The British Imperialism in India: A Boon or Curse

[rkumar]

Friend,

How many colleges and Universities were established by the British Crown in India till 1947 and what is their number today?

How many factories and Big, medium or small industries were established by the British Government in India till 1947 and what is their number today?

Coming to provision of Railway and Road transport, one cannot fail to understand that this was done not for welfare of the Indians but for using these facilities to serve their colonial interests like ensuring smooth flow of Indian Raw Material to ports and also making provision for easy transportation of military to quell the trouble, if any in vast stretch of Indian occupied empire !

The British colonial system sucked the economic and cultural fabric of the nation and showed and nourished the seeds of communalism which ultimately led to partition of India. For understanding this phenomenon kindly go through records of the Bengal Asiatic Society or the foundation of the Muslim League in 1906 with provision of separate representation of Hindus and Muslims in local self bodies provided by Government of India Act 1909. Divide and rule policy and this proportional representation continued to be widened subsequently till the British did what they wanted, the tearing off of India in three parts before granting Independence in 1948.

Not to speak of visiting, not everyone has heard the name of Ross Islands.

But it is certain that it was a bane for the Indians to be ruled by the British. The Britishers suffered at the places mentioned by you because they were always in quest of looting natural resources and wealth wherever they could lay their hands.

Swami Dayanand Saraswati has said in this regard:

VIDESHI ACCHHI SE ACHHI SARKAR SE SWADESHI BURI SE BURI SARKAR ACHHI HOTI HAI !!

We are talking same thing just with one difference. You are explaining the symptoms and I am trying to explain the underlying disease and its pathology. Let us forget about British, as if they never came to India. Let us go back to 1857 and try to trace the future course India would have taken. What do you think India of today would have been? Please try to paint a realistic picture of today's India. In my view we would have been at least 500 small countries like Singapore fighting with each other like Somalia and Ethiopia. You are talking of Buddhists era when people were travelling from India to all parts of world. Yes they were and thats why India was very strong in those days. Were we still travelling around the globe during Prithvi Raj Chauhan's period? Did our rulers have intelligence when Afghan Lashkars started from Ghazni to attack them? How come we had to fight them all on our own territories in Panipat and not in Kandhar? Fate of India can not be understood unless we understand the society of the time. Lessons of the history are not in story telling but in understand the causes of that story. Will you like to tell us the name of any university or college established by Mughals or even Prithvi Raj Chauhan ? Any university established by Raja Man Singh of Amber? Any scientist patronized by Akbar or Jahangir? Name me one significant technical innovation made by Indians from 1000 AD to 1857 AD. We can't be singing the Maurya period songs for ever. Could one mount the navigational tools of Sawai Jai Singh on a ship and go all over the globe? Could sailors rely on his solar clocks on high seas when it was cloudy?

RK^2

RK^2

 

[rkumar]

I am a product of convent school education and western education. Are you suggesting I am anti nationalist, anti jat culture, anti local language etc? If so, you are entitled to the views and I do not mind.

Fact of the matter is that all nationalists were educated in modern schools and not in Madarsa or Ashrams of some Sadhus. Gandhi, Nehru, Patel, Subhash, Jinnah.... and 100s of them got their education in most modern schools. I can not think of even one prominent nationalist who was educated in the ashram of some pundit in Kashi or Haridwar.

RK^2

 

[rkumar]

From what I have seen and learnt about Indian history, British were in awe of the richness of Indian art and may I add, to the religious Hindu fervor of India to some extent. I use the word 'awe' because unlike some previous conquerors, the British did not physically destroy the existing Indian art such as in temples etc. Infact, they admired it, for they took away some of the most beautiful sculptures for preservation in their museums, so their people could have access to the beauty India held, and still holds. This export May anger some Indians, and I donot blame them.

Its British who established institutions like Archaeological Survey of India who are responsible for preservation of our monuments. It was a British officer who saw Taj Mahal surrounded by vagitation and who protected it. In fact Ashoka the great was almost lost and only western historians brought his greatness to limelight.

