English as a universal language

[Sharkith]

As far as I can see you are now clutching at straws. If I were you I would not write off the central importance of the enlightenment so easily because it is reflected in practically every sentence you say as a basis for your arguments. If that is the underpinning of your value system then it is the foundation upon which your arguments right now and those of the Empire were made.

I agree that a major achievement of the British empire was it's self transformation but this does not allow it to escape from shame. Now to the shame thing. You want examples now I will give you them. I am going to pick a few because if you do not see why there is a culture of shame around the history of the British empire then I am kind of shocked. You personally might not feel it but that does not deny that this feeling of shame is not there. Why I am directly opposing you is because I feel that shame gives us an important sensitivity in the face of the world. To remove it destroys something and leaves in its place nothing but a vacuum and potentially relplaces it with a kind of insensitivity.

The form of the British empire took was largely the colonial form. In this respect the transferral of large numbers of already dominated peoples to locations that became colonies was a central part of the empire project. It began with the movement of Scottish persons to Ireland and it was based on the extraction of local 'cash' crops to be sold as a central part of the mercantile system.

The British empire through this system of Merchantilism systematically destroyed indigenous crops throughout the world. In several locations this system was the direct cause of famine that killed millions. The Irish famine is a prime example where the cash crops of the empire were plentiful but the local indigenous crops failed. The British system insisted on removing those (cash) crops for the markets in England and we know the result in Ireland - millions died and millions more followed gladly to the American colony. The Irish population is only now recovering to pre famine numbers.

You might say oh this is the old systerm and the British empire 'learned' from this. I would say no. In fact things got worse and time and again the British instigated cash crop systems all over the carribean and places like India. In India it is estimated that between 12 and 29 million Indians died as a result of the witholding of cash crops for the British markets when the local crops failed. This system of cash crops it still in place today only now in the hands of multi national corporations many of whom have their roots in the British empire. The Holocaust pales in comparison to the apparently 'enlightened' British empire.

The slave trade of Africa was instigated by the British to support the merchantile sytem of sugar production in the Carribean. The whole notion that a person is sub human because he or she does not display our so called western rationality was supremely dsiplayed by the wonderful British empire who bought and sold person because they appeared sub human.

I can go on. The Aboriginal peoples of North America, Canada and Australia faced incarceration and imprisonment for not moving to where they were told to go to as little as 60 years ago by governments that were put in place as a result of British colonialism. Not only this during British rule these persons could be shot as sub human.

Now you might not feel any kind of shame personally because of this Ovi however I hope that you begin to understand that the feeling of shame associated with the British empire is there for bloody good reasons. If I have to go on I will the cataclogue of wrongs is massive.

On shame. Shame is where you confront yourself in the eyes of others and feel that you have wronged them. If there is one thing that is crucial to British consciousness as a marker of the wrongs of the past it is there culture of shame and feelings of guilt. You personally might want to see that removed because you personally do not feel the shame. I disagree and I feel that sensitivity should always be part of our social consciousness.

To remove it is to deny history and the many many wrongs the empire did even in its so called enlightened state. Finally Kundera once said something very wise and something you should listen to.

'The greatest crime of the people is to forget.'

[Luz]

UK is evil cuz Blair sleeps with Bush



I get what you are saying Shark, but at the same time, nobody living in UK were alive back then so its not their shame to bear ?

I dont like stuff Sweden did during WW2 for example, but as I wasnt there it feels kinda weird for me to be ashamed of it. I could not influence anything happening so long ago, if I were alive I can only hope I would done something different but I will never know.

Maybe in the same way you would run around and try free slaves I hope!

EDIT : I only just read a few seperate posts btw..

[Kallima]

I'm with Luz on this one. As a human being I feel a kind of generic shame for all the particularly lousy things human beings have done whatever the time or country. Its worth remembering what we are capable of, to try not to let it happen again.

My personal responsibility is about what I do and what I allow to happen around me.

[Hemuli]

No thanks, everyone who have played at classic server knows how our dear frenchmans acts at rvr. Well, if u like about 3fg vs 3fg fg fights then.

And ofc language. It's just fact that french peeps can't speak english, so better that they have their own community.

