When the UK was a developing nation we did we get any foreign aid?

Question

I was watching a show about Africa last night, showing their plights as a developing nation. Then I thought 'back when we were a poor country, in say, the 1700s, there was no Comic Relief or Oxfam to help us out'. Did the UK build its own wealth to become what it is today or did it in fact grow through hand outs and foreign aid like Africa relies upon?

Answer 1

Umm, the UK was hardly poor in the 1700s. Perhaps you've heard the phrase "the sun never sets on the British Empire." That's the time period when the phrase gained currency.

Much of the wealth and power of Imperial Britain was taken from its colonies in places like Africa and Asia. Losing those resources to European powers (the UK, France, Spain, etc.)is a very big part of why these nations are still just "developing" now. Consider this the repayment of a debt.

But yes, when the lands that would become the UK were themselves "developing", a great deal of this development (roads, towns, etc.) was done by a foreign power. That would be Rome. Aside from that, there wasn't anybody else to give them foreign aid, because everybody else was developing themselves.

Answer 2

Britain built her national wealth upon piracy, buccaneering, slavery and smuggling, for the most part.

The slave trade in particular, which started back in the 17th century [or maybe even earlier] financed just about everything else, including the Industrial Revolution which started in the 18th century.

So, the Brits did not need any aid. They simply took what they needed and anyone who stood in the way was simply cut down and killed.

Thinks were much simpler back then when arguments were settled swiftly and without fuss.

Now we have to go through a complex system of political cobblers just to sort out a stupid problem like Iraq etc and it's costing us dear to do it. Time to pull out and go home.

Answer 3

The UK, The US and most other developed countries built themselves up the old fashioned way, by innovation and free enterprise of the citizens. Now adays, third world countries are either corrupt dictatorships, anti-innovation socialist states or both. This is why even with tons of foreign aid, these nations are not developing with any real speed or effectiveness.

Answer 4

In the 1700s Britain started to build its wealth through its own natural resourcesand by sending its navy overseas to colonise other countries.
The advantage it had was that it had not been colonised by a foreign nation since 1066 and so kept all this wealth for itself whereas the Africans at the same time had the misfortune to be colonised by European nations who grabbed their natural resources and exploited them for the slave trade.
The traditional society of the Africans was totally destroyed for centuries and they are still trying to recover

Answer 5

You are right. We bootstrapped ourselves up. Other countries have done the same of course. Holland had nothing but mud at the start.
It is true with individials as with countries: no one loses wealth as fast as people who have won it.

Answer 6

Back in the 1700s most countries were selfish bastards who secretly hated each other

Answer 7

You got the old version of foreign aid. Your navy would go to "new worlds" and bring back anything valuable that they found.

Answer 8

Yes, the rich black people in Africa used to send us bibles ,food parcels and blankets !

Answer 9

i suggest you reread a few history books. your dates seem to be a little askew.; however, i think we all get your point but may i add people now can afford to have compassion for the plight of other.

Answer 10

we just took anything we wanted - human beings (slaves) to provide labour for us and to sell on, property (minerals, artefacts, land plus anything else of value to us) and simply took ownership of any country or land that took our fancy.
Is that "aid"? ... hell yes