|
Re: Inglorious Empire
Originally Posted by morpeth
(Post 12843939)
I have said many times all evidence should be considered, not just from or another group, that applies anywhere in the world. My mother's memories are valuable because she was a professional caring woman with standards but also caring empathy for those she served which I also observed first hand in the 1960's, not because she was British, Yes because she was British I would have to consider her bias, as I would in an Indian observer, or my impression of your anti-British bias.
There have been famines in India throughout history, though there have been many criticisms by both Indian and British historians of British responses, though also considering the scale and particular circumstances I am unsure whether a Mughal administration would have necessarily handled better. OH his late brother doctors, were caring with standards with empathy for those they served. Post independence they continued to treat British people in India and UK with the same. We are discussing governments. Famines throughout history -----weather conditions have not changed but nowadays there is care for the people no the total neglect as during British occupation. Do you not understand that the conditions preventing storage of food made deaths inevitable? |
Re: Inglorious Empire
Originally Posted by morpeth
(Post 12843946)
Bipat it is useless debate with you to compare the depth and scale of poverty in the Uk compared to India since in prior discussions you reject any and all evidence from Indian and Foreign organizations , universities, governments and academia.
Your views may indicate why India has such endemic and pervasive poverty, that middle and upper class India and from a standpoint of Hindu nationalism or Indian patriotism ans sensitivity , just deny reality.A country where until a few years ago over ten percent of the population, by some estimates twenty percent, well over 100 million didn't even have toilets but defecated in the open. thousands upon thousands of day workers fleeing cities stating otherwise they would starve, hardly do circumstances in Britain compare. Thanks for the links, I stand corrected that such idiotic landlords have also been reported here. Some of 'simple' origin/ancestry in rural areas still prefer to defaecate in the open'. State authorities are trying to stop this. Yes there is still a lot that needs to be done. As for middle class they see present day British bathrooms as rather primitive! Certainly far more toilets than there were in 1947!!!!! Travelling in India with small children in 1960s I would 'dream' of a decent toilet. You seem not to understand population numbers. There are obviously thousands of day workers going back to villages. Obviously they would starve without any income, however the various State governments are giving payments. |
Re: Inglorious Empire
A few months ago I haerd a programme on BBC Radio 4. Reminiscences of British people who lived and worked in India, before and after 1947
I was horrified at the levels of racism expressed by most of the speakers. |
Re: Inglorious Empire
Originally Posted by scot47
(Post 12843959)
A few months ago I haerd a programme on BBC Radio 4. Reminiscences of British people who lived and worked in India, before and after 1947
I was horrified at the levels of racism expressed by most of the speakers. However at the risk of personal knowledge being criticised by Morpeth it mostly didn't. The Indians knew that the local British were under their own government and British authority orders, and they mostly got on together at a personal level. That is partly why so many emigrated to the UK ----they wanted to see what it was like! Also they expected a good response when the got there. As we know that didn't always happen!!! |
Re: Inglorious Empire
Originally Posted by Bipat
(Post 12843949)
Yes I have repeatedly said that there were good relationships between Indian and British--'on the ground' ---
OH his late brother doctors, were caring with standards with empathy for those they served. Post independence they continued to treat British people in India and UK with the same. We are discussing governments. Famines throughout history -----weather conditions have not changed but nowadays there is care for the people no the total neglect as during British occupation. Do you not understand that the conditions preventing storage of food made deaths inevitable? As far as governments while there were relatively few British civil servants in India, less than 5,000 at independence, certainly quite felt there were contributing to the betterment of the Indians and India whether you agree or not, and certainly an administrative achievement to be able to rule the subcontinent with so few. |
Re: Inglorious Empire
Originally Posted by Bipat
(Post 12843986)
Yes it certainly existed.
However at the risk of personal knowledge being criticised by Morpeth it mostly didn't. The Indians knew that the local British were under their own government and British authority orders, and they mostly got on together at a personal level. That is partly why so many emigrated to the UK ----they wanted to see what it was like! Also they expected a good response when the got there. As we know that didn't always happen!!! |
Re: Inglorious Empire
Originally Posted by Bipat
(Post 12843954)
Morpeth I wondered when toilets would come up!! I pointed out to you the wording on the census form that people said they had no toilets when they had good outside toilets.
Some of 'simple' origin/ancestry in rural areas still prefer to defaecate in the open'. State authorities are trying to stop this. Yes there is still a lot that needs to be done. As for middle class they see present day British bathrooms as rather primitive! Certainly far more toilets than there were in 1947!!!!! Travelling in India with small children in 1960s I would 'dream' of a decent toilet. You seem not to understand population numbers. There are obviously thousands of day workers going back to villages. Obviously they would starve without any income, however the various State governments are giving payments. The day workers are in the thousands upon thousands, seeking to get home any way they can- such happening are another indication of the state of the people there. The progress you often refer to under the Modi government certainly shows India's problems go much beyond simply having a large population. |
Re: Inglorious Empire
Originally Posted by Bipat
(Post 12843752)
#
Indira Gandhi was responsible for far more atrocities than that! She was punished for it---assassination!!! You might remember that Margaret Thatcher was a particular friend of Indira! The British were foreign occupiers for nearly 100 years. Until present day memory. The famines killed millions.The apartheid, the poverty that British rule has produced has taken decades to eliminate. May I ask how much time have you actually spent in India and how many States do you know well?? As to your point about Mughul intermarriage with Indians, Mughul men took non-Muslim women, converted them to Islam and had Muslim children with them. Did Mughul Muslim women marry Hindu men and have Hindu children? Nope. That is more like conquest than intermarriage. As for "the apartheid and poverty the British rule has produced", was everyone driving Ferraris before the Brits rocked up in 1700? And did India have a rigid caste system, often enforced by violence, long before the first white man ever set foot there? Don't blame the British for problems that were there long before. In many cases British rule improved these problems, ie with better infrastructure and removal of the jizya tax by Muslims on non-Muslims. |
Re: Inglorious Empire
Originally Posted by scot47
(Post 12843959)
A few months ago I haerd a programme on BBC Radio 4. Reminiscences of British people who lived and worked in India, before and after 1947
I was horrified at the levels of racism expressed by most of the speakers. |
Re: Inglorious Empire
Originally Posted by morpeth
(Post 12844053)
You may wish to re-read my post as nothing in the post indicates I do or do not understand the details of how the famine was handled, therefore your question has no relevance except simply that India has experienced has famines throughout its history, and to judge the British handling of famines takes an understanding of the circumstances at the time-though as I have said several times it seems many who have looked at the period have been critical the British handling of the matter.As far as governments while there were relatively few British civil servants in India, less than 5,000 at independence, certainly quite felt there were contributing to the betterment of the Indians and India whether you agree or not, and certainly an administrative achievement to be able to rule the subcontinent with so few.
