Any questions Regarding India

[Roybot]

seriously sometimes it seems to me that one invader has to be come in india??what do u think?do u feel like this coz only sindh was conquered not hind?
and u are pre- islamic arab people ,invader canbe from ur india or from pakistan ...... haha

just asking ......

You probably want to rephrase your question.

 

[illusion8]

unfying northern india you take it as a good thing. did they just unify the muslims of northern india? because according to you they were carrying out a genocide of muslims. the muslims are still a minority in the areas ruled by the moghuls clearly showing that no genocide happened. where a genocide apparently happens the race either migrates or is exterminated! for example the JEWS under Nazi rule.

if that was the case there would have been no hindu left in 800 years of their rule in the areas they ruled. but that is not the case!

and a bad economy? how did you deduce that wasn't the india under there rule called the richest empire of the time? weren't the true plunderers of india the british?

both your statements contradict each other!

In reality the one thing we remember the Moghuls are by a few of their architecture - they were as foreign to us as the British, their long stay in India did result in some assimilation, the Moghuls left behind converted Muslims and the British left behind converted Anglo Indians. There are few Goans who still hold on to the Portuguese culture and their passport same goes with Pondicherry where they cling on to French. We let them be around after the invaders left because of their assimilation with the local populace and they bring variety into the fabric of the nation.

 

[ice_man]

With the singular exception of Akbar, most Indians don't hold the Mughals in any esteem let alone high esteem. Taj Mahal happens to have been built in India, the only saving grace to Shah Jahan's rule & the story behind it is fascinating even if hidden under it are tales of unparalleled debauchery from a supposedly mourning man. Why should Indians otherwise care for a Persian married to a bigot if not for the fact that we have ticketing rights to the architectural marvel built right here?

well Akbar is respected by hindus because he butchered the religion hence understandable that hindus love him for distorting islam.

but besides the Taj mahal and ticketing rights story why are the other moghul construction so adopted and their food too?

suchs as:

Fatehpur Sikri

Agra Fort

Red Fort

Humayun’s Tomb

Qutb Minar


why not bring all these down like you did with BABRI masjid? or is it a stockholm syndrome case? either disown the moghuls or own them but this hypocrisy is weird. that on one point you call it the dark ages of indian civilzation and yet you love to own them up and call them your own.

 

[third eye]

You probably want to rephrase your question.

Need to....

 

[ice_man]

In reality the one thing we remember the Moghuls are by a few of their architecture - they were as foreign to us as the British, their long stay in India did result in some assimilation, the Moghuls left behind converted Muslims and the British left behind converted Anglo Indians. There are few Goans who still hold on to the Portuguese culture and their passport same goes with Pondicherry where they cling on to French. We let them be around after the invaders left because of their assimilation with the local populace and they bring variety into the fabric of the nation.

but didn't your friends say that a massive genocide of hindus happened under the moghuls? if so then why is the majority hindu? and how come so much architecture was built if the moghuls never enjoyed peace,prosperity and were constantly at war & carrying out genocide of hindus?

 

[illusion8]

well Akbar is respected by hindus because he butchered the religion hence understandable that hindus love him for distorting islam.

but besides the Taj mahal and ticketing rights story why are the other moghul construction so adopted and their food too?

suchs as:

Fatehpur Sikri

Agra Fort

Red Fort

Humayun’s Tomb

Qutb Minar


why not bring all these down like you did with BABRI masjid? or is it a stockholm syndrome case? either disown the moghuls or own them but this hypocrisy is weird. that on one point you call it the dark ages of indian civilzation and yet you love to own them up and call them your own.

Does the present Pakistan still use the British names of roads and areas and are there any old structures in Pakistan which the British or the Sikh conquerors built?

 

[Roybot]

well Akbar is respected by hindus because he butchered the religion hence understandable that hindus love him for distorting islam.

but besides the Taj mahal and ticketing rights story why are the other moghul construction so adopted and their food too?

suchs as:

Fatehpur Sikri

Agra Fort

Red Fort

Humayun’s Tomb

Qutb Minar


why not bring all these down[ like you did with BABRI masjid?

