to end this lies and disscussion for ever

[Jedi 999]

As details of the plan became public knowledge, prominent Bengalis began a series of demonstrations against partition and a boycott of British products. While protest was mainly Hindu-led the Muslims nawab of Dhaka was also initially opposed to the plan, even though Dhaka would serve as capital of the new province. Baxter suggests that the "divide and rule" policy was the real reason for partition. Lord Curzon said, "Bengal united is a power; Bengali divided will pull in several different ways."[3

Notice the notice.

This article may contain original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding references. Statements consisting only of original research may be removed. More details may be available on the talk page

http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/ent ... ngal_(1905)#Reason_for_Partition
its from here

[Tagmatium]

As details of the plan became public knowledge, prominent Bengalis began a series of demonstrations against partition and a boycott of British products. While protest was mainly Hindu-led the Muslims nawab of Dhaka was also initially opposed to the plan, even though Dhaka would serve as capital of the new province. Baxter suggests that the "divide and rule" policy was the real reason for partition. Lord Curzon said, "Bengal united is a power; Bengali divided will pull in several different ways."[3

Obvious copy/paste from Wikipedia is obvious.

That proves his point, as it shows how he has a source, not that he has no thoughts of his own and is too bigoted to not think that everyone is against him.

[Conserative Morality]

wrong to increase tension and civil unrest since there was a strong anti british sentiment in bengal http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/ent ... ngal_(1905)#Reason_for_Partition

So by pissing them off even more, they hoped to... Decrease worker efficiency and decrease profit?

Yeah, no.

[Conserative Morality]

http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/ent ... ngal_(1905)#Reason_for_Partition
its from here

There is currently no text in this page, you can search for this page title in other pages or edit this page.

[Dododecapod]

I'll just repost this for emphasis, as it was taken from your previous thread;

According to this map, shortly before the Bengal famine you mentioned, India was a very divided place. Kingdoms, principalities and smaller states were constantly carving out territory in what were most likely fierce internecine conflicts. (Another thing you fail to address in your anti-colonial tirade) These conflicts had been going on for millenia, dating all of the way back to the first Muslim invasions back in the twelfth century, (If memory serves) and showed no intention of slowing down. Had the British (Or any other colonial power, for that matter) not gotten involved in the subcontinent at all, come the turn of the 21st century, I would no doubt think that India would be a collection of small, tribal-tied states bitterly fighting over resources.

Though colonialism has wrought terrible, terrible things onto the subcontinent, (And even in places like my home country, Canada) simply glossing it over as 'evil' and accusing us Anglo-Saxons of being 'racist' is ignoring a significant piece of the puzzle. History cannot be seen in black-or-white, it has to be appreciated and understood for the murky shade of grey it is, warts and all.

In conclusion, even though the British did terrible things to India and the subcontinent, they did give them two important things. The first is a lingua franca, English, that practically everyone, from Sri Lanka to Islamabad, had to learn in order to function in a British-dominated society. Secondly, the British presence itself served as an enormous motivator; everyone, whether they were Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist or Christian, they all disliked the British and wanted independance.

In short, if the British hadn't colonized India, it would be a largely tribal, violent and undeveloped place, with nations largely based upon ethnic or religious divides constantly bickering with one another and little hope of meaningful unity.

well the british stirred up anti-hindu /anti-muslim sentiments and thus played some role in the partition not major but minor and if the british had not been their many things could have happend

No. British policy was to not engage in religious matters; not a particularly successful policy, actually, and one which almost certainly had a hand in the lead-up to the Indian Mutiny, but one which had a major effect in the suppression of inter-religious violence during the period of British rule. Being strongly Christian-biased, they treated Muslims, Sikhs and Hindus more or less equally.

The partition was largely spawned by pressures from within the subcontinent. Of course, there would have been no partition without the British - because there would have been no unified India to partition.

wrong they used divide and rule everywhere remember palestine guys they are champions at that

Certainly. It's a very effective tactic. But the British divided along secular, political lines by preference; having learned the problems of getting involved in religious conflicts previously, they wisely avoided such here. Of course, politics and religion are always bedfellows, so total avoidance was impossible, but the tactics of the British were to strike at the political where possible - aside from anything else, the balkanized nature of both the Hindu and Muslim regions of India made such fracture lines far easier to manipulate than religious ones.

[Jedi 999]

As details of the plan became public knowledge, prominent Bengalis began a series of demonstrations against partition and a boycott of British products. While protest was mainly Hindu-led the Muslims nawab of Dhaka was also initially opposed to the plan, even though Dhaka would serve as capital of the new province. Baxter suggests that the "divide and rule" policy was the real reason for partition. Lord Curzon said, "Bengal united is a power; Bengali divided will pull in several different ways."[3

Obvious copy/paste from Wikipedia is obvious.

