The Brilliant Shashi Tharoor Speech... Slap on face for the Advocates of British Colonial Rule

drkrack

Heart Repairer
Adept
This is one of the most brilliant speeches I heard recently from a Indian. Speaking against the British on the British soil...
British owe a billions of pounds to India. Must listen for every Indian, born in independent India.

 
It looks to me that a lot of Indians have this false sense of entitlement.

Why do the British owe anything to India? Anything they took as rulers of the Indian colonies is anyway theirs to take by virtue of them being the rulers and the dominating force at the time. They did as they pleased by virtue of their power over us.

Just because they allowed the colonies to be free again does not mean they are obligated to return everything they took when they ruled.That is how things work and people need to get over this.
 
So when is his lecture against islamic occupation of India coming? Has he calculated how much the muslims owe us?
This is a very curious question. I always hear these things from bhakts on Twitter, but more and more, sane people seem to be using such logic. Do you say this about everyone? If someone wins a bronze medal for India do you go and say, "that's allright, but when you you win a silver you useless prick?"

What is wrong with you guys? Why does this guy have to speak on anything other than what he fancies. Since when is he a slave to your whims that you judge him if he doesnt do what you want.
 
It looks to me that a lot of Indians have this false sense of entitlement.

Why do the British owe anything to India? Anything they took as rulers of the Indian colonies is anyway theirs to take by virtue of them being the rulers and the dominating force at the time. They did as they pleased by virtue of their power over us.

Just because they allowed the colonies to be free again does not mean they are obligated to return everything they took when they ruled.That is how things work and people need to get over this.
By that logic bank robbers are entitled to the money they steal? They are the dominant force during that time (of the robbery). lol
Think before you speak man.
 
By that logic bank robbers are entitled to the money they steal? They are the dominant force during that time (of the robbery). lol
Think before you speak man.

Yeah, but the police is the authoritative force when they get captured. So whatever they took is taken back from them. And guess what happens when they don't get captured? They enjoy what they have taken as if it is their well deserved earnings.

What is the difference between the colonial British Govt before independence and the Indian govt now? The British Govt by virtue of their powers took what they wanted from the colonies they ruled and distributed it where they wanted. The Indian govt too takes from various states by virtue of its power and redistributes it as it pleases.

That is how authority always worked regardless of type of Governance and whether its within the country or across countries.

If India wants to get whatever was taken from it when it was part of the British empire, then it should wage war (but not necessarily a war with weapons and armies) and get authority over Great Britain and then it can do as it pleases.

Otherwise, its all petty excuses to revel in self pity by portraying ourselves as sorry little shits who could not develop much in close to 70 years of independence because the big bad British Empire took away everything we had.

Seriously, this "Foreign Invaders took everything we had" excuse is getting old now.
 
Have you considered Late Sir. Kalam in the list??

You nailed it pretty well my friend

So when is his lecture against islamic occupation of India coming? Has he calculated how much the muslims owe us?

Islamic rulers stayed and belonged to this country later on.
Islamic looters on the other hand mostly looted, but they never claimed that They improved the country by looting it !!

The speech was part of the reply to the British speakers who claimed that the benefit of British Colonial Rule was MUTUAL !!

It looks to me that a lot of Indians have this false sense of entitlement.

Why do the British owe anything to India? Anything they took as rulers of the Indian colonies is anyway theirs to take by virtue of them being the rulers and the dominating force at the time. They did as they pleased by virtue of their power over us.

Just because they allowed the colonies to be free again does not mean they are obligated to return everything they took when they ruled.That is how things work and people need to get over this.

When did British give freedom to India ? They were FORCED to hand it over , rather we SNATCHED our freedom from mighty British Empire in a NON VIOLENT WAY !

The Indian contributions to both World Wars is never mentioned, in fact our contributions were far greater than the British themselves. This speech gives proper official account of our contributions.

The so called Wealthy Nations owe large share of their wealth to the crimes committed in their colonial rule. The union of Scotland and England was cemented with the loot in the British colonies. He specifically mentioned that the the bonds (between Scottish & British) are loosening because of absence of colonial loot !!

You don't own the loot, no matter how you acquire it. Now I think even the Chinese counterfeiting of Western brands can be justified in this way of thinking.
 
When did British give freedom to India ? They were FORCED to hand it over , rather we SNATCHED our freedom from mighty British Empire in a NON VIOLENT WAY !

No, we did not snatch our freedom and the so called Non-violent movement has no part to play in the decision. The British were in no position to effectively control the colonies while still looking after the security and well being of Britain. That is the sole reason several colonies were liberated. It was plain and simple strategy to focus their resources more effectively where they wanted to focus. If you ask me it was more like the British abandoned some colonies to fend for themselves.

