with India no longer a colony and the suez crisis imperialism has changed so much as to be a different organisation now and the Americans run it now as well. The third world is exploited but through debt traps more than the direct colonial governance I was talking about.
And the giving up on India as a colony was at least in part a result of British political desire to do so. If Churchill had been reelected he would have probably fought a war over it
I was kinda facetious, the British Empire as it existed is indeed gone, but unfortunately neocolonialism is still going pretty strong
I also think it was a cost calculation on the part of colonial empires which got rekt during WW2, just too expensive to deal with the unrest when the economy is in the shitter, the Brits actually understood that much more than the French, who sent a lot of men to die in the jungle of Indochina and the mountains of Algeria
Agree on Churchill tho, considering his revolting opinions on the colonised people
Got rid of it?
Fair point
with India no longer a colony and the suez crisis imperialism has changed so much as to be a different organisation now and the Americans run it now as well. The third world is exploited but through debt traps more than the direct colonial governance I was talking about.
And the giving up on India as a colony was at least in part a result of British political desire to do so. If Churchill had been reelected he would have probably fought a war over it
I was kinda facetious, the British Empire as it existed is indeed gone, but unfortunately neocolonialism is still going pretty strong
I also think it was a cost calculation on the part of colonial empires which got rekt during WW2, just too expensive to deal with the unrest when the economy is in the shitter, the Brits actually understood that much more than the French, who sent a lot of men to die in the jungle of Indochina and the mountains of Algeria
Agree on Churchill tho, considering his revolting opinions on the colonised people