Your way of expressing things never ceases to amaze me, it as if you imagine a view in your mind of someone's point of view that you can argue against, when it has no basis in reality. Please do show me one single post where I said or implied or alluded to the idea there not people in the Uk who share emotional subjective attitude towards British rule of the colonies. About India if people cant face facts or have limited knowledge, I cant do much about that. In any case how does that translate I am "incapable of realizing ? Your logias usual incomprehensible

As far poor houses and other comments the difference is I try to look at the whole picture and the evidence. And not the crazy pivots you do whensomeone mentons a fact that doesnt correspond with teh rosy view tat you potray of Inida..,
.
I was responding to your comment why does EMR visit India if he comments on some negative aspects. So I just asked since you have this fantasy in your mind based generally on no evidence or understanding of history or economics of 'evil' British rule, why would you are your family step foot in Britain ? Why would you use modern technology in India derived from British rule ? .​​​Members of my mother's family after the war refused to step foot in Germany after what they saw there during the war ( two were in Germany at the end in May 1945.

Your lack of insight into your own closed mind never ceases to amaze me!!

Those who have views regarding the negatives of colonial rule for the 'natives'; have "emotional", "subjective" views, "can't face facts", "no understanding of history", "limited knowledge" (Even though they were there and were the supposed beneficiaries!!!!)

Again---- you ask the question "why would I or my family step foot in Britain"? I thought it was only EMR that had trouble reading (understandable, as I sense that he is dyslexic) what is your problem?????
How many times have I told you? I am British, UK is my country of birth and origin. Our children and grandchildren were born in the UK----I speak English!!! I live in the UK as well as in India!!!!!!

The British Raj is history.

Technology derived from British rule??? Why do you assume that if the British hadn't been there people would still be travelling in bullock carts????? How is that different from UK citizens in horse and cart??

Again you describe my "rosy view"-----HOW MANY TIMES---have I told you I could write pages----even a book!----about negatives of India----you never ask what ----just go on about your own narrow views!!!

Morpeth why do you not join in the discussion with the Keralan poster on the 'Republic Day' thread----It would be interesting!!!

If you could write a book etc ., why do you object to anything negative in the News, call the BBC biased, accuse Indian press of being socialist, left wing because it publishes the same news. ?

let's agree, then
If the British raj is history then anything that predated it is also history and has little relevance in today s world..

EMR You frequently describe UK newspapers as being biased about various matters, why do you think the media of other countries is different?

You do not live in India how can you possibly know?
You always pick out the wrong items!! You miss much of the real problems of the country.

You tell me why does the BBC regularly report on crime in India and not China, Australia, Nigeria etc.etc.

It does .

​​​​​Your lack of insight into your own closed mind never ceases to amaze me!!

Well Bipat again you may have a problem either with reading or logic. If you look back on the many posts you will see quite a few times where I have acknowledged my lack of knowledge on a particular item or where I have learned from posts. But for most items you never have any evidence to contradict others of view, and rather fanciful comments you throw out for which the only proof is what your relative’s state. On several occasions I have presented form a wide variety of sources material, Indian and foreign, private and government- you then deny everyone without any data or logic. You throw out comments about the middle class person in India not having possessions under British rule, bizarre comments about the amount and flow of British taxation, or refer to a book by someone with not the slightest understanding f economics.

You sometime post nonsense or clearly incorrect facts about India- then when someone indicates the error you never say that you made an error, instead I saw it out my window or my relatives told me” meaning everything ese is not true. You apparently for example very unaware of the restrictions India places on foreign business.


Those who have views regarding the negatives of colonial rule for the 'natives'; have "emotional", "subjective" views, "can't face facts", "no understanding of history", "limited knowledge" (Even though they were there and were the supposed beneficiaries!!!!)

Again not true, I have tried wherever possible when I gave an opinion or question to back up with evidence or logic. You bias is well-known and your fantasy depiction of British rule is fine for Indian patriots but not anyone who seriously wants an understanding.


