Paul Hyett wrote in
news:BDvZqWXOBDiIFwbc@blueyonder.co.uk:
> On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 at 19:00:56, Cynic wrote in
> uk.legal :
>>
>>>Unfortunately, this is not an exaggeration or some sort of conjecture.
>>>It is what would have happened, had the US not fought back.
>>
>>And why would that have been such a bad thing? It may have turned out
>>to be an improvement.
>>
>>The US does not seem to mind if the people in Vietnam or Iraq or many
>>other places are conquered and end up speaking American and eating
>>McDonald's hamburgers.
>>
>>Americans seem to think that it is a *good* thing for the people in
>>foreign countries to be forced into adopting American values, because
>>the American way of life is better than theirs (most Americans
>>believe), so they are being done a favour.
>
> The same arguments were applied to the British colonies in Africa.
>
> The native populations fought for independence as an abstract ideal, but
> when they achieved it, they mostly found they had no idea how to
> actually handle it. The result has very often been decades of bloody
> civil war and/or brutal dictatorships.
>
> I wonder if the population of Zimbabwe think they are better off now,
> socially & economically, than they were when the British were in charge?
You could ask that of most Africa's former colonies.
The British if nothing else were enlightened administrators and did more to
create a middle class in thier colonies than anyone or anything else.
Frank |