What's new

Busting the myth of "British Railway Gift" and other gifts to India

IND151

BANNED
Joined
Oct 25, 2010
Messages
10,170
Reaction score
3
Country
India
Location
India
Indian Railways

After the boycott of the Simon Commission, from 1927, and the death of Lala Lajpat Rai, it was clear (especially to the British) that their days were numbered. Facing problems at home and abroad, the significant British interest in India was extraction of remaining wealth in Indian hands.

A prime example of that was the railways.

indian%20railway.jpg



During WW2, nearly 40% rolling stock from India was diverted to the Middle East.More than 50% of the track system was the outdated metre gauge and narrow gauge. Track systems were nearly a century old. 40% of the railway system went to Pakistan. 32 of the forty-two separate railway systems operating in India, were owned by the former Indian princely states. So much for the British gift of railways to India. More than 8000 outdated steam engines were used as motive power – and less than 20 diesel locomotives were in use.

Starved of investments and maintenance, the railways infrastructure at the time of British departure was crumbling. Colonial British (subsequently, the Indian also) response was to affix the blame onto the employee at the lowest rung and move onto the next one accident.

Post Independent India continued with this practice – till LB Shastri called a halt to this. In 1956, the Madras-Tuticorin express plunged into a river when when a bridge at Ariyalur (Tamil Nadu) was washed away in floods. 144 (some records suggest 156) passengers died. He resigned from the Union Cabinet – claiming moral responsibility for the railway accident.



This resignation saw LB Shastri become a political legend. This (resignation) also changed the mindset of the Indian Railways. After fresh elections of 1957, one year later, he was re-inducted into the Union Cabinet. Steadily, as railways infrastructure was upgraded, accidents decreased.

It took a non-Congress Government in 1977 to change the face of Indian Railways. Prof.Madhu Dandavate, the Railway Minister in the 1977 Janata Government started the railway renaissance in India. 3rd class railway travel was abolished. Wooden-slat seats were abolished. Cushioned 2nd class seating system was made minimum and standard. Train time tables were re-configured. Reservation systems improved. Railways started getting profitable.

The de-colonization of Indian Railways began effectively in 1977 – 30 years after British departure. Symbolically, that was also the year that the Rail Museum was set up. The progress after that has been remarkable. Today for a US$5, an Indian can travel for a 1000 km.

All this when only 25% of Indians travel by rail at least once a year.

https://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&r..._YGYCA&usg=AFQjCNFyLW--7b7hMpobNKUFIAbiD1thOw

Note: My intention behind opning the thread that letting people know the state of Indian railway in 1947 and If Indian Railway is a huge force now, providing means of cheap travel to millions of Indians, it is due to Millions of Railway Employees and ministers like L.B Shastri and Prof. Madhu Dandvate.
 
. . . . . . . . .
Technically speaking, it is correct to say the British did not gift those railways mentioned in the article. In fact, all the railways in India were not gifted. They were owned 100 percent by the Indian people because of the amount of treasures the British took from the India by force, by tricks, by lies.

But the fact reminds it was the British who introduced the railways to India. They designed, built, fabricated, managed, maintained the system.

So in broad term, it is correct to say the British gifted India the railways.
 
. .
I have to agree with the article to some extent. I don't think that anything in India left by the British can be called "gift", as the intent was never to give the Indian people something, but rather to take things from the Indian people by building these tools. If they could find a profitable way to dismantle the tracks and ship them to somewhere else, they would have done it.

That being said, it is a sad fact that for the past few decades the Indian government failed to significantly develop the railway system left by the British. It was a great asset, but the Indian government did not invest much in it, instead just kept milking the old system to its somewhat run-down status. Had the Indian government showed any capability of independent development, no one would have thought of this "gift" theory.
 
.
Most of the Indian giants like the L&T are gifts of British empire to India.

u place the credit to the princely states but also call them traitors...............

The British transformed fishing villages into business hubs like Bombay and Calcutta......

army traditions on both side of the border still follow British love.
 
.
Most of the Indian giants like the L&T are gifts of British empire to India.

u place the credit to the princely states but also call them traitors...............

The British transformed fishing villages into business hubs like Bombay and Calcutta......

army traditions on both side of the border still follow British love.

Umm - Larsen and Toubro was started by two Danish guys at the very end of the Raj. Hardly a gift of the Empire.
 
.
What would you call Turkey siding with the Whites in the EU and not joining with its brothers in the Middle East.

Well Turks are an Altaic speaking people form East Asia who have Indo-European and C.Asian genetic makeup, not middle-eastern.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom