The "Special Relationship"

[DC10RealMan]

I have just read part of a speech by the Prime Minister of New Zealand on Sunday 3rd September 1939 the day that the UK declared war on Nazi Germany. Quote "Both with gratitude to the past, and with confidence in the future, we range ourselves without fear besides Britain. Where she goes, we go. Where she stands, we stand" Unqoute. On that day New Zealand declared war on Germany, and within the next few days where joined by Australia, Canada, South Africa, India, and the other nations of the Empire. I appreciate that we are now in the 21st Century, but as one who recently visited the Stonefall Military Cemetery near Harrogate where thousands of young Canadians lie who died as members of the Royal Canadian Air Force in World War 2 and Passendaele where thousands of Canadians died in an earlier confict, I am constantly bemused by British politicians and their perceved "special relationship" with the USA. What about the "actual debt of honour" we in Britain owe our old Empire family who did not wait two years before joining in. I am not "having a go" at the Americans, but the stupidity of the UK politicians and their self delusions. I feel better having got that off my chest!!!!

[WebPilot]

It's not just the relationship with the US. One of the fallouts of our joining the EEC was to divert much of our trade and investment from Canada, Australia and New Zealand to our new best friends, leaving our old friends to find new markets and relationships.

Spiffing of us, wasn't it.

[16 blades]

...And don't forget the British Left's almost religious zeal in attempting to eradicate all memory of Empire from British history.

An unfortunate venture with an even more unfortunate side-effect - those who served the Empire and gave their lives in conflict become a forgotten memory in the socialist dream of a whitewashed history. A travesty.

16B

[Blacksheep]

That "Special Relationship" wasn't in place when we declared war on Germany.

It was a later invention of Sir Winston Churchill who was of course only half English. The other half of him was American.

We do indeed owe a major debt of gratitude to "the Dominions" - especially to the Canadians - and not all of us Britons have forgotten. A quarter of those who waded ashore in Normandy were in the Canadian divisions and tens of thousands of Canadian aircrew have their last resting places in Europe. The Canooks contributed out of all proportion to their numbers and if it wasn't for them - particularly the Royal Canadian Navy's Mid-Ocean Escort Groups - we wouldn't have held out long enough for the Americans to use Britain as a jumping off point in Europe. Without the contribution of Canooks, Aussies, Kiwis, Indians and men and women from all the other parts of the old empire, we probably would have gone under by 1942.

Then the Americans probably wouldn't have bothered to come to Europe at all, the Cold War would never have happened and our military men would all be wearing enormous hats and speaking Russian...

[Cambridge Crash]

16 Blades - who on the left is trying to 'eradicate' evidence of the British Empire? Perhaps you should read of some of the darker deeds of Imperial arrogance in Mike Davis Late Victorian Holocausts Verso, 2001, which publishes in increasingly sickening detail events in India and elswhere from 1879 until 1901, where upwards of 60 million people persihed as a result of mercantilist and subsequently free-market policies directed from London. Until now, these enormous famines have been largely air-brushed out of history - even AN Wilson's 'The Victorians' - a warts'n'all account of the period - fails to mention these cataclysmic famines. Davis is a left-wing US academic, by the way. Does this constitute eradication or revisionism?

Perhaps back to the thread...

Australia and New Zealand felt justifiably hurt by the apparent volte face taken by Edward Heath in 1971; ironically Britain would have entered the EEC a decade earlier under Macmillan if it wasn't for the arrogance (and veto) of de Gaull. Interestingly, the loss of assured markets for primary produce led to greater diversification of the economy in both countries and encouraged an entreprenerial spirit, as well as a reduction of the role of central government - 'Rogernomics' in New Zealand in the mid 1980s (under a reforming Labour government) instituted state sector reforms that would have made Thatcher blush. Killed of the 'model' welfare state and produced a fresh generation of exceedingly greedy and exploitative Capitalists.

The cause of European integration was largely a US inspired project; the Cold War International History Project has revealed a considerable body of evidence of US support of leading European politicians in the 1950s to establish a federal state. Interestingly, although Winston Churchill had voiced the establishment of an 'English Speaking Union', during the dark days of May 1940 he expressed to his PPS the desire to establish a post war federated Europe.

The Intelligence special relationship - which underpins the closeness of the UK and US - was negotiated by Harry Hinsley in 1942 and constitutes the longest running defence pact of the modern era. Rick Aldrich's The Hidden Hand, or anything by Chris Andrew (President of Corpus Christie and historian to the Security Service - and an honorary Air Cdre) outline the complexity of this relationship from the earliest days.

CC

[Re-Heat]

16B - do you know what we did in Kenya in the 50s to try to retain Empire? South Africa? Who invented concentration camps?


We civilised (or westernised?) native peoples of many lands certainly, but the only motivation was for our material benefit be it economic or military, not some philanthropism.

Questioning the past and actions of those is quite different from remembering those who gave their lives for our freedom. There is always room for analysis and improvement, just as in every debrief after every flight, from the one where rated a 0 to the ones where rated 6.

[foldingwings]

6 Posts and still no lefty rantings from Bernie the Bolt (aka crossbow).

There's still time!

[Cambridge Crash]

Re-Heat - very well said. In spite of the damage that Britain colectively did to India, the Indian Army (all volunteer, I think) was central to British military strategy in the Middle East, and of course the far east. Brave men and women who did die in defence of their country and of the Emprie.


