What's new

Lee Kuan Yew

The comments of the Singaporean shows that he is still living in the colonial era.

The growth of India is not sponsored by Govt. of India like Chinese, But a true entrepreneur growth with out GOI's help. In China people follow the Chinese bussiness policies and will abide by the rules set by CCP.
Here in India our diversity is our strength, Our business model is prospering even with out the GOI's help show the spirit of our entrepreneurs.

Just like USA when it started its rise in 1900's, the growth of USA was because of these entrepreneurs and their excellence.

Economic growth has nothing to do with race, ethnicity or language.

Today what ever you claim about Hans is not true. The Hannization is a false theory and there exist lot of cultiural,linguistic and racial differences among Chinese even today.

Can you point out one positive attribute of diversity?

You stated it is a strength. I can list literally hundreds of disadvantages of diversity, but I can't think of a single positive aspect.
 
1. The Marathas never had an empire. Far from it they had a confederacy of local Sardars like Scindia, Holkar, Bhonsle, Gaekowad and smaller chiefs like Pantpratinidhi, , Panse, Vinchurkar, Pethe, Raste, Phadke, Patwardhan, Pawar, Pandit, Purandare and Mehendale, who were never at peace with each other or with the titular head at Pune, Peshwa.

Marathas were the confederacy but it was united under the command of Peshwa and he was not the titualar head rather titular head were Chhatrapatis who were in power till war with Aurangzeb but after their victory against mughals they were replaced by Peshwas


However, the Marathas have dreamt of ruling from Delhi throughout their existence. In 1713 Emperor Farukhsyar had given them a farman giving them certain rights conditional to their loyalty to Mughal realm. But their dream was shattered utterly by that great soldier and leader of men and a Ghazi of Islam, Ahmad Shah Abdali (Durrani) at the 3rdBattle of Panipath 1761.

although defeat in the third battle of Panipat due to those traitor rohillas pressed the brakes on maratha expansionism for a while but they quickly recovered the losses and again started the liberation of India from foreign islamic rule and when rohillas captured Delhi( one of the few remaining territory of once big mughal empire) and overthrew then mughal emperor Shah Alam II
in order to revence the rohillas for siding with foreign invaders Marathas under the great general Mahadji Shinde defeated rohillas taking control of Delhi and reinstating Shah Alam as titular emperor of Delhi while Martha's were in actual control for helping reinstating him is mughal emperor shah alam awarded shinde with the title of Vakil e mutalik so you see they did managed to capture Delhi and marathas again became the dominant force in india which they remained till their last war with british

anyways Marathas put up a great resistance against foreign invasion of India by abdali and later Britishers unlike Mughals and Delhi sultanate who couldn't do a **** against Nadir Shah and Timur respectively


2 . The Marathas have been notable in history for treachery, fickleness, cruelty and lust for loot and destruction.

Muslims rulers were much more worse they didn't even spared Muslims like babur massacred pashtuns, dawoodi bohras were prosecuted by Aurangzeb etc

post-Aurangjeb the Maratha activity had weakened the Mughals

when mughals were stronger they tried hard completely eliminate marathas. marathas just returned the favour with interest

allowing the rise of
the English and small kingdoms allover
SA. Had the Marathas been otherwise then
the English could not have defeated the
patriot Tipu Sultan.

what do you mean by otherwise??? did you expected them to bow before mughals and tipu sultan's loss to britisn was due to his own stupidity he foolishly tried to provoke the comparatively much stronger Maratha empire and got defeated in the mysore-maratha war weakening him instead of provoking marathas he should have made alliance with them against britishers


3. Maratha units in IA use the war cry, :Chhatrapati Shivaji ki Jai"

another one and a little more popular of their war cry is "Har Har Mahadev“

without
realizing that Shivaji was nothing but a
deceitful dacoit who had taken full
advantage of Mughal magnanimity and
honor.

Shivaji was great Hindu Emperor who dreamed of liberating Hindustan from Islamic rule and by slashing his right thumb with a blade he took the oath of establishing hindavi swaraj(Hindu self rule) which he and his descendants did managed to achieve. Chattrapati Shivaji Maharaj strived hard throughout his life against all odds to achieve his he is respected not only by marathas but Hindu all over the world as (Dharamveer)protector of the faith and Hindu Hriday Samrat(emperor of Hindu hearts).
 