(A message today to us is that our Indian town/( 'city' in Indian terms) has ended lockdown today due to excellent management of pandemic in Karnataka State!! So all shops are now open there and rickshaws are trading (our usual form of transport!) People in India were born into the situation of British Rule. They took jobs to earn a living----they had no choice. What else would they do?? As you know the civil servants had good salaries. So did lawyers and other professionals. You also know that the British had guns. Any disobedience was dealt with. Yes there were few soldiers at any one place but increase could be summoned at any one time and also from Britain itself. Presume you supported the last war? Or would you have enjoyed greater wealth under German 'rule'? (Yes I know exactly where the soldiers were stationed in our southern town. Their barracks became a hotel (not much used) and gone now via freeway road building. I also know where the 'No Natives' signs were hung, to prevent entry by locals, including those in professional posts.) |
Re: Inglorious Empire
Originally Posted by morpeth
(Post 12844060)
Bipat, as you recall when is subject discussed before I provided extensive research on the subject by Indian and foreign observers, from the media and academic studies, world institution studies and even Indian government pronouncements- you can try to explain it away or deny the situation- and as you state you have a disregard for any serious analysis- but the situation was obvious, and brought up simply in reference to the absurd idea you have often promoted that poverty in India is not of a scale and depth to that permits any remote comparison to the UK. It isn't a question of population numbers, and as Modi evidently has done very well handling that situation according to the media, there simply needed to be the willpower to address- certainly Modi didn't go to all that effort because of a question on the census form.10 or 20 percent or more of the population is significant whether in the UK or India. .
The day workers are in the thousands upon thousands, seeking to get home any way they can- such happening are another indication of the state of the people there. The progress you often refer to under the Modi government certainly shows India's problems go much beyond simply having a large population. Yes the transport needed was underestimated at the beginning of lockdown. (You might accept that at least they are protected from the pandemic!) I haven't looked up the care packages by Individual States, however the PM-Cares Fund has started. Along with other measures. https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/26/coro...n-dollars.html https://www.mid-day.com/articles/let...umbai/22736282 https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...w/74848539.cms (Modi himself was a tea-seller -----a fact frequently 'mentioned' by the opposition!!) PS ---Just as an aside a Keralan man was airlifted (at presumably his great expense) today from the UK to home to get needed treatment for an ongoing illness. Presumably he feels safer there. |
Re: Inglorious Empire
:popcorn:
Don't stop. This is good . |
Re: Inglorious Empire
Originally Posted by Elgin1983
(Post 12843609)
There wasn't much intermarriage because there weren't many British there. No large-scale settlement, just the thin white line. But for the first 150 years there was intermarriage, which produced the Anglo-Indians. Only after the 1857 rebellion were things changed. As for Mughal "intermarriage", did they allow Hindu men to marry Muslim Mughul women and produce Hindu children? Nope. As is always the way in Islam, Mughul Muslim men took Hindu women, converted them to Islam and had Muslim children, which is really just another form of conquest. Some of the Mughul emperors also imposed the notorious jizya tax on non-Muslims.
As for economics, India's proportion of the world economy was no doubt larger in 1700 than in 1900, but that was because the overall size of the world economy was so much smaller in 1700, before the industrial revolution. The living standards of most Indians were raised significantly during British rule thanks to the things prestonjohn mentioned, such as the railways and other infrastructure, civil service, rule of law, organised system of government, schools and colleges; not to mention the removal of Mughul jizya and oppression of non-Muslims. I enjoyed reading morpeth's learned posts, many thanks. The caste system certainly a harsh one, and I would assume to a degree the influence of British and Western concepts have been beneficial in modern India's views of the caste system and fairness to the untouchables. While one rarely hears about Christians in Pakistan, who are quite discriminated against, Pakistani Christians have told me that historically many converted to Christianity to escape the Hindu caste system. A close Parsi friend made the same observation about some conversions in India. To what extent that was the reason for conversions or some conversions in India proper I do not know, but Bipat puts extraordinary reliance on hearsay so I assume it must be true. |
Re: Inglorious Empire
Originally Posted by Bipat
(Post 12844095)
Morpeth why do you find it surprising that there are thousands of day workers in cities of millions population?????
