Also i will overlook the fact that you credit “Hindus” to have started a movement against Sati and etc..

I am curious about how you can overlook something when you mention about it. As I said, you folks are quiet amusing.
Now, am I to understand that my perceived effort of crediting Hindus was misguided or wrong? Well, then in the next sentence, I see:

It was certainly Hindus, but only some Hindus, actually a mere handful.

So “some” “mere handful” Hindus are not Hindus, you mean!!! As I said, the “twist”ed world view is quiet amusing. But I digress, I should have taken the hint from your id.

I dare not mention the role of caste in this in case you explode again

[1] So, now that you dared to mention it (presumably unwillingly or somehow forced to), let us hear about those low caste women who were regularly raped by all upper caste men across the entire sub-continent. Or “some” upper caste men. Were they more than “mere handful” to be qualified as upper caste or Hindu in your world view? Since you appear to have such ready statistics at hand to make such sweeping statements, would we, the mere mortal of “explosive” kind, can be enlightened with that statistics?
[2] Comparing caste based discrimination with the atrocities committed by “civilized” jolly good fellows from small European island is the kind of reductionism that can only be expected from folks with a world view of certain “twist”ed kind.

63 years is long enough to make the “British did it” excuse a stale one. Besides this particular article seems to point out that the British did not consciously try to brain-wash us. In which case we must have been even more gullible than usual…

The “British did it” argument is very valid because the system British left was not mostly changed. When someone compares India’s independence with the independence of a country that threw off colonial powers, the comparison is invalid. A revolution is usually higher in terms of human cost but it also destroys the old system which eventually results in something new. Indian independence is half-done because most systems British established was never changed. Heck, even today, in a worm country like ours, lawyers can not argue without wearing British style black courts. How stupid can that be?

Pray how do i become anti-national if i choose to bring up that taboo subject- caste? Also i will overlook the fact that you credit “Hindus” to have started a movement against Sati and etc..
It was certainly Hindus, but only some Hindus, actually a mere handful.

Did not really try to defend the British. No need to go kablooey.

>> yes, I am sure, rapists check whether rape was institutionally sanctioned or not before getting into the act.

That is exactly my point. You cannot classify a rapist as British or non-British. Especially as India today is hardly a safe haven for women. Women always face the worst forms of exploitation even in a so-called sovereign, independent nation. I dare not mention the role of caste in this in case you explode again .

But you are right, it does not lessen their crime and the Raj itself CAN be held responsible for the crimes committed against its subjects.

Why would the British try to abolish caste? They were not crazy to do something like that! I have never said they were do-gooder rulers, all I objected to was Sunil’s simplistic explanation which is dangerous in this kind of situation as it, very demonstrably, leads us to acquit ourselves of all blame.

My point is this: enough with the fallacy that the British are to blame for everything that’s wrong with the country, they only, as you very rightly pointed out exploited – they did so easily by taking advantage of the deep prejudices already extant. Could they have really managed to corrupt present (in their time) and future generations of Indians? And if we choose to “ape the west” today whose fault is that?

The British have undoubtedly left a legacy of loot and exploitation, but one does not have to be British to exploit. Morality is not linked to national identity or national pride – more’s the pity.

63 years is long enough to make the “British did it” excuse a stale one. Besides this particular article seems to point out that the British did not consciously try to brain-wash us. In which case we must have been even more gullible than usual…

I don’t think rape was an institutional practice of British imperialism.

yes, I am sure, rapists check whether rape was institutionally sanctioned or not before getting into the act. Please do read about the behavior of British who won tea estates in Darjeeling or Assam or the Indigo farming zones in whole of eastern India and how gracefully they behaved with the women they kidnapped in front of the eyes of their family. I am sure certain Hindu nationalists have a tendency to write their own version of history, but so do Raj apologists.
Both Sati and Child marriage were legalized by British in the name of protecting the native practices. Before them, other rulers grudgingly tolerated the practice although there were lesser kings who tried to prevent it. It actually took Hindus to start a movement against these and other practices. Only then it got abolished. May be a little more information is harmful to supposedly benign face of the Raj.

It is amazing how nationalists easily brush aside THE dominant theme of Indian society and politics – caste

It is quiet amazing how anti-Hindus and anti-nationalists find only caste as the “dominant” theme. Show me how many rulers of the British Raj actually tried to legislate caste or untouchability out of existence. Then look at how many nationalists tried to get rid of caste and still does today.

The britishers were not marauding conquerers like Chengiz Khan. Their ingress was more subtle, more insiduous, they came through trade.
I don’t think rape was an institutional practice of British imperialism. Remember the empire was under the reign of Queen Victoria till 1901. You seem to have written your own version of history

As to your interesting theory on Child marriage and Sati, you might want to understand caste dynamics before coming up with wild surmises.

It is amazing how nationalists easily brush aside THE dominant theme of Indian society and politics – caste