4 ms·

Yup. I try to learn as much history as I can, but I've not heard about that attack. Although from a quick google that particular one doesn't look like it was to

Yup. I try to learn as much history as I can, but I've not heard about that attack. Although from a quick google that particular one doesn't look like it was totally unprovoked, although it does appear to have been totally out of proportion to the provocation. I'll have to read up on that in more detail when I've got the time. An aspect of the defense of empire that particularly frustrates me is the way people will attempt to obfuscate that all the european empires were about resources. People like to make out that we colonised India because we wanted to teach them about western beauracracy and trains. The initial occupaction was conducted by a literal commercial company for commercial gain. Robert Clive became one of (possibly the?) richest men in Europe as a result. Similarly people make rebellions sound like they were completely unjustified. At the same time, if you ask them what Britain would have done if the Germans had invaded during WWII, they'd tell you we'd have fought them to the bitter end. It's the nationalistic version of the idea that "no-one is the villain of their own story". Somehow us invading somewhere is different to Germany (or France) invading Britain.

pasabagi 4y ago
A commercial company founded by pirates! The incident seems actually pretty typical to me. There's often an element of provocation, a degree of legal ambiguity, often a degree of moral ambiguity about the laws themselves (extraterritoriality etc). My guess would be that the Nationalists would have seen it as fully within their rights to seize a merchant vessel in China for military purposes. The attack stands out because it comes in just in the tail of the first world war, and it's a naval bombardment of the civilian city of an allied power. It's unlikely (but possible) that a chinese person who had served on the western front alongside the british might have returned home only to be blown up by a british shell! It's also recent enough that it's presumably within living memory for some people who live in the area. It's also an odd time, because at that point, the british and japanese were close allies, and were mentioned in the same breath by the chinese.

pasabagi 4y ago

A commercial company founded by pirates! The incident seems actually pretty typical to me. There's often an element of provocation, a degree of legal ambiguity, often a degree of moral ambiguity about the laws themselves (extraterritoriality etc). My guess would be that the Nationalists would have seen it as fully within their rights to seize a merchant vessel in China for military purposes. The attack stands out because it comes in just in the tail of the first world war, and it's a naval bombardment of the civilian city of an allied power. It's unlikely (but possible) that a chinese person who had served on the western front alongside the british might have returned home only to be blown up by a british shell! It's also recent enough that it's presumably within living memory for some people who live in the area. It's also an odd time, because at that point, the british and japanese were close allies, and were mentioned in the same breath by the chinese.