What's new

The Bengal Famine: How the British engineered the worst genocide in human history for profit

dray

BANNED
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
10,853
Reaction score
-1
Country
India
Location
India
The Bengal Famine: How the British engineered the worst genocide in human history for profit
Rakhi Chakraborty

“I hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion. The famine was their own fault for breeding like rabbits.” -Winston Churchill

The British had a ruthless economic agenda when it came to operating in India and that did not include empathy for native citizens. Under the British Raj, India suffered countless famines. But the worst hit was Bengal. The first of these was in 1770, followed by severe ones in 1783, 1866, 1873, 1892, 1897 and lastly 1943-44. Previously, when famines had hit the country, indigenous rulers were quick with useful responses to avert major disasters. After the advent of the British, most of the famines were a consequence of monsoonal delays along with the exploitation of the country’s natural resources by the British for their own financial gain. Yet they did little to acknowledge the havoc these actions wrought. If anything, they were irritated at the inconveniences in taxing the famines brought about.



The first of these famines was in 1770 and was ghastly brutal. The first signs indicating the coming of such a huge famine manifested in 1769 and the famine itself went on till 1773. It killed approximately 10 million people, millions more than the Jews incarcerated during the Second World War. It wiped out one third the population of Bengal. John Fiske, in his book “The Unseen World”, wrote that the famine of 1770 in Bengal was far deadlier than the Black Plague that terrorized Europe in the fourteenth century. Under the Mughal rule, peasants were required to pay a tribute of 10-15 per cent of their cash harvest. This ensured a comfortable treasury for the rulers and a wide net of safety for the peasants in case the weather did not hold for future harvests. In 1765 the Treaty of Allahabad was signed and East India Company took over the task of collecting the tributes from the then Mughal emperor Shah Alam II. Overnight the tributes, the British insisted on calling them tributes and not taxes for reasons of suppressing rebellion, increased to 50 percent. The peasants were not even aware that the money had changed hands. They paid, still believing that it went to the Emperor.



Partial failure of crop was quite a regular occurrence in the Indian peasant’s life. That is why the surplus stock, which remained after paying the tributes, was so important to their livelihood. But with the increased taxation, this surplus deteriorated rapidly. When partial failure of crops came in 1768, this safety net was no longer in place. The rains of 1769 were dismal and herein the first signs of the terrible draught began to appear. The famine occurred mainly in the modern states of West Bengal and Bihar but also hit Orissa, Jharkhand and Bangladesh. Bengal was, of course, the worst hit. Among the worst affected areas were Birbum and Murshidabad in Bengal. Thousands depopulated the area in hopes of finding sustenance elsewhere, only to die of starvation later on. Those who stayed on perished nonetheless. Huge acres of farmland were abandoned. Wilderness started to thrive here, resulting in deep and inhabitable jungle areas. Tirhut, Champaran and Bettiah in Bihar were similarly affected in Bihar.

Prior to this, whenever the possibility of a famine had emerged, the Indian rulers would waive their taxes and see compensatory measures, such as irrigation, instituted to provide as much relief as possible to the stricken farmers. The colonial rulers continued to ignore any warnings that came their way regarding the famine, although starvation had set in from early 1770. Then the deaths started in 1771. That year, the company raised the land tax to 60 per cent in order to recompense themselves for the lost lives of so many peasants. Fewer peasants resulted in less crops that in turn meant less revenue. Hence the ones who did not yet succumb to the famine had to pay double the tax so as to ensure that the British treasury did not suffer any losses during this travesty.

After taking over from the Mughal rulers, the British had issued widespread orders for cash crops to be cultivated. These were intended to be exported. Thus farmers who were used to growing paddy and vegetables were now being forced to cultivate indigo, poppy and other such items that yielded a high market value for them but could be of no relief to a population starved of food. There was no backup of edible crops in case of a famine. The natural causes that had contributed to the draught were commonplace. It was the single minded motive for profit that wrought about the devastating consequences. No relief measure was provided for those affected. Rather, as mentioned above, taxation was increased to make up for any shortfall in revenue. What is more ironic is that the East India Company generated a profited higher in 1771 than they did in 1768.




