Read 37 comments as:
Filter By
For all this materialism, you'd happily sell yourself.

No wonder why Law firms consider us as cheap slaves.
Living like 2nd class citizens in your own country just to have fancy buildings. No.
I reported comment 9 for fake news. There is no historical evidence of any "dogs and indians" sign in British India. This is a common myth that IT cell bhakts circulate based on photos taken from various movies. Examples below:

Example 1: From the movie Mard.





http://www.bethlovesbollywood.com/2011/04/ultimate-bob-christo-getting-dishoomed.html

Example 2: From the movie The Legend of Bhagat Singh

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVd_K7UWA2w

Example 3: From the movie Indian Summers.



The director of the movie says:

"By this time a lot of European clubs would accept Indians that were willing to accept British social customs, but there were still a number of clubs that had a colour bar. Notoriously, there was one in Chittagong [now Bangladesh]. In 1932 there was an uprising where a few violent nationalists tried to burn it down and shoot the guests. It was a landmark moment in the story of nationalism. Although the Royal Shimla Club is entirely fictional I have tried to reflect some of the real fault lines that were running through the empire at that time."


https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/the-true-stories-behind-new-channel-4-series-indian-summers
There are plenty of verified reports of similar treatment at least, plaque or not.
Quoting dalit activist Chandra Bhan Prasad:

Quote:
The Anglicist camp, led by Lord Macaulay, argued for the European kind of modern education, with focus on modern sciences. Macaulay won, and the British-type of modern educational system was introduced in India.

What if the indigenous education continued, with Sanskrit, Arabic and Persian as media of instruction?

Well, to most Indians, it may be a matter of conjecture. To some of us, India would have been most probably like Afghanistan, or at best, the present day Nepal, where few Indians would have been doing "Bahadur-griri" in Europe or America, and not as IT professionals in Silicon valley.

Come on my scholar friends, wake up and arise. Time has come to shed shamelessness, and set into a reasonably virtuous mode. Remember, Lord Macaulay was India's earliest Gandhi, if GandhiJi epitomized freedom movement as it was he who conceived independent India when Gandhi was not even born. The Lord Macaulay, one of the greatest mind born in the past millenium, was the latest Jawaharlal Nehru, if Nehru epitomized modernity.

The greatest celestial spirit for India, code named Thomas Babington Macaulay, was born on October 25, 1800. We must be enlightened enough to take his anti-Hindu, anti-Caste views, in correct spirit. Let us celebrate the birth anniversary of one of the greatest philosophers this planet has produced, not for the Lord, but for the India shinning. There is a shinning India, in words of my scholar colleague, D Shyam Babu, "India is NOT Shining, but the British India is Indeed Shining".
https://www.countercurrents.org/dalit-prasad271004.htm
Absolute trash

If people think british rule was good then we all know who divided indians deeply and started using their resources

Just reduce population of india and see cleanliness and make politicans accountable

Only if politicians were honest we would have be clean 50 years ago

Out cities are not in planned manner

Well infra is improving in recent years but still we are lacking in hygiene and cleanliness. We have cows, bulls and dogs roaming freely in street.

Just remove gutka dogs and other animals from street and see the cleanliness of streets in India
In my view India would have been better off under British rule. The British ruled Hong Kong until 1997. Had they ruled India until 1997 we would have been like Hong Kong. Also, Pakistan, Burma and Bangladesh would have been part of India and China would not have had the guts to attack us.
It's just that you would be treated as a 'brown skinned n***er'. Small price to pay for you probably. Rest of us are really not okay with it.
After reading your praise, viceroy of India would have passed a new law whereby, dogs and Indians not allowed on social media with immediate effect.

Would have been so much fun enjoying a so called better governed country.
20% of global GDP before the British to almost nothing after they left. Yeah we definitely benefited...

At least we're starting to recover now
1. Cities were better governed - only for the white subjects. There was still large swathes ignored and cordoned off - eg: delhi has an entire area previously only for whites. Waste management was pretty bad.

2. Beautiful and Grand Buildings - again, it was mainly for administrative buildings and some places of leisure. Rest of the Indians were left to rot. These buildings are expensive to build and maintain - would you rather have 'beautiful' buildings or good admin? Cause India does not have the resources for both and the Britishers only focused on superficial goodness - rest of the money was siphoned off to their mashed potato eating population that still eats like Germany is bombing them.

3. Many unis were established - granted, somewhat a good point, but then again, why are we comparing Britishers to Mughals? Are you telling we incapable of starting our own unis? Have you forgotten about Nalanda and Taxilla 'uni'? Education became a bit more formalised under the British but it was not out of the goodness of their hearts.

4. Many learned men were appointed as profs and admins - We are a population of 1.2B, of course in trying to not gatekeep education and opportunties some lacklustre appointments happen. Are you telling me beyond the Russel group, any unis in UK are good? Even in the Russel group most are questionable. Do you really want someone who doesn't understand what it is to be Indian to be in charge of teaching Indians?

5. English Language was introduced - I'm sorry, are you telling me the populations in Japan and SK depend on English for their education? It is good we can communicate in a common language, but I think given time we would've figured out a common language or have adopted English on our own. There was no need to siphon $4.5 trillion for that.

6. Scientific temper was encouraged - did you and I read the same history? The Britishers frequently gatekept the common Indian from accessing premier institutions (even Ramanujan faced lots of issues, and that man was a genius par excellence). Also Pre Mughal era had a decent amount of scientific advancements. While I agree stuff like Homeopathy
Good people died so you could be born as a free individual. How mods allowed this utterly disrespectful thread to be hosted on this website is beyond me.
Only a stupid can ask such a question.

Millions of Indians died for our independence. You insult them all.

You must apologise for this kind of thought. Shameful.
Points to show that India in 2024 is better off than British India:

- Only one famine has happened in India since 1947, while over fifty famines killing millions of people occurred in just one or two centuries of British rule.

- India's share of the global GDP in 1947 was 4%, now it is significantly more.

- There is now a proper English-speaking middle class of crores of people in India, who contribute both to high-skilled immigrants to the West as well as leading scientists and academicians within India.

- Even though India is still poor, with an unenviable level of human rights, the poverty levels and experience of the aam admi is incredibly better and higher than it was during British rule. A disadvantaged Indian today has a much better chance of doing well in life and accessing justice than he did 100 years back.

There are many more reasons, but these are some of the key ones.