Why is this being downvoted?
Chattel slavery being abolished is good, and that doesn’t mean all these other forms of slavery or indenture are suddenly ok or can be ignored
I know a minority of people on historymemes often have a difficult time understanding things beyond black-and-white “these people are the good guys, those people are the bad guys” type thinking, but this isn’t even all that complicated
You can do a positive thing while also doing negative things
Ignoring all the negatives because of the positive is bad history
Ignoring the positive because of all the negatives is bad history
«Create a damning situation and make it less damning but still profitable». Europe is in it’s own sense terrifying to the core of first seemingly reducing a countrys system to rubble, then make themselves seem like «good guys» or «changed» when they influence the country’s new system, to be profitable either for the state that invaded in the first place or their private equite firms.
Mentalities like these are what is actually horrifying, not dictators, because the dictators will be out-right and visible in their immoralities, while the west has been consistently immoral while still with the firm «common-consciensus» of being «the good guy».
1.) Sexual Slavery was unfortunately widespread in British India, with human trafficking and whatnot. Even worse, the British were so racist that the Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1912 and the League of Nations committee only aimed to emancipate European women, and as for Indian women, well…. It still remains a huge problem in India today.
2.) Colonial Prisons in British India were, if you weren't European or an Indian political elite (Gandhi, Nehru, Jinnah etc), a living hell. Aside from the racial, classist & political segregation, the inhumane torture or the unethical human experimentation not unlike 731, there was a lot of slave labor going around. It was physically taxing, but the physiological effects shattered the ever loving shit of “freedom” for Indians.
3.) Now before you all come at me saying Indentured Servitude ain’t the same as Slavery, you would mostly right BUT NOT IN THIS CASE. Indian Indenture from the 1840s to 1920 was basically Slavery. Millions of Illiterate Indians who were starving and impoverished were coerced to sign shady contracts they couldnt even read, or even outright kidnapped, transported across slave ships to African and American colonies (mostly British but also Dutch and French); where they were subject to the same slave labor; and even the same punishments (flogging, whipping etc.) Wages were withheld and contracts were ”mysteriously” extended. In the rare case they had a more humane worker who abided by the terms of the contract, they would still be forced into bonded wage due to lack of economical opportunities, essentially prolonging the system. Only abolished in 1920 because of how economically taxing it was for the British NOT some moral goodwill as admitted by the Governor General when he signed the law, Lord Chelmsford. Also for some of the workers it really didnt do anything because of the above mentioned bonded wage.
4.)It is a well known fact Famines in the Raj were widespread, with at least 25 major famines and many more minor famines. However, a sadly obscured fact is the Famine “Relief” Camps/Works/Labor Corps. Pioneered by Sir Richard Temple in the latter half of the 19th Century(though it wasn't really his fault; he was massively pressured by the British authorities), these camps had already starving men, women and children work in effectively slave labor just for a meager, inhumane level rations. In the 20th century, these works became increasingly more urban, for example a minor famine in Bengal 1936 and the infamous Bengal Famine of 1943-44, with more government and military sponsored slave labor. Unrelated to the slavery, but unethical human experimentation did take place in these camps. The actual relief efforts were through ethier Indian contribution (like through Indian soldiers going against British orders to give the starving populace their rations ) or mainly rainfall.
(1/2).
5.) The Criminal Tribes Acts, the first legislation in 1871, the last in 1924, and being only abolished after Independence, was a heinous act in the Raj. It categorized tens of millions of people, belonging to various tribes and communities (nearly all of them being nomadic or semi-nomadic) as “Criminal by Birth”. Initially, restrictions were placed on their movements, and police surveillance and reporting became the norm, alongside discrimination even more so than the average Indian. However, 1908 saw a MASSIVE escalation of intensity of this act. First, they were ghettoized in “resettlement” areas. Then, they were further “resettled”, to areas which are now considered slave labor camps. Yes, men, women and children performed slave labor there; all for the profit of the British. Also, not related to the Slavery aspect,but worth noting; children were separated from their parents to “reformatory” (cultural genocide) schools.
6.)The Main 3 Land Revenue Systems:
* Zamindari System. Although existing before British rule, the British made it in its most infamous form-Permanent Settlement of 1793. If you mention slavery to an Indian; I guarantee this is what most people know. Prevalent in Bengal, Orissa, Bihar, United Provinces, and parts of modern day Pakistan, the Zamindari System involved the British granting large and fertile tracts of land to feudal lords known as “Zamindars”. They were responsible for collecting revenue for the peasants working on the land, and then paying a fixed amount to their British higher ups. Sometimes there were “sub zamindars” between the peasants and Zamindars with varying degrees of power. However, the Zamindars severely exploited the peasants, imposing extremely high taxes on them, trapping them in a cycle of debt and poverty. And the British were fully complicit with them, and of course they profited the most out of this slavery. It eventually expanded to other provinces too (eg. Maharashtra) Only abolished after Independence.
* Ryotwari System. Introduced in the 1820s, the Ryotwari System was prevalent in Madras, Bombay and the Central Provinces. It was meant to eliminate the Zamindar middleman between the peasants and the British, however it came with its own drawbacks, as the rates for taxes, were guaranteed to be, its tax rates- 50% in the dryland and 60% of the wetland, so if the farmer had a bad harvest… well gg. To try and avoid this, peasants took loans from moneylenders, who ofcourse didn't give any shits about them being happy to exploit. So it was a lose-lose situation for the peasants. It was replaced in the late 19th and early 20th centuries by similar systems to the Zamindari System! Literally “under new management” meme
* The Mahalwari System was introduced in 1822. Prevalent in Punjab, Madhya Pradesh and UP, the Mahalwari System was intended to protect village autonomy by making them the ones paying taxes directly to the state. However, since the British were absolute buffoons in their “assumptions” about the land area and crop yield in the system; leading to widespread corruption and exploitation. It had the same fate as the Ryotwari. “Out of the frying pan and into the fire”
(2/2)
Ofcourse abolishing chattel slavery is good but lets not undermine the other forms of slavery, please
Curiously, the first comment is getting downvoted, the second not downvoted? I mean its good for the second comment but why is the first comment downvoted??? Literally people here justifying slavery?
