Rule Britannia was Mad Dogs and Englishmen out in the Noonday Sun. But what Noel Coward didn't reflect in his little ditty is a modern world racked by blood, death and conflict because of English arrogance, imperial greed and insufferable pomposity.
No other country besides Britain comes close to qualifying for the same category as Nazi Germany when measuring crimes against humanity and suffering on a mass scale.
The fate of dozens of nations in Asia, Africa and the Middle East was forged in the furnace of English colonialism and remain haunted by present day violence and conflict.
China, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, West Indies, Kenya, South Africa, New Zealand, Ireland, Canada, Australia, Botswana, Nigeria, Egypt, Sudan, Ghana, Uganda, Zimbabwe, Malaya, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, United Arab Emirates, Iraq among others. In fact only 22 nations during Pax Britannia were not colonized by Britain.
English racial superiority rivals the Aryan myth of Nazi uber alles in its cold contempt for colonized and subjugated people.
The past glory of John Bull came at a very high price still being paid for today.
With Brexit, the English Upper Class sans their colonial empire has turned on its own lesser people to satisfy their addiction to sadistic dominance. English folly stands alone in history, this time with the British people set adrift in violent seas.
This is much more than mere incompetence.
82
YES.
10
Glad to see this brilliant piece published here. For once the Times scoops The Guardian. I guess it is hard even for that excellent paper to print it in the U.K. I wonder what those pompous fellows at the Economist “Newspaper” as they call themselves think. They have to create on of those fancy a new columns named Pankaj!
32
What a load of old tosh! You think what you like about the British Empire! I personally think it was Britishers at their best! Winston Churchill was one of the greatest leaders of all time and if not for him the world would have looked the other way while Hitler overran Europe and eventually the world through the use of an Atomic bomb!
20
Join the club.
2
Good old neo Marxist tosh. Your author clearly has a massive Indian nationalist chip on her shoulder. A patchwork of accusations made up to suggest a malign pattern. This is classic Marxist revisionism.
One can see lots of ultra liberal NYT readers lapping this up.
Fact is government is messy and complicated and no empire is free of crimes as well as glories. America, I'm looking at you too.
29
As someone who is NOT a member of the British ruling class can't see why giving India what it wanted when it wanted it was so wrong. 70 years later, India is still riven by internal divisions which can't surely all be laid at the door of the UK, or the "ruling class" - because ultimately the voters will decide. On Ireland, the creation of the North was decided by voters, and will in future be decided by voters. Democracy at work. Same for Brexit and everything else. Seeing conspiracies and shadows everywhere is a dangerous mindset. Cock-up by well-meaning people works better for me than these rehashes of ancient history.
24
How refreshing to read such an objective summary of Brexit and the folly of the Brits. 30 years of the 'English' Elite and their crony newspaper publishers blaming Europe for all their ills (including the idiot Boris Johnston blaming Europe for demanding straight bananas ) has led to this- turkeys voting for Christmas. We will suffer in the short term but we have the energy, the immigrants from Eastern Europe and the outlook to move past this quickly. Thank you for your wonderful piece - I've emailed it all over the world.
36
If Britain was a true democracy they would have left the EU decades ago. Who wants to take orders from Brussels. Britain has a substantial population. If one does not the way the vote turned out just do it over as seen; how pathetic they are.
7
Prince Philip just proved this / again. At 97 yrs old he drives a car that careens through an intersection and totals the vehicle and injured two in the other car. Two days later he has not apologized; I don’t know if he has been held responsible for the incident - he WAS at-fault. And then he is driving a similar vehicle without a seatbelt. Fine of £100. Was he fined? I wonder if he is trying to kill himself. If he is he should use another option - so as not to put others at risk with his stupid behavior.
28
Right when I was giving up on NYT, this article shows some brilliance remains.Every international dispute has its roots due to arrogant British imperialist division like Middle east Palestine-Israel, Iran-Iraq-Kurd issue, India-Pakistan, Pakistan-Afghanistan and many more. And the blood of the worst man made disaster Partition of India-Pakistan lies on British aristorats and the tragedy is, it is still not fully acknowledged and accepted around the world. The denial starts within the subcontinent where you had PMs like Manmohan Singh(ironically a Punjabi) saying British rule was good for India. Time the victims of Partition were given the same dignity and sympathy given to the victims of the Jewish Holocaust.And Great Britain is treated the same way as Germany for their imperialist crimes.
22
Karma. I say this as a South African. Time for Britain to face the horror of imperialism.
19
And people wonder why Obama removed the Churchill (whose troops tortured his grandfather) bust from the Oval Office.
28
Millions of people died because of people like Mountbatten. Millions of women raped. Millions made refugees. Even today, they are still dying, being raped, being made refugees because of people like Mountbatten.
Britain, or more precisely the English, deserve Brexit.
The Irish Republican Army assassinated Mountbatten.
Remind me who is the terrorist again?
15
Why does the sun never sets on the British Empire? Because you can never trust a Brit when it gets dark.
25
The author seems much too gleeful about a serious matter.
8
Yesterday I read this almost amusingly hysterical article about the partition of India that gave not a word about the situation in which this happened followed by comments that were blazing with a level of bitter resentment and hatred of the British suggesting in fact there is a sense of Britains continous important in the world which is very flattering!
However my comment was not posted by the NYT and because it is the only comment that gives some facts about the situation I am trying again. It would be sad if the NYT again blocked it
In 1947 Britain after six long years of war (andthere was no ^phony war^) Britain was bombed out,bankrupt food rationed and exhausted.By ending Lend Lease America forced the UK to beg for a loan granted on condition that Imperial Preference (customs duties that paid for the upkeep of the Empire) were completely scrapped. It was essential therefore that Britian got out of many of its colonial responsibilities as quickly as possible
Although the Muslim and Hindu leaders worked together to ensure this happened quickly the basic hatreds between them remained resulting in 4 vicious wars in 1947 ,65.71. and 1999
To suggest the way India was partitioned caused these religious hatreds is absurd. The British worked very closely with Indian and Muslim leaders and anyway once these two new nations became independent they could have scrapped the British system completely and instantly!
The article and comments are therefor complete nonsense!
16
If India is such a success story, why are so many Indians leaving India?
14
Great Editorial but I am respectfully disagree with assumption of incompetence asI believe British elite knew
What they are doing and instead of
Incompetence brutality and cruelty and
Care less was the reason.
Purdue knew they are killing people
with OxyContin but their goals was
Millions $ rather than caring about
Patients. So they were not incompetent
but brutal.
Redcliff got knighted that was only
Things mattered to him rather than
massacre and rape of millions.
H
4
Mr Mishra weaves a compelling and fascinating comparison of Britain's 1947 Indian exit and Brexit today.
Interesting that the "exits" of Canada, Australia and New Zealand were of a totally different character; but us poor sods did get dragged into two world wars to help the chumocracy.
7
Stupidity in England isn't a Ruling Class preserve — the statistics show that uneducated racists right across the economic spectrum voted for Brexit.
References:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0176268018301320
http://www.natcen.ac.uk/news-media/press-releases/2017/september/new-report-uncovers-extent-of-racial-prejudice-in-britain/
10
Jolly ho my boy.
I do believe you are "spot on".
4
Get a life! Stop whining! Your Indian government has really set a wonderful example of how to govern! Once the men in India start using toilets rather than defecating on the ground because they think it's "manly", then we can compare notes about civilization! Then there's all the polution... air, water, land, everywhere. You're really one to lecture Europeans!
16
If the Brits can survive Hitler's V-1s and V-2s, Brussels is not a problem. But, message to Brits, get gone while you can--the Grand Collective will stomp England to dust.
8
I suspect Pankaj found evidence that a Brit was responsible for depriving him of his pillow and a warm blanket, the morning he woke up to write this article :-)
7
@Pankaj
How's contemporary politics in India ?
Perfect ?
10
What a rather odd essay and even odder, for the most part,
NYT Picks.
There was no proper way to leave India and why anyone thinks there could have been a perfect way to delineate Pakistan from India is delusional.
Nehru and Jinnah agreed to the partition,
if you wish to blame someone for the bloodbath that
followed, blame them, however:
No one forced anyone to kill their neighbours,
people do what they will do and to think that you have
the wisdom to always implement a rational solution
is far more foolish than anything the British "Elite' came up
with.
As for Brexit, how does it help most people who do not have
the skills to move to Europe ?
It doesn't, as for the economic penalties that the EU wishes
to impose on Great Britain for leaving -
it only show that well educated bureaucrats in Brussels
are even stupider than Radcliffe.
As for the armchair commentators who are absolutely sure they could have de-colonised the Empire in a splendid manner - I have a plane ticket for you to Syria - have at it lads.
14
As for the leadership of the UK today, 36% of the present cabinet are privately educated and 22% of Labour's shadow cabinet. Should that be a disqualification? It certainly has not been in the USA where Trump, Obama, both Bushes, Kennedy, and Franklin Roosevelt were all educated privately, as was Al Gore and John Kerry, while the Obamas and Clintons sent their children to private schools (44% of Senators and 36% of US Representatives have done the same). The US (unlike the UK and India) has still failed to elect a woman head of government - the UK has had two - both of them far from coming from what the author considers the "elites," went to selective state (grammar) schools. In the 19th century the British chose as Prime Minister, Benjamin Disraeli, born to a Jewish family (he converted aged 12) – how many Jewish born Presidents has the US chosen? How many Moslem Prime Ministers has India had (it is the third largest Moslem country). This is a preposterously biased article which demonstrates an unbalanced hatred for the British.
11
Confirms what I have posted re Brexit punishment for British colonialism.
1
I wonder what the author thinks of those Indian and Pakistanis who have lived and starved in misery so they could allocate resources to nuclear warheads. The US makes similar stupid and harmful decisions but the degree in the Indian subcontinent is over the top.
4
I gotta read some of this guy’s books!
1
Keep looking back. Smart.
3
Even in 1939, there were some who saw clearly what the entirely English proponents of British Imperialism were all about, and dared write about it -
The following excerpt and link exposes the inherent blindness and ferocious ignorance of these Masters of Mankind -
"George Padmore 1939
The British Empire Is Worst Racket Yet Invented By Man
Source: New Leader, 15 December 1939.
Transcribed: by Christian Hogsbjerg for the Marxists’ Internet Archive 2007.
“If Imperialism means a certain racial superiority, suppression of political and economic freedom of other peoples, exploitation of resources of other countries for the benefit of the Imperialist countries then I say those are not characteristics of this country.” – Neville Chamberlain, British Prime Minister.
As a piece of humbug this statement cannot be beaten. How is it possible to maintain an empire without imperialist methods? This is just a contradiction in terms and Mr. Chamberlain certainly knows better. For his father in collusion with Cecil Rhodes annexed more territory in Africa for British Imperialism than Hitler has yet succeeded in grabbing in Europe for German Imperialism. But all who know British imperialists are not surprised at Mr. Chamberlain’s statement, for they are the most hypocritical ruling class in the world."
https://www.marxists.org/archive/padmore/1939/worst-racket.htm
4
I can hardly believe that I'm about to defend the British, but Mr. Mishra's tiresome screed is not only excessive and malicious but unforgivably inaccurate.
1) Mountbatten was a British Labour Party appointment as Viceroy and being attacked by a "right-wing historian" is hardly news.
2) Mr. Mishra's knowledge regarding the partition of Ireland is at best limited. First, it has never been as simple as Irish Protestant v. Catholic. Second, every pre-1916 rebellion against the British after the Williamite wars was predominantly Protestant led. Did he ever hear of Wolfe Tone or Robert Emmet? In 1916 the IRA leadership except for de Valera were not Catholic altar boys in their outlooks or beliefs. That said, the partition agreement was a mistake that perpetuated future misery for the British and Irish.
3) By the time of World War II, the British knew the Raj was over but held on to fight the very real Japanese threat. After the war, Whitehall tired of being the referee between the Muslim League and the Congress Party allowed partition and the pre-Raj historical hatreds exploded. Today corruption,religious persecution and murder reigns in the subcontinent that so reverently speaks of Gandhi.
4) In summary, Mr. Mishra really should moderate the malign adjectives and try to do a better job of historical analysis. However I would first prescribe a massive infusion of fiber before he attempts that unlikely task, let alone tackling the political and economic complexities of Brexit
17
It seems a bit much to blame the Brits alone for much colonial catastrophe. Mountbatten was incompetent but considerable blame can be placed on Pakistani and India leaders at the time stoking tribal hatred and demanding things be done quickly. Similarly, the Troubles were not due to simply drawing a line but deep seed animosities that created the breakaway counties (it was not the Brits who attempted to keep them but the reality of the population). Similarly, it is a bit insulting to portray the British population as a bunch of ignorant peasants being led by an elite (very postmodern marxist that) w/o any brains or ability. Just like any imperial power the decline of empire is never pretty.
I live in a 'Remain' area surrounded by 'Leave' areas in the N. of England (and voted Remain) and was my organisation's representative at many local Brexit debates during the vote. What surprised me was that people were more informed that journalists/pundits gave them credit for. Also, to characterize the Tory's as just a bunch of posh boys from boarding schools is simply not true as is the stereotype of all Labour MPs as brought up on council estates by single mums.
While I am not a Tory/Labour supporter - more Lib Dem - and question the competence of the leadership of the party, one hardly has confidence when looking across the aisle and seeing Jez (Corbyn), McDonald, Abbott and the shadow cabinet of pocket Trotskyites. If they were competent they would be in power.
9
One keeps wondering what‘s wrong with them? Great explainer piece!
1
Hilarious!...The idea that an Indian can harbour such grievances over seventy years after independence is astonishing..the idea that Americans can join in with their bitter hatreds of the British suggest also a level of resentful inferiority that is also remarkable and of course flattering as a reminder of how the the American dream has collapsed Here however for those who like the truth are the facts..
.
By 1947 Britain was a bankrupt bombed out food rationed nation with daily electricity cuts. Hindu and Muslim nationalists were pushing for independence Britian had to desperately ask America for a loan and Mountbatten sensibly agreed with the Indians to withdraw as quickly as possible the boundaries of India and Pakistan etc agreed in consultation with the Indian leaders. The idea of blaming the British for the hundreds of thousands of Indians murdered or raped etc is absurd
The same can be said of all independence arrangements made by the British. From Independence all countries could wipe out any British decisions instantly.India has shockingly grown from 400 million to 1400,000,000 and still has about 400 million who have never used a toilet, drunk clean water or who can read
I notice the usual comments about the the Irish famine. Ireland had a very advanced system of workhouse welfare for the starving (the only in the world) but was overwhelmed .It gave however free passage to the Canadian territories (most US ports refused Irish entry)
10
The “divide and rule” policy of the British Raj has come home to roost. Karma in action.
5
Thanks to the author for reminding us of the dangers of British Imperialism. You would think that the United States would know better than to have stood in it stead for a foolish imperialism and to this day to count it our country's best ally in the world. Too bad that in Iraq we were egged on by Blair instead of listening to Schroeder.
1
Thanks for your putdown. We Yanks have been making fun of Brits ever since we thrashed them.
2
People think Boris Johnson can lead Britain out the EU, yet I'm unsure if he's stupid or if it's a clown act to get away with telling Tory lies. On the same TV show the media made a fuss because Boris said a stupid unimportant thing, he said an even bigger lie that the media didn't care about, because he said there wasn't a vote on the 2nd war against Iraq, when more Tories voted yes to it than other Parties. He either doesn't know what the party he belongs to does, or it's an experiment to see if he can get away with blaming others for what Tories caused. The ex banker Farage who was paying foreign wife on tax payers expenses and hiding money in tax havens, always planned to resign, to leave us out the EU with Tories in power, who only work in the interests of upper classes, bankers and corporations. Another Nigel, Nigel Lawson who made our economy collapse in early 90s by closely linking the British economy with USA in 1980s relying on many being in debt, was advising we leave the EU, while he applies to live in France
3
Had the British not left and India and Britain become one nation, we would have seen a black Indian Queen on the throne, something even Meghan Markle may not be able to sit on.
2
Prince Phillips SUV rollover yesterday is very metaphoric for British strategy over the past 100 years.
Britain’s colonialism and international stupidly was not alone but their legacy abroad proved better than most of the competition.
My British heritage is not so bad.
2
Fantastic analysis
Mahatma Gandhi, a new lawyer, thought himself a proper Englishman living in South Africa. One day a policeman pushed him off the sidewalk and into the street, where he belonged. This rough treatment of a "brown person" set Gandhi on his course of resistance. In imperial India, an Englishman could beat a servant at his leisure and without cause. There is a vast literature describing the inhumane treatment of Indians by their imperial masters.
4
As it happens, Amazon Prime is offering "The Thick Of It", the series written by Armando Iannucci before he wrote "Veep". Full of insights about the British political system, though system may be too strong a word for the process depicted herein.
Theresa May shows up in series four, in the character Mary Drake.
2
The comments made in this opinion piece about Winston Churchill refusing to help Indians cope with famine in 1943 on the grounds that they “breed like rabbits.” must be addressed. It is true that Churchill made racist jokes, which were common at that time among all classes in England. But the fact is that Churchill was proud of the population increase in India, which he felt was indicative of the quality of British rule.
The Bengali famine of 1943 was caused by bad weather which destroyed much of the crops upon which the people relied. A combination of hoarding by merchants, indifference by the native-controlled local governments of nearby states, and poor administration by the Imperial government made things worse.
Churchill ordered "Every effort must be made, even by the diversion of shipping urgently needed for war purposes to deal with local shortages." Unfortunately not enough could be done. Early 1943 was the nadir of the Battle of the Atlantic and there was scarcely enough shipping getting by the Nazi wolf packs to supply Britain. In earlier famine times, grain was imported from Burma and other nearby places, but these were all under Japanese control. Japanese submarines patrolled the approaches to India. Grain was brought in from Australia and Iraq but not nearly enough was available. Churchill did his best.
12
Superb, nails it!
1
Wonderful piece, but if you’re in a hurry the 8-word headline says it all.
I now see the masters of India, and wonder what all the fuss is about the British imperialists.
5
That was a fun read
1
Bravo. I am exhausted by our countries Churchill worship. Can someone force Joe Scarborough to read this article?
Fantastic comment on the irony comment about Ireland. Britain is finally being called to account for their dastardly deeds. Fighting Hitler in WWII doesn't forgive hunreds of years of destructive behavior.
3
British rule as an empire, to plunder distant lands, some of it taken over later by America, was a disaster to the world, and it's people; you didn't mention the Middle East, where absurd partitions were concocted for the benefit of the 'free' flow of oil...and whose price we are paying even today. Brexit is just the last stupidity explaining the ilusion of british superiority...as they are shooting their own foot. Well deserved, it seems.
2
The best article I have read in a while.
2
Wow. What a lot of statements made with so little caution or documentation ! And not much evidence of self criticism . . Short of forcibly deporting protestants in Ireland (or Jews from Germany, Slave descendents from the Southern States, Palestinians from Israel, Pilgrim Father descendents from the USA, manifest destiny settlers from Native American tribal lands ) it seems unhelpful to rail against a historical reality, however associated with stupidity, ignorance, racism, brutality ,deceit , greed etc. The issues surely are what to do in the future. The main opinion piece seems to be a broad based criticism of UK policies, linked to a group of policy making “Oxford chums”, which relates Brexit to Indian Partition, to Irish Partition and to Scotland. My reading of the Indian history differs ( would Jinnah as head of the Muslim League really have agreed to a delay in partition? – references please) but I certainly see the British role in India as totally self interested and hardly benign - surprise. Like US immigrants etc etc! Hopefully we are all growing out of just quoting history from our primary school texts. Gerrymandering is not confined to Ireland . Whatever you learn from Indian, Irish and Scots History it will be that it is complicated. UK confusions with Brexit are linked with problems of democratic process as well as small group power. These problems are hardly unique to the UK. A few more facts can make an opinion carry more weight.
7
It is not entirely surprising that an article as saturated with spite as this should be published in a place where anti-British sentiment has long festered, handed on from father to son and carefully burnished to a dull glow over countless years.
But ask yourselves this - how is it that two nations as magnificent as India and Pakistan, having for decades clamoured for the British to go, promptly dissolved themselves into fractitious genocidal conflict and still 70 years after are still blaming the British for all their ills?
One would almost think the British were doing them a favour by stopping them from indulging in such murderous ways for so very long, until at last, the British worn out from such endeavours wearily retreated.
There are many ways to read hostory, but it is probably best done with honesty and charity, two qualities not readily apparent here.
12
Mishra digs into the subject with all the caustic irony he can, but his insistence that the same upper class obduracy that typified the Raj’s exit also typifies Brexit reifies a static, eternal Britain that, if the tables were turned and a Brit was describing India, would be called racist.
5
Well, As my English teacher would say..."the chickens have finally come home to roost". Now that the British are having a taste of their own medicine, let's wait to see how it tastes in their mouths. I feel sorry for the millions of ordinary British people who are being used as pawns in this game.
The overall issue after WW11 was that Britain was broke and a ward of the US. The latter demanded that the Empire be dismantled starting with India and the financial pressure did the rest. Mountbatten was following orders from London.
4
This opinion is far off the mark since the Brexit movement is not wholly of British origin but fits well with the Trumpian world in the US and other anti immigrant movements in several other European countries.
4
Well Mountbatten did reap the whirlwind as I recall. He ended with a Bang!
Finally someone pointing out the facts.
A pity however that he ignored the fact that the entire Middle East situation centered around Israel has direct roots in English imperialism, and this aspect is always ignored, time after time.
1
I would be snarky about the British system, but considering our own billionaire system of influence on both parties, I can't see how the US system is any better.
Or would you seriously trade a David Cameron or a Mountbatten for a Sheldon Adelson or a Koch?
3
On my best day
I cannot look in the mirror
And tell myself that
I’m a better man than
Winston Churchill
4
Congratulations Mr. Mishra. This is one of the better articles I have read in the NYT. Keep up the good work.
Odd piece in many ways. India is currently run by a racist Hindu party that clearly feels Hindus are superior to everybody else, certainly to Moslems, so not much there in terms of moral superiority. Moreover India, a vast country of over a billion people that STILL has an economy smaller than the UK, so not much evidence of economic superiority either (note that China, starting from the same place, has done much better. I note that India also is not part of any significant economic community. Inane event, I think the problems with a hard Brexit have been incredibly oversold. If the economy contracts by 5% so what? Just kick out the 5% of the population that are not citizens and the per capita economy would be unchanged!
4
There is little in this article with which I agree other than the British ruling class containing a lot of ignorant egotistical people.
Though Mountbatten did withdraw from India hastily, and the partition lines could have been drawn by many people with greater knowledge of India, that definitely does not explain the mayhem that followed. The violence was simply unavoidable under the circumstances given the tension between Hindus and Muslims and Sikhs, tension that preceded the arrival of the British by centuries.
Muslims in Calcutta began slaughtering and raping Hindus in mid-August 1946, BEFORE Mountbatten had even announced the date of British departure. This is depicted in the 1980s movie Gandhi. It was in the mere anticipation of the British leaving and without knowing precisely when they would depart.
From Calcutta the violence spread. Forty Muslims were slaughtered in reprisal violence in Patna, the capital of Bihar province in October, 1946. This is still prior to lines of demarcation being drawn or a date of departure being set.
The violence spread to Punjab in March, 1947, with Muslims attacking Sikhs and Hindus, and still BEFORE the setting of the departure date or the demarcation lines.
I know it is fashionable to blame the upper classes for the world's woes but some times the real culprit is fallibility of normal people. Inaccurate historical analysis like this article is exactly what I have come to expect from the NY Times.
10
What a superb piece. I love Great Britain. But the English aristocracy has gotten by far more on style than substance, as reflected in the disastrous decisions it's made when substantive and ethical judgment has been called for.
On a lighter though somewhat less illuminating note, this old Monty Python bit on "The Upper Class Twit of the Year" comes to mind:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCyr1ugzxXM
2
Referring to https://www.bbc.com/news/politics/eu_referendum/results,
N. Ireland, Gibraltar and Scotland all voted to remain. England and Wales voted to leave. As always, the English wet the bed.
Reading personal stories of people from the northwest Indian state of Punjab during the 40's partition-era is gut-wrenching. I have some Punjabi friends whose grandparents and great-grandparents were victims who endured brutal familial separation and were "lost" forever.
The terrible tragedy and separation that followed is justifiably the work of Britain. "Divide-and-Rule" was their game plan and you see if worked out just as they intended. Churchill also referred to native Indians as "Sub-human", so he has that going for him. In my eyes, he was a vile individual.
I pray for UK's children, but apart from that I have no feelings of sympathy because of this Brexit mess. Just desserts in my opinion.
3
An excellent article by Fintan O’Toole on this same theme:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/oct/19/brexiters-theresa-may-northern-ireland
2
Karma grinds slowly, but it grinds exceedingly small and it is relentless, there is no escape.
2
In relation to the populist lunacy that is Brexit, one might with as much justice write of the malign incompetence of the British working class, except that all such sweeping generalisations are equally misleading and unhelpful. As for the malignancy of aggressive nationalism, I cannot see that England or the UK as a whole has a track record which is significantly more repulsive than that of, say, Belgium, or France, or for that matter the United States. To claim otherwise reveals its own less than subtle prejudices.
3
Pankaj Mishra quoted the great Paul Scott is his article concerning the British “ruling class”.
Mr Mishra should be reminded of Scott’s words on the first page of the first volume of The Raj Quartet, when he described the relationship of India and Britain, in 1942, as being:
" the spectacle of two nations in violent opposition, not for the first time nor as yet for the last because they were then still locked in an imperial embrace of such long standing and subtlety it was no longer possible for them to know whether they hated or loved one another, or what is was that held them together and seemed to have confused the image of their separate identities".
This was the real meaning of the following four volumes of Scott’s masterpiece and was his judgement of the twilight of the Raj, not a selective quotation used by Mishra to justify the intemperate opinions expressed in this article. I might add that, although there are parts this article with which I agree, the level of undisguised pleasure at the present lamentable situation in the UK, together with distortions of historical facts, are not only unattractive, but devalue much of what was written.
As for Paul Scott's statement that we, as British and Indians, no longer knew if we loved or hated each other, I always felt the former. In that context, applying today's standards, to facts of a century or more ago, is not that useful and invariably intellectually dishonest
4
Of course, this article is also base on the idea that there might be something wrong with an elite group of insular people who are known to one another and who can't help but keep bringing up the same bad ideas about how to subdivide the world.
Sounds like the Harvard and Yale crowd in Washington DC, and why we have such a wretched relationship with Latin America, the Middle East, and Asia. And of course why the Republicans can't get away from outmoded ideas about taxes.
1
A simple line on a map caused suffering in India.
A simple slogan 'Make America Great Again' and some ugly dog-whistle policies carved out a powerful political demographic that put an idiot in charge of a superpower.
A Brexit decision made on the basis of emotion, scant facts, uncontrolled migration and tainted by Russian social media trolls is falling victim to all the consequential details that were not considered.
The general issue that confronts us is that politics is by nature a simplistic overlay on the rich complexity and diversity of human society and the organisations, systems and relationships it contains.
We should pause to consider the ideal qualities, skills and knowledge that political leaders should possess to operate effectively in the modern world and set about training people to work as our elected professional politicians.
Amateur politicians are what we have but not what we need.
We know that the edited soundbites played on the news are not telling the whole story.
So we should also consider whether politics can ever safely be conducted through social media posts and tweets because these forms of communication are very poor at communicating the detail of most real world issues.
A financially struggling news media dominated by a focus on ratings and controlled by moguls such as Rupert Murdoch does not pass muster as the great fourth estate needed to inform citizens and protect democracy.
8
This article is venemous spouting of personal opinions without any shred of striving for balance and truth. For one thing the Indians, Hindus and Muslims, were authors of most of the tragedy that ensued in 1947. If the Indian leadership had cooperated better, much of this inter-sectarian disaster could have been avoided. Demonizing the British may make the author feel better, but it is not helpful.
6
I am loathe to see what purpose, or productive discourse, can come from such an article as this. And the ruling classes, anywhere, are rarely competent. How does this piece help?
7
History will always be what is written, not what occurred.
It's valuable to view past errors and deficiencies, but they should be judged in their time, not by current knowledge/morals and with hindsight.
The author is absolutely right, the arrogance of empire is appalling, but it is entirely understandable how that came about from the social structure imposed by an invader of our islands and by religious doctrine over a thousand years.
How Britain behaved in India was a disgrace, but was India a pure and righteous beacon before the British arrived ? And come to think of it, was America right to take over lands from Mexico? In fact Could Alaska not itself be called a colony? - well, it's not actually attached to the main body of States and it's population was overtaken by white settlers for the political purpose of keeping Russia from America's back door - or am I rewriting history from a modern perspective?
Yes, there are a minority of people in Britain, who through wealth and private education, still think they have the right to rule over we mere plebs, and as a gang of Brexiteers they are intent on taking us into a fantasy land that will ruin us, but that is to ignore the many other politicians who are NOT from that background, just as many in Congress are not the like of Trump.
It's entirely right that we face and acknowledge our past, but it's also easy to slag-off others and point fingers, we all live in glass houses, do be very careful how far you throw your own brick!
3
Mr. Mishra's comments are bang on the money, but unfortunately all empires have behaved the same way. Blind self-interest is the founding principle of colonialism. Before British domination of India, the Mughal Empire notoriously tortured and butchered millions of Hindus, Sikhs, and non-Sunni Muslims. Later, Indian rulers cooperated enthusiastically with the East India Company and then the British Raj in suppressing and exploiting the population. One must also remember that Gandhi's Quit India Movement insisted on independence and seemed to have no more idea than did the British elites that slaughter and chaos--willfully committed by Indians against other Indians--would result.
The U.S. Empire has nothing to be proud of, either. Its corporate-capitalist imperialism has chummed up with the world's worst dictators to terrorize and exploit helpless civilians within the American "sphere of influence." It's the way empires work, and it would be wonderful if we could override this vileness in our human nature and treat each other a bit better. (Not holding my breath.)
6
"But it is safe to say that a long-cosseted British ruling class has finally come to the end of itself as it was."
And about bloody time.
2
Pankaj Mishra has described tha ills and evils of the British ruling elite in maligning the British cause and half hearted championing the Brexit .Indeed , it is worst political paralysis of the century.Mishra draws Brexit parallel with the British colonial rule in Ireland and in India and cites how Mountbatten incompetence led to million death,destruction rape and loot in India in 1947.
No doubt it reflects how insensitive and callous British ruling elites were ,particularly under Winston Churchill , to suffering humanity in Indian subcontinent who were caricatured by Churchill as rabbits.
Does similar feelings the current ruling elites in UK are reflected towards its own population ? It is a mute question that seeks answer which none,remain or leave camp are able to address.
It is wise to derive lessons from the past blunders and not to repeat those in the present . But harping on the past is to ruin the present and the future.
Mishra misses the root cause of British majority vote in favor of leaving European Union .It is the 30 years of failed neo-liberal economic order that made the life of working and middle class unbearable. While a large proportion of wealth accumulated with a tiny minorty, the less privileged deprived of human dignity and a descent life as a human under neo-liberalism found an excuse to isolate itself from the EU.
