How did Britain lose its Empire?

Question

Is it correct that some land was simply just given away? if thats the case i think thats terrible! British people died to have the honour of owning that land.

I will never ever be ashamed of my countries history, owning a quarter of the worlds land is impressive and the best ever military achievement

Answer 1

From a historical point of view, I don't believe there was anything wrong with taking that land - it's what all powerful countries did so that they themselves were less of a target for other empire builders. However, by the 20th century, things had changed, Britain had been war-weakened, and the colonies were gaining the right to speak up for their independence. Usually, when independence was asked for, it was given. This often made the countries less economically stable than they were when they were a part of the British empire, but it is no longer acceptable to colonise a nation and other countries would have been likely to declare war on Britain if they stopped granting independence.
Best answer maybe?

Answer 2

Britain didn't own the land forming the Empire and I doubt even that the most rabid advocates of Empire, say in the 19th century, saw it as that. To suggest ownership is incredibly naive. And in many cases the way the land was occupied was less than honourable. In fact, i would suggest that the giving up of the Empire was much more of an honourable thing - something that had never been done before.

Answer 3

Hello,

The British with their colonies were smart enough to leave on the crest of the wave. Troubles and disenchantment were just beginning and they realized that eventually down the road, the cost of keeping the lid on the colonies would be far greater than what they could take out. They left with dignity and very little bloodshed compared to France and Spain and resentments or hatred for their mistakes and errors were not nearly as great as seen by the British Commonwealth that still exists like a nice old boy's club.

Had they stayed on a lot more lives would have had to be given and the results would have ultimately been the same.

Cheers,

Michael Kelly

Answer 4

Don't go running away with the idea that we took over other people's lands for some grandiose sense of purpose and honour.

The driving factor behind the British Empire was profit (admittedly there were some who were in it for other reasons) and you only have to look to the East India Company for a grand example of this.

And, yes, it is correct that a lot of the Empire was given back without reparation. Isn't that the right thing to do, to give the land back to those who really own it? - perhaps the US could learn a lesson or two from this.

Answer 5

Keeping millions of dark people in servitude with a jackboot and a rifle grows tiresome.

Besides, the Brits got wealthy and soft and, well, they turned their young men into wimps that didn't have the stomach for empire.

Now the only question remaining is..... there's a few more 'counties' over across the Irish Sea that were the first of Britian's colonial empire and still lookinjg for their independence.

The troops have left. When will you bring the rest of the ones you sent there home and leave Ireland to the Irish?

Answer 6

Of course land was given away, and lots of it. We gave a lot to our colonies, but we really shouldn't have taken the land in the first place. After the first world war Britain was weakened and we couldn't hold onto the empire any more, we had to concentrate on matters closer to home.

Answer 7

Fact is the people they oppressed and stole the land from in the first place rebelled and kicked them out. Think India

Answer 8

owning that land? going to someone else's country, enslaving, killing, raping and murdering the natives, exploit their resources and then being proud of that?

you should be ashamed of Britain's atrocities.

Answer 9

i really think it was.

NO DENTAL COVERAGE. . .