Americans React To "The British Empire: The Good, Bad, & Ugly Details | Megaprojects"
Вставка
- Опубліковано 6 тра 2024
- #britishhistory #britishempire #americanreacts
Original Video: • The British Empire: Th...
Join our Patreon for full, unedited reactions to TV shows, movies, concerts & more: / embracethesuck21
Subscribe to our other channels:
@SpencerJoyceMusic
@AriasandtheNATION
@spencerjoycelifestyle
@WreckedNation01
@SpencerJoycesWorld
@StoriestotheNation
One correction. The British were not the first to start trans atlantic slavery - it was the Portuguese. But the British were the first to end it.
Also were not the biggest participant...
Which makes you wonder why there is so much focus on Just Britain...
The Act Against Slavery in Upper Canada in 1793 was the start of ending the vile business.
I love how other Brits brand the "we ended it first" as some sort of proud thing to claim.
"I stopped beating my wife before my neighbour did."
Well, pat yourself on the back, big man.
@@michaeldowson6988 If you look at the English speaking world, maybe. If you look worldwide, you'll find another truth.
African warlords were.. and still are responsible for the slave trade.. for bringing 'the product' to market. Without them the market would not exist.
Britain did NOT start the Slave Trade. We were however, the first Nation in History to make it illegal and our Navy gave up thousands of men in the act of enforcing it on the other European Nations
AND---EVEN AMERICAN SHIPS WERE BOARDED.
The good and great things we did for the world far outweigh the bad but they don't like talking about the good things do they.
enforced it on all nations
Bravo .. blue Peter badge is on its way🎉
@@frankgunner8967 Unless you where the Victims or the family of the Victims the Empire killed, then its all bad and we British where only seen as monsters.
Could be the same said about the poor Native Americans by the European Invaders............there is still anger to day in the US by the Natives there.
Makes me laugh he thinks Great Britain started the slave trade
it wasnt just the british that condoned the slave trade at that time, pretty much the whole world did including the people who sold their own people
as a brit i feel no shame what so ever with regards to the slave trade, its just what it was back then, im proud we ended it
started the slave trade?🤣 the guys a clown, the slave trade was thriving way before we got involved
Feel no shame, because you weren’t there.
@@spruce381 no neither were you or anybody who is still alive today
the slave trade was a legit trade back then that was booming until us the british ended it
so stop crying about it
@@orbytl2799 😂 no tears here dude.
@@orbytl2799 British has a capital B. And language is the backbone of our culture. You should have more respect.
@@True_Heretic sorry
had i been on my keyboard i wouldve capped it
but when i type on my phone i dont usually do no capping
45 trillion has been heavily debunked
Source?
@@kayvan671 literally anyone who's looked into it
@@kayvan671 logic
As someone who grew up and went to school in NZ, it was pretty clearly understood that our experience of Imperalism was very liberal. Our countries founding document, The Treaty of Waitangi, was only signed in 1840. It gave the native people , the Maori, British citizenship and guaranteed their rights to their own resources. In return, Maori undertook that if they ever wanted to sell land, they had to offer it first to European settlement companies. There were many misunderstandings (some deliberate) but the experience of most people was far more civilised than in other countries. (Australia are our nearest neighbour, biggest trade partner and closest military ally. They are also barbarous, racist, swine whose feet smell. They also claim to have invented all NZ ideas and cheat at sports.)
That is funny. Boggans
you all got broken birds none fly
@@ianjones9498 I'm a Kiwi and that made me laugh!
You think the Australians are bad neighbours, thank your lucky (flag) stars that Britain wasn’t your neighbour.
Smelly feet gave me a good laugh.
Dont care what folk think of it..Britain and its Royal Navy ended the Transatlantic slave trade...and that is possibly one of the greatest things any country has ever done in the history of the World. Fact.
Once it wasn't profitable
Yes but was it enough to erase the terrible sins. We industrialised slavery from what was a craft industry before
@@user-ee8ux5hg8ea lot of it also had to do with Britons reading a book written by an ex slave and his experiences - once the public found this out it also helped kickstart the end of the trade
@@user-ee8ux5hg8e go away bot
@@pastyman001 Rubbish. Tell that to the Arabs.
Puritans went to America, criminal to Australia, that left all the normal people here 😂🤪
So I'm NORMAL!!!🤣😂🙃🤪
@@shaneb4612 as normal as I am 😂😂😂🥴🥸🤓🤪
Criminals were sent to America first, they had to switch to Australia when they lost the 13 colony. America was a prison colony and the reason the Puritans left was because they weren't allowed to persecute people in England for their religion.
Criminals went to Australia in much the same way 'criminals' went to the Gulag. They were not all criminals, many being criminalised for the occasion.
@@jamiedalton2623 I hope you weren't in the Gulag?
Second comment: Britain DID NOT start the slave trade , that has existed throughout history.
Even If you mean the Atlantic slave trade specifically, Portugal and Spain got there WAY before we did. Portugal is estimated to have transported 14.5 million slaves to our 3.1 million.
To be very very clear these are both disgusting figures and im not excusing anything.
I simply wanted to point out that Britain isnt solely to blame for colonialism in the 15-19th centuries!
What's wrong with colonialism? You understand how animals behave right? You are sitting in a nice cave another creature likes, you fight for the cave and the stronger one gets to live in it right?
What is it with people believing weak creatures should just be allowed to receive everything they can without being able to even defend it? That is a violation of the natural order, an abomination. The weak have NO rights at all aside from the rights the strong choose to give them.
It is fact that the British did NOT start the slave trade. They did however participate in it until the establishment of the Royal Navy's African Squadron. By the time that the trade was eventually stopped over 2000 British sailors had died to achieve this result.
A small island, a small landmass BUT it's a land of giants!
Most regimes across history have their dark periods, if not all. Indians, for instance, were knocking the crap out of each other before Europeans got involved there, as were native American tribes and Africans.
