[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: India: A Country of Beggars

 
I believe that while the colonial system had its drawbacks, it also had 
its benefits. The same holds true for the Nazis' constributions to 
science. However, the onne key problem for both was that they sought to 
exploit others for their own gain. Both degraded and killed others for 
their benefit.
The British contribution to India is not insignificant. For example, the 
built up the railway system which the Indians at the time seemed 
unwilling or incapable of achieving. The British changed the system of 
landownership. While there had been no system of ownership previously, 
rather there existed a system of tilling rights bequethed to the masses by 
the emperor and his underlings. In fact, the emperor did not own the land 
but managed on behalf of the community or god. While I disagree with the 
zamindari or ryotwari systems, I believe there may have been some 
benefits associated with these systems.
The British established the system of grants in aid for educational 
institutions. This made the source of funding more consistent and not 
dependent upon the whims, likes, or dislikes of the emperor and his 
group. This system helped facilitate the development of the university 
system and the establishment of Benaras Hindu University and Aligarh 
Muslim University.
The Indians were certainly not inept, as they made very 
significant contributions to the British economy, culture, and language. 
In fact, the British empire would not have been as significant a player 
as it was if it were not for its colonies- especially, India. The British 
relied heavily upon India for financial, human, physical, and food 
resources for both its war efforts.
All societies reach a plateau in their development- cultural, 
economic, political, social, or technological. These can be overcome by 
the infusion of new ideas, which was the the case for India. The Dravidians, 
Aryans, Greeks, and Persians, as well as the British, French, Dutch, and 
Protuguese made contributions to India and its people. As invaders, they 
also imposed their world views upon the conquered.
I fervently believe it is unfair to paint the Indians as a country of 
beggars without understanding the economic situation. Such an assertion 
woulf be equal to blaming the colonial powers for all our ills. As a 
parallel, the United States of America has gone from being an economic 
powerhouse, to a relative economic basketcase in a space of twenty years. 
Because the USA fell behind the Japanese and other nations technologically 
and economically, would it be right to them as lazy and arrogant 
goo-for-nothings? No. We all have to compete in this global economy. If 
we don't today's beggars may become tomorrow's kings.


 On 21 Jun 1996, GERALD J. LA CORTE wrote:

> Greetings,
> 
> : >It is ridiculous to blame the western thoughts for every damn
> : >thing happening in India. In fact, but for the western developement
> : >and opening its own eyes to have economic development, India
> : >would still have remained as a country of beggars.
> : I suggest that without Western ideas of colonialism, capitalism and
> : socialism India would not have developed into a country of beggars, if
> : that's what you claim it was at some time.
> 
> I don't like getting into the middle of these arguements because there are 
> usually too many emotions involved; but usually end up putting my head on 
> the chopping block where it is quickly severed.
> 
> As I recall, India was mostly free from outside intervention until about 
> 1050 when the Moghuls came.  Most of India then paid taxes to Ifshaham (I 
> think) until 1200 ot 1300 when the central states regained nominal 
> autonomy, while the south remained mostly free.  Then sometime during the 
> eighteenth century the British came who "conquered" or super-dominated 
> most of India until some fourty-odd years ago.
> 	The British domination was assisted and aided by rivalry between 
> Indian states.  (This also draws to the caste system, although not very 
> well.)
> 
> As I recall, when the Moghuls came, India was having its Tantric period, 
> which started four-hundred years previously.  And, during the 
> one-thousand years before that, the Puranic and Buddhist periods.
> 
> At the start of the Buddhist era, India already had steel, the wheel, use 
> of animals, streets, houses, sewage systems, writing, and quite a few 
> discoveries and inventions.  I'm uncertain if most of the population was 
> literate or illiterate.  Did India have the steam engine?  Did India 
> actually use the steam engine or was is mostly a toy (like with the Greeks)?
> 
> As far as I know, India made no significant technological or 
> developmental changes without outside influence.  Gunpowder didn't leave 
> China until the thirteenth century when they were conquered by the Mongols.
> 
> : Now it seems as if Western societies are thirsting for spiritual
> : enlightenment, and age-old Oriental practices are rising again.
> 
> With Christianity being as deep as it is, what do you expect?
> 
> That's the three intellectual developments that India I think lacked: 
> literacy, gunpower, and the steam engine, after which electricity would 
> have been necessary (coupled with magnetism, which they had).
> 
> Bests,
> 
> Jay
> 
>
Advertise with us!
This site is part of Dharma Universe LLC websites.
Copyrighted 2009-2015, Dharma Universe.