It was an early example of the way the British Empire often worked: if the British couldn't beat you, they got you to join them. Commerce, Civilization and Christianity were to be conferred on Africa, just as Livingston had intended. But they would arrive in conjunction with a fourth 'C': Conquest. It is indeed one of the richer ironies of the Victorian value-system that the same navy that was ...
2022-04-18 18:30:57
It was an early example of the way the British Empire often worked: if the British couldn't beat you, they got you to join them.Commerce, Civilization and Christianity were to be conferred on Africa, just as Livingston had intended. But they would arrive in conjunction with a fourth 'C': Conquest.It is indeed one of the richer ironies of the Victorian value-system that the same navy that was deployed to abolish the slave trade was also active in expanding the narcotics trade.The reality was that German defeat was exogenous, not endogenous: it was the inevitable result of trying to fight a global conflict without being a global power.Pre-war, tarriffs had been on the increase around the world, but they had mostly been designed to raise revenue; in the 1920s and 1930s the barriers against free trade were inspired by visions of autarky. [CHURCHILL] ...we shall never surrender, and even if, which I do not for a moment believe, this Island or a large part of it were subjugated and starving, then our Empire beyond the seas, armed and guarded by the British Fleet, would carry on the struggle, until, in God’s good time, the New World, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old.In 1996 only 28 per cent of foreign direct investment went to developing countries, whereas in 1913 the proportion was 63 per cent. Between 1947 and 1987 British defence expenditure had amounted to 5.8 per cent of gross domestic product. A century before, the proportion had been a mere 2.6 per cent.
I started the book in 2016 and stopped it half way. Then I picked it up again recently and finally finished it today (probably after a year since I started!). It's a very detailed history book focused on the British Empire history, and is very different from any of the history books that I've read before. Lots of quotes and references from historical contexts to support his argument. This is qu...
2017-03-18 09:16:56
I started the book in 2016 and stopped it half way. Then I picked it up again recently and finally finished it today (probably after a year since I started!). It's a very detailed history book focused on the British Empire history, and is very different from any of the history books that I've read before. Lots of quotes and references from historical contexts to support his argument. This is quite the same as what I was taught in the PrincetonX: HIS201x Global History Lab course on edX. Good job Niall Ferguson!
4 things that I learnt from the book:
- it took the British 300 years to build an empire after fierce competition with the Spaniards, the Dutch, and others. It peaked during the late Victorian Britain. Achievement include the colinization of India, the white dominions, rule of a quarter of the world's land surface, global trade network, global naval bases,etc.
- The British Empire exported immigrants, capital, technology, insititutions, which all improved the development of the world (less technologically advanced societies), although with lots of bitter consequences and controversial debates.
- The empire collapsed after World War II as it owed too much debt to the Americans and couldn't afford the economic burden running the empire any further. It had lost the empire but failed to find a role.
- American informal empire took over the global burden, considering itself responsible not just for waging a war against terrorism and rogue states, but also for spreading the benefits of capitalism and democracy overseas.
I started the book in 2016 and stopped it half way. Then I picked it up again recently and finally finished it today (probably after a year since I started!). It's a very detailed history book focused on the British Empire history, and is very different from any of the history books that I've read before. Lots of quotes and references from historical contexts to support his argument. This is qu...
2017-03-18 09:16:56
I started the book in 2016 and stopped it half way. Then I picked it up again recently and finally finished it today (probably after a year since I started!). It's a very detailed history book focused on the British Empire history, and is very different from any of the history books that I've read before. Lots of quotes and references from historical contexts to support his argument. This is quite the same as what I was taught in the PrincetonX: HIS201x Global History Lab course on edX. Good job Niall Ferguson!
4 things that I learnt from the book:
- it took the British 300 years to build an empire after fierce competition with the Spaniards, the Dutch, and others. It peaked during the late Victorian Britain. Achievement include the colinization of India, the white dominions, rule of a quarter of the world's land surface, global trade network, global naval bases,etc.
- The British Empire exported immigrants, capital, technology, insititutions, which all improved the development of the world (less technologically advanced societies), although with lots of bitter consequences and controversial debates.
