I'm sure the inhabitants of the many countries the British invaded and continue to hang on to would disagree.
The Online Safety Bill he mentions in his outrage at YouTube taking down his speech is itself an attack on freedoms.
He's also part of a political party working to criminalise protests they disagree with.
The only places I can think of that Britain currently "hangs on to" against the will of the inhabitants are arguably Scotland and Northern Ireland, but in both those places about half the population want to continue to belong to the UK.
So it's not obvious to me who you're referring to here.
Although, the talk of blocking another Scottish independence referendum could certainly be used as evidence of holding on to a country against the inhabitants will. You can't know their will if you prevent them from expressing it. Yes, they expressed it 7 years ago but a lot has changed since then, most notably leaving the EU.
Otherwise, where do we draw the line? How far do we go back? Those original human perpetrators are long dead.
"Fathers shall not be put to death because of their children, nor shall children be put to death because of their fathers. Each one shall be put to death for his own sin."
~ Deuteronomy 24:16
~ Numbers 14:18
;)
A phrase for ever situation. So versatile.
It is either:
A. Never
B. Sometime
If you feel it's A then there's nothing to debate.
If you feel it's B then let's haggle over the definition of sometime?
It appears my definition is that that "sometime" is now.
Your definition is sometime in the future.
It's not as interesting to talk about present achievements because the UK is clearly in decline. That's why this politician was identifying their ideology with the glorious past and romanticizing it.
Any positives are negated by past malevolent actions?
Thanks for your comments!
--
EDIT: Upon some cursory research I still am not sure I can agree with your assessment.
--
[1] Bill of Rights : 1689
[2] United Kingdom : 1707
[3] Civil Liberties in UK : (various dates)
[4] Magna Carta : 1215
[5] Parliamentary Privilege
--
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_of_Rights_1689
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom#Kingdom_of_Grea...
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_liberties_in_the_United_...
There is no history of the UK being enlightened by freedom.
;)
Ostensibly they are forbidden from returning because the islands are a nature reserve, but it came out in leaked cables the nature reserve's raison d'etre is keeping out the Chagos Islanders. Conservation is only a side-effect.
Propose one colony where the indigenous society was freer
So the assertion is that being colonised increased their freedom?
I don't know man, but arguing for a process that discriminated against people on the basis of their color is something that I thought was a thing of the past. I guess I was wrong.
And countries don't evolve in a vacuum. Many countries would have adopted British ideas of freedom just through observation.
I understand being unconformable with one's country's past, but the mental hoops to try to get some justification to colonization is so strange.
Even if (and that's a BIG if) those societies ended up "freer" let's not fool ourselves, not a single country went to colonise another for hundreds of years to make it freer, they went there to exploit it. If 500 years later that country is in a better shape now (again a BIG if), that's an unintended side effect.
Generally speaking the colonisers established their colonies to access natural resources, being new agricultural techniques to undeveloped lands, and engage in trade. The culture of the coloniser naturally came along with them.
Even if there were no specific goal of bringing freedom that may still have been a side effect.
How is that an argument? If I enslave a group of people, force on them my language so they can follow orders and 500 years later that language opens doors for them, how am I "illustrious"? it's a side effect of an inhumane act.
Trying to twist this so my history doesn't make me uncomfortable is historical immaturity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_Britain#Norman_Engl...
I'm also not sure if being a white coal miner in 1870 in Britain would have been much better than the jobs in the colonies:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mold,_Flintshire#The_Mold_Riot
The political systems of every one of those countries are freer today than they were before the British “visited”.