As have the majority of colleges in the USA. Young people looking at and espousing a monochrome, hostile and emotive, cherry-picked one-sided view of history in which there is no acknowledgement or tolerance for shades of grey let alone colour. Aggressively attacking anyone who would ever dare question their "enlightened" limited world view and totally unwilling to listen. Facts know no politics but do go a long way when presenting the truth, no matter how welcome or unwelcome.
Multi culturalism seems to have combined with postmodernist concepts like intersectionality to create a reliable and cozy way for anyone who is not white British (other than the brave intellectuals like the speaker) to find "instant moral superiority" inbetween their "insta-gram lifestyles" and I suspect they will have little to no meaningful impact on the present or the future other than to waste their youth and energy getting upset in a time when they could be moving everyone up and on.
I was there for this debate. After the debate, the President gave the woman who kept interrupting Dr. Masani a chance to speak. She declined the opportunity to comment.
Maybe she just wanted to shout him down so she didn't hear something which upset her? It's commonplace in society today. They seem to forget that the right to free speech means you sometimes have to hear opinions which make you very uncomfortable.
Quite obvious they were out just to derail him from a speech containing truths and highly valuable alternative perspectives to the orthodoxy which we have been forcefed.
@@harrybassett9433 she was there to use the same old arguments "but what about the Bengal Famine - absolutely not the fault of Japan!?" or "I saw doctor who and an episode PROVED white people are to blame for Partition!" etc :P
She needs to go to the library and get a large book on manners!...these stupid children are being told from a man who knows, an Indian man who is extremely intelligent...and because they don't like what they hear, they try to disrupt and bully. I am glad he did not make way for those woke idiots.
i am an indian and i know for a fact that what he is saying is true. doesn't mean that the british were benevolent. but the natives weren't exactly nice people either.
@@zodiacmanan No but it doesn't condemn the brits either. Based on todays standards everyone fails. Based on the standards back then, one clearly provides benefit to people more than the other. Progress is incremental, and slow.
@@colins3688 by failing to speak only the approved utterances in full you have demonstrated an openness of your mind to un-ideas which might lead someone else to not fully speak only the approved utterances. And if that goes on too long, someone might get to thinking the brits aren't pure evil, which might as well be absolving them. Adhere to the minitru guidelines or find yourself the subject of the next two minutes of hate.
@young entrepreneur In absolute terms, India's GDP roughly doubled from 1750 to 1950 (It was declining at the end of the Mughal Empire). India fell behind, in relative terms, as a share of the global economy, but that's a period of massive industrialization and rapid GDP growth in Western Europe and North America.
Have a look at the video of the intelligent unwashed disrupting a speech by Jacob Rees-Mogg in Bristol a while ago to see how these cretins handle opposing opinions.
@Sawyer But it is absolutely typical of woke leftists. Every time someone starts arguing against the leftist ideology I absolutely expect a load and angry response while they are still making their argument. It wouldn't be tolerated if it was the other way round.
The irony of a white woman trying to overtalk/silence an Indian historian regarding his own culture's history is simply staggering. Old habits die hard it seems.
@@himanshusharma7877 Continue to wallow in your delusion. The truth is a bitter pill for the likes of you to swallow. Dr Masani is 100% spot on about this aspect of Indian history.
@@himanshusharma7877 say whatever you want to say but you might not be here today if the practice of suttee had been allowed to continue, or burying alive unwanted female babies.
Hey my guy this entire channel is literally dedicated to debate with rules. Like this entire channel is dedicated to different opinions. Them asking points of interest and shit is normal for this forum so no this isn’t the first time they’re hearing different opinions.
@@sorencorreia6872 They had no interest in points of information if when given the opportunity AFTER they declined to comment at all! they clearly just wanted to disrupt.
@@sorencorreia6872 not when the points of order and questions are meant to filibuster and interrupt the speaker to the point where they can’t get their points across. This should be obvious.
This is clearly a revisionist version. While I do acknowledge the existence of a lot superstition and caste related practices which I condemn so many parts of India such as Kerala, Tamil Nadu had independent of the British throne over thrown such practices. The infrastructures such as damns and railway lines constructed was purely used to loot India's natural resources because most of the mines and fields used for textile cultivation where towards India's geographic center. The infrastructure merely enabled them to get these resources to the ports. If you think they were benevolent with the labourers you probably hit your head a few times too many. Similarly the civil servants were needed to enable cheaper officers to the alternative which is British citizen working in India which would cost the crown significantly for expenses for officers working over seas. The amount of looting that had taken place should be looked into by these revisionists. So next time you lot are preaching about white man's burden do look into the context behind it and hope you would be able to understand the racist overtures associated with it. You have not left India better of. If you indeed did leave India better off ask yourself why such performance wasn't repeated at various African colonies. Edit:excuse the typos.
The railway's cost was exorbitant compared with what was being built elsewhere such as in the British colonies Canada and Australia. It was double the cost but the cost was borne entirely by India whilst the contracts were given to the Brits by the Brits. The railway was not a gift to India India paid for that - rather it was implemented to more quickly transfer raw materials to the Brits who then manufactured goods that were sold at extraordinary prices to India. Indians were not allowed to manufacture those goods. This is another way in which the Brits enriched themselves. British education my foot. When you entered India, it was producing 24% of world trade. When you were kicked out, that was reduced to 3% or so. Where was your education used. Well, it was used by the few to assist the Brits to rule India. India had leadership position in mathematics, made the first gunpowder artillery that was used. You called the decimal system invented in India as the Arabic-Hindu system whilst the Arabs themselves called it the Indian system. You think that Newton first recognized that there was a force between bodies, such as that apple that brought sense to Newton. But the Arab writer had stated that the Hindus said a force existed between a body and earth which he said he was recording but not convinced of it. (But Newton, with the help of others did give a calculation for that force). Bose was a remarkable Indian who in vented Bose Statistics which the Brits refused to print in their scholarly Journal because it was not right. But when the same was sent to Einstein, that work was translated into German and published and so today we have Bose-Einstein statistics. Sati started as a reaction to the rape that the muslims practised upon the conquered. So Hindu women prefer death by fire rather than being raped by the muslims. When you are glib about your contribution to India, be reminded that the development of Britain was made upon the hardship you implemented in foreign lands, particularly in India. Indians and dogs were not allowed in places as per posted notices. This tells what you think of Indians. This is all history. And we will never forget it.
@@igDeepanshu0804 This is the often-cited Indian paradise myth, the myth being India was a technological and economic powerhouse before the Brits came in and ruined it. It's nonsense. India wasn't even a country. Some of your list of things above are true. But let's not pretend India was a paradise. You had a caste system, You burned widows alive. Many Indians lived in abject poverty (and still do despite India having independence for half a century now) Many of the more rural parts of India had never been touched by technology, many living in the dark ages technology wise. The Brits were far from perfect but lets not keep pretending India was a paradise. The Brits helped put India on the map in the modern world, we built your infrastructure. Whether our motives were entireley pure or not, its there and you can use it. We brought vaccinations that you didn't have. We brought India into the modern world. Also, why do people like you never criticise the Mugal Empire which dominated India before the British? Ask yourself that. Seeing Indians complaining about the British is like me complaining about the Romans, We didn't even have the Aquaduct before the Romans came.
@@drunkenork5373 Mr Ork, are you drunk in real life as well? We don't criticize the Mughals because unlike the British they assimilated and form part of India today. While I do acknowledge the role British had in removing some social evils like Sati there were plenty of Indian activists advocating for such a law to be implemented. If the British were so considerate how come steps werent taken to abolish the caste system then. Remember British ruled India for almost hundred years officially and more unofficially. Please do research more on famines caused in India due to the poor British rule in India when they wouldn't allow Indian farmers to cultivate food crops and forced them to cultivate textile along with cash crops. And let's not pretend that British rule absolutely helped India with its poverty issue. We can only build overselves on what was left. So before you come preaching about your white supremacy do your research you donut.
@Rohan Dick Yes well said, what did Britain ever give India apart from democracy and the railway system which dragged them out of the middle ages and gave mobility to millions for the first time ever. obviously.
@@eddiehockley4144 Not to mention immunization, modern medicine, colleges and universities(though those things have gone to shit now), rule of law, a social structure which enabled many to move up the social ladder nad improve their material life. Other European powers deserve some credit too.
@Rohan Dick As for Churchill, that man is no Saint either. That's for sure. But famines happened earlier too. This famine was the result of a War. If the War didn't happen then famines wouldn't have happened too. The food supplies were being taken for the soldiers. If you remember there were Indian soldiers (Indian+ Pakistani+ Bangladeshi) too who had volunteered for the War.
@@dwaipayanroychowdhury7035 It's Basically European colonisation. If the British didn't came, then the French would have, or might be Portuguese, Dutch or Spanish.
@Rohan Dick Now, as for Churchill, he surely was not a Saint but he already talked about the Bengal famine. It was in the middle of WW2. The rice supplies were being taken for the soldiers in the fronts and there were about two million Indian soldiers who had volunteered to fight for the allies. Holding by Indian merchants and the Japanese occupation of Burma was to be blamed for it since it had cut off the rice supplies. You are so blinded by hatred and brainwashed that you can't even listen to a bit of what he said.
The irony of a bunch of privileged woke white kids objecting to how an Indian scholar feels about his own history. And growing more offended that he isn't interested in having them correct him.
@@arpanmalakar11 You may be surprised to hear this, but there are a lot of Indians that are also British. He is the son of Minoo Masani, a former MP of India, and scholar on Indian History. The label "Indian Scholar" fits him both in terms of ancestral origin and academic work.
@@ericfeldkamp3788 the indians in uk are not indians anymore, for us pure indians, they just become another subjects and their citizenship is already banned by the Indians. That's why we hate the Indian origin Brits. You might be surprised to hear this but that's the truth.
As an Egyptian, I think my opinion here might be of value. Egypt was under British rule in the early 20th century. I can tell you right now that the British were no friends and they were known for their quite brutal leadership style. However, to discuss any history, we must separate the sin from the sinner. While the British empire’s history is by no means flawless, like every other civilization, to undermine its achievements as a civilization by calling it shameful is ignorant at best and absolutely stupid at worst.
@@eshaansarkar2017 India was not a country as It is now. Me I belong Panjab now part of Pakistan and India. I do not know In which state of India you born. We were way better than any other empires in the Indian subcontinent. Hindus Sikhs Muslims were living together but the arrival of British first destroyed the empire and then by applying "Divide and Rule policy" it also destroyed the friendship, solidarity, brotherhood among the people from different communities. In result, Pakistan got created and massacre of 1947 took place where million of people died and displaced. So you cannot say "As for India, I am glad they came." You can talk about your state or the king who was ruling on your ancestors. But don't talk about all India because there were many empires (states) were living happily by maintaining the peace. As for Panjab, I feel sad that they came and destroyed a very vibrant empire (country).
@@eshaansarkar2017 glad they came??you sure??if they hadn't come jailanwala bagh would never have happened nor would all the wars which led to so many indians dying I guess you wouldn't be glad if your parents died in the jallianwala bagh.
@@Pudin-kc2oz - if the British hadn’t of course come , you’d have ended up with the French. To see real genocide in action you merely have to look at Algeria and Indo China. The British acquired “ India” by way of defeating the French in what was then a World War against the French , Dutch and Spaniards. “ India” itself as a political entity and was ruled by a multitude of competing groups and Princely States. They made up the bulk of “ India” until the British left in 47. Over half of the landmass was run directly by “Indians” with the balance run by Indians under the tutelage of British Administrators. Even at its height in the 1920’s fewer than 120000 European Britons lived there and over half were British Army units stationed in India. That’s for over 4.2 million square miles excluding Sri Lanka and Myanmar. The point is that given the disparities in people numbers the British could not have ruled by strength alone. It needed the active participation of what became Indians ,Pakistani and Bengalis.
Points of information are standard in competitive debates. Members of the other side are allowed to interrupt and he's allowed to say no. The fact that he didn't offer any points during THEIR speeches despite his alleging that their facts and numbers are wrong and their points are biased tells me he wasn't interested in facing any real challenge.
I live in a former British Colony. By the time we became independent, our living standard was one of the highest in the World…. so much for Britain “draining” the Colonies. As an Aboriginal member of Parliament stated recently, at no time have Aboriginal people enjoyed a better standard of living, longer lives, greater freedom from starvation or violence, infant survival rates or equality of rights for women. All this is the result of what Britain brought to the Colonies. It wasn’t perfect, nor would any fair-minded person expect it to be.
Yes, that's correct. It wasn't perfect. But these political hacks skip over all the boring good stuff, they find something that's imperfect, and they say it was bad to the core. The British took control and maintained control with the use of force, but they often transformed the colony to a thriving place based on law and order. Where would for example India have been without the British? It wasn't like the Moghuls where developing anything, they weren't even Indian.
@@eirikbelisarius1100 I suspect that the PC critics have never stopped to think how expensive and unprofitable maintaining control of a resisting population is….. and how much the home-population objected to paying taxes to support needless wars.
@@brianjacob8728 If you have a point to make, please try to do so clearly. Objecting to other people’s arguments without giving a valid argument of your own would make you the “hypocrite”.. As a matter of stern, historical fact, the public and political debate in Britain throughout the 19th and early 20th centuries reveals an enormous amount of contention over both the justification and the causes of foreign wars. As a matter of equally hard fact, the number of British soldiers in British colonies was generally minute in comparison to the size of the native populations, and the British made a habit of recruiting, training and arming members of those populations… not exactly something you can get away with when the population as a whole is hostile.
