myth of indian independence ?

[ifesvr]

1. The Declaration of Indian Independence (or Purna Swaraj) was passed on 26 January 1930. That is why the Constitution was adopted on the same day in 1950 when India became a Republic. India was the first nation to do so in the Commonwealth of nations eventually being followed by many others.
In that sense the independence for both Pakistan wand India was in August 1947 but the dominion status left later on.

2. For your second question, you do understand that the Governor-general even if it was symbolic was a representative or appointed head of the King/Queen of UK. If you regard the Indian Independence on 15 Aug as a myth on account of Lord Mountbatten being English then the same can go for Pakistan as MA Jinnah was Indian. Both the 2 G-Gs of India and 4 G-Gs of Pakistan and Pakistan was appointed by the King/Queen of UK, even though it was the home govts. selection.

Moreover, AFAIK the 1st Constitution of Pakistan came only in 1956 when it became an Islamic Republic, so my question to you would be Which "constitution" did Jinnah took an oath on? Until 1956 Pakistan was governed under the Government of India Act of 1935.

just a tidbit...the present Queen Elizabeth II of the UK was also ironically the Queen of Pakistan from 1952 to March 1956.

 

[Leader]

India got rid of dominion status when we made 'Indian Constitution' on 26th January 1950.

That's why both 15th August and 26th January are national holidays.

Although India obtained its independence on 15 August 1947, it did not yet have a permanent constitution; instead, its laws were based on the modified colonial Government of India Act 1935, and the country was a Dominion, with George VI as head of state and Earl Mountbatten as Governor General. * wiki about republic day of india.

lawfully both the countries didnt get independence on the same day as 14-15 August. you remained under the British til 1950...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Leader]

1. The Declaration of Indian Independence (or Purna Swaraj) was passed on 26 January 1930. That is why the Constitution was adopted on the same day in 1950 when India became a Republic. India was the first nation to do so in the Commonwealth of nations eventually being followed by many others.
In that sense the independence for both Pakistan wand India was in August 1947 but the dominion status left later on.

2. For your second question, you do understand that the Governor-general even if it was symbolic was a representative or appointed head of the King/Queen of UK. If you regard the Indian Independence on 15 Aug as a myth on account of Lord Mountbatten being English then the same can go for Pakistan as MA Jinnah was Indian. Both the 2 G-Gs of India and 4 G-Gs of Pakistan and Pakistan was appointed by the King/Queen of UK, even though it was the home govts. selection.

Moreover, AFAIK the 1st Constitution of Pakistan came only in 1956 when it became an Islamic Republic, so my question to you would be Which "constitution" did Jinnah took an oath on? Until 1956 Pakistan was governed under the Government of India Act of 1935.

just a tidbit...the present Queen Elizabeth II of the UK was also ironically the Queen of Pakistan from 1952 to March 1956.

1- so basically 15august is a transfer of power day for newly born india, and actually it got independence on 26th of january 1950 when it got rid of domino status...

2-3 Yes, Jinnah amended it, thats what I said before posing questions to indians... Mountbatten being Governor General is entirely different from a indian born Pakistani leader or visa versa... you know it very well...


now how powerful was Mountbatten ? was he bound by constituent assembly of india to obey the indian demands? what exactly was the power equation between Nehru and lord Mountbatten before gaining full independence from British?

and one more question, did Mountbatten try to keep india under British crown ?

 

[T90TankGuy]

so you are taking Mountbatten as your founding father ???

---------- Post added at 04:21 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:20 PM ----------



probably a sikh from Pakistan is ruling India ? no ?

one should endeavor to learn the English language before trying to reply .
i called the people who drafted our Constitution our founding fathers. by the way how could Jinnah sign as loyal to the Constitution of Pakistan when it was not written till 71?

 

[Leader]

one should endeavor to learn the English language before trying to reply .
i called the people who drafted our Constitution our founding fathers. by the way how could Jinnah sign as loyal to the Constitution of Pakistan when it was not written till 71?

thats why he was a successful lawyer and a successful opposition leader...

