CokeSnortingTory Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 was it truly their banking system though?edit spell Who else's would it be? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 comments?er - the strong take from the weak? evolution in action? survival of the fittest? Not very nice when you're taking their scalps. http://www.danielnpaul.com/Col/1999/BritishGenocide.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 (edited) As Ward Churchill points out, the British state first carried out scalping in various 'wars of pacification' in Scotland and Ireland. Scalping was then used in N America. The Indians adopted the practice. Others suspect that scalping was practiced in N America well before the Europeans arrived. Edited June 9, 2009 by gruffydd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MOP Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 It depends. At the time, we were simply superior to most of the parts of the world that we colonised, therefore we had the right to colonise them. WTF? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
talby Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 Maybe India should look a bit closer to home before trying to blame me :- http://escapefromindia.wordpress.com http://www.dalitnetwork.org If they got rid of the caste system they might get somewhere Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guillotine Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 If only the West had followed the example of that great Asian adventurer and benefactor Genghis Khan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erat_forte Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 It depends. At the time, we were simply superior to most of the parts of the world that we colonised, therefore we had the right to colonise them. Open season for your local chavs to nick your telly then Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stars Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 It depends. At the time, we were simply superior to most of the parts of the world that we colonised, therefore we had the right to colonise them. By implication if you can successfully attack your neighbor (say a frail little old lady), any reasonable person would conclude that you had the right to do so? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
talby Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 Forgot to add - if you want a laugh just read this site :- http://www.britishreparations.org Read the comments for "chip on shoulder" responses. And people still don't realise that offshoring of jobs to India is considered "reparations" by stealth by the "left" such as "Patricia Hewitt" and therefore "justified" http://www.contractoruk.com/news/001195.html "UK Trade Secretary Patricia Hewitt has infuriated trade unions by defending outsourcing of jobs to India during her keynote address at the Confederation of British Industries. Hewitt said that half of the world's poor lived in India and the country would benefit from economic growth as jobs moved there. But her critics immediately rounded on her, saying that tens of thousands of workers had been sacked in the UK and their jobs outsourced." And after her early bath :- "http://www.ptinews.com/pti%5Cptisite.nsf/0/16F540C8903898B8652575CA0016A1CD?OpenDocument" "London, June 3 (PTI) Senior Labour leader Patricia Hewitt, a former health secretary in the Tony Blair government has announced that she will not contest the next elections and will focus instead on charity work in India .... Hewitt, MP from Leicester West, will take over as the chairperson of the UK India Business Council in Juy." If you want a real socialist examination of how offshoring is hurting real Indians then check this article out "http://www.socialistparty.org.uk/articles/7129" "The social composition of the IT workforce helps explain its distance from the rest of the working class. It also exposes the myth that the industry offers opportunities for social and economic mobility irrespective of caste, religion and regional background. On the contrary, if anything it helped to widen this disparity. Most of its workforce (in some cases as high as three-quarters) is drawn from urban, upper/middle caste and landowning agriculture communities. A study of IT employees in Bangalore shows that brahmins (upper-caste priest community) constituted 48% of the workforce. The brahmins' predominance is not surprising, given their historical monopoly over higher education and employment in the formal sector, especially in south India. " The enemy is the state. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fishfinger Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 (edited) I can't see anything wrong with the article - he hits the nail on the head over and over and over again. Britain's record in the colonies is one of pure criminality, with episodes of genocide for good measure. Sickening. So the British Empire was worse than the Mongols? Or the Ottomans? Or the Romans? Or the Spanish in South America? Or the Belgiums in the Congo? Edit: Spelling Edited June 9, 2009 by Fishfinger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marko Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 (edited) This article is sh1te - this kind of thing is always predicated on one GLARING unspoken myth: namely that before we rocked up the 'natives' were all skipping about in Arcadia, with milk and honey flowing in the rivers and peace and love all around. What a crock. The innocent natives were often as not beating ten bells out of each other, selling each other into slavery, burning each others wives alive on funeral pyres, fighting religious wars, participating in clan dust-ups, getting stuck into a good ol' bit of genocide, or harbouring imperialistic ambitions of their own. The pinko argument is entirely based on this UNPROVABLE assertion that, had we not turned up, these places would have been paradises...presumably something to do with the innate goodness of the non Anglo. Yeah, right. Let's be frank - the top dog always gets to be hated and criticised....and Anglo-Saxon society has been for centuries the top-dog. Why? Because our way of organising things has manifestly been more successful than that of others. And we should not be apologising for this. Sure there have been many events in our imperial history that are shameful, but there are also plenty of things to be very proud of, and on balance we dragged the rest of the world (sometimes kicking and screaming) into modernity. Oh well excuse us. Christ, if we hadn't turned up a lot of people in the world would be sitting around discussing the best way to cook their neighbours heads. What really burns their balls is not that we as a culture has been so cruel, but rather that we have been so monstrously successful compared to everyone else. ...a culture that developed and championed representative democracy for centuries; that led the abolition of slavery and the emancipation of women; that kick-started the industrial revolution and begun the modern age; that led and leads the way in science and engineering; that has produced the best literature in the world; that has never been seduced by extremism (unlike our much more 'sophisticated' European neighbours that Grauniad readers fawn over so much, with their olive oil and fascism); that defeated the tinpot dictators Napolean and Hitler; that produced a diasporia which to this day stretches across the globe from Australia to Canada. All this from a small rainy island on the edge of mainland Europe. Let us be clear: Britain has been KICKING ASS for centuries, and I personally am very proud of this history. Edited June 9, 2009 by marko Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fishfinger Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 This article is sh1te - this kind of thing is always predicated on one GLARING unspoken myth: namely that before we rocked up the 'natives' were all skipping about in Arcadia, with milk and honey flowing in the rivers and peace and love all around.What a crock. The innocent natives were often as not beating ten bells out of each other, selling each other into slavery, burning each others wives alive on funeral pyres, fighting religious wars, participating in clan dust-ups, getting stuck into a good ol' bit of genocide, or harbouring imperialistic ambitions of their own. The pinko argument is entirely based on this UNPROVABLE assertion that, had we not turned up, these places would have been paradises...presumably something to do with the innate goodness of the non Anglo. Yeah, right. Let's be frank - the top dog always gets to be hated and criticised....and Anglo-Saxon society has been for centuries the top-dog. Why? Because our way of organising things has manifestly been more successful than that of others. And we should not be apologising for this. Sure there have been many events in our imperial history that are shameful, but there are also plenty of things to be very proud of, and on balance we dragged the rest of the world (sometimes kicking and screaming) into modernity. Oh well excuse us. Christ, if we hadn't turned up a lot of people in the world would be sitting around discussing the best way to cook their neighbours heads. What really burns their balls is not that we as a culture has been so cruel, but rather that we have been so monstrously successful compared to everyone else. ...a culture that developed and championed representative democracy for centuries; that led the abolition of slavery and the emancipation of women; that kick-started the industrial revolution and begun the modern age; that led and leads the way in science and engineering; that has produced the best literature in the world; that has never been seduced by extremism (unlike our much more 'sophisticated' European neighbours that Grauniad readers fawn over so much, with their olive oil and fascism); that defeated the tinpot dictators Napolean and Hitler; that produced a diasporia which to this day stretches across the globe from Australia to Canada. All this from a small rainy island on the edge of mainland Europe. Let us be clear: Britain has been KICKING ASS for centuries, and I personally am very proud of this history. +1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomwatkins Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 This article is sh1te - this