"points of order can be made and are allowed".... Listen here, if someone gets a no 9 times... from the same person, then that person is interupting the debate. Should i perhaps raise my arm randomly 10, 20 or 100 times in every subject. After all i am just asking a question. This person had a message that you so liberally tried to make difficult that i had problem swallowing that feeble explanation. Se how his hands are shaking trying to make a point, who do you people think will get sympathy online? The message should be to the crowd "you may ask for points of order, but you may not harass the speaker".
@@lalaholland5929 In general (not sure of Oxford Union's specific rules): Properly, it's a statement about the rules of discussion or debate, and may be raised at any time. A point of order is supposed to be handled immediately by the presiding officer. In practice it's abused to make a subjective comment the speaker wouldn't be allowed by the rules to make at that time. The point of order is handled by the presiding officer stating that it is not a valid point of order and business continues. What should be offered is a point of information (a comment or question from the opposing team), which a speaker may or may not accept. Most rules require the PoI to come from an opposing debater, but OU may allow the body to make them as well (again, I don't know their rules).
@Rifle Eyez famines are natural and they have occured in other parts of india too but the death toll was never so severe cause people used to store food but britishers forced farmers of bengal and bihar to grow cashcrops like opium and indigo instead of food crop Also indigo makes soil unsuitable for other crops to grow The little food that was stored by farmers of other places were supplied to british soldiers who fighting for war in which india had no role
@Rifle Eyez japan did not stop rice emports to india india bought rice but that rice never reached poor people because british administators diverted rice supplies and made rest very expensive Bengal was not as deficet as yasmeen is claiming bengal famine ended because 1944 had a good rice harvest
@STALIN Ever heard of the holocaust? Nazis. Ever heard of the abolition of slavery? The British Empire. Ever heard of the millions of innocents who died in the gulags? Stalin.
No - they didn’t kill millions. The British had wars with many nations and they did some bad things - the Opium Wars in China, for instance, or the concentration camps in the Boer war - but, overall, they were good imperialists compared to the other possible imperialists. The British fought wars to protect themselves or their citizens - or to protect their trade or their own interests. They didn’t invade countries to conquer them nor did they murder millions for ideological reasons. And they often brought good laws and good government to countries so that those countries had a decent start at independence. Stalin, Hitler and Mao were evil, mass-murdering psychopaths.
@@Woodchuck799 in fairness the left have had their fair share, like Donald trump is racist or working with the russians or evil or sexist etc. There one thing the left does better then everyone else and that's being stupid, it like a talent.
It always boggles my mind that people blame Churchill for a famine that happened during a world war, where everyone was suffering. He had his hands full with trying to keep Britain and the rest of the empire safe from Nazis who were destroying England. I’m sure that he would have acted quicker if his people weren’t living in subway stations and were living with fears of invasion and death. The sad thing is everyone was malnourished during that time because food was rationed. I remember seeing pictures of British kids during the war and many looked gaunt and small.
This man is spectacular. An intellectual who is only interested in facts and evidence rather than emotive language based on ignorance and hurt feelings
God bless Dr. Zareer Masani for telling the truth, it is sad day when native British need a lesson in how great they were from others. Sad state of the UK
How great they were in stealing others assests, using poor indian's for their wars, atrocious behaviour with indian handloom workers, from chopping their fingers to destroying their mills. By the way INDIA will never forget that britishers still owe india 45 trillion dollars which i think they can't Pay in Centuries.
It's unfortunate our students are indoctrinated to hate our own history and scorn our ansestors they're only taught the worst aspects but are never taught of our nations incredible victories or the good this nation did for the world
Oh well done and well argued, Dr Masani. I am from Singapore, a former British colony. I can safely say that so much of our modern infrastructure was splendidly constructed on the historical groundwork laid during nearly 150 years of colonial administration. Objectively, our own leaders have acknowledged the British to have been "60% good and 40% bad." Certainly a lot less vicious than the Japanese Occupation of just 3.5 years.
@@drstrangelove4998Nit Singapore, they got decimated because the french failed to protect Malaysia. Hong Kong was also run on by the Imperial Japanese
@Rohan Dick Now, as for Churchill, he surely was not a Saint but he already talked about the Bengal famine. It was in the middle of WW2. The rice supplies were being taken for the soldiers in the fronts and there were about two million Indian soldiers who had volunteered to fight for the allies. Holding by Indian merchants and the Japanese occupation of Burma was to be blamed for it since it had cut off the rice supplies. You are so blinded by hatred and brainwashed that you can't even listen to a bit of what he said.
@Rohan Dick Rohan i appreciate you might be feeling disappointed. No one is defending colonisation. I wish to make it very clear. Iam grateful to be an Afro- British person. And really proud of the people of this land. Best country in the world ❤💜💥 That said your comment is lengthy and I wish I had all the time to put down all the Data and facts not merely from wikipedia or hearsay. But authentic sources. My naive question is when did India gain her independence from Great Britain? Are people still suffering and starving today without the British involvement? Who is the biggest donor of grants to india without strings attached? ( British government and British people). How many Indians have gained there education like Doctors in the NHS through British taxpayers money ie student loans, grants and commonwealth scholarships. In the 20th century and 21st century. Corruption in India are you still going to blame the British for that. Arranged marriages and forced marriages in India? Plus discrimination among the dark toned indians. Human rights abuse? Income in inequality? Please do not blame the British for snippets of what happened years ago and has got rectified even beyond. I kindly request you join me in being grateful to the one Decent country on planet earth ( Great Britain ) 💥💜💥❤ The Gentleman was telling the truth ❤❤💜❤💜 Oooo i forgot Indians tried forced labour on East Africans. Please let me know how i can email you Data, Graphs, and articles etc.Thanks for your understanding GOD BLESS OUR QUEEN 🏌️♀️💜💜💜
@@smithswilliams9116 i agree that corruption and poverty today is independent india's fault, but you cannot deny that poverty was brought in india by british and britain is built hugely by looted money from india
I am an Indian and I completely agree with this man and also respect the British Empire but call it United Kingdom or just Britain. Calling Great Britain is a disrespect to Northern Ireland.
I'm not defending colonialism by any means, but considering colonial empires as a whole, the british empire was less brutal compared to say the dutch or belgian colonial empires.
@@jerichoakbar2296 depends on the colonies and to what metrics for instance here in Australia along with canada and new Zealand are functioning democratic nations with high standards of living and large personal freedom's
@@yeetdragon1629 these are are the ex colonies where the colonizers are higher in number than the natives, it will be better if examples of non white colonies.
Yes cancel culture shouting him down,so lucky they live in the uk to be allowed to say such awful things about our amazing country. Facts Facts Facts🙏🏼
Sashi Tharoor, an Indian politician and historian, has been criticized for his hypocrisy in condemning the Indian soldiers and General Reginald Dyer who were responsible for the Jallianwala Bagh massacre in Amritsar in 1919, where a number of unarmed Indian civilians were killed, while not condemning the Indian rebel soldiers who were responsible for the Satti Chaura Ghat massacre in Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh, in 1857, where Indian civilians and British men, women and children were killed. The Jallianwala Bagh massacre in Amritsar in 1919 was a tragic event in which Indian soldiers in the British Indian army, under the command of General Reginald Dyer, killed a number of unarmed Indian civilians. The crowd had gathered in violation of martial law and had been involved in rioting and attacking the Indian army soldiers prior to the shooting. The number of deaths and the aftermath of the shooting is a matter of historical debate. Sashi Tharoor, an Indian politician and historian, has been criticized for making false claims about the event. Another tragic event that occurred during this time was the Satti Chaura Ghat massacre in Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh. This event, which took place in 1857, saw Indian soldiers killing Indian civilians who were seen as loyal to the British, as well as British men, women, and children. The Indian soldiers killed the hostages, including women and children, after the British refused to accept the mutineers' demands. This incident is considered one of the most brutal of the rebellion and had a significant impact on British public opinion at the time. It is important to note that the rebellion was not a unified movement, and there were instances of Indian soldiers and civilians fighting against the rebellion and supporting the British. The rebellion was ultimately suppressed by the British army, but it had a profound impact on the country, leading to significant changes in British policies and administration in India. However, it is worth noting that Tharoor has been criticized for not condemning the Satti Chaura Ghat massacre despite his condemnation of the Jallianwala Bagh massacre.
@@priteshpjjagani4753 Most informative.Thankyou..Tharoor strikes me as rather in love with himself as well as one eyed in his view of so vast a d complex a subject.
@@juliandenormanville5225 The truth about the British divide and rule policy showing evidence that the British came to India in the early 1600s maybe 1608 but didn't govern all of India until 1818, so the British did not rule India for four centuries. the truth section about taxes, showing that under the maratha there were special types of taxes 25% and 15% which were significantly higher than the 1% 2% 4% imposed by the British and further explain that 99% of the taxes collected in India remained in India for the benefit of Indians. The speaker states that caste discrimination is still practiced in India and will never go away because it is thousands of years old. TRUTH: While caste discrimination has been a long-standing issue in India, it is illegal in India and efforts have been made to reduce discrimination and promote social mobility. They mention that Sati (a practice of widow immolation) was only followed in Bengal province and was abolished by Raja Ram Mohan Roy through educating people in panchayats (a democratic system established in India in the 4th century). TRUTH: While Sati was primarily associated with Bengal, it was abolished by the British government in 1829, not by Raja Ram Mohan Roy through panchayats. They argue that India's civilization stopped for 4 centuries under British rule, and that India needs western education to modernize. TRUTH: India had a rich history and culture prior to British colonization, and while British rule had negative impacts on India, it also introduced new ideas and technologies. Additionally, India has made significant progress in terms of modernization and development since gaining independence in 1947. They mention that religious riots were started by the British through their "divide and rule" policy. TRUTH: While the British did use a divide and rule strategy to maintain control over their colonies, it is not accurate to say that they started religious riots. Tensions between different religious groups existed before British rule and have continued after independence. They credit 30 million Indian soldiers for helping the British survive the Nazis. TRUTH: India did contribute a significant number of soldiers to the British army during World War II, however, it is not accurate to say that these soldiers helped the British survive the Nazis. The war was fought on multiple fronts and the outcome was determined by the actions of multiple nations. Additionally, before World War II, the Indian army was 200,000 soldiers but 2 million volunteered to fight in World War II, including 1 million Indian soldiers who fought against the Japanese in Burma and Calcutta to protect India from Japanese invasion. They argue that British colonialism negatively impacted India's economy, as India's GDP was 23% of the world's GDP in the mid-18th century when the British came, but only 3% when they left. TRUTH: India's GDP as a proportion of the world's GDP has fluctuated over time and it is not accurate to say that it was 23% in the mid-18th century and only 3% when the British left. Additionally, the impact of British colonialism on India's economy is complex and debated. While it did extract resources and wealth from India, it also created new economic opportunities and markets. The GDP actually grew exponentially under the British but the rest of the world modernized, industrialized, and grew even faster. They mention the system of zamindary, where Indian farmers had to pay taxes, with 10 parts going to the British and 1 part going to local rulers, as a reason for India's poverty. TRUTH: The system of zamindari, where landlords were responsible for collecting taxes from tenants, was abolished in India after independence in 1947. The system did contribute to poverty and inequality, however, it is not accurate to say that 10 parts of the taxes went to the British and only 1 part went to local rulers. They note that the British Empire's economy was heavily dependent on India's rich and fertile land. TRUTH: India did contribute a significant portion of the British Empire's economy, however, it was not the only colony or source of wealth for the British Empire. They mention that many Indians who work in the BBC have become "anti-national They mention that many Indians who work in the BBC have become "anti-national" and that the British media does not accurately portray Indian history. TRUTH: There is no evidence to support the claim that Indians working in the BBC are "anti-national" or that the British media does not accurately portray Indian history. The speaker concludes by expressing frustration about the "trillions looted," "millions of lives lost," and other negative impacts of British colonialism on India. TRUTH: The extent of wealth and resources extracted from India by the British during colonization, as well as the number of lives lost as a result of British actions, is a matter of historical debate and interpretation. While it is acknowledged that there were negative consequences for India during British rule, the specific numbers and extent of the impact are not agreed upon by all historians. Regarding the Bengal Famine, it is true that low crop yield from previous years had a domino effect on the famine in 1942, and that the October cyclone and flood destroyed 50-75% of the rice crops. Additionally, most deaths during the famine were caused by disease, such as dysentery, diarrhea, malaria, and cholera, which were spread by the flood and poor sanitation. Many of the deaths were also among refugees who had fled from Burma and encamped in Bengal or Calcutta. However, it is also true that Indian landlords hoarded rice and Indian merchants participated in war profiteering and speculation, inflating prices for rice. It is also true that Gandhi, Patel, Nehru, and Azad did not send any food to aid in the famine, and that it was primarily the British, Australians and Winston Churchill who sent enough food to eradicate the Bengal famine in just one year. Churchill sent a Famine and Relief Committee and the new viceroy at the time was Lord Wavell. !
@@juliandenormanville5225 I don't know why these Indians are so ignorant about their own Indian history. Believing propaganda doesn't help them they don't learn from their mistakes and Shashi tharoor is worse than Hitler
@Holy Jones none, literally none. Indians did all these on their own. If British really did all these, people would have never fought for independence lol.
@Holy Jones That's a wierd flex considering the fact that the sole purpose of education was to put Indians in British administration to further their rule in India. Unfortunately it backfired. Still wanna thank the West for Industrial Revolution.
@@josa5112 the fact he says “rather that” (talking about ethnicity) would suggest that an Indian was being racist to him and had their comments deleted
Ah, now this is a REAL bona fide debater and when not stampeded by cancel cult, it is amazing how interesting the real story is. All credit to the British of the era for stamping out so many evils and spreading so much good across the world. This chap is so much better than the cretin supposedly on the same side. I could hardly believe the duplicity of the intellectual and moral worm who preceded him. At least this is civilized, in good old-fashioned British tradition, unlike debates in US universities.
Hey just so you know this is still an extremely limited view of the issue. Just because this guy makes good points doesn’t mean this is the “real story” both sides of the debate are the “real story” just different interpretations of the facts and different weight on certain facts. You may choose to focus on the good that imperialism has done but it doesn’t erase the bad it did at the same time. There’s room for both in the narrative, debates like this are not about finding one right answer but the nuance between the issues. We can acknowledge that good things were done at the same time that we acknowledge the suppression, paternalist, racist, and mercantilist attitudes which pervaded these systems and harmed so many.
@@sorencorreia6872 Agreed. As a person from Vietnam, a previously colonized country, I can attest to this. There have been many innovations and infrastructure the French brought to us, however few of them were done with the interest of our people at heart, but to better accomodate the French people there, and to transport more natural resources back to the "motherland". And the stories of abuse, mistreatment (that is putting it lightly) is literally uncountable. There are 2 sides to the issue of course, but to simply dismiss these crimes as "cancel culture" or "liberal propaganda" is disrespectful.
To provide some context, I'd like to point out the 1857 India rebellion. India rebelled because 1. Brits ruled India with an iron grip (as with any other colony) 2. They forced the Indian to kill their sacred animal to have oil for their guns ( the equivalent of making a Christian piss on the cross, btw). So please, some good were done, yeah. But to simple dismiss the bad things as the work of a "cancel cult" is insulting.
@@HungTran-gz5em The cancel cult is about preventing any debate at all. It is a very good thing that we discuss the positives and negatives of British rule in India. I could not agree with you more that some terrible things were done by the British to Indians, which is usually the only thing about which comments is allowed. It is much harder to debate the positives, such as rule of law, industry, infrastructure, democracy and the enlightenment, all of which have and will bring phenomenal benefits to billions of Indians. Britain and India are now friends and they should both be able to reflect on the past and the future with passion and respect. This debate was such an occasion.
I am an Indian and I have respect for my Independence but I also have immense respect for the British Empire. It was not really bad thing to happen but really a great thing. 🇮🇳🇮🇳🇮🇳🇮🇳❤️❤️🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧
@STALIN don't say before the British Hindus and Muslims coexisted peacefully always. During Aurangzeb's rule, you can see what the religious tension had arised into. He destroyed temples. He imposed religious tax on non muslims. There are more countless examples. You just need to read history. Moreover take a look at the Maratha Empire. It sought to create a Hindu Raj throughout the empire where there would be no place for non Hindus. There were inconsistencies in religious harmony during Pre British era.
@STALIN as you said the decrease in population was due to famines but the Indian Famine Codes created by the British was the first modern response to famines in India which so successful that it was continued unti the country became Independent.
@STALIN en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Famine_Codes#:~:text=The%20Indian%20Famine%20Codes%2C%20developed,scarcity%2C%20scarcity%2C%20and%20famine. You need to read this.
@STALIN Before the British Hindus and Muslims coexistence peacefully. What planet have you beamed down from? Read some history. They dis not coexist peacefully at all. Indian history before British rule is one of constant warfare between Hindus and Muslims.
Yes, of course it’s not a national disgrace; If you knew literally anything about the empire you would know it to be our biggest pride, with very good reason
I am an Indian and I respect my Independence but I also admire the Empire. The Empire was really a good thing to happen but I wouldn't disagree that it had a dark side too.
While the British empire may have benitted its colonies, it is important to remember most of these supposed benevolences were only to accommodate and comfort their position in the colony. What's more is, their oppression of native populations cannot be overseen. One prime example is the jallianwhala bagh massacre in 1919 in which a participants of a peaceful protest were captured within closed walls with a guarded exit upon the order of General O'Dwyers simply to instill fear in the population (his words not mine). It is also crucial to understand, land which you do not originate from is not yours to take no matter what you plan to do with it. Imperialism should not be justified in such manner as this oversees the dehumanising acts carried out by the oppressors. And now tell me, how can you ever pride in such an empire?
@@palakpatel3295 Yes, it's true that in this world no country is another's friend. But the greatness of the British Empire is something which no empire in history can ever match. It is because at that time the whole world was colonised by European powers. The oppression of Native populations is equally true as the hatred for the Native population against the Colonial settlers. Now as for Jalianwala Bagh, you need to read the real story rather than what our biased brainwashing history books have taught us. That day the firing which took place at the Bagh is something which would have taken place even if India had been independent. It's because that day was declared as a curfew. The reason for the curfew was very legible. It's basically the same reasons which take place in Jammu and Kashmir. But we need to strongly condemn one man's actions, General Dyer who could have made the firing a little bit less indiscriminate. He could have been more humane, so that the number of loss of lives could have been significantly reduced. The massacre was not something of the Government's plan. When the Government came to know about such an incident, it took the best possible action which needed to be taken against the aggresors. Moreover as for this so called theory of a certain group of people not originating from a certain place, it might interest you to know that the huge Indian population itself is made up of people who came from different places. First, the Dravidians lived here, after that came here the Indo Aryans from Central Asia near the Caspian sea. After that came the Greeks when Alexander Conquered some Indian Kingdoms. A lot of Greeks settled in India at that time. After the Zoroasters(Parsees) came from Iran, although with a significantly lower population. When the Islamic era started, a lot of populations from neighbouring Islamic countries came to settle in India.( Turks, Mughals, Afghans) etc. At the last came the Europeans who settled (British, French, Portuguese, etc). So, this theory of foreigners settling down and exploiting native population is not true. As for Imperialism, it is not something which is Britain's creation, but is practised since the beginning of human civilization. You need to understand that India as nation didn't existed before Britain came here. It was just a terrestrial unit. In the present day, we are not trying to justify imperialism in a sense as if we are inviting them to come and invade us again. If they invade us, we shall surely resist, but the thing is we are just some seekers of truth who are just speaking up for what we believe in. We believe that we should study history freely and our patriotism should not interfere in any way while learning history, while learning about our past, while seeking the truth.
@@eshaansarkar2017 what strongest action possible?? What?? Forget hanged till death, they should have sent dyer to rot in andaman Nicolas Islands where they kept freedom fighters fighting for their motherland. And about that Indian issues, yes we have, we even talk about it how rajput kings lavish lives was turning point, we gave sc-st 33% reservation because how upper class treated them. What Indians did wrong is our part to discuss and we do. It can't be use as an equaliser because u want to be proud of that inhuman empire. M neither proud of the Indian kings and obviously not the bits. Be ashamed. Its a human thing. Good luck.
He's right regarding the Bengal Famine. It was created by rapid urbanisation, industrial, the abandonment of farming by large sections of Bengal who were tenant farmers or Muslim and Hindu landowners who grew cash crops and not food.
You know that they were FORCED to grow cash crops due to British policies, right? The British created economic policies which punished farmers who grew food crops and essentially turned the bread basket of India into a money making factory for the British. And not to forget the appropriation of land and farms of thousands of Indian peasants by the British government for their war efforts, which caused inflation to skyrocket and made food extremely expensive for Indians. But regardless of all that, it still doesn't answer why Churchill categorically denied food to millions of starving brown people that his country tyrannically ruled over, and rather diverted all the food that was left in bengal, as well as the aid sent by Australia and America to North Africa and Greece where British and American Troops were already pretty well stocked.
To summarize: - A growth of 350m in population - Eradication of famines - Preservation of culture - Banning of burning widows - Allowance of remarriage - Banning of child marriage - Introduction of vaccines - Eradication of disease - Introduction of antibiotics - Most industrialization in Asia - Introduction of the ICS - Introduction of democracy - Introduction of liberalism If they were trying to oppress India… they didn’t do a very good job of it.
No bro, they did a very good job in oppressing. Just try to read about the atrocities, law, insults, rules. There was fuckin salt law... Salt. The country which rules the spice world was fighting for salt. But it's okay if u wanna hear the story from people who oppressed rather than from people who were. N about that othwe things... We would have slowly or gradually learnt that anyway from British. U didn't need to invade us. Ask my grandfather, his friends and try to explain this logic. I don't hate England, i listen to rocki follow Chelsea n i dont know why but i even love the accent but u can't bring this few good things against what people felt and went through. This is really rude and cruel. Good bye.
@@alenp5282 the government elected by us. Salt and fuel is different. Nice try man. But if u had the logic and not ego. U wouldn't have came up with this stupid anology. We Indians have issues too, the caste system is foolish, we created 33% reservation for that. There's still bashing in media about old prejudices etc. Doesn't mean it makes the old Britain right. Anyways, be proud if it makes you feel good. Tc. Slap a guy in Britain 10 times and say hey- atleast be thankful that it made your cheeks stronger.
@@grizzii2149 you don’t seem to understand my comment. I am pointing out that if their motivations were truly how Shashi Tharoor and other Indian nationalists portray, I.E genocidal or brutal, then they did not succeed in achieving those goals, because it was completely balanced out. No one is saying there were zero problems, racism or intolerance. Every country had that whether they were colonized or not, including Great Britain itself. No one is asking India to be grateful. But the insinuation that they are mortal enemies is outrageous and deserves to be called out as jingoism. Why do Indians still quote the false figure of $45 trillion? Or the false claim of 1.8 billion deaths? Both figures were given by the exact same “doctor” and Indian nationalist. No scholar recognizes her claims besides AUTHORS like Shashi Tharoor who makes a living off of sensationalized content, not telling the truth. He’s not a historian. To finish off my comment, let me point out that England lost so much money to the Vikings prior to unification. If I use the exact same logic as the “economist” and calculate what Norway, Sweden and Denmark owe to England, the number is genuinely too big to type out in this comment, with Britain being owed the same amount of money that the world has ever made. That is so outlandish no one entertains the idea, so why do Indians? Tell me.
What a guy ! Facts from an educated Indian. The British on the whole dramatically improved human civilisation, health, education, economies, law, civil society, public works, technology, ending slavery, cast system, democracy.. There is something wrong with people who cannot see the British Empire in the round. They focus upon the lesser negatives. Why? Lack of education, racism, personality disorders, grievance mongers.
As an Asian I think that you have every right to be proud of your culture and heritage. Ignore the toxic people who are telling you to not be proud. Woke left are the real racists
What a wonderful man. Thank you Sir, for sticking up for the British Empire! He started well and battled on even better. Like a dreadnought plowing through rough seas Given such a short time to give his balancing address, it is disgraceful that some of the students, without the majority showing their displeasure of it, tried to persistently interrupt him. Rather than listen to what he had to say respectively, they are literally trying to stop him talking, but getting to get him to listen to them. The woke/left he spoke of really are the pits. Students these days!
Artists were fascinated in Europe by extra-European art - especially the emergent avant-garde and modernists at the turn of the industrial century. Nations like Britain and France consumed, reinterpreted, and adored the unique visual culture from around the world. It is perhaps the greatest testament to individual liberty and empire. Under no other circumstances would another state readily accept such a large importation of foreign culture. Britain learnt about the world - and the world learnt from Britain some of the most important cultural and societal lessons to date. That is where worldwide democracy, liberty and freedom came from.
And when democracy in places like Iran in the 50s won it was the British who called up the CIA to help bring down the government and ensure the shah would rule as a dictator for the next 20 years leading to the blowback of the 79 revolution
what a legend, RIP. i just found his book on Macaulay which id forgotten i'd bought, now's the time then. I hope i'm half as sharp at that age. these young kids are disgraceful. funny how 5 years of social media somehow gives you the confidence to go up against a veteran historian.
Unvarnished facts. We British should be very proud of our ancestors achievements. The push back starts here. Those of us with a kernel of knowledge on this subject have been gagged for a very long time.
Yes. Here in Texas I teach my students that Britain has overwhelmingly been a force for good in the world. So sad to see its young people be brainwashed.
Masani is a Zoroastrian, an immigrant from Persia; they because of their colour got the preferential treatment from the British. He is giving that back to the British with a false history.
This moderator is an absolute disgrace. “You are allowed to ask questions, so keep asking them”!! Imagine if that’s how they behaved in Parliament! You can request permission to ask a question, and if that is declined, that’s it. You are not allowed to constantly interrupt someone so that he runs out of time before being able to say what he has planned to say. That, incidentally, shows how much the wokists fear rational opposition.
@@paololuckyluke2854 - Correct. It is part of proper decorum to not interrupt people when they are speaking, and wait your turn to ask questions either at the end of the conversation, or at an appropriate break in the conversation.
@@paololuckyluke2854 that's not how it works, watch other oxford union speeches also other people have right criticism. Anyway, I'm with Dr zareer masani.
The irony of a bunch of privileged white kids objecting to how an Indian scholar feels about his own history. And growing more offended that he isn't interested in having them correct him.
@@profelderflower all the visible hands were similarly hued. And sure, there may have been others interrupting, but it's "whitesplaining" that the left has a fixation on right now. But only when someone other than them is doing it.