 

[aakash_2410]

Although India obtained its independence on 15 August 1947, it did not yet have a permanent constitution; instead, its laws were based on the modified colonial Government of India Act 1935, and the country was a Dominion, with George VI as head of state and Earl Mountbatten as Governor General. * wiki about republic day of india.

lawfully both the countries didnt get independence on the same day as 14-15 August. you remained under the British til 1950...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Not really mate. Dominion status does not mean you're not independent. Look at Canada, Australia and Jamaica they're still British dominion does that mean they are not indepedant? Dominion status only means that Queen of England is the head of the country and not President.

Going by your logic Pakistan made constitution in 1973, before that it followed the British rules so does that mean you guys weren't independent till 1973? No right.

 

[Maritimer]

Mountbatten lost his Viceregal title on 15 August 1947 and became the Governor General, signalling the end of British imperialism in India (Independence Day). The governance was firmly under the control of Nehru-led cabinet and the Constituent Assembly. Mountbatten was replaced by C Rajagopalchari as Governor General on 21 June 1948 and India adopted its own constitution on 26 January 1950 and became a Republic and President Rajendra Prasad was elected. During the period 1947-1950, India was officially known as Union of India with dominion status similar to Pakistan between 1947-1956.

Don't know what is the fuss? And what is this domino???

 

[ifesvr]

1- so basically 15august is a transfer of power day for newly born india, and actually it got independence on 26th of january 1950 when it got rid of domino status...

NO, I'd rather say it's the other way round. 15 Aug indeed is the Independence day while 26 Jan is the actual transfer of power.

But, when u look at the transfer of power the Indian and Pakistan perspective is different. That's why as a Pakistani you view the Governor-General above the Prime Minister. While it was and is usual in Pakistan for the 4 G-Gs and subsequent Presidents to have more power than the Prime Minister, in India the G-Gs and presidents are a ceremonial Head of State with very limited powers(on which too he/she needs the recommendation of the govt. before action).

2-3 Yes, Jinnah amended it, thats what I said before posing questions to indians... Mountbatten being Governor General is entirely different from a indian born Pakistani leader or visa versa... you know it very well...

Well, you did not answer which Constitution of Pakistan did he take an oath on. As i said earlier the first came in 1956. Amending wordings in the oath does not change anything, there actually needs to be a Constitution. And anyways Jinnah took the oath to Lord Mountbatten thereby legitimating the rule of King George VI.

now how powerful was Mountbatten ? was he bound by constituent assembly of india to obey the indian demands? what exactly was the power equation between Nehru and lord Mountbatten before gaining full independence from British?

and one more question, did Mountbatten try to keep india under British crown ?

See my first response above and as i said earlier in 1950 India became the first Republic in CON thereby relinquishing the British Crown. Also an example is the Hyderabad case where Mountbatten advised then Home Minister Patel to resolve the issue with negotiations and without the use of force. But, Patel eventually did otherwise.

 

[third eye]

1- so basically 15august is a transfer of power day for newly born india, and actually it got independence on 26th of january 1950 when it got rid of domino status...

2-3 Yes, Jinnah amended it, thats what I said before posing questions to indians... Mountbatten being Governor General is entirely different from a indian born Pakistani leader or visa versa... you know it very well...


now how powerful was Mountbatten ? was he bound by constituent assembly of india to obey the indian demands? what exactly was the power equation between Nehru and lord Mountbatten before gaining full independence from British?

and one more question, did Mountbatten try to keep india under British crown ?

What diff did it make who the GG was post Aug 47 ?

The Queen remained Head of State for India & Pak.

 

[Leader]

Not really mate. Dominion status does not mean you're not independent. Look at Canada, Australia and Jamaica they're still British dominion does that mean they are not indepedant? Dominion status only means that Queen of England is the head of the country and not President.

Going by your logic Pakistan made constitution in 1973, before that it followed the British rules so does that mean you guys weren't independent till 1973? No right.

symbolically I meant to say, cause like I stated in the first post how Jinnah amended the oath, and got out of loyalty to British thing...