Although the starved populace of Bengal did not know it yet, this was just the first of the umpteen famines, caused solely by the motive for profit, that was to slash across the country side. Although all these massacres were deadly in their own right, the deadliest one to occur after 1771 was in 1943 when three million people died and others resorted to eating grass and human flesh in order to survive.



Winston Churchill, the hallowed British War prime minister who saved Europe from a monster like Hitler was disturbingly callous about the roaring famine that was swallowing Bengal’s population. He casually diverted the supplies of medical aid and food that was being dispatched to the starving victims to the already well supplied soldiers of Europe. When entreated upon he said, “Famine or no famine, Indians will breed like rabbits.” The Delhi Government sent a telegram painting to him a picture of the horrible devastation and the number of people who had died. His only response was, “Then why hasn’t Gandhi died yet?”


Winston Churchill



This Independence Day it is worthwhile to remember that the riches of the west were built on the graves of the East. While we honour the brave freedom fighters (as we should), it is victims like these, the ones sacrificed without a moment’s thought, who paid the ultimate price. Shed a tear in their memory and strive to make the most of this hard won independence that we take for granted today. Pledge to stand up those whose voice the world refuses to hear because they are too lowly to matter. To be free is a great privilege. But as a great superhero once said, “With great freedom comes great responsibility.”

The Bengal Famine: How the British engineered the worst genocide in human history for profit
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some of the photos are too horrific to post here, readers can check the Google link: bengal famine - Google Search
.
 
There was a mention about this Bengal famine in Shashi Tharoor's Oxford Union speech!

Winston Churchill, the hallowed British War prime minister who saved Europe from a monster like Hitler was disturbingly callous about the roaring famine that was swallowing Bengal’s population. He casually diverted the supplies of medical aid and food that was being dispatched to the starving victims to the already well supplied soldiers of Europe. When entreated upon he said, “Famine or no famine, Indians will breed likerabbits.” The DelhiGovernment sent a telegram painting to him a picture of the horrible devastation and the number of people who had died. His only response was, “Then why hasn’t Gandhi died yet?”

How arrogant & nasty one can get? :o:
 
India never mentions the good things we did, only focus on the negatives, without us there wouldn't be any modern India as we know it today. Even if it did, it will be farrrrr smaller or made of several different independent countries/states from oriental north eastern states of arunachal pradesh/manipur etc who would have been independent or part of china/Burma to Kashmir, khalistan/punjab, Maoist areas etc. Etc.
All these kingdoms/states would not have been part of India today without our rule. we unified India and established a central government/authority with laws and regulations, modernized the army/military, built the worlds most extensive railways to bring the country closer and established a unifying national language. So Indians should also mention all the many good deeds we did, not just the bad ones.
Though i'm not justifying the above unwarranted actions of Churchill.
 
Last edited:
India never mentions the good things we did, only focus on the negatives, without us there wouldnt be any modern India as we know it today. Even if it did, it will be farrrrr smaller or made of several different independent countries/states from oriental north eastern states of aeunachal pradesh/manipur etc who would have been independent or part of china/burma to kashmir, khalistan/punjab, maoist areas etc. Etc.
All these kingdoms/states would not have been part of india today without our rule. we unigied india and established a central government/authority with laws and regulations, modernuized the army/military, built the worlds most extensive railways to bring the country closer and established a unifying natuonsl languagd. So indians should also mention all the many good deeds we did, not just the bad ones.
Though im not justifying rhe above unwaeranted actions of churchill.
Dude you broke your keyboard.
 
India never mentions the good things we did, only focus on the negatives, without us there wouldnt be any modern India as we know it today. Even if it did, it will be farrrrr smaller or made of several different independent countries/states from oriental north eastern states of aeunachal pradesh/manipur etc who would have been independent or part of china/burma to kashmir, khalistan/punjab, maoist areas etc. Etc.
All these kingdoms/states would not have been part of india today without our rule. we unigied india and established a central government/authority with laws and regulations, modernuized the army/military, built the worlds most extensive railways to bring the country closer and established a unifying natuonsl languagd. So indians should also mention all the many good deeds we did, not just the bad ones.
Though im not justifying rhe above unwaeranted actions of churchill.
Countries Compared by Economy > GDP per capita in 1950. International Statistics at NationMaster.com
Countries Compared by Economy > GDP per capita. International Statistics at NationMaster.com
Look at these statistics on GDP per capita in 1950 versus today.
No statistics on Britain in 1950 but lets assume our living standards were roughly the same as France
1950
India
$597.00
France
$5,221.00
2012
India
$1,489.24
Britain
$38,514.46
It's pretty clear that the differences in living standards that exist today cannot be explained by colonialism.
 
