Sign In | Create Account

 
|| आ नो भद्राः क्रतवो यन्तु विश्वतः || Let nobel thoughts come to us from everywhere, from all the world || 1.89.1 Rigveda ||
Section : Politics
Latest: 

Which countries have the most brutal and horrific history?
 
It took Adolf Hitler 12years to murder 6 million Jews, but Churchill murdered 4 million Indians in just over a year.

By Arun Haridas, An Indian




The Bengal famine - The India's forgotten holocaust 

The Bengal Famine of 1943-44 must rank as the greatest disaster in  the subcontinent in the 20th century. Nearly 4 million Indians died  because of an artificial famine created by the British government, and  yet it gets little more than a passing mention in Indian history books.

It took Adolf Hitler 12years to murder 6 million Jews, but Churchill murdered 4 million in just over a year.

Which roughly means 10,000 people dying every  single day by starvation. 

Bengal had a bountiful harvest in 1942,  but the British started diverting vast quantities of food grain from  India to Britain, contributing to a massive food shortage in the areas  comprising present-day West Bengal, Odisha, Bihar and Bangladesh.

“Parents dumped their starving  children into rivers and wells. Many took their lives by throwing  themselves in front of trains. Starving people begged for the starchy  water in which rice had been boiled. Children ate leaves and vines, yam  stems and grass. People were too weak even to cremate their loved ones.”

By 1943 hordes of starving people were flooding into Calcutta, most  dying on the streets.

Subhas Chandra Bose, who was then fighting on the side of the Axis  forces, offered to send rice from Myanmar, but the British censors did  not even allow his offer to be reported.

Churchill was totally remorseless in diverting food to the British  troops and Greek civilians. To him, “the starvation of anyhow underfed  Bengalis (was) less serious than sturdy Greeks”

When asked  to release food stocks for India, Churchill responded  with a telegram asking why Gandhi hadn’t died yet.

Churchill’s hostility toward Indians has long been documented. At a  War Cabinet meeting, he blamed the Indians themselves for the famine,  saying they “breed like rabbits”. His attitude toward Indians may be  summed up in his words : “I hate Indians. They are a beastly  people with a beastly religion.” On another occasion, he insisted they  were “the beastliest people in the world next to the Germans”.

 “Churchill’s attitude toward India was quite  extreme, and he hated Indians, mainly because he knew India couldn’t be  held for very long.” 

 “Churchill regarded wheat as too precious a food to expend on  non-whites, let alone on recalcitrant subjects who were demanding  independence from the British Empire. He preferred to stockpile the  grain to feed Europeans after the war was over.”

Churchill was not only a racist but also a liar.



A history of holocausts

There were 31 serious  famines in 120 years of British rule compared with 17 in the 2,000 years  before British rule.

The famines that killed up to  29 million Indians. These people were murdered by British  State policy. In 1876, when drought destituted the farmers of the Deccan  plateau, there was a net surplus of rice and wheat in India. But the  Viceroy, Robert Bulwer-Lytton, insisted that nothing should prevent  their export to England.

In 1877 and 1878, there were labour camps set up by the British. Within these labour camps, the workers were given less food than  the Jewish inmates the Nazi concentration camp.

In 1901,it is estimated that at least 19 million  Indians had died in western India during the famine of the 1890s. The  death toll was so high because the British refused to implement famine  relief. 

Israel, for instance, cannot forget the Holocaust; neither will it  let others. Armenia cannot forget the Great Crime — the systematic massacre of  1.8 million Armenians by the Turks during World War I. 
The Poles cannot  forget Joseph Stalin’s Katyn massacre.
The Chinese want a clear apology and reparations from the Japanese  for at least 40,000 killed and raped in Nanking during World War II.

And yet India alone refuses to ask for reparations, let alone an  apology. Could it be because the British were the last in a long list of  invaders, so why bother with an England suffering from post-imperial  depression? Or is it because India’s English-speaking elites feel  beholden to the British? Or are we simply a nation condemned to  repeating our historical mistakes? Perhaps we forgive too easily.
But forgiveness is different from forgetting, which is what Indians  are guilty of. It is an insult to the memory of millions of Indians  whose lives were snuffed out in artificial famines.
British attitudes towards Indians have to seen in the backdrop of  India’s contribution to the Allied war campaign. By 1943, more than 2.5  million Indian soldiers were fighting alongside the Allies in Europe,  Africa and Southeast Asia. Vast quantities of arms, ammunition and raw  materials sourced from across the country were shipped to Europe at no  cost to Britain.

