Transcripts For BBCNEWS HARDtalk 20240704 : vimarsana.com

So much to shape the world of today . Sathnam sanghera, welcome to hardtalk. Its nice to be back. Its great to have you back, and you are back with a new book, which i have here empireworld. Its your take on just how massive the impact of the British Empire was and still is on the world. You certainly dont undersell your idea, its subtitled how British Imperialism has shaped the globe. I really do believe that. I think the British Empire explains so much about peoples daily lives Around The World, tea drinking in india, in britain, patterns of tax avoidance, even the Bbc World Service used to be known as the bbc empire service. It explains so much about our daily news. Youvejust come back from guyana theres a Border Dispute there that goes back to empire, israel palestine, a dispute that has its roots in empire, but also, theres a gap between the way in Which Britain sees itself and the world sees britain through the prism of this history, and i think we need to remember what we did before we go around pontificating on things like democracy and the environment and human rights. We need to remember our distinctly patchy records on those things during the age of empire. But do you think your perspective is driven in part by your own background 7 youre of indian heritage, born and raised in the united kingdom, so britain and india matter particularly to you, you know them particularly well. Im just wondering if youre sitting, listening, watching this in tokyo, beijing, brasilia, are you really going to buy the concept that the British Empire, as opposed to any other empire, has been this global force, which you say, apart from the internet, you cant think of Anything Else which influences the world so much . Yeah, absolutely. I mean, it affects south america. I mean, Something Like 60 of the countries who ended up playing football got it indirectly or directly through the British Empire. The english language. Christianity. You know, these are things that we need to understand through the prism of this history. So, many historians whove spent decades looking at the British Empire seem to feel an impulse to treat it as some sort of Accounting Exercise they look at what was positive about it, they look at what was negative and then they try and sort of come to an overall conclusion, good or bad. Were you tempted to do that too . I think initially, cos thats the only way weve talked about empire in britain until recently. But what i realise with the empire world, travelling to mauritius and nigeria and barbados and india, is that the legacies are profoundly contradictory. So, the British Empire resulted in quite a lot of democracy Around The World australia, singapore and so on. It also resulted in a huge amount of geopolitical chaos, it spread slavery, it also spread anti slavery, it spread the free press, it spread press censorship, it destroyed the environment in massive ways, but it also led to the birth of modern environmentalism. So these legacies are much more contradictory than i expected when i started myjourney into this history. Some of that is just happenstance and unintended consequences. Surely youre trying to get to sort of Core Motivations for the British Imperial experience . There werent any Core Motivations in the sense that it was such a sprawling history, covered such a wide geographical area. Its very hard to generalise whatever you say about the British Empire, you can say the opposite to a certain degree. A man in india in the early 20th century might have had a really positive experience with colonialism in the morning a Police Officer might have helped him sort out a dispute but then in the evening, he might have had a horrible experience of imperial racism. Both things can be true. Opposite things can be true at the same time, and i think thats a really powerful way to understand this history. And what you seem to be telling us is that we shouldnt look at the empire and its legacies through prejudiced eyes, we shouldnt bring our own biases to it, we should just confront the truth as best we can discover it from the historical record, and goodness knows you spent a lot of time researching this. But it seems to me theres one telling quote at the beginning of your book, which does give you an overarching motivation and perhaps give you a sense of being on one side. You say, in an i mean, you dont say it, you quote an African Proverb at the very opening of the book, and the proverb goes like this until lions have their own historians, Tales Of The Hunt will always glorify the hunter. I think what that is alluding to, for me anyway, is the fact that the british concealed a lot of the facts of what happened. I dont want to sound. Covered stuff up . Yeah, absolutely. When they left india, there was said to be a pall of smoke over delhi cos of all the documents that were being burnt. If you look into the foundations of nigeria, the founders of nigeria went out of their way to destroy evidence of what they were doing. Even now, the records, the personal records of lord mountbatten, the final viceroy of india, are still officially secret. So its taken a lot of time for historians to catch up with what happened. Weve only had one view of history, which has been the view of the colonisers, but now were getting multiple perspectives finally. Yeah. What you seem to be saying as well, though, and