eb1b74 No.97
Our first priority should be the reconquest and cleansing of South Africa.
Perhaps, having gained a foothold on the dark continent, we can attempt to restore order to all of our rightful possessions there. The savages will this time be armed with Kalashnikovs rather than sticks and stones, but we have modern armour, attack helicopters, and the like. It should be simple enough so long as we're not attacking from the sea.
7e20ea No.105
>>97The East India Company had the right idea. We should think along this lines. However, formerly annexing territories in Africa, and India was a mistake. Because frankly most Indians and almost all Africans are too different from developed civilized peoples.
ALL HAIL BRITANNIA
eb1b74 No.110
>>105You are wrong. That they are different only matters if we treat them as equals and not as inferiors and subordinates. We need to establish dominance and then put them to proper use.
0e03f3 No.111
>>110The only true superiority is that of the Aryan. The noble ones, refusing to be slaves, keep slaves or allow slaves to be kept.
If the British Empire is to rise to greater glory all conquered peoples must be wholly assimilated into the folk.
7e20ea No.115
>>111Aye
>>110You would feel at home owning a bunch of black slaves eh? Well guess what one day they'll revolt and you'll the one white devil against a horde of black devils.
That said if a territory is incapable of ruling itself (our economic interests are threatened), a puppet government could be established under the principle of benefit for both Britannia and said territory.
eb1b74 No.119
>>111We must assimilate them in their right place, not in the place of our own people. What is difficult to grasp here?
>>115Spoils of war are just property. We must make war to make empire, and if we come upon slaves by such means, all the better.
7e20ea No.124
>>119Hey guys, look, this is the one who called me a villain
eb1b74 No.126
>>124>Hey guys, look, this is the one who rightly identified me as what I am! 7e20ea No.140
>>126You want an aggressive undemocratic slave state. The legacy of enslaving blacks is the worst stain on the British Empire. Not just for humanitarian reasons, but because of the weakness it wrought from within.
eb1b74 No.158
>>140I want limited democracy for lawful White subjects and servitude for conquered enemies.
There is no "stain". You are the weakness.
7e20ea No.183
File: 1429079639266.jpg (1.08 MB, 863x1222, 863:1222, 86ea473092e61f48c558717933….jpg)
>>158Yes, that was tired. Many times. No slave state lasts for long. Why? The slaves are more numerous than the masters and eventually their desire leads to revolt and/or the masters lose their nerve and certainty in their perceived superiority.
Then there is also the fact that with technological innovation slaves lose a lot of their value.
eb1b74 No.205
>>183Revolt is only possible if the Empire loses its nerve. You have lost your nerve. I have not. Regain your nerve. This is your failing.
7e20ea No.207
File: 1429173028963.jpg (1.83 MB, 2480x1754, 1240:877, 4bf8331f4c718b4d06d7df7400….jpg)
>>205I find your obsession with slavery disturbing. Perhaps you should visit
>>>/mental/ That said, the Empire endorses the Libertarian principle of the contract. If you can find somebody who will sell themselves in slavery to you in the presence of an authorized contract officiator, so be it. There is a catch however, any contract has at least one method of nullification-either party can challenge the other to a duel- either to the death or some other agreed upon challenge. The victor may free him / herself from said contract.
eb1b74 No.218
>>207It's a matter of principle. Foreigners are not Imperial subjects, so if we are to put the interests of subjects ahead of foreigners, then foreigners should have no recourse against or protection from slavery. If you do not allow unconditional enslavement (as well as seizure of property, killing, non-consensual sex) of foreigners, then you are acting inconsistently with the principle that interests of Imperial subjects must come first.
7e20ea No.222
>>218
Why so revisionist comrade?