Slavery was abolished on June 1, 1862 in all United States possessions, according to Brainy History. That’s exactly 145 years ago. This was during the Civil War, so it was a symbolic but hollow gesture if the date is correct.
The slave trade in Britain was made illegal in 1802, backed by further legislation in 1807 and 1833. Royal Navy ships were vigilant in stopping the trade.
American history intrigues me. I often think the world could have been a much different place if events had transpired differently.
For instance, if the American colonies had remained British, how would the world look today? I think it would be a better place, although the USA itself would not exist as we know it. There would be separate English, French and Spanish speaking independent countries.
That in itself would have put the brakes on American domination, which largely occurred through the country’s abstinence from World War One until the death, so to speak. Europe and the British Dominions suffered while America profited.
Slavery had to be abolished and it’s a wonder it took the Americans so long to realise that. Whatever you think about British imperialism, in my mind they were the best colonists and the ones with the most altruistic world view.
If Australia had been settled by the Spanish, Dutch or French, for instance. we would be a much different country today, probably more like Argentina, South Africa or Mauritius.
Very nice article thank you very much…
you have to come to live in the US and study american history. The slavery issue is not that simple as it looks, the country was divided, and a civil war came as a result… Lincoln did its best to try to keep a fragile new nation united, this nation had a very low budget for an army, and a lot of debt. finally the civil war years ended, and Lincoln after many other great politicians who tried, years of disagreements between states in the congress,and a long civil war, finaly it was abolished…
this (relatively new) nation had to deal with the british who was using us as slaves, and for taxation purposes, and with other big empires around (french and spanish) who were trying to split us to take a part each one… but we won!
I read this post due to the recent reply to it, not realising you wrote it so long ago (I thought there was a 12 month limit on comments?); but I’d already thought of a response, so I’ll write it!
Michael said: ‘Whatever you think about British imperialism, in my mind they were the best colonists and the ones with the most altruistic world view.’
Broadly speaking, I agree with you on this. The USA did have a small number of colonies, such as the Philippines and some others in the Pacific and Central American/Caribbean region, but it was never a fully-fledged empire (and it certainly was never thought of as such by Americans).
I’m not sure how the USA exactly treated these nations, but I think they were at least as good as the British.
A while ago, I was reading a discussion on a very similar topic on an internet forum, about which nations were the best and worst colonisers.
Generally, it was universally agreed that Belgium was the worst, due to the atrocities committed in the Belgian Congo in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Apparently more people died in the Congo in 20 years than died (due to colonialism) in the entire British Empire in 200 years.
Whilst Belgium is certainly an outlier on the brutality scale, it is hard to rank many of the others, because their actions tended to vary quite considerably from colony to colony.
However, Britain was definitely on the whole the best coloniser, being far less given to outright brutality than almost every other empire and also, even when laws were discriminatory, the rule of law tended to exist to a far greater degree in British colonies that elsewhere.
Michael said: For instance, if the American colonies had remained British, how would the world look today? I think it would be a better place, although the USA itself would not exist as we know it.’
I find it interesting that you would seem to have a generally more negative view of the USA and American dominance in the world than I do.
I find this interesting, because I would assume that you view yourself as conservative (I don’t mean that in a party-political sense, more in terms of political world-view), whereas I consider myself as left-wing.
At present, anti-Americanism is popularly associated more the Left than the Right.
However, I have read that in the UK, whilst on particular issues, the Left may be more critical of US government actions (such as foreign policy and the lack of social protection, etc), that it is actually the British Right that it more suspicious of the influence of the USA per se (i.e. the Right is more disdainful than the Left of American culture and creeping ‘Americanisation’).
Would you say that this is true for Australia as well?
Whilst, I am quite critical of some particular actions of the US Government, such as the Iraq War, among others, I generally have a fairly positive view of the USA and American influence in the world.
I will quote a passage from 20:21 Vision: The Lessons of the 20the Century for the 21st’, a non-fiction political book by Bill Emmott, a British journalist. On American dominance in the 20th and 21st centuries, he writes:
‘America is the first world power to have exercised its dominance by and large in a benevolent manner … Britain’s period of dominance depended far more than America’s on the repression of the people over which it ruled and the overt twisting of the trading relationship between the home country and its colonies in the direct favour of British firms … Britain was a gentler imperial power than other colonialists of the time, but it was still brutal by today’s American standards.
‘For the most part America has since 1945 built a co-operative empire … rather than a coercive one … in part because of America’s own democratic and liberal values, which have long had a more universalist, utopian cast than did nineteenth century Britain’s …’
Twitter: mgorey
says:
Some good points there Adam. I’m certainly not anti American. I find the country and its history fascinating, and largely I agree it’s had a positive influence on the world.
Without America’s leadership the Cold War might have had a totally different outcome.
In the original post I suggested the world might have been a better place today if the American colonies had remained British.
I meant that in the sense we would have had unity across the English-speaking world, with common laws and traditions. The Empire may have transformed into a federation.
Imagine a common market where we were free to travel from Australia to live and work in Britain, Canada or USA, etc?
The First World War probably would not have occurred, which means WW2 wouldn’t have happened either.
The more I read however, a British victory in the War of Independence was never likely given French involvement.
Even if the British had hung on at that time, they would have faced the same dilemma Lincoln did when it came to abolishing slavery and a conflict of some kind would have ensued.
As for American cultural influence, your theory sounds right, although I have never studied it. Personally, I accept that society, culture and the language evolves in response to a range of influences. I don’t blame anyone and I don’t feel threatened. I notice the changes more as I get older.
Finally, as to colonisers, we agree the Belgians were disgraceful. Portugal and France did little to educate and advance indigenous peoples and left little in the way of a legacy apart from war and buildings.
The Dutch were mostly commercial in their outlook and lacked resources, otherwise they might have left a better legacy in Indonesia.
Australia did a good job in Papua New Guinea. I think just about everyone believes Whitlam withdrew from there too early.