The Decolonisation of India Explained

[@asaxthegamer5655]

You know being an Indian on the internet was already hard and then the government decides to discover the internet.

[@losjsjshsjnsjsjs]

India is poor 2k GDP per capita country comes in poor category Why because india have 20%of world population and 2% of world land area and natural resources India population 1.4 billion European population is also 1.4 billion But they occupy Whole North America South America Australia and New Zealand 50% of World land area and natural resources If Indians want to become rich with good GDP per capita and infrastructure indians need to conquer other countries Best target Australia Land area bigger than whole South Asia Natural resources value 20 Trillon USD Population 20 million (2crore) Australians are Britishers who left United Kingdom 200 years ago by killing native Australians they occupy Australia and living a luxurious life by selling natural resources With GDP per capita of $65,966 (nominal; 2024) $69,475 PPP India have young population of more than 300 million in war young people fight Peace is enough From last 70 years we are following Gandhi Peacefull ideology Still we are poor now we need to change

[@losjsjshsjnsjsjs]

In 15th century Europe area = India area Europe Population=India Population Then Europeans colonize and shifted their population from Europe to North America South America Australia New Zealand And on other hand india didn't colonize other countries+ losse land to Islamist in form of pakistan Bangladesh Today Because of colonization Europe have more natural resources and less population because they shifted their population from Europe to North America South America Australia New Zealand And india have more population less natural resources Today Europeans taunt india by saying overpopulated country And poor just because india didn't looted any other country and shifted their population This is why I say peace is never good for any country you should loot other countries European Population 1.4 Billion India population 1.4 billion But the difference is 50% European population live outside Europe in North America South America Australia and New Zealand

[@losjsjshsjnsjsjs]

No matter how much hard work the people of other countries do, they still can't earn money equal to Europeans. I am talking about the majority of the people of a country, not a single person (GDP per capita). The top 50 richest countries in GDP per capita are European countries or oil-rich countries. The real reason Europeans occupy all of North America, South America, Australia, and New Zealand, controlling almost 50% of the world's area and natural resources. Now, some will give examples of: - The Korean Economic Miracle, - The Japanese Economic Miracle, - And the Taiwan Economic Miracle. But in reality, no miracle happened. After World War II, Japan received $23 billion in aid, and Korea received $13 billion from America-these amounts are much higher in today’s value, though the exact numbers are unclear. Japan, Korea, and Taiwan became rich by becoming slaves of America (Europeans). These countries provided military bases to America and followed the same foreign policy as Europeans (for example, when the U.S. sanctioned Russia, Japan also sanctioned Russia). In exchange, America gave them prosperity through money, aid, technology transfer, factory setups, etc. For example, Taiwan is a small island country with a population of 10 million, but still, Taiwan is rich because of semiconductors. How did semiconductors come to Taiwan? Because of the USA. RCA (Radio Corporation of America) set up its semiconductor factory in Taiwan in: - 1966 (initially as a joint venture) - 1970 (as a wholly-owned subsidiary, RCA Taiwan Ltd.)

[@CherrEblue]

@@losjsjshsjnsjsjswhat are you talking bout bro?

[@Deep_Side_Sleep]

@@losjsjshsjnsjsjs Is this an Indian government bot account? Edit: It is indeed a propaganda bot

[@AntonioKatan]

There's this fantastic story about the annexation of Goa where the Goan garrisson, short on military material for the imminent invasion asked the Portuguese government for arms in code, so as not to set off any Indian spies that could intercept the message. The guy charged with delivery flew a plane with the cargo full from Lisbon to Goa and arrived there just as the Indians were taking the airport, got shot in the leg as he was landing, the whole shebang. When the Portuguese soldiers opened their crates, they were filled not with weapons but with chorizo sausages, because "chorizo" was the code name they used for weapons.

[@SZD.]

There's no annexation of hoa. Its invasion of goa by India which was portuguese land

[@eldhothomas4910]

@@SZD. Portuguese colony *

[@SZD.]

@@eldhothomas4910 paid Modi stooge

[@ChristianDall-p2j]

13:10 Holy roman Empire was neither holy, nor roman, not an empire, the indian civil service was neither indian, nor civil, nor a service! I see a disturbing pattern of 3 here!

[@jonathanwebster7091]

@@ChristianDall-p2j well, the HRE wasn't by the last century of it's existence, when Voltaire was writing. That quote is one that often gets taken out of context, because for much of its history, the HRE *was* more than what it ended up as (as a Secular, German loose Confederation). It just wasn't after 1648.

[@allangibson8494]

The Indian Civil Service was and is still very Indian. The exact same civil servants continued to run India after independence.

[@ChristianDall-p2j]

Sorry! Dident know that!

[@ChristianDall-p2j]

And I know that the holy roman empire was holy, and declare the true roman empire by the pope and first holy roman emperor, by the time it was built! And all the catholics agreed with Them, becauce one of Them was the pope, after all! Though I Think the true roman empire was the eastern roman empire (aka “the byzantine empire”) wich was litterally the continuation of the eastern half of the roman empire, wich survive after the western half fell!

[@luritdurit]

Babe wake up the dutch history youtuber Uploaded

[@stefanocapparelli4997]

@@luritdurit historywithhilbert? 😂😂

[@vaderblaster9709]

@@stefanocapparelli4997 no i think he means possible history

[@kylo_ben]

I’m setting aside my Christmas preparations to watch this. This has my full undivided attention

[@Adam-wg2rf]

I hope you would have a merry christmas, am gona celebrate hanukkah and am exited.

[@lingnarzihary2492]

@@kylo_ben like India before 1947?

[@tanaybanerjee7276]

As an Indian, can vouch for your coverage of the atrocities of the colonization. But the decolonisation misses a lot of details. Does not put in place the entire story. You missed one of the biggest events that is the Indian Army mutiny and the Indian National Army formed by Subhash Chandra Bose.