Because these were build using Indian money and Indian labour. Its our property. If it helps attracting tourists then we ll keep it.

Babri Masjid is a different case, there are thousands of other bigger and much more grander mosque in India which Hindus could have brought down, but they only went for that dilapidated, defunct Babri Masjid, ever wondered why? I mean if they really had to make a point they should gone for Jama Masjid in Delhi right?

 

[pk_baloch]

which favourite dish majority of indians like the most?

 

[abhishekgoel80]

Thanks, you have found a stable way to transfer government power, in China, the party found one also.
There will be always uneven there, in USA, east and west part are more advanced, the states in the middle US is a bit behind. In China also like this, but the central government takes 70% of government income while the local government get 30%, the central government is investing more money in poor province.

How about the first industry-Agriculture ? In 2000, the Chinese government claims there is no hunger in China, there are still some but in general, China produces enough food. How the agriculture is running in India ? Due to the high population, I understand the problems of hungers.
In China, all the land is owned by the Govt and many lands are ensured to do farm, if I am a farmer, I can get some refund from the Govt.

The main problem in our country is policy paralysis and low quality of human resources. e.g. We lack in manufacturing because the in many areas the domestic policies is not favourable there are a lot of clearances still required and many taxes, levies and bribes. In some state there is government subsidy but it in 90% of the cases it goes to crooks.

In many states the political parties are essential run by local goons who extract money from business person. They need money to fight elections and be in power. The IT and knowledge related business are till now away from there grasps.

The agriculture revolution started by land reforms where the feudal system was dismantled and land was distributed to original labourers. That yield gains then as there was more incentive to work on the land where full yield is of the worker but as it also posted hindrances as their were no economies of scale and very little mechanization. We became self sufficient but are yields are way below the western counter- parts(1/3rd on avg) and agricultural productivity one tenth per labourer.

Now in case of development when land is needed government can acquire land(which implies no option to farmers) the compensation is fixed by government. Usually the compensation is adequate but the price increases after development; many political parties have made this issue and want share in future profits thus the policy of land acquisition has been put on hold this has impeded development as the risk of developer is increasing. Land acquisition now needs a middleman i.e. politician that sucks both the parties(farmer and developer) dry.

The problem of democracy are if the few persons are in power and the institutions controlling them (auditing agencies, police and judiciary) are not effective it turns into a mess where dogs are fighting for a loaf of meat. India the institutions are developing but political class is not ready to give away power. Various interest groups operate and a lot of energy is wasted due to their selfish interest.

 

[illusion8]

but didn't your friends say that a massive genocide of hindus happened under the moghuls? if so then why is the majority hindu? and how come so much architecture was built if the moghuls never enjoyed peace,prosperity and were constantly at war & carrying out genocide of hindus?

There was a lot of killings of Hindu's but then no one can wipe out a big community, China was overrun so many times in their history, but they are still there, the moghuls built buildings to be used and they wanted us to marvel at their architectural brilliance. They were on a superiority trip and wanted to leave behind a lot of things that speak of their legacy. We don't care much about them at all.

 

[Bang Galore]

well Akbar is respected by hindus because he butchered the religion hence understandable that hindus love him for distorting islam.

Akbar is respected because he was a great King both militarily & administratively and it didn't hurt that he was the most tolerant of the Mughals.

but besides the Taj mahal and ticketing rights story why are the other moghul construction so adopted and their food too?

suchs as:

Fatehpur Sikri

Agra Fort

Red Fort

Humayun’s Tomb

Same ticketing rights....what part of that don't you understand?

Qutb Minar

Neither Qutubuddin Aibak or Iltutmish (who completed it) were mughals & yeah the same ticketing rights story interests us.

why not bring all these down like you did with BABRI masjid?

....because it's part of our history. You won't understand. In Karnataka, people go visit the magnificent ruins of Hampi & then go on & see the Gol Gumbuz in Bijapur & think nothing much of it even if the Sultanate had been responsible for the destruction of Hampi. We try (don't always succeed) to not be prisoners of history, you see it helps to have those ticketing rights over both.

or is it a stockholm syndrome case? either disown the moghuls or own them but this hypocrisy is weird. that on one point you call it the dark ages of indian civilzation and yet you love to own them up and call them your own.

