Was the British Raj good or bad?
>>17999211Bad, it was the best chance to exterminate the jeet plague and those angloids blew it
>>17999211England paved the way for globohomo and now they are paying for their sins.
>the bad guy is wearing a fucking turtleneck
>>17999211Good. Their failure was in not continuing to reinforce the preexisting racial caste system that placed whites at the apex of society. The ill conceived "enlightenment" about racial equality was the ruin of the world.
>>17999211Good for India, bad for Britain
It allowed to the birth of more indians so it is a terrible thing
Overwhelmingly good. The only downside is that indigenous political structures were subordinated.
Good for Brits, bad for everyeone else (including other Europeans).
>>17999211Bad, they tried to uplift the jeets, dooming humanity
>>17999226Nigga, they tried. If the Brits can't extermiate a population, fugget about it. no one can.
>>18000737Huh? The bongs never tried that, they kept them docile so they can continue to benefit from their tax base, as small as it was. Once it was no longer profitable, they let them go with a stable government in both Pakistan and India. The bongs were saints during decolonization
Worse than bad... it was dumb.
>>17999211For whom?P.S: I wonder how much fun that Eastern European man had while making that scene.>>18000764You are acting like they decolonized India independent of any independence movement. India never stopped being profitable and they tried to delay independence for as long as possible.They weren't pure evil or whatever. But saints is overselling it.
>>18001072Plus their idea for partition was dumb. And yes I am aware partition was inevitable. However, there was no need to make 'East Pakistan', either make Bengalistan or don't make a new country.
It was very good
The British brought new technology but the regime itself was tyrannical. However so were the Mughals, Marathas and various other states that fell under the Raj. All in all in general it was a net positive, but this is not to say colonialism is a good thing in particular.Considering India after independence it probably would have been better if they remained under some level of control by the British, it would prevent the war and genocide in Pakistan and Bangladesh and help suppress corruption and severe incompetence Indians suffered under its own democratically elected politicians.
>>17999211good
>>17999211Good
>>18001076>However, there was no need to make 'East Pakistan', either make Bengalistan or don't make a new country.The main concern the British had during the process of partition and decolonization in India was "What the fuck do we have to do to get these fucking Muslims and Hindus to stop killing each other in the streets? Seriously guys, it's actually retarded how many problems it's causing". Given that they would probably have been happy to create East Pakistan, South Pakistan, North Pakistan, and 'weird little enclaves of Pakistan inside an Indian enclave, inside a Pakistani enclave, which is somehow inside India', if that's what it took to get Muhammed and Mojendra to stop killing each other in the streets.
>>17999211Bad. Portugal should have been in charge.
>>18001072Don’t you think giving up and leaving kind of negates the idea that the Brits tried to “genocide” Indians? Wouldn’t they, you know, have just killed more Indians?