Britain’s debt to India is too great to be ignored by either nation.  According to Cambridge University historians Tim Harper and Christopher  Bayly, “It was Indian soldiers, civilian labourers and businessmen who  made possible the victory of 1945. ”

http://www.tehelka.com/rememberi...


Jallianwala Bagh massacre

On April 13, 1919, thousands of peaceful protesters defied a  government order and demonstrated against British rule in Amritsar,  India. Men, women, and children all gathered on the walled Jallianwala  Gardens, hoping to make their voices heard. What happened next was one  of the lowest points in British history.
At 4.30pm, troops blocked the exits to the Garden and opened fire on  the crowd. They kept firing until they ran out of ammunition. In the  space of ten minutes, they killed between 379 and 1,000 protesters and injured another 1,100. A stampede caused a lethal crush by the  blocked exits. Over 100 women and children who looked for safety in a  well drowned. Rifle fire tore the rest to shreds. 
When the news reached London, Parliament was so shocked it recalled  the man who ordered the massacre, Brigadier Reginald Dyer. In a  depressing twist of fate, the British public labeled him a hero and  raised £26,000 (around $900,000 in today’s money) for “the man who saved India.” He died peacefully, convinced right to the end that his mindless slaughter had been morally justifiable.

http://listverse.com/2014/02/04/...


Partition of India

As a servant of the British Empire in 1947, Cyril Radcliffe has the  distinction of killing more people with the stroke of a pen than anyone  else in history. With almost zero time to prepare himself, Radcliffe was  tasked with drawing the border between India and newly-created Pakistan  that would split the subcontinent forever along religious lines. It was  a tricky task, one that had the potential to cause massive displacement  and ethnic violence even if handled carefully. Radcliffe, on the other  hand, was asked to make some of the most-important decisions during the  course of a single lunch.
The result was a border that made no ethnic or geographical sense.  Terrified of being caught on the wrong side, Hindus in modern Pakistan  and Muslims in modern India upped sticks and ran. The result was 30 million people trying desperately to escape one country or the other, a situation that quickly spiraled into mind-numbing violence. 
Gangs of armed Muslims held up border trains and slaughtered any  non-Muslims onboard. Hindu mobs chased and battered Muslim children to  death in broad daylight. Houses were ransacked, villages burnt, and half  a million people killed. It was a ridiculous waste of life, one that  could have been largely avoided simply by giving the unfortunate Cyril  Radcliffe enough time to do his job properly.

http://listverse.com/2014/02/04/...



There is not enough wealth in all of Europe to compensate India for  250 years of colonial loot. Forget the money, do the British at least  have the grace to offer an apology? Or will they, like Churchill,  continue to delude themselves that English rule was India’s “Golden  Age”?

(Courtesy: Quora)

Comment Form

  Name

 Email Address

 Website

 Write Your Comment Here

 


0 Comment


Suggested articles...

Did Gandhi`S Ahimsa Get India Freedom
By Sanjeev Nayyar

Read More
Heartbreaking last message of hanged Iranian woman Reyhaneh Jabbari to her mother
By TNN

Read More
Fareed Zakaria: Blasphemy and the law of fanatics
By Fareed Zakaria

Read More
Iran versus the Islamic State
By By Brian M Downing

Read More
Libya spirals downward as the West looks the other way
By Editorial Board,The Washington Post

Read More
Despite billions in aid, U.S. unable to get Pakistan to confront militants
By David Rohde,Reuters

Read More
Trolls on the Left, trolls on the Right
By Kushan Mitra

Read More
TRUTH AND POLITICAL CORRECTNESS
By MARIA WIRTH

Read More
9 Top Targets ISIS Could Strike Next
By Nick Sanchez, Newsmax

Read More
Islamic State Claims It Has Beheaded American Hostage Peter Kassig
By The Huffington Post | By Eline Gordts

Read More