If you want to wind up the self-flagellating, self-loathing, British Empire-hating, West is worst, I’ve got a bee stinging my imperial backside brigade, do what I did when I taught at Liverpool Hope University. At the start of every lecture on postmodernism, I performed this experiment on my student guinea pigs.

‘If you had been a British colonial administrator in India, would you have let the natives under your governance burn the widow at the funeral of a man who had died?’ I would ask my snowflake students. The response was shocked silence. It was as if a Bengal tiger had got their tongue.

Their entire educational system had indoctrinated them to believe that Rule Britannia was the supreme avatar of evil since Columbus introduced tobacco to Europe. Their ‘edjukayshun’ had also brainwashed the juvenile sponges into believing that all cultures are equal. So for Governor-General Lord Bentinck to abolish this charming indigenous practice through the Bengal Sati Regulation Act of 1829 was colonial, racist and white supremacist.

I would prod the feminists in my class. Would you not fight for the rights of those Indian widows? They would squirm like a cobra in a snake charmer’s basket. If they stood up for the rights of these Indian women, they would have to admit that sati was immoral. They would also have to acknowledge that the Brits did some good in India.

On one occasion after much needling, a student blurted out: ‘I would have given the women a choice.’ I asked him if he knew any women who would relish being barbecued on a funeral pyre. He started fiddling with his iPhone. I’ll admit I pinched this idea from Allan Bloom’s The Closing of the American Mind. When Professor Bloom posed this question to his students at Harvard, he got a similar response. ‘They either remain silent or reply that the British should never have been there in the first place,’ he writes.

My morally relativistic students adamantly believed that Western colonialism was immoral. But they were unwilling to say that burning a woman alive on her husband’s funeral pyre is immoral and that it was moral for the British to ban sati.

With this background, I can well understand why heresy hunters are attempting to gag Professor Nigel Biggar at Oxford University. Biggar is a leading academic. He has written one of the most substantial and provocative books on the just war theory. I bought his book In Defence of War a couple of years ago and it cured me of the virus of utopian pacifism. It gave me the ammunition to combat the ‘confection of hokey, fatuousness and noise’  (Jeremy Paxman’s description of Justin Welby’s New Year ‘massage’) preached in most Anglican pulpits on occasions such as Remembrance Sunday.

Biggar is a big gun at Oxford. He has the grand title of Regius Professor of Moral and Pastoral Theology. His project on ‘Ethics and the Empire’ will analyse the impact of Britain’s imperial past. The academic thought police began stampeding like a herd of mad Indian elephants on steroids when Biggar wrote an article in The Sunday Times titled ‘Don’t feel guilty about our colonial history’.

More than fifty Oxford academics signed a public petition condemning Biggar. For them, Biggar is worse than a Holocaust denier (or that ultimate abomination – a climate change denier).

Biggar’s piece was measured. He quoted from Bruce Gilley, political scientist at Portland State University. ‘For the last 100 years, Western colonialism has had a bad name. It is high time to question this orthodoxy,’ Gilley writes. ‘The notion that colonialism is always and everywhere a bad thing needs to be rethought in light of the grave human toll of a century of anti-colonial regimes and policies.’

A perfectly reasonable proposal for an academic to put forward, you’d have thought? Coming from India, it’s what my wife and I have been saying to the hand-wringing chattering classes for the last 17 years of our stay in Britain, especially when at High Table in Cambridge the sackcloth-and-ashes crowd have whispered in my ear: ‘We are so ashamed of what we did in your country.’

What did you do? Build roads. Bring law and order. Unify five hundred squabbling fiefdoms under petty maharajahs into a single country that had never existed. Create the world’s largest democracy. Give us the English language (and not just so that we could sell you Viagra through call centres in Bangalore). Real education (not the New Labour child-centred absurdity). So shut your fake guilt factory and take your patronising fatuity elsewhere.

Of course, British colonial rule was on occasion harsh and oppressive. But in that case why bash only Western colonialism? The British Raj was around for a couple of hundred years in India while Islamic imperialism existed for centuries.

Francois Gautier in his book Rewriting Indian History says: ‘The massacres perpetuated by Muslims in India are unparalleled in history, bigger than the Holocaust of the Jews by the Nazis; or the massacre of the Armenians by the Turks; more extensive even than the slaughter of the South American native populations by the invading Spanish and Portuguese.’

Even ‘tolerant’ emperors such as Babur (1483-1530) and Akbar (1556-1605) and other more militant Muslim rulers ruthlessly stamped Islamic imperialism on the Indian subcontinent by destroying thousands of temples and building mosques on their foundations. The British, on the other hand, actually paid for the upkeep and refurbishment of thousands of Hindu temples and for a very long time refused to send Christian missionaries to India (even as chaplains)!

