What If Attlee Hadn’t Partitioned India?

[Spring Onion]

Muslim League did nothing for independence, British never arrested any Muslim league leader because they were always loyal to British.

First they created hurdle for Congress in Consituent Assembly, after creating Pakistan they created hurdle for Pakistan's constituent assembly and Liaquat Ali Khan dissolved it.

Muslim ulema were the ones who were killed mercilessly by the brits. infact these were Muslims who joined hands with hindu sadhus for earlier independence movements. League leaders need NOT to be killed prove Muslims' contribution towards Independence of Subcontinent.

I have always wondered, what would happened if there was no partition of the subcontinent.

Then Gandhi might NOT had been killed by Hindu extremists.
Rest everything would have been the same

 

[doppelganger]

There would've been another considerably more bloody Partition after that !

Afaik there was. It happened in 1971.

 

[Armstrong]

Afaik there was. It happened in 1971.

Yes it did ! But looking to score Brownie Points doesn't take anything away from what I was alluding to in the context of what the lady has posted !

 

[doppelganger]

Yes it did ! But looking to score Brownie Points doesn't take anything away from what I was alluding to in the context of what the lady has posted !

As long as the point was scored, we can both be happy.

 

[INDIC]

Muslim ulema were the ones who were killed mercilessly by the brits. infact these were Muslims who joined hands with hindu sadhus for earlier independence movements. League leaders need NOT to be killed prove Muslims' contribution towards Independence of Subcontinent.

I mentioned the leadership of Muslim League, not the Muslims. Till victory of Muslim League in 1946 election, most of the Muslims were supporting Congress.

 

[bronxbull]

Muslim ulema were the ones who were killed mercilessly by the brits. infact these were Muslims who joined hands with hindu sadhus for earlier independence movements. League leaders need NOT to be killed prove Muslims' contribution towards Independence of Subcontinent.



Then Gandhi might NOT had been killed by Hindu extremists.
Rest everything would have been the same

Hindus were also killed for opposing.

Nobody is saying muslims were against independence but the muslim league's position is different from the muslims.

if u inssit to play them as the sole saviours,then you gotta own up to their faults too.

 

[Tshering22]

I have always wondered, what would happened if there was no partition of the subcontinent.

Well its a good thing it happened and was done over with it.

There would have been multiple civil wars within the united country if they had not separated.

However, the older generation of Pakistanis are far more open-minded despite the riots compared to the post-80s youth of today.

In the pre-80s, it was more about territorial aggression rather than religion and stuff, even if the two partitioned on that basis.

After Russians left Afghanistan, it became worse.

Then Gandhi might NOT had been killed by Hindu extremists.
Rest everything would have been the same

What extremist?

That man almost gave away entire India to you lot.

After such a bloody partition, he supported you guys more than the Hindu community to the brink.

That's what RSS got pissed about.

If he had lived more than that, Zahil Hamid's dream would have come true.

 

[SnakeBoat]

Several facts are omitted.
In Hindu dominated regions, in those times, Feudalism made sure that the minorities were abused, oppressed and denied the basic necessities of life. The same happened to Hindus in Muslim dominated regions of the British Raj.
Let us not forget that Iqbal's own view of life was colored through the prism of migrating from Muslim dominated Punjab in early life, that was then being ruled by dominant clans of Punjabi Sikhs. Deep religious leanings in mid life buttressed his views on having a Muslim dominated national entity. Being a poet and naive about real-politik, it is easy to see him envision a pure Muslim society with its freedom prospering alongside a peaceful Hindu brother-state. Bear in mind, pakistan was a festering topic during those times since 1935. It did not happen a day before independence. Sure, political ambitions played into the drama, but were not the only reasons.

The real missed event was to have one or more fully autonomous regions within the Union of India without resorting to partition. The famines and political bigotry by both sides together with the seemingly large influence of princely states dictated the final result. But imagine how the leading lights of those epoch could have saved millions from death, migration and losing their loved ones. The partition was primarily about human misery and still remains so. None of us can be proud of that historic burden. Stats from CIA fact book doesn't ameliorate it. Think of the costs of 3 wars that could have been prevented. think of the social progress we could have made... a la Singapore or Japan post war?
How can you say without a modicum of shame, that the partition was the best thing?
That is an insult to all those who had to endure the tribulations of that period.