 

[Leader]

NO, I'd rather say it's the other way round. 15 Aug indeed is the Independence day while 26 Jan is the actual transfer of power.

But, when u look at the transfer of power the Indian and Pakistan perspective is different. That's why as a Pakistani you view the Governor-General above the Prime Minister. While it was and is usual in Pakistan for the 4 G-Gs and subsequent Presidents to have more power than the Prime Minister, in India the G-Gs and presidents are a ceremonial Head of State with very limited powers(on which too he/she needs the recommendation of the govt. before action).

its not about who being the powerful, its about the person ! Mountbatten being your governor general for whatever reasons, incompetency is not a sin, nor an excuse to let a foreigner governor general and that too from the same country who enslaved us ?

Well, you did not answer which Constitution of Pakistan did he take an oath on. As i said earlier the first came in 1956. Amending wordings in the oath does not change anything, there actually needs to be a Constitution. And anyways Jinnah took the oath to Lord Mountbatten thereby legitimating the rule of King George VI.

oh yes symbolically it does. obviously when the words are removed, it clearly shows the difference... rest was formal procedure... be it just a game of words or whatever, but now one can see the difference and importance...

See my first response above and as i said earlier in 1950 India became the first Republic in CON thereby relinquishing the British Crown. Also an example is the Hyderabad case where Mountbatten advised then Home Minister Patel to resolve the issue with negotiations and without the use of force. But, Patel eventually did otherwise.

not the question of power...

 

[ifesvr]

its not about who being the powerful, its about the person ! Mountbatten being your governor general for whatever reasons, incompetency is not a sin, nor an excuse to let a foreigner governor general and that too from the same country who enslaved us ?

oh yes symbolically it does. obviously when the words are removed, it clearly shows the difference... rest was formal procedure... be it just a game of words or whatever, but now one can see the difference and importance...

not the question of power...

Well so you do accept that the power was in the hands of govt. But if your problem is with Mountbatten, a foreigner being the G-G of India, then there's a lot of such examples we need to discuss. The first 2-3 Chief of all the 3 military forces of both India, Pakistan were British. KM Cariappa was the first Indian COAS in 1949, it was 1951 for Pak. And the major one, Queen Elizabeth is also a 'person' and she in 1952 was coronated as the Queen of 7 major independent countries (apart from many small) - UK, Canada, Australia, SA, NZ, SL and Pakistan. Why didn't Pakistan de-recognize her? As for Jinnah's game of words - Actions speak louder than words.

---------- Post added at 08:16 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:15 PM ----------

What diff did it make who the GG was post Aug 47 ?

The Queen remained Head of State for India & Pak.

Correction..The Queen was never Head of state of India. She became a Queen only in 1952 when King George died, 2 years after India became republic.

 

[Leader]

Well so you do accept that the power was in the hands of govt. But if your problem is with Mountbatten, a foreigner being the G-G of India, then there's a lot of such examples we need to discuss. The first 2-3 Chief of all the 3 military forces of both India, Pakistan were British. KM Cariappa was the first Indian COAS in 1949, it was 1951 for Pak. And the major one, Queen Elizabeth is also a 'person' and she in 1952 was coronated as the Queen of 7 major independent countries (apart from many small) - UK, Canada, Australia, SA, NZ, SL and Pakistan. Why didn't Pakistan de-recognize her? As for Jinnah's game of words - Actions speak louder than words.

I have discussed that already, even still some units get their medals and patronage from Queen and royal army of england, that is not the issue here, first thing was dominion issue, Jinnah didnot take oath on to be loyal to Crown or King of England, where as India remained loyal to Crown...and accepted Mountbatten as its governor general...that is the leader... so technically you got a leader who was not indian national, not part of INC...yet ruling India...while claims are made for struggle for independence from INC.... it doesnot really make sense, year after the independence you still listen sermons from Lord Mountbatten..

 

[scrumpy]

The Royal Family from England is actually Indian

So there you go, we were actually ruled over by our fellow countrymen all that while.

 

[mitth]

independence Indian ...........have .......good.............