‘Contrary to the conventional wisdom, it is the Middle East where the institution of empire not only originated (for example, Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Iran, and so on) but where its spirit has also outlived its European counterpart,’ writes Professor Efraim Karsh in his book Islamic Imperialism: A History.

But Middle Easterners or Muslims feel no post-colonial guilt for the Ottoman or Mughal empires. Only Western liberals derive perverse pleasure from the sport of post-colonial masochism. Western liberals are blind to Islamic imperialism (or Soviet or Communist imperialism). I think I know why they are incurably infected with this fake post-colonial guilt. Because they are the real racists!

Post-colonial guilt is a subtle form of racism and white supremacy. The premise is simple. The poor benighted black or brown subjugated peoples were subjects. The white colonial rulers were the actors and the agents. The colonised were helpless and continue to be helpless because of ‘us’ (Western white liberals). It is all about ‘us’ because we conquered you and only we can make a difference to you today and we will make that difference by whipping ourselves until we finally descend to your level – where you poor things have existed and will continue to exist if we don’t step in and save you. As it was in the beginning, is now and forever shall be. Amen.


  1. I don’t think that anyone living in the West can truly appreciate how different, and how ingrained different cultures are.

    For most of the rest of the world outside of Western Cultural Values, the whole idea of common good and loving your neighbour, is seen as a joke.

    For much of the world, your priority is the following

    1. Family
    2. Race
    3. Religion

    Country comes much lower if at all. Quite often anyone outside of 1-3 above has no rights ( Yes I know they have all these nice laws on the statue books to get western money, but if your tribe, race or religion is not in power the laws are simply not enforced). That is why, if you are to do business without the almost certainty of a bullet in the head one evening, you need a powerful patron. That is how it works and we should not be surprised, if recently arrived cultures operate in the same way here.

    On the colonial thing, read about what Livingstone and others witnessed. Whole tribes effectively farmed as slaves, when they had a good crop, sold and driven to the coast.

    • A really interesting article and , may I say , an even more interesting take on the question by yourself . we should stop trying to be so “inclusive” and we should simply require immigrants and visitors to our country to accept the laws and custom that we have developed over centuries . Such laws and customs are often the result of cruel and unjust events in the past and should only be modified and changed after careful consideration , not simply to accommodate the latest group of incomers or , even worse, the latest virtue -signalling fad adopted by so-called academics and certain politicians .

      • Yes, it is your British law (mostly it’s also our American law, but that’s for another time). If they wish to live in Britain, well the law is the law. As we used to say, if you want to join the club, and remain a member, obey the rules. It’s really quite simple.

      • Multi-culturalism as government policy at the national level began the erosion of the rule of law and was deliberately conflated with multi-racialism to intimidate any resistance to it. The politicisation of the law, selective enforcement and the distortion of the principles of justice were the result and have now been extended to the left’s other favoured identity groups.

        The stupidity involved in these acts of destruction and ultimate divisiveness is staggering. Heaping up our own funeral pyre as once so presciently stated.

  2. Outstanding article, and I very much relished the last paragraph.
    I’m afraid I shall have to steal your brilliant question about sati (or suttee) when talking to SJW, snowflakes and especially latter-day ‘feminists’.
    Being of a somewhat militarist mind, I cannot resist adding the famous saying of Gen Sir Charles Napier (look him up) when stamping out suttee:
    “Be it so. This burning of widows is your custom; prepare the funeral pile. But my nation has also a custom. When men burn women alive we hang them, and confiscate all their property. My carpenters shall therefore erect gibbets on which to hang all concerned when the widow is consumed. Let us all act according to national customs.”

      • Thanks – it stuck in my mind ever since I came across it as it illustrates so well what the British Empire brought to the colonies; Rule Of Law.
        That is something the PC Brigade is working so hard to suppress – just as they are nearly successful in suppressing the incontrovertible fact that it was Great Britain who fought all-out to stop slavery. Ask those SJW and snowflakes if they’ve heard of Wilberforce – they probably think that’s a new energy drink …

        • You could also ask them to name the Muslim counterpart of Wilberforce. Perhaps we are still waiting for him/her.

          • Not when the ‘perfect man’ and example of behaviour to Muslims (as he is described in the Qur’an’) himself captured, used for sex and traded slaves, including Black slaves or ‘raisin heads’, as he called them.

      • Was in the Western Cape recently and so many of the ethnic population want the British back. It was the locals who raised the issue when they heard we were from the UK. We should be proud of our achievements and its positive legacy.

    • I may be quite mistaken, so I will not try to be dogmatic about it. But I have long understood that the practice of sati took many different forms in different parts of Asia over a very long period of time; some of it was forced, some was voluntary. And among the explanations for it, were that in some cases, it was seen as a deterrent against women poisoning or otherwise conspiring to do away with their husbands; and in other cases, it was entirely voluntary, with widows realising that once their provider and protector was dead, with virtually no chance of of finding a replacement, they might as well join him on the funeral pyre.

