Colonialism As Portrayed By the British Media

British news is quite influential in the United States, especially with respect to international affairs. British news about international affairs also quite naturally sometimes deals with India, which is a very important country internationally.

Something quite peculiar sometimes happens when the British press deals with India, however. One occasionally comes across a news article hinting about British benevolence during the colonial era. Often this may take the form of a local Indian purportedly speaking to the reporter about how he or she missed life under the British Raj.

Strangely, this doesn’t seem to happen much with that other great former British colony (the United States). British media is far more familiar with American culture than with Indian culture. Yet nobody in the British media ever mentions Americans missing life as a colony. British rule in India being much harsher than British rule in the thirteen colonies, one would think that Americans everywhere would be talking about how good life was before independence. But, strangely enough, this never happens. Indeed, in my time in the United States, I’ve never met an American who thought things were better under British colonialism.

Nor have I ever met a real-life Indian who thought things were better under the British. Of course, one rarely talks about these topics with Americans and Indians. But it does show the ridiculousness of the concept of benevolent colonialism.

This entry was posted in Asia, Europe and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Colonialism As Portrayed By the British Media

  1. AslanKhan says:

    Seeing how Americans received independence in 1776 and India in 1948, Indians lamenting of their post-colonial problems is easier when most having parents or grandparents who lived during the Raj. The truth is India has become a corrupt Hindi speaking Hindu dominated state, with Muslims, Sikhs, Jains, Christians, Buddhists, Dravidian-speakers, and low-caste Hindu, among others, facing discrimination in every respect of living. If 600 Million Indians cannot receive proper lighting, if millions of Indians must emigrate for better opportunities abroad, and if millions of Indians still cannot receive basic human amenities, education, medicine, etc. then lamenting about a time when the people of this sub-continent had common goals for a better future is understandable. 5% of the United Kingdom is from South Asia, the largest racial minority in the country, they are better off in London, Leicester, or Manchester then the average person in Mumbai, Delhi, or Kanpur.

    • inoljt says:

      Yeah, I’ve seen a lot of people lament their problems in all countries. But I’ve never in my life heard an American or Indian say that they want to go back to colonialism.

  2. Brett Heffner says:

    Benevolent colonialism is only a less severe form of colonialism, but it is colonialism nonetheless. It is the British way of saying to India, ‘be glad that we didn’t govern you like Belgian King Leopold did in the Congo Free State (doublespeak for “Congo Slave State.”)’ You cant polish a turd.

  3. Brett Heffner says:

    ‘Benevolent colonialism’ is an oxymoron! Colonialism cannot exist without exploitation and kleptocracy. By its very nature it is reverse Robin Hood (kind of like the TARP bailout that America couldn’t afford.)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s