Thread 515548407

My friend wants me to believe that India is a shithole today solely due to the British occupation and that the country would've been much better off had the colonization never happened. Even if one could argue that conditions under the Raj were bad for Indians, can Britain really be blamed for all of India's problems a century after the Raj? To me it just sounds like blacks blaming all their shortcomings on whites.

>>515548407 (OP)
>the country would've been much better off had the colonization never happened.
It would have been.
>India's problems a century after the Raj?
This was primarily communism, mass sterilisation programmes for the poor etc. India had stalinist 5 year plans until about the 90s.

India has traditionally (for most of history) been one of the most prosperous regions on the planet. The entire reason there was a rush for India by european powers was because of the wealth available.

But even Indian nationalists don't believe that. They believe before the Brits, the Mughals fucked things up. And before them, whatever guy from Afghanistan or the northwest.

>>515548407 (OP)
Do not fall for the trap of debating whether the Raj was bad or whether the British did enough to help Indians.

Point out that "a series of unfortunate events" never leaves lasting effects. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were bombed into oblivion, then recovered almost immediately once the Japanese were allowed to resume adapting to modern civilization.

Indian society today closely resembles Indian society prior to colonization. This proves that the Raj had no negative impact on Indians (but arguably gave them an advantage in building out infrastructure earlier than most third world countries could).

----

SIDE NOTE
The very reason Indians and Africans had to be subjugated is that they are lesser. White people never tried to subjugate or abuse the Japanese. We did to some Chinese, but that was because it was more difficult to conquer them and many of them were and still are quite savage.

We respected the natives of North America enough to let them have their own reservations. Again, don't get into the "colonizer" narrative, but we worked with natives to kill other natives and other colonizers. The line between "colonist" and "native" was more blurred. There were self-interested parties on both sides who allied with various factions.

----

India has an IQ of 76.
The country is retarded, but they had a white over class once upon a time. And with so many people, even a nation of retards is going to have many geniuses.
The worst thing the British did was teach them English.

Some of the famines in India were exasperated by the British which is about the worst I can find on the Raj from actual sources talking economics not 'post colonial hurt feelings sociologists' pretending to be academics.

>>515548407 (OP)
>but we worked with natives to kill other natives and other colonizers
What the fuck do you think happened in India exactly?

>>515550072
>>515550359

>>515548407 (OP)
>had the colonization never happened
The problem is they've been colonized a dozen times extraneous to the British. Literal, unironic slave bred race.

>>515548407 (OP)
Iberia could be extremely wealthy if not for the Romans.
They plundered all of our mines.
God damn Romans and then they have the gall to say they built some nice bridges or something.
Iberia Superpower by 2050.

>>515548407 (OP)
Your friend sounds like a retard
Get better friends lol

>>515550306

You do realize that the majority of these iq records have been simply made up to purport an agenda right ? Such as specifically choosing malnourished children, wrong weighted averages, and discarding results that show otherwise ?

https://youtu.be/CntemqZAvEs

>>515549966
Wasn't india the richest country alongside china? British were shocked to see the standard of living in bengal so much so they decided to set up their company.

Simple question. Why can't they stop their railways from having shit caused corrosion when they have millions of highly skilled engineers.

>>515551150
Define richest.

Richest as in has the most GDP because it had the most people and industrialization wasn't a thing? That doesn't mean much.

>>515550072
>Hiroshima and Nagasaki were bombed into oblivion, then recovered almost immediately once the Japanese were allowed to resume adapting to modern civilization.
I literally mentioned this to my friend lol. His response was that Japan had assistance from the USA and that "it's not the same". Needless to say I think this was a cheap response. If India had been nuked twice obviously the craters would still be there today.

>>515548407 (OP)
It's a shame the (demi-Draco) British purposefully sabotaged the administrative structures of the Raj before running away in 1947, such that they even divided the land up into what they hoped would be warring, quarrelsome (demi-Draco) states so as to retard their development and thus ability to resist continued British predation.

>>515551002
Well they sure act like low IQ people, getting hit by trains, eating shit, and raping all the time. 76 sounds about right.

>>515548407 (OP)
They would have no electricity, running water, cars, computers, medicine, toil- ... Well pretty much all the luxuries they enjoy they would not have. If it is a female remind her that the British stopped the practice of sati and that she very well could have been burnt alive on her husbands funeral pyre were it not for the them.

>>515550072

>Hiroshima and Nagasaki were bombed into oblivion, then recovered almost immediately once the Japanese were allowed to resume adapting to modern civilization.

Japan is basically a US vassal state at this point, they have been culturally and economically dependent on the US. After the bombing capital investment to the Japan was significant.

India's GDP in 1800 has 23% of the world GDP and in 1947 it became 1.8% while britains GDP skyrocketed to 347%

>>515549752
Traditionally India is ruled by foreigners since jeets are incapable of leadership and long-term planning

>>515548407 (OP)
India is a Frankenstate, one that only exists because it was stitched together by the Brits, which means it is hard to govern. That India got a Westminster-ish system of governance makes it even worse.

Compare with China, which has several thousand year history of centralization and sinicization and so is much more of a natural born state.

>>515550306
>The worst thing the British did was teach them English.

...?

>>515552032

>picrel
well its enough to run your entire tech industry

>Compare with China, which has several thousand year history of centralization and sinicization and so is much more of a natural born state

you are glazing a communist dictatorship against a democracy

>>515550635
>Literal, unironic slave bred race.

That's all of us.

50% Draco (so act like it) 25% Human 25% Ape(oid?).

>>515553651
Those companies all suck and only serve to diminish quality of life.

>>515551150
India was so shit and poor that a literal company just took it over without any resistance
it'd be like jeff bezos buying a shithole like madagascar or something
indian lies need to be put to an end

india was a rich country like 3000 years ago, and never again since

>>515551150
>Wasn't india the richest country alongside china?
you know this isnt true pajeet, stop lying

>>515553834
My genes are not from that red part.

>>515548407 (OP)
Make Kolkata Calcutta Again

>>515554822
What is this from lol

>>515554268
i am not contesting that, but to say a 60 IQ race is making your life inferior says a lot about the people being slaved

It's true the British took billions from India and so much resources from India it's not even funny they starved Indians because they feared them the anglpid fears the chad Indian

>>515555127
>putting retards in charge of large organizations and importing them into your country en mass makes life worse
surprise surprise

>>515555340
Should have starved more desu

>>515548407 (OP)
I mean, why the british didn't force christianity on these peoples like it happened here in the american continent ?
Christianity/western ideas would surely change their whole culture and nation, just saying tho..

>>515553834
You misunderstand, the pic was unrelated. As is this one.

>>515551150
India wasn't a united country when the British invaded.

>>515555587
>putting retards in charge of large organizations and importing them into your country en mass makes life worse
you are proving yourself that IQ is literally a useless metric, whats stopping you from atleast masquerading as a retard and reclaiming those companies ?

>>515548407 (OP)
The British stole all their toilets. They had space age toilet technology. Trillions of toilets the pride of India

>>515554962
RRR. Anti-British bollywood movie, but the absolutely absurd "british were heartless monsters" moments are kino at times

>>515556423
A white smart person has a worse chance compared to a retarded brown person because the latter is more beneficial to the esg score of the company.

>>515557174
and who decides the esg of a company ? you are literally are proving my point

>>515554822
lmao

Honestly it was the other way round. Britain expended far too many resources on those retards.

>>515556533
As much as it leans into the 'British were heartless monsters' stuff, they seem to depict the main villain with a lot more nuance and respect than Western media would. And they show the heroes with a lot more moral greyness than Western media is comfortable with today as well.