Of course, we don't need to look at the Spanish, Portuguese, French, Belgian, German etc empires, because they were all 100% wonderful in every possible way.
Or the Russian empire? Funny how the woke wakners never seem to include that?
@@adriangoodrich4306 By even mentioning 'woke' you reveal yourself to be a half wit.
@@adriangoodrich4306 : stop playing victim card by saying "the woke wakners crap", infact himself playing whataboutism card !!.. how despicable person !.😒
He overstated the economic benefit to Britain of slavery or even imperialism. The bull of Britains wealth was built on its own coal reserves, cotton spinning and free trade.
Where was the cotton (and sugar..etc etc ) coming
from?
@@sarahradford9822Ssshhhhh! Facts be damned. Britain rules the waves etc. etc. 😂
@@sarahradford9822 Most of the cotton came from the USA - not part of the empire. Yes, the Americans used slaves to grow it, until they didn't. The shortage of cotton during the American Civil War caused great hardship in parts of Britain, but those worst affected mostly supported the ending of slavery. Afterwards, which many of the less efficient manufacturers having gone out of business cotton manufacturing was even more profitable.
Sugar first became available in large quantities in Europe from Portuguese colonies in Brazil. The Britain copied that model in the Caribbean and over took them. Then France over took Britain in the 18th century as Europe's biggest sugar supplier. The point being that though a few Britons became very rich from sugar, much of that wealth came from other sweet-toothed Britons.
@peterjackson4763 yep, there's a reason there's a statue of Abraham Lincoln in Manchester.. the cotton blockade and solidarity from the factory workers in the city.
What's v telling in our history though is the reparation to slave owners which only ended relatively recently 🤔 .. our national wealth (controlled by the few) has been very much built on backs of slaves.. imo
@@Dreyno Still small. Without Britain people would be poorer across the world.
They say the British empire was evil but they put and end to many savage practises like in India. They put and end to sati. Sati being when a widow was burned alive on her husband's funeral pyre. Sick of this British bashing when we gave the world so much
Your armies slaughtered men, women and children for centuries. I don’t a damn whether you’re sick of the bashing or not.
Pathetic propoganda by british as usual, your country used to burn women on stakes remember that
Says the people who burn women to stakes because heresy.
And invented the modern world itself, not to mention modern healthcare! Almost everything in our daily lives was invented by the British!
That is the fear of getting raped by invaders, not cultural !!.. don't act like a naive person, we r aware of their(British) beastly nature towards others !!..
As someone who has explored their own Indian heritage, I find these types of video so bizarrely apologetic. They are very biased.
The net benefit that the British brought to India is swept under the carpet by people (usually a certain class of white English people) who like to define Britain's colonization by cherry picking comparatively small (but obviously not insignificant!) yet inevitably dark episodes during British rule.
The British left behind so much more than the Portuguese, Spanish and Dutch left behind in their colonies. A fully functioning civil service, a fully operational and extremely efficient railway network across the country, military infrastructure and garrisons which secured the country from the types of invasion it had suffered from prior to British rule (Monguls, Turks I believe), a postal service, museums, schools, sports (e.g. cricket.. our national sport!) yet got blamed for poverty when they left.
..yet the truth is that Nehru tried to impose socialism on India when the British left which plunged India into decades of corruption once they had left. This still infects India to this day.
So, I'm sorry but in my view, Indians were responsible for making India worse in post-British India. I showed my Mum Google street view of where she was raised in India in the 1950s and she was heartbroken (and embarrassed) to see how run down their street (which had an American convent and wealthy American families living at the time.. I know .. weird!) looked. It almost feels as though these types of 'Historians' know nothing about the reality of India throughout British rule but instead just select the darkest moments to build a virtuous narrative of trying to hold their hands up.
As for slavery.. obviously times have changed... but again.. Britain was merely a market participant in a slave trade where African warlords were entirely responsible for bringing people (often memmbers of their own family!) to the slave markets on African beaches to sell to the world. Britain lost thousands of seamen abolishing the slave trade yet never get any credit for ending it. Truly bizarre.
In 2015, Britain finally finished paying off the loan they took out back then to buy slaves to release
Forgetting that Britain created India,and,as an example,created the tea plantations that still bring huge profit to India.
Both York and Dublin were Viking twin towns.
They were major slave trading areas for hundreds of years.
The slaves they trade were white and predominantly young women for sex slaves.
No one is asking the Norse for 500 years of robbing raiding, killing, and kidnapping
It gone.
It's over.
It's done.
Move on.
Australia got the criminals. America got the religious fanatics. Australia got the better bargain. :)
An astonishingly biased and anti-British view. Your example from the contributing video seems to have been dubbed. No mention of the scienctific and industrial contribution that the British made, nor the influence of parliamentary democracy, not to mention the global reach of the English language. No mention of the great explorers and navigators such as James Cook who was presented as some bloke who was an imperialist - far from it. This was one of the most shocking videos I have seen, and all I can say is - shame on you and the dangerious twerp whom you sought your content from. You need to address this to present an intelligent more balanced view - otherwise you both demonstrate populist false and revisionist history to thousands of your followers who may believe all this volatile misinformation.
Yep.
And yep again enough said
Begins saying it won't be biased then proceeds to he completely biased
Agreed. These two have fallen sharply in my estimation for being taken in by this biased, anti-British woke nonsense. And "started the slave trade?" The man is a total liar!!!!!
He is not biased, infact partially true because it was even far worse than what he explained here and purposefully he ignored to talk about in details !!..
Misses so much. For instance the idea that the empire made us a fortune is, to say, dubious at best. For instance after WW2, as the video says, we granted independence to most of the empire. Given we were dirt poor and in massive debt (to you) at the time from 2 world wars, if India and others were such goldmines, we wouldn't have just handed them back. In reality many were at best cost-neutral and some we made a loss on.
