Please do not show this to Indians.

[Photon]

India could denote a civilization. Just like western civilization denotes Western European culture. But a civilization does not entail a nation. Just like Western Europe has never been a nation.

Without the British unified India. India would not exist as a nation today.

Wrong!

Before British conquered India, there was about a hundred years turmoil, where smaller Indian Kingdoms were fighting for power to become master's of entire Indian empire.(which is why British were able to conquer India in the first place). But before that Indian empire was united for centuries under one dynasty or the other.

So if British hadn't united the smaller fighting Indian kingdoms,eventually another Indian kingdom, would have united the country under a single rule. For that is law nature.
So India would still have existed as nation today, perhaps with different geographical map.

 

[jetray]

if someone think indus valley is in modern day india he need to go mental hospital

only physical territory belongs to you, but culture & heritage does not.
Its like cat thinking itself to be the tiger.

 

[Imran Khan]

only physical territory belongs to you, but culture & heritage does not.
Its like cat thinking itself to be the tiger.

why not culture ? suddenly at 14 aug 1947 we give up our culture and adopt something else ? man come out from this hysteria Indus valley culture is Pakistani culture too. sindhi saraiki punjabi patahn baloch are same tribes live here since centuries . its not you guys follow western culture now more then indian ?can we call you agreez ?

 

[Arsalan 345]

only physical territory belongs to you, but culture & heritage does not.
Its like cat thinking itself to be the tiger.

bharat mata k 2 tukre hahaha.

 

[Royal Rajput]

Whatever you do please do not show this news clip from 1947 to Indian's or they will get a cardiac arrest when they see that they were "born" in August 1947.

unlike others, we dont need approval and validation from white men. may the god give you enough strength and self pride so that you can recover from your deep inferiority complex of being non-White.

 

[faithfulguy]

Wrong!

Before British conquered India, there was about a hundred years turmoil, where smaller Indian Kingdoms were fighting for power to become master's of entire Indian empire.(which is why British were able to conquer India in the first place). But before that Indian empire was united for centuries under one dynasty or the other.

So if British hadn't united the smaller fighting Indian kingdoms,eventually another Indian kingdom, would have united the country under a single rule. For that is law nature.
So India would still have existed as nation today, perhaps with different geographical map.

Bull crap, except for the Mughal rule of a couple of hundred years, there were no central government in the Indian subcontinent for another thousand years. At 300BC Mauryan empire come close to dominated whole India. But no country really dominated the Indian subcontinent until British arrival. So stop spreading your lies about India rule by one dynasty or another. India was ruled by independent kingdoms or empires that are not related to one another. But there were never dynasty successions you see in ancient Egypt or China.

unlike others, we dont need approval and validation from white men. may the god give you enough strength and self pride so that you can recover from your deep inferiority complex of being non-White.

In Supa Powa 2030 video, it’s a white man that affirmed 8ndia Supa Powa status. It’s an Englishman that talk about “How India is so beautiful, so modern, so many white servants”

Watch that video again.

 

[Royal Rajput]

Bull crap, except for the Mughal rule of a couple of hundred years, there were no central government in the Indian subcontinent for another thousand years. At 300BC Mauryan empire come close to dominated whole India. But no country really dominated the Indian subcontinent until British arrival. So stop spreading your lies about India rule by one dynasty or another. India was ruled by independent kingdoms or empires that are not related to one another. But there were never dynasty successions you see in ancient Egypt or China.



In Supa Powa 2030 video, it’s a white man that affirmed 8ndia Supa Powa status. It’s an Englishman that talk about “How India is so beautiful, so modern, so many white servants”

Watch that video again.

so ? we dont care if they like us or hate us. Western domination of glob is long gone. as for servants, we do have white economic migrants here. Jamnagar, pipavav, Mumbai, Pune are filled with Central Asian and Whites from Eastern Europe who are working in Multinational Companies.

