Did Colonialism Really Make Britain Rich? Reem Ibrahim Debate
Вставка
- Опубліковано 7 тра 2024
- In this GB News segment, Reem Ibrahim, Communications Officer and Linda Whetstone Scholar at the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA), debates the role of the British Empire and slavery in Britain's economic development.
Ibrahim outlines the argument from the IEA's new publication "Imperial Measurement" which pushes back on the narrative that Britain's wealth was primarily derived from colonialism and the exploitation of slavery. She contends that the costs of acquiring and defending the British Empire vastly outweighed any economic gains from colonial possessions and the slave trade.
The report argues that it was Britain's shift towards free trade and open markets, rather than imperial domination, that allowed its economy to truly flourish. Ibrahim asserts that the significance of the Empire in creating British prosperity has been exaggerated.
Her viewpoint sparks debate with anti-racist activist Ken Haynes over the legacy of colonialism, corruption in Africa, and whether the West was indeed "built on the backs of slaves." While contentious, the discussion highlights differing perspectives on this charged historical issue.
Discover imperialism's true impact on Britain and the Western world. Watch now and download a copy of Niemietz's book from the IEA website for further insights: iea.org.uk/publications/imper....
FOLLOW US:
TWITTER - / iealondon
INSTAGRAM - /
FACEBOOK - / ieauk
WEBSITE - iea.org.uk/
Do you think the Empire was very limited in creating Britain's wealth? Are we really built on the back of colonialism? Let us know your thoughts below!
Didn't Empire create wealth for the elite? Certain figures, many of whom had statues built, acquired wealth equivalent today of hundreds of millions of pounds. Palmer being one. Of course the Colonial Empire and Slavery are not the same.
The elite as well, received reparations when Salvery ended.
The elite got rich and their descendants benefitted.
There is in fact a proof that what Reem Ibrahim says is true. Germany managed to surpass Britain economically in the 1870s yet it possessed almost no empire. If Britain had attempted to stop other countries trading, then it would have been different.
Was this guy specifically chosen to make his female opponent seem like Einstein?
He was clueless and hopelessly unprepared.
Unfortunately someone in this debate was well out of their depth and desperately lacking in facts
Which is probably why GB news invited him on.
@@matthewdsouza8891What made you think it was the man?
Ken Haynes is thick, but thinks he is intelligent.
I'd be interested in someone questioning them on what they mean by "free trade" as i think they might just be hiding the benefits from colonialism within it. For example, are they arguing that trade in sugar from the Caribbean or spices from the east werent affected by slavery or colonialism? That the forceful capture and movement of people to plantations, which clearly made the owners of the plantations very wealthy, had no impact on cost or availablity of goods? That seems farfetched. Would Ireland still trade cheap food with britain during a famine?
Well done! The black guy was hopeless and a good example of the incoherent narrative that needs to be pushed back on
it was 100 of years' before I was born I DO NOT CARE
u will care soon. There is something called Karma. J!hadis r doing what u did to others. Wait and watch
Very odd... that a people can make a country like the UK wealthy (creating more wealth than it consumes), but those people could not do the same for other possessions in the Empire... What is magic about British and European soil?
However if the Europeans could not make ends meet in these foreign places, I guess it is hardy surprising that following independence their natives haven't been able to either.
Hong Kong, Australia, Singapore...
If slavery didn't make England rich, then why can't they pay reparations.
if you don't owe me money, then why can't you give me money
Just look into Tate & Lyle. For example.
They are talking about net gain not no gain.
I love how they got a slow black man to argue the other point.😂
No!
Many colonized countries were better off from colonization. They often kept the new economic, educational, and legal systems that were introduced and benefitted from getting connected to a broader system.
Like what country for example? And how do you know what their situation would have been without being colonised?
How did 50 Trillion go missing from modern day Pakistan/India/Bangladesh etc 😂😂😂 🇵🇰 🇵🇰 🇵🇰 ❤❤❤
Why u delete my comments? u dont have guts to face truth.
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😊😅😅😅😅😅😅
If west african slaves were so amazing at making wealth west africa should be the richest place on earth.
It was richest place before ur ancestors showed up and looted and made them sl@ave.
Colonalising
Britains wealth is 90% because of the British raj (India).
How did India help Britain to produce glass manufacturing industries, advanced metallurgy, coal mining, textiles, food processing, agriculture, fisheries, quarrying, chemicals, oil exploration? I could go on.
No it's because of the industrial revolution
@@28pbtkh23 talking about textiles - most of the cotton was shipped from India .
@@nilavabiswas7846 bought from India
Wtf 😂 defending colonialism 😂 don’t complaint about Israel, China and Russia then