again, youvejust told me, you know, im open to both the contradictions and the complications of empire, what you seem to be saying more than Anything Else again, correct me if im wrong is that there was a driver, a motivation behind British Imperialism, and that was out and out racism. To quote you, before you begin your answer this is an important quote the British Empire was the single most significant incubator, refiner and propagator of White Supremacy in the history of the planet. That is absolutely true for what empire was like at the height of empire, but at the same time, because obviously, things can be true at the same time, officially, British Empire was nonracist. At the same time, imperialists in london were taking on the racism of australian colonists and saying you should moderate yourself. But theres absolutely no question that the British Empire was proudly. Yeah, but as soon as you start to convolute the argument, i get a little confused. Was a prime motivating force of British Imperialism racism or not . Absolutely, at the height of empire. And its reflected in the fact that when racial science emerged in the 19th century, it had a distinctly british flavour. It became Something Else in germany and then it became Something Else in america, but it was pretty much british racial science. And also, the British Empire became a kind of beacon for White Supremacists Around The World. And youll see it in the poem, white mans burden by rudyard kipling, written by famous imperialists, and that poem is about encouraging the americans to do in the philippines what the british did with brown people across the world. But those historians, and there are many of them Andrew Roberts and nigel biggar and many others who critique your history, for being far too negative and condemnatory about British Imperialism, they point out that what you fail to do consistently is look at other forms of imperialism. For example, other forms of european imperialism as practised by the belgians in the congo or the germans in southwest africa, namibia as it now is, which were more brutally, overtly racist than the British Empire ever was. I dont know how you measure racism. Theres not a unit of racism, but theyve got a bit of a point in that the country with the biggest problem with imperialism, nostalgia at the moment is not britain, its russia. Could say turkeys got a problem too. The dutch, in the recent survey, were found to be more nostalgic about their empire that we are. And you surely couldnt argue, in this argument about racism and the importance of the British Empire, that somehow, British Imperial racism was an incubator for russian racism, could you 7 absolutely not, theyre separate. No, but the whole point of your book is that To Quote The Subtitle Again how British Imperialism shaped the globe. And im just wondering whether youre overreaching . No, because the British Empire was the biggest empire in human history. That is the fact. Thats why it matters perhaps more than, you know, the belgian history or the dutch history. The legacies are real and profound, not just within that 25 of the world that we colonised, but beyond that, cos the world had to deal with us. So i dont think theres been any kind of process of truth and reconciliation with that history. What about consideration of the worlds, the societies, the cultures that the British Empire imposed itself upon . There isnt so much in the book about the way, for example, Nigerian Society worked in all of its complex of course it wasnt nigeria then but that part of west africa worked before the British Imperialists arrived. You could say the same about other imperial projects, that you dont spend too much time looking at what came before and, indeed, you dont spend that much time looking at the 75 years of history that went after the British Empire. It would say its a big enough book already its 350,000 words long. If i started talking about what life was like. No, but isnt that important . Because. Yeah, it is. Because by assuming that so much of what we see in those different territories is all about the British Empire, you may be missing elements of culture, of society that were important before the british ever arrived. Absolutely, but i do use the analogy in the middle of the book about how British Empire was not like a school. Theres a temptation to that the British Empire was like a school with the headmaster in london, the classrooms representing the colonies, but actually, because it took nine months to get a message between the headmaster in the classroom, often, the classroom behaved in its own way. The teacher did what they wanted. Often they already had rules, which continued to be activated and were only corrected when there was a crisis. So i do think the book relentlessly acknowledges the complexity of the history. No, it does constantly reference the complexity. How would you explain the fact that your own grandfather, for example, had a great sort of admiration for the british and their empire, and you could look across the empire, from singapore where its pretty obvious, to hong kong where, again, its pretty obvious, to countries like nigeria where theres a substantial number of people inside Nigeria Today who look back with a degree of admiration, fondness on things that the British Empire gave them. How do you explain that . I think thats the way it always was. I mean, even gandhi, the most