Absolutely inspiring debate with straight unbiased facts which are ignored innumerable times in so called speeches and debates on the matter ,really sad to see how they treated Dr Masani .
@@67frankay this is true, however just stating facts is only half of the trip. he says about how people’s’ livelihoods improved, but he fails to tell us how they there were still horrendous things that happened under the empire
@@theoli8407 I take your point. All aspect of a topic must be understood. This is a debate however and he’s arguing one side of the argument. The matter itself probably falls in the middle somewhere and in my opinion slightly leans towards the empire being beneficial. Pax Brittanica was amazing if you think about how dangerous and unstable the world was before it.
The people clapping after the exchange at 5:53 are vicious. They are applauding the leader's approval and encouragement of their constant interruptions. These "academics" know there is an appropriate and formal time for questions and debate, they simply wish to silence his work. Their behavior is immature, at best, considering the setting. Allowing historical analysis and interpretation to be created with/by such strong emotions is dangerous to academic work. Regardless of a which side is "wrong" or "right," these people need to understand that historical debates will continue until the end of time. There's no reason to turn your historical argument into your religion. That is, unless you have a ulterior motive.
In every debate you are supposed to ask questions. Time is included for the audience questions. If you don't know about how Oxford debate works, read the rule book.
@@animo5445 thank you, big difference in constant interruption and asking questions. Dr. Zareer Masani had the floor and declined to answer - also in the rules.
India supreme court orders India government to save Taj mahal, 70,000 visitors per day 2 million tourists a year Only the British saved the Taj mahal after 350 years but Indians let it go to ruin Lord Curzon, who did more than any Englishman to preserve the Taj and other monuments, noted that picnickers often came armed with hammer and chisel, the better to extract fragments of agate and carnelian from the flowers. He repaired the buildings, restored the gardens, although with a British touch, and got the canals working again. It is easy to revile the British treatment of the Taj, but the Indians haven't always done much better. As Agra grew, little effort was made to spare the Taj the ravages of pollution, which began to discolor the white marble.
I would not blame Indian merchants for the Bengal Famine of 1943 - or Churchill either. When the crops failed in Bengal (which they did from time to time) the normal response was to import food from Burma - but the IMPERIAL JAPANESE ARMY was in Burma, and the Imperial Japanese Navy was in the seas - there was even an attack on Ceylon.
And the population of Bengal grew by 43% in space of 42 years (1901 - 1943), which for a region that periodically suffered from crop failure would have made the problem far worse.
Why not take grains from neighbouring provinces instead of taking it from Burma? Why is it that they have to rely solely on Burmese crops during famine?They should have taken it from the provinces which were not stuck by famine instead of depending on one or two outersource of crops
@@78adarshyadav39 Because elsewhere was also short of food - by the way, local administration (in Bengal and other provinces) had been handed over to Indian officials for years at this point.
@@paulvmarks but there was famine only in Bengal province , right? Was the whole subcontinent suffering from famines? What was the reason for shortage of food in other parts of India? How much power was granted to Bengal government? On which areas of administration did they have control on? And what powers did Britishers retain after handing over the administration job to natives?
The British were FAR better than what most Indians have been primed to think by patriotic propaganda movies. This is coming from an Indian who cares to study history, and does not believe anti white propaganda.
Why this Video has very very less views when compared to that the one in Dr Shashi Tharoor MP? Dr Zareer Masani's Debate and View here is certainly is Interesting.
Great points by Dr. Zareer Masani, Shashi Tharoor is charismatic but he is selective in what history he tells us and the stats Shashi provides is often suspect.
Would you see the history of the brutal maratha empire being debated in India ? Or the Arab slave trade debated in Iran or Saudi Arabia ? Or Russian world war crimes debated in Russia ?
The truth is no where in the world colonisation was meant for the welfare of the natives!! The fact that you were a coloniser once itself proves that your prime motive was exploitation!! The good and bad whatever they were able to bring about in India was a result of their own vested interests They did banned sati and other social injustices only cuz they thought of us as uncivilized and it's difficult to control an uncivilized society Likewise, The ICS and other bureaucracies was a means of better control and British Raj not for our growth and development!! "Drain of wealth" is an obvious and established truth !! I do give them credit for the archaeological discoveries but that's not something they did for our culture or heritage they did it out of their own curiosity and technical expertise So what if they built railways and industries it was built out of our money, our taxes, our labour that the poor peasants paid for even with their lives!! I would have given them the credit if they built it with the gold and silver of their country, their timber (and not the ones they uprooted from the homes of our tribal society) or the hard labour of the "Whites". Do agree that the rich indian classes did serve as puppets of the British in oppressing their own countrymen but I don't agree that British ever did anything with pure intentions or cared about our welfare or upliftment!! Still, I thank them for the unintentional good and the emergence of the idea of nationalism in our country But I also expect them to acknowledge the fact that if India is still not able to recover out of the poverty, malnourishment and unemployment atleast one of the credits goes to the British Raj!!
The very fact that someone came up with the idea of organising a debate on this topic confirms in a way that the British Empire and its imperialism is indeed a national disgrace for the British. What moral right did the colonial British have to subjugate people in far away lands who posed absolutely no threat to their security and never challenged their freedom? It was only their disgusting and naked greed and lust for material wealth that fueled such an expansionist British policy. Even though I am a second generation Indian of the post independent India, the wounds from the unpardonable crimes the Empire committed in British India still bring tears to my eyes. I find it hard to forgive them for their crimes. It is very painful for me to see a scholar like Mr. Masani shamelessly trying to defend the undefendable. I cannot give him the benefit of the doubt on this as I have listened to his BBC Radio 4 documentary on the Jallianwala Bagh massacre in which this man insidiously tried to provide justifications for the massacre. I couldn't believe my ears when I heard him saying all those hurtful things. Shame on him as well.
"it is possible to make natives of this country thoroughly good english scholars and that to this end our efforts should be directed macaulay also articulated the classic reason for teaching english we must do our best to form a class who may be interpreters between us and the millions whom we govern a class of persons indian in blood and color but english and taste in opinions in morals and in intellect who would then go on to educate the rest of india in the western british"-thomas maccaulay finally i can say after watching this video british succeed
His delivery was timed. The chair should have asked for the audience to ask any questions after he has made his presentation. I do agree with him on the role of African chiefs, and the lack of progress on democracy in former French, Spanish and Portuguese colonies in Africa.
Just admit we're the best of a bad bunch and that includes everyone in the world the most tolerant people in the world the British empire is the most successful empire for a reason
The treatment of this great man shows Oxford has fallen. Sad....... -_-
As have the majority of colleges in the USA. Young people looking at and espousing a monochrome, hostile and emotive, cherry-picked one-sided view of history in which there is no acknowledgement or tolerance for shades of grey let alone colour. Aggressively attacking anyone who would ever dare question their "enlightened" limited world view and totally unwilling to listen. Facts know no politics but do go a long way when presenting the truth, no matter how welcome or unwelcome.
Multi culturalism seems to have combined with postmodernist concepts like intersectionality to create a reliable and cozy way for anyone who is not white British (other than the brave intellectuals like the speaker) to find "instant moral superiority" inbetween their "insta-gram lifestyles" and I suspect they will have little to no meaningful impact on the present or the future other than to waste their youth and energy getting upset in a time when they could be moving everyone up and on.
Including Cambridge as well. Seriously, these students are merely children
I was there for this debate. After the debate, the President gave the woman who kept interrupting Dr. Masani a chance to speak. She declined the opportunity to comment.
Maybe she just wanted to shout him down so she didn't hear something which upset her? It's commonplace in society today. They seem to forget that the right to free speech means you sometimes have to hear opinions which make you very uncomfortable.
Funny, she had so much to correct him on but when given the floor decided to remain silent
Quite obvious they were out just to derail him from a speech containing truths and highly valuable alternative perspectives to the orthodoxy which we have been forcefed.
@@harrybassett9433 she was there to use the same old arguments "but what about the Bengal Famine - absolutely not the fault of Japan!?" or "I saw doctor who and an episode PROVED white people are to blame for Partition!" etc :P
She needs to go to the library and get a large book on manners!...these stupid children are being told from a man who knows, an Indian man who is extremely intelligent...and because they don't like what they hear, they try to disrupt and bully.
I am glad he did not make way for those woke idiots.
i am an indian and i know for a fact that what he is saying is true. doesn't mean that the british were benevolent. but the natives weren't exactly nice people either.
Very sweeping statement - its not entirely true. Yes the natives werent nice to each other for a big part. But that does not absolve the Brits.
@@zodiacmanan No but it doesn't condemn the brits either. Based on todays standards everyone fails. Based on the standards back then, one clearly provides benefit to people more than the other. Progress is incremental, and slow.
@@zodiacmanan in what way did my statement absolve the british? did you not read the second sentence?
@@colins3688 by failing to speak only the approved utterances in full you have demonstrated an openness of your mind to un-ideas which might lead someone else to not fully speak only the approved utterances. And if that goes on too long, someone might get to thinking the brits aren't pure evil, which might as well be absolving them.
Adhere to the minitru guidelines or find yourself the subject of the next two minutes of hate.
@young entrepreneur In absolute terms, India's GDP roughly doubled from 1750 to 1950 (It was declining at the end of the Mughal Empire).
India fell behind, in relative terms, as a share of the global economy, but that's a period of massive industrialization and rapid GDP growth in Western Europe and North America.
I like how everyone was quiet when the other girls spoke but now everyone wants to interrupt him. This moderator is so biased and ridiculous.
Have a look at the video of the intelligent unwashed disrupting a speech by Jacob Rees-Mogg in Bristol a while ago to see how these cretins handle opposing opinions.
Feminist privilege.
They are allowed to ask questions and point out inconsistencies. Every debate has this. Just because it happens, doesnt mean it is wrong.
@@zodiacmanan True, but the opposing side was clearly heckling the speaker and the moderator was encouraging it.
@Sawyer But it is absolutely typical of woke leftists. Every time someone starts arguing against the leftist ideology I absolutely expect a load and angry response while they are still making their argument. It wouldn't be tolerated if it was the other way round.
A hall full of leftists. The only person I admire is the wise doctor speaking
The Oxford Union has gone to shit, if you can't hold an argument without being interrupted.
Result of lowering entry level standards, since DEI, PC policies.
“SILENCE, Woke Wench!”
-Based Indian Gentleman
That was well said.
As an Indian I agree with this wise man. Why else did so many Indians fight for the Empire during WW1 and 2
@@backupaccount8731 cuz gandhi said so
@@agrajyadav2951 typical goberandus illiterate
Wise indian 🤣
He is one of those so called traitors in India who think partition happened bcoz of hindus.
He is just a stone pelter within a suit.
An educated and wonderful man…well said sir.🇦🇺 I have a great love of India
Brits always loved India but hated Indians
One of the finest speeches I have ever heard. What a credit to this man; common sense and factual history.
The irony of a white woman trying to overtalk/silence an Indian historian regarding his own culture's history is simply staggering. Old habits die hard it seems.
🤣 this historian is as much of an indian as Churchill
@@himanshusharma7877 Continue to wallow in your delusion. The truth is a bitter pill for the likes of you to swallow. Dr Masani is 100% spot on about this aspect of Indian history.
@@himanshusharma7877 say whatever you want to say but you might not be here today if the practice of suttee had been allowed to continue, or burying alive unwanted female babies.
@@himanshusharma7877 he's more Indian than tharoor
@@PAX777 only westerners are delusional about india cope hard and you will need to cope even harder in the future 😂
This is possibly the first time students have heard a different opinion without being able to shout them down. Are they ok? Did the safe spaces work?
Hey my guy this entire channel is literally dedicated to debate with rules. Like this entire channel is dedicated to different opinions. Them asking points of interest and shit is normal for this forum so no this isn’t the first time they’re hearing different opinions.
University (at least a proper one) should NEVER be a safe space. Safe space is literally the antithesis of university.
@@sorencorreia6872 you sound university educated, and shit... :D
@@sorencorreia6872 They had no interest in points of information if when given the opportunity AFTER they declined to comment at all! they clearly just wanted to disrupt.
@@sorencorreia6872 not when the points of order and questions are meant to filibuster and interrupt the speaker to the point where they can’t get their points across. This should be obvious.
The expression of leftists when their poisonous world view is challenged by facts is priceless.
Well done Dr Masani!
This is clearly a revisionist version. While I do acknowledge the existence of a lot superstition and caste related practices which I condemn so many parts of India such as Kerala, Tamil Nadu had independent of the British throne over thrown such practices. The infrastructures such as damns and railway lines constructed was purely used to loot India's natural resources because most of the mines and fields used for textile cultivation where towards India's geographic center. The infrastructure merely enabled them to get these resources to the ports. If you think they were benevolent with the labourers you probably hit your head a few times too many. Similarly the civil servants were needed to enable cheaper officers to the alternative which is British citizen working in India which would cost the crown significantly for expenses for officers working over seas. The amount of looting that had taken place should be looked into by these revisionists. So next time you lot are preaching about white man's burden do look into the context behind it and hope you would be able to understand the racist overtures associated with it. You have not left India better of. If you indeed did leave India better off ask yourself why such performance wasn't repeated at various African colonies.
Edit:excuse the typos.
