Do you think British colonisation was a good thing for India??

Question

I mean, it is of course a good thing that India is now independant, bet don't you think that it is thanks to colonisation than India became a UNITED nation??

Answer 1

Without a doubt YES.

It made Indians understand the real meaning of UNITY IN DIVERSITY and made them UNITE.

It made them understand the value of FREEDOM (One does not know the value of anything until he loses it )

It arose the fighting spirit in the Indians.

All the more, it exposed the Indians to modern trends and modern sciences.

The best thing is ENGLISH was given (with knowledge or without knowledge) to Indians...and THIS ENGLISH IS THE GATEWAY TO ALL THE MODERN KNOWLEDGE NOW.
Without English, you will again be trapped in darkness.
This language ,even though one wants to Banish, can never be banished.Why hate this language?Do you hate Latin?Spanish?Greek?Roman?...Then why particularly this English?

You love and learn your mother tongue.Give all the priorities to it.Make it sublime and ever living.But for that YOU NEED NOT HATE ENGLISH.

By this ,do not mistake that whatever the Britishers did is good.There were atrocities.injustices and inhuman activities.They are to be condemned.That's why they had to leave this HOLY LAND.

Answer 2

Well, it ENDED UP being a good thing for India and for North America that Britain colonized them. It wasn't beneficial for all, however. Some possessions in the Pacific the British had, like Singapore, simply changed hands when English power was usurped by Japan in the 1940's.

Some people above have said the Indian subcontinent was united, and that was partially true for the majority of the place, but Pakistan broke off soon after the British granted independence. There's still a lot of unresolved conflict that goes on between India and Pakistan to this go, especially over the Kasmir region.

The British granted independence more because it was very unfavorable to have colonies, still, after WW2 (though they were, and still are, called overseas possessions at that point). More so, however, it wasn't economically conducive to keep India as a possession, esp with Britain no longer the world power it was after World War II.

Answer 3

Kya thanks??? When North America was under British rule, and after the Revolutionary War, which America Won, America created a brand new system of government different from British. What did India do? We still use their Parliament system, which is mostly corrupted. Also, for any country to be close to be perfect their Government system has to be efficient.

And you guys are forgetting British took all the riches, leaving us to be poor and creating so much of poverty!

Answer 4

As to eire, the only constructive result became the English language, that's now needed to do international business enterprise, and the Irish have actual outfitted themselves an excellent economic equipment. on the time, i think of they did so plenty extra injury than stable. As to India, confident, I do think of there have been constructive outcomes. In bringing Christianity they extra in some techniques of Christian compassion which did no longer exist in Hindu. Compassion has a distinctive which ability there. They extra in rail centers, and that they dropped at some in India a clean ingenious and prescient and the ability to control themselves as a us of a--extremely than a large style of little principalities. In essence, for stable and sick, they extra India into the admired international. on the different hand, I as quickly as heard that their impact became extra constrained than we expect of. An older Indian became as quickly as asked with regards to the impact on India of the Raj and he replied "What became the Raj? who're the British?"

Answer 5

Not only did it unite the various states but it established the infrastructure that is still in us today.

India is now the largest democracy in the world, and I think that is a credit not only to Britain, but to the people of India themselves.

The system may not be perfect but then, whose is?

Answer 6

Colonisation on any country will never be good and acceptable.

Answer 7

otherwise, we srull would have been many smasthans, ruled by many kings.
who knows, we would have been invaded saddam
or
ershad would be dictating us
or
sam would be guiding us
or
???

english consolidated the peninsula, for their advantage
and
in the meanwhile
the largest democracy was born
none can deny it.

whoever is denying it ,
let them answer
why democratic India could not prevent emergence of new states
why we are unable to link all our rivers
why we are unable to make education and union subjects

Answer 8

How can colonization be good for any country or people ? Silly question to ask. Those who do not know, there are colonies still, full of wars. Please select questions to be asked. Its annoying. This is certainly abuse of the opportunity to get web space and encroach upon web time. I know there still are people who think we got railways. They should asked even a beeter question. Was it good for the peace loving people of Mohinjo daro and Harappa to get butchered and run over by the marauders of central Asia?

India was united from Afghanistan to Deccan to Bengal, before Brits. It again took the Central Government of India to keeps its frontiers safe after the Brits tore it to pieces before leaving. India was not as united during British, as a lot of people might want to think

Answer 9

What a joke!

In 1615 when British were first permitted to trade at Surat in Gujarat, the permit was issued from Delhi, isn't it enough to remind us about the lies spread by the British missionary historians with very focussed and mean political motive.

There was one united India long before the times when people in today's Britain and other parts of the world did not even have a developed society, forget about the concept of nationality.

India has been identified as a nation between the Himalyas and the Indu ocean in several scriptures and literature from ancient times. Bharath Varsha, Aryavartha, Brahmavartha or Jamboodweep are some of the geographical names given to this national identity. With a common ideological philosophy and a tradition of pilgrimage throughout the nation, Indians always maintained a unique identity as compared to the rest of the world.

From time immemorial, Indians from Kashmir and Kailash to Kanyakumari and from Manipur and Tripura to Gandhar started their day remembering several geographical identities as part of their daily prayers such as:
Gange cha Yamune chaiva Godavari Saraswati
Narmade Sindhu Kaveri jalesmin sannidhim kuru.

When the great Sanskrit scholar Agastya muni (of Kashi) convened first Tamil Sangam (in South of India) in prehistoric days, he was still in just another part of India.

In 300 BC, whhen Chandragupta Maurya the King of Magadh rushed to fight the Roman army and defence TaxShila University in todays Pakistan all he did was to defend India from an invading army of foreigners.

When the Namboodiris from Kerala took responsibility of priesthood in Pashupatinath temple in Nepal besides Badrinath in Uttarakhand in 700 AD, they just moved from one divine region of India to another one.

When Shankaracharya worshipped Saraswati as a resident of Kashmir (Kashmir Pur Vasini) in seventh century, he travelled 4000 kilometers within India.

Answer 10

yes. the birtish brought, or at least tried to bring, civilization to the subcontinent.. how successful they were is a matter of debate