kind of thing is always predicated on one GLARING unspoken myth: namely that before we rocked up the 'natives' were all skipping about in Arcadia, with milk and honey flowing in the rivers and peace and love all around.What a crock. The innocent natives were often as not beating ten bells out of each other, selling each other into slavery, burning each others wives alive on funeral pyres, fighting religious wars, participating in clan dust-ups, getting stuck into a good ol' bit of genocide, or harbouring imperialistic ambitions of their own. The pinko argument is entirely based on this UNPROVABLE assertion that, had we not turned up, these places would have been paradises...presumably something to do with the innate goodness of the non Anglo. Yeah, right. Let's be frank - the top dog always gets to be hated and criticised....and Anglo-Saxon society has been for centuries the top-dog. Why? Because our way of organising things has manifestly been more successful than that of others. And we should not be apologising for this. Sure there have been many events in our imperial history that are shameful, but there are also plenty of things to be very proud of, and on balance we dragged the rest of the world (sometimes kicking and screaming) into modernity. Oh well excuse us. Christ, if we hadn't turned up a lot of people in the world would be sitting around discussing the best way to cook their neighbours heads. What really burns their balls is not that we as a culture has been so cruel, but rather that we have been so monstrously successful compared to everyone else. ...a culture that developed and championed representative democracy for centuries; that led the abolition of slavery and the emancipation of women; that kick-started the industrial revolution and begun the modern age; that led and leads the way in science and engineering; that has produced the best literature in the world; that has never been seduced by extremism (unlike our much more 'sophisticated' European neighbours that Grauniad readers fawn over so much, with their olive oil and fascism); that defeated the tinpot dictators Napolean and Hitler; that produced a diasporia which to this day stretches across the globe from Australia to Canada. All this from a small rainy island on the edge of mainland Europe. Let us be clear: Britain has been KICKING ASS for centuries, and I personally am very proud of this history. Bit like the story of America. the Mexican's had done sweet FA with California/Texas. The Indians hadn't got past scalping each other and eating buffalos. Fact is the Anglo-Saxons were responsible for the rise and wealth. Again not everything was done according to the "rules" but nothing is perfect. The Mexican's only wanted Texas back when the "white man" starting exploiting the wealth and the Indian (even with no taxes, sovereign land and casinos everwhere paying zero taxes) has the highest drunkeness per capita in the US. Sound familiar? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guillotine Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 Marko, nice work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y-QUERK Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 We shouldn't have sacrificed the empire to defend the world against hitler. I dont think Britain gave a damn about the world. Britain fought to defend itself from hitler. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EUBanana Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 As Ward Churchill points out Hobsbawm, Ward Churchill... Why don't we throw in Rudyard Kipling for a little balance? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Steve Cook Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 (edited) For 300 years Britain has outsourced mayhem. Finally it's coming homeComments? The Uk's reign of resource and wealth extraction came to an end primarily at the close of the First World War and ended definitively at the close of the Second World War. Since that time we have, however, been deluding ourselves that we do still hold some of the reigns of that historical power. Hence all of the trappings of power such as our inflated monarchy and all of the ritualised pomp and ceremony that still litters much of our public offices. It's all a little bit sad and pathetic really. Edited June 9, 2009 by Steve Cook Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
athe Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 apr400 has a very powerful tactic in arguments. He asks questions you cant be bothered to answer. The answers would be so long and so boring, you are beaten into submission or silence or even both. I use the same tactic with my Wife. Not a tactic at all. I have frequently had discussions over a beer with people about how bad and evil we Britons are. Generally there is little evidence to back up the assertion. I am genuinely interested to be directed to sources that say otherwise, but pointing me towards a list of wars that this country has been involved in says nothing about the British Empire being as evil as was asserted. It's like discussing the safety record of Skodas by directing you to a biography of Henry Ford - sure there may be a link but you're going to