Fact remains that there are still communities in India, including Muslims who are still feeling insecure and being denied the same amount of opportunities that a Hindu will receive. This is a failing of our communities. We as a nation has tried to correct this by bringing in lawas that benefit the minority communities. They have worked to some extent.. perhaps not to the extent we woudl have liked. But nevertheless, the fact remains that despite partition, we never became a religion centric country, We are still secular in the constitution. and in every walk of life, individuals from every minority get a chance irrespective of their religious beliefs. e.g Abdul Kalam Azad, Ak Antony, Zeenat Aman, Shah Rukh and every other Khan, Mohd. Azharuddin, Zakir Hussein, Sunith Francis Rodrigues, Idris Hasan Latif, Justice Fatima Beevi etc., They came to the fore, because they were the best, not because they were Muslims.

 

[Spring Onion]

I mentioned the leadership of Muslim League, not the Muslims. Till victory of Muslim League in 1946 election, most of the Muslims were supporting Congress.

Hindus were also killed for opposing.

Nobody is saying muslims were against independence but the muslim league's position is different from the muslims.

if u inssit to play them as the sole saviours,then you gotta own up to their faults too.

Well its a good thing it happened and was done over with it.

There would have been multiple civil wars within the united country if they had not separated.

However, the older generation of Pakistanis are far more open-minded despite the riots compared to the post-80s youth of today.

In the pre-80s, it was more about territorial aggression rather than religion and stuff, even if the two partitioned on that basis.

After Russians left Afghanistan, it became worse.



What extremist?

That man almost gave away entire India to you lot.

After such a bloody partition, he supported you guys more than the Hindu community to the brink.

That's what RSS got pissed about.

If he had lived more than that, Zahil Hamid's dream would have come true.

And that's why Hindu extremists killed Gandhi. Gandhi who is respected by the world is demonized and abused by extremist Hindus because he supported Muslims' rights

 

[Lux de Veritas]

If the Hindus think deeply enough, they may want to thank Jinah for creation of Pakistan. Today, India has 15% Muslim. With Pakistan and Bangladesh, she will more than 40% Muslim.

And South Asia Muslim is projected to rise. At around 2050, South Asia could be a Islam majority region. And if Pakistan and Bangladesh is in India, Dalits conversion to Islam will have even higher momentum.

 

[bronxbull]

And that's why Hindu extremists killed Gandhi. Gandhi who is respected by the world is demonized and abused by extremist Hindus because he supported Muslims' rights

Luckily he was stopped before delusion go the better of him,

His killer in his confession,mentioned clearly why he killed him.

He said he respected Gandhi but at that time Gandhi insisted on 2 things,

1.Gandhi did nothing about partition riots in Punjab/Direct Action day in Bengal
2.Despite doing so much for muslims,they only saw Gandhi as a kaffir(says a lot)
3.Gandhi insisted that we pay our dues to Pakistan of 55 crore at a time when the Nizam was emptying his treasury and giving it to Pak
4.Supporting Jinnah's proposal of a en exclusive Higwhay from Lahore-Dhaka.

Especially the 4th point,if we think how harmful it ll be for India today.

So,in retrospect Godse became the villain and saved us all from a deluded fool,so i salute him for his moral courage to do the right thing regardless of how history judges him.

If the Hindus think deeply enough, they may want to thank Jinah for creation of Pakistan. Today, India has 15% Muslim. With Pakistan and Bangladesh, she will more than 40% Muslim.

And South Asia Muslim is projected to rise. At around 2050, South Asia could be a Islam majority region. And if Pakistan and Bangladesh is in India, Dalits conversion to Islam will have even higher momentum.

if the population in Pak rises too much,then they might want a war with India unless they fight each other to death.

Bngladesh problem is huge as the North Easterenrs are very serious and if we create a Bodoland,they ll have an issue as well.

This puts East India a region of contention.

 

[Contrarian]

Dalits conversion to Islam will have even higher momentum.

There is no more conversion from Hindus to Islam barring for marriage.
There is infact more conversion from Islam to Budhism/Hinduism.

 

[cirr]

What if the British didn't come and colonize India？

 

[INDIC]

What if the British didn't come and colonize India？

What if British and Americans hadn't liberated China from the Japanese.

 

[ghilzai]

What if British and Americans hadn't liberated China from the Japanese.

What if the turco afghan colonization of India continued?