famous opponent of empire, at one stage of his life was quite into imperial values when he was a lawyer, you know, and like i was saying, empire was Different Things in different times of the day in india. It was Different Things in different parts of empire, it was definitely Different Things in different parts of peoples lives. Your dad arrived from india, a punjabi sikh, with actually very little education i think he pretty much functionally illiterate hes watched your rise as a writer and historian and i wonder what he makes of your take on both the country he came to and the country he life behind . Well, sikhs have a very close relationship with empire. I didnt really. I dont think you could really understand sikhism without really understanding the British Empire because the sikh identity was supercharged by the british. This idea that were a martial race, something you might struggle when looking at my physique, but that was created by the british right . Yeah. The sikh demographics were hugely shaped by the British Empire because the british fetishised us, so there were a lot of conversions to sikhism in the 19th century. So i might not be here if it wasnt for the British Empire. I might not exist. I definitely wouldnt be living in a multicultural country if it wasnt for British Empire, because we are a multicultural country because we had a multicultural empire. Do you think there is a danger that some leaders im thinking of politicians with power in some post British Colonial countries would find something rather helpful in your book . Cos in a way, youre saying there are deep rooted impacts, and many of them malign that are the result of the British Empire that are very difficult to root out of these societies. And take an example, take zimbabwe we know that robert mugabe, an authoritarian, a tyrant, lets be honest he blamed the white man and he blamed the imperial legacy for many things, which, frankly, many people would put at his own door as just a result of corruption and mismanagement. Yeah, and its been decolonisation has been weaponised in india by modi whos trying to get rid of all remnants of British Colonialism, but also, its including the mughal emperors, so hes using it as a way to be islamophobic. But doesnt your whole take on empire and its legacy, doesnt it rob these nationstates, which have, after all, been independent for 70, 80 years, it robs them of agency and of a sense of responsibility. To a degree, but i think theres been hugely inspiring work being done In The Name Of Decolonisation recently. I mean, the renaming of places in tasmania, for example, suicide bay, the site of an aboriginal massacre, now has an indigenous name thats a hugely dignifying thing to do. The return of ghanaian loot the v a and the British Museum have returned some loot to ghana thats hugely important to their national psyche. These are powerful symbols. Do they really make any difference to the people. I think they make a huge difference, like learning medicine, like. It� s happening in india to teach medicine in indigenous languages can be a really important part of your rising Self Confidence as a nation. But theres a limit to what you can do with decolonisation because its baked into the world. You cant stop cricket being played in india, you cant get rid of christianity in africa, you cant undo entire nations made by the british, like niger and australia and pakistan, can you . No. But i want to come back to the point about agency and responsibility, cos you make a point, for example, just one specific point you make a point of talking about the anti gay laws much tougher and draconian in recent years in some parts of africa, and you tie it explicitly to the British Empire and the way in which british rulers in these countries ensured that laws were toughened up against homosexuality, for example. Youre sort of piling on the blame on the british, but surely, if you look at a country like uganda today, or ghana, which hasjust toughened up its anti gay laws, the responsibility, the agency lies with the governments, which have been in powerfor many years, which are truly utterly independent. Absolutely, and ive met some lgbt workers who put the blame purely on their current governments. But what youve got there is a very paradoxical situation because, you know, the majority of anti gay legislation that existed in the world in 2018 came directly or indirectly from the British Empire. But, equally, the western governments and britain are doing quite a lot to help lgbt people in the modern age. Yeah, and isnt the point, you know, youre saying, look, here was britain, and through the sort of 18th, 19th century, it posed its will and its values upon the world in, as you say, in an overtly racist form in many ways. But the point surely is that britain, over the last 70 years, has changed massively, the sort of social morays and attitudes and legislation for those things in britain has changed in all sorts of ways. Thats about agency and these countries, which we left long ago, also have that same agency. But you dont seem to pinpoint that . No, i do, iagree with you to a degree. I mean, someone like Shashi Tharoor who wrote a very negative book about the affect of British Empire<\/a> was and still is on the world. You certainly dont undersell your idea, its subtitled how British Imperial<\/a>ism has shaped the globe. I really do believe that. I think the British