Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sun Tzu who wrote (153371)	12/6/2004 9:27:12 AM
From: Neocon	Respond to of 281500

Well, the colonization of the Eastern seaboard was pretty peaceful. Indian tribes were not generally hostile, unless recruited in the occassional disputes between the French and British, which were themselves not terribly bloody. The acquisition of India progressed largely through alliances with native leaders that helped to settle local disputes, although the Great Mutiny, which lead to the transfer of power from the East India Company to the British Crown was fairly bloody, if brief. Territory acquired in Africa rarely encountered serious resistance. As I recall, Ceylon and Burma did not offer serious resistance, in South Asia. Certainly it was a mixed bag, but against a backdrop of pre- existing competition in these various locales, it is possible that there was a long term drop in violence with the establishment of more orderly administration. Sometimes decolonization had bloody events associated with it, but in myriad instances the devolution of power was itself peaceful enough, which is why so many Commonwealth nations demonstrate loyalty to the Crown. Of course, this was particularly true in settlement colonies like Canada and Australia. But the British did not have to be driven out of most territories: in the aftermath of WWII, they set a timetable and left. In cases like the Caribbean, things were rather peaceful. In instances like the intercommunal violence in India, they might be blamed for leaving prematurely. In any event, in nations with such levels of intercommunal hostility, it is relevant to ask how they would have sorted things out without the British.