Propaganda
-
dtechba — 11 years ago(May 23, 2014 06:37 AM)
Lord man the Boer Wars predated the Phillipines by 10 to 20 years. Even Churchill condemned some British conduct during the Boer Wars. I hold the British military in very high esteem but your ignorance of the historic facts as woefully naive. As for the American Indians, reservations are not concentration camps. Not that the conduct there by US forces was something to write home about.
-
ContinentalOp — 11 years ago(May 30, 2014 07:58 PM)
''I hold the British military in very high esteem but your ignorance of the historic facts as woefully naive. As for the American Indians, reservations are not concentration camps.''
They are pretty damn similar though. As were the POW camps in the Civil War, which predated the Boer War.
''Lord man the Boer Wars predated the Phillipines by 10 to 20 years.''
For someone saying that someone's ''your ignorance of the historic facts as woefully naive'', the claim can be made for you. The Philippine-American War was from 18991902 and the Second Anglo-Boer War (in which concentration camps were first used by the British Empire) was from 1899-1901. However, the Spanish used them in the Cuban War of Independence (18951898) before the US and the UK. And contrary to popular belief the Tsarist regime in Russia had the katorga camps, though you could argue that penal camps and concentration camps are different.
Formerly KingAngantyr -
dtechba — 11 years ago(June 03, 2014 12:12 PM)
The Phillipine Insurrection did not end until just prior to WW1. It should be noted that the famed .45 cal semi auto pistol came from that conflict. It is known as the M1911 the 1911 the year it was approved for purchase.
-
ocoileain1890 — 17 years ago(May 27, 2008 05:19 AM)
"The British were the most humane and least brutal, and in the end, they gave most of their empire back to the native peoples simply because they were asked"
Centuries of State sanctioned brutality, religious and civic persecution, culpability through sheer neglect in in the artificial holocaust that was the 1845-47 famine, rapine, avaricious resettlement of the natives from their ancestral lands, god I could go on at risk of sounding like a broken record but what would be the point? 13 miles down the road from where I live British soliders indulged in the delightful little sport of Pitch capping that is pouring hot pitch, or tar (mainly used at the time for lighting purposes), into a conical shaped paper "cap", which was forced onto a bound persons head and then allowed to cool. Less elaborate versions included smearing a cloth or paper with pitch and pressing onto the head of the intended victim. The "pitchcap" was then torn off taking lumps of skin and flesh with it which usually left the victim disfigured for life. Wonderful! How to win over the natives! Instead such treatment goaded the peasant population into open rebellion as ill-educated (Because of a prickly little series of discriminatory edicts called the "Penal Laws".) farm hands took on canon and cavalry with little more than pikes. Slaughter ensuing.
Selective historical amnesia seems to prevail in the British educational system in relation to the history of Ireland. We'd been "asking" for our country "back" since the medieval period but quickly realised ones point of argument to be augmented no end with the fixing of a bayonet when dealing with the British. One thing you taught us well, might is right! But sure thats all in the past since we're "civilised" now. Well done. We're still dealing with the socio-political and physic poison of the occupation well into the 21st century. This country will never be right. Please do continue to live in your insular cotton wool feel-good bubble with wax in your ears or maybe I could recommend you some
books? Theres no excuse for remaining blind or indeed delusional in this information age. -
ikinmoore — 17 years ago(May 27, 2008 12:02 PM)
Do I detect some anti British feeling here. I am British and I have always believed that there are good and bad in all. I don't care for politics or religion and what our Ancestors did is not my fault. I enjoyed the film and never occured to me that people here would get so upset about british history.
Just rememeber this:
The white Americans did to the Native Americans
The White Australians did to the Native Australians
Black Africans tribes did to each other.
Germans did to most of Europe.
Russians did to Germans when they tried to wipe out Europe.
Americans did to Japan.
The World trade Centre
The list is endless and yes the British were brutal and cruel.
Humans are basically very cruel but as I said each one has a good side and a bad side. So don't be so bigoted or narrowminded.
The best films are made in an intelligent format. -
naseby — 11 years ago(October 08, 2014 11:05 AM)
Ocoilean is quite correct in NOT trying to justify the British Empire as all-forgiving and ok in most respects as has been mentioned. However, HE should remember that true, the atrocities in Ireland are unforgivable, plenty of Irishmen enlisted 'outside' of both the two World Wars for service in Britain's armed forces. If Britain was SO bad, surely they would have not (as many Indians did for instance, under the empire). My point is, that there is blood on all our hands and the present generation has NOTHING to do with what our forebears did. If so, should the allies be taking what they want out of post-war Germany still? The Easter Rising and subsequent executions was the factor that tipped Irish Nationalism 'mostly' to the fore, before that, most Irish people despite the famine, were 'ok' with Britain in Ireland. Fact. However, to re-iterate, the Empire was definitely WRONG.