Empire<\/a> explains so much about peoples daily lives Around The World<\/a>, tea drinking in india, in britain, patterns of tax avoidance, even the Bbc World Service<\/a> used to be known as the bbc empire service. It explains so much about our daily news. Youvejust come back from guyana theres a Border Dispute<\/a> there that goes back to empire, israel palestine, a dispute that has its roots in empire, but also, theres a gap between the way in Which Britain<\/a> sees itself and the world sees britain through the prism of this history, and i think we need to remember what we did before we go around pontificating on things like democracy and the environment and human rights. We need to remember our distinctly patchy records on those things during the age of empire. But do you think your perspective is driven in part by your own background 7 youre of indian heritage, born and raised in the united kingdom, so britain and india matter particularly to you, you know them particularly well. Im just wondering if youre sitting, listening, watching this in tokyo, beijing, brasilia, are you really going to buy the concept that the British Empire<\/a>, as opposed to any other empire, has been this global force, which you say, apart from the internet, you cant think of Anything Else<\/a> which influences the world so much . Yeah, absolutely. I mean, it affects south america. I mean, Something Like<\/a> 60 of the countries who ended up playing football got it indirectly or directly through the British Empire<\/a>. The english language. Christianity. You know, these are things that we need to understand through the prism of this history. So, many historians whove spent decades looking at the British Empire<\/a> seem to feel an impulse to treat it as some sort of Accounting Exercise<\/a> they look at what was positive about it, they look at what was negative and then they try and sort of come to an overall conclusion, good or bad. Were you tempted to do that too . I think initially, cos thats the only way weve talked about empire in britain until recently. But what i realise with the empire world, travelling to mauritius and nigeria and barbados and india, is that the legacies are profoundly contradictory. So, the British Empire<\/a> resulted in quite a lot of democracy Around The World<\/a> australia, singapore and so on. It also resulted in a huge amount of geopolitical chaos, it spread slavery, it also spread anti slavery, it spread the free press, it spread press censorship, it destroyed the environment in massive ways, but it also led to the birth of modern environmentalism. So these legacies are much more contradictory than i expected when i started myjourney into this history. Some of that is just happenstance and unintended consequences. Surely youre trying to get to sort of Core Motivations<\/a> for the British Imperial<\/a> experience . There werent any Core Motivations<\/a> in the sense that it was such a sprawling history, covered such a wide geographical area. Its very hard to generalise whatever you say about the British Empire<\/a>, you can say the opposite to a certain degree. A man in india in the early 20th century might have had a really positive experience with colonialism in the morning a Police Officer<\/a> might have helped him sort out a dispute but then in the evening, he might have had a horrible experience of imperial racism. Both things can be true. Opposite things can be true at the same time, and i think thats a really powerful way to understand this history. And what you seem to be telling us is that we shouldnt look at the empire and its legacies through prejudiced eyes, we shouldnt bring our own biases to it, we should just confront the truth as best we can discover it from the historical record, and goodness knows you spent a lot of time researching this. But it seems to me theres one telling quote at the beginning of your book, which does give you an overarching motivation and perhaps give you a sense of being on one side. You say, in an i mean, you dont say it, you quote an African Proverb<\/a> at the very opening of the book, and the proverb goes like this until lions have their own historians, Tales Of The Hunt<\/a> will always glorify the hunter. I think what that is alluding to, for me anyway, is the fact that the british concealed a lot of the facts of what happened. I dont want to sound. Covered stuff up . Yeah, absolutely. When they left india, there was said to be a pall of smoke over delhi cos of all the documents that were being burnt. If you look into the foundations of nigeria, the founders of nigeria went out of their way to destroy evidence of what they were doing. Even now, the records, the personal records of lord mountbatten, the final viceroy of india, are still officially secret. So its taken a lot of time for historians to catch up with what happened. Weve only had one view of history, which has been the view of the colonisers, but now were getting multiple perspectives finally. Yeah. What you seem to be saying as well, though, and again, youvejust told me, you know, im open to both the contradictions and the complications of empire, what you seem to be saying more than Anything Else<\/a> again, correct me if im wrong is that there was a driver, a motivation behind British Imperial<\/a>ism, and that was out and out racism. To quote you, before you begin your answer this is an important quote the British Empire<\/a> was the