Secondly, the video kind of leaves you with the idea that it was us causing the tribal wars. It wasn't. Yes people died in the partition of India, but if they hadn't done it, it's certain there would have been a civil war anyway because of religious tensions. Britain's rule over India had largely prevented that for centuries.
If not for the British Empire, the US, Australia, Canada and New Zealand to name just a few would basically not exist in their present form. They'd certainly have been conquered by someone else, probably Spain in the case of the Americas, and you'd have the US and Canada looking much more like Mexico, which I'd say isn't ideal.
Wars and empires are as old as human society itself. In terms of benefits, we're one of the better empires. We brought medicine, schools, hospitals, infrastructure, parliamentary democracy, fair criminal trials, property rights etc etc to countries that, in many cases, were centuries away from achieving this on their own. It is undoubted that most of the empire is better off for us having been there than not, just as Britain is likely better off for the Romans and Norman conquests.
When it comes to the wars, for a large portion of the empire, the countries involved voluntarily sent millions of men to fight. There wasn't mass conscription abroad. Indians, Canadians, Australians, South Africans etc etc all volunteered in huge numbers to help us. Why? Because lots of people supported the empire and, at the very least, supported the UK's survival. If we were so terrible, they obviously wouldn't have done that.
The main thing of course, as other comments here have said, is the slave trade. Britain didn't start it, we did however end it. We were the first power on earth to end slavery not just within the empire but the Royal Navy also policed it and shut it down across the world. Given every country in history has had slavery, the one country who spent money and lives to end it should be celebrated for doing so. It's one of our proudest moments as a country.
I don't know about other people in the UK, but I (aged 35) wasn't taught almost anything about the empire in school, good or bad. My knowledge has come from my own research later. I'd be happy in principle for kids to learn about it, but the problem is nowadays it would all be taught through the lens of 'look how terrible we were'. Ignoring context entirely. Overall the empire is of course a mixed bag, like all of history, but I'd say in terms of quality of life, health, lives saved through medical advancement etc etc we're definitely in the plus column.
👏👏👏
We were mega rich before WWII. But at the end of WWI we imposed entirely unfair and extreme penalties on Germany, at Versailles, which made certain that there would be a rise of German nationalism further down the line. So we set WWII in motion with that treaty. And then, when Hitler invaded Czechoslovakia Churchill pleaded for a military response from Britain and France to aid the Czechs. Had that occurred Hitler's expansion would have been nipped in the bud and there would have been no world war after all. But WE got it wrong again. As a result millions of people died and we lost our our riches. Kind of, what comes around goes around, I'm afraid. The reason we handed people their own countries back is because our army was outdated and underfunded. We couldn't have hung on as a result.
@@True_Heretic Yes and no. It's true that the treaty of Versailles pushed them into a corner, but it was the the wall st crash and the economic mishandlings of the weimar republic (hyperinflation specifically) that really pushed them over the edge. And while appeasement was of course a total failure, you have to consider that the vast majority of brits remembered ww1 all too clearly, many had fought in it themselves and many more had lost whole families as a result. The desire for another war with germany unless as an absolute last resort was not there. It's easy with hindsight of course, but fairly reasonable. Also, in the treaty of versaille, what Britain most wanted out of it was german colonies and shrinking the german military. it was more the french who wanted the most severe sanctions on the germans.
You give a fair counter argument. But Hitler was there for taking. And Churchii, a warrior, knew that We should have crushed the enemy, and we didn't,
@@joemarkham5142 Good response. JOE
We didn’t start the slave trade countries had been doing it for 100s of yrs before Britain did -
The arabs mostly. And they were still sending slaves to Saudi Arabia right up untill the 1960s untill the UN and major powers pressured them to stop. Half the young boys didn’t survive the trek across the sahara desert and then half again didn’t survive being castrated.
Thousands of years, not hundreds...
Thousands of years. Four or five thousand potentially.
@@True_Heretic Yer middle east far east, it was the tribal chief that sold them and other people from Africa that took them to the ports maybe Arabs.
@@mickrap6001 But it was the British who provided the incentive for them to do that. By arming them and paying them with stuff they really wanted. Without British involvement such slaving would have remained a cottage industry, rather than global mega-industry that we made it. We were the biggest slavers of all. Nobody who wants to deal in the full truth of our part in the slave trade can view our ancestors in anything but a negative light.
Sorry, but he needs to check his facts. Britian, by no way, started slavery. Slavery was around before Britian was even a nation, we may have been good at it but we weren't even the first to take slaves from Africa to the America's that was portugal.
Don't mean to be a complete rotter, but you are miss-spelling Britain.
Oh, Simon Whistler!! What a travesty of a history lesson.
Littered with oversimplifications, misinterpretations, bias - yes bias for a 21st century viewer’s pov, ignoring of context, and actual falsehoods.
Very naughty.
What exactly?
Slavery is not totally abolished yet. These countries still fight it every day (or so I hope they do) Women and children are the biggest trades in todays slavery, a lot of missing people are suspected to have been taken and put into the slave trade worldwide (including forced marriages). And based on regional population size, 65 per cent of forced marriages are found in Asia and the Pacific. Arab States have the highest prevalence, with 4.8 out of every 1,000 people in the region in a forced marriage.
I want a slave. That would be super cool.
It is fashionable today to denigrate our history but I am proud of being British and of our history, despite its many flaws. You cannot judge history by today's standards but unfortunately that seems to be the thing to do nowadays. There are a lot of "facts" this man has stated which are either misleading or outright lies. He has hugely simplified the bad (which were much more complex than he states) and barely mentioned the good to paint the darkest picture possible.
I agree you cannot judge history with the lense of today. The fact that we look back at our history and recognise both the good and the bad, surely means we have moved our standards on and learned lessons from what happened. I think a lot of people lose sight of that perspective.