Countries Compared by Economy > GDP per capita in 1950. International Statistics at NationMaster.com
Countries Compared by Economy > GDP per capita. International Statistics at NationMaster.com
Look at these statistics on GDP per capita in 1950 versus today.
No statistics on Britain in 1950 but lets assume our living standards were roughly the same as France
1950
India
$597.00
France
$5,221.00
2012
India
$1,489.24
Britain
$38,514.46
It's pretty clear that the differences in living standards that exist today cannot be explained by colonialism.
A young man murdered his parents. When he was supposed to be sentenced he requested the judge to spare him of harsh punishment as he was an orphan.:angry:

Sell your crappy theory among your own elk. Even after looting and killing half the world, "little britain" is still a poor country. Even if british loot 10 earth planets, they will still be greedy barbarian butchers.
 
A young man murdered his parents. When he was supposed to be sentenced he requested the judge to spare him of harsh punishment as he was an orphan.:angry:

Sell your crappy theory among your own elk. Even after looting and killing half the world, "little britain" is still a poor country. Even if british loot 10 earth planets, they will still be greedy barbarian butchers.
Not a theory. It's fact.
 
India never mentions the good things we did, only focus on the negatives, without us there wouldn't be any modern India as we know it today. Even if it did, it will be farrrrr smaller or made of several different independent countries/states from oriental north eastern states of arunachal pradesh/manipur etc who would have been independent or part of china/Burma to Kashmir, khalistan/punjab, Maoist areas etc. Etc.
All these kingdoms/states would not have been part of India today without our rule. we unified India and established a central government/authority with laws and regulations, modernized the army/military, built the worlds most extensive railways to bring the country closer and established a unifying national language. So Indians should also mention all the many good deeds we did, not just the bad ones.
Though i'm not justifying the above unwarranted actions of Churchill.
Rubbish... When we invented number system and zero, we weren't under British occupation. When we built a civilization with 25% of world's GDP, we weren't under british occupation. When Asoka built his empire from present Afghanistan to Burma, there were no british. The only thing british gave us was death and destruction.
 
India never mentions the good things we did, only focus on the negatives, without us there wouldn't be any modern India as we know it today. Even if it did, it will be farrrrr smaller or made of several different independent countries/states from oriental north eastern states of arunachal pradesh/manipur etc who would have been independent or part of china/Burma to Kashmir, khalistan/punjab, Maoist areas etc. Etc.
All these kingdoms/states would not have been part of India today without our rule. we unified India and established a central government/authority with laws and regulations, modernized the army/military, built the worlds most extensive railways to bring the country closer and established a unifying national language. So Indians should also mention all the many good deeds we did, not just the bad ones.
Though i'm not justifying the above unwarranted actions of Churchill.

The entire world was under monarchs and feudal lords before the concept of nation states came in, most parts of India was under some major ruler at different points in history, and India would have become a nation state like all other nation states without the so called 'help' of Britain. In fact, probably we would have been a much bigger nation and a far more peaceful region without the British 'help' of that communal divide & rule policy that divided the country in three parts through a horrifyingly painful process. Take the example of China, they also existed in different shapes and sizes under different rulers, sometimes at a fraction of its present size, but that didn't stop them from forming a big nation state.

And about the railway etc., it was done to facilitate British government, not Indians. And it would be laughable to say that without British we would not have a railway today, in fact, we would have far better infrastructure and quality of life today if our wealth was not looted by them. We have achieved quite a few things after our independence, I can list a few here if you want, but the point is we did all that without the so called 'help' of Britain, and from here we will only go forward.

