Why NATO Colonial Imperialism is Bad, England Murdered 100 Million in India, in 40 Years

[Rigby5]

How British colonialism killed 100 million Indians in 40 years

The extraordinary mortality rates in India between 1880 to 1920 were no accident.

www.aljazeera.com

This is an al Jazeera article on how the British murdered over 100 million people in India, from 1880 to 1920.
And to me that is who NATO really are, the monsters who deliberately keep starting wars, like WWI, and massacring civilians, like we did with Shock and Awe.

{...

How British colonialism killed 100 million Indians in 40 years​

Between 1880 to 1920, British colonial policies in India claimed more lives than all famines in the Soviet Union, Maoist China and North Korea combined.

• Dylan Sullivan
  Adjunct Fellow in the School of Social Sciences, Macquarie University
• Jason Hickel

Recent years have seen a resurgence in nostalgia for the British empire. High-profile books such as Niall Ferguson’s Empire: How Britain Made the Modern World, and Bruce Gilley’s The Last Imperialist, have claimed that British colonialism brought prosperity and development to India and other colonies. Two years ago, a YouGov poll found that 32 percent of people in Britain are actively proud of the nation’s colonial history.

This rosy picture of colonialism conflicts dramatically with the historical record. According to research by the economic historian Robert C Allen, extreme poverty in India increased under British rule, from 23 percent in 1810 to more than 50 percent in the mid-20th century. Real wages declined during the British colonial period, reaching a nadir in the 19th century, while famines became more frequent and more deadly. Far from benefitting the Indian people, colonialism was a human tragedy with few parallels in recorded history.
...}

We need to stop pretending that NATO and all colonial imperialists are the "good guy". We aren't.

 

[Ralph Norton]

that is who NATO really are, the monsters who deliberately keep starting wars, like WWI

Given that WW1 started in 1914 but NATO was not formed until 1949 I would have to say that, once again, you are full of shit.

 

[irosie91]

Given that WW1 started in 1914 but NATO was not formed until 1949 I would have to say that, once again, you are full of shit.

I am very interested in knowing JUST HOW the brits
murdered millions of Indians

 

[Doc7505]

How British colonialism killed 100 million Indians in 40 years

The extraordinary mortality rates in India between 1880 to 1920 were no accident.

www.aljazeera.com

This is an al Jazeera article on how the British murdered over 100 million people in India, from 1880 to 1920.
And to me that is who NATO really are, the monsters who deliberately keep starting wars, like WWI, and massacring civilians, like we did with Shock and Awe.

{...

How British colonialism killed 100 million Indians in 40 years​

Between 1880 to 1920, British colonial policies in India claimed more lives than all famines in the Soviet Union, Maoist China and North Korea combined.

• Dylan Sullivan
  Adjunct Fellow in the School of Social Sciences, Macquarie University
• Jason Hickel

Recent years have seen a resurgence in nostalgia for the British empire. High-profile books such as Niall Ferguson’s Empire: How Britain Made the Modern World, and Bruce Gilley’s The Last Imperialist, have claimed that British colonialism brought prosperity and development to India and other colonies. Two years ago, a YouGov poll found that 32 percent of people in Britain are actively proud of the nation’s colonial history.

This rosy picture of colonialism conflicts dramatically with the historical record. According to research by the economic historian Robert C Allen, extreme poverty in India increased under British rule, from 23 percent in 1810 to more than 50 percent in the mid-20th century. Real wages declined during the British colonial period, reaching a nadir in the 19th century, while famines became more frequent and more deadly. Far from benefitting the Indian people, colonialism was a human tragedy with few parallels in recorded history.
...}