single most significant incubator, refiner and propagator of White Supremacy<\/a> in the history of the planet. That is absolutely true for what empire was like at the height of empire, but at the same time, because obviously, things can be true at the same time, officially, British Empire<\/a> was nonracist. At the same time, imperialists in london were taking on the racism of australian colonists and saying you should moderate yourself. But theres absolutely no question that the British Empire<\/a> was proudly. Yeah, but as soon as you start to convolute the argument, i get a little confused. Was a prime motivating force of British Imperial<\/a>ism racism or not . Absolutely, at the height of empire. And its reflected in the fact that when racial science emerged in the 19th century, it had a distinctly british flavour. It became Something Else<\/a> in germany and then it became Something Else<\/a> in america, but it was pretty much british racial science. And also, the British Empire<\/a> became a kind of beacon for White Supremacists<\/a> Around The World<\/a>. And youll see it in the poem, white mans burden by rudyard kipling, written by famous imperialists, and that poem is about encouraging the americans to do in the philippines what the british did with brown people across the world. But those historians, and there are many of them Andrew Roberts<\/a> and nigel biggar and many others who critique your history, for being far too negative and condemnatory about British Imperial<\/a>ism, they point out that what you fail to do consistently is look at other forms of imperialism. For example, other forms of european imperialism as practised by the belgians in the congo or the germans in southwest africa, namibia as it now is, which were more brutally, overtly racist than the British Empire<\/a> ever was. I dont know how you measure racism. Theres not a unit of racism, but theyve got a bit of a point in that the country with the biggest problem with imperialism, nostalgia at the moment is not britain, its russia. Could say turkeys got a problem too. The dutch, in the recent survey, were found to be more nostalgic about their empire that we are. And you surely couldnt argue, in this argument about racism and the importance of the British Empire<\/a>, that somehow, British Imperial<\/a> racism was an incubator for russian racism, could you 7 absolutely not, theyre separate. No, but the whole point of your book is that To Quote The Subtitle Again<\/a> how British Imperial<\/a>ism shaped the globe. And im just wondering whether youre overreaching . No, because the British Empire<\/a> was the biggest empire in human history. That is the fact. Thats why it matters perhaps more than, you know, the belgian history or the dutch history. The legacies are real and profound, not just within that 25 of the world that we colonised, but beyond that, cos the world had to deal with us. So i dont think theres been any kind of process of truth and reconciliation with that history. What about consideration of the worlds, the societies, the cultures that the British Empire<\/a> imposed itself upon . There isnt so much in the book about the way, for example, Nigerian Society<\/a> worked in all of its complex of course it wasnt nigeria then but that part of west africa worked before the British Imperial<\/a>ists arrived. You could say the same about other imperial projects, that you dont spend too much time looking at what came before and, indeed, you dont spend that much time looking at the 75 years of history that went after the British Empire<\/a>. It would say its a big enough book already its 350,000 words long. If i started talking about what life was like. No, but isnt that important . Because. Yeah, it is. Because by assuming that so much of what we see in those different territories is all about the British Empire<\/a>, you may be missing elements of culture, of society that were important before the british ever arrived. Absolutely, but i do use the analogy in the middle of the book about how British Empire<\/a> was not like a school. Theres a temptation to that the British Empire<\/a> was like a school with the headmaster in london, the classrooms representing the colonies, but actually, because it took nine months to get a message between the headmaster in the classroom, often, the classroom behaved in its own way. The teacher did what they wanted. Often they already had rules, which continued to be activated and were only corrected when there was a crisis. So i do think the book relentlessly acknowledges the complexity of the history. No, it does constantly reference the complexity. How would you explain the fact that your own grandfather, for example, had a great sort of admiration for the british and their empire, and you could look across the empire, from singapore where its pretty obvious, to hong kong where, again, its pretty obvious, to countries like nigeria where theres a substantial number of people inside Nigeria Today<\/a> who look back with a degree of admiration, fondness on things that the British Empire<\/a> gave them. How do you explain that . I think thats the way it always was. I mean, even gandhi, the most famous opponent of empire, at one stage of his life was quite into imperial values when he was a lawyer, you know, and like i was saying, empire was Different Things<\/a> in different times of the day in india. It was Different Things<\/a> in different