The British Raj in the sub-continent was a good thing for the muslims?

[SarthakGanguly]

Our true religion is islam, the will of God

We would never have gone back to worshipping monkeys or idols

The Muslims were too strong to be subdued and had a history of domination of the sub continent, even without the Mughals there was the likes of Tipu Sultan etc

A stong muslim sub continent would have defeated the british and other colonials, its was sikh and marath ineptitude that meant their rule was short and pathetic and their fight against the british was shamefull

Was that why Mir Jafer sided with the British? Come to India and join AAP. Would suit you and the party well.

 

[Black Widow]

Our true religion is islam, the will of God

We would never have gone back to worshipping monkeys or idols

The Muslims were too strong to be subdued and had a history of domination of the sub continent, even without the Mughals there was the likes of Tipu Sultan etc

A stong muslim sub continent would have defeated the british and other colonials, its was sikh and marath ineptitude that meant their rule was short and pathetic and their fight against the british was shamefull

La la la la /....

Man made religion will vanish one day..

common Muslims were in poor condition, are in poor condition and will be in poor condition in Indian subcontinent.. Only way is to change the religion.. From Afghanistan to Burma, common Muslims live 3rd class life. There life is full of poverty.

 

[Developereo]

British rule was the best thing that ever happened to India's Hindus.

For thousands of years, the various tribes and regions were fighting each other The same British who divided the Muslim world into dozens of pieces did the Hindus a favor by giving them a united country for only the second or third time in history.

If it weren't for the British, modern India would not exist and the various ethnic groups would be fighting each other as separate countries.

 

[Black Widow]

British rule was the best thing that ever happened to India's Hindus.

For thousands of years, the various tribes and regions were fighting each other The same British who divided the Muslim world into dozens of pieces did the Hindus a favor by giving them a united country for only the second or third time in history.

If it weren't for the British, modern India would not exist and the various ethnic groups would be fighting each other as separate countries.

Your History started from 6th century. Before that there was no civilization...

You are highly Misinformed. Tribalism was in Arab and Africa. One of the tribe (Islam) grew rapidly and became religion. Indian were civilized before Islam born..

 

[Developereo]

Your History started from 6th century. Before that there was no civilization...

You are highly Misinformed. Tribalism was in Arab and Africa. One of the tribe (Islam) grew rapidly and became religion. Indian were civilized before Islam born..

Utterly irrelevant to the point I raised.

India was a collection of warring tribes before the British came (except for a couple of brief ancient empires).

Without British colonialism, modern India would not exist.

Hindus would be killing Hindus, as they had been doing for thousands of years, and as Muslims are doing to each other now.

 

[INDIC]

British rule was the best thing that ever happened to India's Hindus.

For thousands of years, the various tribes and regions were fighting each other The same British who divided the Muslim world into dozens of pieces did the Hindus a favor by giving them a united country for only the second or third time in history.

If it weren't for the British, modern India would not exist and the various ethnic groups would be fighting each other as separate countries.

Someone need to teach you about Maratha Empire. Delhi belonged to Maratha since 1758 while Mughals had nothing to rule.

 

[Developereo]

Someone need to teach you about Maratha Empire. Delhi belonged to Maratha since 1758 while Mughals had nothing to rule.

Show me the time periods when the current landmass called Republic of India was a unified country.

There was only the Maurya empire and the other one (Chola or Gupta, I don't remember).

 

[Black Widow]

Utterly irrelevant to the point I raised.

India was a collection of warring tribes before the British came (except for a couple of brief ancient empires).

Without British colonialism, modern India would not exist.

Hindus would be killing Hindus, as they had been doing for thousands of years, and as Muslims are doing to each other now.

Historical blunder.... This happen when you read history at Madarsa.

India didn't had tribe concept. There were small kingdom (Raja) and there was a King of King (Maharaja). The structure was federal in nature. The war rules were very civilized. There was no place of war-crime (women, cattle and scholars were not killed).

Where as tribal religion (Islam) was totally brutal. War crime was integral part of tribal culture. The way our Imam was anihilated at karbala was one of the example.

Before Brits came to India, Marathas were ruling India. The structure was federal, Peshwas (Head of states/Zone) were reporting to Marathas. Rajputana was allaiance with Marathas.