- The empire collapsed after World War II as it owed too much debt to the Americans and couldn't afford the economic burden running the empire any further. It had lost the empire but failed to find a role.
- American informal empire took over the global burden, considering itself responsible not just for waging a war against terrorism and rogue states, but also for spreading the benefits of capitalism and democracy overseas.
It was an early example of the way the British Empire often worked: if the British couldn't beat you, they got you to join them. Commerce, Civilization and Christianity were to be conferred on Africa, just as Livingston had intended. But they would arrive in conjunction with a fourth 'C': Conquest. It is indeed one of the richer ironies of the Victorian value-system that the same navy that was ...
2022-04-18 18:30:57
It was an early example of the way the British Empire often worked: if the British couldn't beat you, they got you to join them.Commerce, Civilization and Christianity were to be conferred on Africa, just as Livingston had intended. But they would arrive in conjunction with a fourth 'C': Conquest.It is indeed one of the richer ironies of the Victorian value-system that the same navy that was deployed to abolish the slave trade was also active in expanding the narcotics trade.The reality was that German defeat was exogenous, not endogenous: it was the inevitable result of trying to fight a global conflict without being a global power.Pre-war, tarriffs had been on the increase around the world, but they had mostly been designed to raise revenue; in the 1920s and 1930s the barriers against free trade were inspired by visions of autarky. [CHURCHILL] ...we shall never surrender, and even if, which I do not for a moment believe, this Island or a large part of it were subjugated and starving, then our Empire beyond the seas, armed and guarded by the British Fleet, would carry on the struggle, until, in God’s good time, the New World, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old.In 1996 only 28 per cent of foreign direct investment went to developing countries, whereas in 1913 the proportion was 63 per cent. Between 1947 and 1987 British defence expenditure had amounted to 5.8 per cent of gross domestic product. A century before, the proportion had been a mere 2.6 per cent.
It was an early example of the way the British Empire often worked: if the British couldn't beat you, they got you to join them. Commerce, Civilization and Christianity were to be conferred on Africa, just as Livingston had intended. But they would arrive in conjunction with a fourth 'C': Conquest. It is indeed one of the richer ironies of the Victorian value-system that the same navy that was ...
2022-04-18 18:30:57
It was an early example of the way the British Empire often worked: if the British couldn't beat you, they got you to join them.Commerce, Civilization and Christianity were to be conferred on Africa, just as Livingston had intended. But they would arrive in conjunction with a fourth 'C': Conquest.It is indeed one of the richer ironies of the Victorian value-system that the same navy that was deployed to abolish the slave trade was also active in expanding the narcotics trade.The reality was that German defeat was exogenous, not endogenous: it was the inevitable result of trying to fight a global conflict without being a global power.Pre-war, tarriffs had been on the increase around the world, but they had mostly been designed to raise revenue; in the 1920s and 1930s the barriers against free trade were inspired by visions of autarky. [CHURCHILL] ...we shall never surrender, and even if, which I do not for a moment believe, this Island or a large part of it were subjugated and starving, then our Empire beyond the seas, armed and guarded by the British Fleet, would carry on the struggle, until, in God’s good time, the New World, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old.In 1996 only 28 per cent of foreign direct investment went to developing countries, whereas in 1913 the proportion was 63 per cent. Between 1947 and 1987 British defence expenditure had amounted to 5.8 per cent of gross domestic product. A century before, the proportion had been a mere 2.6 per cent.
I started the book in 2016 and stopped it half way. Then I picked it up again recently and finally finished it today (probably after a year since I started!). It's a very detailed history book focused on the British Empire history, and is very different from any of the history books that I've read before. Lots of quotes and references from historical contexts to support his argument. This is qu...
2017-03-18 09:16:56
I started the book in 2016 and stopped it half way. Then I picked it up again recently and finally finished it today (probably after a year since I started!). It's a very detailed history book focused on the British Empire history, and is very different from any of the history books that I've read before. Lots of quotes and references from historical contexts to support his argument. This is quite the same as what I was taught in the PrincetonX: HIS201x Global History Lab course on edX. Good job Niall Ferguson!