Mr Cameron share the blame for such a catastrophy so does Tony Blair, a disguised antisocialist, championed Thatcher neoliberalism .
There's nothing quite like the confidence of the incompetent and the arrogant - and it repeats again and again. Reading this piece, I was reminded of the neo-cons who descended upon Iraq post-2003 expecting to be greeted by cheering hordes and showered with rose petals . . . and they remained convinced of their rightness inspite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
4
I think Pankaj Mishra is unduly harsh on Mountbatten. The Indian partition crisis was not of his making. It was Churchill who consistently tried to divide Muslims from the mainstream Congress, and who reinforced the notion that Muslims would be treated like second class India in a 'Hindu' India. It was this policy, of espousing the Muslim cause as opposed to that of the secular Congress party, that ultimately led to the partition of the country.
From what I have read of the last months of the British Raj in India, Mountbatten's hand was forced by the rising tide of violence between Hindus and Muslims fanatics. He felt the communal riots could be best controlled by elected representatives of the soon-to-be-formed India and Pakistan. Most of the Congress and Muslim league politicians seem to have concurred with this view. Hence the advancement of Indian independence from June 1948 to August 1947.
This opinion describes a particular case of what every empire has done since the beginning of time. The imposition of some on the other, accompanied by a complete disregard of their human nature. This is a phenomenon taking place now by the powers that be. What is worrisome is that humanity hasn't moved beyond the phase of empire creation, and now we stand contemplating those "big nations" trying to build, well!, another empire.
It's difficult to be optimist in this 21st century: I guess it's the same that any other era past.
3
SURPRISINGLY The facts of the Russian hacking of the British vote during the balloting on the Brexit matter is omitted. While it's important to describe the class struggles surrounding the Brexit vote. The Russians did not stop at using weapons grade nerve agents in attacking British citizens. They also hacked the computer systems used for voting. Frankly, I think that the US got a worse deal than the UK. Theresa May is no Donald Trump. She is capable of mature, logical reasoning, is articulate and can focus on debate and tasks related to reading and writing for significantly longer than it takes Trump to write one of his 140 character tweets (that would be the pride and joy of the average third grader). Until the Brits beef up their defenses against Russian hacking, they'll be unable to resolve their problems. Meanwhile, May has survived another vote of no confidence. As the end of March approaches, the economy is likely to tank, which could trigger another vote of no confidence. Exiting the EU without any plan in place holds many uncertainties and dangers for the entire group of EU nations, not just for the UK.
4
Fascinating and well written column. Look forward to exploring his book for more. Thank you NYT!
3
This piece contains a lot of important historical facts, that I've been surprised to learn that many otherwise highly educated Americans do not know. This has to do with our upper class' emulation of the British upper class. Read this, people.
5
On a smaller scale but just as painful for its former subjects, Britain let go of Hong Kong without adequately ensuring (via UK citizenship, for instance) that China won’t inevitably limit, and one day terminate, political freedom.
Nor are the British alone - consider the establishment of Israel by Western powers, and the endless wars and miseries that ensued. All the former empires looting Africa’s resources, then leaving it partitioned to their whims.
The US is also consumed with long-term effects of its own short-sighted actions, whether in Latin America, or more recently, Iraq and Syria.
10
With respect to Hong Kong, India, Pakistan(s), Trans Jordan, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, numerous African and Middle East Countries, Caribbean Nations, Scotland, Republic of Ireland... they were NEVER Westminster’s to give away.
Every hive has its own queen bee. The one of the British elite has its queen bee in the Monarchy. I think it's time for Britain to say goodbye to the Monarchy not before thanking it for its 1000 years of service. Good manners require it.
2
This measured and inciteful article should be made compulsory reading for British politicians but it probably won't happen. The utter chaos in the Tory (Conservative) Party is evidenced by their absolute refusal to discuss their Brexit Plan with Opposition leaders until that Plan was rejected by Parliament recently. Such support by the Opposition much earlier in the debate would have obviated the need for Prime Minister May to depend on the votes of the DUP politicians whose only policy to any betterment of the people of Northern Ireland has always been a NO. Lest it be forgotten, the same DUP voted against the Belfast Agreement that has brought 20 years of relative peace to our Island. This same Party now holds the balance of power in the critical future relationship between the UK and the EU. This may be hard to believe but they have the backing of some influential Tory backwoodsmen whose heads are firmly stuck in the sands of 19th century Imperial Britain and all its supposed glory. Speaking of the 19th century, the Charge of the Light Brigade comes to mind. Speaking on Irish Radio recently, a local politician likened the madness of the Brexiteers to that famous Charge and opined that the present crop of anti Europe Tories would probably say that the Charge of the Light Brigade seemed like a good idea!
8
There seems to be a problematic tendency among commenters - one to some extent reinforced by the article - to confuse "English" with "British." Such a tendency reinforces the very English nationalism and ethnocentrism that Mr. Mishra so justifiably protests against.
4
This article encapsulated my feelings perfectly. When the full fury of Brexit is unleashed, May we please see Scotland and Ireland join into a Celtic Republic?
16
Well, well, Mr Mishra - so the atrocities that India/Pakistan experienced after getting their freedom, which they had been fighting for over decades, was entirely the fault of the departing British rulers, and nothing to do with the barbarity and primitive instincts of their own inhabitants (which is still on display today).
15
@James Oldroyd First read all the history
@James Oldroyd
You hit the nail on the head.
1
I think that most former British colonies are better off because of British influence, including the US. Disclosure: My father was born in Scotland and my grandfather shared at least two battlefields with Winston Churchill in Sudan and South Africa.
Scotland the Brave!
9
One of the most brilliantly written and accurately argued articles I have read in a long time. One note of clarification regarding Churchill: To say that he refused to help India cope with the famine of 1943 because of his rabid racism is being so kind to him as to almost absolve him of the crime -- Churchill actually was single-handedly responsible for making the famine much worse by diverting a substantial portion of India’s grain production to Europe for use by Allied troops (see Madhusree Mukerjee, “Churchill’s Secret War: The British Empire and the Ravaging of India During Word War II”).
14
Churchill made the correct decision. Defeating fascism was the more important task. Sometimes one has to choose the least bad alternative.
4
Interesting. And no doubt, bound to be the response from this generation of India's educated, as they look back on what they never knew, and what they, now, take for granted. And yet,the government, the very nation it self, the educated of India, would not be even close to where they are today, unless the British had brought their approach to education and government to India
5
It is ignorance of history to say education and government didn’t exist before the British arrived. But hey the times under Henry VIII isn’t the government that the British are proud of, is it ?
India was a British invention. As to the hasty exit, didn’t Gandhi insist the British left sooner rather than later? And some say the entire timetable was dictated by Jinner’s cancer. Partition has turned out to be a disaster in every case but it was not malignly intended. As for the incompetence, an understaffed administration ran the second most populous country on earth!
There is plenty to say about the wrongness of empire and the iniquities of the British empire and its ruling class, however, nationalist polemic misses its mark. Many of the harshest histories of British India have been written by British scholars, in any case. This is a classic argument by false analogy,
13
Even this very week, we witness the ongoing hardening of the mountainous Afghan-Pakistan frontier (by Pakistan, notably) as another present-day result of the long-ago remote decision-maker's arbitrary 'put the border, oh, shall we say, hmmm, there. Yes, that's probably fine. I'm sure it will all be fine in the end' post-colonial arrogance: Two-meter high, concertina-topped fencing that villagers on either side in the valleys below cannot accept as legitimate. [Shakes head and sighs. Again.]
1
It seems that introspection and reflection are not Britain's strong points.
The BBC and The Guardian have been focusing mainly on problems around the world,especially the US.The UK section of the Guardian does not appear on the front page.It requires a separate search.
Except for fluff pieces re the Monarchy,US media has allowed Britain to avoid scrutiny.
It's high time to start looking into what is going on there and to expect accountability.
The poverty rate in England is shockingly high,along with food and housing insecurity,displacement,brutal austerity.
These should be news topics.
6
@Laura - I think that you may be a little confused. The BBC and The Guardian, in common with most reasonably competent international news media organisations, re-order the display of their news items dependent on their readers' locations. For readers outside the UK browser geo-locators prioritise non-UK news stories. Within the UK these, and other news outlets, deploy (seemingly endless and often too introspective) news about the UK as a priority.
This news includes endless self-examination of BREXIT, the consequences of administrative "austerity" programmes and current levels of food and housing insecurity. The recent canard ("fake news") concerning the poverty rate in England, if you will, more properly in Britain, based around an erroneous analysis, possibly intentionally misleading, recently disseminated by @SpectatorIndex wilfully conflated and confused different statistical series. Even by relative-poverty statistics, however, calculated consistently by Eurostat, the UK "at-risk-of-poverty" rate, stood at 17% for 2017, preciscely, if ironically, the EU average.
The relative-poverty measure is not one usually adopted by the US in federal calculations, but the comparison point, just for interest would suggest that in 2017 those in relative poverty in the US under this method would approach 33% in contrast to the 17% in the UK (and the EU as a whole.)
Mote and plank.
7
This is a very entertaining trashing of the British in India and of the British ruling class. But it overlooks the fact that India is fully functioning democracy and is on track to become an economic superpower that may well surpass the US and China. So the damage wrought by the British was not permanent and perhaps not all that damaging. People in India have more political rights than the Chinese and that is a positive result of British rule. And picking on the errors of the British ruling class is very easy. The British have had a relatively large measure of political freedom and there are among them many who have have spent prodigious amounts of energy excoriating their own political and military establishments. The Chinese George Orwells are in prison or worse. As far as the civil war that followed partition, democracy and ethnic strife go hand in hand as we have seen in countless countries around the world. Religion and race often delay the establishment of a civil society based on laws and individual rights. I’ll say one thing, if the American Revolution has failed I believe there would many more native Americans around today, because the Indians sided against the colonists and with the British in order to protect their lands from settler encroachment. The British were probably the least barbaric of the European colonial powers. Their empire is over so let’s move on. Plenty of countries today struggle to find their way, and the U.K. Is certainly not alone.
18
PM does not hide his dislike of the British. Why should he? We are all entitled to hold our prejudices dear and flaunt them to the world. But to do that so conspicuously when presenting a case does that case no favours.
I am no student of British colonial rule in India. However, I find PM's connection between that and Brexit a little thin.
However you view the Brexit vote and subsequent upheaval, it was, in essence, an exercise in pure democracy. Each side of the campaign had the opportunity to convince the electorate of the merits of their case. Collective wisdom being a tried and trusted principle of referenda, it was up to the electorate to make the decision. In this two-horse race, whoever got the most votes would win, even if only by a single vote. Leave won, not by a single vote, but by nearly 1.3m votes. Arguments will rage for years over the reason for that result. Forget about the "they were lied to" line of argument. Both sides told some whoppers. Personally, I don't believe that our voters were that easy to fool.
It seems to me that the reason Leave won was that PM's hated British ruling class and their allies (paymasters?) in Megaglobal Incorporated both forgot the same thing in their rush for profit, power and self-perpetuation - they forgot to look after the little people. And when the neglected little people got the chance to tell them what they thought of them, and their beloved EU, they seized it with both hands.
For good or ill? Only time will tell.
10
The electorate were not competent to have made this decision as is obvious in retrospect.
2
Yes, the British did a lot of bad and incompetent things. But they mostly treated their colonial people as well or better than those who controlled them beforehand, and often after as well. Let's give thanks that India didn't break itself up into the many warring nations of pre-British India. Let's give further thanks that India ended its failed Nehru/Ghandi economic experiment before too many more millions starved in poverty and started to embrace (British) capitalism. The British, despite their faults, gave us a system of government and economics that has led to greater prosperity and peace than any that the world knew before. Brexit is an error of too much democracy for the UK's good, if anything. So you have to keep a little perspective when making lists of bad things they did. There was some good, too.
Mr. Mishra is better at anger than perspective.
9
In the 10 years between 1890 and 1900, 19 million Indians died due to famine caused by British colonial policies.
No famine occurred in independent India.
Other famines in India under British occupation:
-Great Bengal Famine of 1770
-Madras , 1782-83
-Chalisa Famine, 1783-84
-Doji bara Famine, 1791-92
-Agra Famine, 1837-38
-Orissa Famine, 1866
-Bihar Famine, 1873-74
-Southern India Famine, 1876-77
-Bombay Famine, 1905-06
-Bengal Famine, 1943-44
Total estimated deaths: 35 million
By comparison:
-25 million died in Stalin’s collectivization
-45 million died in Mao’s cultural revolution
-55 million died in WWII
2
Interesting piece. The chums and dons will be aghast.
Some points:
Historically, has colonialism or imperialism offered any benefits ?
Obviously this article's momentum is not designed to mention this. But I daresay some benefits do exist even if they may not outweigh the negatives.
We live in a world now where all centers of power are under attack. The overarching declining power of imperialism is under attack from tribalism, populism etc. All these isms have their negatives and positives - England is not alone but is perhaps the best example.
Imperialism and chumocrats certainly have their flaws as you outline. However once you get beyond this, you realize that countries/ societies without this influence certainly have their own disturbing native politics. Sometimes it is easy to blame those who impose rule while ignoring what might be intrinsic.
3
@Chin Wu writes "Well written piece about the arbitrary borders that caused many civil wars after WWII..." Many comments reflect this idea that arbitrary borders are the main cause of so many wars. They did contribute, but it is difficult to say that they were the primary proximate cause.
Let's take China for example. Since the 1950, they have had armed conflict with, or in, Tibet, India, Burma, Russia, Vietnam (both as ally and opponent), Taiwan, and Korea. Which of these were caused primarily because of arbitrary borders?
Point: wars are caused by many different factors. Simply saying that arbitrary borders caused so many wars in so many places is an oversimplification. It is also an insult to the people involved that they don't have the agency to go to war or not.
As a pacifist, who faced incarceration during the Vietnam war, I think that is it important to realize that many different factors can contribute to horrible outcomes. British chumocrats and arbitrary borders being only two of them, and rather minor ones at that.
IMHO, the desire to blame an entire class for a serious problem is one of the primary reasons people can be whipped up for war. And that is what Mishra's article does - blames an entire class.
6
While I find much merit in Mr. Mishra's op-ed, he misses the boat on Brexit. Brexit was chosen by a popular referendum, not by a small coterie of superficially educated aristocrats. If anything, Brexit has been opposed by a majority in Parliament, especially the House of Lords. Brexit is not motivated by imperial nostalgia. It is motivated by a desire for more democratic accountability, not now possible in the European Union.
11
Was Britain insensitive in dismantling its empire? Of course. Equally of course, there was probably little they could have done to solve ethnic conflicts that came to a head when the Empire dissolved.
This is a common side effect of the dissolution of empire.
Nowhere do I see any acknowledgement that animosity between Hindus and Muslims, as well as between Protestants and Catholics in Northern Ireland, Arabs and Jews in Palestine, and whites and blacks in southern Africa, was not something that Britain caused, but something that was home grown.
As long as Britain maintained imperial rule, it could keep a lid on it. When it left, it was up to the newly independent peoples.
This is not of course to justify Europe's history of imperialism. But It is perhaps too easy for those who live in former imperial possessions to blame their plight on the imperialists, rather than taking responsibility for their own behavior.
14
I thought that at the root of the Irish troubles was the settling in Ulster of Protestants from Scotland and England - part of a colonization strategy similar to that employed elsewhere in the Empire. Not quite home grown!
8
@Josh Hill
These animosities between Hindus and Muslims, Arabs and Jews etc were certainly intensified by the British policy of divide and rule. In the late 1930s, the British under Prime Minister Baldwin had decided to offer India self government. At that time, the Muslim League was not demanding a separate country for the Muslims. Had India been given independence during this period, the country may well have remained undivided and peaceful. Instead, Churchill started espousing the Muslim cause as opposed to that of the secular Congress, which ultimately led to the partition of India.
6
Mr. Hill,
"This is not of course to justify Europe's history of imperialism. But It is perhaps too easy for those who live in former imperial possessions to blame their plight on the imperialists, rather than taking responsibility for their own behavior."
Clearly you have little to no understanding, or level of awareness, of what England did to tens of millions of people it subjugated in its centuries long campaign to own and control the wealth of the planet.
Their last holding, other than the Falklands, is Northern Ireland, and it's taking and subjugation was the result of several hundred years of unbridled state organized terrorism against the entire nation of Ireland, resulting in the rape, pillage, and slaughter of countless thousands of Irish men, women, and children, as well as documented attempts to criminalize the teaching of the Irish language, prohibit education, and religious freedom.
Do some in-depth research before blaming the conquered for the actions of the conquerors.
2
The nice thing about being an ancient nation is that regardless of the situation you can find examples that suit an argument.
Beware: this is how ugly things like stereotypes, racism, etc form.
Like everything else, the current situation has been reached by a confluence of many factors, most of them mundane (e.g. politicians better at getting elected rather than sophisticated political theory & negotiations).
In our modern, increasingly complex world let’s not make the mistake of turning yet another argument into an easy attribution of “good” and “bad” based on things like origin and class. Let’s confront the complexity and rise above. The planets, and humanity, needs us to.
8
@Will Campbell
" ... most of them mundane"
Takes an awful lot of misguided thinking to suggest that English Imperialism was in any way "mundane"
Next, I can imagine your suggesting that the decades and centuries of suffering, resulting from the atrocities visited on the subjugated, by these heartless creatures, be forgiven, and forgotten.
To forget the past is to invite its repetition, and to truly forgive is an attribute reserved for some Divine arbiter of the failings of humankind.
1
Blessed are the once-ruled peoples, their elites can take comfort from the incompetence of their own rulers, by observing ponderously, generations past, on the incompetence of the once-rulers, often from the distance afforded by living in those once-ruling lands.
5
Certainly there is no defending British imperial and colonial behavior, but visiting the sins of the father on that of the sons (sexist pronouns seem appropriate in this case) is just too simple a game during an obvious series of mistakes. Criticism of politicians for politicking and turning events to their favor is again a worn (and boring) path. This author ads little to the debate - in fact very little indeed. A history lesson is always welcome but I find the formula of this article quite simplistic. It seems to be, seize a moment of turmoil when there are easy targets everywhere (fish in a barrel?), add a dash of history with some apt quotes to establish oneself as a "wise observer", criticize everyone to make one seem even more wise in comparison, and then end without providing a single constructive suggestion. I love history, hate brexit and asymetries of power, and hope for a 2nd referendum now that everyone's had a taste of the alternative, but I can't say I thought this was great editorializing...
13
The British upper class may be whatever it is they are, however Brexit would have gotten nowhere without the millions of ordinary Brits who were motivated to vote for Brexit because they wanted to register a vote against Turks immigrating to their country.
12
@Carlos
Now with thousands of European professionals leaving the NHS the agency is resorting to recruiting nurses from India and the Philippines. Unintended consequences.
2
A brilliant essay, yes. The case is strong for letting the current crop of Chums in Britain know that the history of arrogance is long and there will always be survivors of it to note the changes.
At the same time, it's important that the account might well include mention of some of the locals who made the matter of partition worse than it needed to be, even by the 'standards' of aristocratic incompetence built into the DNA of imperialism.
Here I remind readers of the person and role of Muhammad Ali Jinnah, the head of the Muslim League at the time of Indian independence. While he is still regarded very highly in Pakistan, many in present day in India and not a few in Pakistan, are less so inclined. He insisted on a separate state for Muslims in the sub-continent. See the book "Freedom at Midnight" by Collins and Lapierre.
If only Jinnah and the Congress Party under Nehru could have shared power, the devastation at partition might have been avoided. And who knows, the great mass of the people in those two countries could have avoid several wars and coups and other unfortunate civic shortcomings.
Could the British have insisted on that course? I doubt it, but the author here might well disagree. Perhaps Prakash will write some more?
4
Agree with many who state that the stresses of Brexit may cause old fault lines to fracture. It is fair to ask whether the Scots could be better off with EU/EA ties to Scandinavia, Ireland, EUrope, and still maintain overland routes to England and Wales. Certainly global warming and the militarization of the Arctic will enhance both Scottish economic prospects and its value as a military base. Scotland must be a trading nation since it is not self sufficient in foods.
I think it is reasonable to assume that Ireland will become all Ireland. The “border that isn’t a birder” is nonsensical, just bureaucrats rearranging words to suit. As a rump Britain struggles to keep Scotland, the value of English ties to the six Northern counties will diminish. At some point, without another English occupation force, the UDP and the new Paisleys will recognize the realignment of strength and will do the sensible thing and wear the green. A united Ireland will retain a commanding strategic position and the economic virtues of indigenous agriculture, hardworking people, good education and, as an island, orientation to several trading partners.
The Welsh case is more difficult to call, in part because their path to economic self sufficiency is more difficult to ascertain.
7
There are just a few adages, as old as time, that if humans stick to, then life can be so much better.
One of them being, "Do unto others, as you would have them do to you."
Human hypocrisy while so easy to see through, is yet, so deeply rooted. We never see how we have treated others, run away and disown the past in a millisecond even if the impact of our actions live forever.
Just like the English having conquered, occupied and pillaged all over the world, have developed a case of supreme anxiety when the reverse happens via immigration in an infinitesimal proportion, similarly, many in USA, being clearly of immigrant descent are suddenly all tied up in knots about immigration! America was annexed from Native Americans by the Europeans (mostly of British descent). It is actually occupied land since Native Americans did not have a visa system and hence pretty much everyone arrived here illegally since they were not invited by them.
If that's not bad, coming to modern times, What's worse is that immigration is what America needs most now. With declining birth rates, aversion to either do extreme hard sciences or labor (I am talking of average decline in both, not individual), and most importantly, an economic battle with China that has a population of 1.3B!
I hope what Britishers are, ironically, known for: common sense. Somehow shows up from where ever its hiding in Britian (as well as in USA) for the betterment of both countries and the World at large.
6
"sending countless young Irishmen to their deaths in a catastrophic military fiasco at Gallipoli, Turkey, during World War I". Any student of WWI and/or Turkish history knows that although the British army included many Irish soldiers, the main victims of British mismanagement at Gallipoli were ANZAC troops. As a result, Australia and New Zealand were reluctant to send troops during WWII in support of Britain. The role of ANZACs at Gallipoli was even acknowledged by Ataturk in an iconic speech.
11
Well, i will buck the tide here & the almost universal condemnation of Brexit, with the author & everyone else surging on a mounting crescendo like a chorus of painfully grating, hysterical Jeremy Corbyns. Would YOU want to give up control of your country's borders? Would YOU want your country's finances determined by Brussels? I say Go England. The eurozone is bound to fail. The amalgamated states of Europe....? It was a nice idea at the start, but not now. It's a glorified illusion heavily under pressure. But sadly i think the government & parliament will loose their nerve. Still, in the end, history will prove that the majority's first impulse to leave the EU was correct.
5
All the English upper classes can do is talk. They are excellent at it. They made Robert Falcon Scott a hero when he was an utter failure at everything except writing his diary.
5
If one looks at Irish Partition in 1921 or the Balfour Declaration of 1917, then there is no question that as the British _withdrew_ from its Empire, that it made some terrible mistakes. So far, fair enough. However, Mishra then makes a grotesque error in his analysis of Brexit, one that the lazy commentariat make time and time again. The Ruling Class almost universally supported to remain in the European Union; it had nothing to do with Empire, views of imperialism or whatever. It was a decision by the Plebiscite and was made because of the failures of the European Union. This constant failure to understand that the decision to leave was not anti-European, was not nationalistic or xenophobic is really tiring. The decision to leave was anti-EU, a decision made because of its centralisation of power, its corporatism and many other factors that led many people with centrist views to leave the Bloc. It suits left wing commentators like Mishra to take this line and those in America, ignorant of the actuality, swallow it hook, line and sinker. As a result of the failing Eurozone, there is a deflationary death trap worse than Japan suffered and likely to continue for 20 years, far longer than the life expectancy of the EU which is probably no more than 4 or 5 years given the predicament it finds itself in with the Euro, a currency on the point of collapse.,
6
@V N Rajan You are correct and many thanks. I had not included it for that reason. But Mishra is one of those who propagate mistruths as are a seemingly endless number of people here regarding the history of Britain and the causes of Brexit.
3
@V N Rajan
Your point along with the internal squabbling between Jinnah & Nehru. Between the Muslim League & the Indian congress. The dynamic between the two parties along with past animosity between Hindus-Muslims was the reason for the violence. But for Indians who see the partition as some great tragedy and think that Pakistanis would've ever tolerated being under Hindu rule, blaming the British for everything is an appealing argument.
3
While it’s tough to blame British incompetence alone, keep in mind their long term tactic of playing one local group against the other and serving as the arbiters while never understanding the root of these discords. This just didn’t happen in India but in every other multi-ethnic colony where these unresolved issues fester to the day. Oh, that makes it the entire Commonwealth minus the white-majority states like Canada, Aus and NZ. That said, no other group of colonial invaders did a better job in running and stitching together current India than the Brits. There were some enlightened souls who helped Indians learn more about their culture (William Jones?) and not to forget their administrative framework...which still beats what any other invading or indigenous group ever had. And what about Cricket, huh?
8
@R Desikan
Quite right on both points. These are enormously complicated issues. For all their notorious faults, the British did suppress the horrific practice of suttee and create a railway infrastructure that, whatever one thinks of it, is the main system of transport for Indians today. And yes, cricket . . . .
4
@R Desikan
Not having to understand, mischaracterising and then legitimizing claims of native cross-enmity - that is not a form of state, post-colonial violence, right?
I am not as erudite as many of the commentators and the author. I do however agree with the theses that the Etonians were not just incompetent but were malign. I also disagree with all the colonial apologists for blaming Indians and Irish for the consequent problems as their own inadequacies. In fact I almost find a parallel in Mr. Trump and his blaming the problems of the world on the others.
13
Not sure I'd make the connection to the partition of India, it may be just be the foolish promise of a Prime Minister trying desperately to maintain Party unity who had no concept of unintended consequences.
2
A very informative article, and one that puts the present disaster of Brexit into some historical context. Only last night one of the BBC's better political pundits remarked that no one seems able to remember history anymore. In my years in the UK, I've seen plenty of examples of so-called upper class or wannabe upper class politicians and managers who were incompetent but were left in their positions nonetheless. In their efforts to determine if Theresa May is courageous or idiotic, no one mentions that she served as Home Secretary as the government completely lost the plot on immigration, a direct line to the outcome of the referendum.
I learned soon after arriving in the UK that the 80s British tv sitcoms Yes, Minister and Yes, Prime Minister (in which a senior civil servant continually outwits the inept politician he works for) was not actually a comedy at all, but a documentary.
19
I'm puzzled as to why the author blames the elites for Britain's Brexit Debacle. Most of the elites opposed it. Was the darned people that voted for it by a clear majority. Most of the elites would have been very happy to ignore the whole matter and continue merrily on their EU way. If only the people had not been consulted! How dare they seek a voice in such a decision! It is beyond their puny intellectual capacity to understand this issue. That's the problem with voting.
5
If only the elites hadn't riled up the plebiscites into voting.
2
Nothing short of scathing; given my country's history and currently political situation, accurate as well.
8
From a Brit - thank you for such a searing and accurate analysis of the causes of Brexit. Perhaps the economic meltdown it will create will teach us some humility and consign the entitled public school fools to history.
15
It is not too late. Call a new vote and save yourself, England. We will soon be ridding ourselves of the scourge of Trump and the Republicans.
A housecleaning of the inept and crazy is upon us.
14
England is only one part of the United Kingdom.
A well written, thought provoking write up and bang on the money. Nevertheless, hard to stomach from a country that shuts down Government over a wall.
13
@Tony Turner
Indeed. It's not as if the U.S. doesn't have its own fantastically inept, self-serving elite. The American system may be a plutocracy or kleptocracy rather than a modified aristocracy--though the Kennedy, Bush, and Clinton dynasties do suggest aristocracy--but they're both kakistocracies. This is all very sad considering that both are supposed to be democracies.
2
A brilliantly analytical article that brings out by juxtaposition of Brexit with the hasty and ill thought out and planned partition of India, the sheer incompetence in thought and execution by these elite. No wonder the Sun now only fleetingly passes over the "British Empire", it once never set on.
5
You can argue about history, but drawing parallels to Brexit is a total red herring.
Why is that the people most obsessed about the British Empire and tying it to present day UK are mostly non-British.
Almost like they have an agenda? News flash, the British people have moved on. The British Empire is irrelevant in 2018 in the UK.
Yes our politicians are rubbish.
6
Well here’s the thing. Britain may want to “move on” but the colonized people remember and are there in the long grass, still bitter. It’s like the old adage in Ireland - “the trouble with history is that the English never remember anything and the Irish never forget anything”.
I’m sure that goes for other peoples too and based on conversations with Indian, Pakistani, South African and American friends I believe it to be true.
2
Pro Brexit Brit here.
Don't make the mistake of thinking that Jacob Rees-Mogg and Boris Johnson represent the British Establishment. They don't. The real Establishment in Britain was and is in favour of remaining in the EU.
During the referendum campaign Remain had the following:
- the Prime Minister, David Cameron, an old Etonian Oxford PPE graduate, the epitome of Establishment education
- Deputy PM Nick Clegg (recently employed by Facebook)
- the Chancellor (in charge of the Treasury)
- Home Secretary, now PM, Theresa May
- Foreign Sec, now Chancellor Philip Hammond
- large majority of MPs across parties
- majority of the House of Lords
- vast majority of big business
- vast majority of trade unions
- former PMs Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and John Major
- Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Emmanuel Macron and numerous other world leaders
The list goes on. Many of these people and organisations support a second referendum to try to cancel Brexit.
It's tempting to draw a straight line from the Empire to Brexit but the vast majority of talk I've heard mentioning the two comes from Remainers trying to explain the vote. Perhaps the simplest explanation is the truest: the average Brit doesn't much like the EU and would rather be out.
6
@Zetland
It's fair to say that no one foresaw the current Brexit conundrum, but given what you know now is Brexit still a good idea? It's fine to talk about not liking the EU and what the average Brit wants but pushing ahead with Brexit just to snub the elites may not be the best way forward.
3
I disagree. The current “conundrum” as you call it was perfectly predictable- it is indeed the inevitable consequence. In particular in Ireland we were amazed at how little attention was given to the Northern Irish border problem. It was dismissed as an issue and ignored during the referendum debate despite the efforts of several Irish commentators and politicians (and indeed British politicians such as John Major and Tony Blair) with experience in Northern Ireland. But what was not inevitable was the series of disastrous decisions that Teresa May made. On 5 or 6 occasions she has faced a fork in the road and on each occasion unfailingly she took the wrong path. Failing to seek a cross party consensus on how Brexit should look, laying down spurious red lines, interpreting a 52/48 decision in the hardest most extreme way, pandering to a right wing minority of MPs in the ERG, calling an optional election where she lost her minority, going into coalition with the racist, sectarian, Luddite and homophobic DUP, even now not seeking true cross party support, failing to prepare for a no deal outcome while simultaneously refusing to take thy daft idea off the table. She is a disaster. She should go. No more nattering outside number 10. No more red lines. Just go and crawl under a rock. Britain needs an election.