@@ukie713 facts
The railway's
cost was exorbitant compared
with what was being built
elsewhere such as in the British
colonies Canada and Australia. It
was double the cost but the cost
was borne entirely by India whilst
the contracts were given to the Brits by the Brits. The railway was
not a gift to India India paid for
that - rather it was implemented to
more quickly transfer raw
materials to the Brits who then
manufactured goods that were
sold at extraordinary prices to
India. Indians were not allowed to
manufacture those goods. This is
another way in which the Brits
enriched themselves.
British education my foot. When
you entered India, it was producing
24% of world trade. When you
were kicked out, that was reduced
to 3% or so. Where was your
education used. Well, it was used
by the few to assist the Brits to
rule India.
India had leadership position in
mathematics, made the first
gunpowder artillery that was used.
You called the decimal system
invented in India as the Arabic-Hindu system whilst the
Arabs themselves called it the
Indian system. You think that Newton first recognized that there
was a force between bodies, such
as that apple that brought sense to
Newton. But the Arab writer had
stated that the Hindus said a force
existed between a body and earth
which he said he was recording
but not convinced of it. (But
Newton, with the help of others did
give a calculation for that force).
Bose was a remarkable Indian who
in vented Bose Statistics which the
Brits refused to print in their
scholarly Journal because it was
not right. But when the same was
sent to Einstein, that work was
translated into German and
published and so today we have
Bose-Einstein statistics.
Sati started as a reaction to the
rape that the muslims practised
upon the conquered. So Hindu
women prefer death by fire rather
than being raped by the muslims.
When you are glib about your
contribution to India, be reminded
that the development of Britain
was made upon the hardship you
implemented in foreign lands,
particularly in India. Indians and
dogs were not allowed in places
as per posted notices. This tells
what you think of Indians.
This is all history. And we will
never forget it.
@@igDeepanshu0804 This is the often-cited Indian paradise myth, the myth being India was a technological and economic powerhouse before the Brits came in and ruined it. It's nonsense. India wasn't even a country. Some of your list of things above are true. But let's not pretend India was a paradise. You had a caste system, You burned widows alive. Many Indians lived in abject poverty (and still do despite India having independence for half a century now) Many of the more rural parts of India had never been touched by technology, many living in the dark ages technology wise. The Brits were far from perfect but lets not keep pretending India was a paradise. The Brits helped put India on the map in the modern world, we built your infrastructure. Whether our motives were entireley pure or not, its there and you can use it. We brought vaccinations that you didn't have. We brought India into the modern world.
Also, why do people like you never criticise the Mugal Empire which dominated India before the British? Ask yourself that.
Seeing Indians complaining about the British is like me complaining about the Romans, We didn't even have the Aquaduct before the Romans came.
@@drunkenork5373 Mr Ork, are you drunk in real life as well? We don't criticize the Mughals because unlike the British they assimilated and form part of India today. While I do acknowledge the role British had in removing some social evils like Sati there were plenty of Indian activists advocating for such a law to be implemented. If the British were so considerate how come steps werent taken to abolish the caste system then. Remember British ruled India for almost hundred years officially and more unofficially. Please do research more on famines caused in India due to the poor British rule in India when they wouldn't allow Indian farmers to cultivate food crops and forced them to cultivate textile along with cash crops. And let's not pretend that British rule absolutely helped India with its poverty issue. We can only build overselves on what was left. So before you come preaching about your white supremacy do your research you donut.
The whole debate should be published unedited.
So that the british oppression and extremisim get some space to hide under these untrue facts. Even god can't trust the britisher in the dark.
You can find every speaker on the internet if you really want
@@donkeydesiamericanprofessor Masani's is the only segment in defence of empire, the three opposed to it are still up.
Out of all languages he chose to speak facts
@Rohan Dick Yes well said, what did Britain ever give India apart from democracy and the railway system which dragged them out of the middle ages and gave mobility to millions for the first time ever. obviously.
@@eddiehockley4144 Not to mention immunization, modern medicine, colleges and universities(though those things have gone to shit now), rule of law, a social structure which enabled many to move up the social ladder nad improve their material life. Other European powers deserve some credit too.
@Rohan Dick As for Churchill, that man is no Saint either. That's for sure. But famines happened earlier too. This famine was the result of a War. If the War didn't happen then famines wouldn't have happened too. The food supplies were being taken for the soldiers. If you remember there were Indian soldiers (Indian+ Pakistani+ Bangladeshi) too who had volunteered for the War.
@@dwaipayanroychowdhury7035 It's Basically European colonisation. If the British didn't came, then the French would have, or might be Portuguese, Dutch or Spanish.
@Rohan Dick Now, as for Churchill, he surely was not a Saint but he already talked about the Bengal famine. It was in the middle of WW2. The rice supplies were being taken for the soldiers in the fronts and there were about two million Indian soldiers who had volunteered to fight for the allies. Holding by Indian merchants and the Japanese occupation of Burma was to be blamed for it since it had cut off the rice supplies. You are so blinded by hatred and brainwashed that you can't even listen to a bit of what he said.
This guy is a fucking savage. His argument's power grows with every "NO"
The irony of a bunch of privileged woke white kids objecting to how an Indian scholar feels about his own history. And growing more offended that he isn't interested in having them correct him.
@@ericfeldkamp3788 I was going to try counter you... but you’re pretty spot on lol
@@ericfeldkamp3788 he is British
@@arpanmalakar11 You may be surprised to hear this, but there are a lot of Indians that are also British. He is the son of Minoo Masani, a former MP of India, and scholar on Indian History. The label "Indian Scholar" fits him both in terms of ancestral origin and academic work.
@@ericfeldkamp3788 the indians in uk are not indians anymore, for us pure indians, they just become another subjects and their citizenship is already banned by the Indians. That's why we hate the Indian origin Brits. You might be surprised to hear this but that's the truth.
As an Egyptian, I think my opinion here might be of value. Egypt was under British rule in the early 20th century. I can tell you right now that the British were no friends and they were known for their quite brutal leadership style. However, to discuss any history, we must separate the sin from the sinner. While the British empire’s history is by no means flawless, like every other civilization, to undermine its achievements as a civilization by calling it shameful is ignorant at best and absolutely stupid at worst.
In the British Empire, every colony's case was peculiar. As for India, I am glad that they came.
@@eshaansarkar2017 India was not a country as It is now. Me I belong Panjab now part of Pakistan and India. I do not know In which state of India you born. We were way better than any other empires in the Indian subcontinent. Hindus Sikhs Muslims were living together but the arrival of British first destroyed the empire and then by applying "Divide and Rule policy" it also destroyed the friendship, solidarity, brotherhood among the people from different communities. In result, Pakistan got created and massacre of 1947 took place where million of people died and displaced. So you cannot say "As for India, I am glad they came." You can talk about your state or the king who was ruling on your ancestors. But don't talk about all India because there were many empires (states) were living happily by maintaining the peace. As for Panjab, I feel sad that they came and destroyed a very vibrant empire (country).
@@ਅਥਰਾਸਿੰਘ as for me, I am from Kolkata
@@eshaansarkar2017 glad they came??you sure??if they hadn't come jailanwala bagh would never have happened nor would all the wars which led to so many indians dying I guess you wouldn't be glad if your parents died in the jallianwala bagh.
@@Pudin-kc2oz - if the British hadn’t of course come , you’d have ended up with the French. To see real genocide in action you merely have to look at Algeria and Indo China. The British acquired “ India” by way of defeating the French in what was then a World War against the French , Dutch and Spaniards. “ India” itself as a political entity and was ruled by a multitude of competing groups and Princely States. They made up the bulk of “ India” until the British left in 47. Over half of the landmass was run directly by “Indians” with the balance run by Indians under the tutelage of British Administrators. Even at its height in the 1920’s fewer than 120000 European Britons lived there and over half were British Army units stationed in India. That’s for over 4.2 million square miles excluding Sri Lanka and Myanmar. The point is that given the disparities in people numbers the British could not have ruled by strength alone. It needed the active participation of what became Indians ,Pakistani and Bengalis.
Stop interrupting the man. Why is it fashionably liberal to silence the opposition of the debate nowadays.
Because they’re “right” moral good people
- as they see it.
@@odiedodieuk I think perhaps, morally challenged.
It happens in every debate - as the moderator said, it is allowed. So ...
@@zodiacmanan Yet one side let the other speak politely, the other shouted over them. Ill let you guess who was courteous and polite.
Points of information are standard in competitive debates. Members of the other side are allowed to interrupt and he's allowed to say no. The fact that he didn't offer any points during THEIR speeches despite his alleging that their facts and numbers are wrong and their points are biased tells me he wasn't interested in facing any real challenge.
I just saw videos of Oxford debates from 7 years ago and compared to now, you can see the absolute degradation.
Dr Zareer Masani would make a better PM than most Tories.
His father had been an MP in India.
He is a terrorist😂
Masani would make a good uncle tom. They come penny a dozen these days. Sometimes for free.
I live in a former British Colony.
By the time we became independent, our living standard was one of the highest in the World…. so much for Britain “draining” the Colonies.
As an Aboriginal member of Parliament stated recently, at no time have Aboriginal people enjoyed a better standard of living, longer lives, greater freedom from starvation or violence, infant survival rates or equality of rights for women. All this is the result of what Britain brought to the Colonies. It wasn’t perfect, nor would any fair-minded person expect it to be.
my goodness u srsly r deluded
Yes, that's correct. It wasn't perfect. But these political hacks skip over all the boring good stuff, they find something that's imperfect, and they say it was bad to the core. The British took control and maintained control with the use of force, but they often transformed the colony to a thriving place based on law and order. Where would for example India have been without the British? It wasn't like the Moghuls where developing anything, they weren't even Indian.
@@eirikbelisarius1100 I suspect that the PC critics have never stopped to think how expensive and unprofitable maintaining control of a resisting population is….. and how much the home-population objected to paying taxes to support needless wars.
@@peterwebb8732 resisting population? hypocrite much?
@@brianjacob8728 If you have a point to make, please try to do so clearly.
Objecting to other people’s arguments without giving a valid argument of your own would make you the “hypocrite”..
As a matter of stern, historical fact, the public and political debate in Britain throughout the 19th and early 20th centuries reveals an enormous amount of contention over both the justification and the causes of foreign wars.
As a matter of equally hard fact, the number of British soldiers in British colonies was generally minute in comparison to the size of the native populations, and the British made a habit of recruiting, training and arming members of those populations… not exactly something you can get away with when the population as a whole is hostile.
"points of order can be made and are allowed".... Listen here, if someone gets a no 9 times... from the same person, then that person is interupting the debate. Should i perhaps raise my arm randomly 10, 20 or 100 times in every subject. After all i am just asking a question. This person had a message that you so liberally tried to make difficult that i had problem swallowing that feeble explanation. Se how his hands are shaking trying to make a point, who do you people think will get sympathy online? The message should be to the crowd "you may ask for points of order, but you may not harass the speaker".
Agree'd
Well said!
Sorry, what is a point of order?
@@lalaholland5929 In general (not sure of Oxford Union's specific rules): Properly, it's a statement about the rules of discussion or debate, and may be raised at any time. A point of order is supposed to be handled immediately by the presiding officer.
In practice it's abused to make a subjective comment the speaker wouldn't be allowed by the rules to make at that time. The point of order is handled by the presiding officer stating that it is not a valid point of order and business continues.
What should be offered is a point of information (a comment or question from the opposing team), which a speaker may or may not accept. Most rules require the PoI to come from an opposing debater, but OU may allow the body to make them as well (again, I don't know their rules).
Agreed
Every nation's history has disgraceful elements. Just check what the Maratha Empire did in Bengal before the Brits came.
death toll during maratha invasion is nowhere matches to bengal famine
and in maratha bengal scenario both are natives who fighting no foreigner
@Rifle Eyez famines are natural and they have occured in other parts of india too but the death toll was never so severe cause people used to store food but britishers forced farmers of bengal and bihar to grow cashcrops like opium and indigo instead of food crop
Also indigo makes soil unsuitable for other crops to grow
The little food that was stored by farmers of other places were supplied to british soldiers who fighting for war in which india had no role
@Rifle Eyez japan did not stop rice emports to india india bought rice but that rice never reached poor people because british administators diverted rice supplies and made rest very expensive
Bengal was not as deficet as yasmeen is claiming bengal famine ended because 1944 had a good rice harvest
@@1Nonlykillian you've researched the wrong benagl famine mate because the one your describing happened long before ww2.
@@pecadodeorgullo5963 i am talking about 40s
Did the empire do bad things? Yes.
Did it also do amazing things we value to this day? Yes
Should both sides b e discussed? Yes.
@STALIN Ever heard of the holocaust? Nazis. Ever heard of the abolition of slavery? The British Empire. Ever heard of the millions of innocents who died in the gulags? Stalin.
@STALIN Have you ever had an original thought?
@@rodthecod I mean the British did kill millions around the plant
No - they didn’t kill millions. The British had wars with many nations and they did some bad things - the Opium Wars in China, for instance, or the concentration camps in the Boer war - but, overall, they were good imperialists compared to the other possible imperialists. The British fought wars to protect themselves or their citizens - or to protect their trade or their own interests. They didn’t invade countries to conquer them nor did they murder millions for ideological reasons. And they often brought good laws and good government to countries so that those countries had a decent start at independence.
Stalin, Hitler and Mao were evil, mass-murdering psychopaths.
@@rodthecod accurate statement
He did well to not give way to the heckling opponent. Thanks Dr. Masani.
Wow.... good for him.... look what happens when knowledge doesn't agree with critical race theory
Facts are true by definition. Critical race theory is a pack of intentionally hate-mongering lies, pretty much by definition too.
🤔...smh🤷♂️🙄😆🤣. Really?🤷♂️#stagingtoensnare
Entitled white leftists shouting him down.
critical race theory is the funniest talking point the right wing has come up with so far
@@Woodchuck799 in fairness the left have had their fair share, like Donald trump is racist or working with the russians or evil or sexist etc. There one thing the left does better then everyone else and that's being stupid, it like a talent.
It always boggles my mind that people blame Churchill for a famine that happened during a world war, where everyone was suffering. He had his hands full with trying to keep Britain and the rest of the empire safe from Nazis who were destroying England. I’m sure that he would have acted quicker if his people weren’t living in subway stations and were living with fears of invasion and death. The sad thing is everyone was malnourished during that time because food was rationed. I remember seeing pictures of British kids during the war and many looked gaunt and small.
and what bout the one's in west bengal?
And the entire theory is based on a warped understanding of a few accusations made in a single book written by a non-historian!
I see you have videos of all 3 speakers form the other side, but only 1 from the opposition. We want the whole thing guys!
That was the entire thing, remain upset with your biases being unfulfilled.
@@Litterbugtaylor 'your biases being unfulfilled'
That's funny coming from the echo chamber.
Remain upset
@@Litterbugtaylor I'm not upset, but you clearly are.
Says the one coming crying and calling it and echo chamber.
Awesome to see some people with common sense! Obnoxious people trying to interrupt my man speaking nothing but facts!
So rude it was his turn
Disgusting trying to tell a Indian, what he should feel and be angry.
Bravo, sir for standing your ground. Shame on the rude, entitled ones who tried to ambush you.
The 'rude' ones know the truth about the Empire.
@@Saarthak12 no they don't. You wouldn't be saying the same thing if masani was arguing how evil the British empire was.
So stfu.
This man is spectacular. An intellectual who is only interested in facts and evidence rather than emotive language based on ignorance and hurt feelings
what facts he spoke, how do you know these are the facts.
@@SaarthakSinha you don't know what you're talking about. The British dragged countries out of the gutter.
@@Claire-tn4xp True. We basically civilized half the world .
@@Brad-Jenson exactly. They hate that we're superior to them.
@@SaarthakSinha 🤡 bollocks
God bless Dr. Zareer Masani for telling the truth, it is sad day when native British need a lesson in how great they were from others. Sad state of the UK
How great they were in stealing others assests, using poor indian's for their wars, atrocious behaviour with indian handloom workers, from chopping their fingers to destroying their mills. By the way INDIA will never forget that britishers still owe india 45 trillion dollars which i think they can't Pay in Centuries.
Amen
Well said
It's unfortunate our students are indoctrinated to hate our own history and scorn our ansestors they're only taught the worst aspects but are never taught of our nations incredible victories or the good this nation did for the world
Well said. Totally agree.
Oh well done and well argued, Dr Masani. I am from Singapore, a former British colony. I can safely say that so much of our modern infrastructure was splendidly constructed on the historical groundwork laid during nearly 150 years of colonial administration. Objectively, our own leaders have acknowledged the British to have been "60% good and 40% bad." Certainly a lot less vicious than the Japanese Occupation of just 3.5 years.
And the British rid the Japanese too, from those countries.
@@drstrangelove4998 Not really.
Agreed
Singapore has done really well.
@@drstrangelove4998Nit Singapore, they got decimated because the french failed to protect Malaysia. Hong Kong was also run on by the Imperial Japanese
He's the biggest man in that room
We need more people like him today!
Good for this man to speak up and be heard!
With white leftists trying to shout him down.
@Rohan Dick Where are you from? What nation are you from?
@@Paul-hl8yg Rohan Dickhead is from Maharashtra, India.
@Rohan Dick Now, as for Churchill, he surely was not a Saint but he already talked about the Bengal famine. It was in the middle of WW2. The rice supplies were being taken for the soldiers in the fronts and there were about two million Indian soldiers who had volunteered to fight for the allies. Holding by Indian merchants and the Japanese occupation of Burma was to be blamed for it since it had cut off the rice supplies. You are so blinded by hatred and brainwashed that you can't even listen to a bit of what he said.
Rubbish
Out of the five videos uploaded on this topic, this is the only one that is actually making a case against the issue.
Well done sir
Thank you so much for defending Great Britain ❤🧡🧡❤
As an Afro- British person. Iam so proud Great Britain. 🧡🧡❤❤❤.
Thank you for the support man.
“British weren’t alone….French….Spanish….German….Japanese….Everyone….Even Indians themselves.”
@Rohan Dick Rohan i appreciate you might be feeling disappointed.
No one is defending colonisation.
I wish to make it very clear. Iam grateful to be an Afro- British person. And really proud of the people of this land. Best country in the world ❤💜💥
That said your comment is lengthy and I wish I had all the time to put down all the Data and facts not merely from wikipedia or hearsay. But authentic sources.
My naive question is when did India gain her independence from Great Britain?
Are people still suffering and starving today without the British involvement?
Who is the biggest donor of grants to india without strings attached? (
British government and British people).
How many Indians have gained there education like Doctors in the NHS through British taxpayers money ie student loans, grants and commonwealth scholarships. In the 20th century and 21st century.
Corruption in India are you still going to blame the British for that.
Arranged marriages and forced marriages in India?
Plus discrimination among the dark toned indians.
Human rights abuse?
Income in inequality?
Please do not blame the British for snippets of what happened years ago and has got rectified even beyond.
I kindly request you join me in being grateful to the one Decent country on planet earth ( Great Britain ) 💥💜💥❤
The Gentleman was telling the truth ❤❤💜❤💜
Oooo i forgot Indians tried forced labour on East Africans. Please let me know how i can email you Data, Graphs, and articles etc.Thanks for your understanding
GOD BLESS OUR QUEEN 🏌️♀️💜💜💜
@@smithswilliams9116 i agree that corruption and poverty today is independent india's fault, but you cannot deny that poverty was brought in india by british and britain is built hugely by looted money from india
@Rohan Dick your surname is apt just follow it with a HEAD and its spot on!
I am an Indian and I completely agree with this man and also respect the British Empire but call it United Kingdom or just Britain. Calling Great Britain is a disrespect to Northern Ireland.
So glad Indians and other former colonies still support Britain
most of us hate british empire, not mordern day britain
@@pramit8903 Yeah its a difficult one when it comes to backing any old empires with peoples views back then
I'm not defending colonialism by any means, but considering colonial empires as a whole, the british empire was less brutal compared to say the dutch or belgian colonial empires.
What???
India wouldn't have existed if they didn't colonise.
Yes that's right But it was not a boon for colonies either
@@jerichoakbar2296 depends on the colonies and to what metrics for instance here in Australia along with canada and new Zealand are functioning democratic nations with high standards of living and large personal freedom's
@@yeetdragon1629 these are are the ex colonies where the colonizers are higher in number than the natives, it will be better if examples of non white colonies.
Hold on lads, this one's got an opinion, someone call security........
Yes cancel culture shouting him down,so lucky they live in the uk to be allowed to say such awful things about our amazing country.
Facts Facts Facts🙏🏼
He spitting facts
Oswald Mosely was based
@@kingbread5808 Your well educated your diction is to be applauded 😂
@@comradeschnitzelstein7177 your diction is outstanding i can tell you had a good education👍
@@Lordveer what?
This is my kind of bloke
Not scared of standing up and telling THE truth
Sashi Tharoor, an Indian politician and historian, has been criticized for his hypocrisy in condemning the Indian soldiers and General Reginald Dyer who were responsible for the Jallianwala Bagh massacre in Amritsar in 1919, where a number of unarmed Indian civilians were killed, while not condemning the Indian rebel soldiers who were responsible for the Satti Chaura Ghat massacre in Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh, in 1857, where Indian civilians and British men, women and children were killed.
The Jallianwala Bagh massacre in Amritsar in 1919 was a tragic event in which Indian soldiers in the British Indian army, under the command of General Reginald Dyer, killed a number of unarmed Indian civilians. The crowd had gathered in violation of martial law and had been involved in rioting and attacking the Indian army soldiers prior to the shooting. The number of deaths and the aftermath of the shooting is a matter of historical debate. Sashi Tharoor, an Indian politician and historian, has been criticized for making false claims about the event.
Another tragic event that occurred during this time was the Satti Chaura Ghat massacre in Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh. This event, which took place in 1857, saw Indian soldiers killing Indian civilians who were seen as loyal to the British, as well as British men, women, and children. The Indian soldiers killed the hostages, including women and children, after the British refused to accept the mutineers' demands. This incident is considered one of the most brutal of the rebellion and had a significant impact on British public opinion at the time.
It is important to note that the rebellion was not a unified movement, and there were instances of Indian soldiers and civilians fighting against the rebellion and supporting the British. The rebellion was ultimately suppressed by the British army, but it had a profound impact on the country, leading to significant changes in British policies and administration in India. However, it is worth noting that Tharoor has been criticized for not condemning the Satti Chaura Ghat massacre despite his condemnation of the Jallianwala Bagh massacre.
@@priteshpjjagani4753 Most informative.Thankyou..Tharoor strikes me as rather in love with himself as well as one eyed in his view of so vast a d complex a subject.
@@juliandenormanville5225 The truth about the British divide and rule policy showing evidence that the British came to India in the early 1600s maybe 1608 but didn't govern all of India until 1818, so the British did not rule India for four centuries.
the truth section about taxes, showing that under the maratha there were special types of taxes 25% and 15% which were significantly higher than the 1% 2% 4% imposed by the British and further explain that 99% of the taxes collected in India remained in India for the benefit of Indians.
The speaker states that caste discrimination is still practiced in India and will never go away because it is thousands of years old.
TRUTH: While caste discrimination has been a long-standing issue in India, it is illegal in India and efforts have been made to reduce discrimination and promote social mobility.
They mention that Sati (a practice of widow immolation) was only followed in Bengal province and was abolished by Raja Ram Mohan Roy through educating people in panchayats (a democratic system established in India in the 4th century).
TRUTH: While Sati was primarily associated with Bengal, it was abolished by the British government in 1829, not by Raja Ram Mohan Roy through panchayats.
They argue that India's civilization stopped for 4 centuries under British rule, and that India needs western education to modernize.
TRUTH: India had a rich history and culture prior to British colonization, and while British rule had negative impacts on India, it also introduced new ideas and technologies. Additionally, India has made significant progress in terms of modernization and development since gaining independence in 1947.
They mention that religious riots were started by the British through their "divide and rule" policy.
TRUTH: While the British did use a divide and rule strategy to maintain control over their colonies, it is not accurate to say that they started religious riots. Tensions between different religious groups existed before British rule and have continued after independence.
They credit 30 million Indian soldiers for helping the British survive the Nazis.
TRUTH: India did contribute a significant number of soldiers to the British army during World War II, however, it is not accurate to say that these soldiers helped the British survive the Nazis. The war was fought on multiple fronts and the outcome was determined by the actions of multiple nations. Additionally, before World War II, the Indian army was 200,000 soldiers but 2 million volunteered to fight in World War II, including 1 million Indian soldiers who fought against the Japanese in Burma and Calcutta to protect India from Japanese invasion.
They argue that British colonialism negatively impacted India's economy, as India's GDP was 23% of the world's GDP in the mid-18th century when the British came, but only 3% when they left.
TRUTH: India's GDP as a proportion of the world's GDP has fluctuated over time and it is not accurate to say that it was 23% in the mid-18th century and only 3% when the British left. Additionally, the impact of British colonialism on India's economy is complex and debated. While it did extract resources and wealth from India, it also created new economic opportunities and markets. The GDP actually grew exponentially under the British but the rest of the world modernized, industrialized, and grew even faster.
They mention the system of zamindary, where Indian farmers had to pay taxes, with 10 parts going to the British and 1 part going to local rulers, as a reason for India's poverty.
TRUTH: The system of zamindari, where landlords were responsible for collecting taxes from tenants, was abolished in India after independence in 1947. The system did contribute to poverty and inequality, however, it is not accurate to say that 10 parts of the taxes went to the British and only 1 part went to local rulers.
They note that the British Empire's economy was heavily dependent on India's rich and fertile land.
TRUTH: India did contribute a significant portion of the British Empire's economy, however, it was not the only colony or source of wealth for the British Empire.
They mention that many Indians who work in the BBC have become "anti-national They mention that many Indians who work in the BBC have become "anti-national" and that the British media does not accurately portray Indian history.
TRUTH: There is no evidence to support the claim that Indians working in the BBC are "anti-national" or that the British media does not accurately portray Indian history.
The speaker concludes by expressing frustration about the "trillions looted," "millions of lives lost," and other negative impacts of British colonialism on India.
TRUTH: The extent of wealth and resources extracted from India by the British during colonization, as well as the number of lives lost as a result of British actions, is a matter of historical debate and interpretation. While it is acknowledged that there were negative consequences for India during British rule, the specific numbers and extent of the impact are not agreed upon by all historians. Regarding the Bengal Famine, it is true that low crop yield from previous years had a domino effect on the famine in 1942, and that the October cyclone and flood destroyed 50-75% of the rice crops. Additionally, most deaths during the famine were caused by disease, such as dysentery, diarrhea, malaria, and cholera, which were spread by the flood and poor sanitation. Many of the deaths were also among refugees who had fled from Burma and encamped in Bengal or Calcutta. However, it is also true that Indian landlords hoarded rice and Indian merchants participated in war profiteering and speculation, inflating prices for rice. It is also true that Gandhi, Patel, Nehru, and Azad did not send any food to aid in the famine, and that it was primarily the British, Australians and Winston Churchill who sent enough food to eradicate the Bengal famine in just one year. Churchill sent a Famine and Relief Committee and the new viceroy at the time was Lord Wavell.
