5 ms·

The UK spawned a bunch of successful countries. Since it lost control, some have been wildly successful and all have developed. So there's something about them

by t43562 2y ago

The UK spawned a bunch of successful countries. Since it lost control, some have been wildly successful and all have developed. So there's something about them and their way of operating that worked. Part of that has to be location - the Dutch were in the wrong place and got stomped on by Spain to their detriment but I think they had the same attitude to enterprising/adventuring/financing - perhaps even more so. As a colonial myself the bit about exploitation is just so much cheap envy/sour grapes/whatever. All over the world people get exploited by someone and get conquered by someone. A "country" is just a lot of bits that someone conquered. In the ancient world I don't think anything was great but it was probably better in the end to be conquered by the Romans than many others. In the same vein the British weren't the worst and got a bit smarter over time. What they really did was open the world to trade, of course in just as unfair a manner as any other colonial power ... but it was both good and bad for them. Initially they had the industrial revolution, but they couldn't stop the same thing happening elsewhere once they turned on the flow of trade. Now a university degree isn't a guarantee of a great job - because many people have one. Similarly many countries have industrialised economies with an educated population now. Europeans or any other formerly advantaged country find it harder to command high prices for their own products while enjoying the products of less advanced countries at a discount. Countries with large scale like the US and China can make the incredible investments needed to make the next advancements. Countries like Britain can only do it when they team up as in the EU. The Brexiters are essentially luddites who cannot see this writing on the wall - they desperately believe that scaling up is something they can avoid. They want to retain control of something that shrinks until it is nothing because they are scared utterly **tless of the changes that might happen if they aren't in control. It's like trying to climb back into the womb.

Dalewyn 2y ago
>Countries like Britain can only do it when they team up as in the EU. The Brexiters are essentially luddites who cannot see this writing on the wall The UK remains one of the world powers and the Pound Sterling one of the reserve currencies thanks to their familial ties with the Five Eyes and the Commonwealth Realm, and select friends like Japan. Island country and continent countries bloody hating each other is a tale older than history. If anything, it's the EU (namely France and Germany) who need to figure out how to get countries fully on board with them.
- dijit 2y ago
  > The UK remains one of the world powers and the Pound Sterling one of the reserve currencies With every passing year this becomes less true. The UK is in managed decline, the entire world knows it; its only brits themselves who see themselves as exceptional. (I’m British, living in Sweden).
  - rich_sasha 2y ago
    Sad but true. The saddest bit IMO is the lack of even ideas for how to reverse it. Subsequent governments just rearrange the deck chairs and distribute blankets on the increasingly tilted deck. The current decline of universities' financial situation may be another terrible blow. One thing in which the UK is genuinely a top performer worldwide is higher education. But 3/4 are expected to go into the red this year, and the universities are increasingly stuffing their courses with whoever can pay their fees, regardless of ability.
- tim333 2y ago
  Yeah I was against Brexit as it was a huge upheaval that made trade with our main trading partners harder but small independent countries can do very well if they are open to trade and are run sensibly. Look at Singapore for example.
  - surgical_fire 2y ago
    The problem with that line of thinking is that Singapore benefitted immensely from its geographical locations and from being an excellent port in a complicated region. England can hardly benefit from the same.
    - Dalewyn 2y ago
      What Britain doesn't have geographically is more than compensated with what they do have politically. Again: The familial ties and friends. The era we live in right now is Pax Americana, the United States is top dog. But so long as the United Kingdom remains aligned (those familial ties!) that means both and all of us are top dog. Same story with solid friends like Japan who also enjoys top dog status. It is a cold hard fact that Britain is no longer a superpower, it's also a cold hard fact that Britain wouldn't be a power period were they by themselves. Fortunately for them though, we are family. Countries like France and Germany only kind of sort of enjoy the benefits of Pax Americana because they are two-faced and greedy or worse. France suddenly getting kicked out of that nuclear sub deal with Australia and replaced by America and Britain was a brutal demonstration of an unseverable family blood and bond. As an aside, the British Isles are an "excellent port" in a "complicated region". America does appreciate having two giant and unsinkable carriers (USS Britain and USS Japan) next to potential hotspots in the world.
eesmith 2y ago
> and all have developed Isn't that true of pretty much every country, even the few that were never colonized by European powers? I mean, Afghanistan developed since its independence in 1919, but that's hardly attributable to some sort of intrinsic Britishness. Same for Egypt, with its 1922 independence, or Libya in 1951. Just like how Vietnam developed after independence from France. While we've seen how Japan developed without being part of any colonial system. ("it was probably better in the end to be conquered by the Romans than many others" rejects the idea that it might have been better to not be conquered at all.) > A "country" is just a lot of bits that someone conquered. The modern definition of a "country" also requires a permanent population and a government, along with recognition by other countries. Note that this definition is of fundamentally European origin. Further note the difficulty of using your definition for "Northern Cyprus" and "Sealand", much less the "Sovereign Military Order of Malta".
- physicsguy 2y ago
  Japan was a colonising state, Korea, Manchuria, Taiwan
  - eesmith 2y ago
    I was commenting on 'spawned a bunch of successful countries .. and all have developed' by pointing out the meaningless of "developed". Every country has developed over the last 100 years - those which were British colonies, those which were French colonies, and those which were not colonized. That Japan and Ethiopia carried out atrocities to expand their respective empires during that time is completely besides the point.
    - t43562 2y ago
      I don't claim to "really know" but being born in a "formerly pink" bit of Africa has always seemed a lot better to me than the alternatives. I wouldn't want to have been born in Mozambique or Angola (Portugese) or the DRC (Belgium) and even the Francophone bits of Africa seem a bit doubtful to me. This may just be for reasons that nobody can control of course. Perhaps anyone taking on those places would have had the same results.
mike_hearn 2y ago
With you until the last paragraph. It's unclear what you mean by "investments needed to make the next advancements", but be aware that the UK is back in the EU Horizon Research programme. It rejoined that part only a year or so after leaving, something the Remain campaign and the EU's negotiators insisted would be impossible, and the Brexit campaigners said would be an obvious and common sense move for the EU. Turned out the latter were correct, the Remainers were wrong and the EU itself was bluffing. That said, it's not very likely that teaming up with the EU makes any difference. The UK was a full member during a time of economic stagnation. The EU is not outperforming it.

