Discussion about this post

User's avatar
OmgPuppies's avatar

I'm reminded of something the Englishman G. K. Chesterton wrote when he visited America shortly after World War I:

"But there was something else that made me uncomfortable; it was not only the sense of being somewhat boisterously forgiven; it was also something involving questions of power as well as morality. Then it seemed to me that a new sensation turned me hot and cold; and I felt something I have never before felt in a foreign land. Never had my father or my grandfather known that sensation; never during the great and complex and perhaps perilous expansion of our power and commerce in the last hundred years had an Englishman heard exactly that note in a human voice. England was being *pitied*. I, as an Englishman, was not only being pardoned but pitied. My country was beginning to be an object of compassion, like Poland or Spain. My first emotion, full of the mood and movement of a hundred years, was one of furious anger. But the anger has given place to anxiety; and the anxiety is not yet at an end."

Expand full comment
thethirdromana's avatar

I can see a couple of other people have contributed their perspective as British people; I'd like to add mine, particularly in gratitude for all the work you do on this!

I think the phrase that's relevant here is, "the axe forgets, but the tree remembers". Which is to say that every country where the British committed atrocities remembers the details of all of those atrocities; every Irish person, for example, can list every detail of what Britain did there, whereas the average British person is aware of the Great Famine and maybe a general sense of historical guilt, and that's it.

That's not surprising. There are 197 countries in the world and Britain did terrible things in quite a lot of them. Even listing all of the countries that were at some point under the control of the British Empire is a significant exercise in memorisation. I don't think the average British person is aware of what Britain did in China, and if they were told, the reaction would be something like "oh, there too?" Most people now learn about the worst of the British Empire at school (read: slavery) but not the details of everything the British Empire did, in part because there wouldn't be any time left to learn about anything else.

If you are someone (generally left-leaning) who feels that the British Empire was especially bad and people in the modern day do have a moral responsibility to atone for its actions (and a majority do not think that, either because they think the British Empire was a good thing/less bad than other contemporary empires, or because they don't think we bear a responsibility for the actions of our ancestors), then China is _still_ very far down the list of countries to apologise to or to return artefacts to. I think for the average person there are three reasons for that.

1. Because we did much worse in other places. Find any list of the worst atrocities of the British Empire, and China doesn't feature. (This is - I hope obviously - not a defence of the British Empire in China). Apologies should, intuitively, be given to the worst affected first, and I'd note that we have apologised to Ireland and to Kenya. (Personally I feel we should be giving a LOT more apologies than that, but I'm trying not to make this about my views).

2. Because modern China is doing reasonably well. I think for the average person, if we are going to apologise for our history, and especially if that comes with financial recompense, it should be to the countries that are still suffering the worst consequences. Some people want UK aid spending to be explicitly treated as reparations for British colonialism. Outside of disaster support, very few people want the UK to send aid to China.

3. Because British people are generally hostile to the Chinese government. Not, I would say, to Chinese people, culture, etc, but decidedly towards the CCP. If actions to atone for colonialism - an apology, a return of artefacts etc - would strengthen the CCP, then I would expect most British people to be against it.

This is a bit of a tangent, but I think something that's really important to understand is that British culture is very much in favour of supporting the underdog. You see this in the massive popular support for Ukraine here. There are quite possibly more Ukrainian flags flying in Britain today than British ones. Most British people are extremely proud that our country is one of Ukraine's top supporters globally.

This is not because of any particular attachment to Ukraine, a country that most British people couldn't have found on a map before February last year. It's because, regardless of how out of step this might sound with our country's history, British people love to support an underdog, particularly an underdog fighting for values of democracy and freedom that we share.

China is not an underdog and never really has been. That affects the British view of the past - instinctively, British people feel much more guilt about atrocities in countries that were completely unable to defend themselves, where we had machine guns and they had spears and shields. (Is this an accurate view of historical battles? It doesn't really matter - it's one that a lot of people here would share). Whereas Britain v China was one empire against another.

I think this is also where Britain's view of itself differs considerably from China's view. We see ourselves (ahistorically, but nonetheless) as an underdog. A lot of British writing refers to Britain as "a small island" or similar. Even when the British Empire was at its height, there was a lot of insecurity about falling behind Germany or the USA.

You didn't ask this, but the preference for the underdog also affects the British view of the present - in particular, in the context of Taiwan. If China were to invade Taiwan, I don't think there would be quite the same surge of support for Taiwan as there was and still is for Ukraine, partly because it's further away, partly because the British economy is so much more dependent on China than on Russia. But nonetheless, even for people who know nothing much about either country, of course you side with the smaller, weaker country, especially if it's a democracy.

Expand full comment
27 more comments...

No posts