29 karma · joined January 19, 2011
Yes, dalits. Read the rest of the comments to understand why.
Have your heard of honour killings where a dalit family killing the upper caste bride or groom?
What do you think happened between when they landed and when they left? They landed as traders; they took sides between the warring kingdoms and sultanates for access to markets. They just played on the differences for their own gains - divide and rule. Read about the Partition of Bengal. This was the modus operandi of the empire everywhere: hindu v muslims in India, catholics v protestants in Ireland, muslims v jews in Palestine.
>When they left, they left a united India. Those are just cold hard facts that cannot be argued with - India may have been politically united in 300BC, but it sure as hell wasn't in 1700. At the bitter end, if the Brits had really, really wanted to leave India divided, it would not have been a difficult thing to accomplish.
Well they did not try to leave it united. The British never had direct control over all of India. Many regions were under direct rule, many still under princes. It was the Indian political will, after independence (and after the India-Pakistan partition), which united India in to a whole. India did not become a Republic until 1950.
The India of today would be unrecognizable from British India. Many former British colonies in Africa continue to be only slightly better than Somalia. You are giving the Raj too much credit.
The fix would be to roll our own matching ~/.fonts.conf or /etc/fonts/local.conf for all the non-GNOME applications.