That proves his point, as it shows how he has a source, not that he has no thoughts of his own and is too bigoted to not think that everyone is against him.

well everyone who is against me is either

colonizer 's desandant
settler colonist desandant
british
colonial settler
european (whose country colonised another country )

[Birnadia]

As details of the plan became public knowledge, prominent Bengalis began a series of demonstrations against partition and a boycott of British products. While protest was mainly Hindu-led the Muslims nawab of Dhaka was also initially opposed to the plan, even though Dhaka would serve as capital of the new province. Baxter suggests that the "divide and rule" policy was the real reason for partition. Lord Curzon said, "Bengal united is a power; Bengali divided will pull in several different ways."[3

Obvious copy/paste from Wikipedia is obvious.

That proves his point, as it shows how he has a source, not that he has no thoughts of his own and is too bigoted to not think that everyone is against him.

Forgive me, I wasn't thinking when I wrote that post...

[Conserative Morality]

well everyone who is against me is either

colonizer
settler colonist
british
colonial settler
european (whose country colonised another country )

I'm none of those. I'm an American, and a non-interventionist at that.

[Birnadia]

As details of the plan became public knowledge, prominent Bengalis began a series of demonstrations against partition and a boycott of British products. While protest was mainly Hindu-led the Muslims nawab of Dhaka was also initially opposed to the plan, even though Dhaka would serve as capital of the new province. Baxter suggests that the "divide and rule" policy was the real reason for partition. Lord Curzon said, "Bengal united is a power; Bengali divided will pull in several different ways."[3

Obvious copy/paste from Wikipedia is obvious.

That proves his point, as it shows how he has a source, not that he has no thoughts of his own and is too bigoted to not think that everyone is against him.

well everyone who is against me is either

colonizer 's desandant
settler colonist desandant
british
colonial settler
european (whose country colonised another country )

Source?

[Cameroi]

only because people choose to obsess on them and imagine them scripts to be guided by.

which IS part of the problem and NOT of any sort of solution.

History is important, history shows us how people have acted in the past, history shows us humanity at it's best and worst, furthermore, history shows humanity. Period. History tells us everything about power, about mankind, it's like Machiavelli without the commentary. People look to the past for guidance because they want to be guided, and because they are human.

So unless you plan to exterminate the human race, please, stop complaining.

the human race is exterminating itself, and using history, along with ideology, and economics, as among its excuses for doing so.

if it were ever presented HONESTLY it MIGHT do all or some of the good things you claim for it.
this is not however done. rather it is ALWAYS presented in one distorted manor or another, as a tool of totally vested and gratuitous propaganda. not by one side or another, but by all sides. the temptations and ease of doing so, are just too great to ever expect to be forgone, thus making it invariably and totally unreliable as a guide to anything.

[Tagmatium]

well everyone who is against me is either

colonizer
settler colonist
british
colonial settler
european (whose country colonised another country )

"You're either me, or the enemy".

Brilliant.

Long ago, I was actually sympathetic to your points. It was this ridiculous attitude that made that otherwise.

And I love that you, again, paint an entire nation as the enemy, whilst claiming that you're not a racist or Anglophobic.

[Tagmatium]

the human race is exterminating itself, and using history, along with ideology, and economics, as among its excuses for doing so.

So what would you have us do, Cameroi?

Sweep it all under the rug so that we might go on repeating the same mistakes again, and again, and again?

That is what ignorance of the past does.

[Conserative Morality]

the human race is exterminating itself, and using history, along with ideology, and economics, as among its excuses for doing so.

Actually, we're growing. There's more of us now then ever, and chances are, our numbers will continue to increase until it stabilizes. Technology is far more effective a tool than evolution, quicker and more efficient. We're not going extinct anytime soon.

[Jedi 999]

well everyone who is against me is either

colonizer
settler colonist
british
colonial settler
european (whose country colonised another country )

"You're either me, or the enemy".

Brilliant.

Long ago, I was actually sympathetic to your points. It was this ridiculous attitude that made that otherwise.

And I love that you, again, paint an entire nation as the enemy, whilst claiming that you're not a racist or Anglophobic.

they colonised my country as proven in the op they did nothing much and you cant be racist towards colonizers

[Avenio]

well the british stirred up anti-hindu /anti-muslim sentiments and thus played some role in the partition not major but minor and if the british had not been their many things could have happend

I never said anything about the partition. The only reason I included Islamabad in my statement is that it was under British jurisdiction as a part of 'British India' and were thus obliged to have English as a major language. Without the stabilizing influence of English as a lingua franca, arguably, Pakistan and India would not have existed, and we would see a collection of tribal and religious-based states, like I said. Perhaps even the Indian states could be under Chinese suzerainty now, who knows.

well i think positive and india would have been better off without the brits they stole much of india's wealth

Read what I said. India would not exist. Period. There would be no 'Indian' wealth, because it would be divided up amongst the tribal states, and, if the model of many small states acts as it did in a similar way everywhere else, it would not have been developed.