[@Afnan_Taher]

This video is about decolonisation not colonisation.

[@Sleepyirishcoffee]

The national army did nothing to drive the British.

[@charananekibalijaun8837]

Bose, the INA and the mutiny of the indians army had 0 effect on British rule in India. This is a later distortion by Indian nationalist. It's the myth that indians somehow freed themselves from British rule.

[@Sleepyirishcoffee]

@ exactly my point. Why do people glorify bose anyway? If he had his way, we'd be japanese slaves, which is objective worse.

[@amritpanda7947]

​@@charananekibalijaun8837it's hard to believe the greatest empire would just leave it's crown jewel. Ofcourse the countless famines made a smooth path for it

[@AchyutChaudhary]

0:04 *🇲🇲Myanmar (Burma) also became an independent country bro - don’t forget it, it was the largest Indian province!* 😂

[@HistoryScope]

yes, but we're going to cover that in a future video.

[@alpha-raygaming5252]

​@@HistoryScopeSPOILERS!!!!

[@swedishfish2357]

​@alpha-raygaming5252 He said Pakistan and the rest of the British Raj were going to be their own videos at the start of the video

[@alpha-raygaming5252]

@@swedishfish2357 I suppose, DOUBLE SPOLERS!!

[@Afnan_Taher]

Well, historically the empire of Burma was it's own thing. It doesn’t have anything to do with India.

[@jodybarrett2265]

been waiting for another crazy banger from this channel. Literally expanding my historical knowledge 3 fold

[@scotandiamapping4549]

15:00 I think you meant to say 1911 there, not 1811 Not trying to be negative, this is a great video. Just got a bit bamboozled by that

[@ItIsFutbolNotSoccer]

Yeah it was 1911

[@lucario2188]

10:30 the fight between Muslim and Indus started with Aurangzeb. The British merely exploited and amplified what was already there. 11:30 again this view already existed, before the british. The British merely continued to promote it, because it benefited them.

[@BegginerGamer24]

Exactly, sometimes nationalism blinds people. Being proud of your country is a good thing but not to such an extent that you don't believe the facts.

[@Randomguy-wd9jz]

pakistani are Indus people, not the country of India

[@Mrblob100]

No India was always completley peacful, there was NEVER any violence.

[@BegginerGamer24]

@@Mrblob100 I can't till if your sarcastic or just dumb

[@EmmaWithoutOrgans]

@@BegginerGamer24nations are not materiallt neccessary anymore read marx

[@vikramk4966]

This video has oversimplified facts so much that it is getting much history wrong. I am all for criticising British colonisation but claiming Hindus and Muslims were living in complete harmony or the Birth of the Indian National Congress, or portraying the root causes of the War of 1857. History Scope has missed relevant historical context and skewed many things in this explanation. Obviously, the History of the 200 years of the subcontinent can't be covered in a 50-minute video, but oversimplification = miscommunication.

[@ripfluffyman9972]

Killer video. Can’t believe that my school thought covering this in 20 minutes would do it. Any justice basically taught British came Indian said leave in British left.

[@Chubbyjoes4954]

You never disappoint to make a sad video right Before the Holidays! another great video, that I'll Watch 100 times

[@yaminikantasahoo556]

An Indian here. Many may find it hard to believe but British did not create Hindu-Muslim fault line. The regions in India which were under muslim rulers infact welcomed British rule for example, hindus in Bengal to escape nasty rulers like Sirajuddaula. Main cause of 1857 rebellion was anxiety against Christian missionaries where hindus and muslims had a temporary pact to come together, that's it. Although British racism is not a myth it was preferred by most Hindu population over murderous muslim rulers. Second INC was not formed by Indians. It was created by British administration to have a controlled oppostion to stop further revolutions.

[@rishavkumar1250]

Not every sultan was a murderous vampire, chill

[@skooskipotato3750]

No. Most of the rulers and regional powers joined in the revolt of 1857 for their own self interests and not because of Christian missionaries

[@skooskipotato3750]

No. Most of the rulers and regional powers joined in the revolt of 1857 for their own self interests and not because of Christian missionaries

[@dheerajpimoli9539]

@@rishavkumar1250read the biography written by themselves or supervised by them. They will be worse than vampires.

[@dheerajpimoli9539]

@@skooskipotato3750go check the reason for rebellion

[@chrisedrev9519]

Your videos manage to be both chill and in-depth. Thank you so much.

[@ripfluffyman9972]

These are some of the best videos to watch when you’re stoned because they’re interesting entertaining and usually kind of funny but if somebody catches you watching and you just say you’re doing homework and get left alone

[@AdityaMehendale]

@@ripfluffyman9972 and that's not even a lie.. Technically, is there even a difference? HistoryScope is better than most lecturers anyway.

[@jamesgray6238]

I think it should be recognized that the Mughal Empire itself was a colonial Empire started by a timid Chieftain. India hasn't been ruled by an Indian based Elite for quite some time until recently.

[@Yatagurusu]

@@jamesgray6238 the definition of colonisation isnt "foreigner controls us" lmao. Mughals werent even foreigners after 1-2 generations.

[@name_dropper8112]

Everyone who came to India got Indianized. Bruh we've been scamming y'all since then. You think we'd scam our own?

[@alvichoudhury3127]

The way you're trying to spin it is quite deceiving yes the mughals initially were from outside of India but they moved into India and became Indian not the same as a coloniser. They did not take profits and funds out of India to another country.

[@Yajna007]

Timurid chieftain *

[@charananekibalijaun8837]

@@alvichoudhury3127 I've heard this argument before. So for you it's fine had the British settled and stayed in India? You got to be kidding me. The fact Mughals stayed and islamized large parts of the population created numerous conflicts until this very day. 🤦

[@waqqashanafi]

Indians after the British left: "HOW DARE YOU DIVIDE US?! ... LET US SHOW YOU HOW IT'S DONE PROPERLY!"

