W. Churchill was the man who destroyed the BE.

Devdas

Ad Honorem
Apr 2015
4,317
India
#91
Nah. The empire had started to fragment earlier than that.
Ireland was independent 1922?
Canada essentially by 1867.
Australia by 1901
NZ 1907
South Africa 1909.
...
the rest would follow eventually. WW1-2 combo sped up the process.
Except Ireland, all the colonies mentioned were populated by people from mainland Britain and thus government was sympathetic to them towards self rule. Brits found it too difficult to control Irish separatist movement. Elsewhere in Asia or Africa, Brits were in no mood to provide self rule or independence to their colonies. During world war 2 all anti-British protests for independence in India underwent a brutal crackdown, in 1950s Mau Mau uprising was suppressed in Kenya. In India, only after the revolt in Royal Indian Navy in 1946 by Indian sailors, that British changed their mind to provide independence to India instead of holding on.
 

Devdas

Ad Honorem
Apr 2015
4,317
India
#92
Keep in mind that all of those countries, while independent, was still somewhat tied to the British Empire. For example, before the 1920s they were bound by Britain's foreign policy.
In Asia and Africa, that was a response to rising nationalistic feelings in many British colonies. In India also, British provided a central legislature but voting rights were limited and Viceroy appointed by London still had the de-facto power, not the central legislature.
 

Maki

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
2,503
Republika Srpska
#93
In Asia and Africa, that was a response to rising nationalistic feelings in many British colonies. In India also, British provided a central legislature but voting rights were limited and Viceroy appointed by London still had the de-facto power, not the central legislature.
Eh, India was a Dominion for a short period of time. They quickly declared themselves a republic.
 

royal744

Ad Honoris
Jul 2013
10,118
San Antonio, Tx
#94
The story is sad. It is the fact that during ruling of W.Churchill Britain finally became just a satellite of the US.
This is silly. Is this an effort to somehow blame Winston Churchill for the end of the British Empire? If so, try to learn a thing or three. Churchill was an advocate for the Empire but not even he could end the rising tide of colonial liberation. The slow, somewhat painful dissolution of the British Empire took a very long time and it started before Churchill and ended after his time in power. The Dutch and the French were going thru similar events at about the same time.
 
Likes: duncanness

royal744

Ad Honoris
Jul 2013
10,118
San Antonio, Tx
#95
Okay. Churchill was great on drinking whisky, eating and smoking cigars. But it is not sign of a genius.
You know, Hitler and Goebbels frequently derided Churchill for being a “drunk”, but never seemed to wise up to the fact that they were being beaten by a “drunk” in front of the whole world to see.
 
Jan 2015
3,244
Front Lines of the Pig War
#99
Before W.Churchill G.Britain belonged to the Great Powers...after GB lost its position.
Yes, and Barnard discovered a comet in 1889, the year Hitler was born.
Hitler dies in 1945, just as the comet Väisälä disappears from the sky.
Coincidence? Only the naive think so...

I insist that BE had its chance to survive ( because it was founded on free trade and political freedom within). But Churchill triggered the process of the end.

How?
By not surrendering to Hitler?
By winning the war?
 
Mar 2019
512
Kansas
How?
By not surrendering to Hitler?
By winning the war?
I guess we would need to hear the alternatives. The UK lost India by basically having to agree to independence if the Indians fought for the UK. The relationship with Australia drifted because it became obvious the British could not be the big brother defense wise that Australia needed, and has hitched its wagon to the US ever since.
 

Similar History Discussions