- Joined
- Apr 28, 2012
- Messages
- 7,114
- Likes
- 7,762
You need some objectivity lessons as well.No,India did not deserve the occupation.I am not defending the colonial rule.
But you have to look at history objectively from the context of that period and not from a polarising point of view.
British rule was neither good nor bad for India.British plundered the country black and blue but at the same time India owes it's existence to them.A large parts of India are part of the Indian union because of the British rule.
British did a lot of things in India for their own self interest but we ended up reaping the benefits.
Had UK not colonized us,we would have been surely colonized by even worse powers like Russia,Japan,Spain or Portugal.
Russia and Japan would have simply liquidated the population even at the sight of a simple protest,Ask the people living in andamans about what was the life under the Japanese rule.The later two would have imposed inquisition on us and would have eradicated India's ancient culture and things like Vedas,upanishads would have been lost to history.
Even if India had not been colonized,we would have been left to the perils of the Mughals,who would have ensured India's transformation to an Afghanistan type country.
Despite the partition,the British ensured smooth transition of power.In the Independence act of 1947,the kingdoms were left with the choice of joining either India or Pakistan,if suppose there had been a provision for third options like remaining independent,then India would not have been able to integrate into a single union that it is today. The kingdoms would have declared independence and would have gone directly to the UN who in turn would have legitimized their claims.
There were no worse powers, all of them were equally bad. Some less and some more depending on local conditions. Now coming to the liquidation part. Does artificial Bengal famine count as liquidation? But more than that, the reason that Indians did not get liquidated was because they produced a lot of wealth for their masters. Now why would you kill a golden goose? It was not a pre-meditated decision to let India keep its culture, but it was deeply rooted in benefits that Indian population provided. All the societies which get completely plundered had nothing better to offer to the imperialists. Just to clear up your head a bit further, look at the immigrant Indian workers sent to different British colonies. Reason- Indians are hard working and try to make best out of any situation.
What would have happened if India were not colonized is hardly a question to ponder over to justify British rule. May be India would have united under Marathas or Sikhs given that a lot of other countries too united themselves during this time. Anyway, it is childish to use what if statement here when it proves nothing.
British ensured such smooth transition that around a million people died during it while the white masters were sipping their tea in Delhi. The kingdoms joined India due to the efforts of Patel and their own insecurity regarding different matters. Not to forget the support of local people in these kingdoms who wanted to join India as well.
Last edited: