Who is the most Evil individual from the 20th century ?

[Scalieback]

You may like these:

India is a geographical term. It is no more a united nation than the equator.

A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.

Once in a while you will stumble upon the truth but most of us manage to pick ourselves up and hurry along as if nothing had happened.

Then again, you may not ....

 

[Bangalorean]

You're still whinging on about the Brits sixty five years later? Oh dear.

Was it our fault you decided to spend money on defence and space programmes rather than starvation, malnutrition etc?

Get over it and stop blaming Britain for your ills. Wake up and take responsibility for your own actions.

India wouldn't exist. You'd still be fighting your own little wars between the states, that is if you hadn't been conquered by the Portugese, French or Japanese. Maybe even the Chinese or Russians.

Grow up and act like the proud country with a great history you are.

I agree that the Brits cannot be blamed for India's current problems. The Brits could have been blamed in the 1950s, or even the 1960s at most. 25 years is enough time for a nation to pick up and shake its problems off. The fact that it did not happen, is entirely due to the flawed economic policies of early quasi-socialist Indian leaders.

But then, there is one thing about online Brits that I detest. It makes me want to smash in the face of the Brits I meet on the internet.

Their obsession with how much money India has "wasted" on things like space program and such stuff, and how Brit "aid" "finances these things". I don't understand whether online Brits are mathematically and economically illiterate, or whether they say such stuff deliberately to rile us up.

According to online Briturds, India should "know its place", and spend money "only on the poor". These Briturds need to have some sense kicked into them. Tell me, what does India do with the Masters graduates and the PhDs that pass out of Indian universities? Send them back to the ----ing slums? Or send them to the West, as has been the case throughout the latter half of the last century? According to Briturds, anything hi-tech or cutting-edge that India does is a "waste" - after all, India is "poor", so India should constantly, for eternity, spend money on the poor. ----ing idiotic Briturds.

Maybe you need to learn something about India's post-independence history and economic policies, instead of being a typical Briturd by blaming India's "waste of money on space program and nukes" for India's poverty.

 

[Scalieback]

I agree that the Brits cannot be blamed for India's current problems. The Brits could have been blamed in the 1950s, or even the 1960s at most. 25 years is enough time for a nation to pick up and shake its problems off. The fact that it did not happen, is entirely due to the flawed economic policies of early quasi-socialist Indian leaders.

We had the same discussion on Arrse

But then, there is one thing about online Brits that I detest. It makes me want to smash in the face of the Brits I meet on the internet.

Oh dear, are you an internet hard man? Should I be scared?

Their obsession with how much money India has "wasted" on things like space program and such stuff, and how Brit "aid" "finances these things". I don't understand whether online Brits are mathematically and economically illiterate, or whether they say such stuff deliberately to rile us up.

You'll know I've answered that point on other sites. I couldn't care less what India spends its hard earned money on. Just don't say we're at fault for something that took place over sixty five years ago. However, if you do say it's Briatin's fault I'll quite happily ask why you decided to spend money on things other than your poor.

As for Brit aid, it's nothing compared to your GDP. Our beef is with our Govt and frankly if India can't spend the money on vaccines, why should we? Britain should stop the aid imo, but that's a matter for politicians.

According to online Briturds, India should "know its place", and spend money "only on the poor". These Briturds need to have some sense kicked into them. Tell me, what does India do with the Masters graduates and the PhDs that pass out of Indian universities? Send them back to the ----ing slums? Or send them to the West, as has been the case throughout the latter half of the last century? According to Briturds, anything hi-tech or cutting-edge that India does is a "waste" - after all, India is "poor", so India should constantly, for eternity, spend money on the poor. ----ing idiotic Briturds.

Some Brits feel like that. Should I call you an Indiarse? Sticks and stones and all that .....

Maybe you need to learn something about India's post-independence history and economic policies, instead of being a typical Briturd by blaming India's "waste of money on space program and nukes" for India's poverty.

I didn't blame India's 'waste of money on space programme and nukes'.' If you read very carefully, you'll see I used it as an example of how India has spent the money since '47 in response to India's poor being Britain's fault. If you decide to spend the money on the poor fine. If you decide to spend the money on a space programme and nukes, so be it. But don't say it's Britains fault for your starving. It's your money, do with it as you wish.

 

[balai_c]

Starvation in India due to famines was a trademark of the British rule, it has stopped as soon as Indians have attained freedom. Starvation deaths was a signature of British Raj . 1878 great famine was by far the deadliest in 5000 years of Indian history.

