Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > Asian History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Asian History Asian History Forum - China, Japan, Korea, India, Australia, New Zealand, and the Asia-Pacific Region


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old July 18th, 2012, 05:28 AM   #111

M.S. Islam's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jul 2012
From: Dhaka
Posts: 2,085

Getting back to an earlier point:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord_of_Gauda View Post
Contrasting that to India post British Empire, where only six polities exist in entire South Asia ( Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Nepal and Sri Lanka), this is the least number of polities in India in the last 2000 years at the very least.
Sikkim? Kashmir? Hyderabad? Two hundred-odd other princely states?

Or,

Portuguese-held Goa? French-held Pondicherry?

When the British left the subcontinent there were hundreds of existent polities.
M.S. Islam is offline  
Remove Ads
Old July 21st, 2012, 06:45 AM   #112

Salah's Avatar
Unchained
¤ Blog of the Year ¤
 
Joined: Oct 2009
From: Baltimorean-in-exile
Posts: 20,232
Blog Entries: 176
Famine in British India - whose fault?


The almighty Wikipedia lists no less than fifteen famines that took place during the British rule of India. Several of these famines claimed multiple millions of victims, and the sufferings of victims of some of the more recent famines are captured in photography.

On Historum and elsewhere I've seen people use the Indian famines of this era as ammunition for anti-colonial or anti-British arguments. But were any of these famines actually orchestrated, or were they natural tragedies that had occurred in every previous chapter of Indian history? Did the British do anything to help those who were suffering?
Salah is offline  
Old July 21st, 2012, 07:11 AM   #113

Jinit's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jun 2012
From: India
Posts: 3,219
Blog Entries: 1

Spellbanisher gave detailed review about the causes of famine in another thread.


Indeed he did. Threads merged.

Last edited by diddyriddick; July 23rd, 2012 at 06:28 AM. Reason: Redundant.
Jinit is online now  
Old July 22nd, 2012, 07:29 AM   #115

Fireatwill's Avatar
Postmodern Samurai
 
Joined: Jul 2011
From: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 4,278

wrong thread. deleted.
Fireatwill is offline  
Old July 22nd, 2012, 08:20 AM   #116

Louise C's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jan 2011
From: Southeast England
Posts: 7,241

Quote:
Originally Posted by Salah View Post
The almighty Wikipedia lists no less than fifteen famines that took place during the British rule of India. Several of these famines claimed multiple millions of victims, and the sufferings of victims of some of the more recent famines are captured in photography.

On Historum and elsewhere I've seen people use the Indian famines of this era as ammunition for anti-colonial or anti-British arguments. But were any of these famines actually orchestrated, or were they natural tragedies that had occurred in every previous chapter of Indian history? Did the British do anything to help those who were suffering?
Food shortages can be caused by natural disasters like crop failures, droughts, etc. but famines, according to all that I have read on the subject, are caused by apathetic or malicious governments that don't do enough to distribute food, provide relief etc. in other words, a food shortage doesn't become a famine unless the government doesn't act decisively enough.
Louise C is offline  
Old November 16th, 2012, 01:55 PM   #117

Bharata's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Nov 2012
From: Forum
Posts: 269

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fireatwill View Post
You're making excuses for the colonizers.

Stockholm syndrome is a good example of people trying to find the good in their oppressors, its simply a defense mechanism.

Lets say someone is robbed and almost killed, but in the process they learn to value life more and be thankful for what they have - is that mean the act of robbery on them was justified because some 'good' came of it?

One should never reconcile with one's aggressor, one should never try to find the good in what was inherently a bad a thing. This is a more honest psychological approach than trying to fool oneself into thinking - well, it wasn't so bad, some good came of it - that is the worst kind of self deception, and unfortunately an addiction in India which seems to never go away.

Who cares how India would have turned out, the important question is, all those people who suffered, all the wars, the killings, the discrimination, the humiliation, was that all 'for good'?

It wasn't.



A few weeks back your were fighting with some lame laptop-imperialist over this issue and now you're becoming another colonialist fan of sorts. Interesting.
Nice1
Bharata is online now  
Old August 9th, 2014, 12:08 AM   #118
Archivist
 
Joined: Aug 2014
From: Akhand Bharat
Posts: 120

British rule was very bad in India.

The common logics they put to support their rule in India, being countered.

1) British made Railway.

British made railway to transport troops to rebellious area and to goods to harbour as soon as possible. Not to help indian public. British so made railways only in those areas which were militarily or economically important.

More ever Iran was never colonized, dont they have railway? Additionally, for India type agriculture based country having proper irrigation system matters more. Despite having railway Millions of Indians died from famines.

2) British brought modern education.

It had 2 reasons. 1) British lacked enough man power to run their administration in india, so they taught some Indians so that these Indians could run colonial administration. So British effort on spreading education was very little. 2) Christian Missionaries thought to establish Christianity in India, Western Education is necessary.

So they both had different purposeses.

3) British united India.

Wrong. Mauryans first united India.

As for bad sides-Multiple famines with total death toll of over 50 Million, installing an inferiority complex(Colonial hang over), massacres(Jalianwalabagh), destruction of Indian traditional industry and preventing rise of modern industry, Drain of Wealth.
SSDD is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > Asian History

Tags
british, famine, fault, india, rule


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
More than 60 million Indians starved to death under British rule... Revolution Asian History 98 March 17th, 2013 08:48 AM
The British Raj and the end of the East India Company Salah Asian History 1 April 8th, 2012 06:26 PM
Racism and Mutiny in 19th Century British India Salah Asian History 8 March 22nd, 2012 07:59 PM
India - The Jewel in the Crown of the British Empire? Veritas Asian History 54 November 27th, 2011 02:05 AM
india before the British Empire wei Asian History 12 May 3rd, 2008 09:32 AM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.