3
Mr Mishra is wrong to say/imply that Mrs May chose a deadline of 2 years for Brexit.
She very stupidly chose to invoke Brexit without any hint of a plan or (apparently) any knowledge about the EU, EU law, negotiation, the WTO, the modern UK economy and many other things, but the two year deadline is written into the relevant EU measure.
6
I think it is fair to say that the Use of the word “Great” to describe Britain is definitely historically inaccurate, unless it used to describe how great a mess they have made of this world
6
@K. Ebert
It is the correct GEOGRAPHICAL term, as coined by Ptolemy, to distinguish it from Little Britain (Ireland)
3
Great Britain comes from the French (Norman) Grand Bretagne. Big Britain. To distinguish it from “Little” Britain (I.e. Brittany in France). That’s all it means. It is not meant as a moniker of “greatness” as many seem to believe.
3
May didn't impose the 2 year timeframe, it's the agreed upon timeframe for states who trigger Article 50 for leaving the EU.
4
Jan (formerly James) Morris writes brilliantly on the British Empire. One historical fact, often neglected, is that the rank and file of the imperial military force was made up largely of illiterate Irishmen. A force that the upper classes in England viewed (the Irish) as more like monkeys than human. One only need study the treatment of the Irish to see how the Brits viewed their colonial charges. Ireland was exporting foodstuffs to England during the great famine of the 1840's. Unconscionable. Nice people, the English.
4
@Economy Biscuits
"Nice people, the English." Let's not lump the classes together. The working classes--the huge majority-- slaving 16-hour days in the great houses of the rich, down mines, in factories, or on the land were almost as badly treated and in some cases worse treated than colonial subjects. But here's the really niggling question: if you or I had been born into the British upper and ruling classes, would we have thought or behaved any differently? Alas, I suspect not. It's remarkable that any of them did at all.
6
On Tues 15 Jan, the UK Parliament resoundingly rejected Europes best offer, by a 2:1 ratio, the largest in UK history. An action that strengthens the negociators. Regrettably this was a year too late, and so last minute, there is little chance of following it through. On Weds the house voted to keep May + Govt, the problem is the deal. If Parliament had gotten involved earlier, and shown it's strength against the bad deal earlier, Europe might have sobered up, and been more realistic.
On Thursday 17, the NYTimes published this article, by "The Author of the Present", with no mention of what is happening, but some analysis of a post-war exit, some 70 years ago.
1
Interesting,but over cynical...For,our partition woes ,our leaders were more responsible and had been given more say,coupled with the fact that they were running the interim government. Lord Mountbatten was more of a communicator between Clement Attlee (British pm) and india. He was for undivided India and was wholly against the idea of Pakistan, infact if our leaders had taken his counsel seriously, there would have been no Kashmir problem.
The GREATEST EMPIRE in the history of planet earth couldn't have been envisaged or maintained by incompetent fools..It was a great parliament, visionary administrators, sound and courageous soldiery that resulted in a phenomenal accomplishments....Statements denigrating Sir Winston Churchill to be a pighead is not commensurate with the dignified greatness of his role perhaps most pertinent in history...Mr Mishra 's views are wanting and reckless, there is no comparison with the hundreds of years of British supermacy and the present situation. All classes have faults and anomalies, but wisdom lies in taking cognisance of the achievements. Fault finding is easier than fact finding.When a shot is fired, no one looks at the gun but at the destination of the bullet .If its a bullseye then both the gunner and the gun are deemed legitimate.rgds Viresh dutt
15
In an afterword to his brilliant novel "The Wake", Paul Kingsnorth offers his own thoughts on the British malaise. One of them is a fact that most Americans may find incomprehensible: the fact that in today's Britain, 70% of the land is owned by less than 1% of the population. This inequal rate of land ownership is exceeded only by Brazil.
But once comprehended, it explains a lot.
14
And um, isn’t 90% of American wealth owned by the top 0.1%? What’s your point?
6
Well-written article. The author draws parallels between Brexit and India’s partition in 1947; the first time i’ve seen this comparison made anywhere. Very persuasive in his elucidation of historical events, but the article nevertheless fails to restore any confidence in the reader that some kind of sense may ultimately prevail after all, that perhaps even at this late stage some sense may prevail and the Brexit mob may become sidelined either by a new general election (increasingly likely) or a new referendum.
4
I am remembering a 1972 or 1973 film, The Ruling Class, starring Peter O’Toole, with the decline of the nation implied as parallel to the (entertaining) portrayal of the loss of relevance within the culture described in this elegantly presented piece. I lost my youthful Anglophilia with the profoundly revelatory (of British brutality and misrule in India) PBS production in the mid-1980s of The Jewel and the Crown. Nice to read this solid analysis of the current self-destruction.
19
So good we read it aloud together twice and are still discussing it. Thank you for a provocative and precise picture of it all.
20
@tcat
Excellent description of what I felt too.
8
While it is indeed true that the partition of India in 1947 was unbelievably bungled, to blame the catastrophe solely or principally on Britain absolves from blame the very people who committed the atrocities, the Indians themselves, who still haven't figured out how to resolve their seemingly intractable ethnic, caste and religious differences. Let's not forget, the partition itself was necessitated by the murderous enmity between Muslims and Hindus.
26
@CSD
The English have 99.9% of the onus. The rest you can distribute among the locals.
The world with have been a better place without the English.
Newton is an exception. Maxwell was Scottish and Beckett & Joyce were Irish.
I don’t care much about the so called bard. Dante was a much better poet, Machiavelli a much better observer of human nature and of course at least ten Greeks better dramatists.
6
“Divide et impera was the old Roman maxim, and it should be ours,” was the advise given to London by the then British governor of Bombay after the 1857 mutiny by Indian soldiers, Hindu and Muslim.
We have forgotten that Indians of all faiths lived side-by-side for countless generations before the British arrived in India and began a colonial policy of sewing divisions in the population. The consequences were tragic. But so had they been all through British colonial rule.
As quoted in the book “Inglorious Empire,” in the 107 years between 1793 to 1900, 5 million people died in all the wars around the world combined, but in just 10 years between 1891 and 1900, 19 million died in India in famines alone caused by colonial policy.
11
@Blunt
I disagree, the only thing that could possibly redeem Perfidious Albion is the Immortal Bard who understood what it is to be human like no one since Plato.
1
"Whether the British ruling class are wicked or merely stupid is one of the most difficult questions of our time, and at certain moments a very important question."
George Orwell
(who knew something of the British ruling class.)
333
@JM
Stupid is what they were.
The fact that Orwell attended Eton does not make him an expert of the British ruling class.
Orwell was an excellent essayist and a good writer in general but hardly a judge on the place of Britain in the pantheon (more like dustbin) of Nations.
5
We need ask the same of most Americans in leadership.
6
@Blunt
He was also a colonial policeman in Burma, and his book Burmese Days is a pretty resounding condemnation of the attitudes of the colonial administration in that country.
8
The first British colony was surely Jamestown, Virginia, not Ireland.
7
@Jeremy
In fact the settlement of Jamestown and other North American colonies followed the pattern originally used by the Elizabethans in Ireland, particularly Ulster.
9
@Jeremy. Britain invaded Ireland centuries before Columbus sailed to America
Jeremy, you are only a couple of centuries out.
The author supports his insights, but what can you do about the past? A failing of such magnitude can only be attributed to the vices of human nature itself. Ethnic and religious animosity can be stated by any conflict of slight. If the British acted like an elitists authoritarian state; they would finish colonizing Ireland and encourage hacking and meddling on the mainland. The UK parliament listens to any social whine or whimper. The pride of a few old representatives carries weight. You want to point out problems caused by pride look at how the democrats in the US fight Trump over his request for 5.7 billion dollars. The shutdown will cost way more than 5.7 billion. I hope the British people come to their senses and go for a new referendum.
6
Kim Philby was a a committed communist and internationalist. He helped to much make sure USSR could not be bullied by imperialism .
2
For me, Messrs Millican and Faber shed a lot of light on Brexit in their pivotal mock-heroic parliamentary debate half way through Alun Wessler's epic tome, 'Odysseus':
"The Right Honourable Sambuca Millican. (Labour, Manchester South Central.)
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the honourable member for Manchester South East for that demystification. But now in the final analysis, at the end of the day, when all is said and done and when the cows come home, if the vote to leave is upheld, we have to decide on a hard Brexit or a soft Brexit. As far as my party is concerned, we would be strongly in favour of a soft Brexit but with some lumpy bits dotted around. Or failing that, a hard Brexit with some squidgy or sloppy patches here and there. And as regards the question of a red, white and blue Brexit, as a Man United fan I would prefer red and white only, but I am aware that there are Norwich City supporters in this chamber who would be in favour a dash of yellow with the occasional green streak. So in the final analysis, just as a colourful salad all turns to one colour as it passes through the digestive system, we would be entirely in favour of a sloppy brown Brexit, with interim provisions for the House of Lords and the European Parliament to act as a kind of extractor fan until the whole thing blows over, at the public's convenience of course.
The Right Honourable Stephen Faber. I commend my honourable friend for the elegance and perspicacity of his arguments.
3
Eton College, nursery to the upper classes that once ruled a fifth of humanity and a quarter of the earth's surface, features the Eton Wall Game in which a goal was last scored in 1909. Thus was formed the elite of the elite.
7
@Doug Broome
How many Etonites won the Nobel Prize in Physics, Chemistry or even Economics?
How many won the Fields Medal in Mathematics?
1
I completely agree with the author. The former colonists especially Britain and France are now reaping the problems of the seeds of their greed, arrogance and diffidence of their colonial past. How the might have fallen. I have a sense of schadenfreude every time I read about Brexit and the Gilet Jaunes.
20
I meant to write indifference which autocorrected to diffidence!
3
Yes, and right you are, considering that your own country is still mired in poverty some 70 years on.
Is it mere coincidence that the Congress of the United States and the Parliament of Great Britain are equally dysfunctional and incapable of governing their countries? Most of the world now recognize that Donald Trump has no business being the President, and Teresa May is equally ignorant and incompetent. Yet, if we add in the difficulties facing France, Germany, Italy and Spain, plus Greece and Turkey, we could ask if the problems are simply too intractable.
12
Brilliant. As an American living in a medieval market town in Essex after the cunning ruling class Brexiteers succeeded in conning a slim majority of mainly English voters, I was shocked at the local news. It was entirely focussed on reports of the elite - which MPs were being snubbed in meetings - as if the whole country was "below stairs" worried about the fortunes of their masters.
Apparently "civil unrest" is looming in Britain. They can join the pink pussy hats and gilets jaunes.
"But it is safe to say that a long-cossetted British ruling class has finally come to the end of itself as it was." If only that were true.
22
Brilliant piece. As an American living in a medieval market town in Essex after the cunning ruling class Brexiteers succeeded in conning a slim majority of mainly English voters, I was shocked at the local news. It was entirely focussed on reports of the elite - which MPs were being snubbed in meetings - as if the whole country was "below stairs" worried about the fortunes of their masters.
Apparently "civil unrest" is looming in Britain. They can join the pink pussy hats and gilets jaunes.
"But it is safe to say that a long-cossetted British ruling class has finally come to the end of itself as it was." If only that were true.
5
this classic view that disastrous events like the partition of India and problems of N Ireland are to the wrong actions of politicians.
It is geography and ethnicity that causes civil strife in the modern era. Muslims and Hindi were always going to be killing each after the British have left simply because too many people harbour intense ethnic hatred for other people. We see it happening today in former Yugoslavia, Syria, Iraq, Yemen etc.
Yes, the British could have handled it better but how could the they control a country of half a billion people with a tiny army. The author is embarrased by the millions dead in India so he has to blame it the British. But the slaughter was an inevitable stage in the creation of the nation state.
I have taught wealthy parkistanis and Indian in a private school and the hatred they have for each other is shocking. Everything is the fault of the other side.
peace only comes when boarders follow ethnic lines
25
India was a British colony for the benefit of the British ruling class, nothing altruistic there. They left India because they had to, not out of kindness. They exploited the colonies and any benefit to the colony was incidental like the railroad in India. The WW ended the overextended empire.
1
@eugene
False, diverse communities were not always killing each other and in fact had coexisted for centuries until imperialist policies of divide and rule set them on each other.
1
Plundering and looting more than half the world, British were humbled after the WWII.
Millions killed in the partition of India, vast majority of them Muslims. But they didn't left before sowing the seeds of conflicts among nations. Today they are merely shadow of their past. Churchill aligned it's destiny with rising power the US. They are just an echo of American policy. Sooner or later Scotland will be independent, is this a coincident, I don't think so. YOU REAP WHAT YOU SOW.
10
@Hope786
Europe even now hails the UK with appreciation for their rescue in World War II - so scarcely were we humbled by WWII. The UK is recognised as punching bigger than its size - whilst we are in the EU, that is. Very dubious (unless UK exits EU) that Scotland would vote to leave.
2
@Celia Marker Doing business with each other, the nations are nice and polite, that is much more productive and profitable.
People do get along, they do not want to go to war against each other until outsiders feed conflicts and manipulate the people with propaganda.
This is a lazy and in some cases outrageous article (and I speak as a supporter of Remain in the referendum).
You cannot compare Mountbatten's role in 1947 with modern UK politicians. Mountbatten was no genius and his role in 1947 simply by virtue of his being a senior member of the Royal Family looks absurd today. That said, he was only doing what he was told by the Labour government of the time.
As for the lazy generalisations made on Britain's imperial record, I would suggest our record in comparison to any other colonial nation looks pretty good. Generally Britain left its former colonies in pretty good shape, which is more than can be said for, say, the Belgians in Central Africa, the Spanish in Central and South America or the Italians in North Africa.
The reality is that the people responsible for the tragedy and disaster of Brexit (and it is both) are a small minority of the UK political establishment, and they are a broad church across Left and Right and all social classes. There are some idiots and charlatans (Farage, David Davis etc), but some very smart (albeit horribly mistaken) people as well. And don't forget that most British politicians think that Brexit is a terrible idea. This is why they are doing it badly - they just don't believe in it. They are just too gutless to be honest with the electorate that we shouldn't do it - that's the scandal the article should be focussing on.
34
Finally, someone talking sense. I share this sentiment. This article is completely unmoored to what is going on in Britain & equally you just can’t draw this kind of moral equivalency between Brexit and imperialism
10
It’s a red herring argument. How Britain found India was as an economic power, representing 23% of the world’s economy. After 200 years of looting India, when Britain left, India’s share had dropped to just under 3%. Britain rose on the backs of Indians and its economic strength collapsed when British industry could no longer benefit from the manipulation of Indian currency, labor and modes of production. On the other side, India suffered horribly, on many fronts, for decades from the legacy of British colonialism. That Indian has rebuilt it’s economy and is raising standards of living, is a testament to Indian effort and ingenuity, not to the benevolence of British rule.
15
Dear Sir,
Re Oliver Tonkin’s reply. As an Irish person I always find it interesting when a person from an ex colonizing empire tells us how well we were governed by them. It brings to mind the arguments over whether the famine here in the 1840s and British governments response to it was deliberate or just, as I think, malicious incompetence ( to borrow the phrase from Mr. Mishra.
6
While many of its institutions have proven valuable to the world, the image the British elite have always tried to present is one of eternal benevolence and wisdom as well, It conveniently ignores the colonial wars, slavery, racism and the like that also existed,
It seems the image of the glorious powerful British Empire and glorious independence was a ghost of the past and, indeed, almost stupidly ignored long and ugly core issues like Ireland and Scotland,
Was it all arrogance, foolishness or wrecklessness, we'll be asking for many years as the UK launches itself into what may now be the abyss,
5
Hard to express how much I appreciate this piece. The mentality is laid so bare here—the bedrock entitlement of the titled. The ego of Churchill using starvation to gain leverage, the ego of Cameron toying with a disastrous referendum, the ego of Mountbatten letting go if the Raj to swelling symphonic refined feelings...ugh. The elite schools of Britain have a lot to answer for. These boys should have been better educated.
14
Read the articles of Marx and Engels about the US Civil war beginning when they were journalists in London for German news papers.You can read about the British severely in trouble because of the US blockade on the cotton and their investments in the cotton fields in the US seized and the factories in England stopped. They tried to ask the Indians to provide for the loss but they had humiliated them so much to weaken them that they were not able to fill the void of the US cotton with their meager production.These articles are really interesting with todays eyes. At least they were published translated in French by Gallimard 10/18 idees in the 80s. I Doubt they were published in English .
It is before Das Capital.
10
@JPH
Love your comment!
But you are hugely overestimating the Times readers. Hugely.
Good old CC course at Columbia might have leveled the field for those lucky few but for the rest it is way above their heads!
1
A wonderful article! Amazing how many chances the toffs get to redeem themselves despite bungling their way from one catastrophic failure to another.
9
Similar drawing of borders and grouping together of incompatible cultures in my native Nigeria has already led to Africa’s bloodiest war in 1967-70. Also in present day, a President generally acknowledged to be laughably incompetent , but likely to be re-elected out of ethnic fears and jealousies.
8
Sounds like someone has a large chip on their shoulder.
The working class people of the UK have no more longing for a UK empire than they do an EU empire. Both had/have disregard for normal working class people. Both undemocratic and for the elite.
This "empire" rubbish is often repeated by EU extremists as a smokescreen because they don't want to talk about the real issues.
14
My Irish ancestors would nod and laugh in agreement with Mr. Mishra. Make that "grimly smile" not laugh.
And it's not a stretch to see how the current America's Empire, which replaced the scale of Britain's after WWII, has its own version of ruling class whose blend of malign intent and incompetence has been evident for decades.e.g. Iran, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Vietnam, Grenada, Iraq, Afghanistan. Only difference between the American and British versions are the accents, school ties and titles. Like the Brits, the pols are their puppets.
25
A brilliant analysis comparing past debacles (now history) with our current Brexit mess where the population believe past empires can be recreated. They have been led by the nose like pigs to slaughter by those 'educate enough' to know better. But now I see that 'education' is a misnomer.
We are now firmly stuck between a rock and a hard place. Those who are poorer and who hope for a better life under Brexit have been conned and instead unless we remain under old rules in the EU will be worse off - as will we all. I am one of the older generation, middle class and voted to Remain along with many of my friends But most seem to have elected to back as Pankaj says, believing that our own commonwealth, the USA (!) and new world dominators like China will flock to do business with us. The force of the Brexit campaign (complete with its inaccuracies) continues and we are a country split and full of hate.
I attended a meeting of local constituents held by my MP (an ardent Brexiteer in favour of 'NO DEAL'. I wen t to learn ore of the situation - but I (and a few like minded people) was up against 200 rallying Brexiteers not willing to hear any questions by us. A few brave souls queried items like the pharmaceutical crisis if we left - he was howled down, booed and told he was a liar, a scaremonger and to shut up. I wanted to leave - but was scared to - having seen two ladies hounded out of the room by the pack. I thought I lived in a democracy - what democracy?
7
@Melanie S. Not so. Indians very much have the self awareness to realize the causes of our problems that point to ourselves and our successive corrupt leaders.
*However*, it would be foolishness to deny the immense & long-lasting harm caused by many brutal waves of colonialism - British was just the last one. I couldn't even begin to write in the comment section the sheer inhumanity of it.
8
Whilst I can sympathise with the author I fear the whole thing is an attack first and foremost to pour vitriolic bile on the target of his anger rather than a balanced appraisal of Britain and its rulers.
The idea we still have a ruling class is laughable to say the least and shows how ignorant of present day Britain the author is. The whole article is acid laden by a writer who completely ignores the ineptitude of his mother country whilst seeking to apportion blame to a coloniser who left his country 70 years ago in a mess but not for the won’t of trying. It was rather an acceptance that the primitive religious differences the British had been balancing the entire time in India were fundamentally irreconcilable. No one in the Raj or the British Government at the time of the partition wanted it. it was forced through by Indians whose only interest was political control and sad to say the juicy enticement of corrupt profits after the British departed.
May I also point out that the British left the subcontinent whilst it had a population of 400 million which has now grown to 1.45 billion, why then after so much human growth has India failed to keep up with the world in terms of human rights and basic human values. Maybe the author would be better employed taking his anger and directing it towards those in New Delhi.
Had the USA spent 70 years after independence blaming the British for everything then there would not be a USA today and that’s a lesson the author note.
10
@Mike Organ India's GDP was 23% of global GDP when the British invaded. When they left it was 3%. So spare me.
This article is certainly a brilliant piece of anti-British propaganda, anyone who has an understanding of the events of the participation of India will know that there were several parties involved in that debacle. Mountbatton was appointed by Clement Attlee, a Labour Prime Minister as Viceroy. Other parties involved include Jawaharlal Nehru, India's first Prime Minister and Muhammad Ali Jinnah the leader of the Muslim League. (Gandhi was basically a figure head by this time.) There was also the complexities of the Indian Princes. I don't excuse what happened in the British Empire whether it was in the Indian subcontinent, Africa, North America, the Middle East or Australasia but at the end of empire, the British were not alone in deciding events in many cases they were carried along by them.
5
Ironically the UK had a way out of chumocracy in a public education system that actually tried to find and nurture talented individuals of any background. This was torpedoed in a drive to equalize education across the entire population regardless of ability or any other factor. Inevitably this just led to a US-style reduction to the lowest common denominator, and a return to rule by the Eton elite. Harold Wilson did not go to Eton, and neither did poor old Edward Heath, or the Iron Lady herself. The same cannot be said of the said train of duffers who have ruled the UK since, at least among the men.
1
Whether or not one agrees or disagrees with the extend of the incompetence, the whole notion of a privileged class in one country ruling an entire society vastly different from their own seems absurd. Yet it was an historical fact and clearly demanded moral rationalizations from those who benefitted immensely, yet who also might have felt guilt pangs leading to the belief that colonization was for the benefit of the colonized. I know of one nation who refused to accept those rationalizations.
10
Interesting article, well-written, yet only a small piece of a long, ongoing debate about self-determination in the post-colonial world. There is just no room in a daily newspaper to cover this issue in depth, so we are stuck with whatever one author has to say within the limited space of an opinion column. For example, India has been governing itself independently for more than sixty years. It has had several decades to establish policies, and yet it is still racked with sectarian violence and misogyny. The class system still victimizes millions, and corruption is a way of life for many. What are Indians and Pakistanis doing about these things? Blaming dead white men may be emotionally satisfying, but assigning blame does not materially solve any problems. Even if the entire British ruling class were to get down on its knees in public and utter a mea culpa, what would that contribute to intractable religious hostilities? We'd do better examining the current problems that exist because of patriarchal religions that oppress women, while insisting on conformity and submission to their injustices.
29
Diatribe driven by Mishra's hatred of British rule in India and cliched class obsession rather than factual analysis.
He seems very confused about who ruled and rules. India's independence was decided by a Labour government which was in a rush to dump as many colonies as it could out of principle and cost cutting. Mountbatten was a lightweight but also realized that these situation in India was close to meltdown. With London unwilling to use troops to maintain order in a partition, he opted for going as fast as possible.
Mountbatten wasn't the real problem. It was Curzon as viceroy who along with Churchill had prevented Dominion.
Mishra trots the usual drivel about Churchill being driven by racism and cynically starving Bengal. Churchill shared the racial prejudices of his age but was not driven by hate. A quick review of the cabinet papers shows that the famine was a top concern. Churchill didnt "cynically" pick on Irish soldiers in Gallipoli, nor was he blasé. His original plan was doomed by cautious admirals and the land campaign was a mess that reflected military incompetence. Churchill as mortified: he resigned and went to serve in the trenches o the West front.
The creation of Ulster was also much more complex than Mushra paints. In 1914 Ireland Home Rule was called off in the face of probable rebellion in Ulster and the same threat created partition.
On Brexit, what about Corbyn (very pro) and the inability of MPs across the spectrum to show leadership?
25
On a point of information: the two-year deadline for Brexit negotiations was not 'imposed' by Theresa May, as the author says, but was set out in Article 50, which is the official EU withdrawal notice. There are arguments about whether Article 50 should have been invoked later, but, at the time, the EU made clear that there could be no meaningful negotiations on Brexit unless and until it was. Likewise there could be no talks about a trade deal (one which could very likely solve the Irish border problem) until a withdrawal agreement was reached and ratified.
Personally, I think Brexit is cross between a tragedy and a scandal, with a large dollop of farce thrown in - but the EU machinery has not made the process easier. Indeed, it was often said that Article 50 was deliberately drawn up in such a way as to make leaving the EU difficult. In that respect, it clearly lives up to its billing.
15
Can we really expect the ruling class to save the people from themselves? If so, what mechanism do you propose for establishing that class?
5
The flaw that has caused the chaos of Brexit is the way in which the original referendum was carried out: simple majority. In the US, we'd never allow a simple majority vote to upend our society.
Major changes, like constitutional amendments, are harder to pass because they require a higher number of states or lawmakers. Fundamental changes to our system can't easily be implemented due to a tiny sliver of votes needed to create a simple majority.
7
Brilliant piece. absolutely spot on @Pankaj Mishra.
14
Brilliant piece, it sums up exactly what, who and why behind Brexit, the British have never had any regard for the Irish,or indeed probably anyone. Churchill was willing to sign it all back for the use of the Irish ports during WWW2, it is absolutely no surprise that the Brexiteers have no notion of Ireland. They used lies to sell the leave campaign, lies to the most vulnerable people, who were hurting but it was not due immigration or the EU but to the decline of traditional industries in many areas of England. To an unequal society that benefits the rich. I am sure these lies are very familiar to people in the US, they hear them very day, the real sadness is the people that they have voted for are the very people that will do them the most harm because they have only regard for one person, themselves.
26
It’s interesting that you have brought up Lord Mountbatten at the same time as the Irish border debacle- the IRA assassinated Mountbatten, some of his children and his grandson during the Troubles by blowing up his boat.
8
Yes . And the British make most of their money at trafficking illegally all the money they can gather and reshuffle from anywhere in the world. The champions of fiscal fraud for the themselves , the Republic of Ireland with all the global corporations ( Apple ,Amazon, Google, Starbucks, etc..all registered fiscally in Dublin and laundering their money through London ) and for the USA .Greece ?All the money of Greece is in London under false shipping flags .
4
Just a little perspective:
When Ho Chi Minh was asked why he didn't espouse passive resistance like Gandhi, he replied that if Gandhi had been born into the French colonial empire he would have gone to Heaven very soon.
17
sad, but true
4
I don’t know, maybe it’s just me, but I get the distinct impression (over and over and over and over and over...) the author harbors some resentment regarding the British colonial record. Just sayin’...
21
fantastically mild, i would say, considering the actual misery the Oxbridgonians inflicted on the unassuming Asia and africa. Karma time, I suppose even as I don't wish misery on anybody.
9
Isn’t “Britain’s calamitous exit from India in 1947” a result that Hindus and Muslims hate each other. Why else were there so many deaths? And they still hate each in what is apartheid India. Muslims in Bangladesh and Pakistan with Hindus in India, I know Sikhs are involved too so don’t bother bringing that up. And I know that the populations are not 100% divided but pretty close. Would there have been such violence without the religious and ethnic hatred?
13
@Shamrock
Indeed. The religious & ethnic hatred has been a longstanding element on the subcontinent. Mishra seems to be unaware of how badly the Muslim empires of India treated the Hindus for hundreds of years - long before the British came. The Brits, for all their colonial predation, at least attempted to "civilize" the people of the subcontinent via setting up government and other civic institutions which to this day form the bedrock of Indian, Pakistani & Bangladeshi society.
It's just that there are more than few Indian intellectuals & writers these days who are extremely bitter about the partition seek to cast blame upon the British for it and have a tough time acknowledging that the Muslims of India were overwhelming in their support to divide India up with or without British approval.
"no one can be always right, or ever quite right, except for an englishman." -- arthur grimble.
7
Upper-Class Twit of the Year contestants!
(With Apologies to Monty Python's Flying Circus)
7
Oh, for pete's sake. People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
9
Oh well. No one is perfect.
3
Without the British, widows would still being burned alive.
13
@Elle Roque British didn't give rats backside about sati. It was raja ram mohan roy who fought against it. And india has shown consistently that it can self correct its society , poms or otherwise.
11
Another dangerous upper-class twit of that period: Sir Neville Henderson, U.K. Ambassador to Germany 1937-39.
This anti-Czech, pro German was described by British historian Sir L B Namier thus: "Conceited, vain, self opinionated, rigidly adhering to his preconceived ideas, he poured out letters, telegrams and despatches in unbelievable numbers and of formidable length, repeating a hundred times the same ill-founded views and ideas. Obtuse enough to be a menace, and not stupid enough to be innocuous, he proved 'un homme néfaste'". (From William Shirer: The rise and fall of the Third Reich).
Sounds like someone else we know, does it not. Amd substitute "tweets" for "telegrams" and it's even more familiar.
14
The referendum vote was an anti EU and anti establishment vote both of which are seen as largely incompetent, but the EU more so.
Reading racism into the EU vote is entirely erroneous, there is no obvious difference between EU and UK citizens. The issue as far as most working class Brexit voters was downward pressure on wages for unskilled and semi skilled jobs in all sectors of the economy and skilled jobs particularly in the construction industry. This was exacerbated by rising rents and housing shortages. Three million immigrants mainly from Eastern Europe looking for higher wages and welfare benefits cannot be ignored as a factor either.
The relevance to the partition of India is absurdly remote.
The current shambles is driven largely by Mrs May and Philip Hammond both of whom are state school educated (admittedly also Oxford) but certainly not members of the ruling class.
10
Let’s generalize this excellent description of imperial hubris to many (most?) of those in power around the world today. Robert Prechter coined the phrase, “The Potent Director Fallacy,” to describe the all-too-human tendency to attribute superlative administrative and leadership skills upon those in positions of authority who, more often than not, arrived at their high station in life through nothing more than birth right in some cases and divine good fortune in others—sometimes both.
Of course, we have our own shining example in our so-called “president,” who claims to be a self-made man despite having been gifted a $400M head start by his tax-dodging, racist father, and now squats in the White House in large part from having played the part of a (highly scripted) reality-TV business mogul. A similar scenario swirls around the uber-wealthy incompetents around him, who somehow believe that merely by virtue of their wealth they are due their high positions of authority and power, all evidence to the contrary notwithstanding.
I attribute this to our celebrity-focused culture combined with 24/7 propaganda spewed by Fox News and the like, along with degraded education that keeps a large fraction of the populace in constant distraction and ignorance of the debacle going on at the highest levels of government, business, and finance.
29
"It is derogatory to the dignity of mankind, it is derogatory to the dignity of India, to entertain for one single moment hatred towards Englishmen." M. Gandhi
Pankaj Mishra is a brilliant writer but poor historian. He is blinded by his hatred of the British. This history essay gets a "C" because it lacks balance and is, therefore, basically untruthful. Even Gandhi and Nehru recognized the contributions of the British Empire to India. Those contributions are, as every 10th grade American student knows, democracy, parliamentary governance, the civil service, modern universities, a stock exchange, English legal system (non-partisan rule of law) and a unified nation. The British did much to preserve Indian history and culture. The Indian armed forces were a work of art which were a major factor in winning World War II.