RK^2

 

[virj]

Friends,

Some people believe it to be a boon whereas others believe it to be bane. So There is no unanimity on the role of the Imperialist occupation of India by the British which started with the battle of Plassey fought in 1757 AD and lasted in 1947 AD. The candid views/opinions of the participants on this contentious issue are invited.

Thanks.

An interesting Topic based on hypothesis. Some people do believe that English rule was good for India. The reason they often give (and all these arguments are taught in English books) are :

1. Brit made India a political entity.
2. They brought science to India. They brought Rails, Roads and Industries.
3. They brought English language and western education.
4. They civilised Indians (claimed by English and taught in the text books prescribed by them).

People argue that if there would have been no English Raj in India, India would have still have been a country of snake charmers. Poverty would have been worse than Africa. Leave these alone there wouldn't have been any such country as India.


Lets have a look at some of the arguments one by one:

Education & Poverty :
In their own words (Lord Macaulay) :

I have travelled across the length and breadth of India and I have not seen one person who is a beggar, who is a thief, such wealth I have seen in this country, such high moral values, people of such calibre, that I do not think we would ever conquer this country, unless we break the very backbone of this nation, which is her spiritual and cultural heritage, and, therefore, I propose that we replace her old and ancient education system, her culture, for if the Indians think that all that is foreign and English is good and greater than their own, they will lose their self esteem, their native culture and they will become what we want them, a truly dominated nation.​

and it was then they implemented their own education system. The objective was to train us to be slaves and break our confidence, make us believe that Britishers are superior. They started their own convent school which were religious school run by nuns and priests who objective was to destroy our culture and religion. In convent schools speaking in Hindi was a punishable offense and is still in some of them. Even till now some Indians proudly claim that their son/daughter are convent school educated. So that was the time when we had no poor, no beggar. Compare this to when they left us. India was a country of beggars.

Infrastructure :
There is no doubt that they build all this infrastructure for their own needs not for our development. They build these roads and rails to effectively travel across India for better administration and to extend their own rule. There are some who argue that there would be no rail till now if there was no British Raj. It is hard to believe as there are other countries like Iran where there was no British Raj and who was culturally similar to us and look at them now they are considered an Industrial Nation now. There was no British rule in China and it was way behind us in 1940s and look at them now. They have one of the fastest rail in the world.

No entity by the name of India :
Well this is true that there might not have been a nation by the name of India. But that also doesn't mean that there would have been 1000s small nations. The boundary of India in the past kept changing. But that was same for everyone else? Historically there was no nation as Iran and Afghanistan. After the fall of Persian empire and Ottoman empire countries reorganised themselves and came up with new entities. Its hypothetical but culturally we are similar to North Pakistani and north west India and North Pakistan could have been one country. There wouldn't have been any partition based on religion. We wouldn't have lost that many people in partition. There probably wouldn't have been a border dispute with China. This region is one of the most fertile in the world and it could have been one of the richest even now.

Muslim Rule :
Some argue we might still have been ruled by Mughals. Its hard to believe as Mughals were very weak by 18th century and in Sikhs and Marathas were stronger.

But perhaps before we start this debate we need to understand the basic first that it was a foreign rule and we were no more than slave. If you were given two options live in Golden palace and be a slave for ever or live in open fields with not enough to eat I am sure all of us with little self respect with choose the latter. Why did Bhagat Singh laid his life. Just to breathe in "free air". Why did Netaji struggled and made an army against English raj? Because he couldn't see our motherland under Foreign Rule. It was a time when we treated like second class citizens in our own country. We couldn't enter their settlements , couldn't travel in first class. couldn't enter their pubs, couldn't be employed to highest ranks in administration, military and any other services. It was a time when in courts a white men's statement was worth more than all of Indians together.

I can happily live under congress goons for another 56 years but not a single minute as a slave under foreign rule.

 

[drrajpalsingh]

Its British who established institutions like Archaeological Survey of India who are responsible for preservation of our monuments. It was a British officer who saw Taj Mahal surrounded by vagitation and who protected it. In fact Ashoka the great was almost lost and only western historians brought his greatness to limelight.