!
@@juliandenormanville5225 I don't know why these Indians are so ignorant about their own Indian history. Believing propaganda doesn't help them they don't learn from their mistakes and Shashi tharoor is worse than Hitler
@@juliandenormanville5225 go to RUclips channel donkey Desi American professor and check out some videos
What a brilliant speech imparting the true situation when India became independent. Well worth the time to listen.
Did they have to be colonized, in the first place?
@Holy Jones like what?... Indian people have always been innovative
@@tsheponcamane2018 cope harder 😂 I go can on and on about the atrocities done by you ppl, but once again we are on rise so yeah
@Holy Jones none, literally none. Indians did all these on their own. If British really did all these, people would have never fought for independence lol.
@Holy Jones That's a wierd flex considering the fact that the sole purpose of education was to put Indians in British administration to further their rule in India. Unfortunately it backfired.
Still wanna thank the West for Industrial Revolution.
"No, I am in a point of Information, you may learn some information"🤣
An intellectiual man with the facts - and children.
I bet the woman in the black dress is a teacher 🙄
She needs to learn patience and manners.
PROUD TO BE BRITISH.
You mean proud to be a baboon 🤣🤣
@@amartyabiswas9871 Rather that than an Indian
@@amartyabiswas9871 their more intelligent
@@englishalan222 come on bro. You’re talking down on Indians while commenting on a video of an Indian man defending the British empire. Smh
@@josa5112 the fact he says “rather that” (talking about ethnicity) would suggest that an Indian was being racist to him and had their comments deleted
Shashi tharoor fanboys crying in the comments section
😭😭🤡🤡🤢🤡🤡🤡
Well done to zareer masani for facts🇬🇧🇬🇧
Ah, now this is a REAL bona fide debater and when not stampeded by cancel cult, it is amazing how interesting the real story is. All credit to the British of the era for stamping out so many evils and spreading so much good across the world. This chap is so much better than the cretin supposedly on the same side. I could hardly believe the duplicity of the intellectual and moral worm who preceded him. At least this is civilized, in good old-fashioned British tradition, unlike debates in US universities.
At least we don't have a monarchy still
Hey just so you know this is still an extremely limited view of the issue. Just because this guy makes good points doesn’t mean this is the “real story” both sides of the debate are the “real story” just different interpretations of the facts and different weight on certain facts. You may choose to focus on the good that imperialism has done but it doesn’t erase the bad it did at the same time. There’s room for both in the narrative, debates like this are not about finding one right answer but the nuance between the issues. We can acknowledge that good things were done at the same time that we acknowledge the suppression, paternalist, racist, and mercantilist attitudes which pervaded these systems and harmed so many.
@@sorencorreia6872 Agreed. As a person from Vietnam, a previously colonized country, I can attest to this. There have been many innovations and infrastructure the French brought to us, however few of them were done with the interest of our people at heart, but to better accomodate the French people there, and to transport more natural resources back to the "motherland". And the stories of abuse, mistreatment (that is putting it lightly) is literally uncountable.
There are 2 sides to the issue of course, but to simply dismiss these crimes as "cancel culture" or "liberal propaganda" is disrespectful.
To provide some context, I'd like to point out the 1857 India rebellion. India rebelled because 1. Brits ruled India with an iron grip (as with any other colony) 2. They forced the Indian to kill their sacred animal to have oil for their guns ( the equivalent of making a Christian piss on the cross, btw).
So please, some good were done, yeah. But to simple dismiss the bad things as the work of a "cancel cult" is insulting.
@@HungTran-gz5em The cancel cult is about preventing any debate at all. It is a very good thing that we discuss the positives and negatives of British rule in India. I could not agree with you more that some terrible things were done by the British to Indians, which is usually the only thing about which comments is allowed. It is much harder to debate the positives, such as rule of law, industry, infrastructure, democracy and the enlightenment, all of which have and will bring phenomenal benefits to billions of Indians. Britain and India are now friends and they should both be able to reflect on the past and the future with passion and respect. This debate was such an occasion.
A very humble, intelligent, well learned man.
Shame to see the Oxford Union stoop so low as to allow a speaker to be heckled and badgered like this.
I am an Indian and I have respect for my Independence but I also have immense respect for the British Empire. It was not really bad thing to happen but really a great thing.
🇮🇳🇮🇳🇮🇳🇮🇳❤️❤️🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧
@STALIN did you even watched the video?
@STALIN don't say before the British Hindus and Muslims coexisted peacefully always. During Aurangzeb's rule, you can see what the religious tension had arised into. He destroyed temples. He imposed religious tax on non muslims. There are more countless examples. You just need to read history. Moreover take a look at the Maratha Empire. It sought to create a Hindu Raj throughout the empire where there would be no place for non Hindus. There were inconsistencies in religious harmony during Pre British era.
@STALIN as you said the decrease in population was due to famines but the Indian Famine Codes created by the British was the first modern response to famines in India which so successful that it was continued unti the country became Independent.
@STALIN en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Famine_Codes#:~:text=The%20Indian%20Famine%20Codes%2C%20developed,scarcity%2C%20scarcity%2C%20and%20famine.
You need to read this.
@STALIN Before the British Hindus and Muslims coexistence peacefully. What planet have you beamed down from? Read some history. They dis not coexist peacefully at all. Indian history before British rule is one of constant warfare between Hindus and Muslims.
Yes, of course it’s not a national disgrace;
If you knew literally anything about the empire you would know it to be our biggest pride, with very good reason
I am an Indian and I respect my Independence but I also admire the Empire. The Empire was really a good thing to happen but I wouldn't disagree that it had a dark side too.
While the British empire may have benitted its colonies, it is important to remember most of these supposed benevolences were only to accommodate and comfort their position in the colony. What's more is, their oppression of native populations cannot be overseen. One prime example is the jallianwhala bagh massacre in 1919 in which a participants of a peaceful protest were captured within closed walls with a guarded exit upon the order of General O'Dwyers simply to instill fear in the population (his words not mine). It is also crucial to understand, land which you do not originate from is not yours to take no matter what you plan to do with it. Imperialism should not be justified in such manner as this oversees the dehumanising acts carried out by the oppressors. And now tell me, how can you ever pride in such an empire?
@@palakpatel3295 Yes, it's true that in this world no country is another's friend. But the greatness of the British Empire is something which no empire in history can ever match. It is because at that time the whole world was colonised by European powers. The oppression of Native populations is equally true as the hatred for the Native population against the Colonial settlers. Now as for Jalianwala Bagh, you need to read the real story rather than what our biased brainwashing history books have taught us. That day the firing which took place at the Bagh is something which would have taken place even if India had been independent. It's because that day was declared as a curfew. The reason for the curfew was very legible. It's basically the same reasons which take place in Jammu and Kashmir. But we need to strongly condemn one man's actions, General Dyer who could have made the firing a little bit less indiscriminate. He could have been more humane, so that the number of loss of lives could have been significantly reduced. The massacre was not something of the Government's plan. When the Government came to know about such an incident, it took the best possible action which needed to be taken against the aggresors. Moreover as for this so called theory of a certain group of people not originating from a certain place, it might interest you to know that the huge Indian population itself is made up of people who came from different places. First, the Dravidians lived here, after that came here the Indo Aryans from Central Asia near the Caspian sea. After that came the Greeks when Alexander Conquered some Indian Kingdoms. A lot of Greeks settled in India at that time. After the Zoroasters(Parsees) came from Iran, although with a significantly lower population. When the Islamic era started, a lot of populations from neighbouring Islamic countries came to settle in India.( Turks, Mughals, Afghans) etc. At the last came the Europeans who settled (British, French, Portuguese, etc). So, this theory of foreigners settling down and exploiting native population is not true.
As for Imperialism, it is not something which is Britain's creation, but is practised since the beginning of human civilization. You need to understand that India as nation didn't existed before Britain came here. It was just a terrestrial unit. In the present day, we are not trying to justify imperialism in a sense as if we are inviting them to come and invade us again. If they invade us, we shall surely resist, but the thing is we are just some seekers of truth who are just speaking up for what we believe in. We believe that we should study history freely and our patriotism should not interfere in any way while learning history, while learning about our past, while seeking the truth.
@@eshaansarkar2017 so what? Every Empire under the sun had a dark side. The Mauryan, Mughal, Mongol, Roman empires etc
@@eshaansarkar2017 what strongest action possible?? What?? Forget hanged till death, they should have sent dyer to rot in andaman Nicolas Islands where they kept freedom fighters fighting for their motherland. And about that Indian issues, yes we have, we even talk about it how rajput kings lavish lives was turning point, we gave sc-st 33% reservation because how upper class treated them. What Indians did wrong is our part to discuss and we do. It can't be use as an equaliser because u want to be proud of that inhuman empire. M neither proud of the Indian kings and obviously not the bits. Be ashamed. Its a human thing. Good luck.
He's right regarding the Bengal Famine. It was created by rapid urbanisation, industrial, the abandonment of farming by large sections of Bengal who were tenant farmers or Muslim and Hindu landowners who grew cash crops and not food.
Also, much high fertility rates toppled the Malthusian equilibrium.
and also the Japanese occupation of Burma.
Farmer were forced to grow cash crops to export them
You know that they were FORCED to grow cash crops due to British policies, right? The British created economic policies which punished farmers who grew food crops and essentially turned the bread basket of India into a money making factory for the British. And not to forget the appropriation of land and farms of thousands of Indian peasants by the British government for their war efforts, which caused inflation to skyrocket and made food extremely expensive for Indians.
But regardless of all that, it still doesn't answer why Churchill categorically denied food to millions of starving brown people that his country tyrannically ruled over, and rather diverted all the food that was left in bengal, as well as the aid sent by Australia and America to North Africa and Greece where British and American Troops were already pretty well stocked.
And They grew cash crops because they were forced by Brits
What a fine and dignified gentleman. The miserable, smug little Oxford students are unworthy of such a speaker. How did they ever helm an empire?
@@lemonblue6282 Lol. Yep that basically sums it.
@@lemonblue6282 empires are nothing to be proud of.
@@lemonblue6282 thats all very well but lets not glorify the british empire. Its strange how many british ppl take pride in the british empire.
Legend, only way to deal with these indoctrinated brats.
Well said, Dr Masani. Those people couldn't handle what they were hearing.
Yaa bcs he’s lied 🤥 nothing not a single true word
@@piyushtrivedi0023 Cope harder
@@piyushtrivedi0023you are manipulated by the media
@@piyushtrivedi0023 well how can it be lies when it’s documented history?
@@piyushtrivedi0023 Cope
Can't understand why I haven't seen this on the BBC
Must have been an oversight
Brilliant. Just Brilliant.
To summarize:
- A growth of 350m in population
- Eradication of famines
- Preservation of culture
- Banning of burning widows
- Allowance of remarriage
- Banning of child marriage
- Introduction of vaccines
- Eradication of disease
- Introduction of antibiotics
- Most industrialization in Asia
- Introduction of the ICS
- Introduction of democracy
- Introduction of liberalism
If they were trying to oppress India… they didn’t do a very good job of it.
No bro, they did a very good job in oppressing. Just try to read about the atrocities, law, insults, rules. There was fuckin salt law... Salt. The country which rules the spice world was fighting for salt. But it's okay if u wanna hear the story from people who oppressed rather than from people who were. N about that othwe things... We would have slowly or gradually learnt that anyway from British. U didn't need to invade us. Ask my grandfather, his friends and try to explain this logic. I don't hate England, i listen to rocki follow Chelsea n i dont know why but i even love the accent but u can't bring this few good things against what people felt and went through. This is really rude and cruel. Good bye.
@@alenp5282 the government elected by us. Salt and fuel is different. Nice try man. But if u had the logic and not ego. U wouldn't have came up with this stupid anology. We Indians have issues too, the caste system is foolish, we created 33% reservation for that. There's still bashing in media about old prejudices etc. Doesn't mean it makes the old Britain right. Anyways, be proud if it makes you feel good. Tc. Slap a guy in Britain 10 times and say hey- atleast be thankful that it made your cheeks stronger.
@@alenp5282 the tax now is spent to develop India, not some other nation.
@@grizzii2149 you don’t seem to understand my comment. I am pointing out that if their motivations were truly how Shashi Tharoor and other Indian nationalists portray, I.E genocidal or brutal, then they did not succeed in achieving those goals, because it was completely balanced out. No one is saying there were zero problems, racism or intolerance. Every country had that whether they were colonized or not, including Great Britain itself. No one is asking India to be grateful. But the insinuation that they are mortal enemies is outrageous and deserves to be called out as jingoism. Why do Indians still quote the false figure of $45 trillion? Or the false claim of 1.8 billion deaths? Both figures were given by the exact same “doctor” and Indian nationalist. No scholar recognizes her claims besides AUTHORS like Shashi Tharoor who makes a living off of sensationalized content, not telling the truth. He’s not a historian.
