India - "Made in Britain"

[Levina]

I don't look at you as Indian.

Pls do....because I'm a proud Indian.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

I hope you know with every right comes a duty.
I know you dislike Indians but you had no right to say that India was "fathered" by British because remember Vasco De Gama and Columbus had gone looking for India???
But I guess you like being called the one who suffers from lalochezia.

Ciao

And some apparently found it in "West Indies"

Pls do....because I'm a proud Indian.

Request kindly denied .....

 

[patentneer]

This would otherwise be an interesting thread if the intention was not just trolling.

1. No doubt British east India company/ British government's adventures had a role in organization of political system of India the way it is today.

2. However it would be incorrect to say some company created India. What happened can better be termed as 'transfer of power.'

3. Thread creator's claim that British saved Hindus from Muslim is false and delusional and is the result of Upper caste Muslim and Pakistan military class's false perception of history. By 18th century Islamic era in India was already over.

3. Space for British intervention was created because Indian ruling class failed to unite and create a stable political system and administration.

4. It is Pakistan which was 'created' by British. So I suggest Pakistanis should do Puja or Sajda or whatever to the British masters and East India company.

5 thus in and attempt to ridicule India, thread creator has opened a thread that will end in Pakistan being ridiculed.

^^^

Re: above 1-5,

1. No doubt British east India company/ British government's adventures had a role in organization of political system of India the way it is today.

- Also East India Co.'s branch Hudson Bay Co./British govt. did that to and for Canada.
Nothing's perfect, but turned out not to bad Canada -eh! There are others like Kenya, Sing., Malay, UK itself!

2. However it would be incorrect to say some company created India. What happened can better be termed as 'transfer of power.'

- UK, think Oliver Cromwell Vs. Crown is an ongoing transfer-of-power case. Donald Trump is another. I prefer this rather then Commie, Mughal or even Sultanate style transfer-of-power.

3. Space for British intervention was created because Indian ruling class failed to unite and create a stable political system and administration.

- 'Ruling Indian class' was predominantly Muslim, Parsi, Sikh, Marwari etc. Minorities, happy with the status quo. The greater majority of Indian (Indo-Tibetan ppl.) were most disenfranchised and had to come bottom up which took time. For a clear eg. of Divide-&-Conquer, compare with Malaysia or other Colonies. Same-same. Point to note here is that Indo-Muslims and Indo-Tibetan ppl. were the 2 large, numerically equal but culturally different cohorts. Different from each other and also within themselves. Because the 3'rd major cohort was SC/ST. Gandhi's Harijan's who had no religion in the context of Indian Islam or Indo-Tibetan Castes.

Lastly, the majority of Indian subjects including the elite minorities were ok with British colonialism Vs. evolving Aurangzeb style Indo-Islamic colonialism. The 1 thing about British colonialism was it either brought prosperity, fairness and equity for those who mattered, or at least a sense of Magna Carta style 'modernity' like forgiveness, co-option, co-operation, restitution, rehabilitation etc. British colonialism brought far more misery to China through India, rather then India.

Hypothetically and inversely, India today would have been the greatest Islamic nation-state ever, possibly stretching from the Atlantic (think Morroco, even Spain which lost in 2'nd World War) all the way to Japan in the Pacific. Because it still would have been embroiled in the great war, but as a descendent of Akbar, Aurangzeb etc. Mughal India would continue with it's acquisitive and territorial ideology. Indo-Tibetan's (Hindus ), Parsis, Arabs, Sikhs, Jews, Armenians, Jains, Kashmiris, Tibetans etc. would all be minorities in a largely Indo-Islamic nation.

After the great war, when Indian troops were stationed all around the world from Canada to Oz., Italy-Egypt to Burma, Saudi Arabia and Turkey; the territorial nature of the Mughal state would have picked up all said territories, who know s even the world. Germany, Japan, USSR, UK, France, Spain, China had been licked re: external war and internal problems. The US was a 2 bit player. Canada and Australia contributed heavily and came out massively victorious. Mughal India would have dealt with them in short order, sorry to say.

4.-5. No comment.

You were given culture by us. Deal with your reality.

Pagan!

Universities like Nalanda and Taxila where my forefathers were professors. Cities like Mohenjo-Daro. Languages like Sanskrit, health care systems like Ayurveda and Yoga, best discontinuous technologies like metal, farming, cooking!

Hehe = Pagan !

 

[Dushmann]

^^^

- 'Ruling Indian class' was predominantly Muslim, Parsi, Sikh, Marwari etc.

May be you are talking about British period.

And you are a very knowledgeable person but I can understand being anglicized ex-Bombayiite and all (rather than Mumbaikar) how you forget to mention imperial seat created by Chatrapati Shivaji and jump from Aurangzeb to British.

Third cohort SC/ST has to suffer under any rule either Hindu or Muslim. British surely would have loved to create another Pakistan and make Dr Ambedkar another Jinnah. Muslim leaders like Nizam of Hyderabad also was willing to give high post and wealth to him in exchange for converting to Islam which would have changed balance or power in subcontinent dangerously close towards Muslims. But he decided to act sensibly and settled for acting within framework of greater India with some power sharing in the form of reserved seats for SC/ST.