      Does anyone have any other views?

      • My ‘take’ of this article is that it’s not about suttee or the different forms of it as you describe, but about our friends the snowflakes who screech about how and colonialism is/white guilt/etc while not being able to a sewer the question posed to them by the ‘Rebel Priest’.

  3. Ask Africa newly under the cosh of the Imperialists out of the East and of the other lot who came before – from the Arabian peninsula about British colonialism and the answer would only be to affirm: preferable and please come back.

    Though, whatever happened to Britain?

    We lost our religion, were colonized by Marxists, critical theorists and forced marched by Socialism to cure ‘our sins’ and with it, the netherworld of the EU lovin’ purgatories where only the brimstone rank whiff and black tarred nihilism of hell on earth under corbyn awaits.

    • Africa has colonialism again thanks to the Chinese and this mostly enriches the Chinese nation. They are making vast loans to African countries which they will never be able repay, thus impoverishing countries even further. On infrastructure projects the Chinese do not use local labour but their own. Why aren’t the snowflakes saying something about this!

  4. Another storming article from Rev Gomes!

    Anglicanism in England is moribund and moving fast towards its grave. However, even in these last days, the implementation of traditional conservative leadership could yet revive our beloved Church.

    A traditional vicar, robust, unapologetic and very much in the imprint of Rev Gomes, ought to be elevated to the Archbishopric of Canterbury.

    Sadly, there is zero possibility that any conservative will be appointed to any position of influence within the CofE.

    • Though we grieve the sad demise of CofE as it becomes more and more heretical and apostate, I think, God wants us to rebuild the Church of the faithful remnant. We need to pray for the Living Church and pray that those who hold onto the traditional and orthodox Christian doctrines will be able to rebuild it so that it will be the Body of Christ, and the Gospel of Christ will continue to go out the world. The free and orthodox churches are already doing that, but Anglicans need to pull up their socks, look for alternative form of Anglicanism outside the CofE and get on with the rebuilding of the Church of God in England.

      • I do believe you are correct. We Anglicans must get a grip and pull up our proverbial socks! Praying for a miracle is one thing, but the parable of the talents suggests that God helps he who helps himself. Rather than looking to others leadership, someone like me, who feels strongly about this issue, ought to find a way of fixing the problem.

  5. When talking about Empires, it is interesting that the Chinese are completely ignored.

    The Chinese ruler wasn’t called ‘ the Emperor’ for nothing.

    And the Chinese Empire continues to exist today in places like Tibet, Szechuan, South West China and the South China Sea.

    • But they weren’t white and European, and thus incapable of being racist, fascist and oppressive.

    • You can add the Mongol Empire to the list; one of the biggest and most ruthless empires of all time.

      • If you have not already done so, Conn Iggulden’s series on the Mongols, ‘Wolf of the Plains’, Lords of the Bow’ etc, based on fact, is not only a first rate read but also well researched and very informative. It comes highly recommended.

          • They were unstoppable. The only reason they didn’t reach the Atlantic was the death of the Great Khan, which recalled their armies.

    • And Chinese people fled from the Chinese Empire’s quaint customs like slicing people to death, cut by cut, from its corruption, from its grinding poverty and from its overbearing class system to build the great cities that grew from British “invasion”,”subjugation” and “oppression”.

    • Those who need to apologise for inflicting atrocities on the natives and for massacring them, imposing their religion and ideologies on them do not even believe that they did something wrong but this breed of Lefties etc., will bend backward to confess the sins of their ancestors. Ask them to confess their own sins to God who gives them all the blessings of food, shelter, clothes and good friends and life…they will spit on His face and deny Him…..how convenient and comfortable their fake guilt is!!!

    • But surely only British people are bad?

      When left to their own devices, foreigners have largely lived together in peace and harmony throughout history. Except, for example (deep breath);

      An Lushan rebellion (20 million dead)
      Taiping rebellion (another 20 million)
      Mao’s great famine (about 60 million)

  6. Yes, it is full-scale indoctrination or programming in the schools largely under a regime of wimen (with a few men). You can spot them a mile off out of school. They all, sort of, look and speak the same Left-Wing bilge. They even look Left-Wing. Poor children. Imagine having to put up with this for at least 11, now 13, years. No wonder there is serious crime in schools against teachers. How the kids can put up with it. Surely forbearance has its limits. Thank the Lord that I was in school in the 1960s where we were made to behave, and if we did not, we were sorted out: and where, too, we could actually learn about real things; not all these fake, snowflake issues. The British Empire, like the Roman Empire before it, did a lot of good. We should freely admit the bad that we did, but it has just gotten so ridiculous in the schools where there is no give, at all, on what we can be proud of. Extremism? Yes.

