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

Uncovering the truth about the British empire and the Mau Mau uprising

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 89 posts

Re: Uncovering the truth about the British empire and the Mau Mau uprising

#51

Post by pjriot »

JetSetWilly wrote: post #25
tgarma1234 wrote: post #20

Yes one of the great quirks of European history is that the British Empire is not held in the same esteem as the Nazi empire. The British Empire was bizarrely racist and killed tens of millions of people worldwide. Maybe even more than that if you include the promotion of slavery as a business on global scale. England is so lovable now though.

Except it was the British Empire that persecuted slavery and brought to an end the slave trade far in advance of other nations. What people forget is that the norms of the past are not the same as the norms of today. At one time, slavery was normal across vast swathes of the planet. That it isn't today, is in part due to a moral revolution that took place in Britain and resulted in a policy change by the British empi…

Once the economic advantages were outweighed by the political disadvantages.

"while nearly all other countries in the world at the time were totally fine with it". I guess this depends on how you define "country", but lets take it to mean the majority of a population. I'll give you that countries benefiting from the slave trade were clearly fine with it. I sincerely doubt the populations being enslaved were though. (their opinions count right?)

Re: Uncovering the truth about the British empire and the Mau Mau uprising

#52

Post by pjriot »

JetSetWilly wrote: post #30
rusabd wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

British concentration camps predated Nazi's

British concentration camps weren't created for the purpose of mass extermination.

Coca cola wasn't created for the purpose of providing a refreshing beverage.

Re: Uncovering the truth about the British empire and the Mau Mau uprising

#53

Post by RodericDay »

Ressuder wrote: post #49
tgarma1234 wrote: post #20

Yes one of the great quirks of European history is that the British Empire is not held in the same esteem as the Nazi empire. The British Empire was bizarrely racist and killed tens of millions of people worldwide. Maybe even more than that if you include the promotion of slavery as a business on global scale. England is so lovable now though.

I find it curious how some people seem to not believe in moral relativism. Do they not recognise that by doing so they are saying that they themselves are "evil" and immoral? If you look at the contemporaries of the British Empire they do not stand out as exceptional either good or bad morally. Meanwhile, if you compare the Nazis to their contemporaries they do however stand out (though not nearly as some people migh…

This is an ultra-conservative mindset. By only judging people according to what their contemporaries were doing, you basically relieve pressure from questioning the mores of our own day, since we rest easy knowing we will be judged according to what was "normal" for us.

I find it ethically very dubious. Certainly many people committing atrocities have been "going along with the flow" of their own local environments.

Re: Uncovering the truth about the British empire and the Mau Mau uprising

#54

Post by lobotryas »

throwaway-hn123 wrote: post #47
golergka wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that the parent comment author meant the usual anti-colonialism which attacks western colonialism as something unique and blames virtually any hardships of former colonies on it. I recently saw an article which argued that honor killings in Pakistan are to be blamed on colonialism — because, apparently, palistani men felt oppressed by colonial past and had to take it out on their wives, daughters and sisters.…

I guess people get upset about this sort of thing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_major_famines_in_I... Or this http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/india/7991820... But sure, focus on some absurd strawman, and ignore the millions of deaths that the British were responsible for.

No one in this thread is claiming the Brits were innocent lambs. Parent is pointing out that violence is endemic to empire, regardless whether that empire was built by the west, asia, or africa.

Engaging in "what-about-ism" will not get a conversation far.

Re: Uncovering the truth about the British empire and the Mau Mau uprising

#55

Post by pjriot »

JetSetWilly wrote: post #34
Spooky23 wrote: post #6

I think a better example of the evilness of the British Empire is the Irish experience in the 19th century. You lose the "excuse" of racism and are left with religious sectarianism and sheer greed for the policy. The British put inhumane and genocidal policies in place, starving millions in a land of plenty.

The initial British response was to buy £100,000 of corn meal from the US to import to Ireland to combat the famine. This doesn't seem like an action of a government intent on genocide. It seems more to me that British policy in Ireland during the famine is marked by an extreme ideological commitment to laissez faire economics (ie, letting land owners export food from Ireland in large quantities to make money, lettin…

No, it seems like the action of a government attempting to appear concerned when quite clearly humanitarian issues were a tertiary concern.

