Why have the colonial countries managed to glorify their days of empire? Aren't they guilty of mass murder?
374760
Because, for better or for worse, the winner always gets to make the rules. If a colonial power wants to make sure they are glorified, they insist that all the destruction they wrought was for the greater good. Ask the American indigenous populations. Ask the Tasmanians... oh, wait. There aren't any. The eradication of indigenous Tasmanians is the most complete example of total genocide in the history of Western dominance.
933200
Only if they are personally repsonsible - which is unlikely. You cannot impose collective punishments, particularly for historical events - to do so would be as unjust as the original crime. It would be no more justified than arresting every black man in a town because one black man committed murder 30 years earlier.\n\nIt should also be borne in mind that it was not only white men that indulged in slavery - many slaves were captured and sold into slavery by rival tribes or by arabs. Slavery at the time was not generally recognised as wrong - attitudes and recognition of basic human rights have come a long way in the last 200 years. No slave trader would have considered that they were doing anything wrong (as indeed they weren't on a strictly legal basis). If any slave traders should be punished, it should be those who continued after slavery was made illegal.\n\nTony Blair's intention to use the 200th anniversary of the Abolition of Slavery in the UK to express regret at slavery is about right (I guess he had to get something right eventually). There is no need to apologise because the people who should be apologising are dead, as are the people who should be apologised to and the slavery industry was not recognised at the time as anything other than a legitimate business, taken in the context of the times. It is only now with hindsight that we see how truly awful slavery was and in that respect an expression of regret to the descendants of those affected by slavery seems about right.\n\nNeither racism nor sexism are by any means exclusively the failings of white men.
508322
often these leaders are actually dictators who use fear and threat of violence to sustain their power over long periods of time. since the people of these countries are often poor, uneducated, etc. they have little means to fight back.
78682
The principle here is not that they are able to kill people but for what reason. The execution of a known felon who has him/herself murdered countless lives has forfeited his/her right to live under the eyes of the law. If he/she were to be set free and thus cause more deaths on the population it is justified to take his life for the general good. They are against violence, random and senseless violence that is. Sanctioned killings whereby a person has commited crimes deemed irreconcievable in the eyes of the community is not a crime nor hyprocracy but justified and necessary. As for war it depends on the reason, to the defence of life and country it is a noble cause, for an outster of a regime not friendly to a country that is selfcentered hyprocracy for a nation that cherishes life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
535575
No.  For one thing, in many cases that is simply not possible.  Moreover, it is not generally an effective deterrent and could easily give rise to a vendetta culture.\n\nThis colony's future looks dim.
640075
Generally they responded in inappropriate ways. Many of them nationalized economic resources and since they lacked expertise they generally destroyed their economies.  They tended to beome more and more authoritarian and militaristic over time not to mention corrupt.  The end result was that most of these countries threw out the baby with the bath water. They got rid of colonial rule and with it most of the technical and governmental expertise that made any kind of government possible.
941532
I think there is a lot of historical revisionism going on here...well thats assuming that you have any actual knowledge of what you are talking about. Certainly your knowledge of British history is lamentable. Are you suggesting that the American Revolution has been the only 'pure' revolution in world history? I don't understand the reference to communism. The doctrine of Communism was a 19th century one, which really didn't get into full swing until the Russian Revolution of 1917. What about the Glorious Revolution of of 1688 when Britain kicked out King James II and the barons and nobles installed William of Orange and his wife Mary to the British throne? No one died, there were  no battles (at the time at least) and there was a smooth transition of power. Not bad for a country that "always gave in to the king". (oh and as an aside, we had beheaded another King earlier in the same century... but perhaps we were too busy "giving in" to him to notice.) History is never as clear cut as you may want it to be. There was a large Colonial army that fought on the British side against the Revolutionaries that tends to be forgotten about, as it is always the victors that write the history books. It is interesting that many black americans fought in the Colonial army as they saw the British as a better bet for their eventual freedom than Washington et al. Mmmm. I wonder if they saw their so called masters as enlightened revolutionaries, or brutal slave owners who maintained their grip over these poor people by terrorising them with chains, whips and torture. I think we all need to be very careful before holding ourselves up as paragons of virtue.
