Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit
I really would have expected a much more reasoned approach from the likes of you Mr coldtea.

Historically I’ve found your comments informative, well thought out, and entertaining.

Here’s the Wikipedia article on the BOTs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Overseas_Territories

I’m willing to acknowledge those locales probably remain British territories, at least some of them, as an spect of projecting force, in addition the to historical quirks.

I probably don’t know enough.

And, ultimately, it would be nice if everyone got along and was generally content to stay in their lane.

Would the former British colonies be doing better or worse had they never been colonised? Quite possibly better. We’ll never know. At least some of the former colonies have failed spectacularly. That’s probably a good enough reason to never try any of that again.

I’m trying to steelman your arguments here Mr coldtea. Not only that, I have also raged against what happened in a similar manner from time to time.

> Would the former British colonies be doing better or worse had they never been colonised?

It's not necessarily correct to assume that they failed because they were previously colonised by the British. Should we have instead allowed other powers to colonise them? That is the only realisitic counterfactual here. Can we truly say the world would have been better off if the British had not colonised various countries, for example when it came to waging the Second World War?