RK^2

Friend,

It is true.

Thanks and regards

 

[drrajpalsingh]

Fact of the matter is that all nationalists were educated in modern schools and not in Madarsa or Ashrams of some Sadhus. Gandhi, Nehru, Patel, Subhash, Jinnah.... and 100s of them got their education in most modern schools. I can not think of even one prominent nationalist who was educated in the ashram of some pundit in Kashi or Haridwar.

RK^2

Friend,

Swami Dayanand Saraswati and Swami Vivekanand neither attended a Public School run by the British and nor were less nationalist to anyone listed above.

This was so because 'the modern schools' run by the British Government aid were nurseries opened to teach patriotism or nationalism to Indians. It was by default that the above quoted persons and many more grew up nationalists by default on account of their own likings and dislike of the foreign rule.

Thanks and regards,

 

[drrajpalsingh]

We are talking same thing just with one difference. You are explaining the symptoms and I am trying to explain the underlying disease and its pathology. Let us forget about British, as if they never came to India. Let us go back to 1857 and try to trace the future course India would have taken. What do you think India of today would have been? Please try to paint a realistic picture of today's India. In my view we would have been at least 500 small countries like Singapore fighting with each other like Somalia and Ethiopia. ...................

RK^2

Friend,

Yes, there had ushered in stagnation in Indian life by the time of advent of 18th century and India failed to develop or adopt modern scientific means to keep pace with the outside world. This aspect needs discussion separately in another post. Coming to first para of your post about the benevolence of the British to Unite India, I may be permitted to say :

Yes , they left no stone unturned to leave behind in India utter chaos and worse than Singapore, Somalia or Ethopia like scenario in 1947. Kindly see the then prevalent condition of political disunity in India; you would find it was worse than when the British entered India.

To understand the impact of colonisation of India by the British there could be no better example than to see that their policy was to 'divide and rule' and when this policy failed to fulfil their dream, they 'divided the India and quit' as the Government of India Act 1947 envisaged not only division of India in East Pakistan [now Bangladesh], West Pakistan [now Pakistan], India and right bestowed upon 600 odd native rulers [nawas, rajas and petty chiefs known as native rulers] either to remain independent from both India and Pakistan or declare their merger with India or Pakistan.

This mischievous provision lays bare the British intentions to leave India a divided house for ever. Thanks God, Sardar Patel and his team saw through this nefarious design earlier than late and got signed documents of accession from the rulers lying within the territorial jurisdiction of modern India in time except in the case of Junagarh, Hyderabad and J and K.

The first two states were made to merge by timely use of forces. Since then, the issue of J and K accession remains thorn in Indian flesh even today.
The unity of India was ensured by blood and sweat of numerous martyrs in these military actions and many more lives were lost due to communal frenzy let loose across both sides of Indian and Pakistan frontiers leading to migration of millions of people loosing their honour, property and wealth.

This was the sorry state of affairs in Indian political integration left behind the British in 1947 !

Thanks,

 

[rkumar]

on a lighter note; how can we call British rule as foreign if all Europeans migrated from India in past ? How about if some Indian diaspora rules India in 3011 AD ? Will that be called foreign rule ?

RK^2

 

[drrajpalsingh]

on a lighter note; how can we call British rule as foreign if all Europeans migrated from India in past ? How about if some Indian diaspora rules India in 3011 AD ? Will that be called foreign rule ?

RK^2

Friend,

On a serious note, how one can equate the two !

Thanks and regards,

 

[maddhan1979]

Its British who established institutions like Archaeological Survey of India who are responsible for preservation of our monuments. It was a British officer who saw Taj Mahal surrounded by vagitation and who protected it. In fact Ashoka the great was almost lost and only western historians brought his greatness to limelight.

RK^2

Rightly said. If British were not in India, things would have been worse and this place would again be another war torn nation, but again, i see dark ages coming back to India, where rule of mob, criminals, religious entities, nepotismic people, half educated people, semi educated people, people with false nationalistic thoughts and agendas that keep India away from the world, are coming to political power through propaganda, democratic power of sentimentally driven, uneducated, "do as u wish" crowd and criminals.