783064
Most of Europe went through the process that African countries are going through about 600 years ago.  The problem is, we sorted them out with bows and arrows, whereas the ruling elite in Africa are armed to the teeth with 21st century weapons.\n\nNigeria and the whole of Africa is growing up far too quickly and doing so in the knowledge that there is a better life to be had if one has lots of money, and that money is available to the corrupt.\n\nThus, anyone in any position of power anywhere in Africa has the opportunity to rise above the poverty that is endemic by taking corrupt money.\n\nAfrica is doomed to have a very few rich people in positions of power while the rest of the population ekes out a living in abject poverty.\n\nWhen we achieved greatness we had to do so by ingenuity and industriousness.  All an African has to do is be dishonest.  There really is very little hope for Africa in the short term.  This is a crying shame because Africa should be the jewel of the Earth's crown.  It has everything - a beautiful coast, wonderful flora and fauna and mineral wealth beyond imagination.\n\nHowever, the people are unable to see beyond today and they are thus doomed.
441268
there is no justification,imperialism was there .all countries wanted to occupy other countries and turn them into their colonies for raw material and for various other reasons
1150535
Why restrict it to N. Africa. This continent produces nothing but wars, killings, tribalism and incompetent fools, fraudsters, sheep and bankrupt governments. They make me sick. The truth will hurt on this one. Mind you they get all the assist they need from morally bankrupt Westerners and Nations. Margaret Thatcher's son, MARK THATCHER, who now holds a CRIMINAL RECORD for his gun selling activities and support for coup makers, makes my point.\n\nSPECIAL THANKS TO Habblis for pointing out the facts as they exist.
306681
Of course you're not all evil, however your goverment is elected to represent you, the people. So when your goverment goes around killing people for money it reflects badly on the people they represent.
110717
there is some amount of guilt involved.  Today's rich countries have become so by the rape and plundering of poorer nations.
491536
It's cultural. These countries didn't exist before colonialism, just a series of tribal areas constantly shifting. Colonialism brought many benefits but the tribes still existed within the new boundaries, as soon as we left greed and rivalry ensured a breakdown of all the structures. Our own borders took many hundreds of years to establish. It takes a long time to form a stable Nation. You can lead a horse to water .....
382722
What would be a reason to colonize any land?  Why did the Indians come over here way back when the land was connected to Europe?   Hunger for food, wealth, saftey and life.   It is rather silly to equate our feelings and our present laws with the actions and rules that were prevalent in those days.   It was nothing at all to kill for survival and greed in those days.    The Native American also killed, pillaged and raped his neighbor for numerous reasons and it was an accepted fact.   I don't think you can find any other nation in the world that has coddled and repaid their indigenous people as well as has the USA.  Check it out!  Go to an old plantation in the south and look at the slaves quarters, then look at what they came from. Early death in the disease ridden jungles, right? They had it better here as slaves, except with bad slave owners, of course.  Think about it!
1168502
societies which employ the death penalty have statistically tended to have higher rates of murder and violent crime than societies which don't.\n\ncurrently among the western democracies only the usa has a high profile capital sanction - and unsurprisingly there are several american cities whose annual murder rate is higher than most european countries.\n\namericans don't mind this. they are happy to have school shootings as long as they know somebody somewhere is having a lethal injection.\n\namericans are morons.
921609
It's just the simple fact that the british put all the social rascal and scroundals in the land of australia from many years back and the present nation is just the offspring of the uncuth side of british people. That's why their attitude is like criminals. As their grand grand grand grand fathers were all basically social criminals, ousted and outlawed from the land of UK by the then govt. of UK.
795509
I refuse to pay for something that people I didn't know did 200 years ago. The people now alive should receive nothing... what harm was done them? The issue you mentioned in Namibia is totally different in that some of the victims of WWII are still alive or their immediate descendants. You list slavery as the reasons African nations are so poor.... check on the numbers of slaves that were actually taken from Africa.... it's much less than you think. The reason African nations are so poor is the lack of emphasis given to education then and now.