Actually it is largely the same as the Qing dynasty (minus Mongolia). China has had a common culture, language, heritage, and philosophy for thousands of years.

I don't see the 56 ethnic groups of China sharing a common culture with Hans. Nor they and their homelands were historically the part of Chinese civilization.
 
Let me make this easier for you:

Was Rome, Italy?

Was Babylon, Iraq?

Was Holy Roman Empire, Germany?

Was Maratha, India?

Let me give you an example:

Was Majapahit, Indonesia? No!

Or I can give you an analogy:

Imagine the Maratha as a mother & the British as a father. As the father going in & out of the mother. He gives the mother the benefit of western civilization inside the mother. In time the mother will give birth to a child & that child is Modern day India, but remember a child is not his/er parents. The child may take some of his/er parents trait, but the child is still not the parents.

The Point is, today India may take its root culture, language, history etc.from "old India," but its government, law, Cricket & almost everything else came from Great Britain! Today India is just far too different compared from yesterday India

That colonial intercourse may hold good for Hindu India. We Muslims have our own powerful cultural roots and heritage that we never deviate from.
 
I don't see the 56 ethnic groups of China sharing a common culture with Hans. Nor they and their homelands were historically the part of Chinese civilization.

The difference is that these 56 ethnic groups consist of 8% of the population, while minority populations in Indian consist of 100% of the population (meaning there isn't even a majority in India we can use as a base to compare to).

And these Indians are not just ethnically diverse; they are linguistically, culturally, and even class (caste system) diverse.

Hans are 93%; so 93% of the population share a common culture and a common feeling of unity.
 
The difference is that these 56 ethnic groups consist of 8% of the population, while minority populations in Indian consist of 100% of the population (meaning there isn't even a majority in India we can use as a base to compare to).

And these Indians are not just ethnically diverse; they are linguistically, culturally, and even class (caste system) diverse.

Hans are 93%; so 93% of the population share a common culture and a common feeling of unity.

Their homeland is more than 50% of China's area where Hans had historically been non-existent or minimal presence. So, calling them as irrelevant don't sound fair. Hans culture always existed within the borders of Great Wall of China.

Many Chinese claim that Chinese civilization is not exclusive to Hans. :cheesy:
 
That colonial intercourse may hold good for Hindu India. We Muslims have our own powerful cultural roots and heritage that we never deviate from.

What heritage does the East Bengalis have. :omghaha:
 
That colonial intercourse may hold good for Hindu India. We Muslims have our own powerful cultural roots and heritage that we never deviate from.

You forget that you are a product of similar colonial intercourse... first with Islamic Raiders from the west which forced you to convert to Islam..and then British Colonialism... that gave you East Pakistan a....
 
Their homeland is more than 50% of China's area where Hans had historically been non-existent or minimal presence. So, calling them as irrelevant don't sound fair. Hans culture always existed within the borders of Great Wall of China.

Many Chinese claim that Chinese civilization is not exclusive to Hans. :cheesy:

I never called them irrelevant; but you are now trying to find an argument where there is none. Han make up 92% of the country.

This is one ethnic group, not even one RACE, just one ethnic group, that makes up over 9 in 10 of the entire country.

It's as simple as that. Where is the argument? Lol!

There is not a single fully developed country in the world that has been racially diverse during it's modernization and industrialization.
 
I never called them irrelevant; but you are now trying to find an argument where there is none. Han make up 92% of the country.

This is one ethnic group, not even one RACE, just one ethnic group, that makes up over 9 in 10 of the entire country.

It's as simple as that. Where is the argument? Lol!

There is not a single fully developed country in the world that has been racially diverse during it's modernization and industrialization.

The people who formed the largest empires in China were non-Hans, even the current China is a gift of non-Han Empire the Qings while at the time of the Ming Dynasty most of Western China with their people was not the part of China. So, How will I accept China had a united country throughout history. Whole landmass of China was united as a single entity for the first time by Mongols in late 13th Century AD.

Here Chinese history in short, I don't see China as a united country except for Yuan and Qing, it seems Han people never had capability to integrate China as a one nation from Beijing to Urumqi or Lhasa.

Territories_of_Dynasties_in_China.gif
 
Back
Top Bottom