3 ms·

As an Indian, I find the mention of the Gateway of India in this context odd, since it's the least egregious of the lot. Nor has there been any mainstream deman

As an Indian, I find the mention of the Gateway of India in this context odd, since it's the least egregious of the lot. Nor has there been any mainstream demand to tear it down. Locals don't treat the site with any tangible connection to the British Raj, and are at best indifferent to it. There is the plaque, but nobody seems to care. Contrast with the Victoria Memorial, the largest memorial to any monarch anywhere, the site is replete with statues of British monarchs and Governors. Bengal as a province has the longest history of British colonialism, and probably had suffered the most of any Indian region the ills of colonialism. Despite that, there hasn't been any mainstream demand to tear the place down, or even the statues. The locals are very knowledgeable about their colonial history, but seem fine with the statues and enjoy it as a place to hang out.

Spooky23 4y ago
I’ve noticed in conversations with my Indian friends, in general they seem very pragmatic with respect to the British Colonial era. Personally, I expected an outlook closer to my Irish relatives, which usually were more negative. That’s not to say that I’m projecting the feelings of a billion people from a sample of a handful of folks, and my family certainly had some strong bias wrt the Brits. My academic exposure of Indian history basically consisted of a reading about the Indian Mutiny, a bit about Ghandi, and casual mention of partition. It’s a story and history that should be told.
- valarauko 4y ago
  That's an interesting contrast, and I'm sure there's academic literature which lays out why that's the case. My personal impression is that this might have to do with the immediate aftermath of Independence, faced with strong internal crises to deal with. British Imperialism & Partition had left the country bereft - food production, economic infrastructure (raw materials & factories separated by hostile borders), & general development (India at the onset of colonialism produced about a quarter of the world's GDP, and at the end was about 2%). We had a host of issues to deal with, and hating on the British was unproductive. Within 25 years, India was in three full on wars with hostile neighbors. The British were a distant enemy. I suppose the Irish antagonism with the British dates from the much more recent "Troubles", rather than historic English Imperialism.
- mst 4y ago
  My British Indian friends tend to regard it as a subject more worthy of black humour than of bearing a grudge. "Sure, your ancestors were arseholes, but do you have any idea how much money we make off you just by being capable of selling you food that has a flavour?" sort of thing. (that's kinda the ISO standard joke of that class and I'll often tell a version of it myself as a means to indicate I believe that given the history they have every right to take the piss out of us as much as they like, after which anybody of Indian ancestry in the group will tend to grin and start telling better jokes than that one with me and my fellow white English as the target - magnificent way to be entertained over a pint ;)
  - pezezin 4y ago
    I had a British friend who would tell that joke in reverse, as in "the real reason to colonize India was so that someone would teach us how to cook properly"

Spooky23 4y ago

I’ve noticed in conversations with my Indian friends, in general they seem very pragmatic with respect to the British Colonial era. Personally, I expected an outlook closer to my Irish relatives, which usually were more negative. That’s not to say that I’m projecting the feelings of a billion people from a sample of a handful of folks, and my family certainly had some strong bias wrt the Brits. My academic exposure of Indian history basically consisted of a reading about the Indian Mutiny, a bit about Ghandi, and casual mention of partition. It’s a story and history that should be told.

valarauko 4y ago
That's an interesting contrast, and I'm sure there's academic literature which lays out why that's the case. My personal impression is that this might have to do with the immediate aftermath of Independence, faced with strong internal crises to deal with. British Imperialism & Partition had left the country bereft - food production, economic infrastructure (raw materials & factories separated by hostile borders), & general development (India at the onset of colonialism produced about a quarter of the world's GDP, and at the end was about 2%). We had a host of issues to deal with, and hating on the British was unproductive. Within 25 years, India was in three full on wars with hostile neighbors. The British were a distant enemy. I suppose the Irish antagonism with the British dates from the much more recent "Troubles", rather than historic English Imperialism.
mst 4y ago
My British Indian friends tend to regard it as a subject more worthy of black humour than of bearing a grudge. "Sure, your ancestors were arseholes, but do you have any idea how much money we make off you just by being capable of selling you food that has a flavour?" sort of thing. (that's kinda the ISO standard joke of that class and I'll often tell a version of it myself as a means to indicate I believe that given the history they have every right to take the piss out of us as much as they like, after which anybody of Indian ancestry in the group will tend to grin and start telling better jokes than that one with me and my fellow white English as the target - magnificent way to be entertained over a pint ;)
- pezezin 4y ago
  I had a British friend who would tell that joke in reverse, as in "the real reason to colonize India was so that someone would teach us how to cook properly"