India, With or Without British Empire??

Discussion in 'Politics & Society' started by IBM, Nov 20, 2009.

  1. IBM

    IBM Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2009
    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    1
    Dear members,

    I would like your views on two points,

    Was British Empire good or bad for United India? Will India be as strong or weak as today, If britishers had not invaded India.

    Was partitions good or bad for India? specially after looking wat is happpening in pakistan and bangladesh.
     
  2.  
  3. S.A.T.A

    S.A.T.A Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2009
    Messages:
    1,804
    Likes Received:
    453
    Its a difficult and complicated question and there is possibly not a single answer to it.The exigencies of administering such a vast subcontinent forced the British to invest and develop in resources which eventually benefited the Indian nation state.However we must remember that if the tyranny of the raj was not oppressive our forefathers would not have spent their entire generation fighting to overthrow it.

    Now did it leave India strong or weak ?.......The success of the British in forging themselves as the numero uno political dispensation in the Indian subcontinent through the 19th century and the first half of the 20th must be inevitably be construed as an Indian failure.While British,thanks to new military innovations and concepts both in technology and tactics,gave them significant head start over domestic political entities,but what did the Indian power centers in was their lack of appreciation of the larger geo-political dynamics at play.

    To summarize the situation as chess game,the British maneuvered their strategy across chess board,Indian players where and acted like pieces fighting to retain its square.Eventually the strategy was headed for doom.

    A nation state is like human body,it takes an attack from foreign cells for it allow its immune system to develop the wherewithal's to defend against the invaders.The new Immune system eventually helps the body against other similar events in the future.The crisis precipitated by the British conquest eventually forced the Indian power state holders to see the larger picture and act in concert towards a common objective.While the first Indian war of Independence was criticized as lopsided and knee jerk reaction and not a national movement,but historian certainly realize that even though doomed to fail,it was still a concerted political effort cutting across political and regional boundaries and whose significance to the evolution of the peaceful freedom movement that took shape a few decades later cannot be underestimated.

    The idea of a Nation does not take root overnight,it is sum of all small(and big) and insignificant(and significant) social-cultural-political events that over the centuries forms a train of memories that collectively gives birth to a feeling of commonness and from commonness comes oneness....A Nation.

    The British played their ole as the did the Macedonians over 2300 years ago(and everyone that came between them)

    P.S:There is no doubt the partition of India was tragic and should not have happened,i feel its artificial and eventually the partition will be undone by the people of India(whichever country in the subcontinent they live in)
     
  4. kritivasas

    kritivasas New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2009
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    1
    :india:To answer this question we must first answer to three other questions. Was there a possibility of united india,if britishers didn't rule india?Would india be this much of technically advance as it is now(remember the technical revolution in india was brought by britishers)? Which reign didn't exploit india(even now it is being exploited!!)?
    My first question was about unity of india,we achieved it with pain of partition(because a few narrow minded gentlemen didn't agree to live and rule with each other),but still such a big country couldn't be created if britishers didn't rule india. In fact india was never unite before britishers came.
    Second question answers that up to some level britishers are responsible for making india technically advance,they didn't intend to do so,but we in order to fight with them acquired these tools(i mean germane technologies). If britishers didn't rule india, the industrial revolution in europe couldn't reach india so early.:viannen_51:
    Third question is about that india started loose its resources since the dark period only,not when britishers came but much before that. I don't say that they didn't exploit us,but as a whole ruling class always exploited indian resources.Even now,majority of resources are with 40 percent of indian population,60 percent is still being exploited.
    t:connie_running:

    As whole i say that british reign helped india to grow,but at the cost of huge losses.
    one more thing my english could be unbearable,so please pardon me. :Laie_46::Laie_22:
     
    W.G.Ewald likes this.
  5. The Messiah

    The Messiah Bow Before Me! Elite Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2010
    Messages:
    10,788
    Likes Received:
    4,552
    This mentality needs to be changed. For that to happen people to have know there own heritage rather than knowing history of last 200 years and thinking India was always like that.
     
    panduranghari, maomao and Tshering22 like this.
  6. Dovah

    Dovah Untermensch Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2011
    Messages:
    4,754
    Likes Received:
    3,273
    Location:
    Modindia
    There's no we we can teach history without offending the extremist brigade. Atleast we were ALL slaves for the last 200 years, people derive some twisted sense of unity from that misery, I pity them though.
     
  7. The Messiah

    The Messiah Bow Before Me! Elite Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2010
    Messages:
    10,788
    Likes Received:
    4,552
    Who cares about extremists ? extremists exist in every community and if you give them a voice and power then they'd run the whole community down the drain.
     
  8. pmaitra

    pmaitra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    31,663
    Likes Received:
    17,162
    Location:
    EST, USA
    We were not slaves for the last 200 years. Yes, there was discrimination. Indian soldiers in the British Indian Army were not promoted above a certain level. Many places had 'Europeans Only' boards. However, every Indian was free to work for the British Government or chose not to. So there was no slavery.