Yes the transport needed was underestimated at the beginning of lockdown. (You might accept that at least they are protected from the pandemic!) I haven't looked up the care packages by Individual States, however the PM-Cares Fund has started. Along with other measures. https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/26/coro...n-dollars.html https://www.mid-day.com/articles/let...umbai/22736282 https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...w/74848539.cms (Modi himself was a tea-seller -----a fact frequently 'mentioned' by the opposition!!) PS ---Just as an aside a Keralan man was airlifted (at presumably his great expense) today from the UK to home to get needed treatment for an ongoing illness. Presumably he feels safer there. |
Re: Inglorious Empire
Originally Posted by scot47
(Post 12843959)
A few months ago I haerd a programme on BBC Radio 4. Reminiscences of British people who lived and worked in India, before and after 1947
I was horrified at the levels of racism expressed by most of the speakers. The had a Chinese business partner for a few years , describing how white people often referred to as 'long noses' and 'white ghosts' by the Chinese, the Indonesians can be horribly racist against the Chinese, and the Japanese many say racist against everyone. I have sat at a table with Muslims discussing how white people have no souls if they are not converted because looking at how decrepit they said older Europeans looked. Lots to be horrified about everywhere and every time. |
Re: Inglorious Empire
Originally Posted by morpeth
(Post 12844190)
I have never quite understood why in an appraisal of the advantages or disadvantages of British rule Bipat has found it of some importance the degree of intermarriage between the British and the locals. Though certainly the degree of distance the British maintained as compared to Spanish and Portuguese practices and the to a degree the French is distinctive.The caste system certainly a harsh one, and I would assume to a degree the influence of British and Western concepts have been beneficial in modern India's views of the caste system and fairness to the untouchables. While one rarely hears about Christians in Pakistan, who are quite discriminated against, Pakistani Christians have told me that historically many converted to Christianity to escape the Hindu caste system. A close Parsi friend made the same observation about some conversions in India. To what extent that was the reason for conversions or some conversions in India proper I do not know, but Bipat puts extraordinary reliance on hearsay so I assume it must be true.
I am always surprised at the ignorance of people claiming to know everything about India and their view of 'caste'. It was a social 'class' system associated with work, with surnames given appropriately. As Thatcher, Carpenter, etc. Yes the lowest social class 'untouchables' (Dalits), they originated as the group that emptied toilets so could have passed infection -----there were no antibiotics in early times!!! So touching them could be dangerous------think pandemic!!!!!!!! Yes there was terrible cruelty against them. Suggest you read the books of Elizabeth Gaskell and the equivalent in the UK Victorian society. Other 'castes' work groups are proud of their origins they have clubs--group get togethers etc. (The Brahmins if actual priests often live in poverty!!) I presume you know that recent Presidents of India have been Dalits. Castism and any discrimination is illegal in India. Yes there will be discrimination and violence to those in lower social groups as anywhere and local pockets of this in certain areas. Other 'Dalits' run top businesses etc. Yes some change their names most don't. Regarding religion I assume you know about the torture of Hindus in Goa unless they converted and took Portuguese names. Burning of Hindu libraries and documents in Delhi etc. by the British. The conversions to Christianity of the poor on promise of food for their children!! History is violent Morpeth world over, why can you not see this!!!! Yes certainly some lower classes might do anything to hide their origins (In UK they take elocution classes to speak BBC English). (Regarding Parsis they segregated themselves in the sense that it is forbidden to marry out and remain a Parsi. That is why they are prone to certain inherited diseases as are strict orthodox Jewish people. They emigrated to Indi to avoid Muslim persecution. I am sure your Parsi friend explained this.) |
Re: Inglorious Empire
Originally Posted by Bipat
(Post 12844235)
#
I am always surprised at the ignorance of people claiming to know everything about India and their view of 'caste'. It was a social 'class' system associated with work, with surnames given appropriately. As Thatcher, Carpenter, etc. Yes the lowest social class 'untouchables' (Dalits), they originated as the group that emptied toilets so could have passed infection -----there were no antibiotics in early times!!! So touching them could be dangerous------think pandemic!!!!!!!! Yes there was terrible cruelty against them. Suggest you read the books of Elizabeth Gaskell and the equivalent in the UK Victorian society. Other 'castes' work groups are proud of their origins they have clubs--group get togethers etc. (The Brahmins if actual priests often live in poverty!!) I presume you know that recent Presidents of India have been Dalits. Castism and any discrimination is illegal in India. Yes there will be discrimination and violence to those in lower social groups as anywhere and local pockets of this in certain areas. Other 'Dalits' run top businesses etc. Yes some change their names most don't. Regarding religion I assume you know about the torture of Hindus in Goa unless they converted and took Portuguese names. Burning of Hindu libraries and documents in Delhi etc. by the British. The conversions to Christianity of the poor on promise of food for their children!! History is violent Morpeth world over, why can you not see this!!!! Yes certainly some lower classes might do anything to hide their origins (In UK they take elocution classes to speak BBC English). (Regarding Parsis they segregated themselves in the sense that it is forbidden to marry out and remain a Parsi. That is why they are prone to certain inherited diseases as are strict orthodox Jewish people. They emigrated to Indi to avoid Muslim persecution. I am sure your Parsi friend explained this.) Read carefully- you stated people “claiming to know everything about India and the caste system.” However, what I wrote was “To what extent that was the reason for conversions or some conversions in India proper I do not know.” The exact opposite to what you have written. Then you bring up treatment of Hindus in Goa, please do explain what on earth does this have to do with how members of castes were treated in India as a whole? This is quite common in your posts- whenever a subject arises ( and I did not bring up originally the caste system) , part of your response is to denigrate the British or Europeans as if for some bizarre reason you seem to believe this helps deflect comments about a subject. Whether the Dalits would agree with your approach to explain and condone the caste system, and the effect of the caste system effects in India today, I haven’t a clue. I do know if I researched this any foreign source you would discount as either (a) anti Indian propaganda (b) non-Indian views can’t be relied on ( you have written this specifically several times) (c) or if someone doesn’t actually live in India they cannot understand. If I found Indian sources (a) they don’t understand enormity of India (b) they are members of the Congress party. Then you write “History is violent Morpeth world over, why can you not see this!!!!” This is equally a weird statement- I went back over my post and cannot identify a single thing that would indicate I would disagree with you. (Yes, I know about elocution lessons being taken in UK for that reason- my mother during her Nurse’s training was told during one six-month study period down south to drop her Northumbrian accent when speaking to patients. A cousin from Newcastle told not to speak Geordie at work as if a London client heard on the phone, they would assume my cousin was ignorant.) I appreciate you bring up some interesting observations in your post and always of interest situation on the ground so to speak in India these days. It would be more productive if you read posts more carefully and consider the meaning of words. It is a bit hard to respond to your posts sometimes when you are stating someone said something when they did not. |
Re: Inglorious Empire
Originally Posted by morpeth
(Post 12844318)
It would be extremely helpful Bipat that you were more careful in reading the posts you respond to as evidently there is either 3) a language issue or you are responding to what you wish someone had said to be better able to refute what you think they said. That is why it is challenging these discussions.