[@einantassteinas7038]

Thank you History Scope! I've been waiting for this video and suggesting the subject too for a while now :) Great! All the best to you!

[@lazylad1726]

50:25 Pakistan came into existence! There was no Pakstan before 1947.

[@anjelkanja8032]

Neither India nor Pakistan "existed", it was a loosely defined area ruled essentially as a subcontinent by different empires with different areas of control none of which are part of the international borders today. India existed no more than Pakistan did prior to 1947

[@jacbar_01]

0:10 so Kashmir just become your Christmas gift?🎅 Merry Christmas!

[@HistoryScope]

Everybody gets a little bit of Kashmir from me.

[@BegginerGamer24]

It's sad that the government is trying to censor the internet, threatening foreign KZbinrs.

[@youngmasterzhi]

Note: Unlike the British colonies of India, the former French colony in East India (currently Pondicherri) still retains aspects of French culture and practices, such as croissants bakeries, war monuments, religious churches and Parisian street signs. This is because the French colonial rulers did not put much pressure on their subjects to capitulate and actually espoused and intermarried Tamil culture with their own European culture. They even allowed subjects of the colony French citizenship, meaning they can seek employment in France as long as they support their rule.

[@HistoryBeyondBordersTV]

This video is both relaxing and informative. Thanks!

[@himnishishaan2364]

Pretty accurate video historically speaking.....I hope more people know all this so they can think before speaking.

[@tommyhubbard342]

10:25 Wow the british do this everywhere. This is literally the same reason Sudan and South Sudan are fighting- and why the Darfur region has been experiencing genocide.

[@supersuper111]

Technically it was egyptians who conquered sudan and south sudan and darfur under khadive muhammed ali and ismail british only took it over from them

[@XhumpersX]

They're only really similar in that the British were the last ones holding the bag and therefore get blamed for every problem. They were not gods and were not capable of doing things that had not been done by the empire they replaced.

[@MrJabba888]

Ah yes, the classic British colonial playbook: "Divide & Conquer" + "Indirect Rule through Bribery & Patronage"...

[@ravanadevadas3770]

11:37 muslim did come through colonisation tho. Muslim had been invading and colonising inda for centuries befor europeans.

[@aaronnrodgers]

@@ravanadevadas3770 incorrect. Muslims existed in india way before the turkic invadions

[@subhamdas943]

invasion is not the same as colonisation. The muslims who invaded india, eventually settled in India, the British didn't.

[@subhamdas943]

@@kiranchandran1564 that still doesn't change my point... Invasion is not the same as colonization. The British were milking India for their own benefits for people in their own country, while the Sultans and Mughals just wanted to rule and settle on our lands. They were eventually serving us, not people of their own distant land.

[@kiranchandran1564]

@@subhamdas943 ❤️ serving 👏👏👏 by ****ng 3 Sikh gurus 💜 , their sons , cap+ur1ng w0m€n and putting in hearam/se11ing in s1a*e markets ❤️ , putting additional tax "ja×ia " , res+ric+ions for buliding new temples ❤️ , all are "services" for you 🙏

[@kiranchandran1564]

@subhamdas943 @subhamdas943 ❤️ serving 👏👏👏 by ****ng 3 Sikh gurus 💜 , their sons , cap+ur1ng w0m€n and putting in hearam/se11ing in s1a*e markets ❤️ , putting additional tax "ja×ia " , res+ric+ions for buliding new temples ❤️ , all are "services" for you 🙏

[@ShxhzEditx]

The truth is admit it or not but India was never supposed to one country rather a continent or a union like EU, the British made India by experimenting colonial subcontinental politics and creating the INC which eventually led to formation of the Indian union in 1947. Before that India was a geographical entity like Europe is for Europeans.

[@DummyUseless-er3dn]

True

[@ReddyAlwaysReady]

It had been a civilization for millennia before that. The endonym for the European word “India” is Bharat, whose current current boundaries are much less than even in 1947, which has been used in the Vedas written more than 4000 years ago and passed down orally for millennia before then. Whereas the concept of Europe encompassing its current boundaries is less than a 1000 years old

[@s1dwyz732]

@ReddyAlwaysReady that is such a blantant act of pick8ng and choosing your beliefs. Rome had more influence over Europe than any one state in india ever had over the sub continent. Less than 1000 years is just historically inaccurate. Which also leaves out charlimagne and his empire that had equal influence over the continent than any indian state did.

[@tearet741]

@@s1dwyz732 Really ? And what about maurians ?

[@sentientistvegan]

As an "Indian", I agree

[@dezheathen]

Damn I knew it was bad but this was even worse than I could imagine I don't know how India/Pakistan/Bangladesh don't request compensation

[@JakeRed378]

@@dezheathen cause the indian elites who helped british to ran British Raj is currently running India,Pakistan & Bangladesh Especially Pakistan military and Indian businessmen and Bangladesh politicians have defacto dual citizenship in Commonwealth countries and usually leaves their home country and move to London after they retire And now this native elites also begun to heavily influence UK'S politics too

[@varun2250]

​@@JakeRed378India literally didnt have any corporate elite till 1991

[@martin96991]

Because UK 🇬🇧 will never be able to compensate that wealth if they even sell their country.

[@GloomyGlue]

Because everyone wants to have good relations with the west. Nobody would do those stuff. Plus conquering and looting was a pretty acceptable culture during that time.

[@ZibillionBytes]

hindu-muslim seperation of uk at india is being applied to Turkey for a few centuries by several powers. they try to seperate people with ethnicity and religion... they succeeded to a degree in ww1 and now they are trying for more. i hope people watch and read these kinds of sources and learn some lessons from it.