We need to stop pretending that NATO and all colonial imperialists are the "good guy". We aren't.

~~~~~~
History tells us that countries in the past and present ave killed millions in pursuit of power and dominance.
There was Alexander the Great III of Macedon, Rome, Genghis Khan, Kublai Khan, Stalin, Hitler, Mao Zedong.
At one time or another after the fall of Rome, France, Germany, Spain, Portugal and Muslim Ottomans also held the same position.
The millions killed through thousands of years in the name of greed, conquest, religion are many.
To claim it's just happening now is asinine, ignorant and definitely shows you lack of intelligence.
That said, we as a nation should not allow any organization, country or State to dominate and dictate to others, whether it be, Russia, China, The U.S., or the UN.

 

[irosie91]

~~~~~~
History tells us that countries in the past and present ave killed millions in pursuit of power and dominance.
There was Alexander the Great III of Macedon, Rome, Genghis Khan, Kublai Khan, Stalin, Hitler, Mao Zedong.
At one time or another after the fall of Rome, France, Germany, Spain, Portugal and Muslim Ottomans also held the same position.
The millions killed through thousands of years in the name of greed, conquest, religion are many.
To claim it's just happening now is asinine, ignorant and definitely shows you lack of intelligence.
That said, we as a nation should not allow any organization, country or State to dominate and dictate to others, whether it be, Russia, China, The U.S., or the UN.

for rigby----on the FIRST PAGE of your "intro to logic" textbook-----you can find this statement ---
CORRELATION IS NOT CAUSATION
your explanation as to HOW the brits MURDERED
millions of Indians is moronic. Do you have
ANYTHING other than "... at that time there was lots
of poverty..." yanno----like very oppressive laws,
death squads, massacres......etc???

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

this sounds like another totally bogus left wing hate mongering story

 

[irosie91]

this sounds like another totally bogus left wing hate mongering story

sounds like AL Jezeera to me

 

[Rigby5]

Given that WW1 started in 1914 but NATO was not formed until 1949 I would have to say that, once again, you are full of shit.

NATO is a particular group of counties that have a long history of being colonial imperialists.
They actually allied together to attack Germany and Austria in WWI, so the fact they picked the name NATO later, is irrelevant.
It is the same countries.
Mostly England, France, and the US.
Spain used to be a huge colonial imperialist, but the US beat then in the illegal Spanish American war, and took their place, (as well as stealing all their colonies).

 

[Rigby5]

I am very interested in knowing JUST HOW the brits
murdered millions of Indians

There were lots of rebellions against the British invasion and take over, and the natives had no firearms, so the British were constantly committing massacres.
It was very similar to the US massacring Filippino natives during the Moro rebellions around 1911.
We murdered millions of Moros in the Philippines.
The massacres started with British troops, but eventually went on to where the British hired mercenaries, like Sikes, Gurkhas, Moslems, etc.

 