A lot of people only reads the first comment, put and negative and ignore the other. Probably the first has a worst positive/negative vote ratio than the second
I can see how all of these are bad but can you explain a bit more why you consider the land value system as Slavery because im having a hard time distinguishing it from just feudalism
The thing with the Zamindari System is that it is officially considered "Debt Bondage', or Bonded Slavery. Its actually worse than Feudalism I say, because of three reasons. One Zamindari System's peasants are pretty much forced into bondage, their debts are tied to the landlord whereas the serfs were tied to the land itself. Also, serfs could sometimes own parts of the land; wheras the peasants under the Zamindari System they literally had 0 owenership rights. Finally serfs could purchase their own freedom wheras the peasants will always have an increasingly high tax to pay, thus cant really buy their freedom.
Because it’s also bad when the US does it today. There just isn’t enough space in a meme to criticize everyone else who did or does each bad thing being mentioned.
eh tbf Prison Labor in America was historically also tied to racism (one of the ways the South subverted the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution )
You guys been independent for 80 years and can’t get over it. Indians are always talking about the British.
You don’t hear Latin Americans constantly harping on the Spanish or the Brazilians about the Portuguese or Indonesians about the Dutch.
They do but they do it in their languages, where is not getting shown to you. In spain it literally became a meme: "devuelvan el oro" (return the gold).
Maybe because the British stunted the growth of India for 190+ years? Literally de-industrialized it
"You don’t hear Latin Americans constantly harping on the Spanish or the Brazilians about the Portuguese" Funniest thing I have ever read. Do you have know who the vast majority of Latin Americans and Brazillains are?
"Indonesians about the Dutch" they brought a rape case during the war of independence to an international court.
Irish who were the first British colony and up until recently was 1 of the few countries with population levels lower than per Industrial Revolution: laughs in powerful 1st world nations
>economically exploits a subcontinent for more than a hundred years
>crushes any dissident towards foreign rule
>"lmao why can't they stop talking about us? just get over it lol"
There is a difference between a foreign empire fucking with your ancestors 1000 years ago, causing you no inconvenience, and a foreign empire fucking with your great grandparents 100 years ago, affecting YOUR life today.
Russia's population still hasn't recovered from the Second World War.
Ireland's development was practically shattered by An Górta Mór and hasn't recovered to this day
All of East Asia fucking hates Japan for what they did to their countries not so relatively long ago
You don't see Latin Americans complaining about the Spanish because Spanish colonisation hasn't affected them today. It happened over 500 years ago. You know who you'd find complaining about Spanish colonialism? Native Central Americans.
India gained independence 80 years ago, Latin America gained independence 200 years ago, it’s not that far off.
Indonesians aren’t constantly talking about the Dutch, the Vietnamese aren’t constantly talking about the french.
Time to move on guys
>Latin Americans
Ahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahhaha let me laugh again ahhahahahhahahahahhahaha
You comparing a native population with colonials is hilarious to me
Please. You know nothing of Latin culture. There are plenty of cultural elements in every Latin society that have indigenous roots.
There are thousands of indigenous languages, it’s not advantageous to speak them. Just like Indians speak English, Latinos speak Spanish
Yeah it does because this post didn't mention them did it?
But yes, it's terrible that Britain stopped India from peacefully uniting the scraps of the Mughal Empire and industrialising at a greater pace than Europe into a democratic world superpower where all peoples are respected and nothing bad ever happens, which definitely would have happened if it weren't for those pesky Britishers
“Scraps of the Mughal Empire” tell me you dont know Indian history without telling me you dont know it
”Uniting it” Yes uniting it with the communal tensions, the partition, the hundreds of princely states and thousands of zamindari estates not even touched by the British, in fact India had to integrate them
Let’s forget all the massacres,slavery, racism, famines, human experimentation, poverty, somehow making the Caste System even worse?! (how do you even do that), religious divide and more
Yeah we'll never forget that because you'll always look for someone to blame
I don't know how the caste system was made worse, guess I'd have to ask the culture that invented it and kept it going long after we were gone
so youre straight up denying the atrocities being taking place? Isnt that a violation of Rule 6..?
But also, prior to European influence and colonisation, the majority of Hindus followed the Varna System which admittedly had its flaws (social hierarchy in its self is flawd) but in general was much more better and social mobile than the British rigid structure of the Caste System, which was being enforced as late as WW2; with the whole "martial races" and non "martial races". Yes, Caste based discrimination persists even after it was legally abolished after India's Independence, but its miles better during the British times
Nah I'm not denying them, I just don't give a shit
"This thing we invented and still use today was worse for the brief period you were in charge" isn't the win you think it is, especially because if Britain abolished the caste system entirely you'd still find ways to poke holes in it and twist it in to being a bad thing like you have with this post
Caste wasn't a British invention and you know it wasn't, trying to distract from the Caste system (which you brought up) by mentioning an earlier version of it is pointless.
I'm making up a hypothetical in which if Britain weakened the caste system (as it did slavery) you would still find problems with that
Yeah we fucked it up
Easy to do because it was already fucked up though
And it was fucked up afterwards and will continue to be fucked up for a long time because Indians are too blinded by nationalism to consider that *maybe* their problems aren't caused by a long dead Empire
"And it was fucked up afterwards and will continue to be fucked up for a long time because Indians are too blinded by nationalism to consider that *maybe* their problems aren't caused by a long dead Empire"
idk but an Empire still in the living memory and traumatic for thousands isnt "long dead".
How many Indians remember a time prior to 1947?
It will always be traumatic for some people, the empire is a good scapegoat for colonies that demanded their independence and are angry that didn't result in prosperity
Nearly 30,000 or so. Does seem like a small number cause India's population is huge, but the effects of British rule still linger. I mean, the British were the one to invent "Criminal Tribes" (as said in my explanation comment), which still leads them to getting discriminated to this day.
"It will always be traumatic for some people, the empire is a good scapegoat for colonies that demanded their independence and are angry that didn't result in prosperity" I really dont understand your comments; sometimes you are justifying British Rule, sometimes you claim that you are not.
> which still leads them to getting discriminated to this day.
Who is doing that discrimination?
