The Partition of India: Decided By YOU

[@EmperorTigerstar]

What voted on peace treaty or event would you like to do next?

[@the_chosen_one5642]

Collapse of the Spanish Empire, possibly with Brazil as well

[@Futuristicmapping]

SPANISH EMPIRE or the 100 years war

[@potatomasher5310]

maybe post WW2 would be interesting, like the Japanese empire, Italian empire, eastern europe and Germany

[@NobleGamer889]

Partition of the mandate of Palestine🤩🤩🤩

[@stryke5729]

@@NobleGamer889genius

[@whyareyoureadingmynickname8158]

I love how people voted that small coastal area that's not bothering anyone has to be annexed by India, but left a giant Hyderabad right in the middle of subcontinent. I guess some people really love chaos.

[@occam7382]

No, no, no. You're using the wrong phrase. This is the right phrase: "Some men just want to watch the world burn."

[@writershard5065]

And it'd just have the same issue as our reality. India just marched soldiers in and the Nizam could do very little about it. That's how Hyderabad became a part of India. Independent Punjab would be even worse though. It'd promptly spark a war between India and Pakistan over it. The Sikhs would be screwed even more :/

[@erickpoorbaugh6728]

The key difference was that the poll implied that the people of Junagadh would have preferred to join India and it was just the monarch preventing it, but it implied no such thing about the people of Hyderabad. So basically, the voters said, "Go with what the populace wants; the monarch's wishes don't matter." In general, I've found that the polls in this series tend to go with what people think the locals want.

[@occam7382]

@@erickpoorbaugh6728, "In general, I've found that the polls in this series tend to go with what people think the locals want." And do the polls accurately correlate with what the locals actually want?

[@berr21able]

I voted to let India annex Junagadh, if that's what you mean. Allowing Pakistan to annex it would have caused way more trouble in the long run. First, it would have created another border dispute as the area was majority Hindu meaning India would probably still claim the land, further heightening tensions between two countries that did and do hate each other. Secondly, this would have caused major humanitarian issues, as the majority Hindu population would likely all have to move to India. Also, I believe Diu Island would become an exclave in that scenario, and I think they don't have a port, so odds are good there would be a lot of human suffering there as India couldn't supply the area.

[@Great_Olaf5]

Voting on the borders in the decolonization of Africa, the idea popped into my head the other day and won't leave me alone

[@zrpq]

Sorry to pop your bubble but no one cares about Africa 😊 😇😇

[@erickpoorbaugh6728]

I agree, but it might be better to limit it to just one part of Africa---the whole of Africa would probably contain dozens of questions even if he only chose the biggest ones.

[@Great_Olaf5]

@@erickpoorbaugh6728 Once colonizer at a time, compile the whole thing together later?

[@Sadnessiuseless]

@@Great_Olaf5 or regions but yeah colonizer makes more sense

[@occam7382]

Didn't Possible History already do something like this a while back?

[@danielcrud9345]

If this were the real partition of the Indian subcontinent, I feel like India and Pakistan would fight a cold war for influence in Punjab and Kashmir, with maybe China trying to wrestle control in Kashmir. Bengal will probably be a more influential state. Also, I doubt India would allow for an independent Hyderabad and would do everything in its power to annex it, diplomatically or militarily.

[@occam7382]

Oh yeah. India would devolve into absolute chaos if this partition actually went through.

[@andrzejnadgirl2029]

Why cold war? I'm pretty sure that both regions would be on fire, neither India or Pakistan would recognize their independence, it would be a hot mess.

[@danielcrud9345]

@@andrzejnadgirl2029 The only reason I think a cold war would be likely, as while both India and Pakistan won't recognise these states and would want to conquer them, they wouldn't want the other side to get any, which could be the case after direct conflict.

[@awesomestevie27]

Don’t underestimate the Sikhs Sikh empire was one of the most successful countries in the world in the early 1800s

[@aniketghosh6993]

Losing Kolkata this early on would devastate any semblance of stability in the east. Also, I don't think West Bengalis would ever consent to being part of a Bangladesh nation, especially without huge parts of North Bengal to bolster their numbers. In many ways, West Bengalis, due to being predominantly Hindu, would culturally relate to Assamese people more, so they'd demand Assam be a part of a union state to balance out the religions further. This is a doomsday scenario for India. They lose the Industry of the east (it was the industrial center of India prior to the 80s), and even more of the agricultural base of the east and west. This is a doomsday situation for all parties involved barring Bangladeshi Muslims.

[@Caddeus]

Wow. The British Raj is the HRE of Asia. Those borders are a nightmare to look at.

[@NobleGamer889]

@@Caddeus just wait until you see the map of the Chinese warlord era💀💀💀

[@robert9016]

HOI4 player when a map isn’t one big blob: Holy moly it’s the freaking Holy Roman Empire!!!

[@thehuman2cs715]

This really applies here though, did you see the map in the video?

[@occam7382]

@@robert9016, I mean, are they wrong here? You've seen what the British Raj looks like.

[@robert9016]

Guys, I’ve decided that France is the China of Europe because they’re both really big countries.

[@shinyagumon7015]

Of course everyone voted for the most independent states 😂

[@occam7382]

Well, what did you expect?

[@Distress.]

​@@occam7382people who watch a channel like this should have a basic understanding of geopolitics and not "what if there were 1000 countries.

[@shinyagumon7015]

@@occam7382 Exactly this lol

[@dragon_ninja_2186]

@@Distress.but since this won’t change anything in real life why not have fun? Besides it’s boring to have basically the same modern day map except for a few small changes

[@kv4648]

​@@Distress. A lot of smugness in that

[@spatialex]

Some ideas for viewer map polls: - The Scramble for Africa: Decided by YOU - The End of World War Two: Decided by YOU - The Independence of Indonesia: Decided by YOU - The Treaty of Brest-Litovsk: Decided by YOU - The End of the 7 Years War: Decided by YOU - The Subdivisions of the USSR: Decided by YOU

[@zakthebigmac1431]

Subdivision of the USSR is good

[@RockSmithStudio]

Partition of the Ottoman Empire: Decided by YOU would be interesting too

[@greypblox379]

​​@@RockSmithStudiohe did that in the ww1 decided by you video

[@jasondaveries9716]

Love this. Might as well add in treaty of Versailles as well

[@alphaaquilla1359]

The Middle East and Partition of Palestine: Decided by YOU

[@markaxworthy2508]

Hyderabad was about 90% Hindu. There was no justification for it to remain an independent MUSLIM state.

[@didd2810]

Muslim version of "have the cake and eat it too" Kashmir should be Pakistan but Hyderabad should be independent and under a Muslim ruler.

[@markaxworthy2508]

@@didd2810 Or vice versa?

[@jumboo8713]

​@@didd2810 The people of Hyderabad at the time wanted to be part of India it was the king that did not. The issue on Kashmir is more complex.

[@w4led4bas]

​@@jumboo8713the only thing complicated in Kashmir was that nobody asked the Muslim majority population what they wanted

[@didd2810]

@@w4led4bas no one asked anybody what they wanted. The only referendums conducted were in NWFP and Sylhet. Both combined wouldn't even reach a million at the time. Why would anyone bother with Kashmir which was even smaller? Either way Nehru did promise a plebiscite but on the condition that Pakistan abandon it's troops (part of UN conditions) and that Pakistan stop forcing US into this dispute. Pak rejected it multiple times and so Nehru gave up on it. Ever since, Nehru abandoned it, there was no reason for any future PM to pretend it matters. The plebiscite is long dead. You can't demand something that was a product of 7 decade old politics.

[@SquidMonke4]

Wow guys we did it. We made it worse.

[@valentinmitterbauer4196]

ET is at fault here for not giving the option of regional autonomous zones. Meaning, instead of, for example, Hyderabad becoming either independent or "just" a state of India, it could be an autonomous region within India with a higher than average level of self-governance. It worked for South Tyrol in Italy, even though that divide is ethnic/linguistic, not religious.

[@SquidMonke4]

@@valentinmitterbauer4196 nah it would have been the same. People like picking the wildest options

[@flyingfrogs4744]

@@valentinmitterbauer4196 Why would it need an autonomous region? it's a majority Hindu region

[@michaelthomas5433]

This is why we need A.I. to run things.

[@holdenennis]

*better

[@ColumbaMacFearghas]

The partition of Yugoslavia in the 1990s. Yugoslavia obviously broke into states broadly aligned with the ethnic/religious groups living in the former state. What possible alternatives could we come up with? Greater Serbia, Greater Croatia? Albanian Kosovo, Catholic/Orthodox/Muslim? so many options! It might still be too close to the present to really talk about but it would still be interesting.

[@ender7278]

Honestly, I don't think there's much wiggle room for alternatives. It would have to be splitting hairs like we did with post-Napoleonic France. Stuff like whether to trade Goražde.