  7. I’ve noticed the children not only end up hating the country but also their parents , they are so judgemental and have no tolerance for alternative opinions at all .

  8. Don’t worry it will all be over soon and the Liberals(closet Marxists) will have there way as our average IQ descends below that required to sustain a democracy.
    Watching Jamie and Jimmies Friday Night Feast I realised it was pretty much over when they went to a South Norwood school and out of the 8 or so students they were interviewing all but 1 white girl were black.

  9. Here’s a question for all you imperialists:

    If the british empire was so “great”, why aren’t the countries we invaded, subjugated and oppressed clamouring for a return to british rule?

    • Yes I am sure that they would all like to sign up to our current fashionable (with all parties) cultural Marxism and “British Values”.

    • If the British Empire was so bad, why are masses of people from the countries we invaded, desperately pouring into Britain and seeking citizenship here?

      • And it wasn’t all invasion. In India many principalities invited British rule to protect them from neighbouring principalities. In Borneo it was the establishment of peace by the suppression of predatory tribes, pirates and warlords to facilitate trade. Malaya – totally misunderstood by lefties starry-eyed about their communist bandit comrades.

    • Quite simply you only need look at the leaders of former British colonies like South Africa or Zimbabwe where the political leaders subjugate the population with violence and rob the country to enrich themselves.

      There are plenty of people there who yearn for a return to British rule, but with a media which lies on a massive scale do you really think they are going to honestly report this?

      Recently a US academic published a paper that some failed African states would be better off if they were run by Westerners, cue the howls of Fascist Left wing protest which accompanies all ideas they can’t stomach and it had to be withdrawn.

      Here’s one for you, 60% of Jamaicans want a return to British rule. You think their political leaders would allow that to happen? Seriously?


    • Hallo there, weak woman — don’t think were didn’t all spot you quivering at the knees, and dribbling into your Jezza-motif’d bowl of organic vegan muesli …

    • Back again eh? New name, same old tripe.

      Lesson # 1. Most of them were not “countries”. Only thick lefties pre-establish the countries that the British Empire established and gave independence too.

      Lesson # 2. Thousands of people from those countries have been coming here to live under British rule and many of them are in the Commonwealth which hardly indicates a hostile proposition.

      Lesson # 3. Many people in those post-colonial countries do express a regret that the British left. Many of my Hong Kong Chinese friends deeply regret being left in the lurch to “enjoy” their independence under the Chinese communists.

      • Yes, I’m sure people in India and Singapore really wish they were being shot by British firing squads or starved to death by British colonial administrators. I would imagine they’re kicking themselves. Or, you know, not.

        • India is far to diverse (in the old objective sense) for me to speak to, but from what I’ve seen the Singaporeans are quite enjoying their legacy from the Empire. The richest and on of the freest countries on earth. We could learn quite a lot from them, not to mention their last British governor.

          • Ironically there probably wouldn’t be any Singaporeans in the modern sense without the British. There were only about a thousand people on the island when Raffles identified it as the perfect trading port. He arrived in Singapore on 28 January 1819 when the island was nominally ruled by the Sultan of Johor, who was controlled by the Dutch and the Bugis. The Sultanate was weakened by factional division and the Temenggong Tengku Abdu’r Rahman and his officials were loyal to Tengku Rahman’s elder brother Tengku Long who was living in exile in Riau. With the Temenggong’s help, Raffles smuggled Tengku Long back into Singapore. He offered to recognize Tengku Long as the rightful Sultan of Johor with the title Sultan Hussein. In return, Sultan Hussein would grant the British the right to establish a trading post on Singapore. Under British rule the population had grown to 80,000 by 1860.

            It was trade, not invasion, that the British were most interested in and they most often applied law and order to anarchy and barbarism in order to trade peacefully. Rather than fleeing from the British native peoples flocked there to enjoy peace, security and the opportunity to make money without some brigand, pirate or dodgy local ruler robbing them. The lefties constantly get all this wrong, retrospectively inventing a nationalism that never existed and putting the military before the trade when it was usually the other way around.

          • All interpretations (of anything) are partisan because everyone is to some extent biased. No one (but God) can be completely objective.

            But thanks to the Colonel because he provides some reliable history. Check it out, Barry (and feel free to quote historians). .

          • I’m aware of the history. And I’m also aware of the colonials’ attitude to subject peoples and how trade was conducted. Oh, and what the penalties were for crossing the British. It makes the oft-advanced argument that ‘we were doing it because we were altruists’ rather hard to countenance.

          • I agree partly. Human nature is far from altruistic due to the Fall. However, it is also clear that God used the British in the past to further the gospel and a more just civilization. However, these days, the British people (and Europe in general) have turned their backs on God. Judgment is coming.