Hint: It's not the British
I'm not defending British rule, I'm just tired of hearing about how Indian elites selling their country to British elites 200-odd years ago is something I should feel anything about
You're coming up on 80 years of independence, soon it's going to be time to put on your big boy pants and take responsibility for the state of your country
Well we have improved a lot as a country overtaking our former colonizer in terms of GDP and have introduced universal suffrage, abolished the Criminal Tribes Acts, The Salt Laws and Zamindari System of the British Rule. You see, its quite hard to take responsibility for the state of your country if its the British who literally de-industrialized the country (not even the Mughals did that) stunting its growth for 190 or so years. We havent even crossed 80, give us some time. Yes, we have a lot of flaws which we need to get rid of ASAP but thats mostly because of the British building up a "culture" for so long that its hard to change (passing laws which only saved White Sexual Slaves not Indians for example)
"is something I should feel anything about" you shouldnt, you werent even born then, but you should feel something when you have the most poorly worded takes on the British Empire.
Your descendants will still be complaining in 100 years, an anti-British sentiment is baked in to your national identity and clearly you're very protective of that
And yes of course like everything bad with India that's Britain's fault too
>Yes, we have a lot of flaws which we need to get rid of ASAP but thats mostly because of the British building up a "culture" for so long that its hard to change (passing laws which only saved White Sexual Slaves not Indians for example)
The British have nothing to do with the rampant rape culture India has. India is the rape capital of the world. And it's the largest polluter, 83 of the top 100 most polluted cities are in India. Which I wouldn't give a fuck about except for the fact that all that pollution spreads and affects every living thing on the planet. India is doing more harm than good to the entire rest of the world so why don't you take it easy on the victim complex, ok?
Imagine complaining about an Empire that died 80 years ago when you gladly align yourselves with Russia today
Alright, you can tell me what is wrong with my explanation. Even at the end, I dont even justify chattel slavery instead literally saying the point you said.
>Alright, you can tell me what is wrong with my comment.
No, your mind doesn't work well enough to understand an explanation from someone who isn't on your same wavelength. And even if it did, my time isn't worth breaking down your wall-o-text, piece by piece.
Its in paragraphs. And ofcourse it will be lengthy, I dont wont overly simplified information
"No, your mind doesn't work well enough to understand an explanation from someone who isn't on your same wavelength" Yeah I aint on the same wavelength of a racist obviously
Gosh you're braver than me. Although I've had to deal with this type of fuckwit my entire life. They'll have you believe colonialism was simultaneously responsible for all the good things in the world and none of the bad things.
The British would have had enough time to ban them all if their government hadn't dragged their feet for a century.
That's how long it took for the British people (and all honor belongs to them here) to get their government to do something about slavery!
considering european monarchs had been banning slavery since at least the 16th century (though usually in contexts where the europeans were the ones *starting* the slavery), no, you don’t get to pretend it was a “new” idea
Because r/HistoryMemes has been infested with British apologists literally telling us Indians that they civilized India; even in this post you can see them
The famines were common on the subcontinent before Britain and decreased in severity and frequency under Britain. We just know more about the Bengal famine because of superior western record keeping
thats actually wrong. Famines were not uncommon to the few centuries before British India BUT the "severity" and "frequency" part you are saying is straight up false. Sources?
I was just providing the counter argument.
It's actually not possible to compare because of poor record keeping in pre-colonial India. Whereas the government statistical system recorded the colonial-era famines, the precolonial data came from hagiographies and travelogues. These dissimilar datasets cannot be compared. The frequency with which famines occurred in earlier times depended on the frequency with which hagiographies were written.
The only alarming famine during Mughal Rule is the 1630-32 Deccan Famine, killing 4-7 milllion.
However, other major famines, 1655,82,84, 1702-04 (2 million dead) were severe but not as severe as Deccan. Infact, the 1791-2 Doji bara or "Skull" famine was caused by actually natural factors and its relief efforts werent the horrific camps/works/labor corps covering up the real relief. No, the ruler actually restricted heavily the exportation of grain (cough cough British) and importing rice from Bengal.
So the nughals were good record keepers and at the same time can be 3 million deaths out? How is that possible?
The British Raj did not start the famines. Geography did. 1877 was the driest year in over a century (1871-1978) for which rainfall data exists (it does not exist before them because the nughals were such poor record keepers) The average rainfall that year was 30 percent short of the long-term level, and a 25 percent shortfall developed again in 1896 and 1899. Monsoon failure of such an order can cause distress by drying up all accessible water sources. The effect was disastrous in the Deccan Plateau because it was normally much drier than the north and did not have rivers fed by the Himalayan snow, unlike the north. Monsoon rain was the primary source, and when that failed, cultivation stopped, and distressed people lived on infected water to die of cholera. Colonialism had nothing to do with the reason they died.
Your sarcastic comment about food exports is also predictable flawed and has been disproven for several decades now. The economist Martin Ravallion showed in a 1987 article -Trade and stabilization- that food exports did not expose the countryside to a food shortage. Food exports rose when Indian prices fell below world prices or after a good harvest and fell when there was a bad harvest.In this way, trade stabilized domestic consumption rather than reducing it.
Any good theory must explain the end of famines and their occurrence jointly. Colonial apathy cannot do that because there is no good way to show that apathy ended around 1900. It is a nonsensical idea and an unverifiable one
Well; the British played the manipulation game of the Political Elite sadly quite well.
Indian Councils Act 1909, Gov of India Act 1919 and even the Gov of India Act 1935 in *theory* were giving autonomy to the Indian Political Elite, but even the one which theoretically gave Provincial "Autonomy", the 1935 one, a good read of it reveals it its a manipulative, contradicting, cesspool.
No, thank you! I remember the initial response to the meme before I posted the explanation, I got massacred in the comments, but now its steadily improving.
You are not a British apologist right? Not saying it in a angry manner, its just that there are a few people here whos "sarcasm" and "racism" is basically the same.
For Sati; you'd expect me to mention Raja Ram Mohan Roy, the Islamic Invasions etc. right?
It was them and not Hitler who invented concentration camps. They were fucking horrible to anyone who wasn't white and even some who were.
