{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03412462908011869, 'fraction_numerical': 0.011869436201780416, 'mean_word_length': 4.374501992031872, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Cyprus in the 1930s. British Colonial Rule and the Roots of the Cyprus Conflict

and was orchestrated in Britain’ – which, he concedes ‘must serve to modify, to an extent at any rate, the image of Britain as an essentially and predominantly “imperialist” country’ (p. 70). In discussing changes made in imperial policy, the author looks at the British Colonial Office decision to take Jamaica away from white settlers who had run it previously and return it to direct British rule. He makes the fair point that the same thing should probably have been done in the case of (Southern) Rhodesia in the 1960s ‘but was thought to be too difficult at the time’ (p. 77). This is a good illustration of failure to deal with racist policies – which has had serious implications. An important feature of the book – and in the view of this reviewer a great weakness – is the attitude which the author has towards the Commonwealth. One example of this is what he describes as ‘the myth of a “liberal” empire that was created around the time of World War 1 – the “Commonwealth”’, which he calls a clever way of adapting to liberal progress (p. 134). The author is against imperialism, and he makes a good case for this view. His case against the Commonwealth, which he declares strongly, is in the view of this reviewer badly argued and essentially unrealistic.