[@williemherbert1456]

Nah, for Turkey case, it's because they applied the Millet system, which means enfranchisement communally for each ethno-religious group acknowledged by Sublime Porte that empowered the local warlord, janisary bey, chieftain, imam, ulema, etc as autonomous agents to extract taxation based on Jizya tax, Zakat, Devşirme, İspençe and resm-i çift (land-owning taxation). Which openly operate privately without intensive oversight by central imperial bureaucracy in Istanbul and has right to organize government over the land and population live within in each own religious and ethnic law but some verses from Sharia Law about how non-Muslim have right to live within Muslim polity legally, especially about court system. In return, the sultan back in Istanbul or Konstantiniyye would receive lots of money as tributes for granted right to manage land and extract taxes from all of these lands supposedly owned by sultan in name only; however, this system is incompatible for necessity by Ottoman state to modernize and industrialize since these are inefficient and fragmenting that paralyze central authority to enact laws and projects, managing administration, fielding police and armed force, and then developing public service, while extracting resources and money to pay them off. So, the Ottoman actually behaved similarly like the British in how to treat its own subjects; that's why so few school ever being built under former Ottoman Empire territories while unable to entice these heterogenic population divided each under sectarian line unified with singular common identity (they tried with Ottomanism, but kind of too late for it and mostly done symbolically since they have such hard time to crack down Millet system to be abolished entirely).

[@ZibillionBytes]

@@williemherbert1456 1- ottomans didn't give special interest his own people (turks you meant i guess). ottoman's tax system, if we simplify it, seperated as muslims and non-muslims. because the middle age was driven by mostly religion, even the wars are actually about economy. also there were devşirme in divan too. in fact, there were almost no ethnically turk in divan or important duty in palace. 2- ethnicity wasn't important for people too. because in islam, you are muslim or not. but turks nature is a bit tolerant than other people around middle east, if you think about mameluks, which derived a word means non-arab muslims. so we can presume that. 3- they saw balkans as their home more than anatolia. as you may aware, even before conquering istanbul, ottomans were well into balkans and placed people there to islamicise there in peace. also this may be about tımar sistemi but im not sure about it. 4- im talking about the years that eventually reaches ww1, 19th century. following the nationalism waves that came out from france, the big powers created, payed and armed paramilitary forces in balkans. same happened in middle east too. also as we know now that there were some deals about dividing ottoman empire. this is one of the reasons why british didn't want ottomans on their side. 5- petrol discovered in middle east. british occupied especially from northern ıraq to basra gulf because of this. Atatürk wanted mosul and kirkuk both there were turk majority there (i don't now recent situation after syrian civil war but they were still majority there 10~ years) and there are petrol around there. to discourage this ambition, british invented artificial "kurdish problem" that tired army and people more which is already tired. from balkan wars to independence war, we fought from 1911 to 1923 without even a year break. if you think about the turks that lived at balkans had to migrate anatolia, some were killed, some had to change religion, some couldn't find comfort of their own home etc. so he couldn't pursue this. you can look for misak-ı milli in wikipedia. lastly, in today's Turkey, we secular, Atatürk's children try to hold the country together. i know the situation looks like "another islamic regime in middle east" but more than half of the country dont want that kind of lifestyle. but it is forced to people. we had our own way of belief, bektaşi or alevi, which was already ostracized in ottoman time. now salafi "agents" tries to impose their own belief to our people. that didn't work so far but our people mostly uneducated, poor. also ruling party controlling almost all the media. if they can't they scare people. be sure, if the western governors wanted, they were gone good already but they are get along very well. for ex. syrian refugee agreements, garbage agreements etc. it's a very brief summary of the situation. you have to read tons of stuff to understand it better. this region has all the interest of the world because of the petrol. thats why arab spring is happening, thats why usa supports zionist israel, thats why saudis slowly becoming more secular etc. its easy to see when you reaaaly read some good strategists or journalists, not paid ones of course. have a nice one!

[@EzzadinFarah]

90 percent of Turks are muslim

[@ranbeery]

It’s heartbreaking to see how relevant the after effects of divide and conquer are till this date.

[@nestcamo1181]

20:20 funfact!: "mahatma" is the Hindu version "saint"

[@SkwisgaarSkwigelf-69-420]

Sorry but no. Mahatma means great soul. Maha=great, atma=soul.

[@Mikachu000]

0:05 This is certainly.. a decision by the Indian goverment. If it's a necessary one is up for debate..

[@aqualord6285]

@@Mikachu000 I don't think so

[@Etiennejin]

Ghandi wasn’t mad that the British were racist in South Africa. He was mad that they were racist toward Indians. He thought it was ridiculous that all non white people were equally inferior in the eyes of the British.

[@wosiknatalia4469]

Amazing as always, thank you!

[@SiVlog1989]

This entire video shows why Winston Churchill's first speech as British Prime Minister, in 1940, was so oxymoronic. He talked about the timing of his appointment as Prime Minister as a Solemn hour for the country, it's empire and "above all the cause of Freedom". He simply failed to see or accept that you can't call yourself a champion for the cause of freedom and maintain an empire as well. He remained, even in his day, an unashamed advocate for maintaining the British Empire, particularly in India

[@charananekibalijaun8837]

He supported dominion status for India, which would have created a far better outcome for the indians themselves. Nationalism poisoned your ancestors' minds

[@shobarajesh2724]

@@charananekibalijaun8837nope he did not do that either.

[@charananekibalijaun8837]

@@shobarajesh2724 it's very easily researched, bro 'Churchill even sent Gandhi his best wishes for success, and lent tacit approval to Attlee’s plan to grant India Dominion status (thus de facto independence) in 1948' Nationalism poisoned your mind as well

[@DC-pm9lc]

@@charananekibalijaun8837 The British poisoned there brains with communal hate.

[@inigoromon1937]

​@@charananekibalijaun8837 you only serve the colonial discourse: first you destroy them and then you say they are too stupid to govern themselves.