CC

[16 blades]

CC & Re-heat,

I wans't trying to extol the virtues of the Empire, merely pointing out the revisionist tendencies of the current crop of Leftist oberlieutnants, who are attempting to remove all reference to the Empire from our history (it rarely appears in school history curricula nowadays, in any form).

Whether it was a force for good OR evil (I believe it was both), it should still form part of our nations history as taught to our children. I am shocked at the current level of 'knowledge' that even well-educated kids have of history nowadays.

I would contend your assertion that
upwards of 60 million people persihed as a result of mercantilist and subsequently free-market policies directed from London

Don't believe everything you read, CC, especially not when it's written by somebody with far-left tendencies such as Mike Davis. I Quote, from a newspaper interview:

Marx and Engels never wrote about the consequences of environmental change on human history, but Davis does. He’s
the first to link what Susan Faludi describes as "social injustice and ecological distress." "Without trying to sound pretentious," Davis says with a shrug and a sideward glance, "I’m trying to take Marxism into a more nonlinear, chaotic terrain."

There is nothing wrong with having a political bias - most of us do. However, when you take this (from the same interview):

Davis is the first to admit that he won’t let a fact get in the way of a good story. "I was stunned," I’ve heard him say twice lately, "to find out that something I said turned out to be true." And that is the point with Davis: more theoretician than historian, more instinct than research. The point is less what he discovers than which parts of the record he chooses to look at.

....you discover a man masquerading as a historian who displays a complete lack of integrity and a complete disregard for facts discovered that do not fit his marxist prejudices. Not an ideal information source for a subject as complex and far-reaching as the British Empire, wouldn't you say?

That aside, I respect you for quoting your sources to support your arguments. Many don't.

16B

[Cambridge Crash]

Mike Davis, as I noted, is a left writer, however he is not into creating statistics. That is to question the integrity of a well-published author and your comments are bordering on defamation; from my own painful experience in a related case, I would counsel extreme caution.

In the case of India (the book also covers Brazil and China) his primary data is drawn from official reports (eg 1878 Report of the Indian Famine Commission, by Sir Richard Temple; Report on the famine in the Bombay Presidency, Bombay Government 1903). Whether it is 20 million or 60 million (and Davis provides confidence limits) - they died of famine - not from drought. Grain prices were forced out of the reach of huge sectors of the economy in India; the railways, previously heralded as a means of shifting grain to meet demands, were simply used to continue to export rain to the UK and elsewhere.

The thesis of his book is 'to what degree did the colonial transformation of the system of production change the way in which climatic factors exert their influence? Suggest you read the book - I presented it for discussion and critique amongst 20 post -graduates (inluding a healthy does of Neo-Cons) . It is, nonetheless, a harrowing read. I do not necessarily agree with his assertion that the Third World or Global South, as we now know it, was a direct product of Colonial gross mis-management; suffice to note that the GDP of India did not rise between 1757 - 1947.

CC

[WebPilot]

If the "integrity of a well published author" had never been questioned, David Irving would still be regarded as a serious historian. Note that I am not drawing parallels between DI and anyone else, simply that what is published is not necessarily "the truth" and must always considered to be open to question.

[Green Meat]

All this talk of Marxism has re-kindled long-lost learning. If I'm correct (and I'm willing to be proven wrong), Marx was actually writing a manifesto for the German Socialist Workers Party (not NSDAP!) in 1848 whilst staying in a house owned by Engels which was, and this is the interesting point, paid for from the profits of Lancashire cotton mills. Therefore, Marxism directly benefited (it can be alleged) from the British Empire.

In any case, the special relationship was only ever beneficial to the US. Why? Britain was one of the safest bets for post-war overseas bases and given that Britain had relied on US financial and industrial support during WW2, was fairly much tied into whatever the US wanted. One only has to look at the way in which America pulled the plug on the dissemination of nuclear techology to the UK in 1946 to see which way the relationship went.

[16 blades]

My assertions were based upon Davis' own admissions in the interview he gave, so I honestly do not see how they could be defamatory. There have been many evil regimes born of men, of all political persuasions I might add, who
won’t let a fact get in the way of a good story
I may take you up on your suggestion and read the book, but bearing in mind it was written by a (self-confessed)
more theoretician than historian
I would question the validity of his conclusions.

Full interview can be read here

http://www.laweekly.com/ink/99/01/news-macadams.php

16B

[Roland Pulfrew]

And today we see reports that more school children know that Churchill is a dog that sells insurance but don't know that he was Britain's war time leader. :mad: History is being dumbed down and there is a tendency to remove references to The Empire. It does not suit the left to recognise (arguably) the greatest period in British history. A period where enterprise flourished. Where many philanthropists built major towns and cities to provide homes for the work force. And where adventureres explored (and subjugated) many parts of the world for the benefit of our, once, great nation.

We can have hours of philosophical argument as to whether it was good or bad (I happen to believe the former). It did do some things that today are not acceptable (and the Mau Mau internment camps were not concentration camps) but at the time they were acceptable. Times change. Get over it. We have nothing to apologise for, what actually is the point?! We should be proud of what our ancestors did for the world.

[BEagle]

Good speech, Roly!

Our old Trg Flt map still had most of Africa in pink!

[Blacksheep]

Of course it was in pink! Wasn't George, last of the King Emperors, still on the throne when you were in Training Flight, Beags? ;)