Read carefully- you stated people “claiming to know everything about India and the caste system.” However, what I wrote was “To what extent that was the reason for conversions or some conversions in India proper I do not know.” The exact opposite to what you have written. Then you bring up treatment of Hindus in Goa, please do explain what on earth does this have to do with 1 )how members of castes were treated in India as a whole? This is quite common in your posts- whenever a subject arises ( and I did not bring up originally the caste system) , part of your response is to denigrate the British or Europeans as if for some bizarre reason you seem to believe this helps deflect comments about a subject. 2) Whether the Dalits would agree with your approach to explain and condone the caste system, and the effect of the caste system effects in India today, I haven’t a clue. I do know if I researched this any foreign source you would discount as either (a) anti Indian propaganda (b) non-Indian views can’t be relied on ( you have written this specifically several times) (c) or if someone doesn’t actually live in India they cannot understand. If I found Indian sources (a) they don’t understand enormity of India (b) they are members of the Congress party. Then you write “History is violent Morpeth world over, why can you not see this!!!!” This is equally a weird statement- I went back over my post and cannot identify a single thing that would indicate I would disagree with you. (Yes, I know about elocution lessons being taken in UK for that reason- my mother during her Nurse’s training was told during one six-month study period down south to drop her Northumbrian accent when speaking to patients. A cousin from Newcastle told not to speak Geordie at work as if a London client heard on the phone, they would assume my cousin was ignorant.) I appreciate you bring up some interesting observations in your post and always of interest situation on the ground so to speak in India these days. It would be more productive if you read posts more carefully and consider the meaning of words. It is a bit hard to respond to your posts sometimes when you are stating someone said something when they did not. 1) Every Hindu is a member of a caste (social/original work group) unless they have changed their name. ( Presume you will realise that women are not always so defined as their surname will change if they marry differently. Although as world over people tend to marry within their own social group.) This is the same in the UK although as social class is not defined by a name you would not know a person's social origins. 2) Dalit origin people in India receive various benefits and job reservations etc by law. This has caused some controversy as millionaire Dalits get the same benefits. Yes, as world over those thought to be of low social class can be persecuted by others ---and this tends to happen in India more in rural villages and the misery of children being defined by their names is unforgiveable. (Have you read any of Elizabeth Gaskells books that I mentioned? Spoke out about the misery of the lower social classes/Dalits of England in Victorian times-- Raj time!!!) PS-3) Yet again you mention "language" ----I have told you I am British, I speak and understand English.:lol: Would there be a problem if I wasn't?? Many of my replies to your posts are intended to be sarcastic, responses to your general attitude and regarding the 'glorious Empire'----- I just avoid too many emojis. |
Re: Inglorious Empire
Listening to analyses of the life of George Orwell. His 5 years as a servant of The Raj influenced him greatly. Reading Orwell and thinking about his experiences should be compulsory reading for all those Empire Loyalists out there. Orwell was no working class revolutionary. His father had worked in The Opium Department of the Indian Government. The Raj actively encouraged the production, use, and export of Opium. Think about that !
|
Re: Inglorious Empire
Originally Posted by Bipat
(Post 12844353)
1) Every Hindu is a member of a caste (social/original work group) unless they have changed their name. ( Presume you will realise that women are not always so defined as their surname will change if they marry differently. Although as world over people tend to marry within their own social group.)
This is the same in the UK although as social class is not defined by a name you would not know a person's social origins. 2) Dalit origin people in India receive various benefits and job reservations etc by law. This has caused some controversy as millionaire Dalits get the same benefits. Yes, as world over those thought to be of low social class can be persecuted by others ---and this tends to happen in India more in rural villages and the misery of children being defined by their names is unforgiveable. (Have you read any of Elizabeth Gaskells books that I mentioned? Spoke out about the misery of the lower social classes/Dalits of England in Victorian times-- Raj time!!!) PS-3) Yet again you mention "language" ----I have told you I am British, I speak and understand English.:lol: Would there be a problem if I wasn't?? Many of my replies to your posts are intended to be sarcastic, responses to your general attitude and regarding the 'glorious Empire'----- I just avoid too many emojis. The issues of the English class system of course are well known, I am unaware of anyone who would claim the treatment of the lower classes in the UK would approach the level of treatment of the lower castes in India, |
Re: Inglorious Empire
Originally Posted by morpeth
(Post 12844492)
Again you ignore the comments that your write in responses about things I have never said or even implied, hence why sometimes whether there is a language issue. I write I don't know something , then you respond about people claiming they know everything. Not being sarcastic just logical.
The issues of the English class system of course are well known, I am unaware of anyone who would claim the treatment of the lower classes in the UK would approach the level of treatment of the lower castes in India, 2) Previous times----- I suggested an author to read regarding the unbelievable poverty of the English lower classes in the north of England (and no not Cranford---a book really about herself). She was admired by Dickens even though he tried to 'inhibit' her publications. A 'man' thing!!! People burning their wooden floors, stairs etc for warmth, in winter, certainly no food, no medicine. Babies born on earth floors with no help. Certainly no medical help whatsoever. Bodies let down from the upper floors to streets for burial as no stairs left to go down. While factory owners increased their wealth certainly despising those described. 3) Present times----How many Indian 'working' class/Dalits do you know at a daily level, being daily part of their working, home lives, their needs, their families, their ambitions----yes they do have ambitions. ???????? If not many or none----I suggest ---**** *** (At a personal level some have been very efficient at getting Aadhaar and PAN cards for us to get the benefits we are allowed, gas etc.) Just as we give advice about the free medical benefits which have not always been clearly explained by the government as---- 'how to sign up' for example Particularly in rural towns and in heavily built town areas all know each other Morpeth). I agree that in some remote Indian villages atrocities of all kinds can take place-- and there is no excuse for this. Shortage of police. Of course these are described and published to the delight of those wanting to think the worst of the entire country. |
Re: Inglorious Empire
Originally Posted by Bipat
(Post 12844517)
Morpeth I would like to ask you questions---1)-are you speaking of now or during previous times?
