Author Topic: Indian Rebellion 1857  (Read 384 times)

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7398
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Indian Rebellion 1857
« on: September 14, 2020, 12:18:07 am »
Our enemies write about our heroism:

https://counter-currents.com/2020/09/the-anglo-indian-race-war-of-1857/

Quote
No other colonial disaster equaled the fever-pitch intensity among the public than that conjured by the Indian Sepoy Mutiny of 1857. Charles Dickens, a man not known for his support of British imperialism, was also swept up in the fervor. In a letter to a friend composed in October 1857, Dickens wrote:

I wish I were Commander in Chief in India. The first thing I would do to strike that Oriental race with amazement . . . should be to proclaim to them . . . that I considered my holding of that appointment by the leave of God, to mean that I should do my utmost to exterminate the Race upon whom the stain of the late cruelties rested; and that I was there . . . to blot it out of mankind and raze it off the face of the earth. [2]

Well, I’ve always thought his tone betrayed some amount of admiration for Madame DeFarge, who dominated every page into which he wrote her. But Dickens was far from alone in calling for an updated Requerimiento. Neither were responses to the Mutiny confined to Britain, but Americans also worried about the debacle. South Carolinian Mary Chestnut shivered when she observed that “their [Indian] faces were like so many of the same sort at home.” [3] The revolt of nonwhites against whites on the far side of the world stoked southern fears of a black slave revolt unleashing similar horrors in their own corner of the world. [4]
...
On the morning of May 12, 1857, a dispatch from Meerut arrived for Captain Henry Parlett-Bishop of a Bengal artillery unit. His diary entry for that morning was terse and unnerved: “heard . . . by runner (telegraph wires having been cut) that serious disturbances had taken place, collision between sepoys and European officers, in which several of the latter had been killed.” [7] Indeed, the sepoys at Meerut had murdered their British commanders during the night and then marched to Delhi, seat of the diminished Mughal Empire. There, they joined other comrades in that city and proclaimed the Mughal Emperor, Bahādur Shah II, restored to power. With a base of operations in place, the local mutiny became a popular revolt in which the Emperor’s sons, including the infamous Nana Sahib Peshwa; lesser Indian aristocrats, frustrated at British seizure of their lands and rents; and peasants, who resented British reforms that threatened their traditional lifestyles—all rose up in a conflagration engulfing much of the north and central states. The British officially had a crisis on their hands. How had it come to this?
...
imperialism summoned the best of the enterprising individualism that stoked Europeans’ desire for glory and wealth. This, paired with a collective spirit issuing from the “strong gods” of monarchy, nation, and church, bolstered individual efforts with purpose. [8] These two forces made the age of exploration and colonialism/imperialism, from the end of the medieval era in 1492 through the age of industrial modernization up to 1914, the most astounding half-millennia of imperial success since that of ancient Rome. [9] By the mid-nineteenth century, the British Empire in particular had made global conquest an obsession. In 1857 Britannia’s possessions spanned six continents—but the jewel of her empire was India.
...
Before the 1857 Mutiny, the British government did not directly rule India, but operations in the Subcontinent were carried out through the British East India Company (EIC), an entity that began as an ostensibly private enterprise funded by British shareholders (the government would eventually buy large shares of the Company). Its most important investment was in the Indian spice trade. In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, Britain found itself in competition with other European traders, who also wished to increase their economic footprint in India. The Seven Years War (1756-1763), fought principally by the British, Prussians, and their allies against the French, Austrians, and their allies, was a world war. Its outcome thus had similarly wide-ranging consequences, one of them being the strengthening of the British presence in India at the expense of other Western powers.
...
For many Britons, India was a huge rehab facility. Third sons or disgraced army officers could get away from their countrymen and either redeem themselves through colonial service or set themselves up in a place where they could be admired as bigshots in a way that would have been impossible had they stayed home. General Charles Cornwallis enjoyed a second and illustrious career as a governor-general in India after his embarrassment at Yorktown. He was responsible for winning the Third Anglo-Mysore War in 1792 against the Mysorean ruler, Tipu “Tiger” Sultan. Tipu was himself a fascinating man and one who loved to collect European literature and art. He filled whole rooms of his palace with “mirrors, clocks, telescopes, and porcelain” from the West. [10]

He deserved to lose, then. (Did his collection include Dickens fiction, I wonder?)