If not for the World war II and the situation that British were in at the end of it, we would probably be under British rule even now.

The Indian contributions to both World Wars is never mentioned, in fact our contributions were far greater than the British themselves. This speech gives proper official account of our contributions.

British India's contributions are well known and accepted even if not always formally rewarded. We had the largest voluntary army during World War II. However, India was still a colony belonging to British Empire. So it is technically British Empires contribution at the time.
 
The so called Wealthy Nations owe large share of their wealth to the crimes committed in their colonial rule. The union of Scotland and England was cemented with the loot in the British colonies. He specifically mentioned that the the bonds (between Scottish & British) are loosening because of absence of colonial loot !!

You don't own the loot, no matter how you acquire it. Now I think even the Chinese counterfeiting of Western brands can be justified in this way of thinking.

Doesn't make an iota of difference what you want to call it as. Countries get "looted" when they get taken over by other countries. What do you think was happening in all the internal strife that we had within the various kingdoms were part of this Indian sub continent before the Moguls or British came here?

The British has no obligation to return anything to us. We can TAKE IT back when we obtain the authority to take it back. Otherwise, regardless of how we ask for it without having any authority, it is simply nothing than BEGGING for it to be given back.
 
No, we did not snatch our freedom and the so called Non-violent movement has no part to play in the decision. The British were in no position to effectively control the colonies while still looking after the security and well being of Britain. That is the sole reason several colonies were liberated. It was plain and simple strategy to focus their resources more effectively where they wanted to focus. If you ask me it was more like the British abandoned some colonies to fend for themselves.

If not for the World war II and the situation that British were in at the end of it, we would probably be under British rule even now.



British India's contributions are well known and accepted even if not always formally rewarded. We had the largest voluntary army during World War II. However, India was still a colony belonging to British Empire. So it is technically British Empires contribution at the time.

Why was it difficult to control, after governing for 200 yrs? You should have been more organized in governing, when it's bringing such a great revenues. The fact is the Indian resistance during Quit India movement in 1942 was very powerful. British literally begged to support them in World War 2 in lieu of which they'll leave the country once the war is over.

Were Indian World War veterans rewarded with same amount of benefits? Wasn't it their responsibility to take care of those soldiers also?


Doesn't make an iota of difference what you want to call it as. Countries get "looted" when they get taken over by other countries. What do you think was happening in all the internal strife that we had within the various kingdoms were part of this Indian sub continent before the Moguls or British came here?

The British has no obligation to return anything to us. We can TAKE IT back when we obtain the authority to take it back. Otherwise, regardless of how we ask for it without having any authority, it is simply nothing than BEGGING for it to be given back.

We're not begging here, we are not asking something which we don't deserve. We're telling them that the amount you are giving is less than fertilizer subsidy given by the Government of India. It's your moral responsibility (which civilized government diverts the food supplies from starved to death people to Soldiers stock piles? ) to pay for the damages during the colonial rule. It's fine if you say a simple Sorry.. Please listen to the speech carefully.

The whole speech needs to be understood in the back drop of British speakers claiming the benefits of British Colonial Rule were mutual ! Mr Tharoor was responding to the previous speakers in a most factual and satirical manner, with his impeccable command over the English language.

The only two advantages of British Colonial Rule as I see is partially unifying India and the understanding of English language.
 
Why was it difficult to control, after governing for 200 yrs? You should have been more organized in governing, when it's bringing such a great revenues. The fact is the Indian resistance during Quit India movement in 1942 was very powerful. British literally begged to support them in World War 2 in lieu of which they'll leave the country once the war is over.

Because a lot of them got killed during the world war. Britain had to resort to conscription just to boost their military reserves even during the war. They were in no position to maintain their control. You are deluded if you think they could have held on to colonies just by better governance. There is no country in the world that could maintain order even within its ranks without use of power.

Were Indian World War veterans rewarded with same amount of benefits? Wasn't it their responsibility to take care of those soldiers also?

No, possibly because of two reasons.

1. Britain had already decided to abandon India and let it fend for itself. It was no longer going to be part of their empire.
2. Military service in India at the time was a lot like IT services right now. People enlisted because it was a profitable job. Indians soldiers were a lot like mercenaries who fought the war on behalf of which ever country paid them for their services

We're not begging here, we are not asking something which we don't deserve. We're telling them that the amount you are giving is less than fertilizer subsidy given by the Government of India. It's your moral responsibility (which civilized government diverts the food supplies from starved to death people to Soldiers stock piles? ) to pay for the damages during the colonial rule. It's fine if you say a simple Sorry.. Please listen to the speech carefully.