2) Previous times----- I suggested an author to read regarding the unbelievable poverty of the English lower classes in the north of England (and no not Cranford---a book really about herself). She was admired by Dickens even though he tried to 'inhibit' her publications. A 'man' thing!!! People burning their wooden floors, stairs etc for warmth, in winter, certainly no food, no medicine. Babies born on earth floors with no help. Certainly no medical help whatsoever. Bodies let down from the upper floors to streets for burial as no stairs left to go down. While factory owners increased their wealth certainly despising those described. 3) Present times----How many Indian 'working' class/Dalits do you know at a daily level, being daily part of their working, home lives, their needs, their families, their ambitions----yes they do have ambitions. ???????? If not many or none----I suggest ---**** *** (At a personal level some have been very efficient at getting Aadhaar and PAN cards for us to get the benefits we are allowed, gas etc.) Just as we give advice about the free medical benefits which have not always been clearly explained by the government as---- 'how to sign up' for example Particularly in rural towns and in heavily built town areas all know each other Morpeth). I agree that in some remote Indian villages atrocities of all kinds can take place-- and there is no excuse for this. Shortage of police. Of course these are described and published to the delight of those wanting to think the worst of the entire country. This is borderline absurd to claim equivalence concerning the treatment and status of the untouchables in India historically and that of poorer classes in the UK. In any case the discussion brought up by another poster was related to India- please do explain how the experience of the lower classes in England affecting how the untouchables in India were treated, It is admirable your patriotic feeling for India as a foreigner seeking to integrate, but let us avoid nonsense. |
Re: Inglorious Empire
Originally Posted by Bipat
(Post 12844517)
Morpeth I would like to ask you questions---1)-are you speaking of now or during previous times?
2) Previous times----- I suggested an author to read regarding the unbelievable poverty of the English lower classes in the north of England (and no not Cranford---a book really about herself). She was admired by Dickens even though he tried to 'inhibit' her publications. A 'man' thing!!! People burning their wooden floors, stairs etc for warmth, in winter, certainly no food, no medicine. Babies born on earth floors with no help. Certainly no medical help whatsoever. Bodies let down from the upper floors to streets for burial as no stairs left to go down. While factory owners increased their wealth certainly despising those described. 3) Present times----How many Indian 'working' class/Dalits do you know at a daily level, being daily part of their working, home lives, their needs, their families, their ambitions----yes they do have ambitions. ???????? If not many or none----I suggest ---**** *** (At a personal level some have been very efficient at getting Aadhaar and PAN cards for us to get the benefits we are allowed, gas etc.) Just as we give advice about the free medical benefits which have not always been clearly explained by the government as---- 'how to sign up' for example Particularly in rural towns and in heavily built town areas all know each other Morpeth). I agree that in some remote Indian villages atrocities of all kinds can take place-- and there is no excuse for this. Shortage of police. Of course these are described and published to the delight of those wanting to think the worst of the entire country. plus impossible to discuss as you have stated before no analysis by sociologists,economists or historian is valid , and in particular not by an indian. as far as north east of england i could respond with memories of family and friends using as you prefer that is the only acceptable source of information but that has no bearing one way or another with situation in India then or now. your notion of equivalence is just absurd as with your denial of the depth and scale of poverty in india. |
Re: Inglorious Empire
Originally Posted by morpeth
(Post 12844617)
Again my post specifically indicated I didn't claim to know everything about India, in fact specifically have indicated what I didnt know about certain subjects in particular= so why do you respond about people claiming to know everything.If not a comprehension issue what is it ?
This is borderline absurd to claim equivalence concerning the treatment and status of the untouchables in India historically and that of poorer classes in the UK. In any case the discussion brought up by another poster was related to India- please do explain how the experience of the lower classes in England affecting how the untouchables in India were treated, It is admirable your patriotic feeling for India as a foreigner seeking to integrate, but let us avoid nonsense. Morpeth-----I am not a "foreigner" in India. I do not "need" to integrate into my own home. It might interest you to know that although I read out some of your posts to various Indian people----I am too ashamed to admit that I reply to them.:lol: |
Re: Inglorious Empire
Originally Posted by Bipat
(Post 12844638)
Morpeth-----I am not a "foreigner" in India. I do not "need" to integrate into my own home. It might interest you to know that although I read out some of your posts to various Indian people----I am too ashamed to admit that I reply to them.:lol: In terms of reading out my posts- I am sure in the Soviet Union or China today patriotic propaganda also very prevalent and stifling to rational debate, at least to your credit you are open about your opinion that any scholarly factual analysis you consider useless compared to hearsay by non experts. Seems like a common approach to Brexiters at least you have the courage to admit you dismiss any and all experts. In any case I am still exceedingly curious how when I specifically write I don't know something or have limited knowledge, you then respond back to people claiming to know everything about India. Or asking if I understand about the prevalence of violence when I didn't say one word about violence. If you as you say are now Indian and not English and have lost a bit of knowledge about English there is no shame of that. I used to speak Indonesian and Betawi fluently, over the years with less practice I only have basic knowledge now, no shame in that. |
Re: Inglorious Empire
Originally Posted by morpeth
(Post 12844843)
My mistake, I thought you were British, so by definition a foreigner.
