Essay On Partition Of India

1~ Even if the indias change in looks, in the hearts they are still savages

Britain had a desire to have a more economic, political, and social influence over India. Even though the British never preserved a notable military existence in India, they were able to maintain political control. Many changes were made, which benefitted India, but there were also some changes, which contributed to its deterioration. Despite the negative impacts Britain left on India, imperialism is best understood as a strong country extending its authority, in order to increase its wealth, by bringing more of the world under its control, because Britain helped in the development of India from a nation-state, to a unified country, which is modernly the world’s largest democracy.

Imperialism is the domination of one country of the political, economic, or cultural life of another country. Imperialism is more often than not fueled by two major schools of thought known as nationalism and Social Darwinism. Nationalism is a feeling of pride and devotion to one’s country. This can drive a person to think that their country is the most powerful, and in essence drives that person mad with power and a hunger to conquer, which not ironically is exactly what many countries did. Social Darwinism is the very idea that a more powerful country conquer the smaller countries. “Survival of the fittest,” as the well renowned Charles Darwin used to say. Imperialism is also sometimes sparked by military motives, such as when USA set up

The British’s goal to separate the Muslims, Hindus and Sikhs was a total disaster. “The trouble was that Muslims, Hindus, and Sikhs were an integrated population so that it was impossible to make a border without widespread dislocation.” This quote states that making a border was impossible because the groups aren’t meant to be spread apart. “By the end of 1947 there were virtually no Hindus or Sikhs living in west India - now part of Pakistan - and no Muslims in the Indian east.” This explains how the British made Pakistan because of the partition. “The British government and Mountbatten must bear a large part of the blame for this tragedy." Therefore, the British caused religious violence and disagreement against each

When Nawab Bahadur Yar Jung tried to force him to commit to an Islamic state in 1943, he resisted and said the Constitution of Pakistan would be what the representatives of the people wanted, what the people of Pakistan wanted. One of the great fallacies of those wedded to seeing history purely through the 'great men in history' argument is that they don't see the context (Qasmi).” What she has said many times is that there is too much made of the history Jinnah made and too little of the context that made Jinnah. He operated within the context of Muslims in India being a [religious] category, even though they were not united or organised. Jinnah was from a province where Muslims were in a minority.

This period was one of major change in Indian life and culture. While the East

“Englishmen.. have given the people of India the greatest human blessing - peace.” (Dutt). Merely coming to India in the 1600s to trade, the British East India Company established trading outposts. After ridding of French influence in India during the Seven Years’ War and having Indians mutiny against British rule, Britain gained full control of India. India has been under the imperialist control of the British until their independence in 1947. British imperialism caused some negative effects on India through poverty and persecution, but retained more of a positive impact due to its massive improvements in the modernization of India and the overall improvement of Indian civilization.

About 66% of India's populace were Hindus and the Muslims expected that in a free and popularity based India they would be dealt with unreasonably. In the 1937 commonplace races, the Hindus, who overwhelmed the Congress Party under Nehru, won eight out of the eleven regions. The Muslim League under Jinnah requested a different condition they could call their own to be called Pakistan. Both Gandhi and the Congress Party were resolved to protect Indian solidarity. Such a contention between the Hindus and Muslims could just bode sick for the fate of India.

In Bride Kidnapping in Kyrgyzstan by Franco Galdini, he reveals that, “11,800 girls kidnapped each year, 2,000 raped.” This shows the devastating number of women that go through this each year. It also bring forth the fact that numerous women face brutal consequences because of this including rape. Franco Galdini also reveals the fact that, “92 percent of all kidnapped women end up marrying their abductor, 60 percent of those marriages will eventually lead to divorce.” This implies how more than half of the women kidnapped are unhappy in their marriage. It also implies that most women that are kidnapped do not want to marry their abductor and or are not in love with them because if they were their marriage would be forever. In Bride Kidnapping:A Tradition or a Crime? by Farangis Nahibullas she tells us that, “Between 68 and 75 percent of marriages in Kyrgyzstan take place with bride kidnapping.” This indicates the drastic number of marriages as a result of bride kidnappings. This evidence does not lie unfortunately, and the facts of these kidnappings make it even more real. Studying these kidnappings into even more depth leads us into even more harsh

British East India Company played a significant yet strange part in the Indian. It was, at its inception, a commercial venture in the history of The British Empire, which was established in the year 1600 in the subcontinent. The main reason for entering the subcontinent was trade, making money and importing spices from South Asia. It was the Portuguese who used all their skills and their navigational technology to enter this great area first, and start trade in the most profitable manner they could. East India Company entered as an early and old-fashioned venture, and conducted a separate business with their private stockholders. Their approach and their trade lasted for many years until year 1657 (Farrington 5), when they made their base

Indeed, the Partition of India and Pakistan, a decision made by lawmakers far from the front-lines, unleashed an episode of brutal depravity that might be unmatched in recent history. Growing tensions between Hindus and Muslims throughout the 1940s gave a ride for the desire for a Muslim state. Muhammad Ali Jinnah, who is regarded as the father of Pakistan, believed that a unified nation would only lead to marginalization of Muslims and, eventually, violence and civil war. An independent state seemed a solution to this danger. However looking at the grave situation of Pakistan today, was this a good decision or not is a highly debatable point of discussion running past the minds of

There are people bustling, merchants selling, Anglo-Indians watching, and birds flying overhead. How many perspectives are there in this one snippet of life? They are uncountable, and that is the reality. Modernist writers strive to emulate this type of reality into their own work as well. In such novels, there is a tendency to lack a chronological or even logical narrative and there are also frequent breaks in narratives where the perspectives jump from one to another without warning. Because there are many points of view and not all of them are explained, therefore, modernist novels often tend to have narrative perspectives that suddenly shift or cause confusion. This is because modernism has always been an experimental form of

Before the Partition of India, in 1947, India was considered a country with a reasonably peaceful history. However, during and after the Partition, sexual violence, both towards men and women, escalated, resulting in the rape and abduction of over 80,000 women. Cracking India, by Bapsi Sidhwa, tells a story that highlights these violent acts by both Muslims and Hindus, through the eyes of a disabled young Parsi girl named Lenny, who witnesses first hand the violence of Partition when she mistakenly participates in the abduction of her ayah, Shanta. Throughout Cracking India, Lenny observes as the religions involved in Partition become increasingly violent towards both men and women, within their own religions and against others.

On October 16, 1905, Lord Curzon partitioned Bengal on the pretext of it being too big to administer. Instead of dividing it based on areas not considered part of Bengal, they based the division on Hindus and Muslims. The British thought that through the partition, they would succeed in dividing Hindu politicians of western and eastern Bengal and increase Hindu- Muslim tensions. The tremor of partition was felt throughout India and many regarded it as an insult and challenge to Indian Nationalism. Consequently, the moderates of the Congress launched movements and the protests, Swadeshi and Swaraj, became the slogan of the common man and the whole of India was drawn into the Nationalist movement in one way or another.

There are many different reasons why the partition of India occurred. When Britain oppressed India, they had a divide-and-conquer policy that exacerbated the religious and cultural rifts that already existed in the society. The Muslim League, which believed in the ideology of “Pakistan”, actively campaigned to gain more support for the Muslims in India, especially under the guidance of dynamic leaders like Jinnah. Pakistani leader and founder Muhammad Ali Jinnah believed that this partition was inevitable since “‘[a] united India would never have worked’” (Komireddi 2009). He and others thought that a unified state would only lead to the relegation of Muslims to the fringe of society and, ultimately, to violence and civil war. The Indian