One of my repeated irritations at the quality of public discourse on imperialism in Britain today is its woolly, moralising and overly-sentimental nature. The discussion is so often uncritical, proposing and accepting simplicities and tropes that – when I taught – wouldn’t get past the Year 1 undergraduate historian’s door. Much of the conversation takes place without objectivity or context. I saw this last night on television when watching a friend of mine discourse (no names, to protect the guilty) on the subject of Burma in 1885. The entire message was about the country being gifted to Queen Victoria – this of course being a terrible, patronising and humiliating thing - without any understanding of the political context of this particular war and indeed, any sense that the war with Burma was undertaken by the Raj very reluctantly. To an historian this is astonishing. It’s all so tediously ignorant. I am constantly amazed that the worst culprits are those who claim to be historians, especially those who hold positions in our universities. Without irony or self-awareness, many bleat a superficial appreciation of the past that is channelled through a prism of ideology, usually Marxism in the West, though in India at present it is right-wing Hindu mythologising. A more recent approach is to see imperialism through the absurdly simplistic – and erroneous – lens of racism. Many of our impressionable young have fallen into this one-way street presumably because they are not being taught by our universities to be critical thinkers. Instead they are encouraged, so as not to be offended by history, to be clones and apostles of the
Thanks for sharing this work with us. Something which is not often easily accessible to the layperson. Through casual study I’ve become aware of the always controversial nature of the acquisition and maintenance of the British Empire.
I do wonder if the British Empire was a result of a struggle for national survival. Going back to QE1 and the wars against Catholic Spain and others. Through to Napoleon establishing The Continental System freezing Britain out of European trade and onwards.
And arguably to be an Indian Nationalist you required an India to be Nationalist about. Rightly or wrongly British India provided this.
I would say this about our erstwhile empire. Report the facts and characters accurately, for good or ill. Simple as that.
Thanks for sharing this work with us. Something which is not often easily accessible to the layperson. Through casual study I’ve become aware of the always controversial nature of the acquisition and maintenance of the British Empire.
I do wonder if the British Empire was a result of a struggle for national survival. Going back to QE1 and the wars against Catholic Spain and others. Through to Napoleon establishing The Continental System freezing Britain out of European trade and onwards.
And arguably to be an Indian Nationalist you required an India to be Nationalist about. Rightly or wrongly British India provided this.
We were what we were, it was what it was.