Right...so the Marshall Plan was purely for our benefit. I know it provided competition to the USSR, but I would think Western Europe was grateful. Okay, are you the only one seeing this? We love Brits. Brits love us...or used to a decade ago. They must love us because we "took their spot" as world power. Besides maybe Japan or Australia, I can't think of one nation closer to us. As for the America Cup...I think DA had it covered... SPEAKING of the America Cup, I don't think it ended any empires?
Oh we were, but the whole idea of the plan was to provide cash to stymie a possible Communist takeover of countries thought most vulnerable to such an event, so it wasn't entirely altruistic. A lot of European nations managed to get back on their feet relatively quickly because their governments in exile had had years to figure out the best way to do it, and because many people had savings accumulated through years of having nothing to spend money on! This meant there was a (limited) pool of ready cash available in the form of national loans; it just needed persuasion to get people to part with it. Marshall Aid helped enormously, but it wasn't the be-all and end-all.
I wouldn't say any one nation caused the end of the British Empire, fighting two World Wars a few decades apart did it I think. After WWII all the colonial states wanting independence and we didn't have much support to argue against them or stop them. But I would say the UN wanted to make sure we never tried again. During Suez Crisis didn't the US threaten to dump our reserves when the pound was very weak at the time, ultimately forcing us to pull out of the Suez Canal.
The price of maintaining a colony (or an Empire) started rising subsantially in the 19th and 20th century. By the end of WWII it simply wasn't cost effective to maintian most of them. As this became apparent the will needed to maintain any of them eroded as well. I'm not sure how much of it was WWI and WWII and just times changeing. Certainly the wars hastened the end but the British had been moving to the Commonwealth format well before WWI.
I would suggest that the British people ended their own Empire. Yes there were many reasons that lead to its ending, the financial, the end of ww2 etc and many more, but the biggest has to be the realisation that the Empire was not what our fathers generations thought it was or had been. Especially those that served in its far flung corners in ww2 and were not duration military men and women. The lie of Empire was seen for what it was after ww2. And needed no prodding by anyone to bring it to its end. The people of the Home Islands did that themselves. The idea of Empire after ww2 was lost and not just because of folk who lived in the countries themselves. It was the British themselves who saw to that. Some may have been dragged kicking and screaming to that realisation but it was going to be...sooner rather than later. Although no empires exist in the same way of old...although the west has decried the Soviet Empire when it suited them, empires still exist amongst us...The vocabulary has just changed.
I'd agree with you on that lwd, ww2 though was the end of it in British populations minds, if not some politicians. The social maturity had been moving us towards this over many years, since ww1...the days of doffing caps after ww1 and knowing your place was the beginning. The class system was being challenged, all thru inter war years. The war years educated most in these islands to the fact that the populace of our Empire were treated worse and if not, only as good as the lower classes in our own country. Their populaces wanted their countries back...they got them back...Most in this country couldnt hand them back quick enough and rightly so. The lie of Empire during and after ww2 was laid bare for normal everyday folk to see and take in. And most wanted nothing to do with the idea of Empire. The normal man in the street saw it for the empty shell it now was.
I see this has degenerated nicely into the typical pot calling the kettle black and my dad can beat up your dad because your uncle is dumb. Whatever. Glad to see you got your "bits sorted" urqh Brad
Jugs, my bits are sorted and getting sorted. No degeneration that I see..I simply would like to stick to the facts...DA likes to imply other things. Thats up to him...I shall stick to the facts and ignore the Imaginary.
Unfortunately, we gave up almost all of our empire; although it was for a good cause- so the Italians, Germans and Japanease, could not have one. Watch this, its a light humored clip about Empires and WW2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6omQ5JjjLsE&NR=1
Can you elaborate on why it is unfortunate that Britain no longer rules an empire? However graceful the British empire dissolved, there was still much wrong done to the colonies and they long deserved their independence.
Oh really? Are former colonies now run better than under the British? Some are, but some arent, particularly in Africa sadly; places like Zimbabwe, Zambia, Uganda, Tanzania, Sierra Leone, Sudan etc have gone backwards in almost every way since the British left, so for that matter has Burma, Iraq, Papua New Guinea etc. look at former colonies that were settled by Britain, and compare them to colonies that were settled by other colonial powers, you will notice a sever dichotomy. British settled colonies are now modern, stable, prosperous countries, while countries that have their roots in other colonial powers are dangerous, violence filled third world countries. In the western hemisphere, compare Haiti, settled by the French, to the Bahamas, settled by the British. I know that when I do my civic duty and donate blood, stepping foot in Nassau does not make my blood a type IV pathogen. In Asia, compare Singapore and Indonesia. One of these countries is a high tech Asian wonder, the other is slaughtering infidels. Guess which one was civilized by the British, and which one by the Dutch. In Africa, compare English civilized Egypt with Italian civilized Libya. Which one is a world pariah, and which one is a force for moderation in the Arab world. What I'm getting to is that the world would be a much better place if some of the colonies gone wrong, spoiled by the French, or Dutch, or Spanish, would be reconquered by the English for a century, just long enough to install morals and values. Hopefully, those countries would be wise enough to willingly submit. Britain STILL has various colonies; Gibraltar, Bermuda,Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Montserrat, Turks &Caicos Isles,Barbuda, Falklands, Chagos Islands, Tristan Da Cunha, Asuncion, St Helena, Channel Islands, Pitcairn Islands, South Georgia, South Sandwich Islands, British Antarctic Territories etc. Britain introduced an Industrial Base, Organised Economy, Advanced Agriculture, Modern Legal and Judicial Systems, Road and Rail Networks, Electricity, Schools, Hospitals, Civil Service etc in its colonies. But dont forget, nations such as USA, Canada, New Zealand, South Africa, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Malaysia, Israel, Iraq etc would simply NOT EXIST without the British Empire having existed first! So, colonialism had its good points, and importantly, Imperialism was a thing of ITS time, not OUR time, and we must always judge history in the context of the values, culture, politics, norms and attitudes of that time.
I have a feeling that your post will raise a few hackles. But it is hard to argue that most of the former colonies have certainly had major problems, and their democracy has been fragile at best.
and pray what do you mean by a few hackles? But yeah, a majority of the colonies cannot rule themseleves its a sad fact of life.
lol, militant, you are certainly living up to your name. Your claims are rather ludricous in regards to the British Empire and the current state of its former colonies vs. other colonies. I don't have the time to rip your argument to shreds, but maybe some one else will come along and do so while I am otherwise busy.