Remembering India’s Forgotten Holocaust

[INDIC]

That wasn't Churchill's doing.

I meant broadly British, isn't it quite baffling first British conceded and collaborated with Germans in 19th century in creating a hypothetical white Aryan race with blonde hair and blue eyes so that they can extent it on Indians through Aryan invasion theory and Aryan-Dravidian classification for the sake of 'divide and rule' on Indians and then later fighting a world war to kill a monster created out of that Aryan master race ideology, the ideology which they too nurtured once.

 

[Luca1]

That wasn't Churchill's doing.

Thanks for pointing this out. Some of the guys here would probably even pin the actual holocaust on Churchill instead of Hitler as they hate him so much because the Brits ruled India during that time. I wondering what did Indian national congress do to help alleviate the famine at that time?

 

[abjktu]

India is created as a Hindu nation of South Asia. Pakistan was created as the Muslim nation. Religious differences is why these two countries were created in the first place. If not for the religious differences, there won't be a need for partition. The same can apply to Palestine as well.

That was Pakistan but India was created as a secular nation....
In my own state Kerala(South India),45% of population are non Hindus(Ie 25%- Muslims,20%-Christians)...

 

[INDIC]

That was Pakistan but India was created as a secular nation....
In my own state Kerala(South India),45% of population are non Hindus(Ie 25%- Muslims,20%-Christians)...

He is an Indophobic Han Chinese troll. Stop wasting time on him.

 

[Luca1]

That was Pakistan but India was created as a secular nation....
In my own state Kerala(South India),45% of population are non Hindus(Ie 25%- Muslims,20%-Christians)...

Maybe your part of India is a secular India. But not all India is secular, as your countryman would attest.

 

[Luca1]

He is an Indophobic Han Chinese troll. Stop wasting time on him.

hahaha. just because I state the historical fact about Churchill and debunked the India fiction that compare Churchill to Hitler make me a Chinese. Ok.. Churchill is Chinese.lol

 

[Bang Galore]

I wondering what did Indian national congress do to help alleviate the famine at that time?

They were pretty much all thrown in jail and in any case, they had no hold on grain stocks.

 

[janon]

You obviously are an idiot with no clue about History or how fair minded people are here. Churchill was a great leader during the World War but after the war in 1945 he lost the election inspite of leading UK to a great victory. He was like Indira Gandhi great in 1971 but a failure after the emergency. She created Bhinderwale to cut the Akali to size and nearly lost Punjab.

BBC ON THIS DAY | 26 | 1945: Churchill loses general election

1945: Churchill loses general election
Clement Attlee has been elected Britain's new prime minister after Labour won a sweeping victory in the general election.
The outgoing prime minister and great wartime leader Winston Churchill tendered his resignation immediately.

The landslide victory comes as a major shock to the Conservatives following Mr Churchill's hugely successful term as Britain's war-time coalition leader, during which he mobilised and inspired courage in an entire nation.

What's your point here? Are you saying that British are very fair minded because Churchil lost an election? So according to you, for a man who deliberately and knowingly killed millions of people through forced starvation, not being able to continue as PM is a "fair" punishment? Really? That's the penalty for mass murder?

The point is quite simple - Churchill, knowingly store millions of tonnes of foodgrains grown in India to feed British and other Europeans. He once remarked that the Greek resistance fighters deserve that food much more than brown Indians. He systematically impoverished and starved an entire subcontinent, one that actually produced as much food as the rest of the world put together, due to being one of the most fertile regions on earth.

To keep it short - he killed several million Indians. Losing an election doesn't amount to a "fair" punishment for that. You are trying to find false salvation in saying "Oh, we Brits aare so fair minded, we voted Churchil out, don't you see?" No, we don't.

 

[Bong]

Another article on this topic:

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?”

http://worldobserveronline.com/2014...gineered-worst-genocide-human-history-profit/

 

[Vinod2070]

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?”

Fil.thy uncivilized pig, he must be rotting in hell.

 

[Always Neutral]

What's your point here? Are you saying that British are very fair minded because Churchil lost an election? So according to you, for a man who deliberately and knowingly killed millions of people through forced starvation, not being able to continue as PM is a "fair" punishment? Really? That's the penalty for mass murder?

The point is quite simple - Churchill, knowingly store millions of tonnes of foodgrains grown in India to feed British and other Europeans. He once remarked that the Greek resistance fighters deserve that food much more than brown Indians. He systematically impoverished and starved an entire subcontinent, one that actually produced as much food as the rest of the world put together, due to being one of the most fertile regions on earth.

To keep it short - he killed several million Indians. Losing an election doesn't amount to a "fair" punishment for that. You are trying to find false salvation in saying "Oh, we Brits aare so fair minded, we voted Churchil out, don't you see?" No, we don't.

Most Indian Kings did the same. Chandragupta Maurya come to mind yet he is a hero to Indians.

 

[Lonely Hermit]

Most Indian Kings did the same. Chandragupta Maurya come to mind yet he is a hero to Indians.

Is this your justification for Churchill crime and what did Chandra Gupta do? did he ever starve any of his subjects .
Comparing that filthy bastard to Chandra Gupta, Chandra Gupta at the ripe age of 42 left his throne converted to Jainism and starved himself to death according Jain tradition.
He was the first man to truly unite the subcontinent a feet that British even in their 150 years rule could not achieve.

 

[Always Neutral]

Famine had been a recurrent feature of life in the Indian sub-continental countries of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh, and reached its numerically deadliest peak in the late 18th and 19th centuries. Historical and legendary evidence names some 90 famines in 2,500 years of history.[1] There are 14 recorded famines in India between the 11th and 17th centuries

are u going to blame that in churchill too? Idiot Churchill unified India by allowing Sardar Patel to fly in a RAF aircraft with a top UK official to convince the 500 princely states that independence was not an option. 300 of these states were ready to ask foreign powers to help them remain independent. Without UK you would be splintered squabbling children. Hell try replacing English with Hindi in the south of India and see how they kick your ***.