a_f_d

So it was a jolly good thing that we had created India out of all those Principalities, robber baronies and stumps of Islamic Empires <bg>


AndyD 8-)₹

Bipat

I am sure they all including OH and all our relatives are extremely grateful.
(Own community (not caste) have a few hundred years of written history)
Those that received VCs--- the start of this discussion should really give thanks to Britain that they were allowed to put their lives' on the line'.

a_f_d

now now; I think that counts as sarcasm (rather than irony*), but it did actually demonstrate equality of opportunity!
.. and (ignoring massive social and other pressures) all soldiers were volunteers then.

AndyD 8-)₹

* we really need an American input here to keep the pot boiling.

Bipat

It was meant as sarcasm!!
"Equality of opportunity ", for some! you are forgetting all the 'no natives here' signs.
Was just discussing this------- 'to and fro' between two posters on The Forum!! ---while on a quick rickshaw trip to market.
"The British 'courted' the principalities, on the divide and rule principle, it was Sardar Patel who was a great unifying force" I was told.

What have Americans got to do with anything??

a_f_d

Sardar Patel - the latest poster boy of the far right - 'unified' newly independent India by ignoring all Constitutional guarantees and sending the army into any of the Princely States that resisted 'unification'. This was later compounded when the government, against strenuous opposition from the Supreme Court, abolished the Princely privileges written into the Constitution (armed escorts, salutes, pensions - that sort of thing - though not as extensive as those now unofficially enjoyed by politicians).
Americans are reputed to hold contrarian views on sarcasm versus irony.

AndyD 8-)₹

Bipat

Sardar Patel was a Congress leader (had some sympathy with BJP--so on this --Forum that means 'far right'!!)
The British, as I said favoured/honoured the Princes, in a divide and rule strategy, there were more than 500 such states, to have a unified country (that you stated the British provided!!) it was necessary to give power to people rather than the princes, for most it was a peaceful transition.
It was Mrs Gandhi who made an amendment to the Constitution removing their 'purses' etc. among a lot of other brutal things she did.

Andy, this discussion started with recognising the peoples of the Empire/later Commonwealth who gave their lives in 2 world wars. Including Indian men from India.--
To turn this into a tirade --
----'they were 'British really', 'Britain was in India and giving some sort of charitable purpose' instead of for their own wealth getting interests, and gave soldiers an "opportunity"
--- In my opinion is a shameful response.

erinsgirl

Give it a rest please !

prestonjohn

Patel ordered the invasion of Hyderabad, an independent state which had its own army and air force.The Nizam was deposed and the state jewels were grabbed by Delhi.They are still there.His descendants were paid a pittance of their worth and they had to wait for over 60 years to get that. Kashmir was another victim too.Originally it was sold by The East India Company as surplus to requirements after the Sikh wars,to a business man Named Hari Singh who adopted the title of Maharajah.Its no coincidence that Modi`s role model is Sadar Patel, an ultra nationalist and like all nationalists completely delusional in his vision of an India from The Himalayas to the tip of Sri Lanka, not Konekumara...Some times i think that Indias paranoia around the British Raj period is based on the facts that India in its present state still uses the methods and apparatus developed in that period.The police controlled from Delhi. The army controlled from Delhi.Railways etc Delhi. Naipaul theorised that the only thing holding India together is force and fear.Tamil Nadu if given the chance would dump India in a flash and go for a Greater Tamil Elam, which includes parts of Sri Lanka....

Bipat

You have been reading your books again.
Tell me, why is it OK to be proud to be British but not proud to be Indian? Nationalism OK for the British not for other countries?

Bipat

You mean anything negative regarding India is not to be questioned or discussed on this Forum.
Is anything positive ever allowed or only the negative??
Why choose to become an expat in India if no interest to discuss its politics/history or learn from those who actually experienced happenings.

I did not get these impressions from your previous posts.

a_f_d

OK

AndyD 8-)₹

prestonjohn

Thats where you are completely wrong im not and never have been a nationalist.Nationalism i associate with fascism.I live in the United Kingdom, not Great Britain.And if your such a great Indian Nationalist why are you living in the UK Bipat ?

Bipat

Being proud of your country makes you a fascist??????
I have homes in both countries, live in both at different times and am proud of both.
The name is (Bi)pat not Expat. OH has the same sentiments--although our politics differ he is a Modi/ Cameron supporter. I am a Lib-Dem member----(more of a Social Democrat though)---yes it's OK to laugh---our children do.
(I am proud of them too, although they are each quite different)!!!!

Bipat

My govt’s only religion is India first: Modi - The Times of India

Modi 'puts down' RSS oldies with above speech.
I agree with PJ that great orator is always worrying, but all orators are not Hitlers.!!!

Today is budget day!!!!

a_f_d

... gov't of Maharashtra are to convert the house where he was born into a Kipling museum.
wonder what quotes they'll put on the walls? probably not:

Take up the White Man's burden –
The savage wars of peace –
Fill full the mouth of Famine
And bid the sickness cease;
And when your goal is nearest
The end for others sought,
Watch sloth and heathen Folly
Bring all your hopes to nought.

<s> AndyD 8-)₹