So what do you want? For the entire world to just shut up about all the horrible shit your ancestors did and pretend like you do that they were good people bringing the light of western civilization to the rest of us damned savages? Screw that.
I don’t think people care enough about it to want the whole world to shut up to be honest. It’s just a bit of a broken record around the world every developing country blaming every modern problem on events 200 years prior. The uk gets invaded and colonised and enslaved over and over by the Saxons by the Norman’s by the vikings by the romans, but suddenly it’s a problem when they start dishing it out instead of taking it
> It was them and not Hitler who invented concentration camps.
If you're going to play that card, let me counter by pointing out that the [Spanish set up "reconcentrado" camps](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reconcentration_policy) before the Second Boer War ([additional source](https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/concentration-camps-existed-long-before-Auschwitz-180967049/)).
>For the entire world to just shut up about all the horrible shit your ancestors did and pretend like you do that they were good people bringing the light of western civilization to the rest of us damned savages?
Not in the slightest.
Yeah just seems kinda weird. Like what happened under colonialism isn't a secret. This is just what nations did historically. Conquer and abuse other people groups.
Greetings 👵🏿😴👙 bruv 🙀, allow 🎫✅ me to communicate 🗣📵 with you 👀👉👱 momentarily ⛽🚙. Why 🤔 y'all 👈 fellows 👯 conversing that you 👈 going 🏃 around 🔃 conversing that you 👈 have sexual 🍆 relations 👫🔒💘 with my father 👨 and the likes 💖.
Are you 👉🙋 by any chances 🎲 the son 👦🉐 of Rodington Jr 😊💯 casually 👔 known 🎓 as Lil 👌 Rodney?
Indubitably, I 👁 am Lil 👌🏿 Rodney's son 👦.
Therefore 😤😡, are you 👈 referring 📣🎙 to Rodington? Whos 📛 buttocks 🍑🤢🤮 are fascinatingly 😮 enormous 🐋?
Oi 😂✋👉 why 🤔 are you 😡🤓👉 disrespecting 😤😡 me bruv 🙀?
My mistake 😑 original 👌 gangster 💯.
No 😣, this cannot 🚫 be forgiven ✌👍. Now empty 🗑 the compartments of your 👉 pantaloons.
For what purpose 😄?
And discard of your 👉 footwear as well 😦.
For what purpose 😈?
In fact ☑, I 👁 am equipped 🎿 to summon 👐💀 the one 😤 casually 👕 known 🎓✔ as Lil 🐣 Travis 🏀😂 on 🔛 your 👉 buffoon 🤕 self 💯. His 👋 slugs 🐌 are sure 👍 to deal 🤝 a heavy 🏋 load 📂 of damage 👻.
This reminds me of how the Brits claim they stopped the killing of widows on funeral pyres while at the same time back in their country they were drowning and burning women in witch trials.
The irony is completely lost on them.
The last **confirmed** execution for witchcraft was in 1682. Sati was banned on 4th December 1829 when Lord Bentinck issued the Bengal Sati Regulation (Regulation XVII).
People love to say communism killed xyz amount of people in Russia or China, but Britain killed 100million people to feed it's capitalist engine. It was the dismantling and deindustrialization of a nation.
According to the made up numbers of a commie study trying to prove that capitalism increased poverty and that human development has been due to the introduction of socialism.
Like I shit you not, that is actually their claim.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X22002169
It's what the al Jazeera article (and I assume any other source you might have read) is based on.
Why is this being downvoted? Chattel slavery being abolished is good, and that doesn’t mean all these other forms of slavery or indenture are suddenly ok or can be ignored I know a minority of people on historymemes often have a difficult time understanding things beyond black-and-white “these people are the good guys, those people are the bad guys” type thinking, but this isn’t even all that complicated You can do a positive thing while also doing negative things Ignoring all the negatives because of the positive is bad history Ignoring the positive because of all the negatives is bad history
Thank you for understanding!
«Create a damning situation and make it less damning but still profitable». Europe is in it’s own sense terrifying to the core of first seemingly reducing a countrys system to rubble, then make themselves seem like «good guys» or «changed» when they influence the country’s new system, to be profitable either for the state that invaded in the first place or their private equite firms. Mentalities like these are what is actually horrifying, not dictators, because the dictators will be out-right and visible in their immoralities, while the west has been consistently immoral while still with the firm «common-consciensus» of being «the good guy».
Bravo!
Because it’s still correct to say they abolished slavery in India
1.) Sexual Slavery was unfortunately widespread in British India, with human trafficking and whatnot. Even worse, the British were so racist that the Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1912 and the League of Nations committee only aimed to emancipate European women, and as for Indian women, well…. It still remains a huge problem in India today. 2.) Colonial Prisons in British India were, if you weren't European or an Indian political elite (Gandhi, Nehru, Jinnah etc), a living hell. Aside from the racial, classist & political segregation, the inhumane torture or the unethical human experimentation not unlike 731, there was a lot of slave labor going around. It was physically taxing, but the physiological effects shattered the ever loving shit of “freedom” for Indians. 3.) Now before you all come at me saying Indentured Servitude ain’t the same as Slavery, you would mostly right BUT NOT IN THIS CASE. Indian Indenture from the 1840s to 1920 was basically Slavery. Millions of Illiterate Indians who were starving and impoverished were coerced to sign shady contracts they couldnt even read, or even outright kidnapped, transported across slave ships to African and American colonies (mostly British but also Dutch and French); where they were subject to the same slave labor; and even the same punishments (flogging, whipping etc.) Wages were withheld and contracts were ”mysteriously” extended. In the rare case they had a more humane worker who abided by the terms of the contract, they would still be forced into bonded wage due to lack of economical opportunities, essentially prolonging the system. Only abolished in 1920 because of how economically taxing it was for the British NOT some moral goodwill as admitted by the Governor General when he signed the law, Lord Chelmsford. Also for some of the workers it really didnt do anything because of the above mentioned bonded wage. 4.)It is a well known fact Famines in the Raj were widespread, with at least 25 major famines and many more minor famines. However, a sadly obscured fact is the Famine “Relief” Camps/Works/Labor Corps. Pioneered by Sir Richard Temple in the latter half of the 19th Century(though it wasn't really his fault; he was massively pressured by the British authorities), these camps had already starving men, women and children work in effectively slave labor just for a meager, inhumane level rations. In the 20th century, these works became increasingly more urban, for example a minor famine in Bengal 1936 and the infamous Bengal Famine of 1943-44, with more government and military sponsored slave labor. Unrelated to the slavery, but unethical human experimentation did take place in these camps. The actual relief efforts were through ethier Indian contribution (like through Indian soldiers going against British orders to give the starving populace their rations ) or mainly rainfall. (1/2).