        • The largest number of immigrants to this country come from India. I’m sure you would have preferred the widows to be roasted to death on their husband’s funeral pyre.

          • That preference is rather racist or at least ethnocentrist of you, Barry. You would greatly benefit by living a few years in India. We all would also benefit from your being there.

          • The British should have nowhere near India and it’s also somewhere I have absolutely no intention of visiting. Might apply for asylum in Sweden or Germany, though, depending on how the Brexit negotiations go.

          • What can I say? I’m interested in Germany and Sweden. Places like the USA, Australia and New Zealand are equally disinteresting.

          • I came very close to becoming a missionary to India, but the Lord indicated clearly that I was better suited to be a missionary in our own country for the mentally ill– whose numbers were increasing greatly (and still are).

          • To answer that would take a book or twenty. Check out the writings of Drs.Cloud and Townsend, starting with “How People Grow,” “Changes that Heal,” “Boundaries,” and “Safe People.”

          • I once met a man who had acute schizophrenia and who had attended the local CofE church in a very affluent part of London. He had been advised, by the leader of his home group, to flush all his medication down the toilet and pray more. I find it hard to put into words how much contempt I have for this ‘school’ of thought.

          • I agree. That advice to a schizophrenic was just ignorant. Psychosis requires medication because it is generally based on biochemical (even genetic) disorder. But neurosis and what I call normal life problems (poor relationships, poor self-understanding, self-defeating habits of thinking and behavior) require therapy. I happen to specialize in treating a particular religious population — Christians, so they also generally want pastoral counseling and the use of scripture– which I am well qualified to provide. Ministry.

          • Everyone goes through periods of mental illness (severe anxiety, depression, etc.) at some time in their life. That includes me. Over 40 years ago I was hospitalized briefly for a manic episode due to a biochemical imbalance, and also my wife and I entered marriage counseling which helped immensely. I have been happily married now for over 46 years. Also, no further manic or depressive episodes have occurred during the past 40 years (I am 71). I learned a great deal from these trying times and it has helped me in my work with clients. There was also a strong spiritual aspect to my own healing and growth.

        • You seem not to know anything about the multiple massacres and shootings which have occurred in The Indian sub continent since the British Left, or indeed, those that preceded the British.

    • Could that be because they wouldn’t want to be ruled by the likes of you? You would try the patience of a saint. Too many of your type around in Blighty.

    • So you would have liked the widows to be roasted alive on their dead husband’s funeral pyre, wouldn’t you? Because you are a “strong woman”!

    • They could clamour for the British rule if only the British had not introduced education, railways, good values like caring for the sick , orphans, widows, opened hospitals and so on and so forth.Their own good works inspired the natives to have independence and freedom. India would continue to be feudal country ruled by several feudal lords who called themselves maharajas and whatnot and fight among themselves forever. You Leftist, Feminist liberals would never do anyone any good even under the name of good. British empire did some good even though they did it with selfish motives. You will let head hunters be head hunters if you were given a chance to stay among them. And if by chance they did not eat you up alive, you still ignore their cannibalism saying that it is their culture. You REALLY need to be educated. Read some good books or at least observe people from these former colonies… open your eyes and ears…do not be deaf, dumb and blind.

      • The Bengali famine was caused by British policies and killed 2 million people.

        Educate yourself, you sad little man, and you wouldn’t dare tell the relatives of the famine victims about the british “good values like caring for the sick”.

    • For exactly the same reason that adult children of good parents do not go back home to live with the parents at age 30. Good parents prepare their children to be independent.

    • Here’s a question for all you socialist cod-communists. If communism was so great why aren’t the countries who liberated themselves from it clamouring for a return to communist rule?

      • China is about to overtake the US as the most powerful country on earth – politically, militarily and economically.

        Last time I checked, China was a Communist country.

          • No, you’re wrong there. “Cultural Marxism” is a loony conspiracy theory.

            Name one respected, mainstream academic who takes it seriously.

          • Most of them have bought into its agenda. Like asking a fox to denounce the killing of chickens.

            The left’s loony conspiracy, personified by loons like you, is defended by denouncing any exposure of it as a “conspiracy theory”. No theory about it. You and your kind are cultural poison.

        • Which has embraced corporatism and corporate corruption you idiot.

          and which executes more people than any other country.

        • Its a Fascist country. One Party Rule +Capitalism + Nationalism / Ethnocentrism + Socialism= Fascism, near enough.

    • As I recall, some people in Sierra Leone did just that a few years back. From my personal experience, my Irish Catholic dad told me that (southern) Ireland leaving the UK was a disaster, particularly with the Church holding it back.