[Rigby5]

~~~~~~
History tells us that countries in the past and present ave killed millions in pursuit of power and dominance.
There was Alexander the Great III of Macedon, Rome, Genghis Khan, Kublai Khan, Stalin, Hitler, Mao Zedong.
At one time or another after the fall of Rome, France, Germany, Spain, Portugal and Muslim Ottomans also held the same position.
The millions killed through thousands of years in the name of greed, conquest, religion are many.
To claim it's just happening now is asinine, ignorant and definitely shows you lack of intelligence.
That said, we as a nation should not allow any organization, country or State to dominate and dictate to others, whether it be, Russia, China, The U.S., or the UN.

Of course you are right that history is full of massacres.
But the point is the winner often gets to write the history, at least in the public perception, and we should not forget what actually happened.
The NATO counties, like England, France, and the US, pretend to be the ultimate in civilization, with superior values, but actually are the worst, with the most greed and murder.
We should not let history be abused by propaganda.
For example, anyone read the real history of WWI should recognize Germany was innocent and that the guilty parties were the Allies, including the US.

 

[Rigby5]

for rigby----on the FIRST PAGE of your "intro to logic" textbook-----you can find this statement ---
CORRELATION IS NOT CAUSATION
your explanation as to HOW the brits MURDERED
millions of Indians is moronic. Do you have
ANYTHING other than "... at that time there was lots
of poverty..." yanno----like very oppressive laws,
death squads, massacres......etc???

There is nothing at all about "correlation" or "causation" in anything so far.
As to cause, it obviously was greed, as England taxed the natives in India for everything, including salt.
As to effect, the whole point is the link showed the British deliberately murdered over 100 million innocents.
How they did it is in the link.
It was not just by "poverty" but with firearms and massacres.

 

[Rigby5]

sounds like AL Jezeera to me

Al Jazeera is a respected world wide news source.
They just do not have to deal with the same level of local censorship that is imposed in places like the US, UK, etc.

 

[Rigby5]

Read up on some of the massacres.

{...
A cold-blooded genocide. This is probably the most simple and honest way of describing what happened at Jallianwala Bagh in Amritsar, Punjab on April 13, 1919. The ground stands witness to the inhuman atrocities of the British Empire.
...}

 

[irosie91]

Al Jazeera is a respected world wide news source.
They just do not have to deal with the same level of local censorship that is imposed in places like the US, UK, etc.

you can RESPECT it all you like

 

[Rigby5]

you can RESPECT it all you like

I read it again, and decided you did have a point over correlation vs causation.
I assumed the deaths were shooting by British soldiers, but they may have also been calculating lower populations due to poverty, and then I would agree with you that is very speculative.

 

[Rigby5]

this sounds like another totally bogus left wing hate mongering story

Well why should we try to do better than the Ancient Romans, British Imperialism, etc.?
Humans are supposed to be inherently social and cooperative, not belligerent, aggressive, greedy, and violent.

 

[AZrailwhale]

How British colonialism killed 100 million Indians in 40 years

The extraordinary mortality rates in India between 1880 to 1920 were no accident.

www.aljazeera.com

This is an al Jazeera article on how the British murdered over 100 million people in India, from 1880 to 1920.
And to me that is who NATO really are, the monsters who deliberately keep starting wars, like WWI, and massacring civilians, like we did with Shock and Awe.

{...

How British colonialism killed 100 million Indians in 40 years​

Between 1880 to 1920, British colonial policies in India claimed more lives than all famines in the Soviet Union, Maoist China and North Korea combined.

• Dylan Sullivan
  Adjunct Fellow in the School of Social Sciences, Macquarie University
• Jason Hickel

Recent years have seen a resurgence in nostalgia for the British empire. High-profile books such as Niall Ferguson’s Empire: How Britain Made the Modern World, and Bruce Gilley’s The Last Imperialist, have claimed that British colonialism brought prosperity and development to India and other colonies. Two years ago, a YouGov poll found that 32 percent of people in Britain are actively proud of the nation’s colonial history.

This rosy picture of colonialism conflicts dramatically with the historical record. According to research by the economic historian Robert C Allen, extreme poverty in India increased under British rule, from 23 percent in 1810 to more than 50 percent in the mid-20th century. Real wages declined during the British colonial period, reaching a nadir in the 19th century, while famines became more frequent and more deadly. Far from benefitting the Indian people, colonialism was a human tragedy with few parallels in recorded history.
...}

We need to stop pretending that NATO and all colonial imperialists are the "good guy". We aren't.