Again---- you ask the question "why would I or my family step foot in Britain"? I thought it was only EMR that had trouble reading (understandable, as I sense that he is dyslexic) what is your problem?????
How many times have I told you? I am British, UK is my country of birth and origin. Our children and grandchildren were born in the UK----I speak English!!! I live in the UK as well as in India!!!!!!
I ask the logical question- you ask EMR why he would want to visit India considering he points out some things about the country (he does the same for other countries, just this rhead is about India). Considering what many (read the posts form others as well) your extreme bias and fanaticism about India and dislike of British rule and your comments, I just asked a simple question why you would want to step foot in Britian.


















The British Raj is history.

True but Indians seen to have been brought up judging from your comments to relish the role of victim and blame even after 70 years the sheer poverty in the country on everyone else but themselves. I mean really- a country that cannot provide toilets for millions , goes off and starts a Space Program. I would think any person with a social conscience would be appalled.

Technology derived from British rule??? Why do you assume that if the British hadn't been there people would still be travelling in bullock carts????? How is that different from UK citizens in horse and cart??

You seem to be ignorant of what India was like before the British arrived, nor what benefits has derived from Western science, technology and institutions. I don’t deny and never have there were some negatives from British rule- I can only go by what evidence is there not Indian patriotism.

Again you describe my "rosy view"-----HOW MANY TIMES---have I told you I could write pages----even a book!----about negatives of India----you never ask what ----just go on about your own narrow views!!!

Yu keep saying he same thing for which it is stage why you would think relevant. If you look back on thsii and other threads it is just people responding to comments you have made. If you have negative views relevant to the discussion why not just post them?

1) We have been through this so many times----You will not accept that your views are open to dispute as regards British rule in India.
How do you know what the average middle class person owned during the Raj?
Taxation----you even doubt the salt tax!!
Morpeth for those who only possessed a small patch of coastal land that tax could mean starvation.
As a light hearted suggestion, I said get a DVD of the film Lagaan---I presume you would think it nonsense---!

The book you refer to is I presume that of Shashi Tharoor-----Yes a despicable character---I presume you realise that he has been finally charged----I don't suppose you know anything about that!!!
His book however has a bibliography of more than 130 pages----references for each chapter------are they ALL wrong.
He should have asked for the help of Morpeth shouldn't he? the all time definitive expert on the Raj!!

We have discussed the restrictions on foreign business -----you seem incapable of accepting that politics will affect the speed of change.

What I have seen in 50 years of travel throughout India through multiple States, knowing countless people, living with actual Indian people is all ' folk memory'.
However those British of the Raj in their segregated housing are absolutely knowledgeable!!

2) I just repeated the words you used.

3) Can you not see the stupidity of asking a British person who lives in Britain why they would want to step foot in Britain??? British rule I history ---why would it affect me NOW?
It is not present governments responsible.

(EMR has nothing but criticism of India---he attacks every post which even mentions India-----he has finally spent 3 weeks there--it would seem a reasonable question to ask why go
again?)

4) "Goes off and starts a space programme"------I have said that it was inappropriate for Nehru to start it when he did. However why waste the years of research, put people out of work, end the cooperation with other countries NOW????

Do you not think that Indian's themselves are the best judges of how the Raj affected them?? Why is you view accurate but theirs "patriotism"?
What was the UK 'like' for the majority of its poor 200 years ago??

5) You describe my "rosy views" ---just because I disagree with your repetitive posts.
"People responding" -----It is just you yourself and EMR-----refusing to accept any views but your own-----one of you until recently not set foot in the place----the other with personal links to the Raj.

As I said why don't you join in the conversation on the Indian 'Republic thread" At least other posters to exchange views with!!

Bipat we respond simply because you refuse to accept even the most basic facts and recorded history..

The problem Bipat is you do not read posts clearly- you make up comments that are not even supported by the posts your refer to. This is such an interesting thought process you have it is actually fascinating to read.



1) We have been through this so many times----You will not accept that your views are open to dispute as regards British rule in India.- another silly and ridiculous comment that is factually wrong that can be proven buy numerous posts where I have readily acknowledged there are different views.

