"You might be thinking of the British overseas territory"

Not just them, but I'll leave it at that.

Some years ago when the United Nations started critiquing colonies, the British overseas ones were rebranded as "territories" and "dependencies." (The French still have overseas colonies, the so called DOM-TOMs, and also some nearer to home.)

Some of these overseas ones like Gibraltar and the Falkland Islands have overwhelming support for British rule thanks to an aggressive neighbour. Some of these remaining colonies have active independence movements with varying support.

>Not just them, but I'll leave it at that.

Okay then if you're just going to be cute and nonspecific there's no point in continuing this discussion. I'm not interested in trying to decipher vague insinuations.

I don't think you'd like the answer. Not all of its colonies were vast distances away.

"Crown dependencies" are one phrase used to rebrand British colonies but there are other ones.

> the so called DOM-TOMs

Fun fact: they've not been called that in 23y, they're DROM-COM

Rebranding doesn't change what they are. Tahiti, New Caledonia and maybe even Corsica (depending on who you speak to) are all treated like colonies.

Not to open a can of worms, but there are probably people who still consider Northern Ireland a colony.

They can consider what they like, but it is factually wrong. People in NI get to vote in UK elections.

A reasonable case can be made that it should be Irish territory, not British, but that is a territorial dispute.

The people in Tahiti get to vote for representatives in Paris. But French Polynesia is still a colony.

A small colony doesn't count?

They're not colonies. An overseas territory is not the same thing as a colony.

You can rebrand something as a territory or a dependency (or a DOM-TOM in the French case) but they're still the same. Even during the height of colonialism many of these places had some self-government and even democracy (Hong Kong). That was partly a practical consideration as many of them were so far away they had to run themselves to some extent.

But not all of Britain's colonies are far away.

The people living there might struggle to identify the difference?

Are you calling them stupid?

Mauritius and La Réunion are doing much better than say Madagascar.

I think it was in reply to the "with millions of people in them" comment.