Anyway, my experience with British people of all classes, especially the English, is that they are rather easy-going, polite, self-deprecating and amusing. I am an older American who, believe it or not, knew many people who served in the Empire at it end. They were not monsters nor especially stupid!
23
What makes you think India would not have adopted any of these things on their own? Don’t ignore the fact that majority of India was illiterate when British left.
Yes modern English people are nice and so are Germans and the Japanese but that does not erase the past.
13
This letter is from the perspective of an older white man, whose knowledge of history will be skewed. The British were most certainly monsters!
8
@Redneck Some quotes from a man who ruled the Empire at its sunset:
1] "Gandhi should not be released on the account of a mere threat of fasting," Churchill told the cabinet. "We should be rid of a bad man and an enemy of the Empire if he died."
2] "It is alarming and nauseating to see Mr Gandhi, a seditious Middle Temple lawyer, now posing as a fakir… striding half-naked up the steps of the Vice-regal Palace," Churchill said of his anti-colonialist adversary in 1931.
There are more, and you may also want to read "Churchill: The End of Glory" by John Charmley (which is unlikely to have been taught in 10th grade) or Madhushree Mukerjee's "Churchill's secret war".
"People sometimes question why on Earth did people not listen to Churchill's warnings about Hitler in the late 1930s," says Charmley, "to which the short answer is that he'd used exactly the same language about Gandhi in the early 1930s."
Churchill was an Aryan supremacist. It is just that he thought he was a superior Aryan than the chap in German !
1
Generalization is dangerous and misleading. The result of the referendum, which was unbelievably badly handled, was 52-48. So almost half the voters wanted to remain; and the campaign was incredibly mendacious and the question very vague. I have two siblings who are both medical doctors; they both voted for Brexit, but not for racist or xenophobic reasons -- for them, it was an issue of sovereignty, or dislike of the undemocratic Brussels bureaucracy.
I know full well how awful the memsahibs and duffers of the Brits in India and the colonies could be, but I also know that there were intelligent and hardworking and well-intentioned civil and military officials as well. Imperialism was a terrible thing -- what was taken with the sword must be held by the sword, to quote a British soldier who served in India; but it seems hypocrisy is not confined to the Brits. Criticism of the class system in UK -- which is highly attenuated compared to what it used to be -- is strange coming from the land of the caste system and a class system perhaps stronger than England's now.
16
I think Brexit will be a disaster, and the politicians in the UK have been a breathtakingly arrogant and stupid. I hope with all my heart that the UK remains in the EU...
...however, really, who's to say if the UK leaves, that in 50 or 100 years time it will not be seen as an act a prescient good sense, or a happy accident? Who knows what will transpire in the future? I mean, there's a lot of aspects of globalism, and global capitalism, that I find abhorrent. To detach from that, in some degree by this act, may in the long run be a good thing... I kind of doubt it, but who knows.
6
@Stephen
I share your view completely - but am selfishly relieved that I will only experience a few years of the disaster that will follow Brexit - and not be around to see history prove Remainers right. I hope very much I am wrong and we will remain and will not have to lose all that we have built up over the last 100 or 200 hundred years (even though we may deplore how we British did that).
What distresses me most, is the Brexiteers who voted for it cannot afford to lose the little they have under the present regime.
Quote' Democracy is a very bad form of government, but all the others are so much worse.'
1
Meh, no arguments here. Some of us are well aware of the uglier parts of our history, and would never qualify for membership of The Club or Establishment anyway. It’s these same people who happily shot striking British workers or angry protestors, or forced them into slums and poorhouses. And yes, it is frustrating to see the same type of aloof, posh cretin waxing on about “vassal states” with no self-awareness at all. A lot of us cringed that day. Rees-Mogg is essentially a modern version of a cruel Dickensian overseer in a cotton mill packed with orphaned child labour. It’s as if they endure through all history like the ghosts of UK past.
And it is even more frustrating that the legacy of Empire hasn’t been decidedly demolished by British research and commentary as is long overdue. Alas. I think at its heart is the elephant in the room - Britain got where she is today by basically annexing territories and valuables and bullying others into trade that was extremely preferential to the UK (ie, you sell it to us and only us, and we’ll sell it to everyone else with a markup). If you objected, your villages and ships got burnt. Governments are scared of admitting guilt for past events, possibly because they fear the possibility of legal judgements and reparations.
I do think more nuance is required in places, too much emphasis placed on “English”. I know an English villain is the traditional cliché and far easier to cast in movies, but sadly it’s not as simple.
8
While I sympathize with many of the author's views, I strongly object to his excusing the violence of Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs after independence by saying that the British are responsible because of the borders they created. No. Killers are responsible for their acts. One may say that certain actions were taken that made it more likely for killers to do their work, but that doesn't change who is responsible. The continual retention of old hurts and slights by Third World countries, unable to move into the future, keeps them in the Third World.
14
I have always thought of WW1, followed by WW2, as the “revenge of imperialism”. Then followed by the end of colonialism. What really sticks in my craw is when the US has been enmeshed, through it’s own ignorance, in post colonial messes like Vietnam, the Middle East, etc. left behind by ex-colonialists. The faster England becomes little the better in my mind.
5
@C. Neville
The US has never been ignorant nor innocent of the messes it has become involved in or created.
Greed and a crusader's zeal to fight communism has brought us to where we stand today at least as much as imperialism.
3
Brilliant big-picture analysis. Thank you for this assessment, which, sadly, brings all-too-clear perspective to the sheer, Woosterish buffoonery of the current Brexit quagmire.
7
Most political parties in Britain are opposed to Brexit. Thus, even when the Brxit plan went down to defeat, Ms. May herself was resoundingly reaffirmed as P.M. the next morning.
Does the Beeb offer any TV shows where a rich big-city man interviews a group of employees and tell some of them, ''You're fired?''
1
Being an Irishman myself I am in full agreement with you. What a pitiful, squabbling, incompetent bunch the British politicians have become. The comments in French and German newspapers emphasise the gains from manufacturing, finance and other jobs moving to the continent. As I see it third world status for England cannot be ruled out. Scotland is likely to break the Act of Union from 1705 and rejoin the EU. From an empire where the sun never sets to a blob between the North and Irish seas.
9
Probably the most scathingly accurate and honest article on the actual manipulators of the UK economy and politics you will read in a long time. Bravo!
6
The sun may Not rise in UK due to incompetence and arrogance of Politicians.
2
I’d just like to say there are some excellent - and copious - amounts of Whattabouttery going on here. The moment any criticisms are raised - Whattabouttery India!
Great. Schoolboy stuff.
Mishra's commentary is delicious with simile, metaphor, and wit, and spot-on in its analysis. It is brimming with lessons for the chumocracy, which I doubt any of them will grasp. Monty Python got it right 50 years ago with their sketch "Twit Of The Year Award", in which they revealed the chumocracy as being incapable of hopping over a low hedge, backing up an automobile, or removing a woman's bra.
4
Britons -> Romans -> Saxons -> Danes -> Normans. There was some healthy gene-mixing within the ruling class during these early days. Then, it stopped. Ruling class became established and almost 1,000 years of in-breeding followed. That probably has something to do with the issue.
7
If one thing saved England in WW1 it was the US. If one thing saved England in WW2 it was cheap and plentiful fuel from the US. One wonders who is going to bail out the US empire.
4
Crikey, don’t let the facts get in the way of your argument.
I have no wish to defend the upperclass twits who are currently destroying my country or who colonised much of the world but to ignore the main circumstances of rapid departure from India is to my mind a tad courageous. Britain had to get out of India because it was bankrupt after the Second World War and did not have the wherewithal to remain a moment longer than it did. The roll of the United States in using its financial domination to enforce the dismantling of the empire and ultimate financial castration of Britain was fundamental. Furthermore this article blatantly ignores the role the Indian leaders at the time had in backing and absolutely encouraging Partition. Moving to the current day I cannot be the only person that finds it ironic that the Trump administration are using the same tactics of divide and conquer to support Brexit and weaken the EU.
10
The same incompetence of the British chumocrats also gave us the troubled Middle East and its profound modern consequences which includes, among other things, the current migrant crisis, one of the major “reasons” behind Brexit (and the ugly rise of “populism”). Full circle we’re coming.
4
The visceral hatred of the British is dripping through here. While no angels, they gave the world parliamentary democracy, free speech, a critical press, academic freedom, liberalism, rule of law, minority rights, votes for women, etc and have been a founding and crucial part of a more peaceful and civilized world order. Every European country at the time were colonizers, the Brits did it with more dignity and left countries much better than others - think India (the world's largest democracy), Canada, New Zealand, Australia, Singapore and the gool 'ol USA (for starters). In fact, there is a good argument they left most countries they colonized better off then when they arrived.
14
This was nasty, I refuse to believe it. Can I no longer admire the British?
4
Brilliant writing, right on point. Quite unbelievable but true. The disasters that the Brits have caused are legendary - hardly any country escaped. What they did in the Middle East/Asia particularly was brutal and the root of all the problems today. Not to mention Northern Ireland - God help the Irish if that’s stirred up again. Good luck to them, they’re completely blind with this ludicrous mess. Another ‘brilliant’ idea by the conservatives and millennials, cooked to their Imperialist tastes. It’s incompetence on a biblical scale.
4
The ghost of Mark Sykes, who like Radcliffe was given a task far beyond his comprehension when tasked with carving up the Ottoman empire, lives on in the elitism that now threatens the British people. If not for the sheer tragedy that awaits them, perhaps there is some sort of poetic justice in the sense that Cameron, Lafarge, Boris Johnson and a financial opportunist like Rees-Mogg will soon be a footnote in history - the ones who brought a crippling economic punishment on their own people through a campaign of hopeless stupidity and hegemony. They will skate away unperturbed.
May will also resolutely try to perform the impossible task, only to be blamed and vilified in the end as the others plan their escape. She didn't cause the mess, but the fantasy that the Brexiteers foisted on the British people during the campaign is responsible for the breakneck speed at which the downfall of a country is being executed. No doubt the elite class, which will be insulated from the economic carnage to come, as with the American banks in 2008, will move along. Nothing to see here, they'll crow.
1
@for the union
Sykes was given the task by people who even understood less than him.
1
Excellent piece. British incompetence at border drawing goes back farther. As the book “the Peace to End all Peace” vividly shows, British ignorance created the current Middle East map and with it intractable conflict.
5
As it happens the main border problems of the modern world, including the primary cause of WW2, was President Wilson at Versailles.
1
Such a well written article yet it clearly demonstrates the ignorance and prejudices of the Anti British brigade. There was nothing wrong with partion in India or Ireland except that it was too arbitrary. Had all of Ulster been partitioned as the concerned parties had originally agreed then the woud have been no problems. Even now as the Irish state reaches maturity they realise that the so called "war" of independence was an unnecessary criminal enterprise sponsored by gullible "irish" America with a distorted view of their past.
4
Brilliant article that gives brexit a broader context - thank you so much for writing this
2
This piece is stunningly good! If I had the power, I would nominate it for a Pulitzer Price. I am getting special delight out of picturing the faces of David Cameron and Boris Johnson as they take in this blistering takedown of the "chumocrats." Great stuff.
3
A brilliant piece about Britain’s fatally flawed chumocracy. However, how long can Muslims and Hindus and all the rest of Kipling’s “half devil half child” local populations go on skewering each other and blaming it on incompetent colonialism? The medievally mindless values that plague the former colonies were present long before the chumocracy built its empire and is still going strong and even regressing in many places over half a century after the empire’s collapse. These values are fundamentally indigenous and can only be changed when the desire for change becomes strong enough from within.
But good luck with that. In Europe a tremendous effort was made to change values from within prompted by the genocidal horrors of World War II, but, as the the alarming current regressive trends demonstrate, it is by no means clear that these changes will be sustainable in the long run.
9
@Jason
The backwards native 'mediaeval' stereotype is ridiculous and insulting - it was when Kipling wrote the and it is now.
India and Pakistan (et al.) are not 'regressing' as if white people no longer being in charge has led to some cultural slide. The problems they have (authoritarian Islamist govt in one, Hindu nationalism in the other) are modern ones with modern roots, not a mediaeval hangover. More to the point, they are only a small part of what are eminently modern, highly cosmopolitan, vibrant places. You do both countries an ignorant disservice by dismissing them as if they were fanatical middle age fiefdoms.
1
A scathingly accurate article. Thanks for the reminder that the world's populace is at the mercy of these self-serving blokes.
3
Pankaj Mishra may (rightfully) rail at the elites of Britain but he ultimately wants to be one of them.
10
A tour de force of an article. Every word is to be savored.
2
Respectfully, I think this article contains a surprising amount of schadenfreude justified by a selective reading of history.
I am not writing a Daily Mail defence of empire; by standards today, the moral standards of its time, and the goals it set itself, it too often failed to deliver any benefit to the people and brought misery instead. You can't build enough trains to replace 5m dead in a mis-managed famine.
However, in this essay and the comments the portrayal of the UK is a disingenuous caricature of villainy. The British elite system produced people like Churchill whose approach to Indians was barbaric, and Earl Mountbatten who this essay is unduly dismissive of. But it also produced Gandhi, Jinnah, Nehru (English barristers) and (obscurely) AO Hume, who helped found the INC. British incompetence may have inflamed Partition, but so did Jinnah's Muslim separatism, Hindu chauvinism fuelled by Gandhi and Nehru, and the willingness of 10,000s to participate in genocide.
What British elite should not be are boogey-men who excuse everyone else of moral agency in times things go horribly wrong. Britain bears a heavy burden for its mishandling of India, but so do India and Pakistan for Partition and a 60yr nuclear standoff.
The Leave Campaign's maliciousness is responsible for Brexit, but so is the obstinance of Britons who refused to consider its human cost and Remainers who ignored them. The world is not split between evil Oxbridge grads and virtuous oppressed.
17
You incorrectly state that Brexit was/is a primarily English demand. If Remain had won you would have had to say the same thing in reverse. The data are as follows (millions for Remain/Leave): England - 13.3/15.2; Scotland -1.7/1.0; Wales - 0.8/0.9; N.Ireland - 0.4/0.4. But this was not a country based referendum. Of it was then we'd have had a final score of 2:2.
Moreover this article is stunningly misrepresentative of the real situation here and sadly attempts to tar modern UK with the bitter brush of colonial reflection. Let us not forget that the evil English Empire created the modern USA from which so may immigrants from around the world have benefited.
The UK is nowadays possibly the most open and ethnically diverse country in the world, second behind only the US in international investment and overseas aid donations. Let's admit that the UK like all countries made its mistakes in the past but that today we are trying and largely succeeding to become a modern responsible country.
Leaving the EU is not an act of imperial dreamers. It is a reflection of our desire to become independent again - like Canada, USA, Australia, Japan etc.
9
What British did before 1947 pales into insignificance what India got after 1947.
Scams after scams and still counting. The worst part is that it is by its own people.
Treachery and betrayal of faith are perhaps the worst forms of crime in the history of mankind. They are even worse than any cold blooded murder.
This is precisely what politics is all about and unfortunately our present day so-called human civilization has evolved from it. There is no escape from it.
No doctor can ever prescribe a medicine for such an evil.
Everywhere on the Earth, it is the same story; be it Brexit, India's freedom movement or anything. Perhaps, the tribal people in the Nicobar Islands who so far have remained isolated from the rest of the world shall remain exceptions.
Tell me if I am wrong.
5
Say what you want about the UK, but at least they haven't more than tripled their population since 1947, as India apparently has.
The UK will be OK as long as they get a handle on immigration, keeping out hordes from certain other countries whose own policies make the British ones look like paragons of rationality and foresight.
7
Mr. Mishra says the truth, but his tone is unfriendly. Us Muslims do not suffer the same anti-English angst that most of our Hindu friends strangely do, despite the fact that we Muslims bore the brunt of the English wrath after 1857 "Mutiny".
Why? We were more perceptive. Muhammad Iqbal after a short stay in Europe around 1900 penned to his fellow Muslims that the English jig was up, and that West was committing suicide - full 15 years before the 1914-45 carnage that followed. While the newly minted sizable Hindu industrial oligarchy fed the Freedom Movement, Muslims bid their time. Hindu leaders boycotted WWII with "Quit India" movement and served jail, but Muslims wholehearted support the War effort and were duly rewarded.
Even now the English view Muslims with grace. Pak Imran Khan married into English moneyed, and another Hasnat Khan could have married into Royalty only if his mother had said yes. A Muslim is the Mayor of London, and few are serving in English Cabinet.
Indian Hindu-Muslim enmity was not of English creation, though divide et impera did occur well into the 20th century till Germany began to hound England. At independence the English wanted a united India but failed - incompetence more than malice.
Mr. Mishra. Let bygones by bygones. No time to gloat at misery of our English ex-rulers. We wish them our prayers in their times of trial, and hope the succeed in ejecting their Establishment that has led them down time and again.
7
@Syed Abbas
As a Pakistani-American myself, from what I can tell the Hindus seem to harbor a distaste for the Brits because they see the partition as a mistake and believe that the Brits should've helped them quash Muslim separatism. They believe that the Muslims should've bent the knee and Hinduized themselves after the British left. After the collapse of the Mughal empire & the arrival of the British I think it was apparent to the Muslims that India as a distinctly Muslim civilization was done for. Luckily men like Jinnah & Iqbal had the foresight to see that the Muslims would never be treated equitably unless we had our own state.
I believe their attitude is the result of the ever increasing trend of Hindu nationalism among Indians & their diaspora. That along with the revisionist history they're fed fuels their fantasies one India under Hindu rule.
For this editorialist to criticize the British and its class system should look at India and its caste system which leaves millions .at birth to a life of poverty.It is now seventy years after Indian independence and the corruption in government is worse now than ever and the economy is still not a patch on the Chinese economy which suffered under its leaders more so than India did under and at the end of the Raj
15
Mr Mishra makes some trenchant analysis of the longer-term failures, or vulnerabilities of Empire, particularly as it affected the sub-continent. He seems to have a particular dislike for Mountbatten and seems to have suffered a lapse of memory about Jinnah's role in Partition and Gandhi's own ineffectual response (The "Have I ever opposed you?" note etc.)
However, Mishra makes one more recent and significant error, suggesting that the Brexit "process", such as it is, has been the responsibility of Britain's traditional elite, which he amusingly terms the "chumocracy."
It has not. In fact, this Brexit embarrassment has been the disastrous failure of the chumocracy's democratic successors, the "bores": the group of grammar school worthies with reasonable, even Oxbridge degrees and whose worthy diligence, usually exclusively employed in the machinery of government, Theresa May exemplifies.
Looking out from the 18th century windows at White's and Brooks's and out across the vast green parklands of the country estates to which the chumocracy retired, there is a sigh of collective embarrassment at their meritocratic, democratic successors who have so comprehensively failed the day, failed the hour.
The chumocracy would have negotiated from strength, ignored all sense of "inclusive" respectfulness, militarised the Irish border and finally, finally, finally put paid to the malign French perfidies of the popinjay Macron. The bores have it, the bores have it. Unlock.
5
I look forward to an article linking the election of Donald Trump to America's treatment of its native peoples -- far worse than Britain's treatment of Indians, and with no end in sight.
4
Pankaj Mishra has more accolades than he deserves. He is a critic of the first degree of English life and is slobbered over by seemingly hundreds of reviewers who proclaim admiration about significant circumstances that can be understood by few. Clear the sheep away and see what is left.
10
Many of the comments look bogus. Few of the ones cited have actual names in any language. The initial lines look remarkably similar. They do not harm anything because accolades in NYT comments and $1.50 might buy you a water bottle in a vending machine. Why would they bother?
Sounds so much like the Republican Party in the USA...they must have shared some of the same homeschooling stable geniuses and community college instructors.
4
The British still have not come to terms with the fact that there no longer is a British Empire.
3
Excellent article. Bravo.
2
Mr. Mishra is spot on here. The sloganeering of "the sun never sets on the British Empire" is being terminally extinguished by Brexit. Trump and his "Make American Great Again" is the end of the post - WWII Raj for the US.
3
No one alive drew borders anywhere. So no one alive deserves comeuppance for the drawing of those borders.
2
An excellent article that sums up the problems the English "educated" have created across the globe wherever England once ruled. We have had to put up with this sort of Superiority complex from the English, the Poms, for years. Now they have crated a mess for themselves that will be very difficult to clean up. The EU hasn't helped, a bunch of wafflers and overpaid self important bureaucrats based in Belgium dictating to everyone what they can and can't do whilst having their collective snouts in the trough paid for predominantly by Germany, France, and England.
2
The arrogance of the British ruling class has always been to the detriment of the people. If not used as cannot fodder to support the empire. The way Ireland has been treated by the British for 100's of years disgusts me, yet they are terrorists despite millions (famine, war, civil war, troubles - all British rulers doing) of Irish having dies because of British imposed rule, and now even more so, holding a gun to the head of the country in the recent laughable Brexit shamble, self imposed disaster to compound the small man/little Englander syndrome which has plagued the English for centuries. Stirring up the right wing hatred and rhetoric against their very own neighbours and largest economic trading block in the world.
3
Why don't the British teach colonial history in their high schools? Whereas London is strewn with fabulous museums, how come there is not a single museum devoted to colonial history?
9
@RamdasColonial history is taught at school. It is after all much of British history. Why no museum? Because you can find so much in the existing ones and mercifully we have been spared another pc fad.
2
A pretty insightful article on the mob-ruled mess, aka Brexit.
My only beef with Mr Mishra's examples involving Churchill would be Gallipoli. That military disaster was actually a good idea that was poorly executed, and military strategists have opined over the decades that it could have been a game changer for the war, had it been successful. Also, the action didn't exclusively involve the Irish--it was made up of--the run by--the British Navy.
5
Generally anzacs (of which many were Irish born) though same principle applies
1
@Kieran
If I can be a little pedantic... the bulk of the fighting troops were British (England, Scotland, and Ireland). Which is not to diminish the contribution or the suffering of the ANZACs. There were also British Indian Army units in significant numbers, and French units.
5
Excellent piece. To draw a further parallel, is it any wonder that Americans suffer from a similar vein of exceptionalism, given that they were the raucous upstarts who sought to form a more perfect union? More exceptional than their British leaders of the time, enough to start and win a revolution?
7
@Dylan
All empires turn vain in time and then they are gone. Almost a law of nature. Rise, Hubris, Downfall. Thank you Entropy!
1
This is a superb op-ed. Stunning acuity and grasp of the matter at hand and incredible writing. Like the words fell out of the sky. Pankaj Mishra is peerless today. There no one who can jump back and forth through history and time, draw parallels and drive home a point like he does.
11
Mishra refers to the Gallipoli campaign in condemning Churchill.Churchill was seeking an alternative to the carnage of the Western Front. Arguably, if the Gallipoli Campagne had succeeded, Turkey would have withdrawn from the War because Istanbul would have been threatened by British Naval Forces. But the British would not commit their best ships to the battle, although close to defeating the Turks. So a land war was instituted. But it was Australian and New Zealand troops, no the Irish that sustained 250,000 casualties: the campaign almost succeeded but for the incompetence of the British command and the active role of Mustafa Kemal A.K.A. Attaturk at a critical time and the expertise of the German generalship.
Many military historians would agree, it seems, that it is unfair to tarnish Churchill's reputation based on Gallipoli. The accuracy of the author's reporting is called to question by his claim that it was a disaster for the Irish.
3
It was a disaster for those peoples other than the British is the relevant point. Talk to the colonies (anzacs etc)
1
The inflated sense of self-worth among English “chumocrats” is staggering, which does help compensate their ignorance and incompetence.
Imbued with grandiose nostalgia, many of them have a superiority complex that prevents them from being realistic about their country’s place in the world today.
14
The British have always thought they were better than everyone else. They even kept the pound when the rest of Europe took the euro. Brexit is just the latest incarnation.
I arrived in London in 2016 to go to a conference on transnational law at Kings College to the news that MP Jo Cox had been murdered over the impending vote. It was almost unbelievable to me that tensions ran so high that a young mother could have lost her life simply for campaigning for what seemed to an outsider like a no-brainer: to remain in the EU.
The Remain Campaign was strong in London. A nice chap wearing a Sandwich Board encouraged me to vote Remain as I walked over a bridge. I said “sorry mate, I’d love to vote remain, but I can’t vote at all, I’m an Aussie.” He took it pretty well and suggested I vote anyway. The day after the referendum everyone was in shock, no one had expected Leave to win. But, I thought surely they’ll negotiate something sensible. As the debacle continues I’m still struggling to understand what they were thinking.
11
It seems the globalists are conflating the very few 'elite' Brexit supporters with Britian's elites history of wrecking other nations.
As a very much NOT elite Brexit voter I have watched the Franco/German political elite's progress are wrecking other European nations for many years, often whilst ignoring the E.U. rules they apply to others. The fudging of facts when we joined the 'common market' was bad enough, but the systemic mission creep that has led the unelected E.U. technocrats to rule and ruin our lives has gone too far.
Yes the Brexit result was a massive revolt against the E.U. autocracy, E.U. democracy being illusory at best. No doubt claims of 'low information' voters and ruling class elites sits well with those that seek to remain in overall power over the easy to manage baseless masses they'd hoped to create, production and consuming 'unit's' that have no identity just a bottom line profit.
3
The view on immigration is easy in England. It is over populated for its size. It is not about stopping people from coming here it is about numbers. We see the countryside ripped up to make way for more houses and roads. We are not building walls, just want more control. We do more for charities and more to help people in need more than most countries. Just because we want independence from the corrupt EU. As for The USA you should know better about what it means to want independence. Does anyone actually look at the corruption going on in the EU. Look at what went on between Goldman and Sachs and loans to Greece. The same ones who instigated the crash.
7
How well written this piece is !
A pleasure to read...
7
Brilliant, insightful article laying out the precedents for the disastrous present day UK situation. As an American who lives in London, I watch with horror as this country moves towards destroying itself. I find myself screaming to anyone who will listen that the US has little to no interest in supporting the UK as it devolves into a small, not very important, middle sized island. The over-inflated sense by the chumocrats of the UK's importance in the world order would be laughable if it weren't so tragic in its consequences.
19
Aside from the obvious question as to why Rose chooses to live in a country she seems to despise, Britain is one of the top five largest markets for US goods and services, so what happens in the wake of Brexit is very meaningful for commercial reasons alone. I believe that is one reason why the US Government sees a stake in the outcome.
3
I am British and middle class with a family that was working class. No blue blood here. I despise Mr Cameron and Mr Johnson etc. because of what they have done to this country and their approach to what they have done which appears steeped in a background or privilege, however to view Britain through Mr MIshra's eyes is see the World through blinkers. It also doesn't help when the 'facts' presented are provably incorrect. Mr Mogg's company has not set up an office in Ireland it has done what almost every other investment company has done and opened a fund there. This has nothing whatsoever to do with Brexit but is everything to do with tax, regulation and offering a service to clients who don't want to be exposed to the UK. His company's office remains in London. I disagree with Mr Mogg and am very much a Remainer, but one cannot complain about the lies told by Brexiters and their ilk and then be factually inaccurate oneself.
I am not trying to excuse the incompetence of the British ruling class, the evil it perpetrated on the World which continues to this day or the nasty effects of its residue, however like the Roman empire, in its time and in its context it was remarkably successful. Its time has long past however but something so successful will have a long tail. The effects of the Roman empire still exist to this day and arguably have an even greater malign influence.
12
Pankaj Mishra is an gifted essayist, and to those acquainted with the history of modern India, this incisive essay rings true, even as it educates an American public largely educated to believe that the British rule in India was both benign, altruistic and far more competent that which followed it.
It is worth noting, parenthetically, that Mr. Mishra, a middle-class Indian born and educated in a provincial city, writes with a keen insider's perspective on that which he speaks to. His father-in-law, Sir William Mount, is a baronet and a member of the British ruling class Mr. Mishra writes about—and his wife is first cousin to the former Conservative Party Prime Minister of the UK, David Cameron.
19
@Alan Carmody
I think it takes a sense of very personal hurt to write an essay like this. It all but asks to be taken with several grains of salt.
The idea that the wars roiling the Middle East to this day, and any strife which has erupted on occasion in Ireland, India and Pakistan since World War 2, can be perpetually blamed on a generation of British “elites” dead for over 50 years seems fanciful, and effectively excuses the actions of the governments and religious leaders of today. I would imagine 21st century graduates of Oxford and Cambridge are as different in outlook to that of their great grandparents as would be their counterparts at Harvard and Yale. The premise that they bear responsibility for decisions taken by their predecessors in 1922 or 1947 is questionable in the first place, and that it explains the Brexit referendum of 2016 seems equally a stretch of logic.
9
The author states "Radcliffe delivered a plan for partition that effectively sentenced millions to death or desolation".
The people who caused the deaths were the occupants of the land who chose to fight over religion. Radcliffe didn't force them to make that choice. I'm afraid the perpetrators need to take responsibility for their actions.
There are plenty of other things to blame the British for instead, such as the Amritsar Massacre or the Bengal Famine of 1943.
15
@Rheumy Plaice
Bengal has been unable to feed itself for generations. In 1943, the Japanese occupied Burma, ending its rice exports to Bengal.
In 1974, floods and the aftermath of Bangladesh's war of independence from East Pakistan caused a famine that killed 1.5 million people. Should we blame that on the British?
2
Respectfully, the understand of cause and effect you display here is rather narrow - or flat.
@Jethro
No. And to be fair in 1943 the British were fighting a war for survival so their ability to influence events in Bengal was limited.
1
An informed and thoughtful summary of the chickens coming home to roost in the U.K. While the British story has been extensively told, it has avoided the stories of the massive exploitation and scars left by kings, queens, and their "chumocrat" minions and beneficiaries. Thank you Mr. Mishra.
8
An excellent hard hitting essay which pulls no punches although the author, presumably of Indian origin, does have some axes to grind.
I should like to point out that although Ireland was indeed England's first colony (there being no unified Britain in the 12th century), England was at that time also colonized by the French-Normans who ruled their domains with a small elite of hard warriors. Irish were always a thorn to any rulers.
And the author misses another blunder of the ruling elite, the disastrous loss of the American colonies due to arrogance and incompetence. One can imagine what USA would have been like as a Canada model of government.
Lastly I would like to point out that Churchill, for all his faults and arrogance, had the bottle to rally an almost defeated nation in WW2 (a world not of his making) taking on one of the most evil empires ever to arise on the planet. Which is why he is revered, not for his politics.
7
Do you suggest, that the American malaise (might is right, money rules all else) is the long term consequence of the American Revolution?
Not at all, US problems are all of their own making! The creation of a democratic republic was groundbreaking and inspirational to the rest of the world, as well as the insights of the founding fathers who created the constitution with adequate checks and balances. I think the civil war might have marked the start of the malaise you refer to.
Look at the French revolution a few years later which descended into chaos and led to a strongman taking over, which sadly is often the fate of violent revolutions.
IMO as a foreigner looking in (although I did live in California for 20 years) it might be time to revise some aspects of the US constitution, but where to find the wise men in this day and age?