2) How do you know what the average middle class person owned during the Raj? I haven’t read any specific study on the possessions of the middle class at the tim ( and I doubt you have either), as I pointed out on anecdotal evidence of being in Indian and Pakistani homes, and speaking to people from the subcontinent, and indirectly references to the economic growth that happened in India. You yourself backtracked ( as often the case) at the absurdity of your blanked comment the=at the middle class didnt have possessions but referring to differences in different part other country. I remember specifically a Parsi school teacher I had who was quite poor by western standards and sometimes she would tutor me in her ‘house’ but showing me possessions that had been handed down through generations.I have asked friends form the subcontinent about your assertion-most laughed and said either some Hindu nationalist or some left-wing foreigner only who would make such a comment.

3) Taxation----you even doubt the salt tax!! – Another absurd comment – please show me one single post where I have denied there was a salt tax ? f you care to look back or employ any sort of reasonable logic, the discussion about taxes resulted from anoethr blanket statement of yours about where and how tax revenues where spent ( Tharoor makes similar comments to yours).

4) Morpeth for those who only possessed a small patch of coastal land that tax could mean starvation. I am not sure what comment this is in reference too.
5. )The book you refer to is I presume that of Shashi Tharoor-----Yes a despicable character---I presume you realize that he has been finally charged----I don't suppose you know anything about that!!!
His book however has a bibliography of more than 130 pages----references for each chapter------are they ALL wrong.

His economic illiteracy and his desire to write a polemic means that either he chose references that hardly proves his point, or betray his limited understanding fo economic history. But I can see for Indian patriots in produces a narrative that people like yourself appreciate. I listen to his speeches on YouTube, often sheer nonsense.

5.He should have asked for the help of Morpeth shouldn't he? the all time definitive expert on the Raj!! Very childish. I have on numerous occasions indicated areas that I have little knowledge of, or that referred to consensus views of experts. As far as Throop I have students like that, wanting to give an opinon and licking only facts or distorting the facts to suit the opinion they wish to give. I wrote quite a few detailed posts of his nonsense approach- but judging from your comments many inIndia would think highly of such drivel. He clearly doesn’t have any grasp of economics economic history.

6. We have discussed the restrictions on foreign business -----you seem incapable of accepting that politics will affect the speed of change. I don’t mean to be rude as I appreciate a lot of the current events information you post, but do you ever read or remember the posts? I have never and I act specifically commented that politics effects the rate of speed of change. I aver just pointed out the numerous occasions you have exhibited lttle understanding fo the restrictions still in place on foreign business, or even Indian business for that matter.In fact currently I am in discussions with an Indian businessman about a possible venture in India and his first comment was that one has to understand the inane regulatory structure in India. I have also repeatedly praised the improvements in recent years.
7.knowing countless people, living with actual Indian people is all ' folk memory'.
However those British of the Raj in their segregated housing are absolutely knowledgeable!! Again you don’t read posts evidently, I have written on numerous occasions whether of the views of the English or of Indians one had to consider other sides, issues of bias and experience- yoru view that only the views of Indians are valid which you have stated on numerous occasions is hardly a way to get a better understanding.

8.Can you not see the stupidity of asking a British person who lives in Britain why they would want to step foot in Britain??? British rule I history ---why would it affect me NOW- It was a rhetorical question following your lead in what you asked EMR.
9.It is not present governments responsible.Has the current government eliminated the inane economic regulation ? Stopped the immoral Space Program ? Gone back to other countries asking for foreign aid for the poor ?


10. "Goes off and starts a space programme"------I have said that it was inappropriate for Nehru to start it when he did. However why waste the years of research, put people out of work, end the cooperation with other countries NOW???? The lack of empathy for the poor is astonishing but apparently widespread among the middle and upper class, perhaps just de-sensitized to the poverty as Americans in Chicago might be to gun violence.