[@Trastact]

2:48 the Mughal empire was past its peak in 17th century. India was mostly controlled by the Maratha empire during that period, which eventually fell due to internal conflict giving the company a way to dominate the subcontinent.

[@ahle.hadith]

@Trastact lol OK, cope

[@Kingkccomedy]

Love the narration, the story telling, easy to understand, to the point,....I always enjoy your videos.

[@dheerajpimoli9539]

This is a very simplistic way of saying things. Britisher involved in creating congress were not sympathetic to the cause they just want vent the anger of indian. They were very afraid that a small thing like pig and cow fat in bullets can cause this much harm in 1857. So congress was a tool for them to not let these small issues cause big chaos

[@alpha-raygaming5252]

22:40 If im correct, I beleve home rule is an oversimplification of what was promised, I believe the actual quotation from the viceroy at the time, Who I think was Hardinge but may have been minto, was something more along the lines of fewr restrictions as oppsoed to more autonomy but at the end of the day it is still true that this was misleading and nothing really changed, especially when you cobsider the passing of the Rowlett Act in 1919

[@sashamellon822]

This is why private companies should never rule.

[@nunocspinto]

This is absolutely very well written. You are a great story teller. Please continue. Thank you!

[@Thechillilover]

It only took 6 years to learn it and 2 to forget it (talking about my education on the topic lol) Great video

[@superds]

Okay this means that Britishers just created a divide between Indians and made profit but didn't rules actually and left the India when the Indians just said go away and started revolting Okay 👍

[@theemperor4901]

Absolutely loved the video!

[@abdullahdaniyal114]

Get popcorns everyone. Comments section is going to be fire.

[@viviansmitha8389]

This is an amazing video, I'd advise you changing the title to make it more lucrative to click.

[@flamethrowerjeet]

Thank you for making this video bro. Summarised the events and even the sentiments of Indians quite well, imo. The dates were all messed up though (100 year lag) : Ex: Queen's Durbar(Coronation ) was in 1911, not 1811. Also, 4 princely States who refused to join were : JK, Hyderabad, Junagarh (In Gujrat) (Not Mysore) and Travancore. But, still great effort. Subscribed.

[@P0L0G0D]

Very clear, easy to follow, enjoyable video. Thanks for the great work!

[@ss_avsmt]

0:05 - Kashmir, don't say anything about it. We will solve it ourselves, like we've been solving since...never mind.

[@RC_ALB]

Mentioning Kashmir on the internet is like mentioning Voldemort in Harry Potter.

[@amritpanda7947]

Btw jalianwalabag was one of the many shooting in that time period after WW1. in odisha tamilnadu bengal and Maharashtra. As punjab was one of the biggest recruitment centres of army it got more coverage in papers.

[@aksamhuda7]

The British milked Africa dry but it was nothing compared to what they did to India 🇮🇳 Absolutely attrocious

[@supersuper111]

The british african colonies were very unprofitable with very few exceptions One small island in latin america was worth more then all of kenya , rhodesia or sudan combined Hell most colonies were a net negative for wealth of england

[@issysito320]

@@supersuper111 whilst it may be true that some colonies were considered to be unprofitable in terms of administration costs colonisation still indirectly contributed to the rapid development of Metropole countries and their wealth, eg through returns on colonial companies or getting access to cheap raw materials. Then they realised they didn't have to spend millions on running these territories via expensive military and colonial administration, so in (some) parts of Africa they peacefully decolonised (whilst conveniently keeping their own companies inside the country to still get these indirect economic benefits). I believe framing colonisation as unprofitable, is misrepresentative of how much colonial expansion was driven by capitalism. It is largely a problem of this analysis of profitability, failing to account for indirect gains created by colonisation which shouldn't be ignored. Just because it cost more to keep a hold of some colonies compared to others, doesn't mean we shouldn't consider how much wealth colonisation is appropriated from the global south due to the minimal reinvestment into these areas.

[@mercer1995]

Africa is far from dry… most experts believe the resource wealth and population growth of Africa will make areas of the continent very prosperous and internationally powerful by the end of the century. Victim mindset will always keep you from achieving greatness… quit blaming others and take control of your own destiny

[@issysito320]

My friend, this is not about victim mindset. I agree that many countries within the global south need to get their act together and kick out their corrupt leadership, these morally bankrupt governors indeed use this as an excuse to justify their ineptitude. However, in order for said governments to properly rise to their full potential a full understanding of how colonialism has underdeveloped ones nation is needed, due to the fact that these extractive structures still persist to this day. This includes dispelling reductive myths about the affordability of colonialism as it was one of the factors for why Neo-colonialism exists now, and many of these postcolonial states have the same extraction systems maintained by their elite. How can a doctor cure a man if he doesnt know the illness of his patient?

[@tearet741]

​@@issysito320Yeah , it had been much better if they would have still kept you as colony and did not give independence like Russia and China

[@carterwegler9205]

I hate when well crafted videos like these are not recommended to the algorithm. I never saw this video on my feed when it came out

[@aashieshjadhav1404]

A very well researched video 👏

[@albdoggonemorris6488]

Funny how Gandhi advocated for Indians in south Africa but not the blacks there. In fact he proposed to the British to be part of a Indian corps to help put down black uprising

[@Anshulhe]

@@albdoggonemorris6488 because gandhi was sensible, he knows if he asks for all rights then both will be suppressed, his first priority is to help his own country men and people.

[@albdoggonemorris6488]

@ injustice anywhere is a threat everywhere. He helped his people at the expense of the blacks there

[@Anshulhe]

@@albdoggonemorris6488 Not at expense of blacks, blacks have their own leaders advocating for them, he advocated for Indians and achieved. Nonetheless both Indians and blacks in Africa ultimately shoved Brits out of their lands And the British person is the last to judge anyone else on morals and right conduct lol 😂

[@iaf010]

​@@albdoggonemorris6488Obviously, he helped his people first. Because his people were different to the blacks and the British had transplaneted Indians to South Africa due to the Empire.