If a genocide occurs as a result of a commitment to a political or economic ideology, does intention really matter?

Re: Uncovering the truth about the British empire and the Mau Mau uprising

#56

Post by JetSetWilly »

pjriot wrote: post #55
JetSetWilly wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The initial British response was to buy £100,000 of corn meal from the US to import to Ireland to combat the famine. This doesn't seem like an action of a government intent on genocide. It seems more to me that British policy in Ireland during the famine is marked by an extreme ideological commitment to laissez faire economics (ie, letting land owners export food from Ireland in large quantities to make money, lettin…

No, it seems like the action of a government attempting to appear concerned when quite clearly humanitarian issues were a tertiary concern. If a genocide occurs as a result of a commitment to a political or economic ideology, does intention really matter?

I think it matters, because the very definition of genocide involves deliberate intent and policy to achieve the goal of wiping out a people.

Re: Uncovering the truth about the British empire and the Mau Mau uprising

#57

Post by linuxkerneldev »

anupshinde wrote: post #24

Shouldn't we as humans bury the longer past and move on and look at the present-day scenario? I know many will say - "What about justice to our ancestors?". Justice is done to them when their children(descendants) do not suffer similar injustice and/or live a better life. How many parents want their kids to live in a war-waging world? I understand what she did was very hard work. But what's the point? People who rais…

> People who raise these issues now probably and unintentionally end up generating hatred amongst individuals who might otherwise be perfectly fine with each other.

I think that's a flawed way to think. Your logic would imply that we shouldn't make anymore movies about the Holocaust because it might cause Jews to hate Germans.

Re: Uncovering the truth about the British empire and the Mau Mau uprising

#58

Post by JetSetWilly »

pjriot wrote: post #51
JetSetWilly wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except it was the British Empire that persecuted slavery and brought to an end the slave trade far in advance of other nations. What people forget is that the norms of the past are not the same as the norms of today. At one time, slavery was normal across vast swathes of the planet. That it isn't today, is in part due to a moral revolution that took place in Britain and resulted in a policy change by the British empi…

Once the economic advantages were outweighed by the political disadvantages. "while nearly all other countries in the world at the time were totally fine with it". I guess this depends on how you define "country", but lets take it to mean the majority of a population. I'll give you that countries benefiting from the slave trade were clearly fine with it. I sincerely doubt the populations being enslaved were though. (…

That's the very thing I am talking about. Britain was the first country in which it was a massive political liability to support slavery, and the first country in which the opinions of ordinary people mobilising and campaigning against slavery actually mattered and made a difference.

You can cast this in cynical terms as self interest, but you can do that with any action by any state in history - Britain is hardly unique there.

Re: Uncovering the truth about the British empire and the Mau Mau uprising

#59

Post by linksnapzz »

Ma8ee wrote: post #8
douche wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Blood and repression is the norm for empires, from Sumeria down through. The new thing is being ashamed of it.

> The new thing is being ashamed of it. Which is a development I very much welcome.

Being ashamed of something you had no possibility of being complicit in, is perhaps psychologically maladaptive. Unless by shame, you mean an opportunity for performative ethnomasochism as a means of virtue-signalling.

Re: Uncovering the truth about the British empire and the Mau Mau uprising

#60

Post by hutzlibu »

RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #42

The sad truth is that empires require massive amounts of violence to maintain. There is no other way. Just look at Sumer, Assyria, Persia, Rome, China, Ottoman, France, Britain, and Germany. Also, make no mistake, the United States is also a defacto empire. Unfortunately, the alternatives to empires is isolation and infighting between smaller powers. For an example of this, take a look at the middle east. The middle…

> Unfortunately, the alternatives to empires is isolation and infighting between smaller powers. For an example of this, take a look at the middle east.

The example of the middle east is not really the best for supporting your claim, since there are not only small powers, but also the big empires fighting for various reasons.

And I believe that is the case in nearly every mayor conflict I know. The big empires are allways involved. So it is not really an argument pro empire, when the empires are the cause for the conflict in the first place.

Post reply on HN