[@xanthespace5141]

>broke into states broadly aligned with the ethnic/religious groups With some exceptions, the borders follow the ones of the republics within Yugoslavia, so idk what you could even do there

[@hogndog2339]

It all goes to Albania

[@Hexapp]

well the Bangladesh genocide wouldn't happen

[@pritsingh9766]

Hahaha 😆 stop being delusional. It would still happen but in your hypothetical scenario victims would have been bangladeshi Hindus .Miya people can never live peacefully with kafirs ,it's not possible. Either Bangladeshi hindus would've won or thousands of them would've ran away .

[@didd2810]

Instead Bangladeshi Muslims would've genocided the minorities, both Bengali and non-Bengali ones

[@kushaliyersharma9688]

@@thedictationofallah bangladesh had 300k deths, which is the lowest possible estimate. and also most of civilian deths were from razakars, the nizam's own paramilitary force. dont try to hide the details in history.

[@VarunKumar-ek3kr]

​@@kushaliyersharma9688what do you expect

[@angkitmoirang3042]

​@@thedictationofallahyou clearly have no idea how many people died in Bengali genocide. Regarding Hyderabad i don't think India hiding anything though i myself don't have much understanding about this incident. A single Google search disclosed all the sensitive story.

[@k.umquat8604]

Fella, you've just poked a subcontinent sized beehive

[@albertjose8879]

Not really. This map is sooo impractical. Im glad it is the way it is today given that European colonisers gave it no time to fully hold referendums etc… hastening the process

[@TheGrimStoic]

that was what he hoped for, anyway...

[@rocketlauncher6207]

This deadass is worse than the irl partition

[@fsbayer]

One thing you missed was the fact that the "P" in Pakistan comes from Punjabi, so in this world it'd have to be called Akistan...

[@azlanadil3646]

Well I mean… in this timeline independent Punjab wouldn’t exist for very long. The Muslim majority in the province would try to unify with Pakistan, either leading to a war or the province still being partitions, most likely in a way more favourable to Pakistan. I also think in this timeline it’s very likely that Pakistan invade sand annexes Kashmir, because it’s very difficult for India to access the province while Punjab exists. Hyderabad is also almost certainly annexed eventually.😊

[@azlanadil3646]

Well I mean… in this timeline independent Punjab wouldn’t exist for very long. The Muslim majority in the province would try to unify with Pakistan, either leading to a war or the province still being partitions, most likely in a way more favourable to Pakistan. I also think in this timeline it’s very likely that Pakistan invade sand annexes Kashmir, because it’s very difficult for India to access the province while Punjab exists. Hyderabad is also almost certainly annexed eventually.

[@awesomestevie27]

Well panjab is still part of India, Pakistan and “independent panjab” which would likely be called Khalistan

[@satnav9699]

@@azlanadil3646 If you look at the composition of the British Indian army after ww2 Sikh troops made up about 15-20% of combat forces + 10% Hindu of Panjabi origin, very unlikely a military/revolt would work.

[@jamieaustin8996]

He only granted the Sikh section of Punjab independence, Pakistan were still given some of Punjab.

[@markaxworthy2508]

The small number of Sikhs (about 1.6%) did not justify a three state solution. They weren't even a majority in their native area of Punjab.

[@dranflame_1236]

That small independent punjab nestled between india and pakistan makes absolutely zero sense. Sikhism wouldnt even be the majority religion there, in fact it wouldnt even be the plurality or second largest. Itd be the third largest religion behind a muslim majority and a significant hindu minority, I dont see this state lasting for more than a few months tbh. Sikhs didnt make up the majority of a single tehsil, hence why their proposals for an independent state were immediately shot down and they reluctantly threw their weight behind india instead.

[@Rajaniaveerinder]

Sikh empire existed with 10% Sikh population It would only be fair to give them an independent state for there sacrifices, less than 1% of Indian population but 30% of British Indian army

[@sumitroy3483]

​@@Rajaniaveerinder how the voting will happen in that country? I don't think Sikh make up majority in that area. You can't disenfranchise the Hindu and Muslim.

[@satnav9699]

@@sumitroy3483 disenfranchis how, the voting in the 1940 election had the unity party as the biggest party, Hindu and Muslim would not be refused a vote

[@leaveme3559]

That was 200 years ago....things are very different now...​@@Rajaniaveerinder

[@dranflame_1236]

@@Rajaniaveerinder What? How is any of that relevant to them having an independent state.