In terms of reading out my posts- I am sure in the Soviet Union or China today patriotic propaganda also very prevalent and stifling to rational debate, at least to your credit you are open about your opinion that any scholarly factual analysis you consider useless compared to hearsay by non experts. Seems like a common approach to Brexiters at least you have the courage to admit you dismiss any and all experts. In any case I am still exceedingly curious how when I specifically write I don't know something or have limited knowledge, you then respond back to people claiming to know everything about India. Or asking if I understand about the prevalence of violence when I didn't say one word about violence. If you as you say are now Indian and not English and have lost a bit of knowledge about English there is no shame of that. I used to speak Indonesian and Betawi fluently, over the years with less practice I only have basic knowledge now, no shame in that. I am British born and bred----I am not thought of as a "foreigner" in India my other home.---My husband is Indian born and bred our children are both, we are all OCI and have all rights there, except voting and purchase of agricultural land! Can apply for Indian nationality any time. Morpeth hundreds/thousands of books have been written about history of India and about the Empire. Hundreds of media reports all with differing opinions you from your distance just select out the negative that you want to believe. Off Topic- as is Brexit and previous pandemic discussion but I read this this morning. See link. Is it 'fake news'??????? Or is it true?????? We left on one of the last Emirates flights out to be in the UK to give support to our medic daughters --- Went from safe Karnataka to dangerous UK!!!!!! Offspring insisting now that we don't move out of the house due to our age. Brother and sister in law 'holed' up in our K home whatsapping regularly to check we are OK:lol: https://newsd.in/uk-minister-lauds-y...-in-karnataka/ PS ----Hope you understood my English!!!! |
Re: Inglorious Empire
Originally Posted by Bipat
(Post 12844886)
Morpeth you are 'priceless'!!:lol:
I am British born and bred----I am not thought of as a "foreigner" in India my other home.---My husband is Indian born and bred our children are both, we are all OCI and have all rights there, except voting and purchase of agricultural land! Can apply for Indian nationality any time. Morpeth hundreds/thousands of books have been written about history of India and about the Empire. Hundreds of media reports all with differing opinions you from your distance just select out the negative that you want to believe. Off Topic- as is Brexit and previous pandemic discussion but I read this this morning. See link. Is it 'fake news'??????? Or is it true?????? We left on one of the last Emirates flights out to be in the UK to give support to our medic daughters --- Went from safe Karnataka to dangerous UK!!!!!! Offspring insisting now that we don't move out of the house due to our age. Brother and sister in law 'holed' up in our K home whatsapping regularly to check we are OK:lol: https://newsd.in/uk-minister-lauds-y...-in-karnataka/ PS ----Hope you understood my English!!!! It is admirable you try so hard to be Indian through the patriotism for India you have adopted. In any country it is appreciated that immigrants or long term residences became favorable to the new host country. Your constant complaints about the British India I am sure well received, and of course and welcome as a scapegoat for 70 years of Indian rule. Whether I live in the heart of Bombay or in Argentina I can certainly read and do analysis of what percentage of British taxation stayed in India or not. As far as various books some have valid opinions, some not some debatable- absurd opinions not based on evidence or logic And in any case you have already written that evidence except hearsay and folk memory isn't valid for analysis or opinion- following that all professors who haven't lived in India or are related to an Indian shouldn't waste time studying in India shouldn't be studying or teaching about India. I am not sure if you realize how absurd this sort of approach is. I am quite sure walking down a street in Bombay people do not consider you Indian but it is to your credit you try to integrate in your adopted homeland. |
Re: Inglorious Empire
Originally Posted by Bipat
(Post 12844886)
Morpeth you are 'priceless'!!:lol:
I am British born and bred----I am not thought of as a "foreigner" in India my other home.---My husband is Indian born and bred our children are both, we are all OCI and have all rights there, except voting and purchase of agricultural land! Can apply for Indian nationality any time. Morpeth hundreds/thousands of books have been written about history of India and about the Empire. Hundreds of media reports all with differing opinions you from your distance just select out the negative that you want to believe. Off Topic- as is Brexit and previous pandemic discussion but I read this this morning. See link. Is it 'fake news'??????? Or is it true?????? We left on one of the last Emirates flights out to be in the UK to give support to our medic daughters --- Went from safe Karnataka to dangerous UK!!!!!! Offspring insisting now that we don't move out of the house due to our age. Brother and sister in law 'holed' up in our K home whatsapping regularly to check we are OK:lol: https://newsd.in/uk-minister-lauds-y...-in-karnataka/ PS ----Hope you understood my English!!!! Yes so far it seems India handling well the Corona situation based on statistics to date, and UK at least based on statistics seems to have had poor results- though I am guessing we will know much more as time passes on issues such as herd immunity, final statistics, and whatever recurrence might happen. My children say the same thing as yours. |
Re: Inglorious Empire
Originally Posted by morpeth
(Post 12844982)
You may wish to check a dictionary the definition of the word in English what the word foreigner means.