Why do they need to say sorry? Why do they need to give anything at all? The Europeans came to India for trade and when they saw all the greed and continuous internal conflict in the country, they thought it would be pretty easy to take over the country piece by piece and that is what they did. As the new rulers of the country, they took what ever they fancied from our country. That is how things work when a country or kingdom is taken over by another. This was exactly what was happening in India before the Europeans or even the Moguls came.

In older times, the conquered kingdoms were pillaged and razed to the ground, people killed or made into slaves. We Indians may think that we are morally entitled to get an apology or even a part of what they took from us, but they are not really obligated to give us anything back.
 
Ok. So what if they owe billions? Do you really believe that Britain will payback all of 8 billion pounds? And even if they did, what guarantee is there that all of 8 billion pounds will be honestly used by our government to uplift India's unprivileged?

Partially true. But we did benefit albeit to a considerably smaller extent unlike what the British speakers claimed who opined that the colonial rule was mutually beneficial.

Like what @Lord Nemesis said, the Britishers abandoned India for two reasons -
a) Their participation in WW2 weakened them to a point where they were in no position to control their colonies.
b) And let's not forget Mahatma Gandhi's non-violence movement which gave them all the more reason to vacate. The Britisher's were members of the allied powers of WW2. Churchill and Roosevelt signed the Atlantic Charter in an effort to maintain international peace and security; the same charter that would later be instrumental in the founding of the United Nations. Think about it. How could any nation openly claim to support international peace and continue colonialism at the same time? Truth be told, the Britisher's were no match for Mahatma Gandhi's principles. I have always maintained that the Britisher's vacated India because of Mahatma Gandhi (and what he stood for) and not because of the Indian freedom movement.

Look. This speech is supposed to be only educational. Tharoor took part in a debate at the Oxford Union. Please don't confuse eloquence with patriotism.

I really wish this video never went viral. Please don't unnecessarily stir nationalistic sentiments.

Who is expecting the British to Pay, they don't have such a clear conscience to do that. Even in the Europe, the British are considered least trust worthy. He mentions it very beautifully '' Sun never set in British Empire, Because Even the God couldn't trust the British in the Dark'' !

Yeah , the whole Indian Freedom Struggle had no effect on the British & they left the country on their own, is too difficult to digest. you are undermining the whole freedom struggle , which is very well acknowledged world wide.

By sharing this video I wanted to educate many people who argue (still many people are arguing on the similar lines ) , that British did great things to us; British rule was better etc. British did everything to suit their needs, not in the interest of the country, though their civil servants were being paid out of the exchequer. In Tharoor's words we literally paid for our own Oppression ! It is the generations born in Independent India needs to be educated much more than any body else. I would prefer the corrupt Indian Govt. over the barbaric British Rule any day !

BTW why are you getting so uncomfortable of a video about factual representation of British Atrocities in India Going Viral ?? I don't think any other British colonies' citizens will show such aloofness.
will you react the same way about video on so called Indian army atrocities in Kashmir going viral ?
 
Yeah , the whole Indian Freedom Struggle had no effect on the British & they left the country on their own, is too difficult to digest. you are undermining the whole freedom struggle , which is very well acknowledged world wide.

Yep, It really didn't really make much of a difference. You need to understand that the world acknowledging a struggle does not necessarily mean it the struggle achieved its desired result.

For instance, you can proclaim that you would go into a den of wild beasts bare handed in fact do exactly that. The world will acknowledge that you went in to face a den full of wild beasts, but it does not mean that you were able to come out of it alive.

Our "freedom struggle" was to some extent a PITA for the British, but you are crazy to think that it was at any point sufficient enough to make the British leave the country. If anything it was the violence of the revolutionaries was more of a pain for them. Gandhi's version of freedom struggle was all about non cooperation. It was akin to a temper tantrum thrown by a toddler when they don't get what they want and the British weren't the sort who would yield to such tactics.

They had to leave India after the world war 2 simply because they didn't have the resources to keep all the colonies under their control.
 
I am amazed that Indians would comment like that. Arrogance and stupidity with no self respect.
There was a trend in the past to think that westerners are much more superior than Indians.
Yes, Indians themselves used to think that. They also used to think that the westerners have some moral high grounds and we don't even deserve to to sit with them.
And your stupid comments actually refer the same mentality even now.

Every sucessfull freedom movement anywhere in the whole history of the world was due to the adding up of many factors(not a single one). That includes subhash Chandra Bose, mahatma ghandhi, people like bhaghat singh, strong development of oneness as a nation that is the basis of any freedom movement etc-2. In 1857 uprising, that oneness feeling had not developed. It was more like a localised uprising. But that sentiment started to change in the 19th century.

