What's new

Churchill's predictions for India

Napa

ODI Debutant
Joined
Sep 4, 2016
Runs
8,613
Post of the Week
1
Winston Churchill wanted India to remain under British rule for reasons rather similar to Hitler wanting "living space" for the Germans in eastern Slavic lands. To that end he promoted divisions between the Hindus and the Muslims. That of course is not an excuse, 70 years later any animosity is entirely our responsibility.

Churchill was not highly regarded by other nations, in his negotiations with Stalin during and after the war he was thought to be consistently outclassed.

His predictions about what would happen if the British left India are amusing:

https://www.winstonchurchill.org/resources/speeches/1930-1938-the-wilderness/our-duty-in-india

1) "Gandhi stands for the substitution of Brahmin domination for British rule in India."
That's tough, given that Gandhi was not a Brahmin.

2) "There can be no doubt therefore that the departure of the British from India, which Mr. Gandhi advocates, and which Mr. Nehru demands, would be followed first by a struggle in the North and thereafter by a reconquest of the South by the North, and of the Hindus by the Moslems."

Prescient indeed!

3) "This danger has not escaped the crafty foresight of the Brahmins. It is for that reason that they wish to have the control of a British army, or failing that, a white army of janissaries officered, as Mr. Gandhi has suggested, by Germans or other Europeans. They wish to have an effective foreign army, or foreign-organised army, in order to preserve their dominance over the Moslems and their tyranny over their own untouchables. There, is the open plot of which we are in danger of becoming the dupes, and the luckless millions of Indians the victims."

Stunningly perceptive about the world!

4) "Gandhi stands for the permanent exclusion of British trade from India."

Without Indian ownership, Britain's greatest manufacturing firm JLR would probably be dead by now. Sold for $2 billion in 2008 to Indians, it now has annual profits larger than that sale price.

5) " In assailing the moral duty of Great Britain in India, the Socialist Government and all who aid and abet Mr. Ramsay Macdonald and his Socialist Government, or make their path smooth, will find they have stumbled upon a sleeping giant who, when he arises, will tread with dauntless steps the path of justice and of honour."

Hear, hear... or maybe not :)
 
Really a shame this overweight racist has been the perennial favourite of the British public.

I hope India buys the whole of the UK and enslave the natives.
 
Really a shame this overweight racist has been the perennial favourite of the British public.

I hope India buys the whole of the UK and enslave the natives.

One step at a time. They haven't even been able to buy their neighbour, the Chinese have beaten them to it. I would leave grand designs about buying the UK for the next couple of generations perhaps.
 
Winston Churchill wanted India to remain under British rule for reasons rather similar to Hitler wanting "living space" for the Germans in eastern Slavic lands. To that end he promoted divisions between the Hindus and the Muslims. That of course is not an excuse, 70 years later any animosity is entirely our responsibility.

Churchill was not highly regarded by other nations, in his negotiations with Stalin during and after the war he was thought to be consistently outclassed.

His predictions about what would happen if the British left India are amusing:

https://www.winstonchurchill.org/resources/speeches/1930-1938-the-wilderness/our-duty-in-india

1) "Gandhi stands for the substitution of Brahmin domination for British rule in India."
That's tough, given that Gandhi was not a Brahmin.

2) "There can be no doubt therefore that the departure of the British from India, which Mr. Gandhi advocates, and which Mr. Nehru demands, would be followed first by a struggle in the North and thereafter by a reconquest of the South by the North, and of the Hindus by the Moslems."

Prescient indeed!

3) "This danger has not escaped the crafty foresight of the Brahmins. It is for that reason that they wish to have the control of a British army, or failing that, a white army of janissaries officered, as Mr. Gandhi has suggested, by Germans or other Europeans. They wish to have an effective foreign army, or foreign-organised army, in order to preserve their dominance over the Moslems and their tyranny over their own untouchables. There, is the open plot of which we are in danger of becoming the dupes, and the luckless millions of Indians the victims."

Stunningly perceptive about the world!

4) "Gandhi stands for the permanent exclusion of British trade from India."

Without Indian ownership, Britain's greatest manufacturing firm JLR would probably be dead by now. Sold for $2 billion in 2008 to Indians, it now has annual profits larger than that sale price.

5) " In assailing the moral duty of Great Britain in India, the Socialist Government and all who aid and abet Mr. Ramsay Macdonald and his Socialist Government, or make their path smooth, will find they have stumbled upon a sleeping giant who, when he arises, will tread with dauntless steps the path of justice and of honour."

