What on earth brings the sunset of British Empire?

[fataljoshua]

I think just before the WW2 breaking out Britain was still the largest super power in world.
But why did it just be beaten by the Nazis and fail to make any strike back in Europe?
Somebody says that it was because the british groverment couldn't afford the war expense and was exhausted by it.(that's why the Lend-Lease Program existed)
As a result, british empire's international leadership was taken by the US after war.

BUT,i can't help doubting that:
1.As the Nazi Germany could afford the war machine even until the night before Berlin was captured. Why the Britain with a stronger financial system simplely became feeble in a sudden, and then had only to play a supporting role.

2.It's well-known that there was a great depression across the world in 1930s, britain, germany, US were struck at the same time. So why eventually when the Germany raised enough funds to open a war, when the US got so wealthy that could gift britain weapons through the Lend-Lease Program, the Britain seemed to be the only one who stay in slum

What on earth brings the sunset of British Empire?

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

Economic base no longer sustainable,massive war debt,loss of total naval supremacy,rise of nationalism in colonies,a general moral distaste among british people on imperialism after seeing the consequences of german and japanese imperialism.

 

[AUz]

In one word: The Hitler!

 

[curioususer]

Losing India.

 

[Kompromat]

Its, something called the Exceptionalism. Exactly the same reason that brought down the Ottoman Empire, the longest standing empire in human history.

 

[Ayush]

about ur 2nd point i have read in my history books that the usa started to play a major role globally after the 1st world war.britain took huge loans from the usa after the 1st world war.some of it to rebuild.it brought huge ammunition,arms etc. from the usa.and usa was more than happy to oblige.and the same happened after the ww2.britain took huge loans from the usa.it is estimated that the amount the british owed to the americans,was more than their gdp.
the usa had an ocean to protect it.so war never took place on its land.so this is how it became a superpower,by exporting arms.

i will try and get u source if i can.

 

[Tridibans]

I think just before the WW2 breaking out Britain was still the largest super power in world.
But why did it just be beaten by the Nazis and fail to make any strike back in Europe?
Somebody says that it was because the british groverment couldn't afford the war expense and was exhausted by it.(that's why the Lend-Lease Program existed)
As a result, british empire's international leadership was taken by the US after war.

BUT,i can't help doubting that:
1.As the Nazi Germany could afford the war machine even until the night before Berlin was captured. Why the Britain with a stronger financial system simplely became feeble in a sudden, and then had only to play a supporting role.

2.It's well-known that there was a great depression across the world in 1930s, britain, germany, US were struck at the same time. So why eventually when the Germany raised enough funds to open a war, when the US got so wealthy that could gift britain weapons through the Lend-Lease Program, the Britain seemed to be the only one who stay in slum

What on earth brings the sunset of British Empire?

About your point no.1:
You have to understand that Nazi germany in no way was able to support the war effort after 1943-44. Infact, with the failure of "Operation Citadelle", Nazy Germany effectively lost the initiative and was on the defensive ever since. Also, the fact that it took the Allies 1 year after operation Overlord to reach Berlin was down to the fact that around this time, it was the Fanaticism of the German people and many brainwashed young/ old alike (Hitlerjugend, Volkstrum, etc) that were providing fierce resistance to the approaching Allies. Also not to forget the elite Waffen-SS troops. IT WAS AN WAR OF ANNHILATION STARTED BY HITLER, ENDED BY THE ALLIES. hence, it was do or die, and Nazi Germany chose death (atleast the governing elite/ Wehrmacht).

2) German economic turnaround was as much a myth as it was a reality. Germany was made powerful by the Nazis after coming to power in 1933. No doubt. But the economic policies was NOT FRUITFUL in the long run. Though, during the first decade (untill 1940-41), Germany was able to turn around its economy (atleast from the outside view), it had immense internal problems that surfaced as a result of the war and the other blunders of Hitler. In fact, it was Speer who made Hitler approve Germany to have an total war economy at the end of 1943, before that, German economy was not at all fully committed to total war unlike UK/ Japan/ USA (1942 onwards).

