Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New research on the cost of colonization to India

aljazeera.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 111 posts

Re: New research on the cost of colonization to India

#11

Post by whoisninja »

wjnc wrote: post #3

My government uses my taxes to buy goods and services in the local market. Is that defrauding or just the nature of providing government? This article is on somewhat loose economic grounds, I fear. People paid taxes, albeit to the coloniser, some people could sell their goods at market prices. Things we still find pretty reasonable. On top of that compounding at 5% for 250 yrs is not a good way to create current doll…

it is defrauding and if you consider the atrocities, shady unethical ways to enslave mass population, the Bengal famine of 1943 - you should be shocked

the so called "sir" winston churchill was after all a mass murderer in a sense. of course it is about power and exercising power, India should have fought back harder to protect itself

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bengal_famine_of_1943

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/world-history/winst...

Re: New research on the cost of colonization to India

#13

Post by pm90 »

yumraj wrote: post #8

To add to that: India's share of world income collapsed from 22.6% in 1700, almost equal to Europe's share of 23.3% at that time, to as low as 3.8% in 1952.[1] And, India got partitioned into 3 countries, all of which have spend insane amounts of resources fighting each other when that same could have been spent on economic development and other hostile neighbors of the unified India would have been smaller in size t…

The counter argument is that a unified subcontinent would degrade into chaos as people kept fighting each other internally. Although, India itself has remained largely democratic (perhaps overlooking the Maoist insurgency) so maybe that wasn’t a huge concern.

Re: New research on the cost of colonization to India

#14

Post by InGodsName »

pm90 wrote: post #7

Thank goodness for this research. I’ve seen many commenters in this forum argue that colonialism was somehow good for India, this seems to comprehensively refute that ridiculous notion. I used to wonder what good it did by musing over past losses this way. As someone born and raised in India, I felt very acutely the feeling of loss, not just in economy but perhaps the well being and scientific progress that just didn…

I never read any account from travellers (from Europe/China) describing India as poor before colonialism. So, i think this article does have some validity.

Re: New research on the cost of colonization to India

#15

Post by kolbe »

pickdenis wrote: post #6
wjnc wrote: post #3

My government uses my taxes to buy goods and services in the local market. Is that defrauding or just the nature of providing government? This article is on somewhat loose economic grounds, I fear. People paid taxes, albeit to the coloniser, some people could sell their goods at market prices. Things we still find pretty reasonable. On top of that compounding at 5% for 250 yrs is not a good way to create current doll…

When the government buys things with tax money, the things are supposed to be used for the benefit of people who paid the taxes. It doesn't seem like the Company even pretended that this was the case.

Most tax dollars in most countries are not spent on goods and services for the benefit of the people who paid them.

Re: New research on the cost of colonization to India

#17

Post by tezza »

Hang on a minute... is this guy saying the country that

* had the largest supply of slaves[1],

* tried to levy taxes on American tea,

* broke China and forced them to buy their own Opium

* invented concentration camps to defeat the Dutch Boers[2]

* used Gibraltar as a control point for the entire Mediterranean

* erased most Tasmanian Aboriginals [3]

did something dodgy in India ??

[1] http://www.slate.com/articles/life/the_history_of_american_s...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_concentration_camps

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_War

Re: New research on the cost of colonization to India

#18

Post by pm90 »

dang wrote: post #12
cslarson wrote: post #2

1 hr + 44 points + no comments = upvote manipulation

No, that happens fairly often without upvote manipulation, and as far as I can tell this post wasn't affected by such manipulation.

It seems that this article has been flagged. Dang, I have noticed this quite frequently now: criticisms of Facebook and articles critical of colonialism get flagged off of the front page. As a regular member of this community, this really undermines my trust in the objectivity of this forum

Re: New research on the cost of colonization to India

#19

Post by justboxing »

I was in India last month after being away for over 2 decades. Visited Calcutta for the very first time. Our Driver and Tour Guide at the Taj took us around the city and told us about a lot of history about the City. At one point he said that over 1 million people live on the sidewalks (called footpaths) in Calcutta. I have seen abject poverty in India while growing up there, but not to this level. There are generations of Indians living on the sidewalks next to each other, from Grandpa to Grandson. They eat, cook, shower and sleep all in a 4 or 5 Sq Foot area.

Towards the end of our trip, we visited Queen Victoria’s Memorial Hall. There was a small Museum in 1 corner of that Palace, which had photos and newspaper stories about Calcutta from the time the East India Company arrived to the time they left.

There, I learned that Calcutta was the Capital of the British Raj in India for a very long time. One of the plaques in that museum gave the reasoning for the British Raj for choosing Calcutta as the Capital. Apparently Calcutta was the richest city in India when the East India company arrived. It was flush with natural resources, grains and wealth accumulated by the Rajas and Indian Kings who ruled before. By the time moved their Capital from Calcutta to Delhi and then left India few years later, they’d plunders everything from that City.

Ask any Indian about Calcutta and the first thing they’ll say is how dirty and piss-broke it is. But most don’t know why it is so. I attribute the state of this once great city directly to the British Raj robbing it blind over a century or two.

Re: New research on the cost of colonization to India

#20

Post by t1o5 »

pm90 wrote: post #18
dang wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, that happens fairly often without upvote manipulation, and as far as I can tell this post wasn't affected by such manipulation.

It seems that this article has been flagged. Dang, I have noticed this quite frequently now: criticisms of Facebook and articles critical of colonialism get flagged off of the front page. As a regular member of this community, this really undermines my trust in the objectivity of this forum

A sizable chunk of users awake at this time of the day are descendants of the very same colonialists. What did you expect ?
Post reply on HN