And what is it about Indian culture that allows unsanitary conditions to be acceptable? I am listening...
Nothing. In fact, India was one of the first civilizations where bathing and personal hygiene were taken seriously. The current conditions are not caused by culture, but by socioeconomic realities.
Worse than the Muslim slaughter houses and the march to death for half of them getting there?
Yes.
Huh? The Indian economy was on steady decline since 1700. It was Auranjeb's disastrous campaigns and the constant war with Marathas that set up India's fall.
The Maratha Empire had the world's largest economy, even in the 18th century. Aurangzeb's campaigns did not change the fundamental economic groundwork of India, while the British Raj did.
The facts do not match your illusionary view of world history.
Comparing Golden Ages in modern terms, your comparison of Indian Golden Age to Europe while it was at its lowest point. All relevant when you are all over the time-lines yourself.
The 18th century was definitely not India's Golden Age, and the 18th century was definitely not Europe's lowest point.
India's Golden Age was the Gupta Empire. Europe's lowest point was the Dark Ages. Ironically, both events are more or less contemporaries of each other.
Do you really believe that?
The Doji bara famine caused 11 million deaths, what about the Chalisa famine... all under the Maratha.
Famine is a part of Indian weather cycles due to El Nino. I guess you going to blame the British for global warming too?
The specific example that I used was the Bengal Famine of 1770, which was a direct result of British policy.
Yes, the Marathas could not control the weather, which is why they were not responsible for the people that died in their land from famine.
Seriously guy, get over this victim mentality. The British don't control the weather.
I don't want to debate basic facts. Before you comment again, please do some reading on the Bengal Famine of 1770, and its causes. Also realize that there were many other famines that occurred during British rule as a result of British policy, rather than bad weather. More people died in that century than in any century prior or since. Was the weather really that unique to that paricular time period?
Like India was industrialised before the British got there?
More so than Europe at the time, yes.
India had numerous cottage industries that produced a wide variety of goods, of which the most popular were cotton textiles. The British effectively destroyed India's domestic industries by implementing high tariffs on Indian goods, and flooding Indian markets with European goods.
That's what colonialism is. Try understanding it. The British tried doing something similar with its American colonies, and that was one of the major causes of the American Revolution.
Interesting... India's share of world GDP during colonial India was anywhere from 10-4%. It has been 65 years since the British left and India's share today is down to 2.5%. You going to blame the British for the rest of the world's growth?
That doesn't even address my point.
The point is that India's economy plummeted
AFTER 1800, while it was under Company and later Crown Rule. Is that so hard to understand?
Not really, Indian share of global GDP declined because there was no real GDP coming out of the rest of the world. When Europe, America and the rest of the world got into the game it was a forgone conclusion a stagnant India was going to lose shares. Like I said before, 65 years since independence and India is still below their lowest colonial share.
Doesn't address my point.
Did you pull that off another Indian nationalist site? Every major civilisation developed a form of counting, even the Maya which clearly had no Indian influence.
Everyone in the world today uses the Indian system of counting, which is based on 10. The Mayan system was based on 20, and was certainly a great achievment, but it is used by no one in the modern world. Try again.
The Chinese abacus had more impact to mathematics than India.
Lol.
Name throwing Einstein is rather funny when he was no historian.
Einstein was a notable personality who was engaged in the sciences. He is qualified enough to make the statement. More so than you or I, in fact.
So I don't want to hear the terms 'NATO' and 'Western Aggression' in any more sentences.
Will using the terms "American aggression" and "French aggression" make you feel better?
Again, words are just there for convenience.
And what pray tell are you doing to advance that goal?
I am undergoing higher education to become a professional. India needs professionals if it wants to develop.