 

[maddhan1979]

Friend,

Yes, there had ushered in stagnation in Indian life by the time of advent of 18th century and India failed to develop or adopt modern scientific means to keep pace with the outside world. This aspect needs discussion separately in another post. Coming to first para of your post about the benevolence of the British to Unite India, I may be permitted to say :

Yes , they left no stone unturned to leave behind in India utter chaos and worse than Singapore, Somalia or Ethopia like scenario in 1947. Kindly see the then prevalent condition of political disunity in India; you would find it was worse than when the British entered India.

To understand the impact of colonisation of India by the British there could be no better example than to see that their policy was to 'divide and rule' and when this policy failed to fulfil their dream, they 'divided the India and quit' as the Government of India Act 1947 envisaged not only division of India in East Pakistan [now Bangladesh], West Pakistan [now Pakistan], India and right bestowed upon 600 odd native rulers [nawas, rajas and petty chiefs known as native rulers] either to remain independent from both India and Pakistan or declare their merger with India or Pakistan.

This mischievous provision lays bare the British intentions to leave India a divided house for ever. Thanks God, Sardar Patel and his team saw through this nefarious design earlier than late and got signed documents of accession from the rulers lying within the territorial jurisdiction of modern India in time except in the case of Junagarh, Hyderabad and J and K.

The first two states were made to merge by timely use of forces. Since then, the issue of J and K accession remains thorn in Indian flesh even today.
The unity of India was ensured by blood and sweat of numerous martyrs in these military actions and many more lives were lost due to communal frenzy let loose across both sides of Indian and Pakistan frontiers leading to migration of millions of people loosing their honour, property and wealth.

This was the sorry state of affairs in Indian political integration left behind the British in 1947 !

Thanks,

The entire concept of "divide and rule" seems crap. Dr.Rajpal Just imagine that you go and start living in Somaliya today, how will u feel? or u go and start living in a place in Afghanistan where strong religious forces control and influence your life, how will u feel?

British came to India after they have gone through religious dark ages of Europe, their society had gone through religious dark ages and they were progressing towards science and other fields of open life. India at that time and even now is controlled by society based, unverifiable, mythological gods and goddesses that hold more value than human lives. When British arrived in India they were facing a crowd of people, who were still living many hundreds of years behind them in terms of thought and scientific progression. These were the crowd of people who were living under more than 500 feudal kings. These were the people who were fighting wars after wars in the name of religion, invaders, feudal kings and so on.

The concept of modern schooling, railway system and lot of other systems come from British, had they not been here, we would still have been fighting religious wars, feudal wars and so on.

I think there are always two thoughts in such issues, one propagated by blind nationalistic people and other thought of people who really live the life. Blind nationalism will always show u the "omnipresent greatness of things around you in life, even if leads you to starvation and fights in the name of religion and other identities. Such entities will never let people see the goodness of other identities, things and thoughts that can improve life beyond the boundaries of their own mental existence"

 

[maddhan1979]

The entire concept of "divide and rule" seems crap. Dr.Rajpal Just imagine that you go and start living in Somaliya today, how will u feel? or u go and start living in a place in Afghanistan where strong religious forces control and influence your life, how will u feel?

British came to India after they have gone through religious dark ages of Europe. When British came to India, their society had gone through religious dark ages and they were progressing towards science and other fields of open life. India at that time and even now is controlled by unverifiable, mythological gods and goddesses that hold more value than human lives. When British arrived in India they were facing a crowd of people, who were still living many hundreds of years behind them interms of thought and scientific progression. These were the crowd of people who were living under more than 500 feudal kings. These were the people who were fighting wars after wars in the name of religion, invaders, feudal kings and so on.

The concept of modern schooling, railway system and lot of other systems come from British, had they not been here, we would still have been fighting religious wars, feudal wars and so on.