Concentration camps, shooting people out of cannons, executing women and children at a peaceful protest, stealing land, stealing artifacts, rape, murder, greed and racism. If you are proud of all that you are a very vain little man who's patriotism is an extension of his daft ego. Don't fake principle or integrity, under the circumstances. Its got nothing to do with "fashion" and everything to do with owning up to the whole truth and not just the bits you like.
It’s an overview - most of what he said was true so yes we know some people in India and China welcomed the British empire and we know slavery existed in Africa before (and a lot of other places) and African kingdoms profited from the trade of slaves across the Atlantic etc but nothing he said was technically wrong if you listen to his actual words.
@@djs98blue there are a lot of things that are technically true but take on an entirely different narrative or meaning without the surrounding context. Just because something is technically true, does not mean that the way it is being presented is not deliberately misleading. You also assume that people know that people in India and China welcomed the Empire, or that they know slavery existed before the Atlantic trade, you are giving far to much credit the average person and their willingness to learn
Fact check here. He got it slightly wrong on Hong Kong, while the cause of the Opium Wars is grotesquely oversimplified. China handed Hong Kong to the British in perpetuity on signing the Treaty of Nanjing in 1842. It was the New Territories that were leased to Britain for a 99 year period, which ended in 1997, when Britain handed Hong Kong back to China (which the locals have bitterly regretted ever since). Also, and far more egregious, his explanation of the Indian famines, which had been a regular event throughout Indian history, were also way off the mark, unfairly painting Britain in an extremely negative light while also conveniently ignoring all of the good things Britain brought to the sub-continent, many of which still benefit India today. And while it's easy to compare history with the morals of the present, it's also wrong and totally misleading. Compared with almost every other empire in history, the British Empire was mostly benign and was run by local people.
He gets a lot wrong
Show me before "British Empire", where "Indian famines, which had been a regular event throughout Indian history" ??.. why U r trying to justify and hide their criminal nature through continuous lying !!??.. whole world knows about their nature and the nature of their successors today !!.
Guys , I'd urge you to learn from historians that have studied this stuff for yrs rather than some schmuck trying to get likes . 😊 . Westminster Abbey would be a great video to react to .😊
Not proud of some things in history but I'm proud to be British . I could say the same about what happened to Native Americans , the Mexicans , Aborigines etc we all have dark history but we r all proud of our Nations
I think he was a bit biassed. I'm not sure that he's been very objective.
It's interesting he's mentioning the famines, but doesn't mention why they happened. The Bengal famine for example happened in 1943 due to it being during WW2. Japan took over Burma from the UK due to them invading it for their Empire and the majority of rice came from Burma, 2 thirds of rice in India came from Burma and the rice crop in India failed due to the weather and poor farming practices. it had nothing to do with Britain or British Empire policy, it was the world war and Japan in the main being the cause. And Britain at the time had no way to get ships to the area with supplies due to the Japanese Navy and Britain at the time also being on rations due to a lack of food at home. I am all for showing our bad deeds, but this myth about the Bengal famine being Britain's fault is just lies frankly
Hmmm! So no reference to land grabbing, debt bondage, Keynes’ inflationary policies, Britain’s method of financing wartime spending, displacement of population, denial policies. Etc. etc.
Yes, if you ignore the realities, Britain is guilt free. If you include them, well………
@@Dreyno The Bengal famine was caused by a complete lack of rice in India, I explained clearly above why this happened. Japan having control of 2 thirds of it and 1 third failing. None of which was the fault of the UK. None of what you mentioned changed the lack of rice in India at the time. Maybe learn some history
@@overthewebb No. You picked out one factor and conveniently ignored the rest because they didn’t suit your narrative. Laying out such simplistic nonsense out of flag waving patriotism and telling me to learn history. Tsk tsk tsk.
@@Dreyno Picked out one factor? That is because the reason for starvation is a lack of food is it not? I clearly gave multiple reasons for this one, factor happening. You just mentioned nonsense that had nothing to do with there being no rice in India. Explain to me how anything you said would have allowed more rice in India at the time. I will wait
Yes the Japanese played a big part, but so did the authorities in India who were mainly British. The military destroyed the rice stocks in Bengal to stop them being captured by the Japanese. They also destroyed thousands of small boats for the same reason. That cut down fishing and make distributing food harder. They also moved troops to Bengal to defend it, and they needed feeding. Add in a bad harvest, bad weather, and bans on exporting food from other parts of India and the result was a famine. It could have been avoided if the central government of India (British) had taken back control over food distribution earlier, and used troops to distribute food earlier. (Control over food and agriculture had been devolved in 1935 as a step towards independence).
Not sure of the Sudan issue being caused by British colonialism. Arabs took North Africa and regard the darker skinned Africans as a sub species.
Kuffar.
South African got the word " kaffir" from Arab slave traders.
$45 trillion... It's not gone into filling our potholes, that's for sure !
fake number invented by a communist
Who came up with the figure of 45 trillion? Slight exaggeration, perhaps? More than slight. I have seen no serious efforts at quantifying that figure. It just seems to have been plucked out of thin air. If it is to have any credibility as a claim,someone needs to explain in detail how that figure was arrived at. And isn't it curious that the figure is given in US Dollars and not British pounds sterling ? Why is that?
@@davidlauder-qi5zvErm... Perhaps that'll be because any report anywhere that values a company or even an individual - always gives the value is US Dollars. I assume because everyone in the world knows US Dollars. But you won't have to search very far on UA-cam to find videos of people who can't answer the question "what currency does the UK use" (Queens money, is my favourite response that I've seen to that question)
As for whether it's an exaggeration... I suggest you have a look at what the East India company was responsible for - at its peak value, it accounted for HALF of all worldwide trade. 45 Trillion definitely sounds like a more conservative figure.
It didn't go to filling potholes because it was filling the pockets of slave traders... Those were private individuals, up to and including the royal family. "Britain" didn't benefit from the slave trade some much as a small number of British elites did.
