Last Monday, a spacious hall at the London School of Economics (LSE) was filled to capacity to hear Shashi Tharoor, the Congress MP, speak about his book Inglorious Empire (published in India as An Era of Darkness ), an excoriating and carefully chronicled account of the impact of British rule on India.

At the start of the event, a call by organisers for a show of hands from those who had gone to school in Britain revealed that just a few in the audience had done so. A follow-up question on who had studied the nation’s colonial history during that time left just a handful with hands up in the air, reinforcing a point Mr. Tharoor made in an interview on Britain’s Channel 4. “There is so much historical amnesia about what the empire really entailed,” he told anchor Jon Snow. Mr. Tharoor’s words ring true for Dr. Mukulika Banerjee, director of the LSE’s South Asia Centre, who moderated the event and later recalled the many times she had witnessed students expressing their shock when they learnt the details of colonial history over the course of their studies. For many, this involved anger too, as such an essential element of understanding the nation had been withheld from them. “It deprives them of so much. They don’t know how to decode so much of their history... And now they don’t know how to decode the forces that led to Brexit,” Dr. Banerjee said.

Britain has had an awkward relationship with its past. In 2010, Prime Minister David Cameron withstood pressure to apologise for the Jallianwala Bagh massacre during his visit to India. “The U.K. is one of the few countries in the EU that does not need to bury its 20th century history,” declared Liam Fox, a prominent campaigner for Brexit, several months before he became Britain’s Secretary of State for International Trade last year. Many have indeed celebrated its colonial history: historians such as Niall Ferguson have written proudly of the empire in books like How Britain Made the Modern World , while the theme of empire makes regular appearances in popular culture.

Greater scrutiny

There is, of course, a sizeable section of the population that is critical and aware. Last year, The Guardian ran a list — based on contributions from readers — of colonial atrocities, while at SOAS in London, there has been a recent student-led initiative to “decolonise” the curriculum. Still, a poll in early 2016 found that just 21% of people regretted the colonial history. Britain’s relationship with its past has come under greater scrutiny following the Brexit referendum, with some critics arguing that glorification of the empire had infused the campaign to exit the EU. Last weekend, The Times of London reported on efforts to build relations with African Commonwealth nations, dubbed “Empire 2.0” by disparaging officials, suggesting that there was a recognition of that mindset within the civil service at least.

The issue of Britain’s past may gain further scrutiny following the release last week of Viceroy’s House , which chronicles the last days before Indian independence and Partition. While it has faced criticism from some on its representation of the Independence struggle and its sympathetic portrayal of the Mountbattens, it “filled a gap in Britain’s cultural consciousness and cultural memory”, concluded The Economist . Colonial amnesia is something Britain has been able to wield to its advantage to date, says Dr. Banerjee. However, she notes, as Britain attempts to forge new relations with former colonies in particular, the need to involve itself and the public in a deeper conversation about the colonial past is likely to gain recognition.

Britain’s relationship with its colonial past has come under scrutiny following the Brexit vote, with some arguing that glorification of the empire had infused the Leave campaign