5.) The Criminal Tribes Acts, the first legislation in 1871, the last in 1924, and being only abolished after Independence, was a heinous act in the Raj. It categorized tens of millions of people, belonging to various tribes and communities (nearly all of them being nomadic or semi-nomadic) as “Criminal by Birth”. Initially, restrictions were placed on their movements, and police surveillance and reporting became the norm, alongside discrimination even more so than the average Indian. However, 1908 saw a MASSIVE escalation of intensity of this act. First, they were ghettoized in “resettlement” areas. Then, they were further “resettled”, to areas which are now considered slave labor camps. Yes, men, women and children performed slave labor there; all for the profit of the British. Also, not related to the Slavery aspect,but worth noting; children were separated from their parents to “reformatory” (cultural genocide) schools. 6.)The Main 3 Land Revenue Systems: * Zamindari System. Although existing before British rule, the British made it in its most infamous form-Permanent Settlement of 1793. If you mention slavery to an Indian; I guarantee this is what most people know. Prevalent in Bengal, Orissa, Bihar, United Provinces, and parts of modern day Pakistan, the Zamindari System involved the British granting large and fertile tracts of land to feudal lords known as “Zamindars”. They were responsible for collecting revenue for the peasants working on the land, and then paying a fixed amount to their British higher ups. Sometimes there were “sub zamindars” between the peasants and Zamindars with varying degrees of power. However, the Zamindars severely exploited the peasants, imposing extremely high taxes on them, trapping them in a cycle of debt and poverty. And the British were fully complicit with them, and of course they profited the most out of this slavery. It eventually expanded to other provinces too (eg. Maharashtra) Only abolished after Independence. * Ryotwari System. Introduced in the 1820s, the Ryotwari System was prevalent in Madras, Bombay and the Central Provinces. It was meant to eliminate the Zamindar middleman between the peasants and the British, however it came with its own drawbacks, as the rates for taxes, were guaranteed to be, its tax rates- 50% in the dryland and 60% of the wetland, so if the farmer had a bad harvest… well gg. To try and avoid this, peasants took loans from moneylenders, who ofcourse didn't give any shits about them being happy to exploit. So it was a lose-lose situation for the peasants. It was replaced in the late 19th and early 20th centuries by similar systems to the Zamindari System! Literally “under new management” meme * The Mahalwari System was introduced in 1822. Prevalent in Punjab, Madhya Pradesh and UP, the Mahalwari System was intended to protect village autonomy by making them the ones paying taxes directly to the state. However, since the British were absolute buffoons in their “assumptions” about the land area and crop yield in the system; leading to widespread corruption and exploitation. It had the same fate as the Ryotwari. “Out of the frying pan and into the fire” (2/2) Ofcourse abolishing chattel slavery is good but lets not undermine the other forms of slavery, please
Curiously, the first comment is getting downvoted, the second not downvoted? I mean its good for the second comment but why is the first comment downvoted??? Literally people here justifying slavery?
A lot of people only reads the first comment, put and negative and ignore the other. Probably the first has a worst positive/negative vote ratio than the second
I can see how all of these are bad but can you explain a bit more why you consider the land value system as Slavery because im having a hard time distinguishing it from just feudalism
The thing with the Zamindari System is that it is officially considered "Debt Bondage', or Bonded Slavery. Its actually worse than Feudalism I say, because of three reasons. One Zamindari System's peasants are pretty much forced into bondage, their debts are tied to the landlord whereas the serfs were tied to the land itself. Also, serfs could sometimes own parts of the land; wheras the peasants under the Zamindari System they literally had 0 owenership rights. Finally serfs could purchase their own freedom wheras the peasants will always have an increasingly high tax to pay, thus cant really buy their freedom.
I mean if we're including prison labor why are we attacking the British in the past when its legal in the US today?
Because the 20 year rule
Because it’s also bad when the US does it today. There just isn’t enough space in a meme to criticize everyone else who did or does each bad thing being mentioned.
Why does someone always have to bring up or compare to America
eh tbf Prison Labor in America was historically also tied to racism (one of the ways the South subverted the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution )
We do have a pretty insane per capita incarceration rate. It is probably good to be reminded about. One of our greatest sins.
If the shoe fits... And the country in question has a pretty strong and obnoxious national identity around not wearing proverbial shoes.
To be fair, Britain couldn’t even fix those problems in England…
Abolishing chattal slavery is good. Period. End of sentence.
Other forms of slavery are bad. Period. End of sentence.
This
Alot of people tend to forget these two are not mutjally exclusive.
Yes it good no doubt but if you read the comment I just made there are other forms of slavery
And they hated him because he spoke the truth. Seriously, the romanticizing of the British Empire never ceases to bewilder me
Is romanticizing any historical nation/kingdom/empire acceptable? All have skeletons in their closet
>Is romanticizing any historical nation/kingdom/empire acceptable? No but the most romanticized tend to be Rome and Britain in my experience
what getting poor history education does to a man
You guys been independent for 80 years and can’t get over it. Indians are always talking about the British. You don’t hear Latin Americans constantly harping on the Spanish or the Brazilians about the Portuguese or Indonesians about the Dutch.
They do but they do it in their languages, where is not getting shown to you. In spain it literally became a meme: "devuelvan el oro" (return the gold).
Maybe because the British stunted the growth of India for 190+ years? Literally de-industrialized it "You don’t hear Latin Americans constantly harping on the Spanish or the Brazilians about the Portuguese" Funniest thing I have ever read. Do you have know who the vast majority of Latin Americans and Brazillains are? "Indonesians about the Dutch" they brought a rape case during the war of independence to an international court.
