Scott Cullen notes:

 >One must wonder whether England's later 20th
 > century departures from Ireland (rather dragged out afther the rising
 > of 1916) and the Indian sub-continent (rather more hurried after
 > WWII), A) were predictable under Petty's calculus that the cost of
 > "ownership" outweighed the revenues, and B) were more  motivated by
 > economics than by post-imperial enlightenment.


That's putting a nice "happy face" on it methinks. Sure, it
was about economics, but it was fully about economics
at the margin rather than any weighty longer term calculations.

The truth, I'm pretty sure, was that it was the price of
maintaining "equality" among the constituent parts of the
empire that caused those who thought that they had
the most to lose to send packing those who stood to
have the most to gain from such equality.

I.e. "ownership" and "enlightenment" are really both euphemisms
here for their opposites in that calculus.

Hugh Whinfrey