Yes, its one nation, many states, somewhat different cultures. India, that was given to us by the British. What was it before? Just provinces and regions ruled by Moghul and Hindu rulers, kings, emporers.
So if we weren't ruled by the British then what would we be today? 1 nation? Would these kings have given up their land? In that case would we have been multiple nations? A large area of the Indian soil was ruled by the moghuls. The majority of the mass were Hindus but many rulers were muslims. So at least 1 nation would have been a muslim nation, like Pakistan? What about the rest? or maybe it would be one big muslim nation with an equal number of hindus and muslims, living cordially? With the British not in the picture, there wouldn't have been anyone to ignite this spark of hatred amongst us.
Not sure if Tamilnadu or Kerela was ruled by moghuls (need to read up on history)?
With our wealth not looted by the British, we would have been a rich country for sure.
What do you think?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Priyanka I blogged about it
Here , I fear we would have lived with coups and constantly bickering kings like we had done till now, China and Afghanistan would have occupied some parts, Taliban would have captures some parts ... we would have maybe had some railway, maybe we would have a unifying language, but which one... I feel we are better than we have ever been before today.
Interesting view IHM. I'll check out your post.
Priyanka, first time here and an interesting question.
Without British we would still be provinces with Kings and rulers fighting among themselves and not caring about the common man at all.
To answer your question about Kerala,
Some rulers of Kerala were Muslim not Mughals but mostly it was ruled by Kshatriya Kings and Naduvazhees belonging to Nair community. As I have heard life wasn't that tough for most Keralites but casteism was rampant. There was a time when lower caste women weren't even allowed to wear blouse. Yes! they had to be bare chested in front of upper caste men.
Anyways things changed. But between Mughal and British I would say latter looking at the development and freedom of speech.
Still at some point I think if countries as small as Bhutan can survive then why not us as provinces. We didn;t need British to unite. We would have lived better with one language, one culture and may have felt much more united. Who knows? :)
Solilo: Thanks for the information on Kerela.
I too feel that it wouldn't have been 1 big country as it is now, maybe 3 or 4. Its always easier to manage a smaller country than a Big one- for eg. Singapore.
Hetu Hetu Madbhooth.
Yeh hota to kya hota,
Woh hota to kya hota...
:)
For those not ready to turn LOOSE
Mothers Against 'Loosers'
http://maald.wordpress.com/
Agree with IHM......India was supposed to be a very peace loving country & tht is why the moghula & brits were able to take over so easily.
So it wasn't the british it cd have been somebody else & mayb the damage cd have been worse
Post a Comment