british and india
  • I think this warrants a seperate thread

    hi

    my my rahul. you have spent a lot of time thinking about this.
    but lets get the facts right.
    the british created a loosely held federation of british india and
    650 princely states( which could not economically survive without
    B.India)
    and then the catlayst was sardar patel who bullied the states into
    submission.
    OTHERWISE we could not have been one state-india.
    imagine getting a passport to go to pudukottai or bangalore or
    hyderabad.
    economically british india would have survived and the princely
    states would have collapsed.
    read about the history of sikkim to assess what could have happened
    650 times over.
    you are talking about foreigners looking down on us. perhaps we look
    upto them too. the chogyal of sikkim married a foreigner. one of the
    senior princes of pudukottai married a australian nurse. so many of
    them inspite of claiming lineage from sun, moon, indra and kubera
    wanted to marry caucasid ladies.

    I sugest you read about the lives of the princes of india. how
    lusty, blood thirsty and mean they have been at the cost of their
    people.
    the princes considerd congress as an enemy more than the british
    themselves. gandhi was banned more than once from enetering
    pudukottai state.
    i also suggest you read freedom at midnight.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Top Posters