    We must afford a voice to every hue as long as these extremists don't try to stifle those voices that run counter to theirs.
     
  9. Dovah

    Dovah Untermensch Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2011
    Messages:
    4,754
    Likes Received:
    3,273
    Location:
    Modindia
    Slaves with benefits then.
     
  10. pmaitra

    pmaitra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    31,663
    Likes Received:
    17,162
    Location:
    EST, USA
    Depends how you define slavery. By slavery, I mean bonded labour. That, the British did not have in India. It did exist earlier. Think of Hazar Dinari. Well, he did benefit out of his slavery, didn't he?
     
  11. civfanatic

    civfanatic Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2009
    Messages:
    4,562
    Likes Received:
    2,526
    Location:
    తెలంగాణ
    Actually, bonded labour did not really exist in India either. The concept of a 'slave' was introduced by the Turkic and Afghan invaders in the 12th and 13th centuries; Hazar Dinari was one of those slaves (Mamluks).
     
  12. pmaitra

    pmaitra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    31,663
    Likes Received:
    17,162
    Location:
    EST, USA
    Well, I meant slavery existed in India earlier than the British era. You are right about what you said.
     
  13. ashicjose

    ashicjose Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2010
    Messages:
    399
    Likes Received:
    58
    Yes you are right but don't forget the good things- because of they we are united now,the military structure of our nation,they liberated us from Muslim rulers,by creating Pakistan they moved Muslim radicals ,they connected us through roads ,railway lines and airports,educational institutes, dams, factories etc etc
     
  14. LurkerBaba

    LurkerBaba Staff Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2010
    Messages:
    6,769
    Likes Received:
    3,678
    Location:
    India
    OT
    That is false. There were no Anglo-Mughal wars, however Anglo-Sikh and Anglo-Maratha wars happened.

    They didn't "liberate us" from Muslim rule, but destroyed the Sikh and Maratha Empires.
     
  15. KS

    KS Bye bye DFI Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2010
    Messages:
    8,008
    Likes Received:
    5,718
    Location:
    irrelevant
    Oh no not again *groan*

    1) They did not liberate us from Islamic invaders. The Marathas did it mostly and the Sikhs too played a part.
    2)We are united not because of British but because of Sardar Patel who integrated the 500 odd princely states into a political entity called India.
    3) Without the flight of resources from India to Britain we would have built the infra ourselves.

    Please why dont people study history instead of repeating the same old "Britain united us" BS over and over.
     
    panduranghari and Dovah like this.
  16. Armand2REP

    Armand2REP CHINI EXPERT Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,397
    Likes Received:
    2,314
    Britain, with or without Tea? :scared1:
     
  17. civfanatic

    civfanatic Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2009
    Messages:
    4,562
    Likes Received:
    2,526
    Location:
    తెలంగాణ
    British colonial rule was a huge blow to the development of India. The Industrial Revolution, which took place during this time and greatly improved the living standards of Europeans, was denied to India because of its colonial status. To make matters worse the British systematically destroyed the thriving cottage industries of pre-colonial India (which could have been used as a basis for an indigenous Industrial Revolution, as they had in Europe) by banning Indian goods throughout their empire, implementing heavy taxes, and forcing millions of Indians to grow cash crops for European markets. This colonial economic relationship between India and Britain effectively put India 100 years behind the West, a gap which we are now trying to close.

    The only Asian country which was able to successfully industrialize and compete with the Europeans during this time was Japan, thanks to the reforms of the Meiji Restoration starting in 1868. It should also be noted that Japan was the only Asian country to successfully resist European colonization, commercial exploitation, and political influence, prior to the Meiji Restoration and the occasion of Perry's "visit" to Japan.
     
    panduranghari and balai_c like this.
  18. KS

    KS Bye bye DFI Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2010
    Messages:
    8,008
    Likes Received:
    5,718
    Location:
    irrelevant
    I disagree. Unless the faith of the people living in those artificial entity changes and they re-enter their native faith, its best that artificial incision stays natural.
     
    jackprince likes this.
  19. ashicjose

    ashicjose Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2010
    Messages:
    399
    Likes Received:
    58
    1.You forget Tippu Sulthan.
    2. How you know Sardar Patel,why he limited his action only within british india.
    3.without them we would fight each other to death.
     
  20. KS

    KS Bye bye DFI Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2010
    Messages:
    8,008
    Likes Received:
    5,718
    Location:
    irrelevant
    One off case. In any case he was ruling a region the size of half of Karnataka. Hardly comparable to the Mughals.

    You point being ?

    No guarentee. Or in other case we would have seen a united India under the Marathas.
     
  21. SpArK

    SpArK SORCERER Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2010
    Messages:
    2,093
    Likes Received:
    1,104
    Location:
    KINGDOM OF TRAVANCORE
    Tippu was the biggest enemy for Kerala, he did ethnic cleansing and even renamed Calicut as Islamabad once.
     

Share This Page