I fucking hope it does.
thing is as it stands UK doesn't have the same prospects neither is the geopolitics dominated by the US gives it leeway to develop any.
Why is Ireland not included but India is?
England rules over Ireland for 900 years.
WE IRISH, KICK THE ANGLOS OUT
Turks rule over Bosnia for 400 years.
INSHALLAH TURKISH BROTHERS, WE NOT SERBS
How do you explain this?
The Irish are basically Irish themed west brits at this point, and they hate themselves for it, so they reject anything British. Ireland is the ex-brony who now hates everything to do with the fandom but still wears the trench coat, fedora and wolf t-shirt.
Bosnia is surrounded by cultural brothers who are split by variants on the same basic belief system, and they are the runt of the litter. They are the choirboy who prefers getting fondled by the priest (turkey) because at least the priest is nice and doesn't beat him up.
>choirboy who prefers getting fondled by the priest
Thanks, you made me remember this gem
OP is a retard there's not going to be a British Empire 2.0, but I think you're slightly wrong. The geopolitics is starting to look better for us. Especially as China and your country become more powerful, decreasing the relative power of the US, then the UK becomes more important as global power is more finely balanced. And then you have how we're almost certainly going to be the top European economy, which will have huge advantages if we're in the EU
We're doing better now than at any point since the early 1950s, but i doubt it'd lead to another empire. It just means that we can retain our seat on the UN Security Council and be considered relatively important.
London is essentially the centre of the financial world, and our lawyers are responsible for doing 80% of cases in places like Hong Kong and Singapore.
>Less atrocities this time that's almost we ask for.
Sorry m8. We have to have some way of thinning out your population, or we'll have the same situation as before, with 22 year old Oxbridge graduate civil servants running the affairs of 20 million Indians each and then fucking up in a drought or famine.
not him but i have a question, you know lets rise above the bullshit that the empire was when you look at it as a whole much better for the Indians and the British alike compared to the princely states and civil wars that preceded it.
I read a thousand things about what the british administrators said did or ordered for the Indian people what strikes me the most harshly is Churchill's
>Oh there's a famine in Bengal lets divert the aid to Greece because they are western and not those savage Indians.
who's land's being feeding the British troops in the entirety of the war?
and when the labor party condemned his words and the press got on his ass his reply was.
>oh the bengalis are starving, then how come Gandhi isn't dead yet.
Churchill's views on the Indian people are considered his main personal flaw, but you have to remember that the guy was a product of his time and saw the Indians as despicable poo-eaters who would sell their own grandparents in exchange for a few rupees. He didn't have any reason not to think that when the only people who rose above their conditions were British educated elite members of Indian society like Gandhi, Bose and Jinnah.
I'm not sure what your question is.
It will lead to the opposite actually, without major influence in the EU we will become as irrelevant as New Zealand.