I think there are always two thoughts in such issues, one propagated by blind nationalistic people and other thought of people who really live the life. Blind nationalism will always show u the "omnipresent greatness of things around you in life, even if leads you to starvation and fights in the name of religion and other identities. Such entities will never let people see the goodness of other identities, things and thoughts that can improve life beyond the boundaries of their own mental existence"

The greatest sufferers of these continuous wars were the farmers and soldiers, who families are still paying the price of their ancestors hardships.

 

[maddhan1979]

The greatest sufferers of these continuous wars were the farmers and soldiers, who families are still paying the price of their ancestors hardships.

These were the people who were doing farming at a time when farming was totally dependent on Nature and there was no given duration, time, months, years of wars.

 

[maddhan1979]

The entire concept of "divide and rule" seems crap. Dr.Rajpal Just imagine that you go and start living in Somaliya today, how will u feel? or u go and start living in a place in Afghanistan where strong religious forces control and influence your life, how will u feel?

British came to India after they have gone through religious dark ages of Europe, their society had gone through religious dark ages and they were progressing towards science and other fields of open life. India at that time and even now is controlled by unverifiable, mythological gods and goddesses that hold more value than human lives. When British arrived in India they were facing a crowd of people, who were still living many hundreds of years behind them interms of thought and scientific progression. These were the crowd of people who were living under more than 500 feudal kings. These were the people who were fighting wars after wars in the name of religion, invaders, feudal kings and so on.

The concept of modern schooling, railway system and lot of other systems come from British, had they not been here, we would still have been fighting religious wars, feudal wars and so on.

I think there are always two thoughts in such issues, one propagated by blind nationalistic people and other thought of people who really live the life. Blind nationalism will always show u the "omnipresent greatness of things around you in life, even if leads you to starvation and fights in the name of religion and other identities. Such entities will never let people see the goodness of other identities, things and thoughts that can improve life beyond the boundaries of their own mental existence"

When British came to India, there were hundreds of kingdoms and when they left India, there were hundreds of kingdoms, so where does the concept of "Divide and Rule" exists?

 

[maddhan1979]

When British came to India, there were hundreds of kingdoms and when they left India, there were hundreds of kingdoms, so where does the concept of "Divide and Rule" exists?

The entire concept of India exists on the principle of "Unity in Diversity", if people can not accept diversity and differences and try to enforce their ideologies and thoughts on other people and their families then they can not accept and respect unity.

It is essential for people of India to understand the differences and respect the differences and not force their ideologies and thoughts on other people through nationalistic propaganda. Why differences? because, the history, culture, contribution of different communities throughout India has been totally different.

 

[maddhan1979]

Today's world is a global world we should not dwell of false nationalism.

 

[drrajpalsingh]

The entire concept of India exists on the principle of "Unity in Diversity", if people can not accept diversity and differences and try to enforce their ideologies and thoughts on other people and their families then they can not accept and respect unity.

It is essential for people of India to understand the differences and respect the differences and not force their ideologies and thoughts on other people through nationalistic propaganda. Why differences? because, the history, culture, contribution of different communities throughout India has been totally different.

Rightly said, the beauty of India lies in : Unity in diversity; and, diversity in Unity !!!

 

[drrajpalsingh]

Today's world is a global world ............

Ages old gospel of Indian civilisation and culture preaches :

Vasudeva kutumbkam i.e. This Globe is my Family.

But there is no dearth of people in the world who preach narrow mindedness and divisions based on petty differences.

 

[maddhan1979]

Rightly said, the beauty of India lies in : Unity in diversity; and, diversity in Unity !!!

The recent attacks on "North Eastern People of India" or "People of North East in Delhi", might be a reflection of such intolerance to different ways of life, thoughts and people.

This is really bad example in terms of maintaining richness of Indian diversity.

 

[maddhan1979]

Ages old gospel of Indian civilisation and culture preaches :

Vasudeva kutumbkam i.e. This Globe is my Family.

What is this crap? Some kind of lyniching or trapping religious organization for Indians/ NRI's located abroad?