-
Sheriff_Of_Nottingham — 16 years ago(February 11, 2010 07:08 PM)
Just remember this:
The white Americans did to the Native Americans
The Native Americans were brutal and cruel to other tribes long before any white man set foot on the North American continent. White captives of Native Americans were often skinned alive and yes this includes women, children, and infants. The Native Americans were also traders of black slaves. Hardly the nobles savages the liberals would like us to believe.
American did to Japan
Are you serious! Japan started the War with the States. During WWII, they committed mass genocide against the Chinese whom they regarded as an inferior people. They treated US/UK POWS worse than the Germans treated the Jews. If Truman did not drop the A bomb, FAR more people on BOTH would have been killed. Even today, the Japanese have a racist attitude towards outsiders. -
Ssertorivs — 12 years ago(August 10, 2013 03:57 AM)
"The Native Americans were brutal and cruel to other tribes long before any white man set foot on the North American continent. White captives of Native Americans were often skinned alive and yes this includes women, children, and infants. The Native Americans were also traders of black slaves. Hardly the nobles savages the liberals would like us to believe"
Gees, then I guess it's a good thing that y'all came over, massacred them and annihilated their culture. Even at the dawn of your history you were such great humanitarians, concerned with making the world a better place! -
SickBoyo — 17 years ago(May 28, 2008 08:45 AM)
The British were the most humane and least brutal, and in the end, they gave most of their empire back to the native peoples simply because they were asked"
British treatment of Ireland is a perfect example of this
you stay classy san diego -
ocoileain1890 — 17 years ago(May 28, 2008 08:55 AM)
"The British were the most humane and least brutal, and in the end, they gave most of their empire back to the native peoples simply because they were asked"
I just found that statement to be so gauche and unqualified to the point of being perverse, blatantly illustrating the complete lack of socio-historic knowledge the average English/British person possesses in relation to the history of Ireland.
I could easily say "Britain never contributed anything positive to the world" but that would be a lie. I'd expect you as a Briton to react with the same about of indignation not narrow-mindedness or bitterness (Which I personally don't feel for the record re. England.) concerning my comment. Relatives of mine had to die for the freedom we enjoy in the Republic today, trust me it would have been great if we didn't have to wage a brutal war of independence and suffer the ensuing trauma of civil war resulting from partition in order to achieve a modicum of freedom. -
ikinmoore — 17 years ago(May 28, 2008 09:15 AM)
Ocoileain1890 you sound really bitter. Don't you think a lot of people suffered in the hands of Germans during the Second world war. 20 million russians died plus millions of Indians, Australias, ect ect ectyet you bleat about the British. The Irish are not perfect as I have said before there are good and bad in all.
The best films are made in an intelligent format. -
ocoileain1890 — 17 years ago(May 29, 2008 06:00 AM)
"The British were the most humane and least brutal, and in the end, they gave most of their empire back to the native peoples simply because they were asked"
I'm not bitter my friend and I think you misunderstand me, I just found that statement to be deeply offensive given how utterly ridiculous it is, void of any rational qualification. Benign and benevolent empire I think not, no matter what ostentatious ideological finery you dress it up in Imperialism is at its very essence all about exploitation and domination. Millions died because of it in Ireland. Simple as. And the only just war is a war of Liberation. I'm not trying to imply that Ireland was the only country to suffer in history and that it's populated by angel's. -
ikinmoore — 17 years ago(May 29, 2008 06:56 AM)
I find it deeply offensive that you paint this narrowminded bigotry of the British. It's History.move on. I have no doubt Ireland has suffered over many years through "Imperialism" to name such a word, by the British. But don't keep harping on about the British as if they have been the only ones in History to exploit or dominate aother nationality.
I am only thankful that the problems in Ireland are now stable for the time- being and that the Irish are now living in peace with one aother.
The best films are made in an intelligent format. -
naseby — 12 years ago(August 31, 2013 08:57 AM)
True ocoileain1890, sentiment where it's due. Though I would say, we gave more than a lot back, letting Irish as well as other minorities of former colonies emigrate here even now as well as when they were needed in construction of say, the railways as so many Irishmen were and later, say, Irish nurses as well as those of ethnic orientation. Especially the Black and Tans in Ireland were despicable of course and I as an Englishman am not proud of that when we know equally of a proud and noble people the Irish and indeed many other races (we 'conquered') are. One thing, we/our countrymen all seem to be guilty of it. I actually have sympathy for the IRA of old, just fighting for their country, not as much as a terrorist they have been today - equally the Loyalists' are as bad. But it is true, however horrible in the past, we have given back (not that that makes up for anything). Take the 9 billion in Euro bailouts and the immigration status given to Irish people since. Though it shouldn't be forgotten, that so many Irish served in our forces as well as from other countries. Quite hypocritically though, a lot of them served us 'during' our empire. Although 'we' British weren't invaded by the Nazis, we didn't seek reparations from them and, it isn't fair the current generations of British people pay for what our forefathers did. However, the underlying thing is, that the original writer may have lost the plot but comparison with the Japanese, German and indeed (although contemporarily displaced) Roman Empire were definitely, far, far, worse.
