Reasons that contributed to Partition

[bengalraider]

@Basileos Menandrou,

Welcome to DFI, and please introduce yourself by opening a thread in the Introductions & Greetings section.

Coming back to your post, thank you. It is one of those typically scripted contents that has been repeated time and again that it no longer has much effect on Indians except for elucidating a sense of derision. The harm the British have done to India far exceeds whatever benefit that India might have received as a byproduct of self centred British activities, and not by design. The feelings that you find reprehensible, are probably quite justified to others, just like Greek sentiments towards the Turks is also justified. Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion. Apropos the British, the fact remains, good riddance to bad rubbish.

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]

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!

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.

 

[bengalraider]

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.

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.

 

[pmaitra]

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.

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.

 

[bengalraider]

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.

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.

 

[pmaitra]

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.

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.

 

[Rowdy]

Whatever but partition was the best thing to happen. If anything I'd say it was incomplete.

 

[Rubaroo]

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.

They are doing it even today.