What kept India united after the British left?

[The Sandman]

Yes appreciation of shared culture, history, language groups, art, music, philosophy, economy...you name it...it varies from person to person how these manifest and prioritise. Also being mindful, tolerant and appreciative of the differences and variations is an important nuanced part of Nationalism (more fundamentally able to compromise and cooperate for a perceived greater good). I can go to a temple in the north and see what practices are the same that I am used to in the South, which ones are different etc... I am sure people do the same for other religions and cultural experiences.....ability to do so makes any nation stronger (i.e having diversity and recognising how to harness that positively).

When this kind of nationalism is not present, then more negative types of nationalism often seep in (i.e nationalism for nationalism sake or nationalism largely focused on other nations/groups etc.). This has also played some role for sure in India's case in her modern history....and it is of course a more global one too. This one often also attracts the most attention because essentially it harnesses the more visceral emotions too. These people are also the ones that tend to be fickle and can be easily manipulated and swayed even to level of becoming what they originally swore to destroy....because simply they are often after the rush of having something to be visceral against rather than logically constructing an identity from within.

There are also those that also have neither the positive or negative nationalism too....simply wanting to exist and get on with their lives (either as part of recognising no true nations exist under larger supernatural entities or newer movements taking their place....or simply just being totally unfeeling to all of it in the first place, or in most cases having no time given the pressing requirement of basic survival) and just through coincidence on their part find national identity around them and have to adapt and manage that. Though in our day and age globally, such people are now rarer and rarer given the polarisation seeping in....and everyone having to pick a clear perceived side on the matter.

Thanks for the ans bro.
@El Sidd

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Zamindar still exist in the Pakistan.

Yes it does - mostly in Sind and south extremity of Punjab. Interesting point to mull over. In most of Frontier and Punjab the traditional tribal/Khan/Malik/Zamindar order has broken down releasing a mass of young people from the lower orders who have made cannon fodder for radical groups like TTP, Sipah e Sabah, sectarian groups and other radical/ethnic movements. It is this demograpy that is causing the instability in Pakistan

Sind is still stronghold of feudal power and most of the lower orders are still trapped in socio-economic servitude and in that sense resembles India's SC/STs. Despite being the poorest and most repressed rural Sind is least inclined toward the radical movements you see everywhere else in Pakistan. You would think that Sind with it's most repressed social groups would produce most of the cannon fodder for the radicals but that is not the case. The reason is the old order is still intact. That is why with exception of Waderas and few "tokens" the place is calm despite the utter poverty and under-development coupled with abuse by the ruling elite.

In that sense Sind is closest to what you have in large parts of India. And just to underline that traditional order is in more advanced stage of decay can be seen in urbanization rates. India has 33% urban population compared to 40% in Pakistan.

 

[El Sidd]

Thanks for the ans bro.
@El Sidd

Random compilation of words.

Hippies never gained political success.

 

[Corona]

In a little bit more detail, when the partition happened, there was a large nationalist fervour of uniting around the idea of Hindustan and to be not Pakistan. Simply, to not be Pakistan. That's why all their leaders harped on about how Pakistan won't survive. It was what they kept the people fed on, what their establishment told their people, that if you go your own way and disunite from them, you will not succeed.

To be fair, India was united as a country at the time of partition, just like Pakistan was.
And if the existence of Pakistan was touted as a reason for staying united, one could argue that Pakistan would do the same, that is, say that Pakistan must be united so as to resist India. Don't forget, the whole reason Pakistan was created was so that Muslims could have their own land and freedom, safe from what was perceived as a Hindu dominated majority government. But Pakistan split eventually while India is still more or less the same.

Surely the argument that 'we must be united so we don't turn out like the other guy' has no merit. If a nation wants to stay united, its reasons must be something more concrete. As for what those reasons are...I have no idea but some of the members here are putting up good arguments.

 

[Pakistani E]

To be fair, India was united as a country at the time of partition, just like Pakistan was.
And if the existence of Pakistan was touted as a reason for staying united, one could argue that Pakistan would do the same, that is, say that Pakistan must be united so as to resist India. Don't forget, the whole reason Pakistan was created was so that Muslims could have their own land and freedom, safe from what was perceived as a Hindu dominated majority government. But Pakistan split eventually while India is still more or less the same.

Surely the argument that 'we must be united so we don't turn out like the other guy' has no merit. If a nation wants to stay united, its reasons must be something more concrete. As for what those reasons are...I have no idea but some of the members here are putting up good arguments.

All I ever see Indians doing is telling me how India is unlike Pakistan. Even my Indian professor could not shut up about comparing everything related to India with Pakistan and how India was different from Pakistan in his defined boundaries.

Pakistan split because well, it had an enemy nation right in the middle of it. I would have also liked to see India stay united if Pakistan got a bigger chunk including Kashmir and a corridor to Bangladesh. I guarantee India would have broken up in to at least two nations as well.

