The caste divisions did exist before British rule but it wasn't as systematic and unified across India as after. Boy how do we even talk about neocolonialism today if there are still people with full on colonial…

How do we talk about topic X if there are people who don’t think about it like I do? People having different opinions isn’t a bad thing. Also I think you likely meant widely, not wildly.

> People having different opinions isn’t a bad thing.

No I think that is a bad thing and a failure of our society if there are still people around repeating talking points from 1850s British colonial rule for christ sake!

Its like saying the Roman empire was great because it brought Aqueducts to the savages or something, like that is just education/knowledge of history + basic moral principles. The genocidal barbarism of colonialism should be something we left behind collectively. Or do you think whether or not the holocaust was good or bad is a matter of opinion too?

Re: When the sun will literally set on what's left of the British Empire

#296

Post by someoldgit »

tehjoker wrote: post #178

This is great! It’s high time a brutal empire that starved Ireland and India and created the situation that resulted in the genocide in Palestine loses its literal shine. Honestly it is crazy that this country still exists as a monarchy in the 21st century.

There was also the opium trade.

Re: When the sun will literally set on what's left of the British Empire

#297

Post by falcor84 »

retsibsi wrote: post #272
falcor84 wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not aware of any 2 countries having their border be a natural coastline

Same principle applies to rivers, though, and there are lots of river borders.

It isn't the same principle. Firstly, coastlines are more jagged because they are hit by waves perpendicularly, while rivers are shaped by water flowing along the banks, smoothing them. Secondly, the borders are typically defined by either the thalweg (greatest depth) or median line, either being smoother lines than the banks. Thirdly, river borders are then in practice defined by measuring the coordinates of particular sample points along the idealized line and then using straight lines or simple mathematical curves to connect these, forming a simple non-fractal boundary.

Re: When the sun will literally set on what's left of the British Empire

#298

Post by ndileas »

falcor84 wrote: post #297
retsibsi wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same principle applies to rivers, though, and there are lots of river borders.

It isn't the same principle. Firstly, coastlines are more jagged because they are hit by waves perpendicularly, while rivers are shaped by water flowing along the banks, smoothing them. Secondly, the borders are typically defined by either the thalweg (greatest depth) or median line, either being smoother lines than the banks. Thirdly, river borders are then in practice defined by measuring the coordinates of particu…

You could say the exact same set of objections to shoreline paradox.

Re: When the sun will literally set on what's left of the British Empire

#299

Post by lenkite »

sys_64738 wrote: post #120
tonymet wrote: post #115

Though empires are out of fashion , British colonies universally benefited from the British empire. The ones who are thriving today owe a huge debt of gratitude, and the languishing ones are that way because they decided not to continue the British tradition. The 20th century decline of the British empire is one of civilization's worst failures, on par with the decline of the Roman Empire.

I remember asking this question to a work colleague from India almost 30 years ago. I asked something like if he hated the Brits for invading his land. He said on the contrary. They advanced their people so rapidly and efficiently through education and technical advances that would have taken hundreds of years by themselves. He said this allowed them to kick the British out once they had outlived their usefulness. Or…

It depends on which Indian state you were from. South Indian states like Travancore were allied with the British Empire and signed a treaty that brought it under British influence. Travancore was facing extinction from Islamic conquerors - Tippu Sultan.

Travancore and British forces defeated Tippu Sultan which resulted in the Treaty of Seringapatam (1792).

Travancore was extremely prosperous under the Britsh Empire and was given special status. The same could not be said of the Northern Indian states which faced heavy subjugation and exploitation by the East India Company.

Re: When the sun will literally set on what's left of the British Empire

#300

Post by Jensson »

ndileas wrote: post #298
falcor84 wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It isn't the same principle. Firstly, coastlines are more jagged because they are hit by waves perpendicularly, while rivers are shaped by water flowing along the banks, smoothing them. Secondly, the borders are typically defined by either the thalweg (greatest depth) or median line, either being smoother lines than the banks. Thirdly, river borders are then in practice defined by measuring the coordinates of particu…

You could say the exact same set of objections to shoreline paradox.

But most borders are not defined as "on the shoreline", they are defined using something reliable.
Post reply on HN