Great Famine of 1876

The Great Famine of 1876–1878 (also the Southern India famine of 1876–78 or the Madras famine of 1877) was a famine in colonial India in 1876-1878 that killed between 6 and 10 million people, and affected 58.5 million others. Starting in south and southwestern India, it spread to the North. It is also called the Dhatu varusha pancham (Tamil: famine of the dhatu varasha = year in the Tamil calendar). Initially affecting the administrative areas of Madras Presidency, Mysore, Hyderabad, and Bombay Presidency, in its second year the famine also spread north to some regions of the Central Provinces and the United Provinces of Agra and Oudh, and to a small area in Punjab.[1] The famine ultimately covered an area of 257,000 square miles (670,000 km2). [1]
Contents

The mortality in the famine was exceedingly high; in the British areas alone, 5.25 to 5.5 million people died of starvation or disease.[1][13] Estimates of total famine related deaths vary. The following table gives the varying estimates of famine related deaths.[14]

he excessive mortality of the Great Famine and the renewed questions of "relief and protection" that were asked in its wake, led directly to the constituting of the Famine Commission of 1880 and to the eventual adoption of the Provisional Famine Code in British India.[12] After the famine, a large number of agricultural laborers and handloom weavers in South India emigrated to British tropical colonies to work as indentured laborers in plantations.[15] The excessive mortality in the famine also neutralized the natural population growth in the Bombay and Madras presidencies during the decade between the first and second censuses of British India in 1871 and 1881 respectively.[16]

The famine lives on in the Tamil and other literary traditions. A large number of Kummi folk songs describing this famine have been documented.[17]

British rule in India is also known for one more social evil:illiteracy.

Prior to the British era, India had its own system of education called Gurukul. However, due to the decline of Indian economy during the british rule[citation needed] there was a slow decline of gurukuls which depended largely on donations.

The British started a new style of education which was hugely inappropriate to the Indian condition. Children who usually took part leave during ripening season to help their parents were considered undisciplined. The mess created by British led to steady decline of the literacy rate of India. The following stats available however of the English educated Indians. Between 1881-82 and 1946–47, the number of English primary schools grew from 82,916 to 134,866 and the number of students in English Schools grew from 2,061,541 to 10,525,943. Literacy rates in accordance to British in India rose from 3.2 per cent in 1881 to 7.2 per cent in 1931 and 12.2 per cent in 1947.[2]

In 2000-01, there were 60,840 pre-primary and pre-basic schools, and 664,041 primary and junior basic schools.[32] Total enrollment at the primary level has increased from 19,200,000 in 1950-51 to 109,800,000 in 2001-02.[33] The number of high schools in 2000-01 was higher than the number of primary schools at the time of independence.[2][32]

In 1944, the Government of British India presented a plan, called the Sergeant Scheme for the educational reconstruction of India, with a goal of producing 100% literacy in the country within 40 years, i.e. by 1984.[34] Although the 40 year time-frame was derided at the time by leaders of the Indian independence movement as being too long a period to achieve universal literacy,[34] India had only just crossed the 74% level by the 2011 census.

So, in short , we have cleaned up the mess the British had left behind after their "benevolent,glorious" rule of 190 years in little more than 65 years.

 

[Scalieback]

Starvation in India due to famines was a trademark of the British rule, it has stopped as soon as Indians have attained freedom. Starvation deaths was a signature of British Raj . 1878 great famine was by far the deadliest in 5000 years of Indian history.

Great Famine of 1876

British rule in India is also known for one more social evil:illiteracy.

So, in short , we have cleaned up the mess the British had left behind after their "benevolent,glorious" rule of 190 years in little more than 65 years.

Good, well done.

Lets discuss how rail, air and road traffic make things a little easier to do in 1950 than 1850. After all, there was the Berlin airlift. How about communications? Sending morse messages over wires, despatch riders, heliographs, flags.

Different times, different logistics, different communications.

I suppose this is Britains fault as well? http://articles.timesofindia.indiat...obal-hunger-index-food-insecurity-india-ranks

 

[Bangalorean]

Oh dear, are you an internet hard man? Should I be scared?

Frankly, I'm sorry that this is just the internet - some of the annoying online Brits I see, certainly need a few minutes of treatment in a dark alley with a sack over their face. The attitude really stinks.

But like you said, it is just the internet, so we'll let that be.

Just don't say we're at fault for something that took place over sixty five years ago. However, if you do say it's Briatin's fault I'll quite happily ask why you decided to spend money on things other than your poor.