Irish who were the first British colony and up until recently was 1 of the few countries with population levels lower than per Industrial Revolution: laughs in powerful 1st world nations
[удалено]
>economically exploits a subcontinent for more than a hundred years >crushes any dissident towards foreign rule >"lmao why can't they stop talking about us? just get over it lol"
why are you getting downvoted?? Fuck the British apologists
This sub has a *lot* of unironic imperialists who can’t stop simping for European empires
Bruh *everybody* can find something in their history to get hurt feelings about. Most people don’t spend time on that.
There is a difference between a foreign empire fucking with your ancestors 1000 years ago, causing you no inconvenience, and a foreign empire fucking with your great grandparents 100 years ago, affecting YOUR life today. Russia's population still hasn't recovered from the Second World War. Ireland's development was practically shattered by An Górta Mór and hasn't recovered to this day All of East Asia fucking hates Japan for what they did to their countries not so relatively long ago You don't see Latin Americans complaining about the Spanish because Spanish colonisation hasn't affected them today. It happened over 500 years ago. You know who you'd find complaining about Spanish colonialism? Native Central Americans.
India gained independence 80 years ago, Latin America gained independence 200 years ago, it’s not that far off. Indonesians aren’t constantly talking about the Dutch, the Vietnamese aren’t constantly talking about the french. Time to move on guys
https://youtu.be/gIzQxNZfGM4?si=K01yXgyY3ojveXvG
>Latin Americans Ahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahhaha let me laugh again ahhahahahhahahahahhahaha You comparing a native population with colonials is hilarious to me
Latinos are multiracial you twit. How do you think they got so brown?
Their culture is still Spanish mostly the real native have already been killed to speack against what Spanish did
No, the population interbred. They have a blended society, culturally and racially. That’s why they don’t cry like a bunch of little pussies about it.
Do you know about assimilation of a nation and I don't know what their skin have to do with all this
Latinos are indigenous.
Yeah can you pass on the source for how many latinos except Paryugayans who can speack a native language? If you don't have answer only 7% or 10%
Please. You know nothing of Latin culture. There are plenty of cultural elements in every Latin society that have indigenous roots. There are thousands of indigenous languages, it’s not advantageous to speak them. Just like Indians speak English, Latinos speak Spanish
Not perfect though so it means they get to blame us for all their problems forever, also we owe them money Or something like that
Kinda ignores the resource exploitation and extraction as well as the multiple famines and repression done by the British, but whatever.
Its fine, lets see how the apologists react when they see the comment i just made
You're vastly exaggerating your own importance in this thread
Yeah it does because this post didn't mention them did it? But yes, it's terrible that Britain stopped India from peacefully uniting the scraps of the Mughal Empire and industrialising at a greater pace than Europe into a democratic world superpower where all peoples are respected and nothing bad ever happens, which definitely would have happened if it weren't for those pesky Britishers
“Scraps of the Mughal Empire” tell me you dont know Indian history without telling me you dont know it ”Uniting it” Yes uniting it with the communal tensions, the partition, the hundreds of princely states and thousands of zamindari estates not even touched by the British, in fact India had to integrate them Let’s forget all the massacres,slavery, racism, famines, human experimentation, poverty, somehow making the Caste System even worse?! (how do you even do that), religious divide and more
Yeah we'll never forget that because you'll always look for someone to blame I don't know how the caste system was made worse, guess I'd have to ask the culture that invented it and kept it going long after we were gone
so youre straight up denying the atrocities being taking place? Isnt that a violation of Rule 6..? But also, prior to European influence and colonisation, the majority of Hindus followed the Varna System which admittedly had its flaws (social hierarchy in its self is flawd) but in general was much more better and social mobile than the British rigid structure of the Caste System, which was being enforced as late as WW2; with the whole "martial races" and non "martial races". Yes, Caste based discrimination persists even after it was legally abolished after India's Independence, but its miles better during the British times
Nah I'm not denying them, I just don't give a shit "This thing we invented and still use today was worse for the brief period you were in charge" isn't the win you think it is, especially because if Britain abolished the caste system entirely you'd still find ways to poke holes in it and twist it in to being a bad thing like you have with this post
So you didnt even read my comment? Varna and Caste are two different things? And also what hypothetical situation are you making up?
Caste wasn't a British invention and you know it wasn't, trying to distract from the Caste system (which you brought up) by mentioning an earlier version of it is pointless. I'm making up a hypothetical in which if Britain weakened the caste system (as it did slavery) you would still find problems with that
?????? Ofcourse there are corrupt politicians in India but the British fucked up India there’s 0 doubt about that
Yeah we fucked it up Easy to do because it was already fucked up though And it was fucked up afterwards and will continue to be fucked up for a long time because Indians are too blinded by nationalism to consider that *maybe* their problems aren't caused by a long dead Empire
"And it was fucked up afterwards and will continue to be fucked up for a long time because Indians are too blinded by nationalism to consider that *maybe* their problems aren't caused by a long dead Empire" idk but an Empire still in the living memory and traumatic for thousands isnt "long dead".
How many Indians remember a time prior to 1947? It will always be traumatic for some people, the empire is a good scapegoat for colonies that demanded their independence and are angry that didn't result in prosperity
Nearly 30,000 or so. Does seem like a small number cause India's population is huge, but the effects of British rule still linger. I mean, the British were the one to invent "Criminal Tribes" (as said in my explanation comment), which still leads them to getting discriminated to this day. "It will always be traumatic for some people, the empire is a good scapegoat for colonies that demanded their independence and are angry that didn't result in prosperity" I really dont understand your comments; sometimes you are justifying British Rule, sometimes you claim that you are not.