[@iaf010]

Nothing strange about helping your own people. Just because there are others suffering as well doesnt mean he should ignore the suffering of this own people. Did Martin Luther champion the rights of Hindus and Buddhists in America ? No, he used Christianity to uplift his own community. So why should Gandhi try to fix all the wrongs at once?

[@s1dwyz732]

40:35 "british soldiers stood by and did nothing" didnt the Indians vote for them to rule themselves?

[@Anshulhe]

That's why rishi sunak ruled over you and Indian billionaires ruling over uk now. And Indians voted for independence not for violence and bloodshed created by British between Hindus and Muslims.

[@hatinmyselfiscool2879]

Are you stupid? Ruling yourself doesn't mean british soldiers still occupying the country and just not stopping crime. You act like a colonial empire doesn't have the obligation to at least protect it's occupied population. You must be an idiot by profession because nobody can think this kind of bs naturally

[@iaf010]

​@@s1dwyz732 British Soldiers (who were basically Indian soldiers officered by British officers) stayed for the supposed peaceful transition from British rule to self rule. But as usual, the British arsed that up as well and millions died in the partiton. Some British officers even sided with their own motives and goals and not the transitional govt. This was also one of the reasons the Indian officers replaced the British as soon as was possible. More than a million British residents lived in India during British rule and in less than 12 months 99.9% of then left India and Pakistan back to the UK.

[@blazer9547]

This is gonna be one of the worst toxic comment sections ever 😂

[@raunakshahi8485]

This video is mostly just about the colonisation, why would it be toxic??

[@aarthirajaraman7453]

​@@raunakshahi8485Colonial apologists vs Indians and Pakistanis

[@stuarttimocin7929]

@@raunakshahi8485 Anything involving events with India/Pakistan overlap usually descends into sh*tshow

[@amritpanda7947]

Colonization is not virtuous so it is to be expected

[@stuarttimocin7929]

@@amritpanda7947 Don’t get conquered then

[@dougdouglas2112]

Really good stuff, like always! 👍🇺🇲

[@WarWhisper-po1si]

Did you say pak a secular state . Which starts from the word Islamic republic of pak 😂😂

[@Space_and_history]

@@WarWhisper-po1si well it was

[@Deep_Side_Sleep]

India also used to be known as a secular country and you can see where we are now

[@Artyomi]

Pakistan _was_ in theory established as a secular muslim state, but that immediately went out the window once independence happened. As in, the state institutions themselves were intended to be non-religious like how most western secular states function. Or rather how Turkey established itself as a secular government despite being majority muslim.

[@viviansmitha8389]

it became as inslamic country only after

[@TingTong2568]

@@Space_and_history no, it wasn't at all.

[@BryanSeigneur0]

I knew my mind had wrapped this in a stupid romantic bubble wrap but I was not prepared for how enraging this would be. God bless the people of the subcontinent and their miraculous (because all democratic lawful and just government is both vital and a miracle) independent government. Men (humans) equal under law. Nations equal under law. Never thought how much non alignment forced emphasis on multilateralism until now. Thank you, Indians for that. I pray multilateralism survives thru the Ras-Putin influenced clown going into the Whitehouse (again).

[@s1dwyz732]

Why do you beleive all nations should be equal?

[@shobarajesh2724]

@@s1dwyz732buddy I didn’t get your question.All nations have humans,and all humans are equal right?

[@area9364]

Today some brits think they did something great and India is poor while literally living off looted Indian wealth.

[@charananekibalijaun8837]

Nice joke bro

[@shobarajesh2724]

@@charananekibalijaun8837is the joke you?

[@charananekibalijaun8837]

@shobarajesh2724 no, it's that comment up there

[@charananekibalijaun8837]

@@area9364 keep telling yourself you're poor because of others 😂🤦

[@vikramk6592]

@@charananekibalijaun8837just like Britishers right now whining about their situation and blaming cultural enrichment for that.

[@aditya.khapre]

Everyone makes Germany the villain of ww2, but the British weren't any saints either.

[@joshuain2771]

@@aditya.khapre If you look at a map of the world at the time the allies controlled most of the globe when the axis were “trying to take over the world.”

[@Jordy-u5l]

This has been fabricated on purpose. they created a group that is not allowed to be criticized. very obvious during these times. and on top of this the official version is mostly lies. same as all invasions of the US over the last 60 years. USS Liberty is an interesting story that sums up history pretty well.

[@ohajohaha]

one doesn't contradict the other.

[@LostinMango]

History is written by winners Who won ? haha

[@vivekthakur5448]

True words

[@Betelgeusewaitforit]

Bold, bold subject. Here we go lads. Channel needs money.

[@HistoryScope]

We covered Africa, Americas, South-East Asia... India isn't that bold, is it? As for money, the decolonisation videos underperform compared to most other topics.

[@Betelgeusewaitforit]

@HistoryScope I gave a like on this too. Bro love your work. It's meant to be funny, it's a local running joke here. 100% funny intent. Zero intention to insult. I actually watched it. Relax. Tell you what I make awesome food, hit me if you are coming here. The Colonial part is a touchy subject for me because my grandparents were freedom fighters and we had a tough time. We gave lots of Gold to the British during the Bengal famines. We somehow managed to make ends meet for our farmers. The independence movement started exactly from there. Just sharing, folks who know what really happened is not discussed anywhere. Farmers dying of hunger in a draught being asked for even more tax because of WW1 & 2. My great grandmother gave her personal jewellery, we have a tiny photo of it. A diamond and platinum set... Life she said is priceless and a days peace is more important than anything material.

[@ArupRatanMitra]

I really like the classical music in the background

[@PowerShellWizard]

In short, India ....will.....be......liberated :) Now it's the turn for my beautiful Palestine

[@kristianjensen2665]

Sacrificial comment to the almighty algorithm! I do love these in-depth, long videos!