Did you ever stop to think that the rise of poverty was a direct result in the rise of population due to British-led measures to improve public health. Instead of dying from childhood or adult diseases, Indians lived much longer lives, their children survived to adulthood and adults lived longer lives bearing more children. The same thing happened in China and Latin America.

 

[AZrailwhale]

NATO is a particular group of counties that have a long history of being colonial imperialists.
They actually allied together to attack Germany and Austria in WWI, so the fact they picked the name NATO later, is irrelevant.
It is the same countries.
Mostly England, France, and the US.
Spain used to be a huge colonial imperialist, but the US beat then in the illegal Spanish American war, and took their place, (as well as stealing all their colonies).

You need to read some history. GERMANY attacked France and the UK In 1914 and again in 1939. France and the UK went to war in 1939 in an effort to guarantee the sovereignty of Poland when GERMANY and RUSSIA launched unprovoked invasions as part of a war of conquest that started when GERMANY invaded and annexed Czechoslovakia in 1938. For the life of me, I can’t understand how you can make the same ignorant and wrong posts over and over again.

 

[Rigby5]

Did you ever stop to think that the rise of poverty was a direct result in the rise of population due to British-led measures to improve public health. Instead of dying from childhood or adult diseases, Indians lived much longer lives, their children survived to adulthood and adults lived longer lives bearing more children. The same thing happened in China and Latin America.

You should read some biographies of Ghandi.
The British deliberately created massive poverty by outlawing all cottage industries and imposing huge taxes on the imported goods that the people were forced to buy instead of making their own.
In particular, look up what the British did with salt.
They outlawed making your own by boiling sea water, and imposed a 50% tax.

{...
The Salt March, also known as the Salt Satyagraha, Dandi March and the Dandi Satyagraha, was an act of nonviolent civil disobedience in colonial India led by Mahatma Gandhi. The twenty-four day march lasted from 12 March to 6 April 1930 as a direct action campaign of tax resistance and nonviolent protest against the British salt monopoly. Another reason for this march was that the Civil Disobedience Movement needed a strong inauguration that would inspire more people to follow Gandhi's example. Gandhi started this march with 78 of his trusted volunteers. The march spanned 385 kilometres (239 mi), from Sabarmati Ashram to Dandi, which was called Navsari at that time (now in the state of Gujarat).[1] Growing numbers of Indians joined them along the way. When Gandhi broke the British Raj salt laws at 8:30 am on 6 April 1930, it sparked large scale acts of civil disobedience against the salt laws by millions of Indians.[2]

After making the salt by evaporation at Dandi, Gandhi continued southward along the coast, making salt and addressing meetings on the way. The Congress Party planned to stage a satyagraha at the Dharasana Salt Works, 40 km (25 mi) south of Dandi. However, Gandhi was arrested on the midnight of 4–5 May 1930, just days before the planned action at Dharasana. The Dandi March and the ensuing Dharasana Satyagraha drew worldwide attention to the Indian independence movement through extensive newspaper and newsreel coverage. The satyagraha against the salt tax continued for almost a year, ending with Gandhi's release from jail and negotiations with Viceroy Lord Irwin at the Second Round Table Conference.[3] Although over 60,000 Indians were jailed as a result of the Salt Satyagraha,[4] the British did not make immediate major concessions.[5]
...}

Higher health standards would not have caused poverty but reduced poverty, as healthier people are more productive and wealthier. Lower health causes poverty, not better health, because you are unable to be as productive.

 

[Rigby5]

You need to read some history. GERMANY attacked France and the UK In 1914 and again in 1939. France and the UK went to war in 1939 in an effort to guarantee the sovereignty of Poland when GERMANY and RUSSIA launched unprovoked invasions as part of a war of conquest that started when GERMANY invaded and annexed Czechoslovakia in 1938. For the life of me, I can’t understand how you can make the same ignorant and wrong posts over and over again.

Wrong.
France attacked Germany first.
Just look at a map of the beginning.

Obviously the dark blue arrows show the initial movement was French forces attacking into Germany.
The red arrows are the German counterattack that bypassed the initial French invasion, making the French retreat back out of Germany.

Not only did the French attack first, but the Germans were the last to mobilize.
WWI was deliberately started by the Allies, not the Germans or Austrians.

The Germans also were illegally forced to surrender by the illegal Allied sinking of civilian food commerce to Germany, causing massive starvation.
Starving civilians into surrender had been made an illegal war crime by the 1906 Hague Conventions the US ratified, which later became the Geneva Conventions.