parts of empire, it was definitely Different Things<\/a> in different parts of peoples lives. Your dad arrived from india, a punjabi sikh, with actually very little education i think he pretty much functionally illiterate hes watched your rise as a writer and historian and i wonder what he makes of your take on both the country he came to and the country he life behind . Well, sikhs have a very close relationship with empire. I didnt really. I dont think you could really understand sikhism without really understanding the British Empire<\/a> because the sikh identity was supercharged by the british. This idea that were a martial race, something you might struggle when looking at my physique, but that was created by the british right . Yeah. The sikh demographics were hugely shaped by the British Empire<\/a> because the british fetishised us, so there were a lot of conversions to sikhism in the 19th century. So i might not be here if it wasnt for the British Empire<\/a>. I might not exist. I definitely wouldnt be living in a multicultural country if it wasnt for British Empire<\/a>, because we are a multicultural country because we had a multicultural empire. Do you think there is a danger that some leaders im thinking of politicians with power in some post British Colonial<\/a> countries would find something rather helpful in your book . Cos in a way, youre saying there are deep rooted impacts, and many of them malign that are the result of the British Empire<\/a> that are very difficult to root out of these societies. And take an example, take zimbabwe we know that robert mugabe, an authoritarian, a tyrant, lets be honest he blamed the white man and he blamed the imperial legacy for many things, which, frankly, many people would put at his own door as just a result of corruption and mismanagement. Yeah, and its been decolonisation has been weaponised in india by modi whos trying to get rid of all remnants of British Colonial<\/a>ism, but also, its including the mughal emperors, so hes using it as a way to be islamophobic. But doesnt your whole take on empire and its legacy, doesnt it rob these nationstates, which have, after all, been independent for 70, 80 years, it robs them of agency and of a sense of responsibility. To a degree, but i think theres been hugely inspiring work being done In The Name Of Decolonisation<\/a> recently. I mean, the renaming of places in tasmania, for example, suicide bay, the site of an aboriginal massacre, now has an indigenous name thats a hugely dignifying thing to do. The return of ghanaian loot the v a and the British Museum<\/a> have returned some loot to ghana thats hugely important to their national psyche. These are powerful symbols. Do they really make any difference to the people. I think they make a huge difference, like learning medicine, like. It\ufffd s happening in india to teach medicine in indigenous languages can be a really important part of your rising Self Confidence<\/a> as a nation. But theres a limit to what you can do with decolonisation because its baked into the world. You cant stop cricket being played in india, you cant get rid of christianity in africa, you cant undo entire nations made by the british, like niger and australia and pakistan, can you . No. But i want to come back to the point about agency and responsibility, cos you make a point, for example, just one specific point you make a point of talking about the anti gay laws much tougher and draconian in recent years in some parts of africa, and you tie it explicitly to the British Empire<\/a> and the way in which british rulers in these countries ensured that laws were toughened up against homosexuality, for example. Youre sort of piling on the blame on the british, but surely, if you look at a country like uganda today, or ghana, which hasjust toughened up its anti gay laws, the responsibility, the agency lies with the governments, which have been in powerfor many years, which are truly utterly independent. Absolutely, and ive met some lgbt workers who put the blame purely on their current governments. But what youve got there is a very paradoxical situation because, you know, the majority of anti gay legislation that existed in the world in 2018 came directly or indirectly from the British Empire<\/a>. But, equally, the western governments and britain are doing quite a lot to help lgbt people in the modern age. Yeah, and isnt the point, you know, youre saying, look, here was britain, and through the sort of 18th, 19th century, it posed its will and its values upon the world in, as you say, in an overtly racist form in many ways. But the point surely is that britain, over the last 70 years, has changed massively, the sort of social morays and attitudes and legislation for those things in britain has changed in all sorts of ways. Thats about agency and these countries, which we left long ago, also have that same agency. But you dont seem to pinpoint that . No, i do, iagree with you to a degree. I mean, someone like Shashi Tharoor<\/a> who wrote a very negative book about the affect of British Empire<\/a> upon india i think that robs agency from indians who didntjust take it all, you know, they responded to imperialism in all sorts of ways, some of them did well out of it. Its a deeply paradoxical situation, hence my point that opposite things can be true at the same time. Yeah. 0pposite things can be true, it can all be complex, nuanced and