C4 Dispatches - immigrants really good for Britain

[sasguru]

The winners always get to write history. The trick is not to lose.

[Churchill]

The ones my ancestors worked in.

When?

[SallyAnne]

Two things you *****, firstly, I'm not CD.

Secondly, what was racist about my reply?

Thirdly, you're a *****!

Oh dear - you clearly didn't have a quickie this lunchtime then?!

[ChimpMaster]

Oh dear - you clearly didn't have a quickie this lunchtime then?!

5 letter expletives are not easy to guess are they? Then again maybe I'm just not clued up on the lingo all the kids are using these days.

I just take it he meant that I was a "5 star" kinda of guy.

[Churchill]

5 letter expletives are not easy to guess are they? Then again maybe I'm just not clued up on the lingo all the kids are using these days.

I just take it he meant that I was a "5 star" kinda of guy.

What I meant was that you appear to be too stupid to understand what is and what isn't racist.

[xoggoth]

All this stuff about did the empire help or hinder the colonies.

Totally against colonisation and empire personally, believing in nationalism means you should respect other people's national sovereignty as well, but if you look at the history of Europe and Asia it is hard to believe that the net benefit was anything but positive. Over less than 500 years, Africa and South America have evolved in a way that took us 2000 to do on our own.

Ah yes, material progress isn't everything some will say, what about the destruction of their valid cultures etc etc? The plain fact is that all fragmented tribal societies, when they are not trying to avoid starvation, spend much of their time in conflict, bloody war and mutual slavery and the view of the noble savage striving peacefully to create a great society is romantic tosh.

[threaded]

Do you know during the Roman Empire the Spice Islands (now Indonesia) became fabulously wealthy.

When the Roman Empire collapsed they went back to poverty. They're occasionally finding fabulous temples from the period hidden in the jungle.

So I guess you can blame the Romans for that.

[lilelvis2000]

sounds like that would have to be a book from your approved reading list

it is NOT quite clear that it was fcuked up at all, history is now showing that they have done well out of it -- i will re-emphasise the point , that if it weren't for the timely introduction of the english language they would now be struggling

You mean it has taken them 60 years to get back to where they were.

I'm not sure there is any evidence that speaking English makes you rich. I think the Japanese, French, Chinese and Germans would have something to say about that.

No history I have read indicates anything but a trampling of culture and a vast theft of wealth. Why not show me what you've got?

[3ill]

All this stuff about did the empire help or hinder the colonies.

Totally against colonisation and empire personally, believing in nationalism means you should respect other people's national sovereignty as well, but if you look at the history of Europe and Asia it is hard to believe that the net benefit was anything but positive. Over less than 500 years, Africa and South America have evolved in a way that took us 2000 to do on our own.

Ah yes, material progress isn't everything some will say, what about the destruction of their valid cultures etc etc? The plain fact is that all fragmented tribal societies, when they are not trying to avoid starvation, spend much of their time in conflict, bloody war and mutual slavery and the view of the noble savage striving peacefully to create a great society is romantic tosh.

I'm not sure if your comments are directed towards India or not, but if they are I suggest you take a look back into the history of India. Going back to the Indus Valley civilization and for a long period until the Mughal invasions, there was no conflict or war or mutual slavery to speak of, rather the Indians of the time were a highly intelligent and advanced civilization. It was only until after the Mughals with their forced conversions and then at a later stage the Raj with their oppression that conflict and war became a problem.

[Churchill]

I'm not sure if your comments are directed towards India or not, but if they are I suggest you take a look back into the history of India. Going back to the Indus Valley civilization and for a long period until the Mughal invasions, there was no conflict or war or mutual slavery to speak of, rather the Indians of the time were a highly intelligent and advanced civilization. It was only until after the Mughals with their forced conversions and then at a later stage the Raj with their oppression that conflict and war became a problem.

Bollocks!!!

What is your take on the caste system in India?