[@MarcTelang]

5:14 seems like people learn from history

[@Cannon530YT]

6:16 _or not..._

[@covexgameplay9019]

Personally, I prefer the no partition solution

[@m79316]

Guess you like chaos

[@didd2810]

​@@m79316it wouldn't have been chaotic had the elitists not made it so. Pakistan was created on the backs of Muslim businessmen and landowners. The majority of Muslims weren't even allowed to vote in the elections. Pakistanis themselves never voted till 1971 and the time they did, 55% of their country left and became Bangladesh.

[@svanimation8969]

​@@m79316is india chaotic ? Just see 1 partition india pak cuzed 6 wars out of which 4 were full scale wars 😂 can u imagine if there were more partitions we would have been another UN MEMBER VOTEBANK like afrcian continent of other rich strong united nations

[@whoisjoe5610]

Basado

[@whoisjoe5610]

​@@m79316 >muh chaos Meanwhile causing the largest mass migration in human history isn't chaotic apparently

[@xlr8_bs514]

5:13 Okay what? Why did you only give two choices? Any Bengali out there would vote to stay in India. We are the most patriotic Indians out there. The majority of all Indian freedom fighters were Bengalis. This is kinda offensive ngl. We'd never join Pakistan and we have absolutely no wish to separate from our motherland Bharat.

[@Cupcake0228]

True this mf just took option out of nowhere without any proper research bengalis are more patriotic than any of us indians could be

[@twilighttricksterXXI]

​@@Cupcake0228 I mean look at the bright side. At least ভারতের less developed provinces won't drag us down. and it's not like it's that weird. Bengal has pretty much always been an independent power in the subcontinent since the পাল সম্রাজ্য। With breaks at the hands of Delhi, Mughals and ofc the Brits and Pakistanis. And we've been one of the top dogs for pretty much our entire history. H*ll the subcontinent wouldn't even be British if a certain someone didn't betray us in a certain battle in 1757.

[@LittletbigT]

I feel like most of these decisions would make things worse or just lead to india/pakistan annexing the smaller state BESIDES independant Bengal which would prevent their bloody independance war and I think create a stronger bangladesh off of shared regional identity not just religious lines.

[@svanimation8969]

I think Pakistan would have been not created instead west Bengal and Bangladesh should be one contry and Pakistan and india one since both parties share similar culture and yes here I'm not talking about religion in reality religion does not play much role than local language culture and traditional practices

[@anupamsatpathi2071]

​@@svanimation8969West Bengal's culture , religion, is different from Bangladesh🇧🇩, I am from West Bengal, No one from from West Bengal want to part of Bangladesh even today.

[@subhajitdutta286]

​@@svanimation8969 lol 🤣🤣🤣 I'm bengali from West Bengal, and We will die but never join Bangladesh🤮 INDIA is my vanity, my conceit, my pride🇮🇳🇮🇳🇮🇳🇮🇳🌹

[@twilighttricksterXXI]

​@@subhajitdutta286 and that is just patriotism built up by almost a hundred years of Indian propaganda. If Bengal was united then you would most certainly be similarly patriotic about that Bengal.

[@D7U110]

​@@twilighttricksterXXI You've to know an Islamic majority state in the subcontinent will always be dysfunctional and worse, torturous for Hindus. An independent muslim majority Bengal would've resulted in something similar to Kashmiri exodus. And those who remained would be religiously raped and converted. Which is what is happening to Sindhi hindus.

[@lifelikellama6324]

Partition of china by europe and japan

[@alexzhangdragonn3438]

Looks like the boxers will have to come and kick you out

[@lepmuhangpa]

You think they'll let them divide China? Without even trying to start the deadliest war in the world?

[@VarunKumar-ek3kr]

​@@alexzhangdragonn3438kinda the opposite happened

[@Qualityfun-relaxationLla-ud7pm]

​@@alexzhangdragonn3438It was indeed possible as china was in turmoil and was not strong at this point

[@Qualityfun-relaxationLla-ud7pm]

​@@alexzhangdragonn3438Many peripheral areas like outer manchuria, tuva taiwan and many port cities were taken so it was possible

[@eclements99]

Alternate vote on Partition of Africa after decolonization would be cool and I’m sure would cause absolutely 0 issues

[@datredhat]

I would like to see the treaty after world war 2 for a poll.

[@goofycat676]

That was done

[@datredhat]

@@Cannon530YT sorry I meant ww2 I’ll edit the comment

[@tathemrelag3123]

Just started the video, but lol at the captions at the start. "after World War III the world was forever changed" Y'know, I'd think so, but somehow I completely missed that it had happened.