[Birnadia]

And I love that you, again, paint an entire nation as the enemy, whilst claiming that you're not a racist or Anglophobic.

^This.

[Conserative Morality]

they colonised my country as proven in the op they did nothing much and you cant be racist towards colonizers

Uh, yeah, you can.

[Jedi 999]

As details of the plan became public knowledge, prominent Bengalis began a series of demonstrations against partition and a boycott of British products. While protest was mainly Hindu-led the Muslims nawab of Dhaka was also initially opposed to the plan, even though Dhaka would serve as capital of the new province. Baxter suggests that the "divide and rule" policy was the real reason for partition. Lord Curzon said, "Bengal united is a power; Bengali divided will pull in several different ways."[3

Obvious copy/paste from Wikipedia is obvious.

That proves his point, as it shows how he has a source, not that he has no thoughts of his own and is too bigoted to not think that everyone is against him.

well everyone who is against me is either

colonizer 's desandant
settler colonist desandant
british
colonial settler
european (whose country colonised another country )

Source?

go look at yourself in mirror or check which country your in

[Jedi 999]

they colonised my country as proven in the op they did nothing much and you cant be racist towards colonizers

Uh, yeah, you can.

well no you cant they came here with their stupid racist ideas

[Birnadia]

As details of the plan became public knowledge, prominent Bengalis began a series of demonstrations against partition and a boycott of British products. While protest was mainly Hindu-led the Muslims nawab of Dhaka was also initially opposed to the plan, even though Dhaka would serve as capital of the new province. Baxter suggests that the "divide and rule" policy was the real reason for partition. Lord Curzon said, "Bengal united is a power; Bengali divided will pull in several different ways."[3

Obvious copy/paste from Wikipedia is obvious.

That proves his point, as it shows how he has a source, not that he has no thoughts of his own and is too bigoted to not think that everyone is against him.

well everyone who is against me is either

colonizer 's desandant
settler colonist desandant
british
colonial settler
european (whose country colonised another country )

Source?

go look at yourself in mirror or check which country your in

I'm not the only person who disagrees with you, y'know. Yes I'm British. Do I have anything against Indians? No.

[Jedi 999]

well the british stirred up anti-hindu /anti-muslim sentiments and thus played some role in the partition not major but minor and if the british had not been their many things could have happend

I never said anything about the partition. The only reason I included Islamabad in my statement is that it was under British jurisdiction as a part of 'British India' and were thus obliged to have English as a major language. Without the stabilizing influence of English as a lingua franca, arguably, Pakistan and India would not have existed, and we would see a collection of tribal and religious-based states, like I said. Perhaps even the Indian states could be under Chinese suzerainty now, who knows.

well i think positive and india would have been better off without the brits they stole much of india's wealth

Read what I said. India would not exist. Period. There would be no 'Indian' wealth, because it would be divided up amongst the tribal states, and, if the model of many small states acts as it did in a similar way everywhere else, it would not have been developed.

tribal states are you crazy or something there were empires not tribes

[SD_Film Artists]

you cant be racist towards colonizers

What does that even mean?

[Birnadia]

they colonised my country as proven in the op they did nothing much and you cant be racist towards colonizers

Uh, yeah, you can.

well no you cant they came here with their stupid racist ideas

Two wrongs don't make a right.

[Dododecapod]

well everyone who is against me is either

colonizer
settler colonist
british
colonial settler
european (whose country colonised another country )

"You're either me, or the enemy".

Brilliant.

Long ago, I was actually sympathetic to your points. It was this ridiculous attitude that made that otherwise.

And I love that you, again, paint an entire nation as the enemy, whilst claiming that you're not a racist or Anglophobic.

they colonised my country as proven in the op they did nothing much and you cant be racist towards colonizers

Bollocks. You can be discriminative against any group - you just need a definition.

And the amusing thing I find, is that, despite all your vilification, you love something the British created - the state of either India or Pakistan.

[Conserative Morality]

well no you cant they came here with their stupid racist ideas

No, they came there with their economic ideas. Racism wasn't their main goal. Furthermore, you're being racist against them, which is being just as bad as them. You're an Indian 'Britisher', assuming that you are, indeed, Indian.