Religion, culture etc can only go so far, the reality is, it is the fear of the outside and unknown that feeds both India and Pakistan.

 

[Super Falcon]

Hatred for pakistan

 

[El Sidd]

Well I don't think you get the idea of Land reform in India.

Although land reform is partial success ,it has done one thing right... It abolished the Zamindari completely. The real cultivators get the ownership of the land. Yadav Jats Kurmi were real cultivators. But Zamindar's were Brahmins,Rajputs or Lala etc. SCs were doing the manual labour. So middle castes were highly profited from land reform. They got political muscle from numbers and administration muscle from reservations. Though there were some redistribution to SC and STs. But Both Upper caste Zamindar and SCs do not know how to till the land. Slowly land is transferred to BC castes.

Some of SC and ST are helped by reservations but that is not enough . India needs large manufacturing jobs for absorbing freed labourers from the farm. That is why Make in India would come in handy.

Land reforms of 1955.

Fought a war in 62.

Fought a war 65.

Resorted to terrorism since 71.

You keep alive your border disputes just because you need a war every now and then.

 

[PakSword]

Hindus have never been united in one boundary. This patch of time will be looked as a tiny period in history in future when some random people have been forcefully confined within certain boundary.

To keep them together, the elite and establishment in India have to play some games. They have to continuously remind the population that Pakistan and China are enemies and if India doesn't have unity, these two countries can beat them like they were beaten in the past by different invaders. Unfortunately, Muslims in India have also accepted this propaganda.

But the ground realities are quite different. This unnatural alliance is showing its true colors now. Hindu fundamentalist government has started supporting mobs who attack Muslims, Christians and low caste Hindu Dalits. Then there are many independence movements in India currently.

India is a time bomb. All the ingredients are there. Our only fear is that when this bomb will explode, it shouldn't affect the neighboring countries as when the time will come, this unnatural alliance will start a nuclear war with the neighbors to save it from disintegration as a last resort.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Here is a interesting fact. All societies that went through transition from the old order to the new went through turmoil. As the old order weakened mass of young moved to cities and facing economic inequality made perfect cannon fodder for radical movements. Some societies managed to temper this transition like in Britain but in others it led to revolutions and civil wars. In Europe the poor masses gravitated to leftist communists or right wing Nazi/Fascists. During this time Europe saw bloody revolutions, wars and chaos. Lot of blood was spilled before society reformed into a new stable order.

in the 1960s/70s we saw similar thing happen in Latin America where socialist movements and revolutioneries like Fidel Castro etc saw trouble all over the continent. In Pakistan the masses have been captivated by the Islamists or ethnocentric movements and we see what is happening in Pakistan. I believe we will see the same in India. Will it come from left leaning socialits and or religious Hindutva groups only time will tell.

As 100s of milions of Dalits are freed from their chains they will no doubt get attracted to some radical groups. As I said earlier Nexalites are a taste of what is to come.

 

[Corona]

All I ever see Indians doing is telling me how India is unlike Pakistan. Even my Indian professor could not shut up about comparing everything related to India with Pakistan and how India was different from Pakistan in his defined boundaries.

Pakistan split because well, it had an enemy nation right in the middle of it. I would have also liked to see India stay united if Pakistan got a bigger chunk including Kashmir and a corridor to Bangladesh. I guarantee India would have broken up in to at least two nations as well.

Religion, culture etc can only go so far, the reality is, it is the fear of the outside and unknown that feeds both India and Pakistan.

I can confidently say that this entire forum is about the differences between India and Pakistan. And can you really blame people? From day one both our people were told that the other guy is the enemy, be it India or Pakistan. And when you have an enmity as long and engraved as ours, people tend to do whatever they can to differentiate from perceived enemies. Even now there will be a thread on how Pakistanis are genetically different from Indians or how the economy of one country is tanking while the other is growing. It's stupid, but that's the way it is for now.

I'll admit having an enemy nation between your country is a bad deal but surely, if Pakistan was as united as they claimed, religiously or nationalistically, then East Pakistan would've resisted our attempts to divide Pakistan. Think about it, the only reason that there is a Bangladesh now is cause we were able to utilize the cracks already present in the relation between West and East Pakistan. India did not separate East Pakistan by Herself, it had help from the locals. And if the locals helped us, that means that they had some problems with you.

And like you said, there was an enemy country between Pakistan. Shouldn't your priority then be to first settle all hostilities with that country? To ensure that there is no reason why said country would attempt to split Pakistan?

Hatred for pakistan

The average Indian doesn't hate you guys as much as you think. If that was the case everyone would resort to fistfights whenever they saw each other. How may incidents of conflict between Indians and Pakistanis do you hear about from places where they intermingle?

