The British did not leave due to the non violent movement. In fact they were quite comfortable with Gandhi's non violent movement. In fact The British actively promoted Gandhi while killing other violent rebels such as Bhagat singh, chandrashekhar azad etc. They were afraid of violent mutiny
The british left because they were afraid of another Mutiny. The main trigger for their exit was the 1946 Naval Mutiny at Bombay. The British were afraid of another mutiny by the then battle hardened Indian army
When the British came, Marathas had already conquered delhi right up till Peshawar. The Mughal Ruler was paying tribute the Marathas. The British were welcomed as liberators from the Maratha oppression by the Muslims
after Prudhivi raj rulling capture by Shabuddin Goris to 1947 crushed our indians brutally. after Indepence abour 25 years patrioitism was there in hearts of indians,afterwords looted again by Indian policticians/Govt employees/upper caste people with rulers and Govt officers support!!!
There is a English adage which says 'Where there are fools (to believe), there are scoundrels (to fool them more).’ A scoundrel said India's GDP was 25% of world's in 1700 and fools believe it. Unfortunately even our former PM Mr Man Mohan Singh uttered this statement once, which shows the extent this false belief has gained currency in the Indian minds and got standardized the Indians idiotic minds. Also these iidiots believe that Mughals (who ruled from 1550 to 1707, the year Aurangzeb died) created this economy.
To put things into perspective, a primitive economy's size in based on population, not on anythings else. If there are 1000 people in a Country A (say India), then there will be 1000 thatched houses, 1000 begging bowls, 1000 spears, 1000 cheddis, etc. Similarly, if there are only 100 people in another Country B, then everying things will be 10 times less. But if you look carefully, the per capita income is more or less same in Country A and Country B. That does not mean that Country A is richer than Country B. To make it further clear, assuming that the primitive Indian economy was 25% of the world’s primitive economy (100%), the Indian economy did not shrink by 2000, but other economies expanded by 400 times using the Industrialization and modern techniques, whereas Indian economy too increased by 4 times. But, since other economies expanded by 100 faster than Indian economy, proportionately Indian economy became 2.5% although it increased by 4 times
Re: The myth that Indian economy was 25% of the world economy !
by S M on Oct 23, 2017 03:12 PM
Yes you are more learned about economics than Dr Manmohan Singh
There is a English adage which says 'Where there are fools (to believe), there are scoundrels (to fool them more).’ A scoundrel said India's GDP was 25% of world's in 1700 and fools believe it. Unfortunately even our former PM Mr Man Mohan Singh uttered this statement once, which shows the extent this false belief has gained currency in the Indian minds and got standardized the Indians idiotic minds. Also these iidiots believe that Mughals (who ruled from 1550 to 1707, the year Aurangzeb died) created this economy.
To put things into perspective, a primitive economy's size in based on population, not on anythings else. If there are 1000 people in a Country A (say India), then there will be 1000 thatched houses, 1000 begging bowls, 1000 spears, 1000 cheddis, etc. Similarly, if there are only 100 people in another Country B, then everying things will be 10 times less. But if you look carefully, the per capita income is more or less same in Country A and Country B. That does not mean that Country A is richer than Country B. To make it further clear, assuming that the primitive Indian economy was 25% of the world’s primitive economy (100%), the Indian economy did not shrink by 2000, but other economies expanded by 400 times using the Industrialization and modern techniques, whereas Indian economy too increased by 4 times. But, since other economies expanded by 100 faster than Indian economy, proportionately Indian economy became 2.5% although it increased by 4 times
Re: The myth that Indian economy was 25% of the world economy !
by on Oct 23, 2017 03:07 PM
The proof of British being scoundrels is found by the simple fact that they encouraged industrialization and education in their white colonies like US, Australia and Canada and did not do so in India. They further colluded with zamindars and nawabs and rajas to keep people backward. That is why our literacy rate was around 11% when the left us and we had no heavy industries. They were wile racists who had no issues in keeping millions in most wretched conditions. So yes Indian economy did not shrink, it was kept stunted because some wanted to feel superior and the only way they could do so was by denying opportunities to others.
During Mughals period we were 100% disturbed by their brutal acts without doing any wrong to them. During British particulars peoples were disturbed due to agitation but very little. However we go much much development during their periods. it's true fact and you need to know it.