have to wade through thousands of pages of unrelated craph to get from one to the other. I had assumed that someone who made such an assertion would be able to back it up without too much trouble - after all it's an extraordinary claim, surely there is some solid evidence behind it. Did the British Empire kill more of it's subjects per capita than for instance the Roman Empire or the Qing Empire? Were we more brutal than the Aztec Empire? Did we loot more than the Pandyan Empire, the richest country of it's time? Or are we simply the ones who left it a bit late, got into Empire building just after the peak, and ended up carrying the can as last empire standing? ps debt-free I assume I irritated you here. Guess it needed joke tags after all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 This article is sh1te - this kind of thing is always predicated on one GLARING unspoken myth: namely that before we rocked up the 'natives' were all skipping about in Arcadia, with milk and honey flowing in the rivers and peace and love all around.What a crock. The innocent natives were often as not beating ten bells out of each other, selling each other into slavery, burning each others wives alive on funeral pyres, fighting religious wars, participating in clan dust-ups, getting stuck into a good ol' bit of genocide, or harbouring imperialistic ambitions of their own. The pinko argument is entirely based on this UNPROVABLE assertion that, had we not turned up, these places would have been paradises...presumably something to do with the innate goodness of the non Anglo. Yeah, right. Let's be frank - the top dog always gets to be hated and criticised....and Anglo-Saxon society has been for centuries the top-dog. Why? Because our way of organising things has manifestly been more successful than that of others. And we should not be apologising for this. Sure there have been many events in our imperial history that are shameful, but there are also plenty of things to be very proud of, and on balance we dragged the rest of the world (sometimes kicking and screaming) into modernity. Oh well excuse us. Christ, if we hadn't turned up a lot of people in the world would be sitting around discussing the best way to cook their neighbours heads. What really burns their balls is not that we as a culture has been so cruel, but rather that we have been so monstrously successful compared to everyone else. ...a culture that developed and championed representative democracy for centuries; that led the abolition of slavery and the emancipation of women; that kick-started the industrial revolution and begun the modern age; that led and leads the way in science and engineering; that has produced the best literature in the world; that has never been seduced by extremism (unlike our much more 'sophisticated' European neighbours that Grauniad readers fawn over so much, with their olive oil and fascism); that defeated the tinpot dictators Napolean and Hitler; that produced a diasporia which to this day stretches across the globe from Australia to Canada. All this from a small rainy island on the edge of mainland Europe. Let us be clear: Britain has been KICKING ASS for centuries, and I personally am very proud of this history. Your ignorance astounds me. Try growing a brain before putting fingers to keyboard in the future please. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wickywackywoo Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 (edited) Forgot to add - if you want a laugh just read this site :-http://www.britishreparations.org Read the comments for "chip on shoulder" responses. And people still don't realise that offshoring of jobs to India is considered "reparations" by stealth by the "left" such as "Patricia Hewitt" and therefore "justified" http://www.contractoruk.com/news/001195.html "UK Trade Secretary Patricia Hewitt has infuriated trade unions by defending outsourcing of jobs to India during her keynote address at the Confederation of British Industries. Hewitt said that half of the world's poor lived in India and the country would benefit from economic growth as jobs moved there. But her critics immediately rounded on her, saying that tens of thousands of workers had been sacked in the UK and their jobs outsourced." And after her early bath :- "http://www.ptinews.com/pti%5Cptisite.nsf/0/16F540C8903898B8652575CA0016A1CD?OpenDocument" "London, June 3 (PTI) Senior Labour leader Patricia Hewitt, a former health secretary in the Tony Blair government has announced that she will not contest the next elections and will focus instead on charity work in India .... Hewitt, MP from Leicester West, will take over as the chairperson of the UK India Business Council in Juy." If you want a real socialist examination of how offshoring is hurting real Indians then check this article out "http://www.socialistparty.org.uk/articles/7129" "The social composition of the IT workforce helps explain its distance from the rest of the working class. It also exposes the myth that the industry offers opportunities for social and economic mobility irrespective of caste, religion and regional background. On the contrary, if anything it helped to widen this disparity. Most of its