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Germany

Germany was a democracy. Hitler got voted into power. USA was part democracy. It did not allow it's untouchables the Blacks voting rights until 1960s. UK is the only example you can cite but it was a superpower of it's time. it used it's vast empire to offset social pressure by giving employment, space and postings. huge numbers of "excess" Britons got exported to Australia, New Zealand, Canada. The empire provided plenty of land, jobs, resources to keep the population just about tempered although there were problems.

So no democracy is not a insurance against mass social unrest. Naxalites are examples of this - unless you think ISI and Pakistan are behind them. You face larger and more rigourous movements like Naxalites. Whether that comes from leftists or right wing Hindutwas is to be seen.

 

[El Sidd]

Pakistan also faught similar wars and How come it is divided into two?

Because internal reasons are far more important than external reasons. Pakistan is not a existential threat to India. It never was.

India was and India is a existential threat to Pakistan and still Pakistan could not held it together. Because You imposed Urdu on Bengali people , they resented and you could not accommodate their demands. Bengali chose separate path. India did not create trouble in Pakistan during 1971. West Pakistanis did.

71 happened because of your paranoia after 65s adventure.

You felt the psychological squeeze.

All because your forward policy in 62 failed.

Curiously enough all this talk of 2.5 front war by sending terrorists from Afghanistan and Iran while planning a smash and grab of Kashmir?

Bongladesh and Urdu?

Now need i remind you are the only country where people from other parts speak English or hand gestures to communicate.

Tainted by racism.

You failed at nation building.

The next recession will see you break like USSR.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

My own feeling is the BCs group [40% of India] will gravitate mostly to Hindutwa or or other radical Hindu groups. The SCs/STs [30% of India] or Dalits/Tribals will feed the leftist radical groups like Naxalities. I also think the Indian state will cultivate links with Hindu right wing based groups to fight the leftist groups made up of mostly Dalits/Tribals and this is already happening with Naxalites.

 

[Peshwa]

You seems to be quite lacking in history. Which books were you bought up with?

Which part of my post are you disputing?
The British legal system or the British parliamentary system part?

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

When exactly did India resist Greeks?

During Alexander's time and then under the greek bactrian kings.By the powerful nanda,then maurya and finally sunga empires.Alexander turned back without facing the nandas.Chandragupta maurya reconquered the areas he had penetrated,defeated his greatest succesor general seleucus's invasion and annexed territory upto modern day afghanistan.The greeks didn't challenge the mauryas after that.After and during the fall of the mauryas around 150-200 yrs later,the bactrian kings made some inroads but were repulsed by the succesor sunga dynasty.Whenever a powerful centralized empire existed,external threats were defeated.Even when semi-powerful states worked together they succeeded.
Thus alexander and seleucus lords of asia were turned back.
The hunas(hepthalites) who had overran modern afghanistan,pakistan and north western parts of the crumbling later gupta empire under mihirkula was decisively defeated by the co-operation between narasimhagupta,a much weaker later gupta ruler and yasodharman of malwa and he was driven out of punjab and western india and restricted to kashmir and further western areas.Mihirkula's father Toramana had been defeated and driven out by the last great gupta emperor skandagupta earlier.

Before that Chandragupta II vikramaditya had defeated the sakas(scythians or indo-parthians) that had ruled gujarat,parts of mahrashtra and sindh and eliminated their presence in india.

The arabs defeated the 2 mightiest empires of the day -the byzantines and sassanids.The completely destroyed the sassanid persians and byzantium was barely able to survive.They overran egypt and north africa and conquered the visigoths of spain.They defeated the chinese in central asia and spread their power there.In Indian region they could only take the small kingdom of sindh on the outskirts .When they tried to cross Indus they faced a centralized rajput power of the gurjara pratiharas allied with the main south indian power - the rastrakutas and were badly defeated repeatedly.The army that had conquered pretty much everyone in that time period was stopped cold.The turks made their successful penetrations only once the rajputs had become divided into many kingdoms -particularly 3 big powers - chauhans,solankis and gahadvals.Ghori was defeated once by solankis,won 1 and lost 1 against chauhans and defated the gahadvals.If they had fought together he would have no chance as odds would be impossible.

Even in case of british ,they consolidated their power by picking off the smaller kingdoms like nawabi of bengal,parts of awadh,mysore,nizam one by one leaving the strongest - the marathas and the sikhs for the last.And only when they were divided due to internal factionalism. When the maratha confederacy was united and fought as such during the 1st anglo-maratha war they fought the british to a standstill for 10 years and that led to 20 years of peace.Only when main maratha leaders fadnavis and mahadaji scindia were dead,and unity broken did they attack again and were successful and bajirao ii joined the british in 2nd war.

So the lesson of our history is clear.Stand united and we can beat anybody.Fight divided and we will fall.