Colonialism and Humanity
Colonialism and humanity perhaps cannot exist in the same sentence.
As an Indian when i read colonial accounts of the how the Europeans brought civlisation to the uncivilized masses of India or when i read about how Indian economy, one of the richest in the world in the 16th century with positive balance of payments was plundered systematically by the British, my blood boils.
Descendants of a civilisation that contemplated the true nature of reality in glorious hymns of the vedas atleast a couple of thousand years before the mighty Roman empire came to exist did not necessarily need the brand of civlisation that the whiteman brought.
The colonisation of India was one of the earliest proactive attempts to set right a trade balance that was heavily tilted in favour of India. In the pre-colonial era balance of trade was very often positive in favour of the Asians especially the large empires of India and China. (The Europeans rammed at the walls of the middle kingdom for over 150 years to gain entry so they could trade and set right the balance of payments that was heavily tilted in favour of China.) So unlike in Africa, in Asia the Europeans very often came to trade and seek markets for their excessive industrial capacity.
It was unfortunate that they came and found particularly weak empires - the declining Mughal empire or the Qing dynasty not fully in control of it's vast empire that they took advantage of the situation and became rulers (in India) or heavily dominated the empire (like in China).
But perhaps we should be grateful for colonialisation.
Two of the biggest empires of the world would not have been brought to modern industrial civilisation if not for the colonisation. In the vast Indian subcontinent, with some honourable exceptions like the kingdoms of Baroda, Gwalior , Travancore in the south and may be some others - it was primarily a feudalistic society, with landlords owing allegiance to the kings lording over the peasants and the kings living in luxury in their grand palaces. Education was for the privileged few and the masses engaged in crafts to make a decent living or as peasants whose lot depended on the weather gods and the kindness of the landlords and the kings. There was no concerted effort across the country to industrialise or for the societies to move forward. Around the same time, the Qing dynasty in China was forced to trade with the Eurpoeans but there was no concerted effort to modernise the country. There was nothing in these two countries like the Meiji restoration era that brought Japan to the modern era with a jolt. So when the Europeans entered India or China it was a clash of civilisations - swords vs. guns and sail boats vs. steam boats.
Colonialisation dragged vast portions of Asia into the modern industrial era. Modern institutions came to being. Judiciary, Civil services, Railways, telegraph, dams, electricity and so on. Without colonialisation am not sure these facilities would have come to India as early as they really did, mired as she and her rulers were, in the past.
But beyond the geopolitics and societal impact of colonialisation - we often forget the men and women, well mostly men who came and lived in these strange lands battling the heat, malaria and god know what else to build roads, construct railways set up administrative services. In my childhood where I lived in Andhra we were still taught the fact that Sir Arthur Cotton built a dam on the river Godavari that made 3 crops possible but more importantly brought a way to control the annual floods that brought much misery to the populace. Sir Cotton's dam is still a big landmark and the construction techniques employed still a matter of wonder. There were men who came along just to do their jobs or build careers, but there were also men who genuinely fell in love with India like Max Muller or HH Wilson (first translator of Vedas). There were some who fell in love with local women across the colonial and racial divide. In all at a human level it was not just about trade, power and empire building but about men who did spend the productive parts of their lives in strange lands leaving legacies behind that at a human level are still remembered and appreciated.
Below a heartwarming account of a man who built bridges in Indo China
http://www.iht.com/articles/2009/03/29/asia/indochina.php
I have often said of the coming rise of India as a return to the rightful position the country had before the decline in 15th - 16th century. But may be the colonial interlude set her on course for this glorious rise. Institutions, Democracy, English and above all the disappearance of the princely classes perhaps accelerate the speed with which India will regain it's rightful position. Or may be even without colonialisation some other event would have been jolted out of our traditional societies into modern industrial civilisations and an even faster pace and with a lot less pain than we have endured ... May be ...And may be the colonialists were right that they were bringing civlisation to these lands.
As an Indian when i read colonial accounts of the how the Europeans brought civlisation to the uncivilized masses of India or when i read about how Indian economy, one of the richest in the world in the 16th century with positive balance of payments was plundered systematically by the British, my blood boils.
Descendants of a civilisation that contemplated the true nature of reality in glorious hymns of the vedas atleast a couple of thousand years before the mighty Roman empire came to exist did not necessarily need the brand of civlisation that the whiteman brought.
The colonisation of India was one of the earliest proactive attempts to set right a trade balance that was heavily tilted in favour of India. In the pre-colonial era balance of trade was very often positive in favour of the Asians especially the large empires of India and China. (The Europeans rammed at the walls of the middle kingdom for over 150 years to gain entry so they could trade and set right the balance of payments that was heavily tilted in favour of China.) So unlike in Africa, in Asia the Europeans very often came to trade and seek markets for their excessive industrial capacity.
It was unfortunate that they came and found particularly weak empires - the declining Mughal empire or the Qing dynasty not fully in control of it's vast empire that they took advantage of the situation and became rulers (in India) or heavily dominated the empire (like in China).
But perhaps we should be grateful for colonialisation.
Two of the biggest empires of the world would not have been brought to modern industrial civilisation if not for the colonisation. In the vast Indian subcontinent, with some honourable exceptions like the kingdoms of Baroda, Gwalior , Travancore in the south and may be some others - it was primarily a feudalistic society, with landlords owing allegiance to the kings lording over the peasants and the kings living in luxury in their grand palaces. Education was for the privileged few and the masses engaged in crafts to make a decent living or as peasants whose lot depended on the weather gods and the kindness of the landlords and the kings. There was no concerted effort across the country to industrialise or for the societies to move forward. Around the same time, the Qing dynasty in China was forced to trade with the Eurpoeans but there was no concerted effort to modernise the country. There was nothing in these two countries like the Meiji restoration era that brought Japan to the modern era with a jolt. So when the Europeans entered India or China it was a clash of civilisations - swords vs. guns and sail boats vs. steam boats.
Colonialisation dragged vast portions of Asia into the modern industrial era. Modern institutions came to being. Judiciary, Civil services, Railways, telegraph, dams, electricity and so on. Without colonialisation am not sure these facilities would have come to India as early as they really did, mired as she and her rulers were, in the past.
But beyond the geopolitics and societal impact of colonialisation - we often forget the men and women, well mostly men who came and lived in these strange lands battling the heat, malaria and god know what else to build roads, construct railways set up administrative services. In my childhood where I lived in Andhra we were still taught the fact that Sir Arthur Cotton built a dam on the river Godavari that made 3 crops possible but more importantly brought a way to control the annual floods that brought much misery to the populace. Sir Cotton's dam is still a big landmark and the construction techniques employed still a matter of wonder. There were men who came along just to do their jobs or build careers, but there were also men who genuinely fell in love with India like Max Muller or HH Wilson (first translator of Vedas). There were some who fell in love with local women across the colonial and racial divide. In all at a human level it was not just about trade, power and empire building but about men who did spend the productive parts of their lives in strange lands leaving legacies behind that at a human level are still remembered and appreciated.
Below a heartwarming account of a man who built bridges in Indo China
http://www.iht.com/articles/2009/03/29/asia/indochina.php
I have often said of the coming rise of India as a return to the rightful position the country had before the decline in 15th - 16th century. But may be the colonial interlude set her on course for this glorious rise. Institutions, Democracy, English and above all the disappearance of the princely classes perhaps accelerate the speed with which India will regain it's rightful position. Or may be even without colonialisation some other event would have been jolted out of our traditional societies into modern industrial civilisations and an even faster pace and with a lot less pain than we have endured ... May be ...And may be the colonialists were right that they were bringing civlisation to these lands.
Comments
Post a Comment