      But, given what a disaster the Empire was, why is it that India has held onto the English language; not brought back Sati; not split back up into 500-odd different countries? Why is it that so many Indian people want to come to the UK, and have the highest regard and affection for the Queen? Why did India hold onto evil Western ideas, particularly socialism, for so long? Why is is rapidly adopting another evil Western idea, capitalism?

      Come to think of it, why hasn’t Africa re-adopted slavery, abolished by the evil British empire? Why hasn’t it gone back to rule by tribal kings and chieftains, rather than (largely crap versions of) Western forms of government? Hell, why live in brick buildings when you can build mud huts?! And why equip your armies with guns when they could use spears?!

      This inability to recognise that, in the real world, issues are not simple and many things are a mix of good, bad and neutral is either a) a sign of true mental illness (rather than the fake kind that socialists accuse people who disagree with them of having); or b) a sign of a lack of a good education, unfortunately a huge problem with anyone ‘educated’ under Nu-Labour and ‘New’ Conservatives.

  10. Lobengula of the Matabele really enjoyed all those lovely inter tribal wars which did so much for his warrior class in that they meant lots of extra wives for the survivors. Also, he has an excellent way of dealing with opposition, especially in the family, when he sent over three hundred relations to heaven. Then those British rotters arrived and spoiled it all for the sake of a few bits of rock deep in the ground.

    • ‘We’d rather you were shot by us than stabbed by someone else makes a slightly poor advert for colonial rule and I’ve yet to see many others. It’s a bit like the argument for going into Iraq or Afghanistan – sooner the tyranny we choose for you than the one you already live under. The arrogance is a thing to behold.

  11. Keep repeating ‘the British Empire was a force for good and enriched nobody’ until you die and I’m sure you’ll all be fine.

      • I’m seeing the justifications. They’re hilarious. ‘Bad things happened without us, so it means that we don’t have to concern ourselves with the bad things that happened with us’. Next week: the Germans apply this to the Holocaust.

  12. “…Western liberals derive perverse pleasure from the sport of post-colonial masochism.” – All of those Western “liberals”, and anti-Empire “intellectuals”, have personally, to a great degree, benefitted, and continue to benefit, by what they have been given by Western civilisation, biting the hand that fed, and feeds, them, on a grand scale. I always find it so hypocritical that so many of them – the elites – are very pleased to gain an honour that bears the name of the British Empire. Then there are the feminists who try to justify Female Genital Muttilation on “cultural” grounds (for there are such) – vile people! Great article!

    • It didn’t stop them enjoying the benefits of attending ancient universities endowed by the nation’s empire-builders.
      They have stopped many of today’s youth from enjoying the same educational standards and freedoms.

  13. One is put in mind of the Dutch West India Company and their policy in Fort Oranje (modern-day Albany NY) in Nieuw Nederland, at the trading post called Beverwijck– they told the two main tribes of Red Indians there to stop killing each other, or the men in the funny buckled hats wouldn’t buy beaver pelts from them. So the natives had a choice– keep killing each other, and no, e.g., metal cooking pots and other goods, or stay out of each other’s way, and plenty of goods and wampum to go around. The natives were fairly sophisticated in their understanding of trade and alliance-building, and immediately saw the advantage in burying the hatchet.

    If there’s one thing that can beat bloodthirst, it might be greed.

  14. “So shut your fake guilt factory and take your patronising fatuity elsewhere.” Made me smile. It reminded my of myself by the third year of University when I finally simply got to the end of my tether with explanations about “the working class” and burst out “we don’t live on another island get on the bus and I’ll take you on a visit!”

  15. This liberal fake guilt is absolutely ludicrous. The Leftist, Liberals from the West who apologise on behalf of their ancestors who colonised some countries are deaf, blind and stupid. They need to be sent to Kabul to live like Afghani women in burkas and be abused, used and tortured or made to work like Scavengers in the some parts of india…or let them be sent to some primitive parts of Africa.. then they would learn what the British empire did for the natives of these countries… I have begun to believe that being a Leftist means you shut your eyes, ears and you mind and believe in lies wholesale and wage a war against the truth pretending the you are the saviours of the world.

  16. An elderly friend of mine was born in Rhodesia where she and her husband ran a ranch until they were thrown out by Mugabe who gave the ranch to one of his cronies. The ranch provided employment for a large number of locals, housing for some, a small medical centre and a schoolroom for the youngsters. They made a decent living but couldn’t be called rich.
    The lady, now in her nineties went back to he country of birth a few years ago. The ranch had been neglected, the only land being in use was small patches cultivated by locals for their own use, the dairy herd had been eaten, the school and medical centre were occupied by squatters. She located two of the men whom she had known as young children and they said one thing to her “Why didn’t our Queen do something?”.
    A country that once could not only feed itself but also export food is now reliant on food imports; a country that once had life expectancies approaching European standards now has a life expectancy in the low 30s.
    So much for Independence.

