Think India should be grateful for colonialism? Here are 5 reasons why you're unbelievably ignorant

[Hindustani78]

What about the Muslim rule?

Fakir-Sanyassi rebellion was against the policies and even for the pride of fatherland. Those Fakir-Sanyassi later moved into Maratha controlled regions.

 

[MST]

On a serious note...All Hindus should thank the British otherwise we would still be under Muslim rule. British rule provided many Hindus to focus on education and gain equal political footing (whatever little there was) with the Muslims.

Had it not been for British Hindus would still be ruled by a version of ISIS.

And the first point is wrong. The partition is the best thing that happened to India. Though the loss of life was a sad event. It should have not happened.

 

[Brickwall]

Colonialism is never good, foreigners who come to rule, is always for their greed, expecting them to be nice is just wishful thinking

We have been constant rule by foreigners for long time, and what is most painful or stupidity , is that we ourselves invite them.

We need to learn from history, whenever we fight with each other, some one else come and make hay out of it.

 

[ArsalanKhan21]

On a serious note...All Hindus should thank the British otherwise we would still be under Muslim rule

Not really. There was serious decline in South Asian Muslim power and the rise of Sikhs and Marathas have already destroyed the Mughal empire. There would have been around 10 major independent regional states in South Asia like Europe today.

 

[arp2041]

I also thank Great Britain for separating Bangladesh from us......They were the real pain in the @$$!!

 

[MST]

Not really. There was serious decline in South Asian Muslim power and the rise of Sikhs and Marathas have already destroyed Mughal empire. There would have been around 10 major independent regional states in South Asia like Europe today.

The sepoy revolt of 1857 was fought under Bahadur Shah Jafar. Guess whose rule it would be had they succeeded. Even if we assume that British failed and Marathas and Sikhs revolt removed Muslim rule, having 10 independent states is lot worse than having one single unified India and one Pakistan (later became 2 for different reason).

So status co is still lot better and my point holds.

 

[ArsalanKhan21]

The sepoy revolt of 1857 was fought under Bahadur Shah Jafar. Guess whose rule it would be had they succeeded. Even if we assume that British failed and Marathas and Sikhs revolt removed Muslim rule, having 10 independent states is lot worse than having one single unified India and one Pakistan (later became 2 for different reason). So status co is still lot better and my point holds.

In Europe, the collapse of Holy Roman empire gave rise to small ethnic states while the Protestent-Catholic conflict had small effect. The South Asia would have a different map with regional states. We are discussing hypothetically.

 

[Sugarcane]

In absence of East India Company there would have been dozens of countries in Indian subcontinent. So, Indians should consider Koh-i-Noor as price of "Indian Union"

 

[Mrc]

Democracy was given to us in 1857 in to iraq in 2003

 

[MST]

In Europe, the collapse of Holy Roman empire gave rise to small ethnic states while the Protestent-Catholic conflict had small effect. The South Asia would have a different map with regional states. We are discussing hypothetically.

Agreed. The impact of British Colonialism lead to the best outcome for Hindus, a single unified nation where they are 80% majority. What they are doing with this majority is a seperate issue. Hence I said all Hindus should thank the British.

For Muslims, British Colonialism along with Jinnah's desire for partition lead to possibly the least desirable outcome. Compared to ruling the whole subcontinent till 18th century, they not only lost most of the subcontinent but their rule is now relegated to the two margins of subcontinent.

 

[livingdead]

you cant blame british for operation bluestar.. come on thats desperate. Also I dont think Indians would have done anything different in case of mutiny.
Rest of the list make sense.

 

[ArsalanKhan21]

........For Muslims, British Colonialism

Muslims feared the rise of revivalist and resurgent Hindus coupled with the democracy where 70% of the population was Hindu and only 25% Muslim.

 

[MST]

Muslims feared the rise of revivalist and resurgent Hindus coupled with the democracy where 70% of the population was Hindu and only 25% Muslim.

I seriously doubt there were 25% Muslims in pre partition India. I don't have a definite source but even if we consider today's numbers

Muslims = 200 million (pakistan) + 180 Million India + 150 Million Bangladesh = 530 Million
Hindus = 850 Million (India)

So its more like 60:40 in favor of Hindus. i don't think the ratio would have changed much. So unless you have a source, pre partition ratio should also be in the range of 60:40 in favor of Hindus.

Now considering Hindus can't even elect a Hindu centric government even with 80% majority (e.g. in Bihar) this fear among Muslims of resurgent Hindus was highly overrated and IMHO cost them dearly.

you cant blame british for operation bluestar.. come on thats desperate. Also I dont think Indians would have done anything different in case of mutiny.
Rest of the list make sense.

Even the Kohinoor one is flimsy.

 

[Hindustani78]

On a serious note...All Hindus should thank the British otherwise we would still be under Muslim rule. British rule provided many Hindus to focus on education and gain equal political footing (whatever little there was) with the Muslims.

Had it not been for British Hindus would still be ruled by a version of ISIS.

And the first point is wrong. The partition is the best thing that happened to India. Though the loss of life was a sad event. It should have not happened.

4 to 7 Million Bengali speaking Indians were dead during the second world war because of famine which let to the changing of population equation

A map of the British Indian Empire in 1909 during the partition of Bengal (1905–1911


and then partition further more divided our lands

 

[livingdead]

To be honest this is how most British people feel- they are under the impression that the Empire was largely a good thing that civilised the "savages". I don't think this is all too surprising, all nations engage in this kind of revisionism, the one exception being post-WW2 Germany. The British empire was far more destructive (and murderous) than the Nazis ever managed to be but the victors are the ones who write the history books.

The best thing India can do is to make sure that the reality is presented to Indian school children in their curriculum, Indians should not be complicit in whitewashing this part of their history.

They did give us many institutions. That does not mean colonialism was good, overall it was terrible.