1) It is admirable you try so hard to be Indian through the patriotism for India you have adopted. In any country it is appreciated that immigrants or long term residences became favorable to the new host country. Your constant complaints about the British India I am sure well received, and of course and welcome as a scapegoat for 70 years of Indian rule. Whether I live in the heart of Bombay or in Argentina 2) I can certainly read and do analysis of what percentage of British taxation stayed in India or not. As far as various books some have valid opinions, some not some debatable- absurd opinions not based on evidence or logic And in any case you have already written that evidence except hearsay and folk memory isn't valid for analysis or opinion- following that all professors who haven't lived in India or are related to an Indian shouldn't waste time studying in India shouldn't be studying or teaching about India. I am not sure if you realize how absurd this sort of approach is. 3) I am quite sure walking down a street in Bombay people do not consider you Indian but it is to your credit 1) you try t0 integrate in your adopted homeland. I don't TRY to be anything---I AM. "Adopted homeland"? ----It IS my homeland. Where most of my family live! UK is ALSO my "homeland". I presume you are one of those people in the TIO Brexit threads that Remainers grumble about, and who sees migrants as perpetual "foreigners". Yes I look different from the average walker in Mumbai---I have pale skin. No-one in our home town gives me a second look!!! What about our children-----what do they TRY to be ---which country do they TRY to integrate into? Local knowledge is "patriotism"???? 2) Why should ANY taxation of Indian people have gone to Britain??????????????????? Or to the building of things in India for the sole benefit of the British at that time? 3) (I presume by your reasoning, three of the British Cabinet Ministers walking down a street in London people do not consider them British! I hope they are trying to "integrate"!!!) |
Re: Inglorious Empire
Originally Posted by Bipat
(Post 12845028)
1) Morpeth your posts sometimes make me want to vomit!!!!!!:sarcasm: :rofl:
I don't TRY to be anything---I AM. "Adopted homeland"? ----It IS my homeland. Where most of my family live! UK is ALSO my "homeland". I presume you are one of those people in the TIO Brexit threads that Remainers grumble about, and who sees migrants as perpetual "foreigners". Yes I look different from the average walker in Mumbai---I have pale skin. No-one in our home town gives me a second look!!! What about our children-----what do they TRY to be ---which country do they TRY to integrate into? Local knowledge is "patriotism"???? 2) Why should ANY taxation of Indian people have gone to Britain??????????????????? Or to the building of things in India for the sole benefit of the British at that time? 3) (I presume by your reasoning, three of the British Cabinet Ministers walking down a street in London people do not consider them British! I hope they are trying to "integrate"!!!) You were not born and bred in India nor even have the nationality, as far as I know, so what else would you be ? And I have said it is admirable you have sought to integrate and blend in, and feel at home there. Whatever reason the railways and other infrastructure was built, it was a benefit to India, which I assume was the topic. You are the one who tried to give the impression some massive amount of taxation went for India to Britain- if you recall I presented you statistics -derived from Indian sources since you don't believe anything is valid from British sources as you have stated several times- how minimal it was. In terms of the overall benefits or disadvantages of British rule for India certainly one can debate. Certainly the British needed to pay for the civil service and to maintain law and order, as well as infrastructure and other benefits. A bit challenging to imagine a continuation of the Mughal Empire would have been as beneficial as British rule. Local knowledge that ignores evidence or logic is blind patriotism. |
Re: Inglorious Empire
Originally Posted by morpeth
(Post 12845188)
1)Simply look at a dictionary what the word foreigner means.
You were not born and bred in India nor even have the nationality, as far as I know, so what else would you be ? And I have said it is admirable you have sought to integrate and blend in, and feel at home there. 2) Whatever reason the railways and other infrastructure was built, it was a benefit to India, which I assume was the topic. You are the one who tried to give the impression some massive amount of taxation went for India to Britain- if you recall I presented you statistics -derived from Indian sources since you don't believe anything is valid from British sources as you have stated several times- how minimal it was. In terms of the overall benefits or disadvantages of British rule for India certainly one can debate. Certainly the British needed to pay for the civil service and to maintain law and order, as well as infrastructure and other benefits. A bit challenging to imagine a continuation of the Mughal Empire would have been as beneficial as British rule. 3) Local knowledge that ignores evidence or logic is blind patriotism. 1) What do you think is the meaning of the words 'overseas citizen of India', I own property that you have previously complained that 'foreigners' can't., Before my husband ((Indian born and bred) decided to become British naturalised, to make travel in Europe easier, I was tax 'domiciled' as India. I am included in the census of our particular community. I have an Indian ID and benefit cards. If India allowed full dual nationality -----what would you call me then? You didn't answer my question above regarding the 'British' Cabinet Ministers who would be thought 'foreign' as they walked in London!! What are they?? Are the really British??? "Sought to blend in"!!!!!!! I presume you have sought to blend in with your family!!!!!:lol: 2) Yes after independence the railways and infrastructure were useful-as a 'start up'---what use before???? Indians were not allowed to use them except certain areas with permission!!!! I have asked you this before why were the British there, if not for their own benefit ???? Statistics do not record the vast sums that were paid to Britain by the Princely States. The 90% poverty wasn't particularly helpful!! 3) Could you explain how in your mind I can be 'patriotic' if I am a 'foreigner'??????? |
Re: Inglorious Empire
Bipat - What do you state as being your nationality on official forms? (Rhetorical question).
My situation - permanently resident in Hungary (5 years plus - no visits to UK since landing here). Tax resident in UK (whether I like it or not). Own property in Hungary, but not in UK. Possess Hungarian ID and health benefit cards. But British, so over here, a foreigner. |
Re: Inglorious Empire
Originally Posted by Bipat
(Post 12845233)
Morpeth as always I am unsure of the purpose of your posts!!
1) What do you think is the meaning of the words 'overseas citizen of India', I own property that you have previously complained that 'foreigners' can't., Before my husband ((Indian born and bred) decided to become British naturalised, to make travel in Europe easier, I was tax 'domiciled' as India. I am included in the census of our particular community. I have an Indian ID and benefit cards. If India allowed full dual nationality -----what would you call me then? You didn't answer my question above regarding the 'British' Cabinet Ministers who would be thought 'foreign' as they walked in London!! What are they?? Are the really British??? "Sought to blend in"!!!!!!! I presume you have sought to blend in with your family!!!!!:lol: 2) Yes after independence the railways and infrastructure were useful-as a 'start up'---what use before???? Indians were not allowed to use them except certain areas with permission!!!! I have asked you this before why were the British there, if not for their own benefit ???? Statistics do not record the vast sums that were paid to Britain by the Princely States. The 90% poverty wasn't particularly helpful!! 3) Could you explain how in your mind I can be 'patriotic' if I am a 'foreigner'??????? You only have to hear them speak to know how British they are. Your wording suggests that all indigenous British view people with different coloured skin as foreigners. This is so out of touch with reality, in my experience of the UK anyway. Generally speaking, where you are born and bred defines you culturally. My own children are British, but they've only spent a total of 6 weeks there in their lives. They have a British passport but in no way are they culturally British, and they themselves would admit that . English was never their first language either. Your seem to want to be more Indian than a real Indian. And by that I mean someone born an bred there. |
Re: Inglorious Empire
Originally Posted by Expatrick
(Post 12845243)
Bipat - What do you state as being your nationality on official forms? (Rhetorical question).