Quote
The Mutiny and Its Aftermath

By June of 1857, the mutineers had ensconced themselves in Delhi and were sending riders out to the surrounding area, stirring up unrest. A number of Indian aristocrats and their tenants throughout the north joined the tumult. Fear plagued the whites in the British army. In a letter dated June 6, 1857 in the town of Lucknow, Lieutenant Octavius L. Smith asked his mother to pardon his writing, and

If [it] is illegible my descriptions wild and the least bit disconnected and my letter otherwise a failure you must attribute it to the ‘Mutiny’ and its effects . . . News has just come in . . . that a plot was overheard concocted . . . to murder all the officers in the Native Regts tonight . . . We all have pistols, some revolvers, others horse pistols . . . [12]

Smith and the other white officers no doubt barred their doors that night. If sleep came at all, they captured it fitfully in their beds, pistols clutched to their chests.

The British and their loyal Indian soldiers recaptured Delhi, then deposed the Emperor. But by that time, Nana Sahib’s followers were on the move, and in June they and defecting sepoys laid siege to the compound at Cawnpore. Outnumbered and with little hope of deliverance, General Hugh Wheeler agreed to surrender his position in return for the safe passage of his troops, along with their wives and children. This decision turned out to be a fatal mistake and one mirroring the Fort William Henry Massacre that took place almost exactly one hundred years before, during the French and Indian War (the North American theater of the Seven Years War). As the British and their Indian allies left the compound in preparation to cross the Ganges River, sepoys descended on them from all directions. Others attacked the wounded men lagging behind the train with swords and kukris (Indian machetes). After the killing began to slow, cavalrymen rode into the water to finish off any of the men left alive. Only four of those men managed to escape. The two hundred surviving British women and children were then herded back to Cawnpore as hostages.

These prisoners languished for over two weeks in a small building that facilitated the spread of deadly bouts of cholera and other diseases—until Nana Sahib received word that British troops would soon arrive and likely force him out. What happened next is still the subject of debate, but according to most contemporary accounts, Nana Sahib decided that his hostages had to be gotten rid of. [13] So, he ordered the sepoys under his command to kill all of the women and children. When they refused this order, Nana Sahib supposedly found local butchers to complete the task. In a scene from hell, the hired killers went about their bloody work for some hours and hacked the two hundred civilians to pieces with their knives and cleavers. They then shoved the victims’ remains down a well. Some were still alive when they found themselves thrown in and buried beneath their dead and mutilated loved ones. Readers may gasp at this graphic depiction, but I’m downplaying it.

After the British retook Cawnpore in mid-July, they discovered the brutal scene and its ghastly well of horrors. Overcome with tears of shock, then revulsion—and, finally, a hatred lacking words to describe it, the British changed their tactics. No longer would they fight a war of recovery, but a war of retribution. Reprisals within Cawnpore were terrible. The British rounded up those they believed responsible for (or at least not conclusively innocent of) the massacres. Some unlucky Indians were compelled to lick the blood from the floors and walls where the murdered whites had been chopped to pieces by their countrymen. Others found themselves forced to eat raw pig and cow meat while they submitted to whippings doled out by low-caste servants. Only after enduring these humiliations were they hanged.

After Cawnpore, the theater of war shifted to the embattled city of Lucknow, besieged by the mutineers. From the beginning of June to mid-November 1857, the men and women trapped in Lucknow suffered torments, both emotional and physical in nature. Disease and malnutrition decimated whites and Indians alike. Katherine Bartrum, the wife of an army surgeon, wrote in June of her household of refugees, “We received letters from our husbands telling of their escape from Gonda . . . [and] grateful were we, to think that they had . . . been preserved,” and “we began to hope that . . . we might meet them again.” By July, several members of her group had died, and an anguished Katherine confessed that “Everyone is getting dispirited; no news of relief; they say we are forgotten & that re-inforcements will never appear.” Her account read like a roller-coaster of emotions, one day joyfully recording the news that rescuers were coming, and the next, despondently admitting in her diary that celebration had been premature. Finally, on November 17, she dashed off the hurried line: “Heard we are to leave Lucknow tomorrow night with just what we can carry . . .” [14]