[@AkshayDixit]

Indians' attendance.

[@copiapadus478]

Great video, please do thorough video about opium wars and their effects in modern China. Fascinating and important topic.

[@TejaDurgi]

british didn't gave us independence we took it learn the history of (navy Revolt India 1946) it it documented by British itself that one revolut changed the British history forever.

[@HistoryScope]

When people say 'give independence' it means that the oppressor simply gives up the fight. It's not an actual gift

[@TejaDurgi]

@@HistoryScope should have mentioned how 78 navel warships have revolted, how civilians of Karachi, Mumbai burned their house & shops of europens ran out of their house to saves their lives in India glad only navy revoluted army was silent British got no way to surrender to the navy, police refused to help British many went unrecorded with a fewer recrds left, they got no option to surrender source :clement attle pm of uk this doesn't only change the history of India's independence but also the oppressors colonies shattered one by one.

[@vigneshedithal3567]

Very informative video, thank you for telling the history of my country to the world

[@energetiic267]

Ironically India just passed UK in Nominal GDP terms this year .

[@kierano8390]

imagine having ur country conquered by a tiny island lmao

[@bhavjotsingh3190]

@@kierano8390 Try again! 🥂✨

[@BornKafir]

​@@kierano8390The tiny islands lost. South Asians own London nowadays. The mayor is the son of Pakistani parents. Their previous Prime Minister was the son of Indian immigrants. Scotland had the son of Pakistani immigrants leading their government. A lot has changed since 1947, Alhamdulillah 😊

[@BornKafir]

​@@bhavjotsingh3190They wouldn't dare. They still haven't recovered since the last time they got chased out by desis.

[@kierano8390]

@@bhavjotsingh3190 did you watch the video xD, try again

[@generalramgaming6370]

I see what you did there in 10:22 (Avatar the last Airbender reference)

[@AOl-mi1ln]

Worst thing that ever happened to south Asia was when the British left.

[@ItIsFutbolNotSoccer]

Thanks for covering Indian history🫡🙏

[@leoskiii5860]

Question for the people in the comments where is Sri Lanka? It’s separate from India now, but was once part of India what was the role it had in this history? Nothing but curiosity is why I’m asking

[@tommay6590]

"part of India" are you sure? When, even under british rule it was a different coloniy i.e. Ceylon.

[@carterstroud5403]

It was usually considered its own separate thing as Ceylon and was administered separately from India,

[@charananekibalijaun8837]

It's never been part of British Raj as it was administered by Aden

[@priyadarshi8548]

Sri Lanka was separate

[@iaf010]

Ceylon and Burma were separate and not ruled from Delhi.

[@petelosuaniu]

British only colonised India for so long because the Indians themselves didn’t like one another and were actually quite different peoples with different languages and cultures - it’s like trying to say Europe is one united country.

[@martin96991]

Wasn't true, if the Islamists and British never came it would still be the world's richest country.

[@petelosuaniu]

@ it would’ve been 30 different countries if the Islamists and British didn’t come. The concept of “India” itself is a British concept.

[@GloomyGlue]

​@@martin96991No it would not been a richest nation in 21st century come on. It's a common sense that every empire is deemed to see a fall.

[@martin96991]

@@petelosuaniu yes every empire deemed to see a fall but it's completely different when an empire took $50 trillion and made a country hollow in every sector. A "fall" is different from being around 27% of global gdp to less than 3% That's not a fall that's "unmaking"

[@gatuarhin]

Good video but I wish it went more into detail about stuff like the fall of the Mughals and the East Indian Company's unprofitability that partially led to its bankruptcy

[@SunnyM360]

You forgot to mention Sindh All the Sindhi Hindus got screwed

[@shocktg7963]

Banger video bro

[@skeletonkeysproductionskp]

Great video, but overly simplified. Muslims and Hindus always fought each other, and Britain became rich became of her headstart with Industrialization which took place prior to Britain's rule over India. Also, Indian purchasing power meant that most profits came from Europe and America. I did whole videos on this for my own channel, but at any rate, Happy Holidays!

[@shobarajesh2724]

But the biggest phase of industrialisation took place when India was firmly under EIC rule

[@skeletonkeysproductionskp]

@@shobarajesh2724 In raw figures, what percentage of Britain's total exports went to India? If it wasn't particularly high, this doesn't work as a thesis.

[@varun2250]

​@@skeletonkeysproductionskpthere's a video on this from the channel Odd Compass

[@AbhyudayaSinh]

Very informative and detailed ❤❤❤

[@DD-ky9xi]

Why should we decolonise from European rulers but not from turk and central asian rulers ??

[@momo-cchi5978]

So, get rid of those Turkic and Iranian rulers. You know, the princes who claimed descent from those invaders. Not the actual Muslim civilians, who they themselves are Indians who were pressured into adopted a foreign religion. I mean, the Hindus are still cool with Parsi and Christian Indians, so why not the Muslims, too, who, by the way, still live in India in the hundreds of millions. 🤷🏾

[@mr_flor]

ooooooh, so the British are at fault for everything bad ever? actually, I have no idea how it flew over my head all this time

[@iaf010]

Eveything bad? No. But they did do lots of bad. They were very good at being evil. Thats why so many people had to chase tbem away from their lands.

[@TheChannelofOrange]

Do a proper video ok the Portuguese dictatorship. It’s fascinating

[@TejaDurgi]

The Royal Indian Navy (RIN) Revolt of 1946. 🔥🔥

[@marcomarciano487]

Are you gonna do a video on the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda?

[@HistoryScope]

Probably at some point. But considering the mental strain making such a video causes, it won't be published any time soon.

[@marcomarciano487]

@ understandable, have a nice holiday

[@SiddharthS-t1i]

being so far away from england and controlling much larger land, the East India company could have created it's own kingdom which would be less pain full to india as it's resources wouldn't go away to a distant land.