Look at how the British and French carved up the middle east after the fall of the Ottoman Empire. We can trace many of today's problems in that region based on how boundaries were established without any regard to the religious and ethnic groups within those new colonies that became independent nations.
14
If Britain is a democracy, it must hold a second referendum now that the people understand the stakes.
13
Because the EU would welcome them back with open arms? Seems unlikely.
1
Ireland and the United Kingdom have been in a Common Travel Area arrangement since 1923. Since there has never been an immigration regime between these two countries, it follows that there cannot be a re-imposition.
8
@Thomas Towey There can And will, however, have to be Border checks and blocks. Not that Brexiteers care about the North and her Brexit difficulties, of course.
4
Mr Mishra makes no mention of the Western Powers, led by Britain, dividing the Kurds into four different countries. Again this was done without the input of any locals. Even though one of President Wilson's Fourteen was an independent Kurdistan, the powers divided the Kurds because they were an independent peoples and would have resisted western interference.
I suspect the control of Kurdistan's oil was a prime motivator for this division. One hundred years later a strong independent Kurdistan would be a stabilizing force over the entire Middle East. The US, Britain, and NATO are paying the price today.
27
Difficult to disagree with Mishra's argument about the upper class tyranny in Britain, like we are still in the 19th Century. This class structure with feudal family roots has survived in Great Britain while it was decimated every where else by the middle of the 20th Century. I think clue its survival lies in inherent Fabian hypocrisy, and Corbyn, another private boarding school product as well, looks more like its contemporary face.
12
mishra, you're right!
british parliament and 10 downing! much worse than american congress and white house! much, much worse than brussels eurocrats, beijing partycrats, and gosh, those darn arabs and israelis!
so much scorn to heap in the age of anger -- and, finally! a decent place to heap it!
18
Best thing about this Opinion article is the author using the learned English language to described the English as they are
28
not only India.
look at Iraq, Africa, Middle East
the Kurds, Jews, the Arabs
if only they didnt lumped all these tribes together..maybe the world is more peaceful today
16
Ah, but tell us how you really feel.
6
Touché.
Bravo!
11
The appropriate audience for this piece are the British ruling elite. Why does Mishra write it in the NYTimes and not in The Guardian or the Economist or the Times along the Thames? -- Kollengode S Venkataraman e-mail: [email protected]
13
Maybe they wouldn’t let her publish there.
@Chris
him not her
No axe to grind here
7
@KJF
What is wring with writing about a wrong?
1
And the invention of endless credit from the Bank of England, back by weapons, helped finance the whole thing... as the dollar finances American overreach today.
5
Looks like Andrew Roberts shared U.S. General Joseph Stilwell's view of Mountbatten.
1
@William Verick
Evelyn Waugh declared Mountbatten to be a vampire.
Most pictures suggest he may have been right.
sounds so much like the democratic party in the USA...perhaps they had some of the same teachers in elementary school
2
Pankaj Mishra's rant against the British "elite" should be answered with one word: "Caste."
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black...
32
@CABOT
Er... your comment would make sense if India imposed its caste system on the UK, and a quarter of the rest of the world.
2
In India the ruling class now are all *lower* caste, even current Indian PM belongs to same and was selling tea at roadside stall not long ago.
In fact just last week a bill was passed in India to give 10 percent reservation to poor Indian upper caste folks such is the success of affirmative action in India
@CABOT
You miss the point of the whole thing.
And, the caste system that predates British Aristocracy by eons, was greatly exploited by the British Raj by the way.
2
and how dear Pankaj, would you rate the efficiency of government in your home country of India?
18
@Joe Yoh
The British started the mess, and unfortunately we've only been too happy to continue with it.
India then wasn't like the India now. We didn't have states. It was a bunch of princely states, each ruled by a Rajah. The support and fealty of each of these Rajahs was essential to the continued rule of the British. The Rajas/nawabs/et al. could do whatever they wanted as long, and only as long, as they supported the British rulers. Divide and rule - that was the motto of the British, and, unfortunately, their legacy. After the British left, the Indians in government were only too happy to continue with their own take on divide and rule. all the decisions taken by the British - partition, the arbitrary borders, only served to compound the problem. What we have in the Indian government today is mostly our own India-born imperialists, whose ancestors were moulded by the British, and who find that they cannot break out of that mold. doing so would be political suicide. Look up the names of some major players in Indian politics, and you will find some connection either to the Imperialists or to the former princely kingdoms.
3
@Joe yoh
Ha ha ha. The British Raj left such a mess that even a miracle wouldn’t have been enough to clean in it up.
In any case you miss his point.
1
There is nothing new in the world except the history you do not know....
8
Sir Donald J. Trump...
I like the sound of that.
2
There is extraordinary incompetence at the highest level of the British Establishment, but that is old news. But there is much to be said about the blistering incompetence of the Indian elites who have ruled the country since Partition.
(Grown children have to stop blaming their bumbling parents at some point.)
Please notice that the Indians and the Pakistanis did not have to fight a brutal anti-colonialist war to get their indepdence. Unlike most of the imperial powers of the West, the Brits packed up and left and let the Hindus and Muslims do what they continue to do so well, that is, kill each other.
32
Karma or “chickens coming home to roost.
2
Harsh but just.
6
Your correction is correct in that customs was removed in 93 on the north-south Irish border. But it was only after the ‘98 good Friday agreement that border security posts were gradually removed. They are now gone completely. Excellent piece, though some credit due to Churchill for making up lost moral ground for warning of and then standing up to Hitler. Some of the other grandees might well have flunked that challenge
5
The British ended the custom of suttee, where Indian widows were expected to fling themselves on their late husband's funeral pyre and be burned alive.
How dare they interfere with established tradition! This is another example of the malign incompetence which the writer so properly condemns.
18
"...The many crimes of the empire’s bumptious adventurers were enabled by Britain’s great geopolitical power and then obscured by its cultural prestige..." [op cit]
--
Could this also serve as an oblique reference to "us(!?)," that is, the United States, beginning say in the years following the end of the Cold War?
***
It's been said that, "the sins of the fathers--in our case, 'Mother' England--are often visited, ironically, ‘on her wayward and rebellious son, the 'Thirteen Colonies,’” that eventually became the burgeoning, blustering replacement for the aging, enfeebled 'Mother country,' as an arbitrator of World power, in the years following the end of WWII.
—
In fact, I’m sure that many would accuse the US, and its “bumptious adventurers” (see above), of the same crimes the English and their elites committed during the disillusion of their Empire, now that our own role, as a power player, also seems to be diminishing.
—
But regardless of what our own future may bring, there's absolutely no doubt, that we at home will remain “culturally” exceptional, at least in our own eyes, for many years to come—
...Even as our own, “home grown” elites lead us into a continuing succession of disasters, both a home and abroad…(!)
3
Churchill was just a tad busy during 1940-1945 saving the world from the Dark Ages of the Nazis and the Japanese Empire, both of whose whose racist and murderous imperialism knew no bounds, including the boundaries of the USSR. Just take a look at a map of Europe and Asia in 1942.
15
@Sd
"saving the world from the Dark Ages of the Nazis and the Japanese Empire" and let's not forget he was using thousands of troops from the sub-continent to do it.
Brexiteers: when your stock in trade is to lie and obfuscate, it's no wonder ordinary folk will make you pay dearly for your arrogance...
3
You know, the fact that Mountbatten was a fraud and that the Partition of India was a rushed and half-done job does not actually explain why Moslems and Hindus and Sihks massacred each other in the hundreds of thousands when Partition happened.
As I said before, I Carry No Brief for the English Ruling Class. In fact, as the Levellers put in in 1650- "....WHo are the Lords but William's Colonels?...". However, it is a bit rich for an Indian to blame the Brits for inter - communal massacres.
17
This piece is EVERYTHING! Thank you, Pankaj, for shining a light on a non-Western view of world history. For too long we have stumbled half blinded by our European viewpoint of the "truth."
12
Excuse me, but if Britain hadn't of bumbled by impressing India into it's now defunct empire, you wouldn't have made it as a nation into the 20th Century. You would have split apart long ago into warring territories based on language, caste, religion, kingdoms and resources. To start, which Indian dialect or language would you like to replace the English language?
25
Perhaps as karma, Lord Mountbatten was assassinated by the IRA in 1979, as well as several other members of his family including his eldest daughter and two of his grandchildren. If Brexiteers think reinstating a hard border between Eire and Northern Ireland will have no effect, they are unfortunately misguided.
5
Did you mean ‘U.S. ruling class’?
3
I know the focus here is on recent history, but the Empires of the Ottomans, the Austria-Hungarians, Russians, Imperial Japanese, Chinese too many times to count, Persians (ditto), Mayans, Mongols...let's go the scoreboard:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_empires
A lot of empires, all of them failed, full stop. Why do Brits or Americans even begin to think they will be the exception?
9
lines on a map - so easy to draw - but can have such brutal and long lasting consequences
like Israel - drawn on a map of Palestine apparently for similar reasons - to allow 'the progressive withdrawal of British armed forces ... as soon as possible and ... no later than 1 August 1948' - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Plan_for_Palestine
now the subject of internecine conflict - with high walls and induced deprivation on original inhabitants of Palestine - fishermen not allowed to fish more than 9 miles out where the fish are - and there's no fish left inside 9 miles - if they go further they get shot by Israeli 'protection' forces ...
6
This author exposes the Hippocratic and self righteousness of the British. And Indians have not forgotten or forgiven them yet.
11
@Andrea martin "Hippocratic" or "hypocrisy"?
@Andrea martin
Could say the same about native Americans feelings about other newer Americans
1
@Andrea martin, and Indians will never forget. The brits can do all the charity work, but they are still thieves that stole from India. It will never compensate
This would have been more effective if you could have refrained from name-calling. Louis Mountbatten may have been an "intellectually limited hustler," but why is "right-wing historian" Andrew Roberts the ultimate authority on him? Obviously you are furious with the way the British treated India, and rightly so. But your anger is making you less effective at making your point. Ultimately all we're left with is feeling used by you to witness your anger.
10
In order to lambast the elite, the writer must cast the non-elite as infants or dolts.
But Brexit is underway because ordinary non-elite Britons chose it, just as ordinary non-elite Indians chose to murder their neighbors during Partition, a choice that a line on a map (no matter how incompetently drawn) can neither explain or justify.
15
Thank you kindly for this wonderfully written history lesson among other things.
The English (more than the British) have ruined the world for so many people and nations (after the idea of a nation became practicable for most of the world).
You brilliantly touch upon the disaster in the Indian subcontinent and Ireland but of course what Sykes-Picot did in the Middle East (David Fromkin’s excellent book “A Peace to End All Peace” describes the incompetent idiots from Viceroys to an amateur called TE Lawrence) is as bad if not worse. Far East, Africa and even North America got a taste of the bitter medicine.
History is a very strange stochastic process with some type of mean reversion imbedded in it.
It is always the horrific ruling class, products of the same schools that inoculate kids at a young age to become such callous, pompous fools who ruin the world. At least ruined it.
Now they are on their last legs. The world has moved and all these Etonites are as ahistorical and figments of some writer’s fantasy as characters of Harry Potter books.
I feel for the British people. They have suffered as well under such a terrible ruling class.
But on Brexit, it is as the man who ended his life in London and is buried in the Highgate Cemetery said: first time a tragedy second time a farce.
7
Mr. Mishra please consider writing more essays for The Gray Lady. This is a joy to read, despite the subject.
13
This anti-brexit argument is made by those of the self-admiring left, by those who want to see a world without nations and states. These people have no notion nor sense of the love for country, freedom, and of self-determination. Through the words of this op-ed and in its comments, I sense bigotry and discrimination against the working classes of Briton, while at the very same time, blaming their bigotry on xenophobia. This discussion reaks with the strong odor of hypocrisy and the self-adulation of these self-elected "intellectuals" of the left.
7
How would you feel about a free nation of California, a republic that would surely be what you perceive as left-leaning?
I tend to blame murders on the murderers.
Partition was opposed by Gandhi and the British but demanded by Muslims who feared for their safety amid a Hindu majority. They were right to be afraid. Free of the Raj, the first instinct of many in the sub-continent was to kill their neighbors -- as they had been doing for centuries before the British arrived and have been doing ever since the British left.
No wonder the writer wants to lay the blame elsewhere.
23
As far back as 1939 Mussolini accurately predicted the decay of post-war Britain after meeting Neville Chamberlain. He remarked to Count Ciano (his forein minister) that Britain's leaders "were not the stuff of Francis Drake and the other magnificent adventurers who created the Empire. These are all are the tired sons of a long line of rich men, and they will lose their Empire."
Chamberlain's wishy-washy attitude at the meeting in Rome would be a key factor in Mussolini eventually throwing in his lot with Hitler, despite Ciano's advice to stay neutral.
5
Excellent article !!
1
Yet the actual killing, murdering and raping was done by Indian sub-continentals not the British. The British did not force them to do it at gunpoint; they did it of their own free will.
27
Look at Jacob Rees Moog, Boris Johnson and Nigel Farange really eternal schoolboys never taken responsibility for the Desaster they created. Britain should get rid of those making promises and not delivering.
3
Wonderfully well-constructed and articulated. A concise summing-up of the Empire-to-Commonwealth-to Ruin British Imperialist project.
By deluding themselves (along with the 'commoners') with loud, frequent and proud Rule Brittania pastiche and regalia, nobody sees the rot beneath the veneer.
And if anyone doth catch-on, pack up your trotters, throw the keys to the next bobblehead and head off to Nice.
5
David Cameron brought this on the UK by his failure to be forthright with Junckers. And the fact that he expected the Great British Public to make a sensible decsion proves how out of touch he was.
5
One of best-written, evidence-based, logically argued article I have ever read!
5
"But it is safe to say that a long-cossetted British ruling class has finally come to the end of itself as it was."
Don't put money on it; one of the enduring traits of those guys is their complete and total obliviousness to anything beyond their manor houses, their clubs, their schools, and their noses. They'll keep sailing right on along.
6
Yes, the British elite are their own worst enemy.
2
I'll skip the arrogance and selective history of the article.
Brexit is not about just Brexit. Leaders across the board are well described by Dylan: "You know something is happening here but you don't know what it is, do you Mr Jones."
The EU started to come apart years ago, its elites losing touch with their own nationals. It had a chance to realize their project wasn't working when it couldn't deal with the Balkan Wars, but they remained complacent, assuming newer generations shared the perspective of those who, after WW II, nobly created a transnational effort to stop European carnage.
The EU has been unable to deal with immigration, terrorism, and the monetary/fiscal disconnect. Being out of touch, its leaders were surprised when these issues resonated strongly with many people, especially those in the East, who had no history of democracy and little with liberal values.
Meanwhile, British elites failed to grasp the anxiety of their own people, leading to the absolute shock at the vote for Brexit. Had Brexit lost, the half the people who supported Brexit or were simply p.o.'d about something, were still out there, their complaints, some of which were legitimate, still needing to be reckoned with, a task neither May nor Corbyn indicate an ability to deal with. It has seemed for a decade that many Brits, as with Europeans in general, have been losing a sense of collective identity, the consequent vacuum filled by long-standing national, ethnic, and religious identities.
5
Catholics are, if not in the majority in Northern Ireland, are very close to a majority. Ireland is on an immutable path to re-unification.
10
First, hindsight is always 20-20. Second, no mention is made of the fact that Britain's empire was already dead and ready to be swallowed up by America in 1948.
Also, Mountbatten wasn't the Ruling Class, he was a cousin of the monarch. It wasn't the Crown that left India, it was the party in power and its colonial office.
By the way, where's the reference to a far more perfidious and disastrous colonial Partition, that of Palestine, where both sides had been promised independence by the British, in an era when Britain actually had some power; and, after a perfunctory defense of the local Arabs, the English simply packed their bags and went.
8
I won’t defend the British upper class or the method in which they decolonized and partitioned India but to allege that, absent partition, there wouldn’t have been tensions or ethnic violence in a single multi-ethnic nation covering the entire Indian sub-content is ridiculous and ahistorical. It’s equally fallacious to assume that had the English not partitioned Ireland, everything would have been “peaches and cream” on that island.
If it had been solely the British ruling class arguing for Brexit, it never would have passed – in fact, the British business class (whose membership overlaps with and includes many Oxbridge grads) was firmly opposed to Brexit. The simple fact is that people in U.K. didn’t like the level of immigration and change occurring their country, they didn’t like laws and regulations enacted upon them by a European super-state, they didn’t like competing with low wage skilled workers from Eastern Europe. I don’t believe Brexit is a good or workable idea, but the idea of having a referendum isn’t an exercise in elitism or hubris – it’s called democracy and sometimes citizens make poor or uninformed decisions.
13
I would like to see an article on the failures of Oxford and Cambridge as universities, because that is where the failing chumocracy was educated and where they should have aquired the rudiments of competant professional skills, or concern for the broader public and respect for truth.
6
All they do their is read Yeats and play pranks.
1
What lack of nuance! The Partition was too complex for one culprit to cause.
The writer willfully conceals contextual facts about the the timing and events leading up to the Partition so he can make a case for putting blame at the feet of the elite "British Ruling Class" (and somehow draw parallels between the Partition and Brexit).
If there is any common theme between Brexit and the Partition, it is "be careful what you wish for."
Mishra chooses not to tell the NYT readers that millions of Indians, Muslim and Hindu, were demanding "independence" and wanted the British to leave. There was civil unrest.
Muslim leaders were agitating for their own country carved out of India. No matter what borders got drawn, they would have been flawed and subject to on-going criticism.
Britain was broke and paying the financial and social costs of WW2. They had more important things to take care of back home.
Nehru and Jinnah (and millions of their followers) got what they asked for. The British didn't just "impose" the Partition. Perhaps Mishra's next article about Brexit or the Partition should be titled "Be careful what you wish for."
27
You are missing the point. The author questions the manner and haste behind the partition was conceived and executed. South Asian sub-continent wanted British to leave but without creating chaos and of course in orderly manner which Britain is known for. As a matter of fact because of the hastiness of British ruling class that time they were ready to leave India before August 1947. It was an attempt to shy away from the responsibility of bloodshed which they were aware of. It is difficult to accept the logic that British ruling party had less clue on what will unfold later. After all they have been ruling for two centuries.
Thank you Sasha. There is no shortage of Punjabis and Hindus eager to desert their sinking ship burdened with one billion more souls than they had in 1947. Why if they are such masters of government and justice?
@Sasha
Thanks - I was waiting for someone to bring up Nehru and Jinnah. Plus there's no disputing Mountbatten won his gold braid thanks to his Grandma, Queen Vic, and a belief in the divine right of the well connected..
And India has done so well since independence--likewise Pakistan. Just like the states of the former Yugoslavia after the death of Tito. Some places are really better off being ruled by an iron hand. Not politically correct, for sure, but probably true.
6
@Pat O'Hern. The British were not an 'Iron Hand' - they were fairly benign.
3
Anyone who cannot serve as whipper-in is not qualified to talk about competence.
Terry Thomas and Peter Sellers seem to be charge. Except they were funnier than these incompetent and unimaginative toffs.
2
India can thank Britain for becoming the greatest Cricketing nation in the world.
6
@M
As an Australian whose national team is in the process of being whipped this season (summer in the Southern Hemisphere) I say to you, indeed, that is an unfortunate truth from where I stand.
3
Terrific article acidulously articulating the fatuous, self-aggrandizing, pompous hypocrites who saw themselves as masters of the universe and who did so much harm, not only in India but especially in Ireland. The execrable Tony Blair belongs in the Tower for his blind, witless support of the Iraq debacle, and the next generation of politicians is just as bad as he was. Chummery for the Brits and Trumpery for us. We are all in big trouble.
7
Brexit Over the River Kwai.
May’s stubbornness, doing what she wrongly believes to be the right thing will be disastrous for all.
1
"Ireland was cynically partitioned to ensure that Protestant settlers outnumber native Catholics in one part of the country." This is disingenuous. The Protestants in Ulster had been there for hundreds of years. They were willing to use violence to ensure that they were ruled from London, not Dublin. That is why Northern Ireland was created.
3
@John N.
You're right. It might have been better written as: "Ireland was cynically partitioned to ensure that Protestant settlers CONTINUED TO outnumber native Catholics in one part of the country".
Another factor was the fear of NI protestants for that part of the-then Irish Constitution that guaranteed the special place of the Catholic Church.
The Fifth Amendment of the Constitution Act 1972 deleted two subsections that recognised the special position of the Catholic Church and that also recognised other named religious denominations.
It was approved by referendum on 7 December 1972 and signed into law on 5 January 1973.
5
@John N. The ancient Irish province of Ulster contains not just the six counties that are a part of the UK but three - Donegal, Cavan and Monaghan - that remain with the Republic. The situation in Northern Ireland was engineered - gerrymandered - so only the six counties that had a protestant/unionist majority would remain a part of the UK. Why else would Ulster have been partitioned?
10
Superb commentary by Mr Mishra. My daughter is a division director for a medium-sized non-profit in London. Her firm no longer hires applicants from the "upper" level UK universities, for obvious reasons.
7
This is quite odd and in material respects historically inaccurate.
Surely the author does not suggest that the bloodbath of a united India and Ireland was wrong to be avoided? By the way, Churchill didn't decide which troops went to Gallipoli and the dead are not uncounted. Try being factual.
The truth is that the class he derides (which is no different from the elitist ruling political class today in the US, Europe or for that matter India) opposed Brexit and the ruled largely supported it despite cogent argument to the contrary.
I think Brexit is a bad idea, but then I went to university and listened to the arguments before deciding.
You either believe in the principles of public consultation and representative democracy or you don't.
The result of the first is Brexit. The result of the second is stopping it because in a representative democracy the obligation on lawmakers is to save the people from themselves.
8
@Martin Scott
So if you do believe in representative democracy, you'd be prepared to accept that the will of the residents of Scotland and Northern Ireland was to remain in the EU ?
London hasn't.
3
@Martin Scott
The elite in the UK is different from the US, certainly, where people might end up at Ivies but started from all over, as Clinton ended up at Yale Law and Obama transferred as a Junior to Columbia.
The UK has its elite coming from very few secondary schools (32 of 55 MPs come from just 3 schools), and them from boarding"prep" schools.
Brexit happened due to a power struggle between three old Etonians - Cameron, Rees-Mogg and Johnson - all trying to be daring swashbuckling statesmen, but actually just playing playground games, where the result is a crisis of massive proportion.
5
@Julian Leave.EU was founded in July 2015 by two middle class businessmen, neither of whom went to Oxbridge or Eton and almost a year before Bojo joined the Leave campaign. No UKIP leader to my knowledge has attended either Eton or Oxbridge (kipper leadership candidate raheen kassam at one point even accused oxford critics of being chinless inbreds!) The Oxford Union first voted to 'say yes to Europe' by the colossal margin of 493 to 92. To say UK elites (as thus defined) "created" Brexit is a total inversion of reality.
Let us not forget the Madras Famine in India. It is believed 5.5 million died of hunger. The British exported all the grain out of India to enrich the British ruling class.
I can’t believe they can get away with Downtown Abbey! Those pretty castles and palaces were built with the blood of the people’s they colonized and natural resources pillaged from their lands.
22
@Lalala
Bengal hadn't been able to feed itself for generations. It survived on rice imported from Burma -- which was then occupied by Imperial Japan. Hence famine.
The same thing happened on a smaller scale in the smaller scale war between East and West Pakistan -- long after the British had left.
Thanks for those references to the partition of Ireland in 1921 and its current relevance to Brexit and "hard borders".
A majority of residents in Northern Ireland voted to remain. I suspect that was because they were very aware of the financial advantages of EU grants. Possibly also of the employment advantages of free movement across Europe.
Far more are than it seems London was ever aware of the "Irish problem".
If a hard Brexit occurs, NI will be outside the EU.
Perhaps in two years, its residents will become very aware of uniting with the Republic of Ireland. This could be in a federation, where NI is one state with its own Parliament (Stormont) and the current Republic is the second state. Being governed in totality from Dublin.
There would be a nice symmetry if this were to occur in 2021 - 100 years after that dreadful partition.
4
In the history of the world, just like in the history of people -what goes around comes around. That cycle is just much longer and overtakes the human life span and thus our imagination. Thus Mr Mishra must be commended, for trans-generational insights into how the grandchild pays for the sins of the forefathers. The "stiff upper lip" the "proper" mannerisms, the "supreme erudition" that the British exude, all slowly fade ... and the empire, fallen, will crumble - trodden by the many brown and black people of the world.
13
A thoughtful piece which is a little over-enthusiastic in some of its language - reminiscent of some of the bluster we hear coming from the English elite the article seeks to criticise.
The article also somewhat overstates the appetite for independence in Scotland. Even a no-deal Brexit scenario is unlikely to tilt opinion on that, frustrated as Scotland is to be getting pulled out of the EU against its will.
The political elite have a lot to answer for but I think this article makes the mistake of bundling them all in together. There are those of that class who are currently trying to mitigate the negative effects of Brexit, something that was voted for democratically by people of all classes.
11
A brilliant piece but deeply flawed. It batters the English with no pretense as to any balanced nuance whatsoever. For instance, the English (and the Irish and Scots in their service) meted out terrible retribution e.g. to Indians involved in the Seige of "Cawnpore" i.e. Kanpur and the 1857 Mutiny a.k.a. the first Indian War of Independence, to speak of just one horrendous crime. But there were also others, English, who served India as administrators, carrying no weapons, bearing no animosity, who were lovers of India and her culture. They probably knew more about the Bhagavad Gita than one could ever have imagined. Just think of the Asiatic Society of Bengal of 1784. Does any of that find a home in this article? To analogize, think of an essay on America as a whole which wholly focussed on the horrors of the KKK omitting all mention of Lincoln, John Brown and those who went down to Selma to march and were beaten for it. How balanced would that be? Unbalanced and vitriolic presentations such as this article, however brilliantly written, do great disservice to both Indians and English because it fails at the most fundamental level, namely, to seek out those nuanced notes that enabled two very different cultures to forge links over two centuries despite their differences. Life is not, never was, simply black vs. white. It was, and is, fully nuanced if only one had the eyes to see that. If that were not the case, how then can we ever hope for justice for all and to reconcile?
34
An article is not a history book. He is obviously talking about those incompetents who rise to power in the chumacracy.
1
Stella Creasy and Lisa Nandy are two Westminster MPs who are proposing that a Citizens Assembly be constituted to recommend the form of a referendum designed to advise Parliament of the wishes of UK citizens regarding the UK;s relationship with the EU. Not men, these British ladies are learning from former British subjects, namely the Irish. Pankaj Mishra's anger against the ruling class in Britain would be better directed if he were to recognize that some British women, and I'm not yet sure whether to include Mrs. May in this grouping, have grown well beyond the Mountbatten men he castigates.
Creasy's and Nandy's interest in the Citzens Assembly idea has arisen because the Irish adopted a Citizen's Assembly, an organization made up of randomly but demographically proportional representatives subject to qualification for service by judges, to recommend to the Dublin Parliament the form of a referendum on abortion. Evidently that approach was astonishingly successful in reconciling the longstanding and fiercely-deadlocked views of opposing parliamentary parties in Dublin. I hope Mr. Mishra is capable of taking that information back to South Asia where, by the way, birth rates remain agonizingly unsustainable.
1
Excellent and interesting article. One thought: "the unconscionable breeziness with which the British ruling class first drew lines through Asia and Africa and then doomed the people living across them to endless suffering." Those lines can be withdrawn if the countries involved were to seek a rationalization of them through treaties and recognition by the UN to stop the "endless suffering" which does indeed exist. It seems, however, that current leaders in the Middle East, Asia and Africa have any intent to do so. Isn't the endless suffering due to ill-treatment and prejudicial favoritism within these countries just as much a problem as the imperially-imposed borders? There isn't a country on this planet that has emerged untainted as a beacon of justice and equality. There isn't a person on this planet that hasn't inherited deficiencies and difficulties from the generations preceding. Yet there's a time one needs to self-examine and change towards justice and embrace of difference. The British are having to do this now for reasons well-characterized by the author. But wouldn't it be useful for India and the rest of us on this shared planet to do the same?
5
Hail Britannia! Make America Great Again! Swan Songs of the Elite.
10
Would expect nothing less from Mr. Mishra. Brilliant analysis.
15
The invective distracts from the message. I started reading hoping to learn some history, but what I get is too full of adjectives and anger and too empty of what I really need to know to understand a complicated subject.
22
@jennifer it's called an op-ed for a reason. an op-ed expresses an opinion, not some objective examination of British history that you're looking for. The invective is well-placed, the Brits are reaping what their ancestors sowed for three hundred years.
Now the chickens are coming home to roost in the form of black and brown immigrants from one of the middle East and Africa to the other. Reminds me of that old saying, 'chicken come to roost never made me sad, they always kind of made glad'
3
@Jennifer E. Read Fintan O'Toole. You will understand.
3
@Jay It may be an op-ed, but it soils Pankaj Mishra's reputation.
It puts him in the category of political hacks that write hit pieces rather than someone who is capable of educating his readers with context and nuance.
He is shrewdly using invective and generalizations, as does Donald Trump, to malign a target.
Hear hear! One of the best pieces of writing on Brexit and Britain's rose-tinted imperial spectacles. Thoroughly enjoyed reading this amidst utter Brexit despair.
36
India was partitioned at the behest of Indian politicians. Congress resisted, but acquiesced in Muslim League demands for Pakistan. Whilst the British can be accused of having encouraged communal feeling prior to the 1930s, there is less validity for that argument in the last two decades of British rule.
The hastiness of Britain's withdrawal was attributable to its own perception that it was losing control of events within India. The mutiny of the Royal Indian Navy and the discontent of British forces in India were factors. More significantly, the UK was facing a 'financial Dunkirk'.
Assertions made in this thread that the UK wished to divide India to control it are highly problematic. Although some British officers staffed the new Indian and Pakistani armies for a while, and Auchinleck functioned as C-in-C of both forces for a short period, this was chiefly for the sake of ensuring a suitable transition.
Radcliffe was actually well-informed about India; he did not receive Britain's highest knighthood for his services.
There has been a common travel area between Ireland and Northern Ireland from 1923 and 1939 and from 1952.
Many Irish nationalists (who came to form the first post-1922 government) supported partition. Yes, the Tories had played the Ulster card quite cynically, but protestant opinion was vehemently against Irish unity. Britain tried to avoid partition in Cyprus, unsuccessfully.
Brexit has more profound causes than those identified in this piece.
24
@Froghole
32 of 54 Prime Ministers west to just three schools: Eton, Harrow and Westminster, and this Brexit fiasco was created when Cameron (Eton and Oxford) thought he was being daring to head off a revolt by (the revolting) Jacob Rees Mogg (Eton and Oxford), only to have Boris Johnson (Eton and Oxford) decide to take the helm of Brexit. It was all an infantile playground battle that has brought the country to utter crisis. Mishra is spot on.
I wonder whether we should Partition the UK to solve the crisis, or whether there should be a Two State Solution!