By the end of 1857, EIC forces had retaken control of most military forts and towns. Their harsh policies included wiping out and burning whole villages, striking fear into rebel hearts and crushing their morale. Though irregular fighting continued into early 1858, it was by then a mopping-up campaign. A treaty in July of that year officially ended hostilities. Rebel leaders and Indians convicted of war crimes stared quite literally down the barrel of British vengeance. The army arranged for a dramatic spectacle of mass executions that India would not soon forget. Artillerymen strapped those guilty individuals to the mouths of cannons, then lit the fuses. Nana Sahib had meanwhile disappeared, never to be heard from again—at least not by the British. I would hazard a guess that he fled north to Nepal or Afghanistan, a favored spot for hunted men. That, or he was killed and left to rot anonymously in the dust.

NEVER FORGIVE. NEVER FORGET.

Quote
Dickens said more than he knew in that intemperate letter when he spoke about “extermination,” and revealed more about human tribalism than he meant, when he fantasized about “razing” the “Orientals” “off the face of the earth.”

There is nothing nice about it, but the Mutiny proved what has always seemed to be the case when two (or more) vastly different groups have occupied the same territory. The people belonging to the one will think of those belonging to the other and say to themselves, sometimes wistfully and sometimes wrathfully, “how much better it all would be—if only they were gone.”

Hence:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-right/if-we-lose/

« Last Edit: September 14, 2020, 12:25:58 am by 90sRetroFan »

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter


rp

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1118
    • View Profile
Re: Indian Rebellion 1857
« Reply #1 on: September 14, 2020, 12:54:54 am »
"not conciously innocent of"
Guilty until proven innocent, if you are "non-White".

rp

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1118
    • View Profile
Economic Colonialism
« Reply #2 on: October 21, 2020, 03:54:18 am »
Indian retailers protest Amazon's entry into India, allege "foreign economic terrorism":
https://www.businessinsider.com/india-residents-protest-amazon-1-billion-investment-2020-1
Quote
Sumit Agarwal of the Confederation of All India Traders said on Twitter that Bezos "runs an organisation that expertises in predatory & anticompetitive business." The confederation has described Bezos as an "economic terrorist."
Quote
Protesters held signs that said "Jeff Bezos go back!" and "Second version of East India Company," a reference to the British company that colonized India, parts of Southeast Asia, and Hong Kong. The theme echoed Agarwal's comment that companies like Amazon are "foreign economic terrorists & invaders."

I am on-board with the protests, but please refrain from using western terms such as "anticompetitive". It is precisely competition that led to this very predicament! Competition to increase market share!

The root of the problem is, of course, capitalism, which, by causing all exchange of goods and services to be purely monetary and thus sold for profit rather than remuneration for the labor cost required to produced the good, incentivizes those with a large amount of capital to undercut prices as they can increase their profit margins, and therefore rewards individuals such as Bezos and those of his ilk (Jews) who are most efficient at this process.
« Last Edit: October 21, 2020, 04:04:05 am by rp »
Like Like x 1 View List

rp

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1118
    • View Profile
India
« Reply #3 on: March 20, 2021, 11:04:57 pm »

rp

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1118
    • View Profile
Re: India
« Reply #4 on: March 20, 2021, 11:09:18 pm »
Kehinde Andrews vs Piers Morgan on Churchill:
https://youtu.be/eoP4KuKOIuM

Andrews is the guy covered here:
http://aryanism.net/blog/other/when-history-is-written-by-leftists/

I love the way Andrews just rolls his eyes and groans when asked by Morgan if does not matter to him that Churchill defeated the "Nazis".

guest5

  • Guest
Re: India
« Reply #5 on: April 06, 2021, 01:39:37 am »
Apparently the British crown jewel was stolen from an Indian boy in the 19th century....