My situation - permanently resident in Hungary (5 years plus - no visits to UK since landing here). Tax resident in UK (whether I like it or not). Own property in Hungary, but not in UK. Possess Hungarian ID and health benefit cards.But British, so over here, a foreigner. The latter was introduced as a 'fudge' to allow dual nationality without dual nationality!!!! Government trying to please both camps in the pro and against dual nationality controversy. How do you as a Remainer explain the view of Morpeth an arch Remainer. That walking down the road in India I am obviously a "foreigner"-----(because I am pale). What about all those 'dark' people in the UK? Are they all "foreigners"? |
Re: Inglorious Empire
Originally Posted by Bipat
(Post 12845272)
I state British/ However in India---OCI ----
The latter was introduced as a 'fudge' to allow dual nationality without dual nationality!!!! Government trying to please both camps in the pro and against dual nationality controversy. How do you as a Remainer explain the view of Morpeth an arch Remainer. That walking down the road in India I am obviously a "foreigner"-----(because I am pale). What about all those 'dark' people in the UK? Are they all "foreigners"? Bit of a non issue really, I have no problem being a Brit in Hungary, and even when I take Hungarian citizenship will still be British, because that's what I am, as another said above, "born and bred". |
Re: Inglorious Empire
Originally Posted by nonthaburi
(Post 12845266)
1)They're more British than you are Indian due to the fact that they were born and raised in the UK, in Rishi Sunak's case it was his grandparents who came to the UK from the Punjab via East Africa, and in Pratel's case her parents fled Uganda.
2) You only have to hear them speak to know how British they are. Your wording suggests that all indigenous British view people with different coloured skin as foreigners. This is so out of touch with reality, in my experience of the UK anyway. Generally speaking, where you are born and bred defines you culturally. My own children are British, but they've only spent a total of 6 weeks there in their lives. They have a British passport but in no way are they culturally British, and they themselves would admit that . English was never their first language either. 3) Your seem to want to be more Indian than a real Indian. And by that I mean someone born an bred there. 2) Yes I agree ----I was pointing out the views of Poster Morpeth, that I can't be 'Indian' because I don't 'look' Indian!! 3) I consider myself as British and Indian. Both!---As OCI and as a member of an Indian family for 52 years, they don't view me as a 'foreigner', I am named on the community census. Perhaps I could be considered as an 'adopted' Indian:lol: Certainly my Indian mother-in -law 'mothered' me (the same age as her younger daughter). She bequeathed to me her mangal Sutra my most precious possession. |
Re: Inglorious Empire
Originally Posted by Bipat
(Post 12845280)
1) Alok Sharma was born and Bred in India.
2) Yes I agree ----I was pointing out the views of Poster Morpeth, that I can't be 'Indian' because I don't 'look' Indian!! 3) I consider myself as British and Indian. Both!---As OCI and as a member of an Indian family for 52 years, they don't view me as a 'foreigner', I am named on the community census. Perhaps I could be considered as an 'adopted' Indian:lol: Certainly my Indian mother-in -law 'mothered' me (the same age as her younger daughter). She bequeathed to me her mangal Sutra my most precious possession. I also am on the community census, pay local property & community taxes, vote in local & EU elections (Hungarian MEPs) but am still not Hungarian! Honorary Hungarian (on citizenship) possibly! |
Re: Inglorious Empire
Originally Posted by Expatrick
(Post 12845290)
Honorary Indian, maybe!"
I also am on the community census, pay local property & community taxes, vote in local & EU elections (Hungarian MEPs) but am still not Hungarian! Honorary Hungarian (on citizenship) possibly! What is my husband then? Born and Bred, OCI etc. etc. Naturalised British but "culturally"? ---(whatever that is?) Can you not see that you can be more than one 'thing'! I am British AND Indian. Back to the topic ---after 52 years of whatever I am and 'knowing personally' 100s of Indian people now long dead---I am capable of knowing something about the effects of the "Empire" on ordinary citizens---!! |
Re: Inglorious Empire
Originally Posted by Bipat
(Post 12845280)
1) Alok Sharma was born and Bred in India.
2) Yes I agree ----I was pointing out the views of Poster Morpeth, that I can't be 'Indian' because I don't 'look' Indian!! 3) I consider myself as British and Indian. Both!---As OCI and as a member of an Indian family for 52 years, they don't view me as a 'foreigner', I am named on the community census. Perhaps I could be considered as an 'adopted' Indian:lol: Certainly my Indian mother-in -law 'mothered' me (the same age as her younger daughter). She bequeathed to me her mangal Sutra my most precious possession. 3) I think the point is that you are more British than Indian. No one's doubting your cultural connections, but they're no substitute for being born and bred in a place , no matter over how long a time period those connections are formed. |
Re: Inglorious Empire
Originally Posted by Bipat
(Post 12845309)
My family do not see me as that!!!! I think that is the important fact. I am a member of an Indian family and have been most of my life! They do not view me as a "foreigner"!:lol:
What is my husband then? Born and Bred, OCI etc. etc. Naturalised British but "culturally"? ---(whatever that is?) Can you not see that you can be more than one 'thing'! I am British AND Indian. Back to the topic ---after 52 years of whatever I am and 'knowing personally' 100s of Indian people now long dead---I am capable of knowing something about the effects of the "Empire" on ordinary citizens---!! Not the same as them surely? |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 3:55 am. |
Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.