Your argument for British colonial rule in India is like the thief who brought a ladder to enter a house and loot all its wealth, and then leaving behind the ladder, only to demand that the owner of the house should be thankful to him for the ladder.


Countries Compared by Economy > GDP per capita in 1950. International Statistics at NationMaster.com
Countries Compared by Economy > GDP per capita. International Statistics at NationMaster.com
Look at these statistics on GDP per capita in 1950 versus today.
No statistics on Britain in 1950 but lets assume our living standards were roughly the same as France
1950
India
$597.00
France
$5,221.00
2012
India
$1,489.24
Britain
$38,514.46
It's pretty clear that the differences in living standards that exist today cannot be explained by colonialism.

Certainly you have picked up wrong or incomplete data (I hope not deliberately). Check the two links from the same site for 1960 data (they don't have data to compare before that year). Let me know if you still don't get it. :)

United Kingdom Economy Stats: NationMaster.com

India Economy Stats: NationMaster.com

Also check this list below for 1960, somehow they didn't mention data for India there in 1960, but Bangladesh & Pakistan's figures are there, India's would be similar.

Countries Compared by Economy > GDP per capita. International Statistics at NationMaster.com

Clearly in percentage terms it's India that made much greater progress compared to UK after the end of colonial rule.

Not a theory. It's fact.

Turned out to be a fiction! :)
 
Last edited:
The Bengal Famine: How the British engineered the worst genocide in human history for profit
Rakhi Chakraborty

“I hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion. The famine was their own fault for breeding like rabbits.” -Winston Churchill

The British had a ruthless economic agenda when it came to operating in India and that did not include empathy for native citizens. Under the British Raj, India suffered countless famines. But the worst hit was Bengal. The first of these was in 1770, followed by severe ones in 1783, 1866, 1873, 1892, 1897 and lastly 1943-44. Previously, when famines had hit the country, indigenous rulers were quick with useful responses to avert major disasters. After the advent of the British, most of the famines were a consequence of monsoonal delays along with the exploitation of the country’s natural resources by the British for their own financial gain. Yet they did little to acknowledge the havoc these actions wrought. If anything, they were irritated at the inconveniences in taxing the famines brought about.



The first of these famines was in 1770 and was ghastly brutal. The first signs indicating the coming of such a huge famine manifested in 1769 and the famine itself went on till 1773. It killed approximately 10 million people, millions more than the Jews incarcerated during the Second World War. It wiped out one third the population of Bengal. John Fiske, in his book “The Unseen World”, wrote that the famine of 1770 in Bengal was far deadlier than the Black Plague that terrorized Europe in the fourteenth century. Under the Mughal rule, peasants were required to pay a tribute of 10-15 per cent of their cash harvest. This ensured a comfortable treasury for the rulers and a wide net of safety for the peasants in case the weather did not hold for future harvests. In 1765 the Treaty of Allahabad was signed and East India Company took over the task of collecting the tributes from the then Mughal emperor Shah Alam II. Overnight the tributes, the British insisted on calling them tributes and not taxes for reasons of suppressing rebellion, increased to 50 percent. The peasants were not even aware that the money had changed hands. They paid, still believing that it went to the Emperor.



Partial failure of crop was quite a regular occurrence in the Indian peasant’s life. That is why the surplus stock, which remained after paying the tributes, was so important to their livelihood. But with the increased taxation, this surplus deteriorated rapidly. When partial failure of crops came in 1768, this safety net was no longer in place. The rains of 1769 were dismal and herein the first signs of the terrible draught began to appear. The famine occurred mainly in the modern states of West Bengal and Bihar but also hit Orissa, Jharkhand and Bangladesh. Bengal was, of course, the worst hit. Among the worst affected areas were Birbum and Murshidabad in Bengal. Thousands depopulated the area in hopes of finding sustenance elsewhere, only to die of starvation later on. Those who stayed on perished nonetheless. Huge acres of farmland were abandoned. Wilderness started to thrive here, resulting in deep and inhabitable jungle areas. Tirhut, Champaran and Bettiah in Bihar were similarly affected in Bihar.