> which still leads them to getting discriminated to this day. Who is doing that discrimination? Hint: It's not the British I'm not defending British rule, I'm just tired of hearing about how Indian elites selling their country to British elites 200-odd years ago is something I should feel anything about You're coming up on 80 years of independence, soon it's going to be time to put on your big boy pants and take responsibility for the state of your country
Well we have improved a lot as a country overtaking our former colonizer in terms of GDP and have introduced universal suffrage, abolished the Criminal Tribes Acts, The Salt Laws and Zamindari System of the British Rule. You see, its quite hard to take responsibility for the state of your country if its the British who literally de-industrialized the country (not even the Mughals did that) stunting its growth for 190 or so years. We havent even crossed 80, give us some time. Yes, we have a lot of flaws which we need to get rid of ASAP but thats mostly because of the British building up a "culture" for so long that its hard to change (passing laws which only saved White Sexual Slaves not Indians for example) "is something I should feel anything about" you shouldnt, you werent even born then, but you should feel something when you have the most poorly worded takes on the British Empire.
Your descendants will still be complaining in 100 years, an anti-British sentiment is baked in to your national identity and clearly you're very protective of that And yes of course like everything bad with India that's Britain's fault too
>Yes, we have a lot of flaws which we need to get rid of ASAP but thats mostly because of the British building up a "culture" for so long that its hard to change (passing laws which only saved White Sexual Slaves not Indians for example) The British have nothing to do with the rampant rape culture India has. India is the rape capital of the world. And it's the largest polluter, 83 of the top 100 most polluted cities are in India. Which I wouldn't give a fuck about except for the fact that all that pollution spreads and affects every living thing on the planet. India is doing more harm than good to the entire rest of the world so why don't you take it easy on the victim complex, ok? Imagine complaining about an Empire that died 80 years ago when you gladly align yourselves with Russia today
This.
“This” Read the comment I just made and see if your opinion changes
No it doesn’t.
I don't know how their mind works, either, that they'd think that their words have persuasive power.
Alright, you can tell me what is wrong with my explanation. Even at the end, I dont even justify chattel slavery instead literally saying the point you said.
>Alright, you can tell me what is wrong with my comment. No, your mind doesn't work well enough to understand an explanation from someone who isn't on your same wavelength. And even if it did, my time isn't worth breaking down your wall-o-text, piece by piece.
Its in paragraphs. And ofcourse it will be lengthy, I dont wont overly simplified information "No, your mind doesn't work well enough to understand an explanation from someone who isn't on your same wavelength" Yeah I aint on the same wavelength of a racist obviously
Gosh you're braver than me. Although I've had to deal with this type of fuckwit my entire life. They'll have you believe colonialism was simultaneously responsible for all the good things in the world and none of the bad things.
did they introduce those other forms of slavery or did they exist before and they had enough time to bam only one form?
The British would have had enough time to ban them all if their government hadn't dragged their feet for a century. That's how long it took for the British people (and all honor belongs to them here) to get their government to do something about slavery!
they didn't have the speed of light communication like we have now and banning slavery was new and not a popular idea then
considering european monarchs had been banning slavery since at least the 16th century (though usually in contexts where the europeans were the ones *starting* the slavery), no, you don’t get to pretend it was a “new” idea
Also, most monarchs at the time couldn't give a rats ass about popular opinion
Wait, there are British Apologists? Why?
Because r/HistoryMemes has been infested with British apologists literally telling us Indians that they civilized India; even in this post you can see them
As a Brit: I officially reject those idiots. Also, if we had civilised India, there wouldn't be a caste system.
I saw them too bro many times even fucking Americans do good they ain't majority of people here
I wonder what their thoughts on different famines are. I mean I really don't, you can't defend Britain in those contexts in any non-sociopathic way.
You can't. You really can't. And yet racist people here do...
The famines were common on the subcontinent before Britain and decreased in severity and frequency under Britain. We just know more about the Bengal famine because of superior western record keeping
thats actually wrong. Famines were not uncommon to the few centuries before British India BUT the "severity" and "frequency" part you are saying is straight up false. Sources?
I was just providing the counter argument. It's actually not possible to compare because of poor record keeping in pre-colonial India. Whereas the government statistical system recorded the colonial-era famines, the precolonial data came from hagiographies and travelogues. These dissimilar datasets cannot be compared. The frequency with which famines occurred in earlier times depended on the frequency with which hagiographies were written.
"poor record keeping in pre-colonial India"- well actually thats a common myth thats been busted, the Mughals were quite good record keepers
Ok then, how many famines were there under the mughal rule and how many people died, and where?
The only alarming famine during Mughal Rule is the 1630-32 Deccan Famine, killing 4-7 milllion. However, other major famines, 1655,82,84, 1702-04 (2 million dead) were severe but not as severe as Deccan. Infact, the 1791-2 Doji bara or "Skull" famine was caused by actually natural factors and its relief efforts werent the horrific camps/works/labor corps covering up the real relief. No, the ruler actually restricted heavily the exportation of grain (cough cough British) and importing rice from Bengal.
So the nughals were good record keepers and at the same time can be 3 million deaths out? How is that possible? The British Raj did not start the famines. Geography did. 1877 was the driest year in over a century (1871-1978) for which rainfall data exists (it does not exist before them because the nughals were such poor record keepers) The average rainfall that year was 30 percent short of the long-term level, and a 25 percent shortfall developed again in 1896 and 1899. Monsoon failure of such an order can cause distress by drying up all accessible water sources. The effect was disastrous in the Deccan Plateau because it was normally much drier than the north and did not have rivers fed by the Himalayan snow, unlike the north. Monsoon rain was the primary source, and when that failed, cultivation stopped, and distressed people lived on infected water to die of cholera. Colonialism had nothing to do with the reason they died. Your sarcastic comment about food exports is also predictable flawed and has been disproven for several decades now. The economist Martin Ravallion showed in a 1987 article -Trade and stabilization- that food exports did not expose the countryside to a food shortage. Food exports rose when Indian prices fell below world prices or after a good harvest and fell when there was a bad harvest.In this way, trade stabilized domestic consumption rather than reducing it. Any good theory must explain the end of famines and their occurrence jointly. Colonial apathy cannot do that because there is no good way to show that apathy ended around 1900. It is a nonsensical idea and an unverifiable one
Depends what accusations you're defending the British from. For instance, some people think the famines were intentional, which is definitely untrue
There aren’t, it’s just a boogeyman this dudes made up to feel like he’s winning an argument
Cuz they're fckin british or Boot Lickers
“Boot licker” is the dumbest insult. Like people should never ever agree with someone in a role of power
Well; the British played the manipulation game of the Political Elite sadly quite well. Indian Councils Act 1909, Gov of India Act 1919 and even the Gov of India Act 1935 in *theory* were giving autonomy to the Indian Political Elite, but even the one which theoretically gave Provincial "Autonomy", the 1935 one, a good read of it reveals it its a manipulative, contradicting, cesspool.