Stockholm syndrome?? Nobody loves anyone here, there is respect for Akbar but that's it. They are now our history just like the British built structures are our history too. You don't worry your poor head about us, we will do fine. Save all the worry for all the hate that you have to have to not understand that we see history, not in black & white but in the grey that it usually is.

 

[Bang Galore]

which favourite dish majority of indians like the most?

I'm sure some (really, really sorry ones ) will disagree but I believe a couple of surveys came up with the masala dosa as the favourite.

 

[ice_man]

There was a lot of killings of Hindu's but then no one can wipe out a big community, China was overrun so many times in their history, but they are still there, the moghuls built buildings to be used and they wanted us to marvel at their architectural brilliance. They were on a superiority trip and wanted to leave behind a lot of things that speak of their legacy. We don't care much about them at all.

BEING OVER RUN is different from being subject to genocide! not all invaders carry out a genocide all the time. moghuls if they weren't tolerant then they would have surely forcefully converted many people. but after 800 years of rule they clearly showed that they were equally as tolerant as the rulers of jerusalem or of the ottoman empire.

 

[abhishekgoel80]

On few post:
I don't care what the Indian feel about mughals but they are inseparable part of our history now. Regarding respect I would say most have been selfish rurals much like are present politicians without any mentality of reforms or mass upliftment.

Those who think Akbar was secular than please remember he was a mughal who at the time where considered looters and plunderers; The ethnic indians at the time the turkish gentry, afghans and the Rajputs all view them as parasites the rajputs were the least powerful. Though muslims at the time were less than 5% of the population they were the elite ( caste or class) ruling the subcontinent. 80% of the people where jungle tribes peasants, artisans (SC/ST/OBCs) who were serving other and nobody exactly cared for them they were just payng the revenues to the kings and lords.

Mughals (in time of Akbat) needed allies to survive and they found it in some weak rajputs clan who were fighting against afghans and other rajputs.

Almost all Mughals have historic recording of sanctioning massacres on the basis of religion at some or other time; but religion was never the agenda it was a political agenda to win favours from Muslim elite.
May be Joe can throw more light in detail

The technology mughals brought to sub-continent was gun and horses; but they were narrow minded person as the Akbar was the person who dis-allowed the printing machine imports stating that writers will be out of business. (Like some politicians of today opposing computerization). Judging by vast expense of India and diversity its anybodies guess what could have been achieved. It might have helped Islam but we would better educated and advanced nation.

 

[ice_man]

Akbar is respected because he was a great King both militarily & administratively and it didn't hurt that he was the most tolerant of the Mughals.



Same ticketing rights....what part of that don't you understand?



Neither Qutubuddin Aibak or Iltutmish (who completed it) were mughals & yeah the same ticketing rights story interests us.




....because it's part of our history. You won't understand. In Karnataka, people go visit the magnificent ruins of Hampi & then go on & see the Gol Gumbuz in Bijapur & think nothing much of it even if the Sultanate had been responsible for the destruction of Hampi. We try (don't always succeed) to not be prisoners of history, you see it helps to have those ticketing rights over both.



Stockholm syndrome?? Nobody loves anyone here, there is respect for Akbar but that's it. They are now our history just like the British built structures are our history too. You don't worry your poor head about us, we will do fine. Save all the worry for all the hate that you have to have to not understand that we see history, not in black & white but in the grey that it usually is.[/QUOTE]



i like how you tip toe and show how utopian society india is and yet your friends here complain of how evil and Draconian the moghuls were. clearly the hate towards the moghuls that you try to hide is not so well hidden in your friends here. who clearly try to show how the british were actual saviours of their culture from the moghuls.

last part oh well that clearly is the best defence of indians when they know they have nothing to aruge with by turning their guns onto us and how "cruel,evil & draconian" pakistanis are.

the bottom line is to pakistanis moghuls were great and were the golden era of this area while the british invaders destroyed our culture and changed the history books and put the hindus in power when LEAVING! and since then the hindus want to forget everything in between and just remember 47 and before that ashoka, with a few bed time stories of some rajputs that stood upto moghuls instead of uniting with them.