Hear, hear... or maybe not :)

british were as white supremacists as germans, infact hitler before world war two was considered a messiah in britain

it were brits who spread racism in their colonies, started black slavery and indian slavery and british treated indians and blacks like sub humans

australia erected flaura and fauna laws which declared native indigenous australians as animals
 
I created a thread in 2011 on Churchill's appalling bigotry and racism, foul even by the standards of his time, which has been whitewashed by the Churchill cultists - http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/showthread.php?134003-The-racism-of-Winston-Churchill

In 1943, Churchill was speaking to the British Cabinet about the famine that was raging through Bengal. Churchill told the secretary of state for India, Leo Amery, that the Indians were "the beastliest people in the world, next to the Germans." and would continue to "breed like rabbits."

Amery eventually remarked of Churchill that he "didn't see much difference between [Churchill's] outlook and Hitler's." He also describes Hindus as "a foul race protected by their pollution from the doom that is their due."

When the Suez crisis erupted in 1956, Churchill was on the backbenches and supported British action against Nasser, once shouting:

''If they (Egyptians) did not look out we will set the Jews on them and drive them into the gutter''.

He was a total opportunist, beginning his career as a Tory, then leaving for the Liberals in 1904 only to rejoin the Tories in 1922 after the Liberals had imploded and were surpassed by Labour. He aptly commented:

“Anyone can rat, but it takes a certain amount of ingenuity to re-rat”

Sounds about right for him.
 
The Brits consider that fatty as the greatest Brit in history


:salute
 
Chuschill was a disgusting man.Dunno why the British folk consider him a hero and a great man.
 
The Brits consider that fatty as the greatest Brit in history


:salute

I think you'll find that many around the world also consider him a great leader, just off the top of my head I bet most of the former colonies established by the Brits would. At least those with a white population majority, e.g, USA, Canada, Australia, etc.
 
british were as white supremacists as germans, infact hitler before world war two was considered a messiah in britain.

Well, some of the British like Churchill were white supremacists. Others who Churchill passionately hated like "Mr. Ramsay Macdonald and his Socialist Government" were not. The British like other nationalities were a mixed bag.
 
Well, some of the British like Churchill were white supremacists. Others who Churchill passionately hated like "Mr. Ramsay Macdonald and his Socialist Government" were not. The British like other nationalities were a mixed bag.

But the White supremacists were the majority.
 
Let's put it to a test :

- how many PM from the north
- how many PM from south
- how many PM were Brahmins

Does anyone know?
 
The Brits consider that fatty as the greatest Brit in history


:salute

He did lose the election straight after the war.

As time goes by, people start looking through much more favourable eye.
 
Last edited:
He did lose the election straight after the war.

As time goes by, people start looking through much more favourable eye.

People soon forget about tub thumping jingoism when they start feeling the pinch in their pocket. Just look at Corbyn's turnaround in the UK elections when he offered students debt free tuition and NHS funding. All the immigration peril suddenly became backseat news and UKIP imploded.
 
Let's put it to a test :

- how many PM from the north
- how many PM from south
- how many PM were Brahmins

Does anyone know?
[MENTION=44089]Eagle_Eye[/MENTION]


From south -


Just 2 - H.D Deve Gowda (Karnataka) and PV Narasimha Rao (Andhra), that's it . Otherwise the list is Uttar Pradesh, Gujarat dominated . Once each has a CM come from North east (Assam, but it was Manmohan Singh, a Punjabi, and I.K Gujral from Bihar (again Punjabi).


Regarding caste
:

Modiji is the first and only lower caste PM, rest all are Upper caste hindus or Sikhs .

So the south has had very poor representation in positions that matter like the PM , there have been some ornamental positions like President and VP , gifted to South Indians. That's all.

The North east has had Zero representation.
 
Let's put it to a test :

- how many PM from the north
- how many PM from south
- how many PM were Brahmins

Does anyone know?

Been a while since we have had a Brahmin PM. Manmohan was a Sikh Khatri. Modi is from a commercial caste. Vajpayee was Brahmin.

I would not divide India strictly into North and South. Gujarat is more central-west to me.

After the Gandhi era, we have had VP Singh (north), Chandrashekar (north), Narshima Rao (south, very good PM), Vajpayee (north), Deve Gowda (south), Gujral (north), Vajpayee (north), Manmohan (north), and last but not the least Modi (central).

Of the 8 PMs listed above, only 1 (Vajpayee) is a Brahmin.
 