Conclusion: Though British empire was in a state of downfall, the WW2 only helped increase its rate of decline with UK committed to the war effort from start to finish of the war (unlike USSR/ USA, etc.). Also, with Allied propaganda about freedom to the Nazi occupied Europe meant that they can no longer have double standards with their own occupied territories in Africa/ Asia. With time, these subjugated populations (remember, most of the manpower was from the British commenwealth of India/ S.Africa/ Australia, etc) became more aware of the happenings and demanded for freedom.

 

[DRaisinHerald]

Its, something called the Exceptionalism. Exactly the same reason that brought down the Ottoman Empire, the longest standing empire in human history.

If Wikipedia is anything to go by, then the Kanem, Mayan, Byzantine, Holy Roman and Pandyan empires, just to name a few, lived longer than the Ottoman Empire.

 

[Kompromat]

If Wikipedia is anything to go by, then the Kanem, Mayan, Byzantine, Holy Roman and Pandyan empires, just to name a few, lived longer than the Ottoman Empire.

They, were either cultures or full fledged civilizations instead of empires. As for the Roman empire, it was a religious clergy not an empire of its own which was pinned down. Ottomans on the other hand were largely a singular governance structure ie Caliphate.

 

[KingMamba]

They, were either cultures or full fledged civilizations instead of empires. As for the Roman empire, it was a religious clergy not an empire of its own which was pinned down. Ottomans on the other hand were largely a singular governance structure ie Caliphate.

Which Roman empire you talking about? The first Roman Empire or Byzantine? HRE were just German wannabes.

about ur 2nd point i have read in my history books that the usa started to play a major role globally after the 1st world war.britain took huge loans from the usa after the 1st world war.some of it to rebuild.it brought huge ammunition,arms etc. from the usa.and usa was more than happy to oblige.and the same happened after the ww2.britain took huge loans from the usa.it is estimated that the amount the british owed to the americans,was more than their gdp.
the usa had an ocean to protect it.so war never took place on its land.so this is how it became a superpower,by exporting arms.

i will try and get u source if i can.

You are right also it forced them to surrender colonies which they could no longer afford to hold as defense from rebellions was not manageable.

 

[Kashmiri Nationalist]

The problem with Britain was being spread too thinly, they could only maintain control through "divide and conquer" to a certain extent, and required Britons to be able to manage and keep the populations suppressed. Remember, all officers in the Raj's Army were Britons, not South Asians - the revolts only showed an underlining weakness behind all the propaganda: the empire was dependent on the exploitation of local people, tensions and the use of economic improvement to earn the debt of the locals.

Britain's foreign policy was always to use empires to offset its strategic disadvantage in Europe and through Empires, maintain peace in Europe. The other nations of the continent did the same, preferring to flex their military might far and wide rather than closer to home. In the lead up to WW1, increased tensions in the expanding empires and local tensions brought about the conflict, the assassination of the Archduke was only a formality, as military build up had been occurring for some time.

The Germans only surrendered because of diminishing aspects of breaking the stale mate but most importantly, the British naval blockade on Germany which rendered their population starving, their industries weak and their work force striking constantly. Germany was always the problem in Europe, due to German-Frank historic tensions. (Britain could not aggrevate France as its strength was more so over the globe, whereas France naturally had a much stronger military and naval might across the Channel isn't much.)

After WW1, the British Military was exhausted - the Empire served the interests of the mainland and as a result, the best officers and soldiers were "spent" (to put it nicely).

In the build up to WW2, there were increased tensions in foreign holdings and not just in India, the economy was diminishing and a lack of manpower was evident. It would've happened sooner or later; Britain was struggling to overcome the military and economic setback of WW1 and WW2 destroyed any possibility of an recovery.

After the Russian revolution there was, however, a bigger enemy in Europe - Russia. It posed a threat not only just to Britain, but the entire world west from it (it should be noted that Russia and Japan weren't the best of pals either, having had at least one skirmish to my knowledge), even Germany was worried of Russia.

What allowed WW2 to occur was the fact that Versailles was "half way", it didn't break the Germans like it did the Austro-Hungarians and left discontent simmering under a very thin surface.

In the end, Britain had a choice: Abandon ship but try to do so on amicable terms so trade and some influence could be salvaged or waste resources it didn't have trying to keep together the Empire and in the process, descend into chaos which would only strengthen the Russian position. (Britain was the main ally of the US, and the US was the main ally of a very weak and fragile Europe against a much tougher, robust and forever-hungry Soviet Union.)

 

[RescueRanger]

Losing India.

Get over yourself, how about the birth of Israel?, how about its influence or lack of it in the post ottoman empire middle east? Or the fact that it had lost but all influence over sea trade and franchises whcih were originally established by East Indian Company, from African through to china.

The growing US clout in manufacturing the the shrinking British manufacturing, the lack of global business influence and prevalence of US Soft Power was also a large contributor. It is no secret that up that the US played both parties ( UK and Nazi Germany) up until it's involvement post Pearl harbor:
How the Allied multinationals supplied Nazi Germany throughout World War II | libcom.org
(Makes for some interesting reading)

 

[Kashmiri Nationalist]

Get over yourself, how about the birth of Israel?, how about its influence or lack of it in the post ottoman empire middle east? Or the fact that it had lost but all influence over sea trade and franchises whcih were originally established by East Indian Company, from African through to china.

The growing US clout in manufacturing the the shrinking British manufacturing, the lack of global business influence and prevalence of US Soft Power was also a large contributor. It is no secret that up that the US played both parties ( UK and Nazi Germany) up until it's involvement post Pearl harbor:
How the Allied multinationals supplied Nazi Germany throughout World War II | libcom.org
(Makes for some interesting reading)

Churchill literally begged the Americans to intervene on multiple occasions. They just didn't want to get involved in "...another European War", there was no stomach.

What we also have to remember is that Germany wasn't hostile to Britain, it was the other way around - Hitler viewed us Asians as subhuman degenerates, and the British as another Aryan race, and wanted to ally with them against the subhuman Russians for his original expansionist goals. The British felt threatened by growing Germany power in Europe which would upset the tender balance of power. Britain never had much power in Europe, that's why they were beaten back out of Dunkirk (and what we must remember here is many of the fallen are part of Pakistani heritage and a lot of the survivors became Pakistanis after the war) and had to follow the American trail after; heck, they were side-lined by America and used as a 'back up' force.

The African campaign is interesting though, it's where Britain's colonial power came into play, and they were losing the war there, even after Rommel's bad gambles and over-stretching of his forces. Had America not intervened, or Hitler gone berserk and attacked Russia (it isn't hard to imagine an ultra-nationalist, non-Nazi Germany in the war - the conditions for another war where there anyway, WW2 was a continuation of WW1 anyway), the Brits would have been over-run.

It was by Hitler's own choice, his own preference, that he left the Isle of Britain alone after conquering France, apart from aerial bombardment, of course. If he wanted, he could have over-run the British with ease. Count it luck on their part this megalomaniac had bigger allusions of grandeur.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

Its, something called the Exceptionalism. Exactly the same reason that brought down the Ottoman Empire, the longest standing empire in human history.

Rome is the longest standing empire in human history FYI.The other is the holy roman empire.

 

[jaibi]

In my view, the reason for the fall of the British Empire is just that they had a good run but at the end their time was up. The process that made Britain a world power was colonialism and by the end of the 40s the colonial weapon could no longer sustain Britain's power. The evolution that made this possible itself is vast and complex. Yet in the end Germany's two wars cost the British Empire dearly and the point had run home to both the Brits and the colonised that Britain could no longer maintain an iron fist over the colonies. Along with that the two emerging powers: the USSR and the USA both did not want Britain to hold the colonies any longer. So the end had come for not only an Empire but a whole era and in the new era the old powers could not survive in the form they had existed long before.