3
@Julian yes and the initiative was loudly opposed by every elite newspaper including the economist (EiC: Oxford) FT (eic: oxford) and the then-prime minister (Eton, Oxford) the now-prime-minister (Oxford) and half the board of the "Britain stronger in Europe" (and in sharp contrast to the leadership of the UKIP established some 23 years before the referendum ever happened)
As a mixed race citizen of a former British colony where my indigenous ancestors were almost wiped out by European diseases and Pommy arrogance, I find this pompous article and your readers’ response to it as bad as the excesses of colonialism. First of all, it is not well written, as some of your commentators claim. It is florid, spiteful, inflammatory and childish in its exploitation of the disaster that is Brexit. The dissolution of the British Empire was caused to a large degree by the shocking debt Britain incurred to the US by standing up to Hitler. There would be no modern Europe had the Brits and their colonies in collective quixotic myopia not stiffened their class ridden backs and done the “right thing”. I wonder how the writer would feel if India today was part of a Nazi Empire dominating half the world? Poor old Lord Mounbatten’s ineptitudes at partioning India are nothing compared to how Indians would feel if they were in thrall to a genuine Master Race. Power structures come and go and the publication of this article in the New York Times at a time when thousands of US government workers are going without their paycheques because of the foibles of your own ruling class, is ironic.Sure, more than half of the British public was conned by Boris Johnson and co and we, former colonial vassals, say: Give them another referendum. But isn’t it time that the US did something about its own class driven great con?
47
@Judy: Well said; Mr. Mishra's florid polemic has played successfully to the choir. Ironically, he is almost as mendacious and manipulative as President Trump in writing it, but those who deplore Trump's gullible "deplorables" don't see how they've been similarly gulled themselves by an author who plays skillfully to their prejudices.
Britain's empire was created at the point of a gun, but it was maintained by sophisticated bureaucracy, good law, good governance and good economics. The simple fact that the former colonies are all democracies and have solid legal systems and workable bureaucracies is due to their colonizers -- whether the anti-imperialists like it or not. To the extent that their former savagery still plagues them, that is not Britain's fault but perhaps a sign that their civilizing and taming was interrupted.
Brexit was chosen by common people, not the denizens of Oxbridge, based on their dislike of foreigners and their resentment towards globalization. It rose from the same motivation that drove some of the US public to elect Donald Trump. Let's not make false comparisons, based on deliberate distortions of history. That's what got us into the present mess.
11
@Judy
Britain's Imperial posturing and arrogance led to German jealousy and the rivalry that became WW1. WW2 was just an extension of that, as we all know. Both were obscenities of an imperial world, where millions were sent to die. To focus on the post-WW2 debt is to open a novel just before the end and think you know the whole.
9
This equation of the post-Brexit chaos with the partition of the Indian subcontinent is nonsense. But not as silly as the idea that clueless aristocrats somehow cobbled together the greatest colonial empire of all time. The British colonial service, like the British navy, was largely a meritocracy. It was a world of opportunity for bright young men not lucky enough to have property. In fact, without a first or second, your hope of getting a place in the colonial service was small. Which may explain why the British built and operated the Indian railway system, post office, irrigation systems, university systems, etc. with a great deal more efficiency and less corruption than their post-colonial successors. Mountbatten may not have been a genius, but the idea that a slower "Indexit" would have led to less bloodshed and violence is highly debatable.
12
@John Crawford
There was some meritocracy late in the empire from grammar school boys, and earlier through those who rose up through the army, but they are exceptions to an overall Oxbridge system was anything but. It was meritocratic only to the extend that it picked the best men from a very narrow sliver of the population. To claim otherwise is to believe that the vast majority of the population then and now has little to add to society.
This Brexit fiasco was caused an infantile power-struggle between three men educated at Eton and Oxford (Cameron, Rees Mogg and Johnson). Each was trying to be daring as he played the game of politics, and each deserves our utter contempt.
To state the obvious, a system is not meritocratic if 60% of its leaders (PMs) went to just three fee-paying secondary schools!
10
An interesting article, but incredibly bitter about the role of the British, particularly in India supported by a lot of literary references. A lot of blame is placed on the British elite for their role in India's partition, which, while not undeserved, is also not unique to the British. Throughout history the ruling power carved up the world as it saw fit, from the Persians to the Romans, frequently without any regard to local conditions.
19
Now now, why so much anger Mr. Mishra- ( He is the Author of recent book ... Age of Anger...a History of the present)- The Indian leaders were partially responsible as well bu their naivete and arrogance .
10
@BPath
Ah, but India had Gandhi, who was far better (although imperfect) than any of the Brits.
Of course the Indian leaders were naive and arrogant, but on a smaller stage. Mishra is arguing (I believe) that when you play on a world stage, you can create world-scale problems. Responsibility must come with power, and the power in India was far-from-equally shared between Brits and Indians.
6
I don’t think you are comparing like with like. Gandhi is a deeply impressive man, but his leadership was not so successful and he did not run the country.
1
Ah! - The Brit bashers coming out in their hordes and rolling around in the mud. Nothing really new about the attitudes from likes of the Indians and Irish. The writer talks of a time frame, the newest of which is 70 years ago.
How I could lament about the nasty Romans invading all and sundry, including Britain, only to be stopped by Emperor Hadrian building a wall (sounds familiar?) to keep out the marauding Scots and their kilts (nae drawers ye ken!).
Don't get me started on the Greeks or Egyptian empires, or even the Spanish and what they did to Latin America. The list is endless, but few seem to heed the lesson that it is all in the past ... gone, yesterday et al.
For sure the UK still has its 'classes', but little different from many other countries. The author should take a look at the background of many of the democratically elected Members of Parliament, and will find that the vast majority did not attend public schools (private schools to those in the US).
As a US-based Anglo of 30 years, I too, am shaking my head at the current political mess and wondering why a true leader doesn't step up. Dare I say, a Maggie Thatcher doppelgänger?
Lastly, it is difficult not to roll around laughing at Americans thinking that the British political situation is a weird mess (and it is). The kindergarten masquerading as the White House is Monty Pythonesque in the extreme ... government by tweets, with major decisions being made on advice from a cable 'news' channel - too funny!
15
"Radcliffe delivered a plan for partition that effectively sentenced millions to death or desolation".
Then as soon as Radcliffe was out of the way the noble and brilliant Hindus and Muslims got together and corrected the borders without further issue?
14
@Mike
The Recliffe line divided communities and properties, river waters etc etc without much thought. Not that it could have forced the Hindus and Muslims to be friends but a thoughtful partition in which both sides sat down with British governor to draw lines would have perhaps lessened the scale of violence.
It is the haste and incompetence of the partition that the author focuses upon, and that the same haste and incompetence is the cause of Brexit, which might lead to dismemberment of the Britain itself as that of the empire.
5
Without disagreeing with the article, as a footnote, the British did little or none of the raping and killing mentioned in the article.
8
@drsophila
Not there, but see Peking in 1900 or Delhi in 1857. There are plenty of horrific examples, on pretty much the same scale.
2
@Julian: please provide a reference for claiming the level of raping and killing you mention. I have not found anything about rape in a quick search (except for reports of Russian and German soldiers in Beijing). With regard to the killing, I have not found anything out of the ordinary for military engagements.
Beijing was an international alliance (including Americans) and Delhi was action taken with the support of many of the Indian kingdoms. It could also be noted that both actions were responses rather than initiatives.
“...mendacious, intellectually limited hustlers.” In other words, the UK is driven by their own versions of Trump.
3
Next, I'd like to hear this writer's opinion on modern India and Pakistan, with their crippling, ancient caste systems, dangers for women, rampant poverty and such lack of basic toilet facilities that people do their business in the public streets and water ways. After all of these decades, would he still blame it on the British?
31
@Scott
Great deal of ignorance and arrogance is apparent in these comments, perhaps by one who has limited exposure to the real change taking place, especially in India. India looks quite good in comparison with the systemic institutional corruption and subversion we see right here in the good old USA. I did not expect so myself about 20 yrs ago but India has made great strides materially and in building institutions and compares well with the industrialized world which has regressed. China has trade surpluses and is buying real estate all over the world but it is India where the institutions of democracy, free market and fair capitalism and justice system have sound foundation. Lots of books in the library.
2
Yes.
1
Winston Churchill was a person who called Mahatma Gandhi a "half naked fakir". This justifies calling him a peghead by the author. This also shows the British elites' attitude toward other people they colonized. I am sure British learned much since then. But I don't share the author's pessimistic view regarding Brexit, but never know! You reap what you sow.
4
@alex e: by God’s Grace we none of us reap fully what we sow.
I dont see the connection at all. It just feels like a lazy attempt to remind everybody, once again, how bad the British were. Got it.
This though is 2019 and the public voted for Brexit, and a house of MP's continues to vote, and a major issue involves two former enemies in Ireland who really should shack up officially and get happy. Mountbatten, although a twit, and his ilk have nothing to do with it.
7
@Scott D
Brexit is only marginally about Ireland. Read the news.
1
I'd have to say a very accurate article.
7
I've waited a long time for someone to write this article. Gin soaked geography - that's what I call it, needing 100 year clean up no less.
7
This polemic is so laced with venom that it is impossible to take seriously. The author clearly has a personal axe to grind with Britain, and conveniently leaves out all the good that Britain has done for the world over the past one hundred years.
9
@purpledog
Then there is no reason to kick them out. They were good slave masters who kept the slaves happy.
Did not some slave masters use some of the same logic against the abolitionists?
And then, why did likes of George Washington fight the Brits over here?
2
@purpledog
It's hard to appreciate the craftsmanship of a well made boot when it's pressing down on your neck and choking you.
I don't understand why a major American newspaper would run an opinion piece about the U.K. I can understand why a British newspaper might run an opinion piece about the U.S.A. given America's influence in the world. But the U.K.? I think we should just leave the poor blokes alone.
4
It could be because many of us travel in, think about, and have opinions about the rest of the world.
5
An example of isolationism at it’s finest. If you think the US is somehow immune from, and unaffected by, events occurring in the rest if the world, you’re living in a fantasy.
@Alan Behr
Voluntarily dissolved itself?
What on earth are you talking about?
They ruined the world they touched. India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, The Whole of Arab Middle East, Iran (BP and even the coup against Mossadegh with the help of Kermit Roosevelt of the CIA), British Africa, China (opium wars), Palestine-Jordan-Israel, post Ottoman Egypt.
Please read David Fromkin’s A Peace to End All Peace. That is just the Middle East!
Voluntarily dissolved itself! It is more like Samson who ruined everything he could as he was going under.
It is not even ironic that they are now seen as pathetic by children of colonials they tried to miseducate so they served the Empire well. Post-Marxist indeed.
12
Other than the Roman Empire, no nation has ever done more to bring civilization and the rule of law to the uncivilized masses than the British Empire. The world ow4s them more than can ever be re-paid.
9
@Jesse James
As the Nigerian novelist Chinua Achebe said once "There is that great proverb — that until the lions have their own historians, the history of the hunt will always glorify the hunter."
The British Empire was the hunter for so long. And now it is the lions turn to tell their stories.
7
Don't disagree at all with the premise - it's quite true. But I admit I wonder how Radcliffe's border itself caused millions of rapes. Generally rape occurs because men find they can get away with it.
5
Every imperial power is convinced that what is best for it is also best for all humanity. Indians speak English; Latin Americans speak Spanish. Europe became Christian; the Middle East became Muslim. It goes on and on—and always will.
3
As I understand the two year deadline was not imposed by May but by the EU, who also said they would not start negotiation until she triggered Article 50. However, it's definitely true that she could have waited while some thinking and conversation took place.
4
What a great article, not only on its subject matter, but as an important rebuttal to last week’s NYT article describing universities that are trying to decide if departments like History are worth keeping. This article illustrates why understanding the past is so central to our civic engagement and decision making today.
14
@Kristine the only way in which this OpEd rebuts the idea that History Departments are unnecessary is that it is so full of falsehoods, half-truths, lies, and decontextualised fact fragments it proves genuine historians are needed to keep polemicists in check. This man doesn’t understand the past, he understands how to write glib propaganda.
1
Great piece but slightly off the mark it's not incompetence if your goal is stay in power, privilege and wealth. It may be, immoral, disgusting and terrible for everyone else but its good for them. If anything we celebrate the British Ruling Class fawning over their accent, lifestyle and royal family.
6
As someone who came to this country in the 80s from Germany I never understood the fawning of the Americans over all things British. I had learned in history class that America was birthed as a direct revolt against all things British. But I suppose over the centuries the privileged over here decided their privileged cousins over there had it better and so the imitation game began.
1
You have it all wrong. As a union reb in England, it was the working class that have stuffed it to the elite. We are sick of their arrogance and corruption and greed . The EU is a prime example, it is bloated and a failed experiment and was always known as the EU gravy train for good reason. The truth is a lot of people of all ages including the young voted out. So we should leave. This is democracy in action. It has sent shock waves around all the elitist establishments around the world. How dare these people who voted out not conform. The EU is just another attempt at empire building as is the action of the USA. How many other countries have tried and failed in the past. People moan about the British empire,but there was many others that were worse. If you travel from England to the EU there is and has always been a border.
5
The most of europeans prefer a UK out of EU, they have been sabotaging us, they don't want EU existing. UK is too egocentric to be part of a team.
6
This piece is fascinating and seems right. My only nit is that the British people voted for Brexit. So it seems unfair to just blame the elites.
Also, one commenter blames the British education system for making the pro-Brexit crowd too stupid to vote against it.
Come on, people all over the world, including the U.S., vote against their own self-interests. It goes beyond a bad education or the twits in charge.
At some point, these voters need to read reputable newspapers, analysis, etc. and vote for their own good. Anyone with a high school education could easily inform himself/herself these days through reputable sources. It's their civic duty.
5
Fantastic analysis. Horrifying to see the Brits have learned so little. Hope things will be better once the incompetent Tories are ousted
3
Unfortunately these quixotic fools of imperialism are killing real people no windmills. I really agree with this article.
5
Excellent opinion.
My concern: My changing some names, you have the GOP and the current politics of the conservatives in the US.
What will our partition look like?
4
The "exalted idea" still prevalent among establishment journalists and columnists who still think they have the right to tell the rest of us what to think. They fear the internet where "ordinary" people communicate with one another and swap opinions.
1
Indeed Brexit is another act of moral dereliction by the country’s rulers. I wonder what Churchill would have said about the Brexiteers weakening the western world and Europe while facing the rise of China. Disgusting and reckless I guess.
1
The Brexiters simply refuse to even consider the possibility that England is in no position to dictate terms of anything to anyone any longer, and hasn't been in nearly a century.
The last faint wisps of imperial gall, diaphenous to the point of translucence, floating away forever in the dying of the light.
5
Excellent historical perspective on the fiasco of Brexit. There will always be a British ruling class that is arrogant and ignorant. Too bad for the people of England, Ireland, and Scotland.
7
And there was me thinking that my father's generation could not be topped for their vitriolic view of the English lairds!
If Brexit were not so serious for everyone else, it would make for tremendous entertainment, but one cant help think that the impetus for it was the EU choosing to focus itself on tax havens, a particularly British fascination. This madness can be traced back to the non-domiciled billionaires taking no little umbrage at the idea of the EU looking into their affairs and rampant tax planning, not to mention blatant evasion.
Portraying this as merely the outcome of Britain having too many chinless wonders or intellectually challenged hustlers within its political ranks is dangerously myopic. You need to look behind the opportunistic Johnsons and inept Camerons of this world to see where the real power and intent lies...
4
As a resident of one of the last tiny fragments of said empire where said chumocrats make a living off thumbing their noses at tax men from the rest of the world, I can only smile and agree with Pankaj. Something about chickens and roosting comes to mind.
Excellent piece.
10
One can practically SEE the spittle flying from the authors mouth as he grins and writes a condemnation of the British ruling class. His absolute glee at the Brexit impasse is impressive. In today's world, that's all you really need- someone to blame for it all.
Were the great thinkers of India, and no doubt Britain, to finally bury the history of resentments and hatred, and instead focus on actual solutions to the vexing problems in both nations, perhaps everyone would be better off.
It is, however, so much more fun to wallow in hubris.
5
@Jbarber873
Speaking of wallowing, the schadenfreude oozing out of this article is neck deep.
1
May I dare to suggest that England solves its Brexit problem by giving up Northern Ireland if solving the "boundary" problem will solve their Brexit problem?
Look, after giving up the American Colonies Churchill managed to get the Americans to help fight their war by inventing the phrase "English speaking people". Who knows one day the Irish too may come to defend the English.
Perhaps a Boris Johnson will ride to the status of a Churchill and "revive" the Great British Empire, and with just as much luck.
Now, like the empire it once oversaw, Britain is getting a taste of what it is like to have their world torn apart by a small group of arrogant and ignorant people who assume they own everything they survey. And it is all because they didn't want to see the people whom they once colonized walking around their streets.
1
Who will come more now since all the Poles are departing.
Brilliant piece. Yet, colonialism and neocolonialism is a gift that keeps on giving. Pankaj Mishra was educated at the University of Allahabad, founded by Sir William Muir and nicknamed "Oxford of the East." (!) The fact that Indian intelligentsia (and throughout the imperium) is experiencing shadenfreude at the comical misfortunes of Great Britain's handling of Brexit now says more about the complicated mixed feelings over histories of empire and nations, connective tissues of language and culture, and feelings of blame and complicity. Mishra is right: British elites had no idea how to leave, let alone rule, India. Yet, what does it say about Indians that these bumbling, self-important know-nothings ruled India for centuries and that Indian elites today clammer for education and work in English-speaking metropoles from London to New York to Canada. "Past isn't dead, it isn't even even past."
3
Brilliant essay. Let’s not forget that we share the imperialistic tendencies of our British cousins, which is underscored by campaigning politicians’ repeated trope that “America is the greatest country of the world.” There is a direct line between that hubristic statement and our misguided war in Iraq, which killed hundreds of thousands and all but destroyed that country.
5
It’s hard to know which thought is more wrong headed: that Mountbatten was representative of the ‘men who ruled india’ or that Brexit was brought about by the British ruling caste. Lovely writing but this isn’t history!
4
Very interesting piece. A lot of parallels with the white male, Republican created fiasco playing out in the US. Democracy is a fragile thing and needs diversity in leadership that reflect the community demograpgics along with intellect, integrity and integrity.
10
Lest we forget the British did more for India than this article seems to suggest, and seems quite one-sided to me. For example
- The British accomplished many major infrastructure projects in India, the most glaring example being the Indian Railways, used by hundreds of millions to this day.
- prior to British regime, India was largely a collection of disparate princely states, often at war with one another. In fact, even after independence, it was quite a Herculean task to bring them all under the umbrella of a single nation
- caste system continues to this day, the direct result of which is the current day reservations system for jobs. It is so widely prevalent that the current prime minister had to recently introduce a bill to award reservations on monetary grounds
- indeed the Indian Parliament system is directly modeled after the British one
- Indian school board exams like ICSE etc are directly descended from the Previous British ones
- Because of the above system, Indians are quite fluent in English, helping them to land jobs with many multinational companies
- British judges and even sports umpires are known to be very fair and impartial in decisions
- As for Churchill, just watch the movie "Darkest Hour " to see the direct impact of his decision making skills.
- of course the author is seeking all the Brexit troubles, so his criticism ( some of it deserved) comes at a handy time.
But let's all be less judgemental and more fair and give credit where it's due.
14
@MC Really, destroying local industry and making INdia pay for the money you 'invest' in it, which is what the British did, is much more substantial that the railways (which were built in order to take the country's spoils to port). Let's face it, we will never know how the British colonies would have developed had they not been conquered. But we do know the extreme damage the British wrought. Everything else is UK public relations.
4
@MC: oh my! The British pilfered India and yes, in order to do so, they did build a basic infrastructure
2
India was a set of princely states (562 to be precise) even AFTER the British left. It was Sardar Patel who was successful in dissolving them and creating a Federal union as we know today. Yes, the British not only created random borders but fled from the more onerous task.
1
This essay is an Indian point of view. Firstly, it was Clement Attlee the new Labour Prime Minister who demanded an unrealistic British exit from India. Both Gandhi, Nehru and Jinnah wanted an immediate separation. What alternatives does the author offer?
The author claims incorrectly 'Ireland was cynically partitioned to ensure that Protestant settlers outnumber native Catholics in one part of the country.' There was nothing 'cynical' about partition. It was fact that the Protestants outnumbered Catholics and did not want to be part of a new Catholic Ireland and be subject to Irish laws.
Indians refer to the Indian Mutiny of 1857 as 'The First War of Independence' and the struggle for 20th century self-rule as the 'Second War of Independence.' These descriptions are taught only in India for whatever sake I know not why.
As well, the author avoids the Truman influence on demanding Britain dismantle its Empire. Britain was drained empty after the war. What solutions can Pankaj Mishra offer to-day? Would he like to turn the clock back to pre-British India?
11
Any excuses for the botched Brexit? Do you think the British elites would have managed this brilliantly if the stubborn E.U. bureaucracy had let them? It’s always someone’s fault.
Another spot on piece by Pankaj Mishra. A placard at the People's Vote demonstration in London in October summed up Britain's predicament: 'Eton Mess', it said, above a picture of David Cameron and Boris Johnson.
As an ordinary British person (with increasingly precious Irish dual citizenship), I do, however, see another causal factor in the Brexit disaster, namely the supremacist xenophobia abroad in the English 'masses' and brought to the fore by Brexit. Etonians may be the originators of this mess, but ordinary British people cannot be absolved of their share of responsibility. In the present calamity, one is tempted to say the English nation as whole is getting its just deserts.
9
I thought this article was about Britain, not the Trump administration and the Republican party?
“Britain,” the magazine belatedly lamented last month, “is governed by a self-involved clique that rewards group membership above competence and self-confidence above expertise.”
Additionally, the partitioning of Ireland sounds eerily like the primarily republican gerrymandering of congressional districts and rampant voter suppression, thus ensuring an unnatural representation, in other words, their "weight" is out of proportion to their numbers.
4
Whether one concurs with this comparison of Brexit and Britain's colonial legacy is subject to interpretation. That said, the orexis for Brexit suggests a more contemporary parallel. Just as Trump's presidency forces America to assess the Reagan Era, Brexit compels Britain to appraise Thatcherism. Suffice it to say, both have reached a dead end, and it behooves citizens of both nations to recognize this.
It will take twenty-five years before the reputations of the UK and USA are somewhat repaired, following decisions made in 2016.
13
Good article. I disagree on just one point. "The Economist" magazine is not an organ of the elite establishment. In fact, two years ago it declared its support for the third ranked political party, the Liberal Democrats who steadfastly oppose Brexit just as they were the only major party to oppose the Iraq invasion.
12
Bravo to these irrefutable accusations, clearly set forth and pulling no punches.
8
It is worse than unfashionable to admit it today, but British imperialism dragged Africa and North America kicking and screaming out of the stone age into the 19th century. In the case of India, it was merely dragged out of the 10th century. The beneficiaries like the author have been complaining bitterly ever since.
17
And killed or enslaved tens of millions in the process.
1
@JD The first thing the Brits did when they arrived in East Africa was to put an end to the horrific Arab slave trade which had ravaged the entire eastern half of the continent for centuries, itself based the vast internal slave trade that had existed throughout Africa for millennia. Slavery was ubiquitous in the pre-Columbian Americas, too. It is very easy to indulge righteous indignation about earlier times and peoples when you know nothing about them.
1
@Jeremy Bounce Rumblethud Very much like the French who will never forgive the UK and the US for winning the war for them.
1
"A columnist for The Economist, an organ of the British elite, now professes dismay over 'Oxford chums' who coast through life on 'bluff rather than expertise.'....Britain is governed by a self-involved clique that rewards group membership above competence and self-confidence above expertise.”
Replacing "Britain" with "America" and "'Oxford chums" with "Republican Party", this quote serves as a descriptor of the angst under which Americans struggle today. While Boris Johnson probably is a closer caricature to Donald Trump than Theresa May, May appears to be doubling down on her efforts to outdo Trump in the spheres of incompetence, arrogance, and mulishness. At least May possesses some degree of intelligence, veracity, and integrity, which is more then we can say of Trump.
1
When you think about it, the Romans also botched the decline of their imperium.
8
@ gnowell
The world around them changed more than they could, holding on to obsolete beliefs and distorted perspectives. But they held on longer than the British did.
1
Funny, but not true. It was a gradual process that spanned hundreds of years.
Marvelous piece. Nothing to add from my point of view.
8
Yes ! Every word. The Truth. From an exasperated, embarrassed, worried, angry - but grateful for this article - Brit ( aka Limey)
5
A devastating analysis. Britain's history is one of causing unimaginable suffering, and the Brexiteers aim to repeat past sins. We've caused our fair share of suffering on and from this side of the Atlantic as well.
So, if you replace “Britain" with "The United States is governed by a self-involved clique that rewards group membership above competence and self-confidence above expertise," you find that both countries are led by incalculably incompetent, dangerous, and treasonous politicians.
13
Brexit was a created problem waiting for a cause - it has failed.
7
Correction.: Churchill voted for Irish Home rule on more than one occasion . He also voted for improving minimum wages and for Labour exchanges to help the unemployed get jobs. His attitude was paternalistic rather than repressive..
However he was definitely in favor of the Empire.
It is not a good idea when writing about the past to lose facts in favor of polemics.
15
What about the "twice promised land" of Palestine?
What about the run-up to World War I?
Could the mistakes (errors of commission and errors omission) made by the leaders, diplomats, and upper ranks of military services of Great Britain been avoided? Who knows?
Let's hope that something gets done right this time around.
3
I cannot stand when I hear the term "British Isles". It is an antiquated term from when Britain ruled Ireland and is certainly not accurate anymore.
I wonder if the English who voted for Brexit still think they own Ireland to have given their neighboring island little to no thought?
I would not be surprised if Northern Ireland goes its own way, or more probably joins the Republic of Ireland within the next decade.
9
it was the disastrous “chumocracy” that enabled the treasonous spy Kim Philby to work for so long at the highest levels of British intelligence and send thousands of innocents to their deaths at the hands of the Russians, during the cold war. He was recommended to the intelligence service by a British Lord who stated ”I know his people”. This, despite known evidence of his communist activities during the thirties. He was able to keep his cover for so long because they could not believe that they could be sold out by “one of their own”.
When finally caught, he was allowed to escape to avoid the embarassment of a trial in the UK which would have chronicalled
the incompetence of the elite class.
514
@Seaef, don't forget Anthony Blunt (1907-83) who confessed to being a Soviet spy, one of the "Cambridge Five" which included Philby. His confession to being a spy was kept secret by The Establishment until 1979 when Thatcher outed him.
22
@Seaef
Thanks so much for the additional information.
I always learn from the NYT and its commenters.
Cheers!
21
@Seaef, it is interesting that we remember the soviet agents but forget the extensive shenanigans of the far right in the security service and SIS during the end of empire. The consequences of the Cambridge Five faded long ago, the activities of the right even in their failure significantly affect us now.
15
First, your quote “bluff rather than expertise” I’m sure cannot go unnoticed. Second, your work is surely fodder for the Anti-monarchists.
2
@ William
Yes, but he is entirely correct in the facts he cites.
5
A verdict delivered with passion!
2
A most well written history lesson by Mr. Mishra. And what's really amazing is his ability to do it with such brevity and clarity.
The 'chumocrats' suffer from a degree of psychological inbreeding that is terminal at this point though the damage has already been done to literally millions of people past and now into the future with their mangled and duplicitous Brexit maneuver.
Instead of using their intellectual resources (what little is left...) and influence to make EU governance more fair, democratic and less bureaucratic and rigid, they have instead gone off the rails for nothing other than a fantasy of the way it was (wasn't) back in the day of British hegemony. What a crock!
8
I'm from Spain, I'm sure the most of europeans prefer a UK out of EU, they have been sabotaging us, they don't want EU existing. UK is too egocentric to be part of a team.
9
So, so good.
4
Well there is an Indian concept of 'Karma', you know.
6
this guy has a real chip on his shoulder about the Brits
the partition of India was a tragedy that could not be avoided due to the intransigent insistence of Ali Jinnah on the creation of a Muslim confessional state, i.e. Pakistan
15
@charles simmonds
That doesn't excuse the speed or the slapdash way it was done. In addition, Britain encouraged Jinnah's nationalism following the old "divide and conquer" rule, saying that Britain was needed to keep the peace. The UK tried to maintain control of India as long as it could, then it cut and ran. Shameful!
11
This should have been an interesting and constructive article, instead it was ruined by the tone, which all too clearly reveals the authors prejudices.
What's really rich is that it was written by an Indian essayist and published in a major American newspaper. Think about that as you read the line (amongst others): "the British political class has offered to the world an astounding spectacle of mendacious, intellectually limited hustlers."
How is that not also true of today's American and Indian political classes?
6
@Sam
The difference is that the British political class has literally shaped the world we live in. Just about every international crisis today stems from the Empire: India/Pakistan, Israel/Palestine, North and South (Aden) Yemen, Somalia (Italian vs British colonies), Rohinga in Burma/Bangladesh, Syria and Iraq (the shameful Sykes-Picot), Iran (Mossadeq), and so on.
US elites have left their mark too, but not as indelibly. The Indian elites have impacted India, but little beyond.
8
@Sam It is possible for both to be true. Although why the author would want to include your desired commentary about American politicians in an article about the partition of India escapes me.
2
A British friend once told me that what the privileged among her compatriots lacked in ability and intelligence, they made up for with a slavish devotion to class.
421
@DL
Yes that's true, but the only point I'd add to Mishra's brilliant comparison is that these upper class incompetents did manage to plunder India financially and economically. The military was brutal. That "jewell" of India kept the ghastly empire going. As a former colony too, Australians were also pillaged financially, and the Indigenous of their land and livelihoods, but with settlers being mostly white, to Churchill 200 years later, 'convict stock', we merely "took the Mickey" out of those clownish fools. That teasing now doesn't depend on the Irish so much (though I'm with them!) - Chinese Australians, Vietnamese, Italian and many more Australians, are also happy to mock the Churchill types. Boris Johnson was laughed at even by business types in Australia and definitely India for his class-addled imperial nostalgia on zero facts.
11
@DL
The unprivileged also have a slavish devotion to class.
9
@Rheumy Plaice
As brilliantly described in Robert Tressels novel The ragged trousered philanthropists - a must read for anyone who wants to understand how the British class system functions at all levels
5
The road to Brexit is indeed treacherous.
borders don't cause conflict, the people inside them do, no ones tells them to, they do it on their own accord and it is entirely their fault. There is no border layout that will stop them doing that.
Not logic.
The Brits ran out of money, full stop.
Think about that, my fellow Americans, as we evaluate our next steps.
4
Mishra plots two or three points in british history and draws a line through them and calls that the truth. I am not here to defend Britian -- i wish my own commonwealth country would break fully from the UK -- but this is a hatchet job. When i read this i don't feel as though i see the UK's pathologies and essential qualities or lack of qualities laid bare, instead this piece forfeits that ambition to Mishra's overwound rage and a smooth-tongued determination to blame others. Here, like British he describes, he is guilty of a partial sightedness of others.
