” Would the British have been right had they won the war for independence.”
It isn’t an ethical question, as war has two sides equally wanting to be victorious. Just because the reasons are good, doesn’t mean you will win the armed aspect of an independence movement.
War vetoes or ratifies the rationality for the two combatants. When I say “right makes right”, it isnt a personal value of mine, it is the reality of the situation. Rush has said the same when he said that the world is governed by the aggressive use of force. Not that the force is right or wrong, just that it IS.
You can easily say as well that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. For ever move for secession, that isnt a mutual decision with the central government, there will be an attempt to stop it.
Free people dont have the right of self-governance, they have a right to TRY. A right denotes a permission for independence without interference, which we know is not how this really ever has worked.
“did you go to school in the soviet union?”
Now, now, don’t straw man. I honestly just see the dynamic of this from both sides.
there are two sides to war but not two sides too self-governance. War destroys legal rights and claims of independence and defaults to force for the decision,. your acceptance of war as a valid determinant of representation is puzzling and shows a value of villanelle over human rights as dod the Nazi, the soviet and the chinese.
The british ruling India and parts of China was not legitimate. it just showed power. And finally the brits had to admit it.