[MENTION=44089]Eagle_Eye[/MENTION]


From south -


Just 2 - H.D Deve Gowda (Karnataka) and PV Narasimha Rao (Andhra), that's it . Otherwise the list is Uttar Pradesh, Gujarat dominated . Once each has a CM come from North east (Assam, but it was Manmohan Singh, a Punjabi, and I.K Gujral from Bihar (again Punjabi).


Regarding caste
:

Modiji is the first and only lower caste PM, rest all are Upper caste hindus or Sikhs .

So the south has had very poor representation in positions that matter like the PM , there have been some ornamental positions like President and VP , gifted to South Indians. That's all.

The North east has had Zero representation.

Bureaucrats from south actually played major role in decision making including national security

Don't think PM from a particular south Indian state will do anything extraordinary for rest of the south Indian states.
 
Last edited:
Modiji is the first and only lower caste PM[/B], rest all are Upper caste hindus or Sikhs .

I won't say that Modi's caste (commercial) is very different from Chandrashekhar (UP Rajput), or Rao or Gowda (both agricultural). The Modh-Ghanchi-Teli caste of Modi is classified as OBC. Lots of Rajputs really really want to be classified as OBC.
 
Been a while since we have had a Brahmin PM. Manmohan was a Sikh Khatri. Modi is from a commercial caste. Vajpayee was Brahmin.

I would not divide India strictly into North and South. Gujarat is more central-west to me.

After the Gandhi era, we have had VP Singh (north), Chandrashekar (north), Narshima Rao (south, very good PM), Vajpayee (north), Deve Gowda (south), Gujral (north), Vajpayee (north), Manmohan (north), and last but not the least Modi (central).

Of the 8 PMs listed above, only 1 (Vajpayee) is a Brahmin.

All these are facts. But Pakistanis, who know nothing about India, will tell you that India is ruled by Brahmin supremacists!

Names of a few of the Presidents over the past 2-3 decades:
- S D Sharma (I think only Brahmin president in last 30 years)
- Abdul Kalam (Muslim)
- Zail Singh (Sikh)
- K R Narayanan (dalit)
- Next President would be a dalit too since both the main candidates are dalits
 
All these are facts. But Pakistanis, who know nothing about India, will tell you that India is ruled by Brahmin supremacists!

Names of a few of the Presidents over the past 2-3 decades:
- S D Sharma (I think only Brahmin president in last 30 years)
- Abdul Kalam (Muslim)
- Zail Singh (Sikh)
- K R Narayanan (dalit)
- Next President would be a dalit too since both the main candidates are dalits

Also for at least half the time the past 2.5 decades, the power behind the throne is a Roman Catholic lady of Italian ancestry.

Small correction, Mukherjee is a Brahmin too.
 
Last edited:
Ramsay Macdonald did win the elections and form the government. Sometimes the Conservatives won, at other times Labour.

Why do you think they're still nostalgic for the Empire ? They wanted to continue bullying Indians.

Have you heard of "Pak*-bashing" ? They randomly attacked (in band) peoples from the Indian SC for no explicit reason, it went on for decades.
 
I won't say that Modi's caste (commercial) is very different from Chandrashekhar (UP Rajput), or Rao or Gowda (both agricultural). The Modh-Ghanchi-Teli caste of Modi is classified as OBC. Lots of Rajputs really really want to be classified as OBC.

Lots of Brahmins really really want to be classified as OBC as well.Try again.
 
Why do you think they're still nostalgic for the Empire ? They wanted to continue bullying Indians.

Have you heard of "Pak*-bashing" ? They randomly attacked (in band) peoples from the Indian SC for no explicit reason, it went on for decades.

I agree that many Britishers were violently racist.
 
I won't say that Modi's caste (commercial) is very different from Chandrashekhar (UP Rajput), or Rao or Gowda (both agricultural). The Modh-Ghanchi-Teli caste of Modi is classified as OBC. Lots of Rajputs really really want to be classified as OBC.

Telis are SCs in some states.
 
All these are facts. But Pakistanis, who know nothing about India, will tell you that India is ruled by Brahmin supremacists!

Names of a few of the Presidents over the past 2-3 decades:
- S D Sharma (I think only Brahmin president in last 30 years)
- Abdul Kalam (Muslim)
- Zail Singh (Sikh)
- K R Narayanan (dalit)
- Next President would be a dalit too since both the main candidates are dalits

Why bring The president here ? I mentioned about "ornamental" positions already. What real power does a President in India have? Everyone knows Modi is in charge. The PM is where true power is .