contradictory, and yet, you know, again, i come back to the point youve written something of a sort of polemical book. Its that mismatch in a way that youre saying much of the previous history of empire has lacked nuance. Its either been empire good or empire bed, its been binary. You want the nuance, and yet theres one fundamental way in which youre not nuanced. You say definitely for good or ill the British Empire<\/a> mattered more than Anything Else<\/a>. I dont think thats polemical. But, equally, i get told all the time ive been too negative about empire or too positive about empire. It depends on. Who tells you youve been too positive . Oh, the left the hard left who i did an interview with novara media on the far left, and they definitely feel like ive been too positive to say, you know, like ive said, britain resulted in the British Empire<\/a> resulted in a disproportionate amount of democracy. So it depends rather on what you thought about empire before you picked my book up. Yeah. It hasnt been easy for you, the aftermath of writing first empireland and now empireworld, because youve stirred controversy. As you say, some people have been very upset because they feel youve been far too negative about the British Imperial<\/a> experience, that, in a sense, youve been talking down britain and its values and its reputation. How seriously have you had to take the abuse, the threats what has happened . It has been pretty horrible. You know, ive had kind of Stalking Situations<\/a> and occasionally had to worry about my personal security. 0nline or actual physical . In real life. I started doing adult events at one point because of all the shouting and the screaming. But i havent had it the worst. I mean, david 0lusoga, its a matter for record, has a personal bodyguard at some live events. Hes a great black historian in the uk. Yeah. And Corinne Fowler<\/a> who was a historian who wrote a report for the National Trust<\/a> about colonialism. Shes talked about having to call the police, about becoming too scared to walk down the street. And this shouldnt happen, and because all we are doing is trying to promote knowledge, but it has happened. But i also feel at the same time that the culture war that has led to all this behaviour is kind of over. Really . I feel like it hasnt really been tested in an election, i feel like the politicians who were engaged in it have lost heart, we even had keir starmer. Did you really think. Imean, imjust. As youre saying that, im actually eyeing a quote from rishi sunak, of course, the Prime Minister<\/a> of britain with indian heritage, who said just a few days ago that extremists are spreading a poison, they want us to doubt our countrys history and achievements. They want us to accept a moral equivalence between britain and some despicable regimes in the world. I mean, im just thinking to myself when sunak talks about extremists who want us to doubt our countrys history and achievements im not saying youre an extremist, but. Yeah . Youre certainly somebody inviting us to be a little bit sceptical about the received wisdom of britains achievements . Yeah, he said all sorts of silly things. He also recently said that historians should stop rewriting history, which is literally what they do. But hes on his way out. If you look at the surveys, Something Like<\/a> two thirds of british people think its a good idea to teach kids about colonialism and slavery. A survey last year found that 44 of people think the royal family should pay reparations for slavery, which i thought was really high given i dont think most people even know that the royal family were involved in slavery. So i feel quite optimistic the population that the population are over this Culture War Way<\/a> before the politicians. Do you want british people to feel a sense of guilt, shame, responsibility . Absolutely not. Its got nothing to do with pride, shame, yourfeelings are irrelevant. History is an intellectual exercise. For me, what this is about is about having therapy as a nation and its about carrying yourself in the world in a more grown up way, at a time, because of brexit, where were having to re establish our international relationships. Right, but therapy i mean, taking it from the personal to the Political Therapy<\/a> is about taking responsibility often. You want. You know, whether it be political rulers or the general public, to sort of have a sense of responsibility, do you, for this past . But therapy\ufffd s also not about pride or shame, is it . I mean, ive had therapy. Ive also written a memoir about my family and discovered very dark things about my family. Did it make me love them any less . No. Actually, it made me love them even more, because looking into the history, taking the time to find out can be an act of patriotism. But there are specific things there are things like apologies coming from the very top, for example, from the royal family orfrom the Prime Minister<\/a> of the country and, you know, its been complicated, weve sort of said sorry but not quite a full apology to nations for slavery, for example, and then theres the very practical issue of reparations. Are you, having been historian whos dug deep into the history of empire and of slavery, are you an advocate now of absolutely paying up reparations to those countries which suffered so much as a result of slavery . I think when you use the word \ufffd reparations\ufffd in britain, people clutch their pearls, and i get it. I mean, there was a judge at the International Court<\/a> ofjustice who recently said, we owe \u00a318 trillion and thats an unrealistic amount of money, thats not going to happen. But i also think, at the same time, weve started the process. 