Reasons that contributed to Partition

Discussion in 'Subcontinent & Central Asia' started by bengalraider, Aug 23, 2015.

  1. bengalraider

    bengalraider DFI Technocrat Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2009
    Messages:
    3,688
    Likes Received:
    2,173
    Location:
    in a fast food joint next to the imperial shipyard
    There is only one benefit to India I would list as explicitly occuring due to British activities and that is the creation of the modern Indian state from the amalgam of princely states it otherwise would have been!
     
    pmaitra likes this.
  2.  
  3. pmaitra

    pmaitra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    31,640
    Likes Received:
    17,124
    Location:
    EST, USA
    Yes, I agree. I think this is a byproduct, and I believe the British never wished India to remain united. Divide and Rule was their policy. Please keep in mind their role in Partition and how they played one group against the other in the years prior to Partition.
     
  4. bengalraider

    bengalraider DFI Technocrat Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2009
    Messages:
    3,688
    Likes Received:
    2,173
    Location:
    in a fast food joint next to the imperial shipyard
    Partition can be attributed to the sheer political hardheadedness of Nehru far more than any ambition of the British. Not to mention the mollycoddling Nehru got where his sheer stupidity was preferred more than the genius of a Khan Abdul gaffar khan by Gandhi.
     
  5. pmaitra

    pmaitra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    31,640
    Likes Received:
    17,124
    Location:
    EST, USA
    I don't see it that way. Nehru was one reason. He wasn't the main reason. The main reason was the British favouring one over the other, and then switching sides back and forth. Perhaps we can discuss it in an appropriate thread.
     
  6. bengalraider

    bengalraider DFI Technocrat Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2009
    Messages:
    3,688
    Likes Received:
    2,173
    Location:
    in a fast food joint next to the imperial shipyard
    In fact I concur we should have a moderator run thread on this.
    However there were numerous Muslim heavyweights like the frontier Gandhi who were opposed to partition among them the names of Allah baksh and Abul kalam azad stand out. One should also remember Habibur rehman who served Netaji Bose and opposed partition till the very end.
    The British supported the Muslim league and Nehru supported that support for he realized that without Jinnah to contend with his mediocrity as the first Indian PM would be far less exposed.
     
  7. pmaitra

    pmaitra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    31,640
    Likes Received:
    17,124
    Location:
    EST, USA
    Great idea. I have forked a thread.

    Back to discussion: Yes, I agree, Nehru was mediocre compared to Jinnah, and moreover, he appeared to have a hand over his head guiding him in a way to make him look good in the eyes of the people. If you recall, Nehru was the lawyer defending the INA generals, who were eventually sentenced but de facto acquitted. This to me looks like a well scripted farce.
     
    Last edited: Aug 23, 2015
  8. Rowdy

    Rowdy Co ja kurwa czytam! Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2014
    Messages:
    3,256
    Likes Received:
    2,959
    Location:
    Milky Bar
    Whatever but partition was the best thing to happen. If anything I'd say it was incomplete. :lol:
     
    blueblood likes this.

Share This Page