Churchill famously said (1942) that “I have not become the King’s First Minister in order to preside over the liquidation of the British Empire.”
The British were right to stop slavery, but FDR and Eisenhower were also right to insist that Britain and France should abandon their Empires. If Britain was as dominant as the US was after the Second World War, I have no doubt that She would have expanded her empire.
Dismantling the Empire was the right thing to do. True, you get monsters like Idi Amin, Mugabe and probably everyone else in Africa. But you also get stellar success stories like Lee Kuan Yew in Singapore, Malaysia and India. Would Singapore have been better if it was still under British rule? I doubt it.
It is to the credit of FDR that he did not seek to expand the territory of the United States (unlike Stalin and Britain after the First World War).
Contrary to popular opinion, the British Empire was a very badly run affair. The average annual growth rate between 1820 and 1950 of British India was a miserly 0.12%, this pales in comparison with the average annual growth rate of independent India. In fact, Britain is doing better today economically than She did as an Empire.
Any robber baron can seize raw materials at gun point and transfer them to the home country for processing and sell the finished products to citizens of the home country and colonials - and at the same time ensure that finished goods from low cost competitors like US and Japan are kept out through an elaborate system of tariffs. The real genius is in influencing people and trading with them without taking undue advantage. That is the genius of the United States.
“Churchill famously said (1942) that “I have not become the King’s First Minister in order to preside over the liquidation of the British Empire.”
Well obviously he would say that. The Empire gave Britain power, prestige and wealth. Why would anyone want to give that up?
“The British were right to stop slavery, but FDR and Eisenhower were also right to insist that Britain and France should abandon their Empires.”
Yes but they were advocating that so that the US could move into the resultant power vacumn, not from any great commitment to democracy and freedom.
“If Britain was as dominant as the US was after the Second World War, I have no doubt that She would have expanded her empire.”
This is a popular opinion in the US but I personally doubt it. The Empire was never very popular in Britain, except for a short period at the start of the 20th Century. WW1 was the key event that dealt the empire its mortal wound. Before that Britain was an imperial power, and proud of it. After, Britain was an imperial power increasingly uncomfortable with the idea. The self-confidence drained away on the Somme. The Conservative defeat in 1945, ousting Churchill, would have happened far earlier if WW2 hadnt happened.
“It is to the credit of FDR that he did not seek to expand the territory of the United States (unlike Stalin and Britain after the First World War).”
No, economic dominance was far better!