[Elrandhir]

I'm with Luz on this one. As a human being I feel a kind of generic shame for all the particularly lousy things human beings have done whatever the time or country. Its worth remembering what we are capable of, to try not to let it happen again.

My personal responsibility is about what I do and what I allow to happen around me.

Second that!

Havent read much of the thread for awhile, just to much stuff that tells me nothing.

And yeah, why care about things that you couldent do anything about anyways.

[Cryn]

However, that is also a value. Maybe we could call it a meta-value. It is a value that allows other values to exist.

If a culture/nation wants us to respect their values, shouldn't the first thing we require is that they agree to respect ours in exchange. We will let you live your life and in exchange you let us live ours.

Definately, if a country wants us dead/enslaved then we shouldn't just reply "well they are entitled to their opinion and the right to build up an army".

There is a need to draw a line. Saying that all countries are equal is an insult to those who are tortured to death at the hands of an oppressive regime. Do people really think that peaceful democracies which have proper law and order are equivalent morally to a dictatorship where the people are terrified of the government?

I think I agree with the spirit of your point. Not sure, it's a difficult one. I definitely agree that sometimes your value system and the values of those you exist with might be mutually exclusive. I don't necessarily agree with the examples you've given, since few cultures have really tried non-violence as a response to attack. Who knows, letting someone enslave you without opposition might be the quickest way to everlasting peace and freedom. We appear to have proved that defending ourselves against every attack (and using force to spread our values, such as democracy) is not a quick route to peace, if a route at all.

I would like to point out that the statement I've emboldened is slightly incorrect, in my opinion. I said that pushing values is a risky proposition, not a bad thing. I didn't mean it as a value, just as a fact (correct or not is another issue) - ie. if you attempt to push your values onto others, their reactions could leave you somewhere you don't want to be.

[Cryn]

You have yet to answer my direct point. Simply stated your arguement was that you feel no shame for the British empire and this position was justified with reference to the fact that we have a different value system and therefore are in no position to criticise the empire as it was.

I've quoted this but realised there has been other discussion on it.

I think feeling shame (or pride) for the acts of our ancestors is in a very real sense completely ridiculous. It is certainly irrational, and seems unhelpful in several ways to moving forward.

If you did not participate in events, or cause them to come about (directly or indirectly) you have no cause for shame or pride. Moreover, it is entirely likely that you have less in common with your direct ancestors than you do with almost anyone alive on the planet today, particularly if you go back a few hundred years, making it doubly silly for you to take on their doings as your own.

No Englishman during rise of the Elizabethan, Victorian or any other flavour of the British Empire has ever used a mobile phone. They didn't know what TV is, they'd never heard of Hitler and the education they received would have wildly different from most readers of this forum. They didn't eat take-aways and they didn't drive cars. They had (for the most part) very little conception of what goes on in other countries. Most would not be widely travelled, even within Britain, let alone without. Your great-great-great-grandfather may have been a strapping chap who endured hardship and colonised new (to them) parts of the world, but he would probably think you're a pansy who stays in too much and has some very suspicious leanings.

In other words, they were nothing like us. If their actions were admirable, we cannot take the credit. If they did wrong, it's not us to blame. If they left a legacy of injustice, we CAN try to put it right, but we should not assume it will be a simple matter and should not feel shame if we cannot quickly come to solutions.

We learn our lessons from the past and strive to do things right in the present. If we do, we have no need to feel ashamed.

[Gandelf]

UK is evil cuz Blair sleeps with Bush

But Blair and Bush are preserving our Western lifestyles, which I think I personally prefer to the alternative offered by certain extremist middle-eastern regimes.

EDIT: I KNOW I prefer my Western lifestyle to that of any extremist middle-eastern regime.

[ambera]

But Blair and Bush are preserving our Western lifestyles, which I think I personally prefer to the alternative offered by certain extremist middle-eastern regimes.

Are they though? Exactly how much safer and better preserved are our lifestyles thanks to their actions?

[<ankh>]

But Blair and Bush are preserving our Western lifestyles, which I think I personally prefer to the alternative offered by certain extremist middle-eastern regimes.

They are making sure they have control over the oilfields. Preserving the Western lifestyle are just an excuse.

/Ankh