  17. “Give us the English language (and not just so that we could sell you Viagra through call centres in Bangalore)”.
    Reminds me of one wag’s comment: “I’m going to set up a business in India, with a call centre in the East End, and see how the Indians like it”.

      • It’s fascinating that things have come full circle. Women and little kids were sent down mines but the Victorians banned this as barbaric, Now, women are encouraged to go into the hard labour jobs and even front line military thanks to the Cult of Equality.

        And this is ‘progress’?

        • The Victorians weren’t bothered about mines being unsafe, but were bothered about sending women and children down them. Strange people, the Victorians.

          • My family were, back in the day, miners. Or at least some of them were. According to the single member of the family who cares about history, quite a lot of them still seem to be down there.

          • My grandfather, great grand parents and great great grandparents were coal miners. One great grandfather was killed in a mining accident as was one of my father’s cousins. They were concerned about safety as were most miners. The miner owners were a mixed bunch. In early Victorian times some had started of as miners themselves and they understood the men and were good bosses. Others, especially the absentee type, were appalling. By the end of the Victorian period very few mine owners knew what it was like to work as a miner.

            Nevertheless parliament did pass acts at various times to improve mine safety. Of course the law cannot guarantee safety. Grenfell Tower is proof of that.

          • Civilised people would prefer that women and children are not exposed to the same degree of risk as men. That is still broadly true today.

          • Nowhere near consistently enough. And if women these days want to do dangerous jobs, up to and including combat, why stop them?

          • Well not exactly. As with the Police and Fire service the lobbying is for changes in the criteria for the job in order to make it possible for women to work in roles that would be simply unlikely due to the physical differences in the sexes. The standards of course also exclude many males too. So in order to exclude men at the same rate they can’t be lowered for males so the result is different standards for women. Fewer push ups, shorter runs, lower weights to be carried etc. As someone who failed entrance many many years ago I can see why a male just a bit taller and not colour blind might be better equipped. The point being that “doing the same job” is not what is being lobbied for; as in these cases it would be a rare woman who could literally do the same job (though if she met the same criteria as men I’d say well done actually). There are many many jobs where the physical differences between the sexes are of no consequence and just a few where these are crucial.
            The point is these differences are telling when the chips are down as friends in the police a force point out and particularly in the fire service where one doesn’t always have power assist available.
            In my field males often are the ones to deal with challenging or violent patients. And I get why and just got on with it myself, as there are no “criteria” to prepare for this so the process is more subtle. The necessary training to do this in order not to be hurt or hurt or injure the patient has to be repeated and requires a certain level of fitness, and has to be refreshed. Perhaps unsurprisingly women tend to drop out or not “refresh” or be unwell and unable to complete the practical elements. Now this is tenable because generally the work is in relatively controlled settings with likely support. I’d think it not so if facing the unknown.

          • Dropping standards for the fire service, the police, the military etc to accommodate women seems like madness.

            For one, ‘Elf and Safety’ seems to stop at the door marked ‘equality’.

          • They had a porn problem before declaring it as ‘unhealthy’. A lot of their sexual proclivities poured into the 20th century.

  18. Rev. Jules Gomes spent a lot of time in India, more than virtually all who are commenting here. He knows the true history well. He has a dark skin and has dealt with racism. He knows of which he speaks. Listen up!

    • Some first rate clerics come out of the sub Continent. Michael Nazir- Ali, Bishop of Rochester was or is another.

      He should have got a lot further in the hierarchy, but was altogether too forthright, clever and, well, Christian.

      • And so we are blessed with his journalistic ministry (instead of his being stuck in ecclesiastic bureaucracy.).

      • You’d like the CofE church down the road. Very, very forthright about their love of Jesus, who they’ll mention in every sentence and also very evangelical, which means that you can turn around and realise you’re in the company of half a dozen idiots with their arms in the air like they just don’t care. Of course, the corollary to this is the smiling intolerance, especially of homosexuality and the fondness for the equally vile Alpha Course. Its pews are always full.

        • Homosexuality is a mental aberration: a condition of radical psychosexual miswiring.

          Of course it should be tolerated since it’s sufferers can’t help it.

          What it shouldn’t be is ‘celebrated ’ and treated as if it were ‘normal’.

          It isnt normal any more than, say, autism is ‘normal’.

          • Yes. It’s an affliction which other people will put up with in proximity if they have to, but would rather it were concealed.

            Rather like someone with an unsightly skin disease which is unfortunate for the sufferer and also for those who are made to look at it.

          • Ah, I see. So nobody should talk about it and people with unsightly illnesses should stay behind closed doors?

          • Don’t flaunt it, that’s all. I am thinking of a man I was near to on public transport. He had a weeping boil or carbuncle on his neck.

