India Never Part Of The British Empire?

India's economy didn't completely collapse like Zimbabwe's has, so my statement still stands.

Umm. Your statement is meaningless. India's economy is also doing fine now, but you see no rational poster claiming it's dispositive of India in 1800.

Your statement's "context" is that brown people can't rule themselves, and India was lucky to have such just, boyish masters.
 
Umm. Your statement is meaningless. India's economy is also doing fine now, but you see no rational poster claiming it's dispositive of India in 1800.

Your statement's "context" is that brown people can't rule themselves, and India was lucky to have such just, boyish masters.
I see, so we're at the stage of you lying about what I said and accusing me of racism. Good oh.

Much like your statement's "context" is that you hate Britain and the British I guess. I'm sorry you couldn't see through your prejudices to what I was actually saying.
 
I see, so we're at the stage of you lying about what I said and accusing me of racism. Good oh.

Much like your statement's "context" is that you hate Britain and the British I guess. I'm sorry you couldn't see through your prejudices to what I was actually saying.

I love you.
 
...Well, that took a turn for the surreal.

Anyway, I as a British patriot think that if we're going to claim that anyone critical of the Raj (like, uh, me) hates Britain, we should also dismiss critics of Hitler, Stalin, and Mao, what with how they obviously hate the great nations of Germany, Russia, and China.
 
...Well, that took a turn for the surreal.

Anyway, I as a British patriot think that if we're going to claim that anyone critical of the Raj (like, uh, me) hates Britain, we should also dismiss critics of Hitler, Stalin, and Mao, what with how they obviously hate the great nations of Germany, Russia, and China.

Let it be known that he's not representative of those of who who are pro raj.
Us Fabians have saner reasons :p

Though it must be noted that British hate is a horrid side effect of controversial UK actions in the past. Largely ones that took place before democracy took hold so its really 'anti-that one guy who happened to be king of england but also did bad things to us'ism (most commonly seen with Ireland)
 
Anyway, I as a British patriot think that if we're going to claim that anyone critical of the Raj (like, uh, me) hates Britain, we should also dismiss critics of Hitler, Stalin, and Mao, what with how they obviously hate the great nations of Germany, Russia, and China.
Hold on, it was in response to Faeelin pretty much lying about what I said so (s)he could get away with calling me a racist for christ sake. In the grand scheme of things there, accusing Faeelin of hating the British is:
A) Nowhere near as bad as erroneous accusations of racism,
B) Probably a lot closer to the truth.
Let it be known that he's not representative of those of who who are pro raj.
If this is reference to me, it's true, but because I'm not "pro-Raj", not any other reason.
Though it must be noted that British hate is a horrid side effect of controversial UK actions in the past. Largely ones that took place before democracy took hold so its really 'anti-that one guy who happened to be king of england but also did bad things to us'ism (most commonly seen with Ireland)
Then that legitimises hatred of any country, because they all have pretty bad track records, and I'd contend that Britain isn't particularly bad even amongst it's contemporaries.

Point is irrational hatred of any nationality is pointless, well, except the French :p.
 

Susano

Banned
Hold on, it was in response to Faeelin pretty much lying about what I said so (s)he could get away with calling me a racist for christ sake. In the grand scheme of things there, accusing Faeelin of hating the British is:
A) Nowhere near as bad as erroneous accusations of racism,
B) Probably a lot closer to the truth.
BS.
1) He represented yoru view fairly accurately. Yes, yes, you said "could", but in the end that was your only argument - that native leaders "COULD" turn into Mugabes. So, either the argument is worthless because it denotes a mere possibility among thousands, or its racist because you obviously mean more than "could". Besides
2) How attacking British colonial policies is an attack on Britain itself is beyond me. It seems to me you ran out of arguments and hence resorted to ad hominem.
3) Btw, racism does not only mean "anti-blakc" or "anti-white" but also works on the level of nations. Thus you did accuse Faeelin of racism.
 
BS.
1) He represented yoru view fairly accurately. Yes, yes, you said "could", but in the end that was your only argument - that native leaders "COULD" turn into Mugabes. So, either the argument is worthless because it denotes a mere possibility among thousands, or its racist because you obviously mean more than "could". Besides
2) How attacking British colonial policies is an attack on Britain itself is beyond me. It seems to me you ran out of arguments and hence resorted to ad hominem.
3) Btw, racism does not only mean "anti-blakc" or "anti-white" but also works on the level of nations. Thus you did accuse Faeelin of racism.
There's a lot of BS here, but it's not mine.
1) He misrepresented me. I can say that because I know what I said, what I meant and what specifically I was responding too. I've also plainly noted those things when there was a misunderstanding earlier (and after that other people seemed to understand), just because you are misrepresenting what I said either on purpose or because you couldn't be bothered to read what I wrote, doesn't change that.
2) HE resorted to Ad Hominems, and I responded in kind. It wasn't me that ran out of arguments and resorted to insults, and if it seems to you I did you're either not looking at what happened on this thread, or blinded to the actions of people you happen to agree with.
3) Fine, I responded in kind. The fact you let his unsolicited accusations of racism slide, and jump over me for responding to him in kind doesn't actually say much about me, though.
 
Last edited:
Top