To finish off my comment, let me point out that England lost so much money to the Vikings prior to unification. If I use the exact same logic as the “economist” and calculate what Norway, Sweden and Denmark owe to England, the number is genuinely too big to type out in this comment, with Britain being owed the same amount of money that the world has ever made. That is so outlandish no one entertains the idea, so why do Indians? Tell me.
God: How self-deluded you want to be?
This Guy: yes.
What a guy ! Facts from an educated Indian. The British on the whole dramatically improved human civilisation, health, education, economies, law, civil society, public works, technology, ending slavery, cast system, democracy..
There is something wrong with people who cannot see the British Empire in the round. They focus upon the lesser negatives. Why? Lack of education, racism, personality disorders, grievance mongers.
As a proud Anglo-Celt/Saxon, I'm embarrassed by my woke white brothers and sisters, they care for others more than their own.
As an Asian I think that you have every right to be proud of your culture and heritage. Ignore the toxic people who are telling you to not be proud. Woke left are the real racists
@@backupaccount8731 ...Well said my friend, the left are the real racists 👍🏻.
Wokes are the worst. Take pride in the great work of your ancestors.
Bravo, my good man. Bravo.
What a wonderful man. Thank you Sir, for sticking up for the British Empire!
He started well and battled on even better. Like a dreadnought plowing through rough seas Given such a short time to give his balancing address, it is disgraceful that some of the students, without the majority showing their displeasure of it, tried to persistently interrupt him. Rather than listen to what he had to say respectively, they are literally trying to stop him talking, but getting to get him to listen to them. The woke/left he spoke of really are the pits. Students these days!
Is it also a typical left behaviour to ignore the fact you can interrupt in between and ask questions, or hypocrisy is exclusive of the right?
This is why I will never go to university
Artists were fascinated in Europe by extra-European art - especially the emergent avant-garde and modernists at the turn of the industrial century. Nations like Britain and France consumed, reinterpreted, and adored the unique visual culture from around the world. It is perhaps the greatest testament to individual liberty and empire. Under no other circumstances would another state readily accept such a large importation of foreign culture. Britain learnt about the world - and the world learnt from Britain some of the most important cultural and societal lessons to date. That is where worldwide democracy, liberty and freedom came from.
And when democracy in places like Iran in the 50s won it was the British who called up the CIA to help bring down the government and ensure the shah would rule as a dictator for the next 20 years leading to the blowback of the 79 revolution
An Indian Freemason. has been paid to say this.
Wow - facts!
cant believe people tried to stop him, hes giving another point of view to an argument, isnt that what a debate is about???
what a legend, RIP. i just found his book on Macaulay which id forgotten i'd bought, now's the time then. I hope i'm half as sharp at that age. these young kids are disgraceful. funny how 5 years of social media somehow gives you the confidence to go up against a veteran historian.
Thank goodness for the truth at last…
One of the bestest speech ever ... it's called sensible counter argument against complete lies. ❤
Your level of intellect is demonstrated by using “bestest” 😂
Unvarnished facts. We British should be very proud of our ancestors achievements. The push back starts here. Those of us with a kernel of knowledge on this subject have been gagged for a very long time.
Please elaborate on how u pride in Britain's imperial history, I'd truly like to know
@STALIN “took Britain to it’s knees”
How?
Britain won WW2. Without Britain, we would’ve lost WW2 undoubtedly.
-an American.
@STALIN yeah they can if they wan't even though they didn't do that they did finnish of the british empire and soviet also it's wwII notWWii
Yes. Here in Texas I teach my students that Britain has overwhelmingly been a force for good in the world. So sad to see its young people be brainwashed.
An excellent summary of the benefits of the British in India in just 11 minutes.
The good Dr. is awesome as always! Tharoor should really take notes on him for history.
Agree
He has discussed with him. Look it up.
It appears that Oxford isn't the place to go for a top class education anymore
No it isn't. Right now, the are flying the LGBT flag from *every* college flagpole (I'm not joking).
Masani is a Zoroastrian, an immigrant from Persia; they because of their colour got the preferential treatment from the British. He is giving that back to the British with a false history.
Just because it goes against your ideology doesn't mean it's fake news
Britannia rule the waves
This moderator is an absolute disgrace. “You are allowed to ask questions, so keep asking them”!! Imagine if that’s how they behaved in Parliament! You can request permission to ask a question, and if that is declined, that’s it. You are not allowed to constantly interrupt someone so that he runs out of time before being able to say what he has planned to say. That, incidentally, shows how much the wokists fear rational opposition.
Oh, the irony here😂. Turning down questions and anyone questioning it is "fearing rational opposition"..
@@animo5445 The questions can come once he has finished what he has to say. Constant interruptions are just attempts to sabotage his speech.
@@paololuckyluke2854 - Correct. It is part of proper decorum to not interrupt people when they are speaking, and wait your turn to ask questions either at the end of the conversation, or at an appropriate break in the conversation.
@@paololuckyluke2854 that's not how it works, watch other oxford union speeches also other people have right criticism. Anyway, I'm with Dr zareer masani.
The irony of a bunch of privileged white kids objecting to how an Indian scholar feels about his own history. And growing more offended that he isn't interested in having them correct him.
2 of the proposition were women of colour from previously colonised countries but okay
@@profelderflower I didn't see either of them interrupting.
@@ericfeldkamp3788 You didn't see everyone interrupting either. What makes you think the audience were all privileged white kids?
@@profelderflower all the visible hands were similarly hued. And sure, there may have been others interrupting, but it's "whitesplaining" that the left has a fixation on right now.
But only when someone other than them is doing it.
@@ericfeldkamp3788 Well maybe if he had taken a point he could have dazzled them with his incredible arguments...
Absolutely inspiring debate with straight unbiased facts which are ignored innumerable times in so called speeches and debates on the matter ,really sad to see how they treated Dr Masani .
i don’t agree with him but i sympathise with him for the fact that all those pricks kept interrupting the poor guy
White leftists
@@pneron2032 i’m a leftist but doesn’t mean i don’t think people should be courteous
Whilst you can disagree. In my opinion he’s stating documented unarguable facts 🤷🏼♂️
@@67frankay this is true, however just stating facts is only half of the trip. he says about how people’s’ livelihoods improved, but he fails to tell us how they there were still horrendous things that happened under the empire
@@theoli8407 I take your point. All aspect of a topic must be understood. This is a debate however and he’s arguing one side of the argument. The matter itself probably falls in the middle somewhere and in my opinion slightly leans towards the empire being beneficial. Pax Brittanica was amazing if you think about how dangerous and unstable the world was before it.
The people clapping after the exchange at 5:53 are vicious. They are applauding the leader's approval and encouragement of their constant interruptions. These "academics" know there is an appropriate and formal time for questions and debate, they simply wish to silence his work. Their behavior is immature, at best, considering the setting. Allowing historical analysis and interpretation to be created with/by such strong emotions is dangerous to academic work. Regardless of a which side is "wrong" or "right," these people need to understand that historical debates will continue until the end of time. There's no reason to turn your historical argument into your religion. That is, unless you have a ulterior motive.
In every debate you are supposed to ask questions. Time is included for the audience questions. If you don't know about how Oxford debate works, read the rule book.
@@animo5445 thank you, big difference in constant interruption and asking questions. Dr. Zareer Masani had the floor and declined to answer - also in the rules.
India supreme court orders India government to save Taj mahal, 70,000 visitors per day 2 million tourists a year
Only the British saved the Taj mahal after 350 years but Indians let it go to ruin
Lord Curzon, who did more than any Englishman to preserve the Taj and other monuments, noted that picnickers often came armed with hammer and chisel, the better to extract fragments of agate and carnelian from the flowers. He repaired the buildings, restored the gardens, although with a British touch, and got the canals working again.
It is easy to revile the British treatment of the Taj, but the Indians haven't always done much better. As Agra grew, little effort was made to spare the Taj the ravages of pollution, which began to discolor the white marble.
I would not blame Indian merchants for the Bengal Famine of 1943 - or Churchill either. When the crops failed in Bengal (which they did from time to time) the normal response was to import food from Burma - but the IMPERIAL JAPANESE ARMY was in Burma, and the Imperial Japanese Navy was in the seas - there was even an attack on Ceylon.
And the population of Bengal grew by 43% in space of 42 years (1901 - 1943), which for a region that periodically suffered from crop failure would have made the problem far worse.
@@aalan4296 Correct. It did.
Why not take grains from neighbouring provinces instead of taking it from Burma? Why is it that they have to rely solely on Burmese crops during famine?They should have taken it from the provinces which were not stuck by famine instead of depending on one or two outersource of crops
@@78adarshyadav39 Because elsewhere was also short of food - by the way, local administration (in Bengal and other provinces) had been handed over to Indian officials for years at this point.
@@paulvmarks but there was famine only in Bengal province , right? Was the whole subcontinent suffering from famines?
What was the reason for shortage of food in other parts of India?
How much power was granted to Bengal government? On which areas of administration did they have control on? And what powers did Britishers retain after handing over the administration job to natives?
The British were FAR better than what most Indians have been primed to think by patriotic propaganda movies.
This is coming from an Indian who cares to study history, and does not believe anti white propaganda.
Why this Video has very very less views when compared to that the one in Dr Shashi Tharoor MP? Dr Zareer Masani's Debate and View here is certainly is Interesting.
Majority of masses don't like truth.
Well said Dr Masani. The truth in its full context is hard for some people to hear.
Because he is lying
@@dumdumdumdum8804unlikely
Great points by Dr. Zareer Masani, Shashi Tharoor is charismatic but he is selective in what history he tells us and the stats Shashi provides is often suspect.
*suspected.
@@anjummuneer5081 suspect*
May The Empire Rise From The Ashes of The New World!
God Save the Queen!
Nah not than shitty empire again from that island
Would you see the history of the brutal maratha empire being debated in India ?
Or the Arab slave trade debated in Iran or Saudi Arabia ?
Or Russian world war crimes debated in Russia ?
The truth is no where in the world colonisation was meant for the welfare of the natives!!
The fact that you were a coloniser once itself proves that your prime motive was exploitation!!
The good and bad whatever they were able to bring about in India was a result of their own vested interests
They did banned sati and other social injustices only cuz they thought of us as uncivilized and it's difficult to control an uncivilized society
Likewise, The ICS and other bureaucracies was a means of better control and British Raj not for our growth and development!!
"Drain of wealth" is an obvious and established truth !!
I do give them credit for the archaeological discoveries but that's not something they did for our culture or heritage they did it out of their own curiosity and technical expertise
So what if they built railways and industries it was built out of our money, our taxes, our labour that the poor peasants paid for even with their lives!!
I would have given them the credit if they built it with the gold and silver of their country, their timber (and not the ones they uprooted from the homes of our tribal society) or the hard labour of the "Whites". Do agree that the rich indian classes did serve as puppets of the British in oppressing their own countrymen but I don't agree that British ever did anything with pure intentions or cared about our welfare or upliftment!!
Still, I thank them for the unintentional good and the emergence of the idea of nationalism in our country
But I also expect them to acknowledge the fact that if India is still not able to recover out of the poverty, malnourishment and unemployment atleast one of the credits goes to the British Raj!!
Yawn, tiresome Marxist rhetoric. Civilization is more than greed and power.
I agree britian is and will be the greatest empire ever
Yes. Take pride in that. Don't let leftist bastards feed you lies. Sure bad things happened, but the good must not and cannot be overlooked.
I thought Americans were stupid...
Was
This man Is A Legend
The very fact that someone came up with the idea of organising a debate on this topic confirms in a way that the British Empire and its imperialism is indeed a national disgrace for the British. What moral right did the colonial British have to subjugate people in far away lands who posed absolutely no threat to their security and never challenged their freedom?
It was only their disgusting and naked greed and lust for material wealth that fueled such an expansionist British policy. Even though I am a second generation Indian of the post independent India, the wounds from the unpardonable crimes the Empire committed in British India still bring tears to my eyes. I find it hard to forgive them for their crimes. It is very painful for me to see a scholar like Mr. Masani shamelessly trying to defend the undefendable. I cannot give him the benefit of the doubt on this as I have listened to his BBC Radio 4 documentary on the Jallianwala Bagh massacre in which this man insidiously tried to provide justifications for the massacre. I couldn't believe my ears when I heard him saying all those hurtful things. Shame on him as well.
I would be super embarrassed to be that person interrupting a presenter in an educational setting.
I agree with him, RULE BRITANNIA
@Rohan Dick u could have just said u didn’t agree mate
"it is possible to make natives of this country thoroughly good english scholars and that to this end our efforts should be directed macaulay also articulated the classic reason for teaching english we must do our best to form a class who may be interpreters between us and the millions whom we govern a class of persons indian in blood and color but english and taste in opinions in morals and in intellect who would then go on to educate the rest of india in the western british"-thomas maccaulay finally i can say after watching this video british succeed
Brilliant speech - this should be shown in schools.
Its funny how they shut up when they are told that they are allowed to ask questions.
His delivery was timed. The chair should have asked for the audience to ask any questions after he has made his presentation. I do agree with him on the role of African chiefs, and the lack of progress on democracy in former French, Spanish and Portuguese colonies in Africa.
Just admit we're the best of a bad bunch and that includes everyone in the world the most tolerant people in the world the British empire is the most successful empire for a reason
What an excellent fellow. Don’t facts hurt, the Empire was, in most ways, wonderful and we must keep defending it.