India’s colonial history
Quote
In the year 1700, India was worth a staggering 21 trillion dollars by today’s standards. Its economy was so large and so powerful that is was bigger than all of Western Europe’s combined.  250 years later, India was one of the poorest countries in the world. So what went wrong?
#colonisation
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_gSRlgwMLs


rp

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1118
    • View Profile
Re: Indian Rebellion 1857
« Reply #7 on: April 25, 2021, 11:07:39 pm »
https://twitter.com/Dauhshanti/status/1376737628595228674?s=20
Quote
A British officer from Anjengo factory in 18th century Travancore nearly lost his life for overlooking at a temple out of his curiosity & saw a Nair lady. The local Nairs chased him and  almost lynched him until he ran & hid himself in a village under moplahs
@acccuuuuu

« Last Edit: May 26, 2021, 04:55:22 pm by rp »

acc9

  • Guest
Re: Economic Colonialism
« Reply #8 on: October 03, 2021, 07:59:53 pm »
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_jGPf764d0

Quote
There is a misguided idea that India should be grateful for the democracy, law and trains that the British Empire brought to their country. But along with these ‘gifts’, Britain also stole $45 trillion from India during its long and oppressive rule, which culminated in the biggest mass migration in human history during the Partition of India and Pakistan.

And those beloved trains? They became the sites of mass slaughter as violent clashes occurred when over four million people were uprooted from their homes and forced to trek to a Muslim-majority Pakistan and a Hindu-majority India. VICE World News host Zing Tsjeng reveals exactly why India shouldn’t be grateful for their trains.



90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7398
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Re: Indian Rebellion 1857
« Reply #9 on: October 03, 2021, 09:14:17 pm »
The Empires of Dirt series is really good! I am going to post other videos from the series in appropriate topics around the forum now!

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7398
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Re: Indian Rebellion 1857
« Reply #10 on: September 10, 2022, 11:33:52 pm »
Continuing from:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/colonial-era/colonialism-as-viewed-by-westerners/msg15569/#msg15569

a retort:

https://www.opindia.com/2022/09/queen-elizabeths-ii-death-tucker-carlson-hails-england-for-civilising-india/

Quote
Western opinion shapers often have a mistaken sense of world history since they tend to look at it from the coloniser’s prism. They labour under the belief that the colonial and imperialist rule greatly benefitted the colonised subjects by offering them the fruits of the industrial revolution and bringing them to “civilisation”. Fox News anchor Tucker Carlson is one such individual who believes India’s civilisation is not millennia old, but just over three centuries old and a gift that Britain bequeathed India when it left in 1947.
...
Carlson sang paeans to the former English monarch, Queen Elizabeth II, who breathed her last on Thursday, at 96. Lavishing praises on Elizabeth II, Carlson slammed her critics highlighting how England left behind a “civilisation” in India when they quit in 1947
...
“When the U.S. government withdrew from Afghanistan after 20 years, we left behind airstrips, shipping containers and guns. When the British pulled out of India, they left behind an entire civilization, a language, a legal system, schools, churches and public buildings, all of which are still in use today. Here’s the train station the English built in Bombay, for example. There’s nothing like that in Washington, DC right now, much less in Kabul or Baghdad,” said Carlson, enthusing about the British rule in India that authentic and unbiased historians say was among the darkest periods endured by the country.

He further continued, “Today, India is far more powerful than the UK, the nation that once ruled it and yet, after 75 years of independence, has that country produced a single building as beautiful as the Bombay train station that the British colonialists built? No, sadly, it has not. Not one.”

This is the Homo Hubris monstrosity he is talking about:

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

Quote
The terminus was designed by a British born architectural engineer Frederick William Stevens from an initial design by Axel Haig, in an exuberant Italian Gothic style. Its construction began in 1878, in a location south of the old Bori Bunder railway station,[5] and was completed in 1887, the year marking 50 years of Queen Victoria's rule.



