Actually it was the Spanish and Portuguese, but the UK as well as other European countries followed sadly. That is why I think it is wrong the the UK is the global "whipping boy" regarding the anger of former colonial nations. The anger should be directed at most of Europe not just one country. On addition to the Middle East, who were very active as well. The Arab slave trade is older than the the European one.
share
Agree, but I think he was just trying to tie in the Royals with racism for a laugh. I guess he could have said they perfected colonialism. That would have been at least closer to the truth.
Regarding Meghan not knowing that much about the royals, I heard rumors she once harbored a crush on Will. Therefore, it had to hurt her to see how reserved he was and his dislike of her when things went south. I also heard in the the book, Harry mentions Meghan thought Andy was the Queen's assistant when they first met, I was like WTH! Considering she met Eugenie at engagements, prior to meeting her husband, surely she knew who Andy was. Even aliens know who he is! I guess Harry showed her pics of the family when they were dating.
share" I heard rumors" Probably not true
shareThe reason why the UK is the whipping boy is that it was the best and most ferocious at it, as well as left the people they conquered completely divided.
British colonialism is also why large parts of the modern world is in crisis. The strife between Ireland and N. Ireland, the breaking up of India, Hong Kong vs Mainland China, even the Mideast Peace crisis was the result of colonialism or at best, British influence. Of course, the US, Germany, Russia and UN didn't help matters, but the UK got that ball rolling with the Balfour Declaration.
You talk about Spain and Portugal, but the thing is, for better or for worse, they didn't leave their former colonies in a state of complete strife like England did, because from what I remember, they didn't use divide-and-conquer and exploit pre-existing tensions to cement power.
Certainly the UK is the whipping boy of the English-speaking world where colonialism is concerned, but now I wonder if the same is true of other language groups. Does the vast Spanish-speaking world bash Spain for the same thing?
shareYes, Spanish speaking former colonies also bash Spain.
The key difference is that Spain and Portugal weren’t obsessed with race like Britain and their anglo-saxon cousins in the U.S. were.
One example is how British colonists simply wanted to exterminate Native Americans, while Spanish colonists wanted to turned them into Christians.
I can't speak for the Spanish-speaking people of South America, but you are dead wrong about Portugal.
Brazil, which was colonized by Portugal, still has major issues with racism, as it was the last country in the Western hemisphere to finally ban slavery. Because it was banned so late, that country has some of the same issues involving racism as other countries where the Brits left their mark. In fact, some might even say that the blacks there got it worse than the ones in the US.
India wasn't really a country until the Uk made it into one by connecting it with railways and teaching them english.
shareCorrect the same with many other now countries the British is what advanced these nations.
People like to pick out the extreme negatives and ignore the positives.
Why is it you don't ever hear people going on about asian countries and how brutal they are even as of today.
On addition to the Middle East, who were very active as well. The Arab slave trade is older than the the European one
I did read slaves in the Middle East were able to advance and were treated more humanely but it was still slavery, no matter how you cut it.
shareThe Arabs, Persians and Turks forcibly castrated all the male black slaves. That's why they have no trace whatsoever of patrilinear black ancestry, but virtually all Muslim Arabs have it maternally.
shareI know that was inhumane and sick.
share"The Arabs, Persians and Turks forcibly castrated all the male black slaves."
That forcibly part is definitely a given. I can't imagine any of them volunteering for that lol.
The UK is the global "whipping boy" because they once had a vast EMPIRE that covered a quarter of the globe, that's why. They were the most successful colonial superpower of their day.
I think his comments are fine for what they were. A reference in a standup bit. The UK weren’t the only ones, but they were the biggest and baddest, and they committed their fair share of atrocities.
shareDespite the sin of colonialism, I still love 🇬🇧.
Why? The Magna Carta. Every person that lives in a country that prizes freedom, liberty and rule of law should give props to the most important constitutional document of all time.
But it is hard to make a good comedy skit out of that rant.
russia is still doing colonialism and it seems not one gives a f*ck. They would remember and shame brits but ignore russian who currently have occupied chechens, tatars, buryats and many other people and their lands. Its actually funny how no one cares. But still whine about brits who stopped their colonialism.
shareJapan once colonized Korea and tried to colonize The Philippines and China.
shareBut still whine about brits who stopped their colonialism.
Thats the most hilarious. They dont give any crap about poor women in Arab countries but will constantly throw tantrums about some rich actress getting 9 millions when her male partner gets 10.
shareMan, what the HELL are you talking about?
Women get raped, sexually assaulted and murdered in the droves every day in the United States and the rest of the Western world. They deal with things like domestic abuse as well.
And now in the Western world, particularly North America and the UK, they have to share bathrooms with gender-confused men or be forced to accept the diagnosis of crackpots who arbitrarily decide which one or more of their kids are transgender.
Arguing that people don't have it bad because people have it worse is the DUMBEST argument that someone can make. That's like arguing that the United States doesn't really have a gun violence issue, because they're murdering each other all the time in the Middle East.
But that's neither here nor there. You're clearly an Incel or somebody who doesn't interact with women on a regular basis to say something this ignorant and off-base.
It's statistically safer for a woman to walk alone outside than it is for a man. This applies for most of the west including the US.
shareIs it?
Are you sure or is that what has been put out there to suit.
The same was said about motor vehicle claims yet they excluded the big one which was more then double amount of men drove.
You could say the same for sexual assaults again not really valid because men do not tend to report these.
Stats can be used any way to suit your agenda.
Women and men are equal according to the women so why would they not be able to handle themselves outside.
Sexual assault is the only category where women outnumber men as victims. When it comes to overall violence in public (including physical assault and murder) then men are majority of the victims.
Also sexual assault in public is relatively rare. Most women are attacked in a home and by someone they know. "Stranger danger" has been exaggerated by movies and the media.
When something does happen to women in public they are also more likely to be helped by strangers than men are.
So yes overall I'd say women are safer out in public while men are safer at home.
What about a man that dresses as a woman?
shareThis is how to deal with them:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WgOIEGz7o_s