 

[faithfulguy]

so ? we dont care if they like us or hate us. Western domination of glob is long gone. as for servants, we do have white economic migrants here. Jamnagar, pipavav, Mumbai, Pune are filled with Central Asian and Whites from Eastern Europe who are working in Multinational Companies.

Watch the video here. So are the Eastern Europeans working at multinationals are Indian white servants like in India Supa Powa 2030. Watch it again.

 

[Royal Rajput]

Watch the video here. So are the Eastern Europeans working at multinationals are Indian white servants like in India Supa Powa 2030. Watch it again.

thanks, this is what going to happen in future. maybe i will hire whites to work in my Farm as well.

 

[Samlee]

Sorry, Mr lhanda but it was your ancestors that hung from trees and bowing down to invaders. Indians have always been more civilized and developed in science and arts.

Yeah Sure After All You Invested Spaceships and Atom Bombs Million Years Ago

 

[jetray]

why not culture ? suddenly at 14 aug 1947 we give up our culture and adopt something else ? man come out from this hysteria Indus valley culture is Pakistani culture too. sindhi saraiki punjabi patahn baloch are same tribes live here since centuries . its not you guys follow western culture now more then indian ?can we call you agreez ?

other than balochi all the languages are derived from sanskrit.
Do you ppl know/use sanskrit? No bcos you ppl discarded the previous culture and adopted the middle east culture. But we still follow the old cultural norms that was followed 2000 years back. Then how can pakistan claim to be its inheritor when it discarded it ?

 

[Photon]

Bull crap, except for the Mughal rule of a couple of hundred years, there were no central government in the Indian subcontinent for another thousand years. At 300BC Mauryan empire come close to dominated whole India. But no country really dominated the Indian subcontinent until British arrival. So stop spreading your lies about India rule by one dynasty or another. India was ruled by independent kingdoms or empires that are not related to one another. But there were never dynasty successions you see in ancient Egypt or China.

Your history if India is only limited to Mughals and Mauryas

What do you know about Pala Empire or Gupta Empire or Delhi Sultanate ?

And if we apply your logic, to China how many of your dynasties ruled 100 % of land area of present day China and for how long.
So can we assume China only became a nation in 1959, when it finally conquered Tibet ?

 

[Imran Khan]

other than balochi all the languages are derived from sanskrit.
Do you ppl know/use sanskrit? No bcos you ppl discarded the previous culture and adopted the middle east culture. But we still follow the old cultural norms that was followed 2000 years back. Then how can pakistan claim to be its inheritor when it discarded it ?



View attachment 445425

i agree but sunskrit is already dead in india too what its mean ? no one talk in sanskrit in india today .

 

[faithfulguy]

Your history if India is only limited to Mughals and Mauryas

What do you know about Pala Empire or Gupta Empire or Delhi Sultanate ?

And if we apply your logic, to China how many of your dynasties ruled 100 % of land area of present day China and for how long.
So can we assume China only became a nation in 1959, when it finally conquered Tibet ?

Those empires you described does not represent India. They are empires unto themselves. They come and go without relating to one another.

As for Chinese dynasties, the land mass they accumulate is not the point. But the fact that people accept that there is one government that rule over China is more important. Since 221BC, China has been one country the majority of time. During the time when China was divided, such as between Han and Sui and between TAng and Song, all the divided rulers regard the others as illegitimate as it’s their goal to unite China. This is why China was united as it regard itself as a single political state since 221BC. Anytime that there is a separation, it will seek unity.

Since India does not have the concept of regarding itself as a single political state, Indian subcontinent is divided most of time. This is because people of the subcontinent does not regard itself as one country that is not divisible. For example, both Pakistan and India readily accept partitioning in 1947. If the geographical India was indeed one country as accepted by its people, the unity of the country would supersede religious differences.

Contrast that to Taiwan China relationship, where both government regard itself as the rightful ruler and the other government as in rebellion, you see what unity means.

 

[illusion8]

The correct description would be...

In August 1947, India gained it's independence, Pakistan was born...and again, in 1971, Bangladesh was born.