0ur relationship with ireland has been completely reimagined, i think, in recent decades through post colonial truth and reconciliation, through the good friday agreement. There was money paid out, there were apologies. Same with kenya we were forced by court to pay \u00a320 million i would say those were reparations we made an apology, our relationship with kenya is better as a result. The Church Of England<\/a> has set aside \u00a3100 million, possibly even more. That may go further now. May go further. Individualfamilies are paying reparations the gladstones, the trevelyans, your colleague, alex renton. And i feel like weve embarked upon the process of reparations without really thinking about it. We just need to do it for more countries. A final thought your books, including one that youve written specifically for children, are now read at british schools. I think you personally have made sure that thousands of them have been sent to schools across the uk. Do you think the next generation of british kids will have a very different view of what the British Empire<\/a> was and what it meant . I havent personally sent them, my publisher did i couldnt afford it. But i feel that young people have got no time for the culture war. They deal with this history in a frank and honest way. They feel the way about museums that, you know, we used to feel about zoos as kids, and they havent got any time for the backlash, theyre just interested in having a grown up relationship with the world. Sathnam sanghera, thank you very much for coming back on hardtalk. Thank you. Hello there. March so far has been quieter, but colder and the Wind Direction<\/a> has played its part. Weve seen an easily wind so far, and in the last few days, its brought a lot of cloud in off the north sea and temperatures struggled along those exposed coasts only around six degrees. But the story is set to change as we go through the next few days. With the Wind Direction<\/a> swinging round to a South Westerly<\/a>, temperatures may well peak into the mid teens, but theres still a chance of seeing a return to some showers or longer spells of rain. Monday, however, will be a quieter story. This weakening Weather Front<\/a> Still Producing<\/a> a cloud thick enough for some drizzle. First thing monday morning, a lot of cloud and some fog around as well early on. Some showery outbreaks of rain moving out to the far north of northern ireland, into the far north west of scotland. And still, the Wind Direction<\/a> coming from an easterly. Here, always that little bit cooler, eight or nine degrees. But out to the west, with the best of any brightness, we could see temperatures peaking at 12 celsius. Now, as we move into tuesday, this Weather Front<\/a> could bring some showery outbreaks of rain into wales and Southern England<\/a> for a time. Its a really messy story on tuesday. Therell be outbreaks of rain drifting their way steadily east, drizzle as well a little bit further north. But the far north of scotland could cling onto some sunshine here, not quite as warm, around six to 8 degrees, but further south, well see temperatures peaking at 13 celsius. Low pressure will sit to the north by the middle part of the week and this trailing cold front will introduce the risk of more rain. But the South Westerly<\/a> winds starting to pick up the milder air moving in. So despite a lot of cloud around potentially on wednesday, there should be some breaks in the cloud. Temperatures will start to rise. Highs of 16 degrees. Brighter, with a few scattered showers, into the far north and west. So as we move into thursday and friday, weatherfronts will continue to bring the threat of showers or longer spells of rain. And some of the showers could be heavy and thundery, but the Wind Direction<\/a> will continue to push this milder air across the country. So temperatures on the rise, particularly in comparison to march so far. So, yes, there is a risk of some showers or some heavier welcome to newsday. Reporting live from singapore, im steve lai. The headlines. A ship carrying 200 tonnes of aid to gaza prepares to leave cyprus after securing all necessary permits to travel. Its the final day of Chinas National Peoples Congress<\/a> well look at what the government in beijing could announce about the year ahead. Several News Agencies<\/a> withdraw this picture of the princess of wales and her children from circulation, after concerns are raised that the image may have been manipulated. And the biggest night on the Entertainment Calendar<\/a> is finally upon us. Will 0ppenheimer dominate the 2024 oscars . Welcome to bbc news broadcasting to viewers in the uk and Around The World<\/a>","publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"archive.org","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","width":"800","height":"600","url":"\/\/ia600208.us.archive.org\/31\/items\/BBCNEWS_20240310_233000_HARDtalk\/BBCNEWS_20240310_233000_HARDtalk.thumbs\/BBCNEWS_20240310_233000_HARDtalk_000001.jpg"}},"autauthor":{"@type":"Organization"},"author":{"sameAs":"archive.org","name":"archive.org"}}],"coverageEndTime":"20240707T12:35:10+00:00"}