That's because some woman made it up and used what I think was a 5% compound interest rate over the entire history of Britain's reign which is ridiculous and in no way sensible. It acts as if the economy was increasing by 5% every year with no recession or change at all and that all that money was solely Indian and not in fact because the the businesses the British were setting up. There are numerous things that it gets wrong and the person who came up with it was some Indian woman with a political agenda, NOT a historian looking through the sources and quantifying evidence.
What have the romans ever done for us?
Terrific race the romans...
@@1nikgEthnicity, not a race.
Well they built the aqueducts…
Sanitation..The roads..
The Indian mutiny of 1857 wasn't primarily due to over taxation, it was due to soldiers revolting after Britain started producing paper rifle cartridges which were greased with pig fat. They objected to biting through them on religious grounds.
The story went around the sepoys that the cartridges were greased with a mixture of pig and beef fat, the former being forbidden to Muslims and the latter to Hindus. Actually it was a mixture of beeswax and mutton fat, but the British officers failed to stop the spread of the rumours.
I often wonder about "What if" without an empire would the millions worldwide who were saved by the infrastructure that produced antibiotics etc been saved? I think that the Empire was a double edged sword. I am British but none of my forbears had any say in it whatsoever.
The British poor and working class lived in squallier on a scale that would have been understood from the London, Manchester and most of the up and coming industrial towns and cite slums, to the far Empire the populations of which would not feel out of place separated only by culture, all in the hands of the wealthy entitled minority, the goal posts move but the major players remain the same. It is what they do now not what they did then, hindsight can be a good thing moving forward but lets not carry the past as a burden nor should anyone live with a chip on their shoulders, it only slows progress and leaves us all in stagnation!
Not all the working class lived in squalor. Workers whose skills were in demand made a decent living. If those skills were made obsolete then there was unrest, such as when power looms put the fairly well paid hand weavers out of business.
The famines in India isn’t 100% correct. There where regular famines in India before Britain and Britain introduced famine relief programs to reduce it. Worked well up until WWII when there is debate over the main cause of the Bengal famine. One of the causes that doesn’t get mentioned much is Indian merchants withholding food supplies as they wanted to sell at a higher price to the armies
Most of his videos are much better than this. For example, he completely misstates the history of Ireland by ignoring the Lordship of Ireland which made Ireland in jure part of the Angevin Empire in 1155. 'Britain' did not 'colonise' Ireland and replace its population.
We're not Evil, we're just very naughty boys.
No, evil Self rationalization
The Vikings turned into modern day Denmark, Norway and Sweden... Things evolve :)
The world would be a very different place if this little island never existed example medicine science technology And many more the greatest nation in history end of story
@dianelittle9317 england was the real power house fact
This little island? There are technically 2,689 British islands, though many of them are tiny. About 800 are considered "significant". Makes me think that we were sort of ganging up on the poor old world. Hehe!
👿💀
Probably the most benign empire on the planet. Gave the world so much. Even America is based on British principles.
Being brutally honest I am afraid Simons information is a BIT wrong. the British had formed a squadron to eomploy their crusade against stalvery before the dates that Simon states/ A truthful scenario would be appropriate.
This guy tends to like to err on the side of caution for his presentations by really sticking it to British history as it's fashionable from certain peoples point of view and he doesn't want to get defunded.
China and opium: it was a Balance of Trade issue, where the Chinese only wanted silver, and some other form of trade had to be found
the way we are taught history is mostly without saying it was good or bad but mostly that it happened, recently i had an american say "what about the war of 1812?" and i had to reply "which one?" because the uk was at the time in a war with spain and france, and the war with USA was a minor fracas in comparison to those 2 lot longer running wars.
The thing is, these subcompanies hired by the British Monarchy are mostly to blame for the horrors that the British Empire is blamed for, also part of the reason the east india company was closed down was because most of its money was made from the slave trade, and closing that down in 1800's meant that the Royal Navy had to hunt down various ships owned by the East India Company, and other such companies.
Unfortunately Whistler has an agenda, and they never fail to avoid the hell out of actually telling the whole story, and they definately make thier stories competely unfollowable by going from 1600 to 1800 to 1700 back to 1600 back to 1700, and most people completely ignore the dates involved as to where these events actually happened and thing that thier storytelling is chronological recital.
23:00 ah yes, Damned if you do, damned if you dont, people who wish for independence and then get exactly what they want, the problem is, USA and its foreign policy is just copying what Britain did hundreds of years ago and are not learning.
as others have said, Britain didnt start slavery, they did join in, but it was already in full swing from France Spain and Portugal, the part missed here is that for the most part The British colonial move wasnt the same as the Spanish and the Aztecs, The Whole India thing is not as cut and dry as anyone makes out because previous to British rule, there were several severe wars where the Indian country requested military help multiple times (the reason i said it this way is that i think there may have been a name change around this time too), again, a lot of these wars were wars where britain aided countries who were fighting Spain and France, and tried to help those countries with upgrading thier amenties because the upperclass idiots who were sent to such countries as aides couldnt do without the modern luxuries they had in London .... The thing most people outside the uk forget, the majority of the uk population were just everyday people trying to make tuppence a week to eat, and being offered a shilling a week to work for the army or navy was a fortune, if they didnt work there it was the option of sit in a village for your whole life and plow mud and hope something would grow (monty pythons holy grail "help help were being repressed" was a common life for the serfs in the areas that became the uk eventually) . Most of the population of the uk was in a situation, you did what the local landlords and lords said or you ended up in jail, or even just being left to die somewhere, this was only really changed when the industrial revolution started, then you had the option of working in the mines, or working in the factories, the cotton mills being especially dangerous for children because the mills never stopped and kids had to run into the machinery to recover parts that had fallen off.
Every country has things in their past which are condemned now. The main thing is most countries have learned from the past and improved over time.
Except britain and their successors(usa) !!..
How the British dealt with africa is the same as the Persian ruling tribes now. Chose a tribe (Saddam hussains) arm it fund it and get it to rule
Britain was still stopping slave ships in the 1900s. Theres one case of a British naval captain being prosecuted amd convicted by australian authorities for stopping a ship involved in blackbirding.