Regarding Brahmin supremacy, it's far more complex than that . The present situation in India is that Brahmanism is no longer owned by the Brahmins , it has been successfully adopted by/outsourced to the upper castes and sangh affiliated OBCs and Dalits .

Brahmins may or maynot have taken up the highest of highest posts , but most of the influential positions of the country - High preists, top bureaucrats, civil servants , even top ideological/party heads (RSS, CPM polit-bureau, Congress leadership outside the family etc ) have a disproportionately high number of Brahmins, given the brahmins don't even make 10% of India's hindus.

Today's resistance to brahminist ideals need not be taken as an assault on the actual Brahmin community, but on certain cultural practices and principles founded/propagated and solidified of the brahmins of erstwhile, which are on a resurgence in today's time (caste oppression, archaic ideals of purity, rabid conservatism,eugenics, glorification of sanskrit and its derivatives (for us south indians atleast) ).
 
Lots of Brahmins really really want to be classified as OBC as well.Try again.

The moment the central and state governments began handing out OBC/Dalit tags to their favoured communities in the name of "reform", that's when the ideals of people like Ambedkar got subverted into the kind of crapshow regarding social upliftment and casteism we have today .

But was Modi's caste treated that bad in his state ? Many of the communities classiified as OBC up north weren't relly "Shudras" were they ? The marathas, yadavs etc are all OBCs. (AFAIK)

As far as I know, the only state were shudras were officially "untouchables" were Kerala and some parts of TN.
 
Last edited:
Why bring The president here ? I mentioned about "ornamental" positions already. What real power does a President in India have? Everyone knows Modi is in charge. The PM is where true power is .

Regarding Brahmin supremacy, it's far more complex than that . The present situation in India is that Brahmanism is no longer owned by the Brahmins , it has been successfully adopted by/outsourced to the upper castes and sangh affiliated OBCs and Dalits .

Brahmins may or maynot have taken up the highest of highest posts , but most of the influential positions of the country - High preists, top bureaucrats, civil servants , even top ideological/party heads (RSS, CPM polit-bureau, Congress leadership outside the family etc ) have a disproportionately high number of Brahmins, given the brahmins don't even make 10% of India's hindus.

Today's resistance to brahminist ideals need not be taken as an assault on the actual Brahmin community, but on certain cultural practices and principles founded/propagated and solidified of the brahmins of erstwhile, which are on a resurgence in today's time (caste oppression, archaic ideals of purity, rabid conservatism,eugenics, glorification of sanskrit and its derivatives (for us south indians atleast) ).

Interesting post! (but has too many flaws -- see below) I posted the Presidents name just randomly -- I haven't been following every post.

The moment you expand the definition of Brahmanism to include even the baniya, OBC and Dalits -- what's left? Muslims? Then you'll turn around say that even the elitist Muslims too are Brahmins! Also, how can Brahmins occupy most importants posts when there has been a policy on reservations for more than 70 years now? It's statistically impossible! I for one don't understand how becoming the CPM politburo member is influential at all. The whole party has lost influence, so who cares about their leaders?! At one point, Mayawati, a dalit, had more influence than the whole set of communist parties put together. She even brought down the Vajpayee (a Brahmin!) government.
 
Last edited:
Why bring The president here ? I mentioned about "ornamental" positions already. What real power does a President in India have? Everyone knows Modi is in charge. The PM is where true power is .

Regarding Brahmin supremacy, it's far more complex than that . The present situation in India is that Brahmanism is no longer owned by the Brahmins , it has been successfully adopted by/outsourced to the upper castes and sangh affiliated OBCs and Dalits .

Brahmins may or maynot have taken up the highest of highest posts , but most of the influential positions of the country - High preists, top bureaucrats, civil servants , even top ideological/party heads (RSS, CPM polit-bureau, Congress leadership outside the family etc ) have a disproportionately high number of Brahmins, given the brahmins don't even make 10% of India's hindus.

Today's resistance to brahminist ideals need not be taken as an assault on the actual Brahmin community, but on certain cultural practices and principles founded/propagated and solidified of the brahmins of erstwhile, which are on a resurgence in today's time (caste oppression, archaic ideals of purity, rabid conservatism,eugenics, glorification of sanskrit and its derivatives (for us south indians atleast) ).

You are then talking about the differentiation of the society into classes. This happens everywhere in the world. Fragmentation into classes is gaining momentum in the USA.
 