People with different ways and opinions that ranged from extremists to moderates to soft liners started to gang up with the leaders of there line of thought. They stood behind all of them for a single motive that was freedom.

And they were always on the lookout for opportunities to weaken the British empire. Merely saying that Britishers left because they wanted to or merely because of world war 2 is completely false. They left because they have to, due to all the factors (national and international) that have weakened them so much that they knew that can't continue to rule anymore because of the increased feeling of nationalism and attacks on the British people and supporters on multiple fronts. There were many few britishers that were there to command Indian armies which comprises of Indian people themselves. They knew that if these Indians would join forces with the freedom fighters(which happened in many places as well) then they won't have any way to protect themselves leave alone there own families.
Heck no britisher was even willing to go to India to rule the Indian men in there armies. They were surrounded by Indians and only protected by Indians. They didn't have the slightest clue of where from an Indian would come and take there life.

Due to the rising feeling of nationalism in Indian people, britishers policy of divide and rule was becoming lesser effective and it no longer guaranteed there own safety.
The Britishers have had a scarcity of people willing to sacrifice there life in India.

Inexperienced people think that wars are won by arms and ammunitions.

Think again. You dont need weapons. It's 90% psychology and 10% weapons. Greatest wars have been won only on psychology. Add to that the perfect timing of world war 2 that left the British empire crippled. Those were the factors that made it inevitable for britishers to loose control. If there was no action from Indians they won't have left India at all.

Even after all this, if you think that the britishers granted you your freedom because they were not forced to but because of merely the external factors, and you feel that you are a low life then the britishers. Then go ahead worship them, clean there feets. And remain in your own world of falsehood.
But,
Don't talk rubbish about Indians and there pride.
 
Last edited:
Yes, Britisher have given us so much in return of what they have taken from India, The constitution, Law& Order[ Police Station, Administration office etc.], Postal Service, Transportation[ Train, Motor etc.] the most Important is they have taught us to wear cloth[Dress Code]:D
It looks to me that a lot of Indians have this false sense of entitlement.

Why do the British owe anything to India? Anything they took as rulers of the Indian colonies is anyway theirs to take by virtue of them being the rulers and the dominating force at the time. They did as they pleased by virtue of their power over us.

Just because they allowed the colonies to be free again does not mean they are obligated to return everything they took when they ruled.That is how things work and people need to get over this.
[DOUBLEPOST=1438269595][/DOUBLEPOST]
Yes, Britisher have given us so much in return of what they have taken from India, The constitution, Law& Order[ Police Station, Administration office etc.], Postal Service, Transportation[ Train, Motor etc.] the most Important is they have taught us to wear cloth[Dress Code]:D
Oh! I've forgotten, the modern measurement System too!
 
Yep, It really didn't really make much of a difference. You need to understand that the world acknowledging a struggle does not necessarily mean it the struggle achieved its desired result.

For instance, you can proclaim that you would go into a den of wild beasts bare handed in fact do exactly that. The world will acknowledge that you went in to face a den full of wild beasts, but it does not mean that you were able to come out of it alive.

Our "freedom struggle" was to some extent a PITA for the British, but you are crazy to think that it was at any point sufficient enough to make the British leave the country. If anything it was the violence of the revolutionaries was more of a pain for them. Gandhi's version of freedom struggle was all about non cooperation. It was akin to a temper tantrum thrown by a toddler when they don't get what they want and the British weren't the sort who would yield to such tactics.

They had to leave India after the world war 2 simply because they didn't have the resources to keep all the colonies under their control.


You're undermining the whole freedom struggle & disregarding the people who sacrificed there lives. This video was posted to make you understand, how atrocious was the British rule. We, born in independent India Take this freedom for granted and talk so irresponsibly.

You don't understand Mr Gandhi either, he was a institution in himself.

1. Non violence : wasn't meant to show our weakness. It was deliberately planned so that we don't loose on enlightened freedom fighters easily. In a population of roughly 30 CR, with 40% literacy it was very difficult to get educated people brave enough for the struggle.

Educated people were fearful for their lives as violent protesters were dealt severely by the British. People like Bhagat Singh, Azad were either Hanged or brutally hunted down, it would have made no sense as their numbers were very small.

Non violence was such a great weapon so that we could save many enlightened freedom fighters lives & with their network many others joined the struggle.

Any brutality against the non violent protesters would have been shameful for the British Govt.

2 Truth : we Indians are hippocrites of the highest order. Unless we be truthful to each other no struggle would have succeeded.

He fought against the religious and caste division so that as many as people could join the freedom struggle.

This growing opposition to British rule ( PITA) made them move their @$$ out of the country to get rid of pain. BTW before going they left a PITA for us in the name of Pakistan.
 
Back
Top