I randomly came accross this page. I haven't verified the claims made in it nor properly assessed any potential bias. But I found it interesting in its mentioning of the past of india and about the east india company. indianrealist.com/2009/03/19/how-india-became-poor/
Just reading the genocide insighted by the British makes my blood boil. Nevertheless this is just another page in the Indian history. If you want to know more about this in a condensed form. Try and source a documentary "History of India". The documentary might be in youtube. Its a pretty long documentary. At least it will save you from reading 100's of books.
Sorry, i have no idea how to edit my own reply, as i dont see the edit button. I have found the link. It wasnt the "History of India" rather "Story of India" here's the link http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/story-of-india/ Ironically brought to you by BBC :lol:
I loved the story of the first english sea traders that arrived in the famous land of India to trade their coarse woven linen, flax & whale oil with the poor barbaric locals.... and were met at the docks by traders dressed in the finest silks of amazing colours & patterns, dripping in gold jewelry & sorrounded by the most amazing spices known to humanity.
Thanks for that I'll look into it. I've suddenly become more interested in indias past. And welcome to the forum.
Before anyone gets all angry at the British for events that occurred in India, just remember that the Hindu Holocaust of the Mughal rulers had not ended when the British arrived. Think of a million people dead per year for over 100 years just because they were not islamic or resisted the Mughals. Many of the remaining Hindu princes were happy to become part of the British Empire to protect their people.
Yup well aware of the attrocities that Mughals commited. But the article OP linked was focused on the most recent ruler. There is no such thing as lesser evil or greater evil, evil is evil. Whether you kill for 1 person or 100 million, its all the same. Attrocities that both of these rulers commited to a sovereign nation was pure evil. One learned the lesson India had to teach them, the other did not. Its not that they were 'happy' to become part of the british, but rather a political move to keep whatever power they had previously. If they resisted im sure they would have lost everything.
The bloody British, imagine going to a foreign country and just taking over by killing the locals, sad for India but I am glad that didn't happen over here.
No, it's just you weren't taught in school what happened. The reason they had to treaty in New Zealand was the fact they couldn't defeat the Maoris... they were too bloody tough!
Couldn't beat the Gurkhas either so we gave them a job instead. I read the 'Fatal Shore' good book on Australian History.
They also have had independence for over 65 years... They are also so poor they have a space program and self-developed nuclear weapons...
You're talking about the Treaty of Waitangi. Nowdays its just a gravy train for any rural Maori who claims membership to an iwi (tribe). Some of the northern tribes (the ones with the most access/contact to Europeans) started trading for contemporary firearms (muskets) on a large scale for their inter-tribal wars. Once the British realized what happened it just became easier to make them 'subjects' through the treaty than to fight them. Also the French were making colonial progress in the South Island tribes so the Brits had to act. If the northern tribes didn't get firearms, or the French didn't compete I'd wager the Maori would have been scattered and enslaved (at best, for them). Hunted down and exterminated (at worse, for them).
Yes but over suffered tyranny for over 400 years under 2 different rulers. 65 years of freedom is nothing really. I don't see why they need a space, at least not when their root social structure is chaotic at best. With massive poverty left by the tyrannical rulers. This was a grave mistake. It will come back bite them on the ass. Nuclear weapons are deterrent at best. The only real cause for concern are the ones who are willing to use it. For the moment. Its serving its purpose.
Being on the other edge of the planet during the age of sail might have had something to do with it as well.
You're not seeing the point of why I brought up the Indian space program and nuclear weapons program. It is a complex country but does have a lot of wealth. Three and a bit generations since independence with the Indians acting in their self interest can't be overlooked or, like you're doing, completely dismissed. What do you think about the Indian automotive industry. Growing at a scale that it has bought out Jaguar and Rover. Is that an indication of poverty? And to go back to the colonial period, the irrigation techniques, transport systems and medical care developed in India by the British increased life span and public health of all Indians, even the poor. Is increasing life span an indicative metric of increasing poverty??
Yes this is true, but you are not looking at the whole picture. India did not spring up in the last 65 years. It has been around far far longer (tens of thousands of years). For most of its existence it lived by itself peacefully. But only recently has it been under a protracted period of turmoil. Constant invasion after invasion. Senseless/mindless killing after killing. So if you consider this grand timeline and the period of peace and turmoil you start to see that the recent 65 years of independence nothing more than a massive power vacuum or rather a a chaotic period. Independence was something India was never ready for. But it needed it. Also I'm trying to keep to the topic at hand of 'how India became poor' I have no wish to speculate on the 'what might happen' since this is just pure speculation. There is no difinitive future. Only a difinitive past. I would like ask you a question. That is if you were a leader of India what would you do to sort out the mess/problems left behind by tyrannical rulers of your past, and bring India into modern age much like your neighbors around you? I'm sorry I have no knowledge on this. So I can't answer this question. No its not. I must point out here that. My main issue is with, the senseless slaughtering of innocent people that the British commited. I will not ever condone or respect shotgun diplomacy. As that is what they did. They see a land of riches before them but have nothing of value for trade. So what do they do? 'shotgun diplomacy' invade the country and take all the resources. Having said that, the British, much like the other rulers did give something back (but took far more than they gave). But let's not kid ourselves here. They provided these service because they planned on 'managing' India. In other words They planned to have settlers in India to enslave the local population. So yes they did bring some technology to India, but not for the reason you seem to believe. Does this sound familiar? This is not the only time this atrocity was committed. They did this to native Australians (aborigines) as well as american Indians. Only the Indians managed to break free from the British. So please don't try to portray the British as some sort of savior. Their path of destruction is here for all of us to see.