It was barely taught in British schools in the 80s and 99s when I attended
We did a lot of bad stuff for sure…. But we also did a fair bit of good as well,ending the transatlantic slave trade for example.
Fighting against Tyranny in 2 world wars losing generations of people and bankrupting the nation in the process. Most European nation's were nasty and most were far worse with the locals than Britain. Look at the French and Belgians for example.
Can't stand this guy. I wish people would stop finding his videos 😂
He's well annoying.
sneary middle class bloke up his own arse mostly
@@martinogoldAnd inaccurate. He's got a lot of his Facts wrong. He just churns out rubbish. He should attend a few of Britain's archives and find the truth. But assume he just wants to make himself sound more Righteous for decrying his country.. the plonker.
Smug seems to cover it!
Listening to S Whistler anyone would think that the Brits invented slavery and Empire building and were the only nation to engage in the trade. He's rather too woke and anti-Brit for my taste - calling himself a Brit, too...not with his pronunciation !
He was born in Oxford, a chorister at Magdalen College School, then went to Stowe School, in his father's footsteps. His pronounciation is English public school. (For those from the US, English 'public' schools are very private.) Now he lives permanently in Prague, Czech Republic.
He's also the talking head for a variety of channels, that generate material - a couple of whom have let him go, in the past.
@@wessexdruid7598 why add 'in the past' when you used the Past Form of the verb in the sentence. He still pronounces English in an odd way.
@@stirlingmoss4621 To imply there have clearly been fallings out with content creators.
Listen to your namesake's accent - it was very similar, for the same reason.
Where the money gone? into the private fortunes of wealthy families
I am proud to be British, but not because we invaded other countries and had the biggest empire. I'm proud to be British because of the culture of the working men and women and their stories and inventions, in spite of the scum oppressive, so called elite class or Aristocracy/Oligarchs/Royals, choose your word. Britain, England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales were built by the people of those nations and they built the infrastructure and nurtured their children and built their schools and for the most part the (choose your word) filthy rich and land owners kept the land and kept the money and the same is true today.
Odd little fact to share: _Britain ended its participation in the slave trade in 1807, then outlawed slavery in all of its colonies in 1833 (which took effect on August 1, 1834)...but slavery wasn't outlawed in the UK itself until 2010._
Yes, 2010.
Now, this wasn't due to any nefarious schemes, but was the result that there English law did not have a state of being which could result in a person being a slave. Okay, so "serfs" were pretty darned close, but they still had the opportunity to quit if they didn't like their conditions. As for indentured servants, they had contracts which stipulated a set time frame to work as "repayment" of a debt and most included terms to protect those using this contract type. So it wasn't until 2010 that someone realized that it was technically possible to have slaves in the UK, so Parliament finally closed that particular loophole - and it was modernized to include human trafficking, as well.
There was no statute that outlawed slavery, but there was case law that did. In the 1820s a judge ruled that Lord Mansfield had ruled in 1772 that no one could be a slave in the UK. This was a little iffy, being based on a common misunderstanding resulting from some newspaper reports of Lord Mansfield's decision which was not given in writing, but it certainly was the law after the later decision.
Theres a joke about "what have the romans ever done for us?", but there isnt one about Britain
“Where’s it gone today”
A lot of it was invested in the USA and Canada via investments and Emigration
When Scotland/ England throw the act of union came about,there was riots in the streets of Edinburgh when the vote was taken place, very few people were allowed to vote , & was past by a very small majority🎉
just so you guys know, the only issue i have with this video is the $45T figure coming out of india... it is OBSCENELY wrong, the "economist" who came up with it was purely trying to push an agenda. Firstly the figure completely ignores any investment made into india in order to make it profitable and consequently the figure represents only turnover and NOT profit. the second (more complicated reason) is that the economist used an obscenely simple compound interest rate on the turnover figure in order to convert it to convert the 17th century currency to modern currency (this makes her figure anywhere between 1000% to 10,000% inaccurate, which is absurd). Then the third (and most blatant) error is that once she found the modern figure in GBP she then used the 18th century conversion from GBP to USD (£1 roughly equal to $5), so she just multiplied the figure by 5 for seemingly no reason. It is complete and utter incompetence at best and absolute intellectual dishonesty at worst.
Proud 🇬🇧 proud Scot
In the UK The British Empire is not taught in our schools. Sure we were taught about many influential British figures throughout the ages and different schools such as medicine throughout the ages but not the actual Empire. Of course this might have changed these days. In my high school history class 25 years or so ago we were taught primarily about the American Midwest.
My annoyance with this is that lots of families in Britain are still sat on massive wealth, power and land gained from these barbaric pasts and pay no tax on any of it. It's just not discussed.
India had massive civil and inter kingdom wars every generation for its entire history as royalty fought to inherit kingdoms from their parents or tried overthrowing the neighbours. When Britain took over there was about 200 years of relative peace and stability along with a technology leap forward from the 1840's to 1940's which has only continued since then!
But all the communal politics caused massive issues , poverty, inequality and blood shed ...
@@sarahradford9822 you mean like every large country ever?
@@riverraven7359 ??
Many countries of the empire still had their own parliaments but the British could overrule them if they wished
Canada has had independence from the British parliament since 1867 when they got their own parliament who they could vote for.
When British, British-Canadian and American women were involved in woman’s suffrage British New Zealand’s woman had already been able to vote since 1893.
I have many American friends and I go to USA very often and today many STILL think that the 4th July is a sad day for me - it never has been and never will be because we have 100 countries who have their own 4th July (!)
And if the revolutionary war had never happened the USA would not have been as strong or rich enough to help us Brits out in both the world wars.
USA has always been looked to as the future until recently - now it feel like looking into the past.
If Britain can have free schools and private schools we can and do also have free healthcare for ALL and private health care for those who wish to jump the line.
Our crappy cheap health system keeps Brits healthier for longer than our American cousins with their bankrupt health care - it’s morally bankrupt and Americans are so brainwashed they continue to blindly follow the opposite of robunbhood - your rich steals from the poor and keeps it that way and everyone just accepts it ?!
CEAZY
And today if I were American I’d make a point of NEVER celebrating July 4th - not because it offends Brits - it never has - I’d make a POINT of only celebrating Juneteenth because you’re not free until ALL of you are free and that includes the slaves.
And as a last note - when the British empire made a pact with the locals they mostly honoured that contract .
By contrast american USA history is littered with tales of broken contracts with native Americans as soon as gold was found on their land.
40 states and not even one could be an honorary Native American state?
Americans are SO hypocritical it’s not even funny.
Empires are always created by greed for money and power for the FEW.
Ordinary British folk weren't interested in taking over the world.
It was the aristocracy, and merchant classes, only.
Not so much the aristocracy. They were largely too busy looking after their own estates and running the country. Only those who had lost their land and younger sons who would not inherit much would take the risks. In the early days of the East India Company 90% of those who went to India would not return alive.
Can't say the Empire was good, or bad, but it was f***ing impressive.
I'm English/British/whatever, white male - no shying away from it - historically we did this and we're not doing too great internationally now, but - it's not my fault, I didn't do these things. It seems like historically we've had "small dog syndrome" - small island, got bitey and took a bunch of stuff that wasn't ours as we had the technology/muskets...
I worked with a Zimbabwean guy over here (UK) that absolutely mourned the loss of British rule "We had schools and working hospitals". He h also detested a whole bunch of his own fellow nationals and would use the *N-word when refering to them. Almost every African/Commonwealth immigrant I've worked with has been a grafter (hard worker) and very much valued education and a big focus on raising their kids right, people are people, we all wants the Maslowe's Hierarchy of Need stuff, food shelter, health, love etc.
As is always the case, it's politicians that ruin it - all the nations, races I've encountered I could go for a beer with + have a nice time - "even" the Muslims, if we go for a coffee/coke whatever - everyone wants the same basic stuff more/less.
Good video, worth a watch.
As to the French:
*hears fireworks.
>surrenders.
or "cheese eataing surrender monkeys"
The Leader, His Driver and the Driver's Wife - is a very interesting documentary around the collapse, just before the collapse of Apartheid in South Africa - it's very enlightening, kinda a pre Louis Theroux documentary by the great Nick Broomfield - worth a look.
Everything you’ve written here is ignorant and ill-informed. Read more.
@@SashaUK-tl9nl AND YOUr REMARKS ARE THE PINNACLE OF PAthetic hard left self pity. go out into the yard and give yourself a good thrashing, and you might feel better,
@@SashaUK-tl9nl on my nationality? On people I've met that all want to actualise themselves on the Hierarchy of Need? Lol - idiot.
I agree with wolfold Sasha you’re ignorant
Australia, Britains biggest open air prison.
As for where the money went , fighting wars and building weapons of all types
Jack the Ripper would have been straight up hanged if he was caught.
We haven't been angels but honestly we have given the world so much
Now look at the American Empire, one that's alive and kicking.
I like discussing the subject and well done the two of you for having a go. There were quite a lot of historical inaccuracies in the main presentations though. Too easy to skip over in 10-15 minutes. As a Brit I recognise history for what it is as long as we learn from it (as long as it’s accurate). In answer to Spencer’s question, yes proud to be British
Best world tour in history very proud 👍🏻❤️🏴🇬🇧
45 trillion is nonsense, worked out on a ridiculous compound interest
Its not just us, your ancestors was apart of it too lol
Jack the Ripper was in 1888, the East India Company and Australia being stolen by the British was nearly 300 years earlier. But, there was a conman who travelled around Africa, Australia and England. He is thought to have robbed and murdered his wives, girlfriends and children. He was eventually caught and hanged in Australia. A few Jack the Ripper experts think that he was in London at the time of the murders and treat him as a suspect, but probably only because they think they might get a book or documentary out of it. There's a UA-cam video about this man.
You should watch the series Empire presented by Jeremy Paxman as he goes all around the world and visits countries once part of the British Empire.
And talks to many people from those countries about the impact it had on them and their parents etc.
He's on the Left and was very selective indeed. It got criticised for lack of academic rigour. That is the BBC for you.
@@richardwills-woodward5340 That's not what I'm trying to point out,everyone he spoke to gave the position that what the empire gave to them massively out does the negatives they just wanted independence at the end.
@@tannoys2008 Gandhi (an enormous racist by the way which is always conveniently overlooked) wanted independence. It is not clear the majority of Indians did. Even today I hear from more Indians that prefer British governance, or at least until recent years they seem to anyway (those that moved to Britain which is a biased sample of course). They got what was called for and what happened? They descended into the same old instincts that befell them prior to British governance by local leadership. India fell apart. India had the all the ingredients to be better than that but Ghadhi was braindead. He was utterly clueless as to how this would work. He had not calculated properly. Of course I don't think Britain should govern India today. The point is India deserved better and the independence movement in India had no clue about the real politick and did not have the geopolitical nouse to transition India.
Partition was the right idea too. The British get criticism for this but Muslims belong in a separate place where they can be kept an eye on. They certainly are a menace to civilisation and development with 100% failure rate wherever they are the majority. This will stand India in a better position moving forward into their future, which has about 50 years before utter catastrophe.
Gt Britain spent billions to end the World Slave Trade. We also spent billions to win two world wars. These countries insisted on getting independence despite not being ready. We did a whole lot for the world, we brought progress and enlightenment.
🤬😈💀
If the British Empire was so real, and supported by the British people, then why was Britain never ruled by a British Empress and there was only ever an Indian Empress? Could the British Empire have been some sort of weird PR stunt? If so, why is it such an appealing story even now that people give it so much weight?