            He should have covered it up, in deference to his fellow passengers. As it was, the sight of it was nauseating,

          • When you say ‘don’t flaunt it,’ what sort of behaviour would you consider to be ‘flaunting’?

          • Paedophilia is considered treatable. So why not homosexuality, at least for some.

            Homosexuals don’t like the idea because it identifies their condition as abnormal.

            I am old enough to remember when it was removed from the American Psychiatrists’ list of treatable conditions under pressure from the homosexual lobby,

          • Going for the popular vote then?

            With less than 2% of the population being Gay its clearly not ‘normal’, but yet it happens, and it happens in nature too.
            It is essentially a birth defect where the sexual preference wiring is switched from opposite to same sex. It has over the centuries probably endured as much persecution as the Jews have, including the Holocaust.

            I don’t see Jewish people parading up and down the streets, nor do I see political correctness enforcement officers wearing kippahs in solidarity.

            Many Gay people have made outstanding contributions to our national life, which needs to be recognised, and despite the fact that there are some with a lemming like death wish regards Islam, there are only too many who recognise the dangers and are largely on our side.
            At this time we need all the friends we can get !

          • Rejecting so called Homosexual ‘marriage’ as an egregious perversion of millennia of human understanding in the interests of a lie about ‘equality’, is hardly to be classed alongside the murder of millions for whatever reason.

            Even the ancient Greeks and Romans who tolerated pederasty / homosexuality ( up to a point) never went so far as to accept homosexual marriage in law, although several Emperors such as Nero went through a form of marriage ceremony with their favourites. ( Nero was the ‘bride’ on one occasion and the ‘groom’ on another.)

            But then they were by no means liberals in many ways. Their ideas about homosexual practice were predicated on maleness: the penetrating partner was not denigrated but the penetrated was.

        • Its pews are always full.

          A CofE Church? Welby listen up, there is hope for the sinking ship still it seems

  19. About 10 or so years ago the BBC made a series of programs in which people with famous ancestors explored their ancestor’s past. One middle-aged, middle-class woman was a relative of the last missionary to have been killed and eaten by cannibals in New Guinea. She visited villages in New Guinea in which he had served. In the first village he had succeeded in putting an end to cannibalism and the constant warfare between villages resulting from it. The present-day villagers revered him as a saint. She then visited the village where he was killed and eaten. There the present-day villagers were deeply ashamed of their ancestors action. In neither place did she pay any attention to the opinions of the villagers, but made an excruciating apology for her relative’s interference in their “culture – one which had brought misery and constant warfare to them. There was no challenge from the programme-makers either. They and she obviously knew better than the “natives”. A more blatant example of racism would be hard to find.

    The view that everything colonists and missionaries did was wrong is not a new one.

  20. An interesting article, though expressed in a rather abrasive style. I think that his example is a great challenge to initiate a debate. Slightly surprised that he didn’t get a more coherent push back against it from his students. There are many examples of less benign colonialism. But the thing about colonialism is that, good or bad, it was never sustainable, and now we live in a post colonial world. We live with the consequences of our imperial past.
    In many ways colonialism is the grandparent of globalisation. For example we would not be outsourcing so much to the sub-continent had our empire not left a legacy of spoken English there. Not so long ago I struggled with endless phone calls to Bangalore trying to get Indian graduates to understand the subtleties of English geography. At the same time I was being served coffee in the workplace Costa by a girl who had just completed a Phd in Geographic Information Systems, who couldn’t find a ‘real’ graduate job.

    • You’ve not answer the moral question. ‘If you had been a British colonial administrator in India, would you have let the natives under your governance burn the widow at the funeral of a man who had died?’ You are dodging the real issue here by obfuscation.

      • The answer is obviously not. The counter is, for example, if you were a British colonial governor in 18th century Australia, what would you do to prevent the attempted genocide of the native people? Or something along those lines. Or, alternatively, smallpox, a benefit of colonialism, discuss.

        • Why not, obviously? Why change the culture just because British Christian morality cannot stomach it? You are using distractions and dodging the real question.
          I could just as well use the example of abortion today in the U.S…. should governments make it again against the law? Or allow this subtle form of genocide through feticide? The bare majority in the USA (and in the Supreme Court) has spoken, but does that make it right?

          • Not everything is about abortion. So you would permit widow burning – which was (in theory) voluntary? Interesting. You are right that morality varies between cultures. I just take the view that burning anyone alive is wrong, and that the imperial power was correct to (eventually) put an end to it.

          • Again, you cannot hear plain language. Did I ever say I would permit widow burning? No I did not. I said things to cause people to think about their decision-making on moral issues and where that impinges on government. If it were me, I would support what the British did regarding this particular issue. It does not mean I agree with everything they did.

Comments are closed.