by t43562 2y ago

Dalewyn 2y ago

>Countries like Britain can only do it when they team up as in the EU. The Brexiters are essentially luddites who cannot see this writing on the wall The UK remains one of the world powers and the Pound Sterling one of the reserve currencies thanks to their familial ties with the Five Eyes and the Commonwealth Realm, and select friends like Japan. Island country and continent countries bloody hating each other is a tale older than history. If anything, it's the EU (namely France and Germany) who need to figure out how to get countries fully on board with them.

dijit 2y ago
> The UK remains one of the world powers and the Pound Sterling one of the reserve currencies With every passing year this becomes less true. The UK is in managed decline, the entire world knows it; its only brits themselves who see themselves as exceptional. (I’m British, living in Sweden).
- rich_sasha 2y ago
  Sad but true. The saddest bit IMO is the lack of even ideas for how to reverse it. Subsequent governments just rearrange the deck chairs and distribute blankets on the increasingly tilted deck. The current decline of universities' financial situation may be another terrible blow. One thing in which the UK is genuinely a top performer worldwide is higher education. But 3/4 are expected to go into the red this year, and the universities are increasingly stuffing their courses with whoever can pay their fees, regardless of ability.
tim333 2y ago
Yeah I was against Brexit as it was a huge upheaval that made trade with our main trading partners harder but small independent countries can do very well if they are open to trade and are run sensibly. Look at Singapore for example.
- surgical_fire 2y ago
  The problem with that line of thinking is that Singapore benefitted immensely from its geographical locations and from being an excellent port in a complicated region. England can hardly benefit from the same.
  - Dalewyn 2y ago
    What Britain doesn't have geographically is more than compensated with what they do have politically. Again: The familial ties and friends. The era we live in right now is Pax Americana, the United States is top dog. But so long as the United Kingdom remains aligned (those familial ties!) that means both and all of us are top dog. Same story with solid friends like Japan who also enjoys top dog status. It is a cold hard fact that Britain is no longer a superpower, it's also a cold hard fact that Britain wouldn't be a power period were they by themselves. Fortunately for them though, we are family. Countries like France and Germany only kind of sort of enjoy the benefits of Pax Americana because they are two-faced and greedy or worse. France suddenly getting kicked out of that nuclear sub deal with Australia and replaced by America and Britain was a brutal demonstration of an unseverable family blood and bond. As an aside, the British Isles are an "excellent port" in a "complicated region". America does appreciate having two giant and unsinkable carriers (USS Britain and USS Japan) next to potential hotspots in the world.

eesmith 2y ago

> and all have developed Isn't that true of pretty much every country, even the few that were never colonized by European powers? I mean, Afghanistan developed since its independence in 1919, but that's hardly attributable to some sort of intrinsic Britishness. Same for Egypt, with its 1922 independence, or Libya in 1951. Just like how Vietnam developed after independence from France. While we've seen how Japan developed without being part of any colonial system. ("it was probably better in the end to be conquered by the Romans than many others" rejects the idea that it might have been better to not be conquered at all.) > A "country" is just a lot of bits that someone conquered. The modern definition of a "country" also requires a permanent population and a government, along with recognition by other countries. Note that this definition is of fundamentally European origin. Further note the difficulty of using your definition for "Northern Cyprus" and "Sealand", much less the "Sovereign Military Order of Malta".

physicsguy 2y ago
Japan was a colonising state, Korea, Manchuria, Taiwan
- eesmith 2y ago
  I was commenting on 'spawned a bunch of successful countries .. and all have developed' by pointing out the meaningless of "developed". Every country has developed over the last 100 years - those which were British colonies, those which were French colonies, and those which were not colonized. That Japan and Ethiopia carried out atrocities to expand their respective empires during that time is completely besides the point.
  - t43562 2y ago
    I don't claim to "really know" but being born in a "formerly pink" bit of Africa has always seemed a lot better to me than the alternatives. I wouldn't want to have been born in Mozambique or Angola (Portugese) or the DRC (Belgium) and even the Francophone bits of Africa seem a bit doubtful to me. This may just be for reasons that nobody can control of course. Perhaps anyone taking on those places would have had the same results.

mike_hearn 2y ago

With you until the last paragraph. It's unclear what you mean by "investments needed to make the next advancements", but be aware that the UK is back in the EU Horizon Research programme. It rejoined that part only a year or so after leaving, something the Remain campaign and the EU's negotiators insisted would be impossible, and the Brexit campaigners said would be an obvious and common sense move for the EU. Turned out the latter were correct, the Remainers were wrong and the EU itself was bluffing. That said, it's not very likely that teaming up with the EU makes any difference. The UK was a full member during a time of economic stagnation. The EU is not outperforming it.