I didn't blame India's 'waste of money on space programme and nukes'.' If you read very carefully, you'll see I used it as an example of how India has spent the money since '47 in response to India's poor being Britain's fault. If you decide to spend the money on the poor fine. If you decide to spend the money on a space programme and nukes, so be it. But don't say it's Britains fault for your starving. It's your money, do with it as you wish.

The Brits cannot be blamed for India's current problems. I already said so. But it is only fair to blame the Brits for looting the nation in the years of colonialism. That is "history" - that is the truth. Saying that the Brits looted India is as fair as saying that Stalin was a mass-murderer.

Anyway, you seem to have a poor knowledge of economics, like most online Brits. You cannot shake off the idea that it is "either-or" - either "spend money on the poor", or "spend money on space". Firstly, "spend money on the poor" is the most silly thing I have ever heard, from an economic standpoint. Maybe you think money should be distributed by the Indian government to the "poor people in the slums"? Reminds my of myself when I was a little kid - I used to wonder why the government doesn't just print money and distribute it to all the poor people in the country.

Huh - anyway, I digress.

The most evil individual in the last century IMO, was Stalin. I voted for him.

 

[Scalieback]

Frankly, I'm sorry that this is just the internet - some of the annoying online Brits I see, certainly need a few minutes of treatment in a dark alley with a sack over their face. The attitude really stinks.

But like you said, it is just the internet, so we'll let that be.

Oh dear, is this you?

PM me when you're due in the UK

The Brits cannot be blamed for India's current problems. I already said so. But it is only fair to blame the Brits for looting the nation in the years of colonialism. That is "history" - that is the truth. Saying that the Brits looted India is as fair as saying that Stalin was a mass-murderer.

It is and when India conquers Britain feel free to have your pick of baubles and whatever wealth we have left

Anyway, you seem to have a poor knowledge of economics, like most online Brits. You cannot shake off the idea that it is "either-or" - either "spend money on the poor", or "spend money on space". Firstly, "spend money on the poor" is the most silly thing I have ever heard, from an economic standpoint. Maybe you think money should be distributed by the Indian government to the "poor people in the slums"? Reminds my of myself when I was a little kid - I used to wonder why the government doesn't just print money and distribute it to all the poor people in the country.

Hmm, instead of allocating XXM rupees on defence you spend XXM rupees on on social welfare. It's not rocket science. ICBM's are, but social welfare programmes aren't.

Huh - anyway, I digress.

The most evil individual in the last century IMO, was Stalin. I voted for him.

We actually have something in common

 

[balai_c]

England, or should I say British Empire has a record in converting the planet's 2nd richest country to the world's poorest. So, yes, that indeed is quite an achievement alright! Bravo! Congrats!!

 

[Scalieback]

England, or should I say British Empire has a record in converting the planet's 2bd richest country to the world's poorest. So, yes, that indeed is quite an achievement alright! Bravo! Congrats!!

Oh dear, you're not reeling out that tired old adage about how India had 20% (or was it 25%?) of the worlds trade in 1700 are you?

Okay, a few points:

India didn't exist. The Indian sub continent was divided up by a number of rulers. Have a look at Tipu Sultan if you wish

Tipu's treatment of conquered subjects, non-Muslims, and prisoners of war, was controversial, and continues to be a subject of debate.

Feeding them to tigers IIRC

The Indian sub continents share of global wealth in 1700 compared to the share of global wealth of say America in 1700? I suppose that's Britains fault as well?

When you conquer a country I'm sure you'll let all of the population crack on and live exactly as they did before and let them do with their mineral wealth as they wish? Doesn't happen that way as history shows us. Yes, Britain used India's resources same as all of the other colonial powers used theirs.

When the Mughals (Mongols) conquered India, did they act like that?

As i've said before and will say again, I am grateful for the contribution made by India in two World Wars and in other fighting.

 

[amitkriit]

Oh dear, you're not reeling out that tired old adage about how India had 20% (or was it 25%?) of the worlds trade in 1700 are you?

Okay, a few points:

India didn't exist. The Indian sub continent was divided up by a number of rulers. Have a look at Tipu Sultan if you wish


Feeding them to tigers IIRC

The Indian sub continents share of global wealth in 1700 compared to the share of global wealth of say America in 1700? I suppose that's Britains fault as well?

When you conquer a country I'm sure you'll let all of the population crack on and live exactly as they did before and let them do with their mineral wealth as they wish? Doesn't happen that way as history shows us. Yes, Britain used India's resources same as all of the other colonial powers used theirs.

When the Mughals (Mongols) conquered India, did they act like that?

As i've said before and will say again, I am grateful for the contribution made by India in two World Wars and in other fighting.