It took me only a few seconds to find an example of infinitely superior post-colonial Indian train station architecture:

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

Quote
This station was officially inaugurated on 19 December 2009



(Note the resemblance to Harappan architecture: https://trueleft.createaforum.com/issues/indian-attitudes/msg5923/#msg5923 )

Back to main article:

Quote
While it is Carlson’s personal choice to slaver over buildings made by the British before India’s independence, what needs to be contested and opposed is his mistaken belief that the British were on an altruist expedition in India, with “civilising” the indigenous masses being their primary object of imperialist ambitions.
...
Racism, economic exploitation, and unabashed loot define the “civilisation” that the British imparted to India

Contrary to what Carlson would have his watchers believe, Britishers in India were guided by the sole aim of squeezing the country dry. In fact, they left India in 1947 not as an act of benevolence as people like Carlson and other perennial sycophants of the British continue to perpetuate, but because remaining in India had become untenable for them, especially in the wake of the losses borne in World War II and Britain’s growing reluctance to grapple with Indian independence movement that was beginning to assume dangerous proportions.

As per conservative estimates, the Britishers looted over 45 trillion dollars during 190 years of their imperial rule in India.
...
If one considers the amount of wealth that was repatriated to England during those gloomy years of slavery, the value comes out to be close to 14 million pounds every year for 190 years
, besides the attendant British inequities & racial transgressions endured by Indians for those woeful years. It is pretty rich of Carlson and apologists of colonialism to clthat the democracy was the positive outcome for the Indians, and that the British rule imparted “civilisation” to what they considered as a nation of unwashed and perpetually squabbling masses. Britishers created deep fissures in the society, some of which exist even today, in their bid to wrench as much wealth as possible from Indians.

Britishers ruled India & Indians, but most positions in the government were reserved only for Britishers. When eminent Indians like Dadabhai Naroji pointed out the treachery and demanded greater autonomy, the British Raj conceded initially but the decision to grant Indians a say in their self-government was merely an eyewash meant to contain then simmering outrage against their inequities and atrocious rule. After the outrage died down, the British, through subterfuge, accumulated all the decision-making power with themselves.

The roles extended to Indians were at best frivolous and at worse spineless.
It is one thing, to empower the masses with providing opportunities of ruling themselves and another thing, to duplicitously stof them off their power by passing a legislation superseding their roles & responsibilities by bestowing their heads with supreme powers to annul any legislation passed by the lower rung Indians.

Apologists of the British empire like to claim that the British brought the Railways in India. What they conveniently hide is the fact that the railways was introduced in India for the transportation of goods and personnel across the hinterland and to aide the mercantilist goals of the East India Company. As historians point out, the perception that Indians should be grateful to the British for starting Railways is deeply flawed as the English had their own selfish reasons to bring the Railways in India. The purpose of the Railways was to serve the British to extract raw materials, goods, and minerals from the rural India that were hitherto inaccessible.

In his book, Tharoor mentioned about how Indian passengers and employees working for the Railways had to face racism from their British counterparts. Indians, he wrote, were never offered the posts of ticket collectors or station masters, which were reserved only for the Europeans. While the Europeans travelled in relative luxury, Indians were consigned to the horrendous third class with wooden benches but were charged the highest passenger rates anywhere in the world at that time. By contrast, the British companies who were shipping freight on the railways, paid the lowest freight rates anywhere in the world.

We previously covered the railways here:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/jews-have-nothing-in-common-with-us!/msg5693/#msg5693

Continuing:

Quote
The Britishers also stole the much-vaunted Kohinoor diamond from India and spirited it away to England, where it was set in the platinum Crown created for the British monarch. The story of its thievery with laced with subterfuge, immorality, and cruelty. The diamond was taken away from the treasury of the Sikh Empire by Lord Dalhousie, the Governor General of India in 1849, when Duleep Singh, son of Maharaja Ranjit Singh, was 11 years old. The British took the diamond by force and peddled a false narrative that it was gifted by the king to the Queen.

In addition to this, Great Britain is also responsible for engineering the Bengal famine in 1943, when three million people died due to starvation or malnutrition. The Bengal famine of 1943 was not a result of a severe drought but it was caused by a complete failure of the policy of the then-British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, who diverted essential food rations to Greece and other European countries even when they did not need it while people in Bengal continued to die of starvation.

The same is also happening now:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/news/why-war-in-ukraine-is-causing-apocalyptic-famine/

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/news/ethnonepotism/