4 things that I learnt from the book:
- it took the British 300 years to build an empire after fierce competition with the Spaniards, the Dutch, and others. It peaked during the late Victorian Britain. Achievement include the colinization of India, the white dominions, rule of a quarter of the world's land surface, global trade network, global naval bases,etc.
- The British Empire exported immigrants, capital, technology, insititutions, which all improved the development of the world (less technologically advanced societies), although with lots of bitter consequences and controversial debates.
- The empire collapsed after World War II as it owed too much debt to the Americans and couldn't afford the economic burden running the empire any further. It had lost the empire but failed to find a role.
- American informal empire took over the global burden, considering itself responsible not just for waging a war against terrorism and rogue states, but also for spreading the benefits of capitalism and democracy overseas.
庄常飞
Basic Books2004版
烝民
Basic Books2004版
目送飞鸿
Basic Books2004版
山人
中信出版社2011版
0 有用 ZZZZZ 2016-04-04 20:59:41
对英国历史的痴迷是从这里开始。
0 有用 知以求趣 2013-12-12 17:35:27
哈佛金融史教授 英国（美国？）版易中天以通俗流畅的笔法纵论大英帝国兴衰史 有论者批评他对逝去的繁华充满无限乡愁 a nostalgist for the Empire 我倒是觉得书中的叙事与观点尚算持中公允 尽管不时会为殖民制度辩解几句 但也言之有据
0 有用 冷观之 2021-12-08 12:41:17
有收获，但也对作者无法抑制的对帝国的赞美和辩护感到不适。
1 有用 佚维桑 2016-04-04 17:43:23
作为参考资料买的，从前言开始就觉得哪里微妙的让我不太舒服，通览一遍后发现洗白实在太过。这书的配套纪录片也看过，深感印度人实在苦啊，老是被拉出来挡枪背锅的，尤其是写到印度人自己愿意分裂，我不知道印度人什么心情，或许他们自愿很开心。荣耀尽归英格兰，有错都是苏格兰和法国。关于科学自然的部分非常值得参考，美化殖民的部分可以直接piss off。有记录二战的南京……好吧，虽然你主要想狡辩自己的帝国主义比日本... 作为参考资料买的，从前言开始就觉得哪里微妙的让我不太舒服，通览一遍后发现洗白实在太过。这书的配套纪录片也看过，深感印度人实在苦啊，老是被拉出来挡枪背锅的，尤其是写到印度人自己愿意分裂，我不知道印度人什么心情，或许他们自愿很开心。荣耀尽归英格兰，有错都是苏格兰和法国。关于科学自然的部分非常值得参考，美化殖民的部分可以直接piss off。有记录二战的南京……好吧，虽然你主要想狡辩自己的帝国主义比日本的要高端大气上档次，不过……我对你改观了。看到最后想对这本书说一句话——要点脸。 (展开)
0 有用 lilin 2016-03-09 09:47:32
叙事不算很清晰，话题转移得很快
0 有用 此间的Jovi 2022-04-18 18:53:11
哪有躺赢的帝国梦。
0 有用 冷观之 2021-12-08 12:41:17
有收获，但也对作者无法抑制的对帝国的赞美和辩护感到不适。
0 有用 白衣卿相 2021-10-14 12:11:03
作者西方中心史观，带着这个前置认知去看看还不错
2 有用 Atsu 2019-08-03 19:38:07
本以为是旧霸权的哀思，没想到洗地痕迹这么重。贸易与人口的流动带动了帝国的崛起，但战争的全球化却导致世界霸权的交替。无论是变革还是进步，英帝国给全球（可以说所有其他国家）带来的伤痛乃至毁灭是洗不干净的，早在击败西班牙无敌舰队之前通过劫掠积累的资产，已然确立了罪恶的成分；纵使因为世界战争与衰退而免被清算，仍不能改变恶的本质。视角独特，观点鲜明，但显然不是写给我辈读的书。
0 有用 Martjn 2018-06-13 22:30:25
洗地学范例（褒义 读完发现居然中文版...浪费时间了