The English in India

soulfood

Just stumbled upon a rare article about the British conquest of India written over 150 years ago.

While some might argue the authenticity of Indian and British accounts of the period for their inherent bias, this article written by an American and published in October 1862 sheds good light on the nature of imperialism (previously discussed here).

Excerpt:

If Macaulay had carried out the magnificent programme of his “History of England,” no chapters would have been as valuable as those which would have told “How in Asia British adventurers founded an empire not less splendid and more durable than that of Alexander.” If these chapters had been written with the truthfulness of the famous article upon Warren Hastings, they would have presented a picture of cruelty and rapacity to which the history of the world can show no parallel.

The English in India

.

Tigr

The English had the superior weapons, and in fact put a gun to the head like a cheap terrorist and looted the country. The work was made easier as the rulers were mostly cruel muslims, and the hindu subjects really didn't care for the muislims. The transfer of wealth was so complete, that they turned a country that had one of the highest gnp into one of the lowest.

They made the farmers grow cash crops, when there was a need for food, which resulted in one of the worst man made famine in world's history. Textile was a big industry in India, but they forbade any local production, cutting off the thumbs of any weavers who engaged in their occupation. They forced the locals to buy cloth made in briton. (Gandhi's choice of wearing a dhoti from homemade cloth, was to fight this policy rather make a fashion statement). They totally neglected any maintenance of existing public works, and a concerened british officer's complaint was met with 'do nothing'..

http://members.tripod.com/~INDIA_RESOURCE/colonial.html

They did introduce the concept of democracy, but this concept was already in existence vis a vis the panchayat at village level. The only thing that they did was they removed the stifling muslim rule, so hindus can move again after a 1000 years of being downtrodden.....albeit starting from almost nothing.....

Rob_The_Pom

Always to good to hear an expert.

__________________
The solution to your troubles is at the bottom of a glass

Apana

. . . and an expert who puts it so succinctly . . .

Apana

Rob_The_Pom

I was being sarcastic.

Apana

and so was I. Indians do get sarcasm and irony

Apana

Rob_The_Pom

Hahahahahaha! (laughing at my dumbness)

I'm sorry Apana! That's twice in two days I've missed other people being sarcastic.
I really am a thick twit at times!

How's that for post 400! Telling everyone how dumb I am!!!!!

Apana

Rob, unfortunately soulfood's link doesn't seem to work for me. It should be interesting. Will check it out tomorrow.

Apana

Rob_The_Pom

Well, it's condensed a few hundred years of history into 2 paragraphs - which I think gives it away before we even start.
For me, it also describes things in very black and white terms and as far as I'm concerned, history is never, ever that simple.
(If it was, it wouldn't be interesting).
Recently we had a thread we ran to a couple of hundred posts just discussing the end of empire, even then it really only scratched the surface.

soulfood

Apana, if the link still doesn't work for you, try this one.

sgeneris

I think the 'callousness" of local rulers -who were not all muslims (I can show numerous examples from the local history where I grew up in India) was equally to blame. It has to be remembered that the British came as traders to India. Their methods of manipulation and exploitation is not very different from present day exploitation of India by a bunch of Multinationals (with Indian heads and owners in some cases). Things may have gotten little more 'humane' or 'Polished' with the advent or democracies all over the world, but the methods remain the same.

As much as the British were in India to exploit, I wonder how exploiters/invaders across different centuries can be compared? eg: British rule vs the Moguls vs the whoever.

I find it interesting how complicated issues like this can be cast into simplistic terms for certain people. Maybe it helps you if you like to play the vicitim.

Rob_The_Pom

A very well made point indeed.

machadinha

Great link Soulfood. btw The other Indiamike-thread you link to points to somewhere in the middle of that discussion, I don't know if that's intentional.

I was already tempted to point to this as an aside on that thread so it's no real reaction to Tigr's post above. Anyway seems appropriate here but more of a general observation in short: another great article that Harper's site leads to is this, Slouching Towards Mecca, 'Originally from “The Fall of Islam,” Harper's New Monthly Magazine, vol. 14, iss. 79, December 1856.' It seems to put the whole "modern" view of Islam esp. in the west in a broader perspective, maybe that view isn't so modern after all.

Anyway kind of off topic here but it caught my attention.

__________________
Reading tips, all picked up at IndiaMike : INDAX's A Comprehensive Guide To India / Dinoj Surendran's Desi Humor / ITHVC on Culture Shock & Travel Health / JetLag Travel Guides For the Undiscerning Traveller / India Travel Links

Tigr

No one is playing the victim (I am personally doing quite well economically). I am just explaining how a country considered one of the richest in terms of gnp in the 16th century became one of the poorest in the 20th. I obviously summarized as there can be voluminous textbooks written about the subject, however I did provide a link which deals it in more details with quotes and instances taken from european writers themselves.

There were many selfish, and cowardly rulers during those years, but their policies did not get rid of manufacturing industry, or had farmers growing cash crops only to benefit the majesty's coffers while the rest of the humanity was dying of famine. The muslims rulers were cruel to the hindus, but they weren't so bad for the muslims, and there might have been shift of wealth within the country...it didn't leave the country. Just look at all the british crown jewels that originated in India to give you a symbolic idea on transfer of wealth.

Its in the past, however it still boils me to see my country men clean toilets
at Heathrow...doing it despite occasional racial insults swallowing pride to feed the family., or do menial labor in the arab world and generally get treated like servants, but things will equal out over time. That's how karma works.

sticky

We need someone to create a sarcastic smiley icon..... maybe winking, and nodding..... with a blind bat under its arm

__________________
->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->->

Flashpackers: Backpackers doing it in style.