https://www.facebook.com/vallury.sarma/posts/568867999817284
Pakistani muslims aren't Arabs or turks .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLaajSOzpS0
Hasan Nisar on Muslim History and the reason of today's failure
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIfH37j_ZTY
If Muslims Were Ruled India For 1000 Years Then Why They Made Pakistan - Hamid Bashani
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zlo8JXmQRJs
Venkateswara Rao Buddhavarapu
Of late I have been reading some posts very convincingly quoting some old newspaper clippings and some words said to have been 'said' by prominent people to support their argument that British in India destroyed
our cultural, educational moral values !!!!!
VVS
It is difficult to expect well-argued statements in FB. It is true that the British rule for two hundred years had, in fact, helped India in some ways, and damaged it in several other ways.
Positive points
• British rule ended the Muslim rule of India which lasted for thousand years preceding it, which was worse in all respects and was a period of total darkness in Indian History, except for few of the rulers.
• The Portuguese and the French were generally as bad as the Mohammedans in their rule. The British East India Company was marginally better which was replaced by the crown rule in 1857.
• The crown rule was generally good. It established administration systems, transport and communication systems, university and schooling system, police and judicial systems and that way it was instrumental in bringing India to the modern age undoubtedly.
• Some of the British intellectuals were genuinely interested in Indian culture and they had, in fact, helped to preserve and translate the Vedic literature into English. Today you can know more about Sanskrit literature from European sources rather than from Indian sources.
• English language had certainly helped India to participate in the world as an important member in the assembly of nations.
• It can even be safely said that their rule was far better than our own rule post 1947 – till now. It is in this period that the moral, cultural, civilizational and dharmic values had been completely destroyed.
Negative Points
• The Christian Westerners and the Mohammedan rulers had one thing in common; both could never appreciate our Hindu religion. While the Muslim rulers were iconoclasts, the British had a different approach in promoting missionary activities.
• The English education, in general, altered our view point into a different mould, and we started looking at things-Indian from an alien point of view
• The Westerners always ascribed the bad social practices and superstitions in the Indian society to Hindu religion. They always favoured the Muslims and were also instrumental in alienating the Buddhist, Jain and Sikh religions by encouraging that they are following distinctly different religions by depicting them as prophet-oriented religions from the polytheistic paganism that was Hinduism in their view. The gurus of Indic religions are different from the prophets of Abrahamic religions. The concept of religion did not exist in India
• The British provided tacit support to partition and fault equally lied with Hindu leaders. While Nehru and Gandhi considered themselves Indian leaders, they were only Hindu leaders in the eyes of Muslims and the British. Their demand for independence was very premature.
• The “Divide and Conquer” policy the British adopted to get India was so powerful that the government of India converted it into the “Divide and Rule” and used it as the unstated state policy in independent India.
VVS
It is difficult to expect well-argued statements in FB. It is true that the British rule for two hundred years had, in fact, helped India in some ways, and damaged it in several other ways.
Positive points
• British rule ended the Muslim rule of India which lasted for thousand years preceding it, which was worse in all respects and was a period of total darkness in Indian History, except for few of the rulers.
• The Portuguese and the French were generally as bad as the Mohammedans in their rule. The British East India Company was marginally better which was replaced by the crown rule in 1857.
• The crown rule was generally good. It established administration systems, transport and communication systems, university and schooling system, police and judicial systems and that way it was instrumental in bringing India to the modern age undoubtedly.
• Some of the British intellectuals were genuinely interested in Indian culture and they had, in fact, helped to preserve and translate the Vedic literature into English. Today you can know more about Sanskrit literature from European sources rather than from Indian sources.
• English language had certainly helped India to participate in the world as an important member in the assembly of nations.
• It can even be safely said that their rule was far better than our own rule post 1947 – till now. It is in this period that the moral, cultural, civilizational and dharmic values had been completely destroyed.
Negative Points
• The Christian Westerners and the Mohammedan rulers had one thing in common; both could never appreciate our Hindu religion. While the Muslim rulers were iconoclasts, the British had a different approach in promoting missionary activities.
• The English education, in general, altered our view point into a different mould, and we started looking at things-Indian from an alien point of view
• The Westerners always ascribed the bad social practices and superstitions in the Indian society to Hindu religion. They always favoured the Muslims and were also instrumental in alienating the Buddhist, Jain and Sikh religions by encouraging that they are following distinctly different religions by depicting them as prophet-oriented religions from the polytheistic paganism that was Hinduism in their view. The gurus of Indic religions are different from the prophets of Abrahamic religions. The concept of religion did not exist in India
• The British provided tacit support to partition and fault equally lied with Hindu leaders. While Nehru and Gandhi considered themselves Indian leaders, they were only Hindu leaders in the eyes of Muslims and the British. Their demand for independence was very premature.
• The “Divide and Conquer” policy the British adopted to get India was so powerful that the government of India converted it into the “Divide and Rule” and used it as the unstated state policy in independent India.
Hasan Nisar debunked 1000 years of Muslim rule ?
Hassan Nisar Powerful Speech India Pakistan Part 1 2 DO NOT TRY TO SKIP
Pakistani muslims aren't Arabs or turks .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLaajSOzpS0
Hasan Nisar on Muslim History and the reason of today's failure
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIfH37j_ZTY
If Muslims Were Ruled India For 1000 Years Then Why They Made Pakistan - Hamid Bashani
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zlo8JXmQRJs
No comments:
Post a Comment