That doesn't change anything, those Indians were fools, who fought others' war, I call them militia who fought under duress or for money. I cannot differentiate between those soldiers who fought and died in world wars and those who fought on the side of Britishers against their own countrymen during 1987 and inside the Jalianwala Park. Those "Indian" soldiers ensured British presence over our soil. Even if Hitler was killing Jews in Germany and bombing London, that was none of our problem, particularly when our own people were starving to death during the same period. Charity begins at home. I am sure we have learned a few lessons.

 

[niharjhatn]

ndia is a geographical term. It is no more a united nation than the equator.

Love that quote.

That's what happens when a sham government is installed by a declining power whose gesture as a final screw you was to cut up the pieces of the pie and let the idiots squabble over the sizes.

I'd much rather have a French-styled revolution and the right to democracy fought for and bled for so that people know what its worth.

Coz right the now the idiots we have in charge are not worth dying for. And half the people don't even understand what democracy is.

Quite ironic that you highlight the Chinese issue when it was under british rule that the border problem cropped up.

Yeah, Britain has had a great legacy in India. Like Mussolini, they made our trains run on time!!

 

[Scalieback]

That doesn't change anything, those Indians were fools, who fought others' war, I call them militia who fought under duress or for money. I cannot differentiate between those soldiers who fought and died in world wars and those who fought on the side of Britishers against their own countrymen during 1987 and inside the Jalianwala Park. Those "Indian" soldiers ensured British presence over our soil. Even if Hitler was killing Jews in Germany and bombing London, that was none of our problem, particularly when our own people were starving to death during the same period. Charity begins at home. I am sure we have learned a few lessons.

1987? I think you mean 1897 Whatever your view on them, I'm still grateful for their help and service.

 

[Scalieback]

Love that quote.

That's what happens when a sham government is installed by a declining power whose gesture as a final screw you was to cut up the pieces of the pie and let the idiots squabble over the sizes.

I'd much rather have a French-styled revolution and the right to democracy fought for and bled for so that people know what its worth.

Coz right the now the idiots we have in charge are not worth dying for. And half the people don't even understand what democracy is.

Quite ironic that you highlight the Chinese issue when it was under british rule that the border problem cropped up.

Yeah, Britain has had a great legacy in India. Like Mussolini, they made our trains run on time!!

I thought you had democracy in India? I'm pretty sure Gandhi was voted for as well. Still, keep blaming the Brits, always a good and popular line to follow rather than face the truth

 

[Nagraj]

Lol !
brit vs indian internet wars!

 

[trackwhack]

Brit hate, mentioning Arrse or what?

show me where I keep posting about brits. dont be evasive with your response.

 

[Sakal Gharelu Ustad]

So, the moderators opened the poll again for more Churchill bashing!!

May be we can let people cast multiple votes to reflect the intensity!

 

[Nagraj]

By no stech of imagination nehru's gov was sham gov.
i am no nehru lover in these matters but deocracy is one thing which flourished under nehru.
if you think contrary is true do point out aother third world country where there were no military rules

Love that quote.

That's what happens when a sham government is installed by a declining power whose gesture as a final screw you was to cut up the pieces of the pie and let the idiots squabble over the sizes.

I'd much rather have a French-styled revolution and the right to democracy fought for and bled for so that people know what its worth.

Coz right the now the idiots we have in charge are not worth dying for. And half the people don't even understand what democracy is.

Quite ironic that you highlight the Chinese issue when it was under british rule that the border problem cropped up.

Yeah, Britain has had a great legacy in India. Like Mussolini, they made our trains run on time!!

 

[nrj]

Why there is reluctance to accept that Churchill was a bastard like many British rulers who ruthlessly exploited Indians beyond all limits only to raise his stature back home while standing on the countless dead bodies ?

Is British nationalistic feeling fueled by degree of monstrous remorselessness shown by its leaders towards subjects far in colonies?

 

[Scalieback]

show me where I keep posting about brits. dont be evasive with your response.

From memory, bearing in mind how much I've answered in one day, your response was 'where ...' in bold.

My post is asking for you to clarify what it was you were 'where...'ing about. Brit hate, mentioning Arrse or what?

I'm not being evasive at all. I'm trying to clarify what you meant by 'where .....'? Is that clear enough?

Edit: I've deleted 'what...' above and inserted 'where...' as I found the post.

Further edit as it was in response to this

They're so insignificant, and yet you keep posting about them. Hmm... Reminded of their place? Where would that be then? Go on, post it

I was talking about Arrse, but just to be sure, are you?

 

[Scalieback]

Lol !
brit vs indian internet wars!

One Brit v ..............