It does no one any harm to examine their country's history critically. As Peter J Taylor said in 1989, if you do not know the past, you do not understand the present.
As a British man I am proud to be British, were we arseholes? Obviously
But Britain has given the world a hell of a lot, culturally no one country has given more to the modern world, every major sport (baring athletics) comes from Britain, Football (rugby, American football, soccer) Cricket, (baseball) Netball (Basketball) Hockey(field and Ice) Boxing (Marquess of Queensberry Rules) Golf, literature Shakespeare, Wordsworth, Keates, Dickens, Orwell, Bronte (all of them) Hardy, Wolfe, Tolkien, Lewis, Chaucer, Thomas, Burns, Blake, Milton, Tennyson the list goes on and on
It gave the world industrialisation, the railroad , the telescope, penicillin, the marine chronometer, The Jet Engine , The internet (sort of) again the list goes on and on
It gave the world English common law, which most legal systems in the civilised world use , the 2 house parliament democratic system, again that most of the civilised world now use again culturally has anyone else given the modern world more?
It stopped a lot of things two, the slave trade that has been covered, but the mutilation of girls, widow burning, female infanticide, it gave girls the right to an education all over the world, where previously they had none, it gave infrastructure, legal systems, agriculture, industry, schools, and hospitals to its colonies . the troubles really started in a lot of these colonies years after we (British left) and again the people that really benefited where the elite, the upper class, not us working class who up until the second world war, sere really struggling like the rest of the world.
As for how its taught in schools, it is not really, there is no need, ever seen a film that paints it in a good light? I haven't. The video is called the good the bad and the ugly of the British empire, there was barely any good covered. So again am I proud to be British? yes. Do i feel ashamed of our colonial passed? No, I was not involved, and no one should feel ashamed of anything they had no hand in.
I will leave you with my favourite line from another british poet Jazzie B (Soul to Soul). A happy face, a thumping bass, for a loving race, peace!
All the European countries were trying to do the same thing, we were just better at it
Why are your videos always out of sync with the audio?
If we haven't learned from a thousand years of mistakes , then God help us.
They didn't start slavery, that goes back many thousands of years.
I think it's wrong to feel guilt and shame for what people did long before we were born, just because we happen to live in the same country as them. We should be judged by our current actions, not the actions of others from the past.
But U love to celebrate that same "guilt and shame for what" !!??..
We did send releif both from Canada and Australia.
alright lads, how goes it, get home from a day sloggin n u gents pop up. lovely stuff.
Good on you Boys. I have enjoyed your take on British humor for several months, but this episode gave me a lot more. I learned new things but, more importantly. I was inspired to think about various things. Escapism like drugs and alcohol is best indulged in moderation. Thanks for putting this guy out there.
300 years ago, it was normal, and accepted that territories could be possessed through force of arms, EVERYONE did it and had been doing so since the dawn of time.
To judge our ancestors against modern day standards and principles is extremely naïve.
British Empire was mercantile in nature, with trading colonies set up and treaties agreed to with local rulers. We were never a land power and didn't spend our time launching invasions of each new piece of land we came across, despite the popular view. We did however use force to stop the slave trade and that took a long time, especially the East African and Arabian markets, not that you hear about that either lol. As you say, historical judgement is naive.
Further, Britain didn't start the slave trade and was not responsible for millions of deaths at all - there is ZERO EVIDENCE for this. What they did do was create modern healthcare that made death rates plummet and diets improve. Not only that but the British are responsible for creating wealth in the world that exists. The British Empire was overwhelmingly positive and I can see no argument against this in light of the modern world we're living in. Primitive countries are still primitive, but the ones governed by the British Empire have far higher GDP per capita today than the ones that were not. Now tell me, what atrocities did (and do) Africans commit today? Middle Eastern peoples? (the largest slavers in history). Where's the downside from that? I will always be grateful for the genius of the British and the British Empire.
Great Britain: Unlike Scotland, Wales wasn't given any option in joining England. After centuries of raiding and war in both directions, England completely conquered and incorporated Wales in the late 1200s. That's why the biggest and best castles in 'England' are all in Wales - they were there to subdue the conquered population. Scotland's King James VI also became king of England (and Wales) after the death of Queen Elizabeth I in 1603, but although he was king of both, the countries remained legally and constitutionally separate until the Act of Union in 1707. Ireland, and later just Northern Ireland, is a horrendously long and complicated story of invasion, counter invasion, conquest, and colonisation. You've got to practice somewhere.
England has been England since 927AD
I understand he's doing a quick overview however he's skipping a lot of crucial information. The east india company was exploitative but the famine's weren't caused by them after the government revoked their charter and took over much of indias wealth was poured back onto infrastructure for food distribution and storage improving the lives of citizens for generations to come. The Bengal famine was a disgrace which should never have happened but again ot was a natural disaster which was badly mismanaged not an act of malice.
Were it not for the Empire and the industrial revolution you would be tending sheep.on a hill.somewhere.
Bullcrap !!.
How else would it be ? No empire no social media .
Down south in America brits fought brits, the true American brits are there, we fight then make up & shake hands & party lol
I was born in 1966. 'The Empire' was never really taught. It was more The Agrarian and Industrial Revolutions.
Both WWI and WWII were ignored because they were:
Too recent
Too emotive
Too surrounded by 'fog'.
We were still playing on WWII bomb sites, but we (as children) didn't know it.
Stone Age, Bronze Age, Iron Age, Romans, Anglo Saxons, Vikings, 'Every war with the French', Tudors, Stuarts, 'Age of Exploration', Agrarian Revolution, Industrial Revolution/Victorians and that's it. History stopped in the 19th century.
This videos does show that while we may have colonised a lot of places we did eventually give it back to the natives, soooo y'know... America... 😉😉
We're taught to hate ourselves, so the kids are off to a great start 🤦🏻♂️
You should watch how the British ended slavery.