Have the British ever committed a Genocide?

Question

Does what happened to the Native Americans officially count as a Genocide (I played cowboys and Indians as a child!)? Are there any other less well known genocides? How about the French, British, Spanish, Italians, are we all now hypocritical?

Answer 1

Yes. Cromwell's regime ordered the slaughter of some 3000 Irish noncombatents after ne battle. More recently, look up the massacre at Amristar (I think thats the spelling ( in India during the independance protests there in the pre-WW2 period.

The Spanish treatment of slaves was even worse than in North America--the reason they imported so many was that it was cheaper to work them to death and replace them than treat them well enough to survive (the opposite was true in the English colonies that became the USA).

The French had their own sins--but I don't recall any specifics off the top of my head.

Answer 2

Few have gone all the way with genocide, slavery being too lucrative. Cultures have certainly been destroyed.
I have to agree though that some of the 'examples' made by Genghis, the effective eradication of Amerinds in a relatively brief time, and the holocaust, all stand out as practically genocidal efforts. The Amerind genocide was a mass effort by the colonial powers. Although Americans pick up the blame for how it ended. Given the numbers involved the Holocaust pales.
In the Bible especially pre-KJB there are lots of bits with 'and the lord said put them all to the sword and sow their land with salt' which I assume was done.
Is it hypocritical? It is true that in the past there have been some awful things. It is not hypocritical to want to change and be better and to say so. It is hypocritical to say you've grown up but still engage in these past times.
I guess this is the age of hypocrisy. Lots of political hot air about how enlightened and grown up we are interspersed with constant rude reminders to the contrary. It is as if the human race decided that the ability to build jumbo jets and toasters and water beds has somehow transformed us into angels. 'Everything changes but man'.

Answer 3

Before everyone lashes themselves into a lather of anti-Brit sentiment, the British are not historically guilty of genocide in any meaningful sense.

For one thing, genocide - meaning the attempted or achieved extermination of an entire ethnic group - was not a crime under any kind of law before the mid-20th century, long after the British had stopped killing ethnic groups en masse. The slaughter of the Irish at Drogheda and elsewhere doesn't count, as they would have had to want to kill all the Irish in Ireland for it to qualify as genocide. By the standards of the time, it wasn't even a war crime, just an unusually brutal police action. Similar atrocities were committed in other countries, but we Irish have long memories and don't forgive easily, which is why events like Drogheda have been remembered.

The British didn't attempt to slaughter the Native Americans. If anyone tried to do that, the Americans came closest. The British may have cheated, betrayed and otherwise abandoned the Native Americans, but it was the post-revolutionary American government and its officers that pursued a more general policy of stealing their land and killing them when they attempted to resist. Nevertheless, I personally don't believe that US policy towards the Native Americans counts as genocide either, but that doesn't mean it wasn't and isn't despicable.

Genocide is a relatively new crime, and it only exists under a law that is generally not very well recognised - international law, to which the USA does not subscribe. The USA, for example, is just one of many nations that subscribes to the UN protocols on the punishment of genocide on the condition that no claim of genocide can be brought against it without its consent - rendering the US, along with India, Singapore, Malaysia, Vietnam, the Yemen and all the other countries that followed suit, effectively immune from prosecution for genocide, because they're never going to give their consent to let anyone accuse them of it.

The British, like any nation that once had an empire, have much to be ashamed of, but they are not one of the few nations have pursued undeniable policies of genocide, if the term is to mean anything. You could probably count the real culprits on the fingers of one hand; basically, the Germans, the Turks, some Rwandans, some Sudanese, and the Cambodians. The Cambodians were perhaps unique in that they attempted to exterminate themselves.

Answer 4

Great explanation Lexo80.

I'm pretty sure that The European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg has ruled the massacre of Chechen civilians between 2000 and 2002 by Russia a genocide. I believe this to be the most recent authenticated genocide.

Of course the most press of late goes of course Saddam Hussein who murdered and butchered his way into power and then used his position to crush all those around him with particular attention to the Shia and the Kurds of whom he gassed 5000 in Helabja in 1988 in one single massacre. They might consider themselves fortunate though when you consider his favoured methods included amputating sexual organs, hammering nails into the body and dissolving limbs in vats of acid. His war was not just one of power it was with a systematic hatred that he aimed to eliminate all of those peoples.

Answer 5

Actualy genocide (the destruction of a genetic strain of people) has only happened once (though a few have had a good go at it!) and even then it was not very successful (many mixed blood people survived and some were moved to the mainland before there distruction) and that was in Tasmania. The Tasmanian aboriginals were killed - first intentionaly and then with kindness - by Australian/British colonials...

Answer 6

Genocide being the deliberate attempt to annihilate a race or ethnic group, right???

Britain in it's colonial past committed many atrocious in the underdeveloped worlds. Out of arrogance,racism and so on They also fought many horrendous battles. However the British Empire relied on trade and the cooperation of the natives. genocide would very counter productive.

So did Spain, Portugal, France etc. The only colonialist country that did not was the Netherlands. probably Portugal too. Trade was too important to them.

However I can not think of any deliberate genocide such as the Germans committed against the Jews, gypsies and others or the Russian annihilation of the Jews. Or Pol Pot committed against his own Cambodians.

I would consider the annihilation of the Native Americans by the US a good case of genocide by some. Also Spain's treatment of Latin American. natives also in the worse type.

We have genocide going on in Somalia today. Will let you look into that. Evil is prevalent through out the world, always has and always will regardless of race or ethnic background.

Hope this of help.

Answer 7

An absolute YES. See the movie Rabbit Fence, an Australian story of how we did it there. Very subtle and sinister.

Answer 8

We have commited Genocide, a civil war can be considred Genocide.

Answer 9

WELL, WHERE HAVE YOU BEEN, GENIUS??
THEY TOOK OVER HALF THE EFFING WORLD!!!
GENOCIDE IS PROTOCOL IN WORLD CONQUEST!!!