Acquiescence to objective immorality doesn’t turn it into objective morality
It is incredible that anyone would defend the history of British imperialism in Ireland as John F Hyland did – ‘British Empire brought great benefit to Ireland’ (August 17). He cites acquiescence prior to 1916 as evidence in support of his argument but that is as strong an argument as there were quislings in Norway who went along with the German Reich before 1945. Acquiescence to objective immorality does not turn it into objective morality. Hong Kong was used as a port to ship opium into China under the British Empire whereas under the People’s Republic it has one of the highest human development indices in the world. If the British Empire is to be compared to a vehicle then it is more apt to compare it to an armoured multi-purpose military vehicle. Should the Irish be thankful for the plantations, the Year of Slaughter, the Ulster Scots genocide of 1798, An Gorta Mór, the Tan War, the British supplying illegal weapons to the Free Staters in the Civil War, the Troubles and every massacre since Baginbun? Newgrange is as beautiful, if not more so, as any of the canals, Georgian and Victorian squares and buildings in Ireland and it was built long before all of them. Why would eroding Gaelic culture be anything but detrimental to Irish society? At least he acknowledges that Westminster is responsible for creating the Leinster House jurisdiction. It should be common knowledge that Brehon laws pre-dated English common law by centuries. Did the British Empire bring prosperity to Tanzania when it was Tanganyika and Zanzibar or Malawi when it was Nyasaland? Did it bring prosperity to Kiribati, the Soloman Islands, Uganda, Vanuatu, Lesotho, Sierra Leone, and the Gambia? Britain has a gross domestic product purchasing power parity per capita that is double that of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh combined. Does anyone believe that the aforementioned countries have a high opinion of the Raj? Do people think they are grateful because the Raj outlawed purdah? On the enlightenment, the Society of United Irishmen were products of it yet I don’t recall reading his defence of 1798. Christianity was introduced to Ireland by Maewyn Succat and he also abolished slavery in Ireland long before the British Empire reintroduced it. He was from the Kingdom of Strathclyde which was a British kingdom long before the British Empire.
It was also St Patrick who did away with barbaric practices such as human sacrifice and mutilation. It was his introduction of Christianity to Ireland, long before the British Empire, that led to better education and literacy.
The Book of Kells is an obvious example of this. It was early Irish Christianity that led to the discovery of renewable energy as monks in Ulster created tidal mills in the seventh century. On improved healthcare, Attlee’s government was elected eight decades ago and there were centuries of substandard healthcare and imperialism prior. Is he going to enlighten South Africans on how they benefited from the British Empire since the Second Boer War?
ÉAMONN MacGRIANNA
Belfast BT11
How did centuries of butchery bring benefit to Ireland?
I wish to reply to John F Hyland’s fantastical claim – ‘British Empire brought great benefit to Ireland’ (August 17). How could the subjective attempt of genocide of a people bring benefit to Ireland? The British Empire drove people off their land and introduced a landlord system that starved more than a million people. They forbid the native language, culture and right to develop and did not give us the English language but forced it on us. How did the centuries of butchery of the local population bring benefit? Mr Hyland states they built railways and canals and beautiful buildings and squares. Perhaps he would like to tell us who these beautiful buildings and squares were built for. It certainly was not for the native population. As for canals and railways – they were built for the quick movement of troops and to get the loot to the ports. As for them bringing the parliament, I thought the Greeks did that. We do not have titled peers with reserved seats for bishops and others. Britain is not a true democracy in the full sense of the word. The British Empire slaughtered millions throughout the world through butchery, famine and neglect. They invented the ‘concentration camp’ in their Boer War, killing tens of thousands of men, women and children. They did not abolish slavery, other countries never used it. They abolished slavery after they used it to develop and opposed it lest their competitors would do the same. They did not bring Christianity to Ireland or the rule of law.
Has Mr Hyland ever heard of the Penal Laws? Palestine, Sudan, Cyprus, India, Kenya etc all raped and pillaged by an arrogant empire.
I suggest Mr Hyland reads a bit more. Caroline Elkin’s book Legacy of Violence – A History of the British Empire would be a start.
FRANCIS RICE
Belfast BT11
Britain was only place to benefit from empire
I would like to recommend a book to John F Hyland, whose letter espoused the ‘benefits’ of the British Empire. The book, which is written by Pulitzer Prize winner Professor Caroline Elkins, is called Legacy of Violence – A History of the British Empire. The paperback edition is to be published on September 7. Perhaps Mr Hyland will have a different view of the empire that has become known as ‘the long holocaust’. The only place to benefit from the empire was Britain itself.
DANNY BOYD
Belfast BT15