12
@Groverman
Look, 32 of 54 British Prime Ministers went to just three secondary schools (Eton, Harrow and Westminster) including David Cameron (remember him... wish I didn't). The country has a narrow concentration of political power unequaled elsewhere, and that's before you talk about the percentage of Oxford and Cambridge grads in politics.
Contrast that with the US: GW Bush was all ivy, but Clinton and Obama ended up at ivies after starting elsewhere. The US tends to bring people to a few elite schools, but in the UK they start at those few schools and stay there.
I was at Oxford in the late 80s and most of the clowns who are making a mess of Britain were there at the same time. It does no country any good when politics gets to be such an insular and culturally incestuous domain. That is the key thread that Mishra highlights.
The UK political and educational systems are utterly compromised and hence the crisis we see now, and the elitist cockiness that created this mess was every bit as evident in the shameful larceny that was Empire.
6
Britain is a democracy. Democracy means people have choices to make. In America, people choose Trump and the result is chaos. The same is true in Britain, sadly. The British people voted for this; they voted to leave the EU, and then topped it off by electing some very ugly immoral individuals to Parliament. As is true for the U.S., the only end to this madness in Britain is when people regain their sanity and rationality - if ever.
8
I think you are being a bit harsh on the current crop of Brits. They are very, very, well aware of the twatish things their ancestors did. They get it. They already aren't proud of it - why do you think they drink so much. Some compassion for a country and a people - who are not the same people who drew partisans - in their dark times.
3
@EC
Partitions, not partisans
My apologies
@EC
No, David Cameron was an Old Etonian, a member of the same narrow "public school" elite that still dominates UK politics and that created the Empire. He created this fiasco by having a referendum that he expected to win, thereby sacrificing the country for his own ambition. It was an act of colossal stupidity and arrogance, just like the many colonial examples in the article, as Mishra explains well. Clowns like Rees Mogg and Boris Johnson are cut from the same cloth. That is why Brits need to create some radical overhaul of their political system because it's utterly broken!
3
@Julian
Sure. But alot more people have their hands embroiled in the issue now and not all of them are of the ilk you blame. And even if they were, it is utterly ridiculous to point to people in the past who did things on different continents to their own and drew lines and say this current crop are truly of the same stripes. How ridiculous.
Stupidity in politics is not an exclusively British thing.
1
Yes, but this pack of 'mendacious. intellectual hustlers' largely created the nation of India. Before they came, 'India' was a geographical expression, not a political one. The subcontinent was inhabited by dozens of squabbling principates, and when the British left, it promptly and bloodily fissured into India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. These hustlers also taught India how to be a parliamentary democracy, and left it with infrastructure that endures to this day, including train and irrigation systems, and a reasonably functional civil service. Everywhere the British once ruled - North America, Australia, New Zealand, Hong Kong, Singapore, even India itself - the government is good.
18
@Silty "Everywhere the British once ruled... the government is good."
You've got to be joking!
How about Yemen, Somalia, Palestine, Israel, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Kenya, Sudan, Egypt, Nigeria, Cameroon, Zimbabwe, Zambia, Burma, Fiji, Trinidad, Guyana, Belize, Jamaica, Afghanistan, Maldives, Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania?!!
All of the above have pretty hopeless politics, largely due to the fact that they are artificial entities either drawn idly by British administrators on a map, sight unseen (Yemen, Somalia, Sudan, etc), or because the British shipped out near-slave labor from India and left demographically unstable states (Trinidad, Fiji, etc).
Hong Kong only became democratic just before the British handed it back to China; the other states you mention only became stable democracies after eliminating or subjugating their native populations. Hardly a ringing endorsement!
6
@Silty No room to mention the former British colonies of Afghanistan, Bahrain, Egypt, The Gambia, Iraq, Kuwait, Myanmar, Nigeria, Pakistan, Sudan, Uganda, Yemen or Zimbabwe then?
2
@Julian I stand corrected. I should have said: 'Everywhere the British installed, or the people adopted, the British form of government, the government is good.'
Brexit is primarily due to the 'pact with the devil' that the British middle classes made with Thatcherism in the 1980's. Unlike most high-migrant countries like Denmark, Germany, France, The Netherlands, and Sweden, the United Kingdom has no functioning trade unions--they were all made impotent in the 70's and 80's, and the final nails were driven in in the 90's.
What does this mean? High migration translates to lower and lower wages for manual and low-skilled service-sector jobs.
On the other hand, a country like Sweden, which has seen tremendous EU migration, has NOT seen wages fall by the same degree. This is because every low-skill sector is covered by collective-bargaining agreements. Now, naturally, high migration hurts the leverage of LO (Sweden's main union), but its presence in every sector has protected Sweden's middle classes from the wrath of a hollowed-out working class.
Where am I going with all of this? I live in London now, and all I hear is "oh it's ignorant people with no education who voted Brexit". And I hear this from many people who are more or less completely anti-union and have embraced the Thatcher Kool-Aid. So my answer is "you make your bed, you lay in it".
12
A polemical hit piece. The premise of this article is that the English public school "chumocracy" is to blame for both Colonial and Brexit missteps. That's lazy thinking.
The English upper classes enabled an island nation to rule over about one-fourth of the world's population in the 19th Century. But WW II vastly accelerated the inevitable 20th Century decline of this empire. No amount of benevolent competence on the part of the ruling elites could have prevented the chaos that followed the British withdrawal from the Indian subcontinent in 1947. The unfortunate distribution of Hindus and Muslims long predated colonialism.
The main cause of this post-colonial chaos is the same as the inability of Britain to negotiate a favorable Brexit: Insufficient power, hard and soft. No amount of effective "chumocracy" could have changed this calculus.
8
Mr. Mishra, steeped as he evidently is in centuries-old insular Foreign Office debates over the conduct of the British Empire, does not seem to realize how ludicrous it sounds to reasonable outsiders to blame the eagerness of Indians and Pakistanis to slaughter each other upon the precise timing of the then long overdue end of British imperial rule. And to hurl all-too Oxford-Cambridge rote insults over it. If only the British ruling class were more competent, what exactly? They would still rule the sub continent? Their magnificent example would have changed the hearts and minds of the peoples they subjugated? There's a map that might have been drawn that by itself, by its god-like perfection, would have stopped the carnage? There's more than enough to criticize in the handling of Brexit by the current generation - that the matter even reached a national referendum ripe for pandering and fear-mongering, for example - without hauling out, from a dubious, insular intellectual tradition, dubious, strained historical analogies with the actions of generations long dead.
16
@RRI
To put it simply, David Cameron (Eton and Oxford) and his similarly educated chums Boris Johnson and others, thought he was being dashing, daring and oh-so-clever to promise a referendum, but he sent his country into this utter disaster. It is precisely people of his background who did the same all over the world, and with similarly disastrous results. Mishra is making a really good point.
Here is a short list of the conflicts and basket-cases that can be directly traced back to British colonial incompetence or mendacious "divide and rule" border-drawing: India/Pakistan, Syria (Sykes-Picot), Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Yemen (Aden), Somalia (Somaliland), Zimbabwe, Burma and the Rohinga, Kurdistan, Israel/Palestine, Egypt, Sudan... I dont have time to list them all.
I think we might consider "Partition" of the UK, or perhaps a "Two State Solution" to Brexit.
4
@Julian As does Mr. Mishra, you seem to presume that there exists such a thing, in the alternative, as competent, truthful, beneficent colonial rule that might have avoided the litany of tragedies that arguably arose inexorably from the imperial subjugation of other peoples, per se. That is what I meant by a dubious, insular Foreign Office debate.
As others have pointed out, the current morass is more a product of partisan conflict among members of a "ruling class," rather than the outcome of a singular class outlook, product of common status and education. Not that I'm against condemning the British or any other "ruling class," as a general matter, but Mr. Mishra's invective, however emotionally satisfying, is based on careless, far-fetched historical analogy.
@RRI
Except that it does speak to the skewed representation of political power in the UK, and thus its unrepresentative nature. Yes, as you say, perhaps all imperialisms are terrible, but that doesn't stop there being a specific characteristic of power in the UK that seems clearly traceable in both many imperial blunders and in this current mammoth blunder.
2
It appears to me that the Russians are currently winning the PsyOps battle of the Cold War.
7
The similarities to the US are not surprising. The GOP party "ruling class" chums attend the same universities and have skated by in life on connections, too much self-confidence, very little wit, and no intelligence. The apple did not fall far from the British tree. Malign incompetence knows no bounds.
3
@J Marie
Kind of, but not really. In the US, people tend to start their educations all over the place but they might well end up at ivies. Obama transferred to Columbia; Clinton went to Yale Law School (yes, GWB was all-ivy). In contrast, more than half of all British Prime Ministers went to just three secondary schools (Eton, Harrow and Westminster)!! The most recent (Cameron) was the fool who got the UK into this mess, along with his Eton and Oxford "chum" Boris Johnson.
2
The timing of this opinion is terrible. We in the Unites States are in no position to criticize Britian about its ability to govern while our President gets his directives from Moscow.
At least in Britain it is feuding with other Brits. Here in the United States our President is acting like his best allie is Putin.
Impeach Trump, swear in Pence and let's rally around him to Make America Great Again. This time for real.
2
Elitism in India is far worse than anywhere else, and Mr. Mishra, who is a successful gatecrasher into the Anglograph elite, should have commented on the Cruel Bloodsucking Competence of the Indian Ruling Class, before casting his gaze outside India.
English continues to pervade political economic and intellectual life in India; yet access to it is systematically denied to all but the rich.
Nehru's address to the nation on independence was conceived and delivered in English. Indian Constitution is written in English. Journalists in English dominate political discourse. Research in Indian history is done almost exclusively in English, even at Indian Universities. English is the language of the modern sector of the Indian economy. In fact the idea of India as a nation is a British legacy, and as all British legacies, it is inherently ugly and oppressive.
The only way to learn English is India, at least the kind of English that will get you in the modern "Shining India" is to be born in a family rich enough to send you to an English-medium school, most of which are outside the reach of common people.
It is almost impossible to learn English as an adult in India.
6
@Kanchhedia Chamaar
What? Britain's cultural dominance lingers so that, as Chamaar says, English continues to dominate Indian life, but Mishra should not "cast[] his gaze outside India"?! Why ever not? This is a hugely important article, and people around the world have benefited greatly from Mishra's scholarship.
5
Pankaj Mishra is altogether correct to condemn wounds inflicted by "Britain’s bumbling chumocrats" on millions of Asians and Africans. By drawing lines through Asia and Africa, Mishra writes, the British ruling class doomed the people living across them to endless suffering. I do have two questions I'd like him to answer, however: who, specifically, were the people who abducted and raped the "countless women" and murdered the "millions" and why, exactly, did they behave in such an evil manner?
5
@mahajoma
Read Franz Fanon if you want to understand the effects of colonialism on the colonized.
5
This article may have some valid points but it is an astounding example of left-wing sophistry which makes a very spurious connection between 1947 and 2017. What is even more surprising is that so many of the readers think it brilliant.
One can sympathize with the victims of historical imperialism without losing one’s capacity for logical reasoning. Today’s Brexit has nothing to do with Churchill or Mountbatten but with contemporary realities. What comes out here is plain resentment against the West and the glee of a post-modernist pseudo-Marxist mystifier that Britain is in trouble. Confusing readers with spurious historical analogies, inventing connections that don’t exist— this is the typical “method” of current post-colonial history, a catalogue of grievances against the West in lieu of historical exploration. But this is what happens when the so-called progressive professoriate blurs the difference between history and literature (and very low quality literature at that).
Moreover, a credible argument could be made that the present plebeian elite has little in common with the old boy gentlemen who would have made mincemeat out of this article in any Oxbridge debating club. But no one likes to say anything positive about “elites,” although everyone wants to go to an elite doctor, own the best car, have the latest iPhone, and so on. Elite means “best” but we do not have the best and brightest in power, nor in the academy—and both do damage to our brain.
4
@Veljko Vujacic
There's nothing meritocratic when the people in question (32 of 55 UK Prime Ministers, for example) come from just three secondary schools. Your argument about elitism would make sense if it reflected meritocracy, as is more the case in the US where folks like Bill Clinton and Obama ended up at ivies for grad school.
Cameron created this mess and he was from the same Eton and Oxford world that has dominated UK political life, yes, and that dominated the Empire. Mishra's point is powerfully coherent.
7
Oh boy. So many words and not a single counter fact.
@Julian
The leisurely gentlemen had many faults and sins but they invented a few important things historically, like modern science, parliaments, civil liberties, and even things closer to the progressive heart such as factory inspection. So much for lack of merit. Not quite clear that the present day meritocracy is doing better.
But my main point was that the author engaged in sophistry—making spurious connections between past and present and successfully (judging by comments) forcing a conversation about the sins of empire in lieu of a sober discussion of the more proximate causes of Brexit.
Hmm.
The author sounds like someone unable to let go of ancient history, of a inherited resentment, who then conflates it with a topical issue in order to prove his point. Isn't that called 'false equivalence'?
How long ago was 1947? Anybody who remembers it will be in their late 70s and anybody who was anything to do with Indian partition will almost certainly be dead.
Brexit is a hard-Right project and there's no 'chumocracy' there. On the contrary, Brexit has been sold as a working class initiative - that by escaping the uber-capitalist, neo-liberal EU, the workers will be freed from austerity, from wretched employment, from being 'left behind' and it's the middle class (the 'elite') who will be held to account for this crushing enslavement, and justly punished. This middle class - with their university educations, their several languages and success in areas like the media, small businesses and the professions - are the ones responsible for low wages, immigrants, the death of industry and industrial towns and cities as well as a general loss of working class self esteem. None of these people are 'upper class'. None wear monocles. Precious few went to Eton school of come from 'old money' families.
If you want to understand the British hard-Right, just look at your own citizens who've contributed to it. Trump is a chumocrat? Steve Bannon is a chumocrat?
The author may well understand Indian anti-Anglo sentiment. He doesn't understand zip about Brexit.
4
@nolongeradoc: "Brexit is a hard-Right project and there's no 'chumocracy' there."
Wrong: Cameron (Eton and Oxford) came up with the idea of the referendum, thinking it was a daring move to save his political power from Brexiteers like Jacob Rees-Mogg (Etron and Oxford), and thereby plunged the country into its greatest political crisis since the 19th century.
His chum Boris Johnson (Eton and Oxford) decided for reasons of pure ambition (he took weeks deciding what side to be on) to lead the campaign.
This was a complete project of the chumocracy.
5
@nolongeradoc Perhaps you might consider looking up the pro-Imperial babble spouted by the engineers and the shills of Brexit--the Boris Johnsons and the Nigel Farages. Brexit might have been *marketed* as an economic initiative for the betterment of the British working class, but it is ignorant (but more likely duplicitous) to assert that the longing for glory days of Britannia did not contribute to its conception and zeal.
6
Better trained students to one specific purpose mostly are not very bright or talented ones. Nonetheless these elite kids from privileged families would steal the show and inherit influential positions in both Govt. and private organizations. Equally "talented" students from equally rich, influential families from other countries, including former British colonies like India, would join their British colleagues in universities there. No wonder political blunders like Brexit and Britain's private sector economy are not doing that great for many years now.
Most 'Oxbridge' students are privately educated. One state school bucks this trend in a big way
Most 'Oxbridge' students are privately educated. One state school bucks this trend in a bi
https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/17/uk/brampton-manor-oxbridge-admissions-scli-intl/index.html
2
The author of this opinion piece should add his own name to the list of mendacious intellectually limited hustlers. Being right about Mountbatten and the partition does not justify the multitude of prejudiced assumptions and mistakes about today in this article. I am sure he had fun writing it though and I was amused.
8
@David Pfeiffer
The author of this piece is not a politician with the power to wreck whole countries, and did not go to Eton (as far as I know) unlike Cameron, Johnson and Rees-Mogg whose infantile rivalries have created this fiasco.
3
Care to list the assumptions you object to? Or is that too much to ask?
I wanted to understand this article so bad, but after having to look up over a dozen words I gave up. I don’t know if I should blame this on the American public school system or if this just was t written for me.
3
Pankaj could not be more wrong. Every era has its tyrannies, often in pairs; once absolute monarchies and colonialism, in the last century communism and fascism, now identity politics and neo-liberal globalism. The later has co-opted Wilsonianism. Wilsonian aggressive moral diplomacy and liberal internationalism has been replaced by the supremacy of debt machine investment banks and corrupt officials who have forced the circumstances wealth inequality and hidden offshore assets. The BeNeLux Common Market thingy will be its next victim. Those who aren’t screaming “run! run! run!” are standing on a beach to get a good view of the coming tsunami. Don’t you feel the tremors?
1
It is very challenging to read about the mistakes of the British - and there were some massive ones, with our own nation in such disarray.
4
I am always bemused by politicians who dismiss foreseeable future problems as "pure millennium bug stuff" fiction. In doing so they betray their ignorance and actually highlight their own incompetence. As someone who worked on millennium bug mitigation, I can personally attest that the systems I was involved with would have unquestionably failed on the first of January 2000. However, that business and many many businesses around the world spent large amounts of money identifying and then mitigating the points of failure. In fact, the millennium bug should be used as a case study in problem management - identify future problems then spend the required amounts of money in the present to avoid spending even larger amounts of money in the future. Contrast this with Mr Johnson's proposal to worry about how to deal with Brexit induced problems after they occur or the numerous politicians around the world who dither in the face of climate change and, rather than disparaging the millenium bug, they should dream of having the competence to be able to emulate it.
8
Such a great article. The British public school system produces entitled buffons who have a very high level of confidence in their own (low) abilities. The legacy of the aristocracy is such that society places value on “speaking well” as opposed to actually making sense. And these people rule the Conservative party. They have wreaked havoc all over the world and have now been unleashed on this country. They are threatening to dismantle a 40-year trading relationship. So many jobs and livelihoods depend on the U.K. being in the EU. Do they even know that Britain imports almost all its insulin as they push the country towards a no-deal Brexit? If we make it out of this debacle, we must remember this time and never elect them again.
12
As a professional historian of India for 13 years, published, traveling to India for the last 13, and having lived and studied in the epicenter of upper class ‘twitishness’ (that is Oxford) and India, I think it is fair to say Mr Mishra is right on a few things:
- Partition of India was hasty. But it wasn’t - as some comments suggest - wholly voluntary. Britain was in debt in 1947, owed huge funds to the US, and faced an nationalist movement that was pressuring the Raj to dismantle. So no voluntary exit here - it was forced. Gandhi and Nehru and Jinnah all pressured the British with their parties and agitations (Andrew Roberts’ and Niall Ferguson’s belittling of their contributions is sad and frankly glib) which largely exposed the moral reality of rule-that it was morally bankrupt and based on force.
- Oxbridge is still largely a center of elitism. And I fear it always will be. Though I was a grad student, I could easily tell most privileged undergraduates were all fluff and mostly superficial wit, rather than imbibed with actual intelligence or profundity. In a more intense, punishing undergraduate education at say, for example, Swarthmore College, they’d all either be exposed as fraudsters it would fail miserably.
- Mr Mishra is a provoceteur, but a needed one. While he misinterprets many complex historical events thought banter, he should be admired for bringing moral light to questions of historical importance that help us understand the contemporary world.
18
Interesting Article. While many of his assertions/arguments regarding Imperialism, the Raj, Partition, Churchill and the history of Brexit till now are valid( though not new or particularly insightful) and well articulated I wonder what views Mr. Mishra holds regarding the European Union as a sociopolitical experiment. A case could be made, and has been made by many citizens of the UK who voted leave that the EU is in its essence a club for white Christians and is being structured / designed to keep ( either deliberately as a side-effect ) people who are not white.
Maybe the English people will blindly follow Farage and Boris Johnson over the cliff and prove to the rest of the world that the lemming fable did come true.
The English will eventually come to realize that being part of the EU was their best hope in competing with new emerging powers. By themselves they will become irrelevant in world affairs. Eventually a lesser nation when Scotland decides to break loose and remain with the EU.
We can watch with great interest the gyrations of the politicians as they elbow each other in the ribs to become PM.
I stand with the leaders of the EU as they hold firm.
On the bright side, they will never ever have the power to rewrite borders across the world causing great misery to people around the world.
6
This is the reason Ireland was so fast out of the starting blocks to impress on the EU the significance of the Irish border issue...and why they never wavered. It took the bumbling Brexiteers over 2 years to get the message, that is how totally devoid of knowledge they are of events outside of their alumni circles. Unfortunately, they still expect everyone else to clean up their mess but so far, thankfully, they are having their noses rubbed deep in their mess and it seems like some of them might be finally twigging they are playing a totally different game to the one they were taught in school! Fantasy meets reality. it's fantastic.
14
If anything, I think the author gives folks like Mountbatten too little credit. Of course we shouldn't invoke malice when incompetence will do. But it's hard for me to imagine that decolonization was specifically engineered to create unstable states subject to British influence.
Another comment points out that the violence during partition wasn't entirely Britain's fault - Indians on every side have to deal with the mutual antipathy. But surely even Mountbatten knew that too! Why not try to mitigate the hatred by at least having sensible borders, or a cooperation mechanism? Nope. If Britain can't rule India, then independent India must be hobbled. Same for every colony Britain held.
It's not enough for dogs to be successful - cats must also fail. That was Britain's ruling class in a nutshell during the colonial era. Rule Britannia and screw everyone else.
Brexit though? Now THAT is incompetence.
316
@Danny
India being such a great democracy,seventy years later.
2
@Danny A friend from an African nation who lived his boyhood through the aftermath of freedom from British colonial rule and the usual disaster left behind told me there was a saying in his youth: "The white man s*its on the chair before he leaves.", which, while vulgar, seems to encapsulate the mess left behind rather neatly. He was fortunate that bloodshed did not happen immediately in his country, but years later when divisions which had been papered over by the colonial bureaucracy's control and mutual dislike/fear of the colonial regime were more forcefully expressed, causing a civil war and famine.
11
@Danny I don't understand this obsession with Britain's empire, 70 years after Indian independence!! Time to move on, as Germany and Japan have - not that I think we are in same league of past crimes, though I know some debate that.
70 years on and we still find India hobbled by a cast system from the middle ages, attitudes to women that are frankly unacceptable and the worst corruption in the world. Time for India and its overseas descendants to take a good look at modern day India and question itself. Move on and look after your billions. You have a space programme, so why not lift millions out of poverty. Hard reflection required, not bitter articles in the American press - whose freedom of speech came from England by the way.
11
Great article. The chaos is is on a par with that of North / South Korea and Vietnam following the US military intervention.
The latest debacles in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan shows that incompetence of the ruling class isn't limited to the UK.
9
My family were friends with that of a British Vice-Consul stationed in Spokane after World War II. At a party to help assemble small aid packages for British children, friends were astonished to hear the Consul hold forth on the greatness of the British Empire, etc.. My mother said those gathered just stared at each other as he talked.
8
While Mishra's account of colonial times is compelling, I'm not sure what- if anything - it has to do with the current Brexit issues.
Imperialism has little to do with the party politics that spurred on Brexit. Is the point of the article to say that the ruling class is as incompetent today as it was during imperial times? I don't necessarily disagree if so, but not sure this is a point best illustrated by overlapping times and people with widely different contexts, objectives and obligations.
If anything, the UK is retreating upon itself and shying away from an international democratic organisation (not really in any way comparable to a colony), thus not only endangering itself economically but endangering all of Europe by setting a precedent of rupture in a coalition that was also created to act as a counterbalance in post WWII powerplays and a deterrent of war.
Colonial history is one thing, our current political situation quite another. While parallels through history can shed light on trends and potentially issue warning signs, this article does neither in my opinion.
8
Well Britain has been banking on free trade agreements with former British colonies which they thought could be negotiated with better terms as compared to the FTA already existing with EU. The main reason behind this thought was well the colonies shared a glorious history with the British (or so the British government thinks). The current article just highlights how the feelings are towards the British proposal on negotiating new FTA. With the British side not providing the concessions that India wants signing the Indian bureaucracy (which is a British gift) may just grind down negotiations to a halt resulting in negotiations taking decades. This may not be the road to recovery UK hoped for.
4
Mr. Mishra’s commentary was classy, caustic and, dare I say, Churchillian. When Churchill was Prime Minister, he believed that Indians did not deserve independence. He suggested that Indians were incapable of running their own country and it would break up into several pieces if it were granted independence.
Fast forward to today. Despite several crises along the way, India has survived not only as a united nation, but also is thriving as the world’s largest democracy. In fact, India’s $2.7 trillion economy is likely to surpass the U.K.’s $2.8 trillion economy this year. And sadly, as Mr. Mishra points out, “Britain itself faces the prospect of partition if Brexit, a primarily English demand, is achieved and Scottish nationalists renew their call for independence.”
Churchill must be turning in his grave.
10
Ignores context and circumstances as is usual with these ideological polemics written from the 21st century viewpoint. Basically a rather vulgar perspective.
The fact is the British Empire was one of the greatest tour de forces in world history. How a small island with a small population, off the coast of Europe, constantly threatened by stronger external enemies, managed to create the greatest empire in history where they ruled 25% of the world's population and that lasted for 200 year an amazing story. And while they were doing it they more or less invented the modern world. Constitutional government; central banking; industrialization; the English language; the greatest writers and scientists from Shakespeare to Darwin; the greatest inventors and explorers. And it was all largely created and run by the Chumocrat's ruling class
Hey what have the British ever done for us? LOL
12
It was. Nothing more to say simply get the fact: it was....
John
Reading your comment saddens me.
It's said that Brits have no sense of history and sadly you have no sense of perspective.
British people produced great learnings for the world not Britain.
From an Irish perspective we view the British people as friends but we would view the Eton establishment and its ilk with absolute disdain.
They presided over the death of two million of us in the great famine and set up a sectarian bigoted society in NI which sowed the seeds that caused the deaths of thousands of innocent lives.
The self same establishment are now shooting the entire United Kingdom in the foot.
The thing about history is that to understand it you need to read all sides.
George Bernard Shaw wrote "beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance"
I recommend John that you read a bit more.
2
Thank you Pankaj for so eloquently penning a superb article which from the bottom of many Scottish hearts rings so true, (Scotland voted 62% Remain). The arrogance of English Ruling class is permeating down to envelop the English Establishment and non-Establishment together in a quest for English Independence aka Brexit. Which is absolutely fine except... keep it in a St. George’s Flag not a Union Flag, and please England don’t be so arrogant as to desire autonomy and deny Scotland that which you seek yourself. That would be arrogant beyond belief.
13
@Alan Harvey
Shows how much you know about history. The British empire was largely run by the Scots and of the 24 British PM's since 1896 13 of them were Scotsmen.
3
I thank Mr Mishra for putting into words some ideas that I've always thought about, but wouldn't dare bring up in polite conversation. And the eloquence with which he draws the parallels is astounding.
8
How glad I am that my paternal grandparents emigrated to the US in the early 20th Century, from Sunderland. However, I'm sure that my grandmother was much happier about it than I could ever be. You see, my grandfather married "beneath himself", and his new family was ostracized for it. She was from the "servant class", was given three years of public education, and then trained to be a maid. Even though she "rose" as high as she could within her class constraints (she actually became a governess), she was forever limited by the circumstances of her birth. My great-grandmother (her mother-in-law) refused to ever set foot in their home because of it, only relenting once, when my grandmother was seriously ill, and in fact, thought to be on her deathbed. She recovered, the "ban" was back in effect, and in 1910, they left for the New World. She died long before I was old enough to want to ask her about it, but I can almost sense her resentment of it all to this day.
I realize that the UK has come a long way in the last century, but the residual effects of such a severe system compels me to worry about their future. Make Britain Great Again rings as hollow as our so-called President's manta, and is just as dangerous. I can only hope that my British cousins will make the correct choice and vote to Remain in a second referendum. Any other choice is sheer folly.
7
Can I correct the assumption that Brexit is solely an English phenomenon. Wales (sadly!) voted overwhelmingly to leave as did other mainly working class constituencies.
To blame the public school toffs exclusively is rather naive even though historically they have a lot to answer for.
5
The people from Wales foolishly believed in the lies from Boris and the like. Sad
The column might have been improved by a different tone.
4
@View from the hill
I totally agree. The Brits who sit in the House of Commons today are often not wealthy, and did not ever themselves draw partisans anywhere. One could write an observational article about how it might help Britain now to think about drawing a line down itself - but to point fingers about the past and use words of vitriol is harsh when compassion would be welcome.
4
@View from the hill Agree completely. For all its merits, it reminded me of the bully boys in humanities seminars who are completely certain of their views and everyone else is an idiot. One of my profs used to call it "putting guns around your words."
1
Thank you kindly for this wonderfully written history lesson among other things.
The English (more than the British) have ruined the world for so many people and nations (after the idea of a nation became practicable for most of the world).
You brilliantly touch upon the disaster in the Indian subcontinent and Ireland but of course what Sykes-Picot did in the Middle East (David Fromkin’s excellent book A Peace to End All Peace describes the incompetent idiots from Viceroys to an amateur called TE Lawrence) is as bad if not worse. Far East, Africa and even North America got a taste of the bitter medicine.
History is a very strange stochastic process with some type of mean reversion imbedded in it.
It is always the horrific ruling class, products of the same schools that inoculate kids at a young age to become such callous, pompous fools who ruin the world. At least ruined it.
Now they are on their last legs. The world has moved and all these Etonites are as ahistorical and figments of some writer’s fantasy as characters of Harry Potter books.
I feel for the British people. They have suffered as well under such a terrible ruling class.
But on Brexit, it is as the man who ended his life in London and is buried in the Highgate Cemetery said: first time a tragedy second time a farce.
7
To rail with apocalyptic certainty against an entire class
displays a charming retro-Marxist touch, but it does not advance the learning needed to resolve any social, political or economic problem. And not everyone who disagrees with you is ignorant or simply stupid. For all its failings, the British Empire voluntarily dissolved itself--something that imperial nations have not, in the course of history, been wont to do.
234
@Alan Behr Voluntarily, or out of financial necessity? One is not necessarily the same as the other.
72
@AJFEqually morally and of economic necessity. At the end of WW2 Britain was broke after 5 years of all out war. Importantly in 1945 the British voted for a socialist government who fervently believed that colonialism was morally wrong and who aided, democratically, some former colonies toward emancipation. It was only after this first rush of enthusiasm that reactionary forces repeated the mistakes of the past, especially in Kenya
39
@Alan Behr
Well, for all its failings the USSR "voluntarily dissolved itself" too. Two cheers for its ruling class of gangster - apparatchiks?
61
An excellent and interesting article with one minor point for consideration: its is arguable that England's first colony was - and is - not Ireland but Wales, a country that, unlike Ireland and Scotland, will find maintaining its distinct identity both more difficult and more important than ever in a post-Brexit political landscape.
209
@Andrew
You're right. The English (i.e., Anglo-Normans) invaded Wales a century before they did Ireland. They conquered most of Wales then (temporarily), before they did Ireland.