[@IsaacFilipe-y2c]

I remember my geography teacher talking about the Indian invasian of Goa during one of my classes once

[@primmm6567]

The idea that everyone was living harmoniously until the British caused divisions is the funniest thing I’ve ever heard

[@Yatagurusu]

The funniest thing is we dont even need to assume 😭😭 the british at the time outright stated that their goals were to create ethnic tensions. That makes it very hard for you people to deny it now😅

[@charananekibalijaun8837]

​@@Yatagurusuit's the British who literally kept everything together. When nationalism poisoned your ancestors' minds, everything fell apart. It's easy to blame the British I guess. Let's outsource our responsibility - that's why you read stuff like 'British invented caste system'. Victim mentality at it's best

[@rishavkumar1250]

​@@Yatagurusuhe is right... the goras exploited these tensions because they were already there

[@Yatagurusu]

@@charananekibalijaun8837 thank you oh white master for teaching us civilisation, for we were lesser evolved apes that swang from trees, just like your textbooks say.

[@markbeale7390]

@@charananekibalijaun8837 Class not caste?

[@MaheshKumar78791]

bro jammu kashmir is a integral part of india , u must show it in india's map in this video .....

[@amritpanda7947]

If you deny the reality you can't achieve the gains of future, the fact is half of kashmir is in Pakistani rule

[@MaheshKumar78791]

@@amritpanda7947 so according to you j & k is not a part of india ?? And if some other country illegally occupied our land we should stop proclaiming our land , is this you want to say ??

[@amritpanda7947]

@MaheshKumar78791 not now completely, in future who knows, if you know what I mean. Boundaries change , but if we don't know where we actually are how are we going to take what we want

[@ohajohaha]

​@@MaheshKumar78791it is disputed per international law and UN.

[@Matrix-tz5yc]

as a Kashmiri, wasnt the purpose to separate muslims and indians? kasmir majority is muslims

[@hansgomez1317]

At 2:10, no, my idea of that came from playing too much eu4 where with a click i send over 100,000 men to conquer me some colonies

[@Talestime0]

A concise and well-structured summary of the Indian subcontinent's colonial history and its path to independence. Highlights key events like the Mughal decline, British exploitation, the 1857 Rebellion, and partition. A reminder of how colonialism shaped modern South Asia.

[@uanime1]

Given how the Muslim Mughal Empire had ruled the Hindu majority for centuries it's somewhat inaccurate to blame all the religious tensions on the British.

[@allangibson8494]

The East India Company wasn’t a “government” organisation. It was a corporation just like Amazon today. India wasn’t technically a colony until the 1850’s - it was a local government that hired corporate mercenaries. France and Britain competed against each other to collect taxes for the local government.

[@goong892]

No matter how much hard work the people of other countries do, they still can't earn money equal to Europeans. I am talking about the majority of the people of a country, not a single person (GDP per capita). The top 50 richest countries in GDP per capita are European countries or oil-rich countries. The real reason Europeans occupy all of North America, South America, Australia, and New Zealand, controlling almost 50% of the world's area and natural resources. Now, some will give examples of: - The Korean Economic Miracle, - The Japanese Economic Miracle, - And the Taiwan Economic Miracle. But in reality, no miracle happened. After World War II, Japan received $23 billion in aid, and Korea received $13 billion from America-these amounts are much higher in today’s value, though the exact numbers are unclear. Japan, Korea, and Taiwan became rich by becoming slaves of America (Europeans). These countries provided military bases to America and followed the same foreign policy as Europeans (for example, when the U.S. sanctioned Russia, Japan also sanctioned Russia). In exchange, America gave them prosperity through money, aid, technology transfer, factory setups, etc. For example, Taiwan is a small island country with a population of 10 million, but still, Taiwan is rich because of semiconductors. How did semiconductors come to Taiwan? Because of the USA. RCA (Radio Corporation of America) set up its semiconductor factory in Taiwan in: - 1966 (initially as a joint venture) - 1970 (as a wholly-owned subsidiary, RCA Taiwan Ltd.)

[@sultan9givewey]

excuses excuses. my girlfriend is singaporean and she just 'git gud' and become rich country

[@conors4430]

Your long winded point?

[@Afnan_Taher]

What about Uruguay, Botswana, Slovenia, China? (P.S Japan was a colonial power)

[@dragonstormdipro1013]

It's almost like looting the world for few hundred years gives you a headstart.

[@HistoryScope]

I made videos about Korea, Japan, and Taiwan already. And no, foreign aid was just a small part of their economic development. The 3 countries in question became rich through state capitalism. Many countries received foreign aid and did not see the same levels of developments.

[@awesomestevie27]

There’s also a religious aspect where well atleast for thr Sikhs they changed Sikhi with a couple things, and they erased history as well as they took over the Gurdwaras and the Gurdwaras were eventually liberated from the British in the 1920s But it was bad there were Idols and Trash in even Sri Harminder Sahib (golden temple) which British also tried to auction until they got scared by the weather changing all of a sudden

[@ioan_jivan]

Very entertaining and of course informative video

[@lanceloomis2569]

Great video, I’m just confused why every map of Canada included Alaska. Did anyone notice that?

[@HistoryScope]

I just checked my file with the assets: I never realized I made Canada wrong several years ago. I am going to fix that.

[@ZawTunAung-ng4ww]

11:33 Erm Actually🥸 Burma is majority Buddhist.

[@HistoryScope]

you're correct. But Burma isn't part of Indian decolonisation. They had their own path. I will cover that in another video.

[@tarunpandey8339]

Sindh , Punjab, PoK : India 🇮🇳 , Khyber Pakhtunkhwa : Afghanistan 🇦🇫, Balochistan : Independent 🟢🔵🔴...

[@YourAashique]

@@tarunpandey8339 whole India: Pakistan

[@OldGreg817]

Yay an early Christmas present 🎉