3 ms·
As if the british monarchy doesn't have their hands dirty with the blood of millions....
by elzbardico 6y ago
As if the british monarchy doesn't have their hands dirty with the blood of millions....
- Macha 6y agoSure, and this is generally regarded as a bad thing. Cromwell gets defenders for opposing them, despite committing many of the same bad things, and in the case of Ireland, even harsher actions with longer term consequences. Complaints about the british monarchy don't excuse Cromwell his actions.
- morelisp 6y ago> Complaints about the british monarchy don't excuse Cromwell his actions. But it does mean reacting to this article purely for its ambivalence about Cromwell's actions is probably the least curious thing you can do.
- dash2 6y agoWhich British monarch has their hands dirty with the blood of millions? The obvious cases where British policy led to that many deaths would be e.g. the Irish and Bengal famines (the latter during WWII). Those both took place at a time when the monarch was a constitutional figurehead. The best case might be the slave trade. But this was at its height under the Hanoverians, by which time the Commons was already the effective supreme power. I suppose you could say that the slave trade started earlier, and that this starting event caused the later expansion. Maybe, but that's a claim about the causal chain that needs arguing for.