16
@Andrew I agree completely. I often say this to my Welsh partner on our visits to her town in the former coal mining valleys. The colonial status of Wales was reinforced to me when I realized that to travel by train from Fishguard on the Welsh coast just up the Welsh coast to Aberystwyth also on the coast involves a long circuitous route through England.
6
Agree that the Welsh case is interesting. Depends, I guess, on when you think colonization occurred. Normans (not English) conquered and held Ireland in 1169, a bit before the Edwards built castles in Wales.
5
While the 'chumocrats" may bear the most responsibility, it's surprising how little mention has been made of Putin's and the Mercers' efforts (via Cambridge Analytica) to promote Brexit through social media. The unraveling of Britain and of the EU has been high in the priorities of both the Russian strong man and the wealthy Mercer racialists. Their evil genius has been to exploit nationalism for their own ends around the world.
4
Pretty sure Mountbatten and Churchill are dead, but if guilt is inherited, lots of peoples could be in trouble.
1
Somewhat off to blame Churchill for the ills of partition. In 1945 the UK elected a true Socialist government which for reasons both moral and economic decided to give independence to most of the British colonies. The mass murder which subsequently took place was committed by both Muslim and Hindu populations and, for once, not the Brutish empire.
3
Like any pervasive viral pandemic, the global British colonial enterprise left weaker unsuspecting hosts completely depleted of vital resources BUT eventually made them
stronger, more resilient and self-reliant in posterity.
After all, their far-flung imperial escapades were the sole means of sustenance that kept that little island afloat for the better half of the last millennium. So how about a little sympathy for those poor ol' British elites? Especially because they've also reliably inoculated their own masses to "Keep Calm and Carry On!"? Cheers!
2
Pankaj Mishra has written an excellent tutorial on the British Ruling Class. It would be satisfying to see Scotland declare independence from UK so Scottish desire to stay in EU come true. Likewise for Northern Ireland to break away from UK, merge with the rest of Ireland and stay in EU. Wales too. Let the English enjoy their hard Brexit which many of them clamored. Then everybody kinda happy.
4
A whole load of nonsense methinks as there is zero equivalency between Brexit, the EU, India, and the British colonial empire. If anything the comparison, and it would it still be off the mark, is between Europe, Brussels, and ordinary peasants aka workers in the West.
12
If the Brits wanted any type of "democracy" they would have pulled away decades ago. Who wants some old men in Brussels to tell a country what to do. Britain should have done just that: BREXIT and stop the dependence.
2
Thanks to the NYT for publishing this essay, A little too much for some,but accurately exposes the arrogance of the self centered and shallow. We also are a country run by those who may be the best and the brightest,but our history in Vietnam and Iraq does not support that view.
7
This was an excellent article from someone who clearly knows the historical facts about our sordid endeavours. Our crimes across the world, from our invasion of Africa and involvement in slavery to Asian, Middle Eastern and Antipodean forays, it is surprising that we have a Commonwealth or even any allies at all.
The history books available in public schools evidently require rewriting so the self indulgent, entitled brigade improve their attitude towards others at home and abroad.
7
Ignorance and hubris indeed. But is there actually anything wrong with self-government? Why would the British want to be ruled from Brussels? Britain already has a government and a monarchy. I think that is all there was to that. The British people decided that the rulers in Brussels weren't actually governing for their needs.
4
From the 1970’s, the UK resisted EU encroachment on its sovereignty, preferring a close trading partnership rather than a federal Europe. Cameron’s referendum for his right wing went awry. Some 15% of the UK’s population are non UK-born (37% in London and c.50% in inner London). Quite high, more than the US, but this was not the referendum’s driver (though it created some right wing mischief during the campaign). Seeking to end, in a year or so, 40 years close economic and legal integration has created mayhem. May sought a deal around her party’s acute divisions. She will have to now deal with all of Parliament (or with voters). Through this, the Brits’ good humour and calm behaviour says a lot about them, as does Parliament’s maintenance of order. Who knows what next?
Pankaj Mishra extremely one-sided and ill-informed article, with particularly venomous wording, sees proof of British aggression and racism, in an inevitable destination from Empire to Brexit. That is both absurd and wrong. He has a virulent anti-British history, with India’s disastrous partition looming large. Terrible mistakes were made by all: Brits, Hindus and Moslems, and their leaders. The timetable the Brits adopted is mostly blamed but I would venture that, once their leaders had insisted on partition, chaos and extreme violence would ensue regardless of lead time. Is Mishra really saying that a mid-1948 partition would have been a well-organised, non-violent process? Or a 1949 one? Really??
4
Brilliantly written and right on the money!
4
It is interesting, too, that Louis Mountbatten was the uncle of the Duke of Edinburgh, Prince Philip, and a very important counselor and guide to Prince Charles, next in line. One of Prince William's middle names is Louis, and his youngest son is named Louis. The monarch is not supposed to be involved in politics, and Queen Elizabeth II seems to have hewed to that through her long reign. It makes one wonder, though, how much the information and advice she gets from her prime ministers is tainted by all this article outlines.
2
The following quotes reveal the real Churchill, a scion of the bumbling English ruling class that ruled more with bluster than with intelligence and sensitivity of global empire built by earlier generation of Britishers.
"I do not admit... that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America, or the black people of Australia... by the fact that a stronger race, a higher grade race... has come in and taken its place.
Churchill to Palestine Royal Commission, 1937"
Extreme hubris led to the demise of British empire. I see similar superiority-complex by those currently occupying the seats of power in Washington, DC. Those who don't learn from history are condemned to repeat it. I would add at a great cost to their countrymen.
8
That diatribe was a long time in the making. I always wondered why that sentiment was never voiced. Well it has been now, and I feel better. I hope the billions and billions of people, alive or in heaven, who suffered under the boots of chums, feel better too.
3
Bitter truths won't stop the relentless glorification of British queens and the hoity-toities in yet another drama on PBS, Netflix or your local movie theater. They are good actors.
3
Having travelled to the UK many times, particularly to London, I found that those who were the most helpful and friendly were those that Brexiters want to leave "their" country.
2
I am deeply hostile to Brexit, but this article tells us far more about the author's bitter projections than Britain as it now is.
The British elite he so deeply scorns have been the strongest supporters of British membership of the EU. But that doesn't fit his thesis, which ignores the populist roots of this disaster. But why discuss Nigel Farage and Trump when you can go on and on about Louis Mountbatten?
9
Well reasoned and written article that counters the Times op-ed writers Brooks and Stephens. Perhaps, the Times can give Mr. Mishra an occasional guest slot to opine.
I can only add the calamitous financial cost of WW1 that nearly bankrupted the Empire and hastened America's rise as the pre-eminent global power.
Ironic that that the Colonial empires of Britain, France, Holland etc. paved the way for those former colonial "subjects" to arrive legally in their former masters countries and change the demographic makeup of those countries.
Finally, Churchill and the rest were never as astute in assessing the strategic situation in the colonies as the 28 year old OSS officer Lt Colonel Peter Dewey. His remarks in September 1945 before his demise were prescient.
"Cochinchina is burning, the French and British are
finished here, and we [ the US ] ought to clear out
of Southeast Asia."
4
Churchill was First Lord of the Admiralty at the time of the Gallipoli campaign. He sent ships to the Dardanelles and, if the crew of any of the ships in that squadron included Irishmen, a possibility, I guess you can say he sent Irishmen to death. But what on earth are you talking about? Kitchener was Minister for war and responsible for sending troops. The whole war cabinet agreed to the Gallipoli campaign. There is more to this, of course. Churchill’s original plan was corrupted by others in the cabinet including Kitchener. It’s all in the history books including the evidence at the ensuing Royal Commission. I suggest that the article is more polemical than historical.
3
How sad to see the UK falling apart under an entitled, but incompetent, arrogant and unelected, born to rule elite. There can be no starker comparison to your USA, which has never been more united and prosperous under the sane and stable governance of a great self proclaimed genius from the billionaire ruling elite, none other than your revered President, Mr. Trump.
2
Hmmm sounds like the US Ruling Class. It is ridiculous how the Anglo-American Empire is ending...
@Julian
Unfortunately people are still fooled by stories of the glamour of aristocracy. Idiotic television series, cheap novels with zero analysis, the lack of class of the American ruling oligarchy (Kennedy’s and Bush’s are the nobility here) all contribute to the continuing appeal of the British Empire, soon to be reduced to a single vassal state; Wales!
Mishra’s article is excellent in many respects including highlighting the foolishness and evil that came from the Etonite cliques.
The end is near. England by itself will find its way in the world where the fiction of its nobility is delegated to the dustbin of history.
5
@Blunt
Absolutely, in series 1 of The Crown that we saw The Queen in Kenya just as the British were torturing and killing tens of thousands (see Caroline Elkins' work at Harvard). I think the series would have been far better had it highlighted those absurd juxtapositions.
1
The irony is that Great Britain, with small population and area, was able to build such an empire, but when it came to dividing it, the leaders created many of the world's hot spots: India/Pakistan, Israel/the Arab world, Iraq, South Africa, and of course, Ireland/Northern Ireland. They just don't know how to leave.
3
Beautiful!
1
When you realize that Oxford is nothing less than a KGB prep-school, it all comes into focus.
1
Wonderfully written. Writer does not address however the suicidal drive of the English working class over the Brexit cliff. It is incomprehensible that the very people with the least to gain and the most to lose, i.e. manufacturing and semi-skilled and skilled jobs, are the most fervent for Brexit to happen. The industrial North and Midlands supplied the majority to carry the day. The 'Chumnocrats' are few in number and huge on influence and the class they hoodwinked the most are the people who will lose out when car plants and skilled labor depart for the EU to beat tariffs. Being from NI I delight in the English being hoisted by their own petard for cynical gerrymandered border they imposed on us in 1921!
4
BBC news of 19/01/17: "It's been reliably reported that today's serious and substantial debate in Parliament over the Brexit planning was abruptly curtailed by news that the little prince is teething..."
5
At last, a well articulated thought piece that is not all about how bad Trump is and how we are all going down the pipes (which we might very well be).... Very refreshing and insightful... Thanks...
3
This is a brilliant piece, indeed, as scathing in its tone as it is accurate in its summation of British colonial history.
My late husband was the Irish-American descendant of farmers who came to the United States to flee what he never failed to call the Irish Potato Genocide. And he was right.
As a former college instructor who used to include a segment on WWII in one of my classes, I would comment to my students that if you removed the gas chambers and the systematic, highly organized genocide of people that the Germans employed, there was little difference in the death toll or the brutality between what the British imposed on their colonies and the Germans imposed on the Jews. Yet we allied with England (and I certainly understand why) ... because while the Brits were brutal colonists, they were OUR brutal colonists. Running up a death toll in Ireland and a slew of far-off lands didn't ring as true for the United States as seeing Germany run through Europe.
495
@DLM
I agree and have argued here in the past that words and definitions matter.
in re: genocide, in addition to what Britain did, you could lump in what Belgium did in the Congo - by some estimates as many as 10 million people killed - as well as what the U.S. did to the native Americans.
And while we're on the topic of words mattering, the camps for Japanese-Americans during WWII are usually referred to as internment camps. They were not. They were concentration camps. The goal was to concentrate a specific group of people in a certain place and keep them there by force. Similarly, the Germans sent Jews not to concentration camps, but to death camps. The goal wasn't primary to 'concentrate' them in one place. The primary goal was to put them to death.
The first step to repeating history isn't forgetting it. No, it really begins with a subtle whitewashing of not calling things what they really were.
81
@DLM Stephen Colbert referred to it as The British Final Solution.
15
@DLM
That's an incredibly big if.
8
Excellent article and summary of the problems in both Ireland and India caused by partition and ethnic cleansing of religious groups. A difference not mentioned here is that the colonisation of Ireland and establishment of a Protestant majority in Northern Ireland was achieved by a brutal policy of plantation by British ruling elites through the confiscation of lands, eviction and deportation of native Irish. Culture and language was suppressed. So, it's ironic indeed that many Brexiteers feel overwhelmed by these foreigners 'invading' the UK from the EU by working in the service and agricultural sectors for the elites. It's not like they were beaten publicly for speaking English in England or anything like what they themselves inflicted on the Irish.
Having no functioning governmental Assembly in Northern Ireland makes a mockery of Tory protests about protecting democracy and 'respecting the wishes of the democratic vote'.
6
I appreciate the mention regarding the "masters of disaster from Cyprus to Malaysia, Palestine to South Africa" as the national boundaries drawn in the Middle East after the First World War led to the several wars therein of late. The Kurds remain divided between four countries as I recall.
6
Maybe a better historical analogy is America ichoosing self determination over economic well being by exiting its colonial status under Great Britain. Britain is now choosing to exit its colonial status under Big Brussls as its EuroPeon loyalists rant about “economic doom” which will likely be as short lived as any America experienced after its Declaration of Independence.
Brilliant essay, Pankaj. The wheel has come full circle. We are living in interesting times.
9
I Carry No Brief for the English Upper Class. Indeed, I think the greatest invention of all time was the longbow because it allowed the people to kill the Lords, thus forcing some change.
However, as to the Irish Border being a stumbling block in the Brexit situation, there really wasn't much choice but Partition in 1920. The Orangemen were ready, willing and able to fight.
And they still are. That is a very difficult situation-far more difficult than is generally recognized.
4
Pankaj Mishra's trenchant analysis of British colonial rule and its long decayed ruling class notwithstanding, the European Union is an alliance of capitalist nations and classes against their working classes. The sooner it's brought to an end, the better.
1
Accurate and stinging, two words which aptly describe the remnants of the British colonial endeavor, as assessed here. The EU was, for them, a privileged sort of gambit, relative to the rest of the members. Now they propose to go it alone, with only perhaps a little less than half of their own natural resources remaining to them. So, of course, South America and Africa remain ripe for the picking, were it not for the inclination of the Russians and the Chinese to help defend the countries there from the rapacity of the bigoted plutocrats. In India, the gambit of cadastral surveys (redrawing boundaries in such a way as to give the appearance of overturning the caste-ridden property lines which favored the Indian plutocrats, while redirecting the inflow of revenue to their own coffers, thus "making" the likes of a Viceroy. Whether it was irony or justice which "Sligo" signified, it probably heralded the immanent demise of noblesse oblige in Britain; how immanent remains to be seen.
5
Thank you Mr. Mishra for detailing a history that colonialists would just as soon we all forget. It's stunning to me that I grew up in the USA and was never told the history of the partition in India---because for so long American, like British history has been taught from the view of the white, male, colonialist perspective---not ever from the view of those who suffered the most.
13
Americans should not gloat over the UK's Brexit troubles, because what has brought them to this sorry state is echoed on this side of The Pond. We too are a society dominated by a small, wealthy elite mostly educated (indoctrinated?) at a handful of highly exclusive institutions. We too have a vast white underclass that is reacting to demographic and technological change by attempting to cling to the one source of status it had. We too base our supposed leadership on military strength rather than cultural, educational, or even economic superiority. We too try to dictate to other sovereign nations what the terms of interaction will be rather than seeking cooperation and compromise. We too think that if we can't get what we want, we can just go it alone and everyone will beg us to come back. We too have a lazy, entitled population that is easy prey for demagogues who tell us what we want to believe, that we can have our cake and eat it too, and no sacrifice or change is required on our part. Beware, my fellow Americans, because Britain's fate may well be ours if we cannot move beyond the mindset of imperial dominance.
21
Without questioning the well-deserved blame the Tories will receive for a botched Brexit, it is fair to point out that Labour has been AWOL as well.
Moreover, in his flaying of the British for their role in the tragedy that befell a partitioned India, Mishra to my thinking goes too far. He derides Churchill for his imperialistic notions, demanding the British continue to rule, and also derides Mountbatten for too-hastily "forcing" independence on India, for which the Indian nationalists had been clamoring for decades. And the millions of displaced persons and almost unimaginable loss of life could just as easily be rooted in the festering religious hatreds between Hindus and Muslims. Sadly, there is ample blame to go round.
4
Thank you Pankaj Mishra. Your Opinion piece is the first time I have read an article accurately describing the incompetence both of Earl Mountbatten and Winston Churchill. This accuracy is so rare that I'm not even sure British law allows it.
19
It's a bit of slur to call Ulster Protestants "settlers" - as if people whose families migrated there in the 17th century are recent arrivals with less claim to full inclusion in Irish nationhood. Besides which, my family, like many in Ireland, were CofI "natives" - 17th Cent. Catholic apostates just like most of the Republic's population today.
The description of the characteristics of graduates of elite British universities is strikingly familiar here stateside. It sounds an awful lot like the same sort of people who populate the Ivy Leagues. Look no further than Harvard's Larry "didn't see the 2008 crash coming" Summers, or Columbia's Glenn "I got paid not to see the 2008 crash coming" Hubbard.
6
@Gary F.S.
Yeah- the Orangmen don't get much respect. Mind you, they are not exactly all that housebroken. And their songs! Yikes-
"...The NIght We Burned Ardoyne..."?
But, still, they are there and have been for centuries and they are not going to leave.
With a few edits here and there, this same essay could apply to Trump and today's G.O.P. " Given the shutdown and other major messes he has created, we now have our own "master of disaster." How many articles have been written lately about the G.O.P. senate denying the realities of climate change, inability and unwillingness to reconcile immigration issues and spending this country in debt beyond imagination?
The truly sad and inexcusable fact is that they would do it all over again just as it appears that the British" chumocrats " are doing today.
9
European Intellectual History ended in 1978 when Edward Said's Orientalism ended all thoughts beyond evils of European colonialism (and by extension the entire Enlightenment project that enabled Said's critique in the 1st place) No one has moved beyond it. No one can manage to stop repeating its gospel--albeit in far-flung iterations. That colonialism was bad and continues to be bad has been the end all be all of nearly all critical thinking among the anglo-American intellectuals for at least forty years. The current social, political status of many former colonies--is but one reflection of this malaise. The rejection of Enlightenment ideals--especially the most crucial idea of self-criticism--with no alternatives and no concern for having one at all is reflected in Brexit, Trump, Orban, and Erdogan and in the triumphal achievements of both Putin and Xi Jinping.
10
This whole drama will pass the the Brits will be fine. London is too influential and prosperous for them to suffer for too long.
And why even mention Mountbatten? Jinnah & Iqbal played a bigger role in pushing for and designing the partition than any Brit. The roots of the partition don't rest in the perfidy of the Anglo but rather the fundamental incompatibility of Hindu & Muslim culture on the subcontinent along with the implausibility of the concept of a single Indian state ruled by a Hindu majority. Don't blame the Brits for that, Mr. Mishra.
13
@asfghzs
That is true about the British role, but some of us still have a hope that there can be a state in which Muslims do have civil rights even if Hindus are in the majority. Oh wait, there is such a place. It's called India. And before you start telling me about all the indignities committed against Muslims in India, most of them have it better off than in the theocratic military dictatorship of Pakistan.
Bad things occur when people support a policy or a person they don't really like just because they hate the other option even worse, and also secretly believe that the person or policy they are nominally supporting stands no chance of actually prevailing.
Brexit
Trump
The US government shutdown
... and on and on.
7
Let us not forget the catastrophe that imperialist border drawing has had and still has in the Middle East and Africa. It matters little whether it is British imperialism French, Dutch, German or any other would-be world power that carved up the less developed world, stole its resources and exploited the labor of its population. "Age of Anger" by Pankaj Mishra has to be a must read.
7
Agree entirely. Interesting point is the other imperial nations have had an easier time (relative to England) letting go.
3
Brilliant analysis! I suspect, though, that the British (and more particularly, perhaps, the English) are not alone in our class-based hubris. The French, for example, have an elite that is arguably even more narrow than Britain's: de Gaulle's originally meritocratic Ecole Nationale d'Administration is now mostly accessible only to those who have been to the Grandes Ecoles, which in turn are open only to those able to have had special tutoring. In the USA, getting to an Ivy League university is still a passport to wealth or influence — and it helps to be blessed with rich parents. Pankaj Mishra is absolutely right to condemn the deadly insouciance of Mountbatten and Churchill — and their modern counterparts. But bad or clumsy behaviour by an ignorant superpower is more the rule than the exception, as Americans must by now be aware after follies that range from Vietnam to Iraq and Afghanistan. By the way, as a Brit who has risen from the near-working class to be part of the "metropolitan anti-Brexit elite" (I abandoned my Brummie accent as soon as I won a place at a "posh" school), I'm very pleased that Mr Mishra is reading The Economist — it pays my pension.
15
@John Andrews I agree with much of that analysis, John. There seems to be great big dollop of schadenfreude smeared over this comment board and an almost complete failure to appreciate that the imperial power causing intractable problems for the world today and for future generations ain't based out of the British Isles ...
2
Th obituary of the US empire may be much the same as the British empire - with all the same features: A bamboozled population living on myths, and arrogant leaders disconnected from reality. However the British empire lasted 350 years, ours is a mere century old so far. It may take another 50 years or so to be absolutely gone . Republican/Trump unilateral rule will speed the process up. We are in free fall already!
16
This is comical. Like most elites around the world, the ruling class in Britain was all in on the concept of the Eurozone, and thought Brexit would simply never pass - the populace had already been fully "pacified". Their failure came in not seeing the rage that common folk had for an open border and nearly unlimited immigration.
4
And the willful blindness extends to “common folk” allowing their base instincts to delude them about the real issues and thinking it is immigration. The common folk should vote for Bernie or Corbyn if they want to address their true ills, but they chose Trump and May? Why? Seriously, why?
4
@c smith
Yes, it's always easy for the likes of Trump to set you at victim blaming and encourage hatred and exclusion. Odd that so-called Christians ignore the teachings of Jesus and encourage this horrible anti-human stuff. Preferring fetuses to living mothers and children, for example. Sickening!
1
@Ben Because IF the elites are going to rob from someone (and they are), it should be foreigners first and legal citizens LAST. How's that for bringing it down to brass tacks?
Fantastic article. Thank you!
I would also note the criminal element, Arron Banks, the Kochtopus, and other outside stirrers of the pot, who have manipulated naive UK citizens against their own interest in order to stir up chaos. Also the disgusting self-dealer and racist, Nigel Farage.
The UK ruling party is busy stealing everything that isn't bolted down to keep their power.
Last but not least, they're favoring fossil fuels over renewables, and have made it nearly impossible to install new clean energy by refusing to stop subsidizing poisoning of our one and only hospitable planet.
10
I forgot to mention the little known Elliots: "The power couple, fossil fuels and Brexit"
https://theecologist.org/2018/nov/23/power-couple-fossil-fuels-and-brexit
3
Is there really an easy way to get a divorce? I don’t think so. It’s public and it opens up all the dirty laundry for all to see. No one ever said BREXIT would be easy. It’s a divorce but a nessassary one. It’s often been said that doing what’s right is never easy or popular. The pain and confusion of this period in Britain’s history will pass and a few years from now no one will know the difference.
2
Countries are not people. By creating these farcical comparisons - no divorce is easy etc - one is being reductionist and simplistic. It is the lack of moral courage and hubris which as led to the peddlers of Brexit taking over the national consciousness
5
@Amit Gupta. Ok but it’s still the right thing to do. Pull the band aid off and get on down the road.
As a POC and Muslim from that part of the world I found Mr. Mishra quoting of Winston Churchill regarding the fact that "Indians multiply like rabbits..." interesting. In 1947 there were 350 million Indians. Today, there are around one billion 350 million Indians. Until India and nations in that part of the world move to equality in education for women and appropriate birth control their situation will only get worse. The billion extra mouths to feed seems to have done nothing for India's development other than sire more babies with a terrible future. I have been to India many times and for the general populace living conditions only seem to worsen although the upper class seems to be doing better. India may have been better off had it remained a colony.
11
An excellent piece of writing.
Perhaps further evidence of the sense of entitlement these people share was when, a few months ago, Teresa May stood up in Parliament and said to the leader of the opposition "We will never allow you to govern".
Presumably, this would be irrespective of any possible result of a General Election.
Hard to fathom the arrogance of that comment, I think.
10
I haven’t yet met a national politician that did not carry a certain arrogance in their back pocket, including Paul Wellstone.
1
While I enjoyed Mr. Mishra's cogent piece, I'm struck by an oft repeated theme about Indian history - that the bad things that happen are someone else's fault. While the abrupt and venally conceived British exit surely was a major contributor to the horrors of Partition, so was a mutual, visceral Hindu/Muslim prejudice which continues to this day. Until India faces this aspect of it's national character lives will continue to be lost.
611
@Melanie S
Very well said, and better than I could have.
28
@Melanie S
Would you say the same thing, then, about the national character of the Irish !
And how visceral were these divisions (on religious grounds) prior to the advent of the British ? How much have you read of the history of the sub-continent to form you opinion of the "national character" !
50
@Melanie S As a stranger, if you bring a bulldozer to a neighbors house and destroy it and then say it that the house had a plumbing problem anyway, and you cannot blame me for the house being in this situation, would that work in a court of law? Is the current situation of the house your fault, or the the fault of the occupants of the house?
Every nation has its fair share of problems, and India will deal with it as it sees fit. What is being pointed out is that the British are indeed responsible for today's problems around most of the world because they interfered and made things worse. Without them, every country was and would have continued dealing with its own problems - but it would be their problem.
99
Another irony in Economic History was the the Irish partition was in part to protect the wealthy and majority protestant north from those "poor catholics" of the south of the island. 100 years later Northern Irland heavy industry is obsolete and useless and its inhabitants survive thanks to London subsidies. The South Republic is wealthier and thriving.
15
@Al
Oh boy I guess you haven’t spent much time in Ireland as most of the Republic is definitely not thriving.
What happened many years ago in India is irrelevant. What we see today is an outcry from those whose global political sensitivities have been affected. If Brexit happens and the UK succeeds or fails then it’s theirs to own. The people voted for Brexit in the referendum. They voted for the parliament that voted to invoke article 50. It’s not as if the people and their representatives haven’t had multiple opportunities to resolve this issue. The real problem for most isn’t Brexit. It’s anxiety over the idea that if Brexit happens then more will follow and the myth of the great European progressive state will vanish.
4
Brilliant piece. I would like to add that the Brexiteers seriously believe that former colonies such as India will happily give them free trade deals that are better than the customs union (!) they still enjoy with the EU.
When I as at Oxford I was stunned that so many right-wing (and often upper class) Brits didn't have the foggiest idea how much the British Empire is still hated by most Indians and Pakistanis - and most Irish of course.
1503
@EBurgett I've observed since I've been a young girl that the majority of the elites and 'top dogs' throughout history have always hated the poor, minorities, the intellectuals, progressives, women, and social change to reduce inequity. FDR was considered a traitor by many among his high social class.
191
@Sasha Love Yes, and wasn't there a reasonably advanced plan for a military coup against FDR in his first term? If memory serves me correctly, democracy in the United States was at real risk.
63
@Sasha Love Of all US Presidents, FDR was the closest to turning America into a dictatorship. He attempted to pack the Supreme Court. FDR signed the order for the internment of Japanese Americans. He also opposed anti-lynching laws. FDR wasn’t exactly the hero people like to make him out to be.
15
Look at history. What standards are we using? All the European countries were imperialist.
Churchill was born in 1872. This was during Queen Victoria’s reign, the height of the British empire, the world’s biggest, with India called "the jewel in the crown."
Churchill was descended from one of England’s most illustrious generals, who was the allied commander in the war against Louis the 14th as he tried to conquer Europe. The British govt then built for the 1st Duke of Marlborough the enormous Blenheim palace, and Winston was born there.
What do you expect his attitudes to be?
In fact, during his time in parliament Churchill did support Britain’s various social welfare policies for working people, and later supported their National Health Service.
Many aspects to this man.
10
As a white working-class boy from East London (our family was removed from the slums and rehoused in what was then Essex) I feel a strong empathy with the oppressed members of the colonies, although of course being white I was able to insinuate myself into the middle classes (indeed, I must express gratitude to those politicians whose guilty conscience led them to enable some of us to go to school in "better" areas).
But after finishing my degree and armed otherwise only with a better command of English than most, and of a couple of European languages, I discovered that I would always be "working-class" from the moment I filled in the word "Dagenham" as my place of birth on whatever forms I had to fill in. The same applied to "Father's profession" - "crane-driver" was just not going to open any doors.
So I left for Europe.
The Brexit clamour ("debate" is hardly the appropriate word) has brought evil creatures out of the woodwork, who have also convinced ordinary folk that "foreigners" of all kinds are the root of all evil, while the benign members of the ruling class are trying to save the nation from being overrun by the European Union. The Labour Party, having lost its way under Tony Blair, is incapable of providing a credible opposition, giving the old Etonians (19 Prime Ministers - all Tories of course - went to Eton) the chance to manipulate the nation's media. Jeremy Corbyn has missed his chance for change.
1285
@Bill George
Likewise.
One born in the Colonies we were weaned on stories of the harm the English did to India in keeping it uneducated.
When I arrived in Canada in my youth I learnt that England was in 1927 the LAST in Europe to make education compulsory to age 16 for its own, full 15 years behind Japan in 1912. What the English did to their own, they did to their colonies.
From then on I too felt a strong empathy with the oppressed of the colonialists.
Let us never again allow the powerful in Europe, in USA, and everywhere do what they did. The 99% count more than the 1%. Let us build a better world for tomorrow. The battle lines are the same as ever, but Never Again.
247
@Bill George
~The Labour Party, having lost its way under Tony Blair~
The democratic party did the same under Bill Clinton.
111
@Bill George
Agree with you about Jeryemy Corbyn and his missed chance. His groveling under to the Blairites has been painfull to watch. He and his people have betrayed those who put him a position of power. Not unusual of course but painful none the less. The no- confidence vote very much exposed the weak position he put himself in.
22
Medicine indeed. The only problem with that is a bit of injustice. The people who did most of those awful things are long dead, while the people today were not even alive during those times. It is, of course, true that the inhabitants of these countries are still suffering from the actions of long ago but it is not clear that punishing Brits today is useful or very important. It certainly won't fix anything. Germany provides a good example. Present day Germans have repudiated the horrors of their past and of those long dead evil ones.
1
Good writing. Indians have moved on though as best as they could after the partition. While they do hold a grudge again the UK, the animosity is gone as the current generation has seen an even more corrupt elite in Delhi run the country to the ground. One person who people have forgotten and outsiders don't know is Labor Prime minister Atlee who passed India's independance act in parliament again a lot of odds. He also started NHS, and was key deputy in Churchill's war cabinet. I don't understand why people overstate Churchill's contribution in the war w.r.t to Atlee, and why he is lesser know outside UK. Maybe he was not a member of the elite that Pankaj refers to as Chumocrats.
3
May's rejected agreement had no solution for the Irish border because there is none under a Brexit. Her solution was to turn the problem over to some future prime minister. This is very much in keeping with Mishra's thesis.
4
This analysis hits the target.
Of course Brexit is about Europe and the concession that England in its "splendid isolation" has never viewed herself as European.
Brexit is about bluster, blunder and bluff and naked stupidity.
Listen to Edward Elgar's Pomp and Circumstance---preferably when played during the Prom at the Royal Albert Hall.
Finally, it is for everybody to see how sick England is.
Darwinism is coming home to roost in England.
(I used to be an Anglophile!)
7