You just made that up.

Are you even Indian?

I will send a note to you next time there is a rally by Akhil Bhartiya Brahmin Mahasabha to demand reservations for poor brahmins.
Thing with some of you lot is that you have been outside of India for so long that you have absolutely no idea about the ground realities and caste politics in this country.
I was born and brought up in a village where we are still treated like royalty and feudal loyalties run deep so I have a general idea about the ground situation here.
 
The moment the central and state governments began handing out OBC/Dalit tags to their favoured communities in the name of "reform", that's when the ideals of people like Ambedkar got subverted into the kind of crapshow regarding social upliftment and casteism we have today .

But was Modi's caste treated that bad in his state ? Many of the communities classiified as OBC up north weren't relly "Shudras" were they ? The marathas, yadavs etc are all OBCs. (AFAIK)

As far as I know, the only state were shudras were officially "untouchables" were Kerala and some parts of TN.

Thing is Sandy like you said OBC tag in almost 90% cases given to secure the vote bank of that particular caste who are majority in that area and traditionally who weren't part of the upper caste hierarchy(but that doesn't mean they were backward). For instance take Jats for an example , though originally a peasant class they were quite powerful because of their sheer numbers and had a decent representation in the army as well (still do) but guess what , an obc status was given to them in 1997 in Rajasthan by then ruling BJP party to secure their votes(Jats have traditionally been congress supporters) .
Re Modi , I don't know about Gujarat but in Rajasthan telis aren't too bad and definitely not considered as Shudra.
 
I will send a note to you next time there is a rally by Akhil Bhartiya Brahmin Mahasabha to demand reservations for poor brahmins.
Thing with some of you lot is that you have been outside of India for so long that you have absolutely no idea about the ground realities and caste politics in this country.
I was born and brought up in a village where we are still treated like royalty and feudal loyalties run deep so I have a general idea about the ground situation here.

Yes, I am aware that Brahmins have asked for reservations.

You said they asked to be listed as OBC, which is different. However the idea is similar, so I won't argue any further.
 
Yeah lets dig up Churchills grave and chop off his head.

If we don't do that, at least let us stop waxing eloquent about him, and bringing up his quotes ever so often to justify a particular course of political action.

Besides being an unapologetic racist, you can see from his predictions about India he had little clue about how the world works. He has a lot of smart *** quotes that even I quote once in a while, but he was no fount of wisdom. He got lucky that Hitler underestimated the Soviet Union, otherwise Britain was a dead duck.

"I am fond of pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals." - WC
 
Last edited:
Interesting post! (but has too many flaws -- see below) I posted the Presidents name just randomly -- I haven't been following every post.

The moment you expand the definition of Brahmanism to include even the baniya, OBC and Dalits -- what's left? Muslims? Then you'll turn around say that even the elitist Muslims too are Brahmins!

Not all OBCs and Dalits are buying into it . But the sudden meteoric rise of BJPs popularity in the past 10 years IS due to a large number of OBC communities buying into the RSS ideology , some dalits too. The Banias and Brahmins were traditionally right leaning (in general) even while the BJP was non-existent .

Given that the OBC's and Dalits make 70% of the population almost , the BJP needs them to keep retaining its power, and capturing it in non-BJP aligned states like TN, Kerala etc and that is its BIGGEST success story too . Though the RSS was by founding and definition the typical Brahmanical organisation, it has convinced other castes, especially the lower ones (irrespective of whether they mean it or not) that they stand for all classes of Hindus.

And regarding reservations , the true status of the effect of reservations can only be judged if the government releases the caste census data , which was conducted last in 2004 it seems, that'd give a good idea of where the communities stand. The govt can then cut down on the quotas from the communities that have shown improvement.
 
I asked TM Riddle that question, are you replying for him?

I certainly would like a few cites saying Brahmins are asking to be listed as OBCs.

Helping two fellow Indians..TMR is a sisodia rajput.
 
If we don't do that, at least let us stop waxing eloquent about him, and bringing up his quotes ever so often to justify a particular course of political action.

Besides being an unapologetic racist, you can see from his predictions about India he had little clue about how the world works. He has a lot of smart *** quotes that even I quote once in a while, but he was no fount of wisdom. He got lucky that Hitler underestimated the Soviet Union, otherwise Britain was a dead duck.

"I am fond of pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals." - WC

Churchill was and will always be a beloved great leader of Brits and the western world.
 
Back
Top