If Industrial revolution would have delayed by 80-100 years, Islam would have been vaporized from India. Oudh, Hyderabad,Mysore and bengal were 4 state where Islam was holding.

Our Bad luck Industrialization happen that time and West became much stronger.. And we lost our 50% land to Islam..

 

[Marigold]

I would argue that the British Raj was a good thing for the muslims in sub-continent because by the time of Bahadur Shah Zafar in 1850s, the Mughals were at their weakest and their decline had become inevitable.
If the british had not taken control of the sub-continent, then the Hindu Marathas in western india and sikhs in punjab would have become dominant force all over sub-continent and Muslims would have been forced to live under their Hindu Raj. I think that would have been even more disastrous for the muslims than the white man's British raj?

The British raj filled that power vacuum at a crucial time in history, and allowed the muslims to regroup first under Sir Syed Ahmad khan's leadership, who worked for the educational upliftment of muslims in the late 1800s. And later the Quaid-e-Azam's muslim league fought to ensure that muslims have Pakistan and the hindu baniyas don't rule over the entire sub-continent

Tha Marathas did not have the Hindu raj, they had the "Hindavi Swarajya" literally meaning Hindu self rule founded by Chhatrapati Shivaji. All religions were treated with respect, there were no forced conversions and there were no religious taxes paid to follow religion like the jizia. And yet you feel that British raj was better? No wonder the British ruled us for so many years.

 

[Developereo]

India didn't had tribe concept.

I was using tribal in the sense of regional groupings. Assign whatever label you want.

The fact is that the various subdivisions in the subcontinent were invading and conquering each other's territory for thousands of years.

And there is no reason why this would have stopped in the modern age.

A unified country was the British's gift to Hinduism. Without the British, modern India would not exist.

 

[Chronos]

Occupation , slavery is NEVER good for anyone.

British Rule has done some good for majority Hindu India since today they might had seen Indian Muslims having more political clout if partition dint take place. (This is my personal opinion you guys might differ).

Well at least in terms of getting social reforms done.

Jyotirao phule with lower caste and female education and Raja Ram Mohan Roy.

We never know what if partition never took place. We can only infer as to what would have happened.

Partiton happened for a reason. What has happened has happened, Ineither view it as good nor bad (excepting the bloodshed).

Couldn't have stopped Pakistan from forming if they really wanted it badly.

 

[INDIC]

Show me the time periods when the current landmass called Republic of India was a unified country.

There was only the Maurya empire and the other one (Chola or Gupta, I don't remember).

I loled on your comment. Marathas controlled most of India by 1758 while treated Nizams of Hyderabad as their tributary by forcing them to pay tribute until British came otherwise they have united rest of them.

 

[Chronos]

I was using tribal in the sense of regional groupings. Assign whatever label you want.

The fact is that the various subdivisions in the subcontinent were invading and conquering each other's territory for thousands of years.

And there is no reason why this would have stopped in the modern age.

A unified country was the British's gift to Hinduism. Without the British, modern India would not exist.

Hell, if you look at the state of Kerala, where I come from, you had the Travancore kingdom and the Kingdom of Cochin.

I think it is actually a remarkable feat on the part of Indian government how many diverse ethnic communities across state lines hold themselves to be Indian. Even though the thought was relatively young.

The idea may have been given by the British, but Indians still have to execute it, and keep it together. And they did, despite the fragility of the Union, the many ethnic groups we have and the various tongues spoken.

 

[third eye]

The idea may have been given by the British, but Indians still have to execute it, and keep it together. And they did, despite the fragility of the Union, the many ethnic groups we have and the various tongues spoken.

Well put.

It is particularly important since the same formula was applied to all parts of British India.

Post partition, one part held on to it, improved it even perfected it.

 

[Truth Finder]

There was only the Maurya empire and the other one (Chola or Gupta, I don't remember).

Gupta(300 ad to 600 ad) direct rule. Rest of the kingdoms pay tributes.

Pala(750 ad to 1174 ad) direct rule. Rest of the kingdoms pay tributes.

Maratha(1707 to 1800s) direct rule. Rest of the kingdoms pay tributes.