Prior to this, whenever the possibility of a famine had emerged, the Indian rulers would waive their taxes and see compensatory measures, such as irrigation, instituted to provide as much relief as possible to the stricken farmers. The colonial rulers continued to ignore any warnings that came their way regarding the famine, although starvation had set in from early 1770. Then the deaths started in 1771. That year, the company raised the land tax to 60 per cent in order to recompense themselves for the lost lives of so many peasants. Fewer peasants resulted in less crops that in turn meant less revenue. Hence the ones who did not yet succumb to the famine had to pay double the tax so as to ensure that the British treasury did not suffer any losses during this travesty.

After taking over from the Mughal rulers, the British had issued widespread orders for cash crops to be cultivated. These were intended to be exported. Thus farmers who were used to growing paddy and vegetables were now being forced to cultivate indigo, poppy and other such items that yielded a high market value for them but could be of no relief to a population starved of food. There was no backup of edible crops in case of a famine. The natural causes that had contributed to the draught were commonplace. It was the single minded motive for profit that wrought about the devastating consequences. No relief measure was provided for those affected. Rather, as mentioned above, taxation was increased to make up for any shortfall in revenue. What is more ironic is that the East India Company generated a profited higher in 1771 than they did in 1768.




Although the starved populace of Bengal did not know it yet, this was just the first of the umpteen famines, caused solely by the motive for profit, that was to slash across the country side. Although all these massacres were deadly in their own right, the deadliest one to occur after 1771 was in 1943 when three million people died and others resorted to eating grass and human flesh in order to survive.



Winston Churchill, the hallowed British War prime minister who saved Europe from a monster like Hitler was disturbingly callous about the roaring famine that was swallowing Bengal’s population. He casually diverted the supplies of medical aid and food that was being dispatched to the starving victims to the already well supplied soldiers of Europe. When entreated upon he said, “Famine or no famine, Indians will breed like rabbits.” The Delhi Government sent a telegram painting to him a picture of the horrible devastation and the number of people who had died. His only response was, “Then why hasn’t Gandhi died yet?”


Winston Churchill



This Independence Day it is worthwhile to remember that the riches of the west were built on the graves of the East. While we honour the brave freedom fighters (as we should), it is victims like these, the ones sacrificed without a moment’s thought, who paid the ultimate price. Shed a tear in their memory and strive to make the most of this hard won independence that we take for granted today. Pledge to stand up those whose voice the world refuses to hear because they are too lowly to matter. To be free is a great privilege. But as a great superhero once said, “With great freedom comes great responsibility.”

The Bengal Famine: How the British engineered the worst genocide in human history for profit
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some of the photos are too horrific to post here, readers can check the Google link: bengal famine - Google Search
.

Lol nice try buddy

Even one of our own most esteemed personalities - Nobel laureate amartya sen has unconditionally dismissed any explicit role of Churchill in creating the famine , in fact with his astute analysis he even argues how the victims were at fault for their own I'll faith. His theories are widely accepted and criticality acclaimed

I'd rather believe a Nobel laureate than some b grade blog writer
 
India should pay Britain for giving them a country, infrastructure, British legal system, English language.

Without Britain, there won't even be a country called India.

Britain did the greatest favour to Hindus by giving them a unified country under a central government for the first time in history.

Britain is the founder of India and every Indian should be grateful for the white man for that. India will forever be in debt to the Anglo-Saxon people because India is a creation of the Anglo-Saxon people. Hindus just happened to get the rewards from British creation.

No other group of people benefitted more from British colonial rule than Indians.
 
India should pay Britain for giving them a country, infrastructure, British legal system, English language.

Without Britain, there won't even be a country called India.

Britain did the greatest favour to Hindus by giving them a unified country under a central government for the first time in history.

Britain is the founder of India and every Indian should be grateful for the white man for that. India will forever be in debt to the Anglo-Saxon people because India is a creation of the Anglo-Saxon people. Hindus just happened to get the rewards from British creation.

No other group of people benefitted more from British colonial rule than Indians.
China should give Hong Kong back to UK so that it is not ruined like being done by china now...
 
deleted
 

Attachments

  • upload_2015-7-25_9-22-19.jpeg
    upload_2015-7-25_9-22-19.jpeg
    108.2 KB · Views: 22

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom