How was the British Empire ruled? - Politics | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Early modern era & beginning of the modern era. Exploration, enlightenment, industrialisation, colonisation & empire (1492 - 1914 CE).
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
How was the British Empire ruled from London in the 19th, early 20th century?

Was there member of parliaments who represented India, or British Africa or Canada or Australia?

Did the Prime Minister have direct power over administration in all the vast regions of the British Empire?
Was there member of parliaments who represented India, or British Africa or Canada or Australia?

British Empire

No there were not.
Since its inception the British Empire has been oppressive. Before it was exploiting India it was exploiting Ireland. Before it was exploiting Ireland is was exploiting Scotland. Hell its first acts as a protokingdom was to exploit the land rightly ruled by the proud and peaceful Welsh people.

ps: 3
Sithsaber wrote:Petty regionalism will get us nowhere brawd, we all know who the real enemy is here.

ps: 6

The damn Northumbrians, amirite?

The autonomy of parts of the empire varied. For instance, Canada got most of it in 1867; Australia in 1901. The parts without much white colonisation/immigration weren't trusted so much, and they were governed by British civil servants. The Canadians were trusted so much, one of them became British PM.
Sithsaber wrote:exploiting Scotland.

Scotland wasn't exploited by the "British Empire", although you may be conflating it with William Wallace, which happened centuries before the Act of Union and the British Empire itself. A Scottish king united the crowns of England and Scotland and the Scottish provided a disproportionate amount of manpower and intellectual power for the British Empire. The whole Scottish independence thing is just Scottish frustration at the English electing Thatcher three times and although their frustration is understandable , independence isn't supported by the majority of the population. Braveheart isn't really an accurate representation of history just like Apocalypto. Mel Gibson should just stick to acting and not directing 'historical' films.
The British Empire established itself and expanded largely through its incorporation of existing indigenous political structures. A single British Resident or Political Agent, controlling a regional state through ‘advice’ given to the local prince or chief, became the norm for much of the Empire. India's princely states, where from the mid-eighteenth century the British first employed and developed this system of indirect rule, stood as the conscious model for later imperial administrators and politicians who wished to extend the Empire without the economic and political costs of direct annexation. In dealing with Malaya, East and West Africa from the mid-nineteenth century onward, officials in the field and notables in London sought to justify imperial expansion and to establish indirect rule efficiently by drawing upon the Indian example. Thus, during a century of empirical learning from relations with India's princely states, the British established a body of theory and policies about indirect rule which then spread throughout the rest of the Empire.;jsessionid=78F8D51919DAC7549E6E6CB74681BA3D.journals?fromPage=online&aid=2650864

Just don't do anything crazy like you proposed […]

Election 2020

Then you need to join the 20th Century before we […]

An ill wind blows someone good... The way this v[…]

There have been reports about people suddenly coll[…]