Why is the fact that England(with its allies) defeated Germany in WW1 a pro? Whether Germany or England should have won WW1 is relative and subjected to personal bias. WW1 being fought for imperialistic reasons and for influence in Europe and the rest of the world, I do not see how England had any more of a moral god-given right to have ruled the world than Germany. I also do not know of any definite moral high ground held by Britain during WW1. Today English is compulsory in European schools, making it a form of oppression. Had Germany won, it could have been that German, not English, be taught compulsory in our schools. Empire served as a civilising mission, but not as much as an ego-centric crusade to remake the world in your own image. That was England's first priority and thus it caused many problems. In general, the less advanced native peoples tended to accept foreign European rule easier than more advanced other cultures did English rule in places such as Africa an India was resisted, but eventually accepted, whereas people who tried to colonize or dominate advanced(White) nations, had much more trouble. This is apparent in the case of the Nazi - Eastern European empire. White on white domination tends to be much more brutal. England had no need to look for posessions in Europe to control, they had all they needed elsewhere. That is why they so often believe in the good of their empire, since it was not as bad as, for example the Nazi, or Soviet empires. Germany having lost its entire empire in WW1, can be compared to a man that lost his reproductive organs. A very severe and humiliating loss in such an imperialistic era. The only place left to go with the hope of remaking a part of the world in its image, was Eastern Europe, and it did not work out. Thus England's imperial history, like that of France, Portugal and Spain, is not as extremely violent as that of the Third Reich, or the USSR, but this is to some extent due to the fact that they directly ruled over more cooperative natives in undeveloped areas, and only indirectly dominated European affairs. There are examples of where England did engage in direct white on white opression that turned out very brutal and verocious - that is their conquering of the other nations of the British Isles many centuries ago. These nations were aquired through savage wars, and cultural and lingual extermination. Also the Anglo-Boer war, where the actual civilising process of Southern Africa was not as important as making sure it was done by England. Dutch rule had to be wiped out or at least be made secondary to that of English, and, God forbid, Dutch and not English became the national language. The Dutch resistance forces were demoralized by letting their women and children die of deprivation in concentration camps. The reason for the British Empire fighting the Germans in WW2 could also have been to prevent Germany from becoming yet again a competitive world power that would jeopardize British world supremacy, rather than true concern for the freedom of European peoples. The latter is just a more presentable cause for the records and history books.
Log in to comment