workforce (in some cases as high as three-quarters) is drawn from urban, upper/middle caste and landowning agriculture communities. A study of IT employees in Bangalore shows that brahmins (upper-caste priest community) constituted 48% of the workforce. The brahmins' predominance is not surprising, given their historical monopoly over higher education and employment in the formal sector, especially in south India. " The enemy is the state. It's as I've said before, Labour are the deadly enemy of every native British person in the country. I am forced to pay that bitches wages while they try to destroy me or I go to jail. She is supposed to be looking out for my interests, not the rest of the worlds. This kind of retarded thinking is common throughout the Labour party. They hate you and I and have been doing their best to destroy us in every way they can for 12 years. Incredible that people like this can get into positions of power in this country, absolutely incredible. Why are British voters so incredibly stupid? Edited June 10, 2009 by wickywackywoo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Bachelor of Arts Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 This article is sh1te - this kind of thing is always predicated on one GLARING unspoken myth: namely that before we rocked up the 'natives' were all skipping about in Arcadia, with milk and honey flowing in the rivers and peace and love all around.What a crock. The innocent natives were often as not beating ten bells out of each other, selling each other into slavery, burning each others wives alive on funeral pyres, fighting religious wars, participating in clan dust-ups, getting stuck into a good ol' bit of genocide, or harbouring imperialistic ambitions of their own. The pinko argument is entirely based on this UNPROVABLE assertion that, had we not turned up, these places would have been paradises...presumably something to do with the innate goodness of the non Anglo. Yeah, right. Let's be frank - the top dog always gets to be hated and criticised....and Anglo-Saxon society has been for centuries the top-dog. Why? Because our way of organising things has manifestly been more successful than that of others. And we should not be apologising for this. Sure there have been many events in our imperial history that are shameful, but there are also plenty of things to be very proud of, and on balance we dragged the rest of the world (sometimes kicking and screaming) into modernity. Oh well excuse us. Christ, if we hadn't turned up a lot of people in the world would be sitting around discussing the best way to cook their neighbours heads. What really burns their balls is not that we as a culture has been so cruel, but rather that we have been so monstrously successful compared to everyone else. ...a culture that developed and championed representative democracy for centuries; that led the abolition of slavery and the emancipation of women; that kick-started the industrial revolution and begun the modern age; that led and leads the way in science and engineering; that has produced the best literature in the world; that has never been seduced by extremism (unlike our much more 'sophisticated' European neighbours that Grauniad readers fawn over so much, with their olive oil and fascism); that defeated the tinpot dictators Napolean and Hitler; that produced a diasporia which to this day stretches across the globe from Australia to Canada. All this from a small rainy island on the edge of mainland Europe. Let us be clear: Britain has been KICKING ASS for centuries, and I personally am very proud of this history. +2 I work in South Sudan (clearing landmines), and see every day how primitive, tribal societies work (S Sudan and PNG are the closest we can get to pre-colonial countries IMO (esp out in the sticks)). Rape is common and not considered a big deal by the 'authorities', a 15 year old girl is more likely to die in pregnancy than finish school, blood fueds between tribes, over 1,000 recently killed in tribal clashes (cattle rustling and stealing women), no concept of agriculture (no concept of the future really), I won't go on. Not the 'paradise' that the tree-hugging anti-Brit brigade would like to suggest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Normal Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 Your ignorance astounds me. Try growing a brain before putting fingers to keyboard in the future please. Any chance of you correcting each point marko made, or are you just in insult throwing mode? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rare Bear Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 (edited) This article is sh1te - this kind of thing is always predicated on one GLARING unspoken myth: namely that before we rocked up the 'natives' were all skipping about in Arcadia, with milk and honey flowing in the rivers and peace and love all around.What a crock. The innocent natives were often as not beating ten bells out of each other, selling each other into slavery, burning each others wives alive on funeral pyres, fighting religious wars, participating in clan dust-ups, getting stuck into a good ol' bit of genocide, or harbouring imperialistic ambitions of their own. The pinko argument is entirely based on this UNPROVABLE assertion that, had we not turned up, these places would have been paradises...presumably something to do with the innate goodness of the non Anglo. Yeah, right. Let's be frank - the top dog always gets to be hated and criticised....and Anglo-Saxon society has been for centuries the top-dog. Why? Because our way of organising things has manifestly been more successful than that of others. And we should not be apologising for this. Sure there have been many events in our imperial history that are shameful, but there are also plenty of things to be very proud of, and on balance we dragged the rest of the world (sometimes kicking and screaming) into modernity. Oh well excuse us. Christ, if we hadn't turned up a lot of people in the world would be sitting around discussing the best way to cook their neighbours heads. What really burns their balls is not that we as a culture has been so cruel, but rather that we have been so monstrously successful compared to everyone else. ...a culture that developed and championed representative democracy for centuries; that led the abolition of slavery and the emancipation of women; that kick-started the industrial revolution and begun the modern age; that led and leads the way in science and engineering; that has produced the best literature in the world; that has never been seduced by extremism (unlike our much more 'sophisticated' European neighbours that Grauniad readers fawn over so much, with their olive oil and fascism); that defeated the tinpot dictators Napolean and Hitler; that produced a diasporia which to this day stretches across the globe from Australia to Canada. All this from a small rainy island on the edge of mainland Europe. Let us be clear: Britain has been KICKING ASS for centuries, and I personally am very proud of this history. +∞ Edited June 10, 2009 by Rare Bear Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rare Bear Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 It's as I've said before, Labour are the deadly enemy of every native British person in the country.I am forced to pay that bitches wages while they try to destroy me or I go to jail. She is supposed to be looking out for my interests, not the rest of the worlds. This kind of retarded thinking is common throughout the Labour party. They hate you and I and have been doing their best to destroy us in every way they can for 12 years. Incredible that people like this can get into positions of power in this country, absolutely incredible. Why are British voters so incredibly stupid? The thing that seems to be forgotten is that her type of person can only exist in a caomparitivly rich society, one which she wants to make poorer. Not her of course, just society in general. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 (edited) Any chance of you correcting each point marko made, or are you just in insult throwing mode? Lets put it this way, many of my Welsh compatriots argue that the English were the uncivilised pagans who we had to christianise via Columba and friends (we couldn't christianise the English directly coz you were such savages of course, or so people say). It is nonsense. Once you start trying to suggest that your culture is superior to another for this reason and that... Y'know Hitler did just that. And then you end up having the right to commit mass murder because you are, of course, making the world a better place? It's complete nonsense. The Empire was clearly all about resource exploitation, and making Mother England wealthier than she would otherwise be. Try reading about the Buccaneers down in the West Indies. Or the detruction of the metals industry in what is now Bangladesh, or about slavery itself. You know, from the outset, slavery was the basis of the British Empire in the West Indies and N America. Until the abolition of the slave trade in the British Empire 1807, Britain was responsible for the transportation of 3.5 million African slaves to the Americas. Cromwell even sent an estimated 50,000 Irish and Scottish slaves down to the West Indies in the 17th Century. In the British West Indies, slavery was only abolished in 1833. Britain led the abolition of slavery? Actually, I think you'll find it encouraged the growth of slavery all over the world. Anyway, British abolitionism was preceded by the New Laws of the Indies in 1542, in which Emperor Charles V of Spain declared free all native American slaves, abolishing slavery of these races, and declaring them citizens of the Empire with full rights. The move was prompted by the thoughts of the Spanish monk Bartolome de las Casas and the School of Salamanca. And, for example, the French Jacobins took action well before the British government ever got around to doing anything. And how exactly can Britain be seen to have led the emancipation of women? Finland even gave women the right to vote before Britain ever did. Jeepers. And it could be argued that Islam has a far better record on womens rights, in historical terms. I could go on, but I can't be bothered. Cheers, Gruff Edited June 10, 2009 by gruffydd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.