21–30 of 96 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not "tactless drivel" to accurately state what actually happened . The British in colonial India were a highly privileged class, and they did a lot worse than just making their punkahwallahs sweat.
Is punkahwallahs an actual term? Asking as an ABCD.
(Kipling also wrote SF short stories, set in a universe with the aforementioned organization as a world government, for example "As Easy As A.B.C." (1912).)
Why so much concern of British officers in India, Better question would be how did common Indian population survived British Raj, when American Native populations did not.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Famines were mainly a result of British mismanagement of resources. This mismanagement peaked when World War 2 was the top priority (read: Bengal famine). The British were indeed sloppy when it came to the welfare of Indians and did enact some evil policies. They were imperialists after all. But there's no evidence that the British wanted to "wipe out" the native population.
> there's no evidence that the British wanted to "wipe out" the native population. No one accused all "the British". If you read my sentence, I used the word, some Brits such as Churchill. There's ample evidence of Churchill's desire to genocide, and even actions taken to genocide non-white people and subsequent whitewashing of the matters. I am sorry if some readers are upset to discover this about their hero, as I…
The Hanslope Park papers were about papers sent back to England related to the entire era of colonialism, not about "Churchill planning genocides" as you suggest.
Why so much concern of British officers in India, Better question would be how did common Indian population survived British Raj, when American Native populations did not.
Gin. Lots and lots of gin and tonic. https://slate.com/technology/2013/08/gin-and-tonic-kept-the-...
>>>
It is a curious fact, and one to which no one knows quite how much importance to attach, that something like 85% of all known worlds in the Galaxy, be they primitive or highly advanced, have invented a drink called jynnan tonnyx, or gee-N’N-T’N-ix, or jinond-o-nicks, or any one of a thousand or more variations on the same phonetic theme. The drinks themselves are not the same, and vary between the Sivolvian ‘chinanto/mnigs’ which is ordinary water served at slightly above room temperature, and the Gagrakackan ‘tzjin-anthony-ks’ which kill cows at a hundred paces; and in fact the one common factor between all of them, beyond the fact that the names sound the same, is that they were all invented and named before the worlds concerned made contact with any other worlds.
Why so much concern of British officers in India, Better question would be how did common Indian population survived British Raj, when American Native populations did not.
Native Americans had no exposure or resistance to smallpox, cholera, diphtheria, influenza, malaria, measles, scarlet fever, typhoid, tuberculosis, etc etc. There are a lot of accounts of cities and towns being completely depopulated very rapidly during the early colonial period just from disease before there was large scale immigration to the Americas from the old world.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> there's no evidence that the British wanted to "wipe out" the native population. No one accused all "the British". If you read my sentence, I used the word, some Brits such as Churchill. There's ample evidence of Churchill's desire to genocide, and even actions taken to genocide non-white people and subsequent whitewashing of the matters. I am sorry if some readers are upset to discover this about their hero, as I…
I'd strongly object to saying these views are "unfortunately the facts of the matter" and that Churchill 'desired' genocide. The Hanslope Park papers were about papers sent back to England related to the entire era of colonialism, not about "Churchill planning genocides" as you suggest.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Native Americans had no exposure or resistance to smallpox, cholera, diphtheria, influenza, malaria, measles, scarlet fever, typhoid, tuberculosis, etc etc. There are a lot of accounts of cities and towns being completely depopulated very rapidly during the early colonial period just from disease before there was large scale immigration to the Americas from the old world.
Follow-up question: why did the disease exchange only affect native Americans. Why didn't the colonists perish due to contact with deadly American diseases they had no exposure or resistance to? Why were the European diseases so deadly to Americans, but not vice versa?
Infectious diseases often arise when humans live in large groups with their animals from which a lot of the diseases originate.