11. Do you not think that Indian's themselves are the best judges of how the Raj affected them?? Why is you view accurate but theirs "patriotism"? Scholarship is not determined in its quality or depth by subjective bias. If Indians like you and Throop have views based on nonsense, why woodland say because Indian it is better? Just like a British historian may have bias in the other way. In History one has to account for bias against the evidence or logic- something you have over and over proven that evidence does not matter to you.
12, what was the UK 'like' for the majority of its poor 200 years ago?? The commercial and scientific revolution underway in the 19th century, and social reforms developed vast improvements. In your case you are talking about a stagnant declining society before the British came that showed not the slightest shred of evidence of matching the ability of Britain to progress as it did. And worse since you belittle what was brought to India such as modern medicine and transportaton and institutions, one has to imagine you have a strange belief that India showed that it could have developed a similar commercial and social revolution absent any evidence or logic showing that.
5) You describe my "rosy views" ---just because I disagree with your repetitive posts. Others have made the same comments and have the same impression about you portrayal of India.( I have the same issue with Americans who like to claim in everything is number 1 in the world).
6.)"People responding" -----It is just you yourself and EMR-----refusing to accept any views but your own-----one of you until recently not set foot in the place----the other with personal links to the Raj. And you have links to disgruntled people seeking to blame the British, but that doesn’t mean your views ae inherently wrong unless the evidence shows otherwise. You make a big deal how your family memory is so important-but then discount the family memory of others.



I appreciate all your comments about current events in India, showing the Indian perspective on things, and certainly on several subjects ( such as the famines)that I should study a bit more. The conversation would go easier if you stopped making posts about things which people never said in the first place.

​​​​​​

2) 'Studies of the middle class'-???????-----I was staying in the homes of and living with what could be described as middle class in the 1960s------OH was born into it---so we don't have to study it? Yes they had possessions that were handed down -----hardly anything bought new compared (with what I read)---the British furnished their segregated homes in India.

5) I said a bibliography of 130+ pages------'books'------are they ALL wrong??

10) your numbering seems to have gone astray!-----'Lack of empathy with the poor????? This Morpeth is an insult that is just not acceptable-------

We live with the poor around us, in our house, in the shops in the surrounding villages. We ride in their rickshaws daily.

The British only saw at a distance.

My late mother in law----would take destitute young girls give them a home, teach them, clothe them, give them extra money at wedding time. This is commonplace among the middle classes---(One early memory of our present home is the father of one girl sleeping on a mat in the kitchen with his tobacco tin-- his only possession. )

Morpeth we cannot agree----- can I ask WHY you don't join in the Republic thread and discuss there??????

The British were the ruling class as the Mughals before them so normal many would have had a nicer situation in life,

Everything an insult to you. Simply defending space programs, lack of toilets, a government that refuses because of pride and patriotism to ask for help for the dire poverty in India, yes to me a lack of empathy. No personal intent intended.And actually I have refrained form many observations from people who were there during the Raj.so as to not upset you unduly

My comments on personal possessions .same source as yours- observations by those who were there and a few of my own- neither of us apparently have studied condition of the middle class from any economic or sociological study.

.

Having references doesnt mean they are good references, or have been used correctly Many silly books written for lay persons have lots of references. I actually checked a few of his refererences at the time, often form other polemics or Tharoor exercised no discernment or understanding.​​​​â� �‹â€‹There is a book called Holy Blood,Holy Grail quite popular among conspiracy type people and one sees it and simialr books at airports. Tos of references- I did a paper on the book , 90% of references were either meaningless, or misunderstood, or not relevant. so having a lot references no proof. Tharoor is even worse- he makes observations ( like you do on history or economic matters) for which a reference should be noted and doesnt.

Sorry for your families past but it simply isnt true that all or even the majority of he middle class in India under British rule had no possessions.You cna tell such a story to simple-minded people or people who have no knowledge of histry or havent vsisite dthe thrid world- but you get upset when EMR or I coment on such nonsense

Morpeth are you really saying that the Indian middle classes lived at the same standard as the British. No need to feel sorry for our family thay had land and were self-sufficient, male relatives were educated professionals (stll natives though so inferior to the occupiers). Which by your tone you are completely in agreement!

A bibliography of 130 pages of books and you disagree with the lot (did you read all of them?

"Simple minded people with no knowledge", ---of the reality of actual lives-- but just read books!!!!!

Why don't you join in the Republic day thread??????

Bipat you may wish to take a break from posting for a day, you just prove my point as you over and over post things that neither I or EMR ever said.. I really dont know what the explanation is , a lack of knowledge of language or logic or what? My post said teh exact opposite of what you have just written

Why would I read each and every reference when after reading a few it is quite obvious the lack of understanding or the poor use of references is so apparent ? I know you are desperate arent any logic to find support for whatever view you have and cant ever let evidence change your mind but I cant imagine serious academic or expert could take someone like Tharoor seriously..

.