Also, please don't use multiple accounts to do this and especially not in the same threads.
There's something I'd like to clarify. I came back to this thread to find that my own comment was flagged, and I'd also collected a surprising number of downvotes in a short span of time (unless flagging resets vote count - I'm not sure). Is the flag from you, as a slap on the wrist for fueling the fire? I didn't think flags were used that way, but once again I'm not sure. If it's not from you, then I suspect some brigading may have occurred. (It's possible someone else felt my comment warranted admin attention, but 1) the timing is odd and 2) you've clearly already seen this thread).
Sorry as well for the meta - I'd have made this a PM, but, well...
Yes, I flagged https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34596819 and downvoted the comment but there were flags and downvotes from other users as well.
I'm not arguing against your view on the topic (nor the GP's, for that matter) but you definitely fed the flames in this thread, and not just in one place. I flagged https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34596819 because it seemed the most egregious.
I've also noticed that there's always an (annoying) triumphal 'gotcha' when they link to some short-form essay mentioning basic facts, denied by nobody, of the famines and loss of relative share of GDP suffered by India etc.
Again, _everyone knows this_. It comes across as naive and arrogant to assume otherwise.
The effect British rule had in India (and everywhere) was extremely nuanced, and there is a huge amount of interesting history to be debated. After all, we're talking about a subcontinent over a 350 year time period.
The British, for instance, banned the practices of Sati (burning widows alive) and of infanticide, and explicitly allowed Indians to compete on equal terms with the British in examinations to enter the Indian Civil Service.
There's very little consensus amongst historians whether or not they were responsible for the famines India suffered at the time, or if they even made any net money from India whatsoever, given their constant fear of raising taxes.
I'm not necessarily trying to take a position either way, by the way, just begging people who are nodding along to some of these bumper-sticker anti-colonialism comments to read more deeply into what is an unimaginably huge subject.
As to the famines: cyclical famines were common in India: https://www.orissapost.com/this-is-why-indian-kings-used-to-.... The British didn’t cause famine in India, though it’s fair to say they mismanaged the response.
This was my entire point in the initial post, it's both hilarious and a bit sad how people are so unaware what the british empire did in India.
That’s my point. And that’s my family’s experience.
Let's turn it around. "I'm fed up of all the Soviet bashing. It was heaven compared to the Congo under King Leopold." See? Not a nice reply is it?