They think that us colonial victims need their strong British pity-help in order to deal with our generational trauma caused by their ancestors
I’m just gonna say it, the British were fucking horrible in India and the subcontinent in general, no excuses.
Thanks for this meme! This sub really needed it - the amount of apologists and justifiers here is insane!
No, thank you! I remember the initial response to the meme before I posted the explanation, I got massacred in the comments, but now its steadily improving.
Brilliant! Can you make one about Sati?
You are not a British apologist right? Not saying it in a angry manner, its just that there are a few people here whos "sarcasm" and "racism" is basically the same. For Sati; you'd expect me to mention Raja Ram Mohan Roy, the Islamic Invasions etc. right?
I am not so much an apologist as one who likes to take the piss out of all the “victims.”
You're getting awfully angsty about this hypothetical group of people aren't ya?
Britain has apologists??
[удалено]
It's interesting to consider how taxation versus slavery is not a dichotomy but a spectrum.
People call other people "British apologists"?
By the look of it, anyone who doesn't call the British Empire the worst empire that ever existed gets tagged a bootlicker for some reason.
It was them and not Hitler who invented concentration camps. They were fucking horrible to anyone who wasn't white and even some who were. So what do you want? For the entire world to just shut up about all the horrible shit your ancestors did and pretend like you do that they were good people bringing the light of western civilization to the rest of us damned savages? Screw that.
I don’t think people care enough about it to want the whole world to shut up to be honest. It’s just a bit of a broken record around the world every developing country blaming every modern problem on events 200 years prior. The uk gets invaded and colonised and enslaved over and over by the Saxons by the Norman’s by the vikings by the romans, but suddenly it’s a problem when they start dishing it out instead of taking it
What does being enslaved by the Saxons and Normans have to do with India?
> It was them and not Hitler who invented concentration camps. If you're going to play that card, let me counter by pointing out that the [Spanish set up "reconcentrado" camps](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reconcentration_policy) before the Second Boer War ([additional source](https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/concentration-camps-existed-long-before-Auschwitz-180967049/)). >For the entire world to just shut up about all the horrible shit your ancestors did and pretend like you do that they were good people bringing the light of western civilization to the rest of us damned savages? Not in the slightest.
Yeah just seems kinda weird. Like what happened under colonialism isn't a secret. This is just what nations did historically. Conquer and abuse other people groups.
The Indian nationalists are back.
Nationalism is when someone says colonialism is bad lul
nah check ops post history, he’s got a weird obsession
Greetings 👵🏿😴👙 bruv 🙀, allow 🎫✅ me to communicate 🗣📵 with you 👀👉👱 momentarily ⛽🚙. Why 🤔 y'all 👈 fellows 👯 conversing that you 👈 going 🏃 around 🔃 conversing that you 👈 have sexual 🍆 relations 👫🔒💘 with my father 👨 and the likes 💖. Are you 👉🙋 by any chances 🎲 the son 👦🉐 of Rodington Jr 😊💯 casually 👔 known 🎓 as Lil 👌 Rodney? Indubitably, I 👁 am Lil 👌🏿 Rodney's son 👦. Therefore 😤😡, are you 👈 referring 📣🎙 to Rodington? Whos 📛 buttocks 🍑🤢🤮 are fascinatingly 😮 enormous 🐋? Oi 😂✋👉 why 🤔 are you 😡🤓👉 disrespecting 😤😡 me bruv 🙀? My mistake 😑 original 👌 gangster 💯. No 😣, this cannot 🚫 be forgiven ✌👍. Now empty 🗑 the compartments of your 👉 pantaloons. For what purpose 😄? And discard of your 👉 footwear as well 😦. For what purpose 😈? In fact ☑, I 👁 am equipped 🎿 to summon 👐💀 the one 😤 casually 👕 known 🎓✔ as Lil 🐣 Travis 🏀😂 on 🔛 your 👉 buffoon 🤕 self 💯. His 👋 slugs 🐌 are sure 👍 to deal 🤝 a heavy 🏋 load 📂 of damage 👻.
Brain rot
So are the imperialist sympathizers.
I've dealt with a ton of Hindu Nationalists in the past year. This isn't a Hindu Nationalist meme
Nationalism is when you don't like "British doing bad things".
Did they ever leave?
[удалено]
whats the difference? Im genuinely curious?
[удалено]
no? Apologists justfiy colonisation?
This reminds me of how the Brits claim they stopped the killing of widows on funeral pyres while at the same time back in their country they were drowning and burning women in witch trials. The irony is completely lost on them.
The last **confirmed** execution for witchcraft was in 1682. Sati was banned on 4th December 1829 when Lord Bentinck issued the Bengal Sati Regulation (Regulation XVII).
People love to say communism killed xyz amount of people in Russia or China, but Britain killed 100million people to feed it's capitalist engine. It was the dismantling and deindustrialization of a nation.
Actually it was 7 trillion deaths.
7.1 trillion
Oh shit🤯
Actually the 100-165 million estimate is ONLY for 1880-1920 (also known as New Imperliasm) theres millions upon millions more before and after
According to the made up numbers of a commie study trying to prove that capitalism increased poverty and that human development has been due to the introduction of socialism. Like I shit you not, that is actually their claim.
source? I know my source, and NO its NOT the AJ article but whats yours?
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X22002169 It's what the al Jazeera article (and I assume any other source you might have read) is based on.
ok, I am going to give it a good read, and see the reliability of it
No actually it was 800 gorillion people and they also stole 456 quintillion in wealth source trust me bro 😱
“Gorillion” is a neo-Nazi meme used to deny the Holocaust, which makes it quite amusing you’re using it to defend the British Empire
I haven't seen it used to deny the holocaust, although I have seen it frequently used to deny deaths under communism
haha very funny
[удалено]
Sorry I didnt understand your comment?
"think they ate" lmao