Was imperialism more positive or more negative for the colonized lands?
Taken from a debate led by BBC - "Was British imperialism a force for good?"
The British empire was, like all empires, a product of its time and place; its modus operandi today seems abhorrent in the light of accepted western liberal thought and norms of today. That said, the western concepts of civilization that have matured into what they are today (at minimum in theory, if not in practice) are far more benevolent than anyone 150 years ago might have dreamed of. Critics of history are harsh; rightly so. It should be remembered though that applying todays standards to events and regimes of the past result in an unbalanced, chrono-centric position; civilizations, whether influenced by European empires or not, are evolutionary, and develop still.
Anon, US |
The Great British Empire of yesteryears is indeed a lesson in history. One can learn from what they did right and what they did wrong. The question, then, is, does the good outweigh the bad? I cannot speak for all the former colonies. I come from Pakistan, and believe that the imperialism was a blessing in disguise. Sure, the conflict and turmoil is forever written in the history books, but the good was really good. The British came when the Mogul Empire was on its declination path. They brought law and order, and most importantly, technology with them. I do not believe that the vast lengths of Railway lines in the Indian subcontinent would have been possible without the colonization. This is just one of the many reasons why the British Empire did more good than bad.
Hamza Sheikh, USA |
Pros and cons of imperialism; complied from various sources
NEGATIVE EFFECTS
|
POSITIVE EFFECTS
|