-
nikjunk — 17 years ago(May 29, 2008 02:33 AM)
Hey guys,
Read my original post, not just a few lines. First, I'm not British. Second, I begin by saying that I belive that the British were wrong to build and empire. What they did was not good. I am not comparing the actions of the British to an absolute moral standard, but TO OTHER EMPIRES. The Ottomans, an empire contemporary with the British, would massacre people by the tens of thousands to make a point. Their behavior in Bulgaria so shocked the British public that it cost Disraeli the election to Gladstone (D was an Ottoman supporter). Ghandi's non-violent tactics would not have worked against most the the empires in history. It depended on the rulers having a conscience.
Can you imagine what the Nazis would have done to these peaceful demonstrations? Most imperial powers would have just kept killing people until everyone else went home. The examination to enter the British civil service during the Empire contained numerous essay questions intended to reaveal the examanee's attitudes towards power and justice. They deliberately attempted to exclude people who would abuse their power. Name another empire that did that.*(see below for irrelivant political comment)
I'm just trying to argue for a little balance here. As one of the posters said, just because the empire did some bad things, it doesn't mean that all of the Brits who went out to the empire had bad intentions. The average Victorian held themselves to a much stricter morality and valued adherance to a standard outside of their own desires than does the modern man. In short, they wanted to be honorable and good people. On a few points, obviously, they were blind, and being human, they had many failings.
If you want anti-British statements, you can get them from from me, but let's be accurate. The British govenment has lead the way in the breakdown of the laws of war, the development of the idea of total war, and the general refinement of atrocities and is particularly adept at blame-shifting (Churchill, like Lincoln in the US, being the master of this skill).
I refer specifically to the concentration camp, developed by them during the Boer war, the violation of the freedom of the seas by their close blocade of Germany during WWI, with the stated intention of starving the German population into submission (this was the single largest step towards total war, in which the civilian population is seen as a legitimate target). They continued the blockade for 4 months after Germany had surrendered. It resulted in the deaths of about 750,000 German civilians, and malnutrution for many more. The German submarine campaign was a poor-man's version of the same thing, done in response to British provocation.
They further blazed the trail by their area bombing of cities in Germany with the stated intention of "dehousing" the German population. German area bombing began as a mistake and continued as a response. However, the British government has only been able to do this through the promulgation of strong propoganda because this kind of behavior doesn't sit well with the average Englishman. They, like the Americans, need to be convinced that they have been reluctantly forced into action. When their government wants to aggrandize itself through various wars and violence overseas, they have to con the public.
So I'm not just sweetness and light about the British empire. And, BTW to the poster that said I should cite something if I want to be taken seriously, how about my citation of Gladstone? His comment on the Mahdist uprising that is the setting of the Four Feathers (this version anyway) was "they are a people rightly fighting for the freedom." His reluctance to fight there cost him his position. As did his support, on more than one occasion, of Irish home rule.
Have the Irish people forgotten Gladstone? He was a great (Victorian!) man.
Ps. Just 2 days ago I was telling my wife about the abuses perpetrated by many English landlords and rulers in Ireland. I was not defending them, let me tell you.
*The Liberal party was particularly good in this regard. It's ironic that their few remaining adherents have fled to the Torries (I mean classical 19th century liberals who believed in liberty and the dignity of the indivudual above all else), who had been their great opponents. The same thing has happened in America, where the modern followers of Thomas Jefferson's ideals find themselves an abused minority in the Republican party (again, their old opponants), courted at every election by the corporate country club and promptly sold out after they deliver their votes. -
nikjunk — 17 years ago(May 30, 2008 02:16 AM)
I have reconsidered and think I need to say that it is legitamate to portray evils that were perpetrated in the past. There is a place for movies about the English in Ireland, or other places in the Empire, that document brutal incidents or policies. As empires go, the Brits weren't too bad, but this doesn't mean that you cannot compare them to a moral standard and find some of their actions wanting.
My problem with the film was not that it portrayed English people doing bad things, but that the director wanted to communicate that the English were a violent people with a violet society (which is why he put a Rugby game in the first scene). This is not legitimate. Victorian society was far less violent than the average through history. There was certainly a lot of human refuse that went out to the colonies and exploited people. To document this is okay, but to paint the whole society with the same brush is unfair. Most British people would have been as horrified by this brutality as we are.
Ps. I agree that the only just war is a war of liberation (or defence).