[@anmolagarwal8671]

the only solution was full undivided india in 1947.

[@kaiserslim2751]

One that I'd be interested in would be for the aftermath of the Mexican-American War. In the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo, Mexico gave up a lot of territory to the US, but there were some Americans who wanted even more, even all of Mexico, while others didn't even want to take any land at all. I believe there were still also a couple other movements trying to gain independence from Mexico around that time, as well (though I could very well be getting the timeline confused), so it would be fun to maybe include them in an alternate treaty. Just a suggestion, though. I'm under no illusions that you'll pick this one for next time. 😂

[@DiamondKingStudios]

Well, General Scott made it all the way to Mexico City.

[@erickpoorbaugh6728]

There was also an attempt by the then-independent Republic of Yucatan to join the US like Texas had, and the bill even passed the US House of Representatives and was supported by President Polk, but the US Senate rejected it.

[@kaiserslim2751]

@erickpoorbaugh6728 I knew Republic of Yucatan was trying to separate from Mexico, but hadn't heard about them trying to join the US. That would be another interesting choice to have on there.

[@DiamondKingStudios]

@@erickpoorbaugh6728 Given that we were named the “United States of America”, I could imagine that among our founders there was ambition within some to encompass a large part, if not the entirety, of the Americas (or at least North America). It was this sort of ambition that probably led to Manifest Destiny, and would have perhaps led to incorporation of the Yucatán as a state, but I would have imagined that many who opposed its being a state would have taken it as a territory (which I think would have proven to be a worse position if kept in perpetuity). My guess as to why it failed, aside from concerns within Washington about a war against indigenous populations within that peninsula (after they had just finished fighting Mexico), was probably because Southern senators didn’t want it as a state. They had given Texas a pass since many of their own flesh and blood (the Anglo-Texan settlers from Tennessee, Georgia, and other Southern states) had established a large presence there and were generally enthusiastic to let slavery expand into the new state (in contrast to Mexico’s abolition of the practice). To them, the Yucatán wouldn’t have been as advantageous; aside from there being very few white, English-speaking Protestants, if any, I’d imagine there to have been a general consensus against slavery. Throw in the matter of ocean logistics (they likely weren’t going to annex Veracruz, Tamaulipas, or any other state bordering the Gulf), and I think that explains why the bill failed and ended up a defeat for many Young America-minded fellows of the day.

[@DiamondKingStudios]

@@kaiserslim2751 I think their delegation in Washington went to our government to propose this. I do know it passed the House but failed the Senate.

[@emilydaddona6329]

We seriously need "End of the Thirty Years War: Decided by YOU"

[@the11382]

That's one way to cause Catholics and Protestants to fight in the comments.

[@theman8421]

Treaty of Utrecht ending the war of spanish succession which ended in a stalemate which could give a lot of wild card options, like does savoy get naples and sicily and could bavaria or the dutch get the spanish lowlands. Theres a lot of possible things you could do for this one. As the great powers seek to check french power but also not let austria get too strong.

[@03.achyuthans39]

The issues here are 1) Partition happened because of religious differences. Bengal was a province that was partitioned early on in the 1905 (as 2 provinces within the empire) but had to be merged because of their protests. But by 1947 the Hindu Muslim divide had grown enough to overpower the ethnic affinity. So keeping Bengal united but Punjab divided makes no sense as both were divided because of similar reasons. 2) This independent Punjab would never survive because Sikhs were the 3rd largest group. Obviously the majority Muslims and significant minority Hindus would further divide the land and gravitate towards their sides. Or maybe the Sikhs can disenfranchise all the Hindus and the Muslims and make it like colonial govt. 3) Hyderabad is.. complicated. The people weren’t that fond of the Nizam but they were also a mix of majority Telugus and other Marathi and Kannada peoples. Marathis and Kannadigas would’ve wanted separation from Telugu Core of the territory and the result would be basically modern Telangana. Even then, who’s to say Telugu affinity won’t make Hyderabad state and Andhra State merge as they did irl. 4) Independent Kashmir would blow up in 5 mins. Which is actually what happened. The King wanted to be independent. Kashmir was the only state in the subcontinent to be offered that choice. But neighbours had other ideas. Best solution for Kashmir would’ve been Kashmir Valley, Gilgit for Pakistan. Jammu and Ladakh for India. 5) Majority of the Buddhists you showed in Bangladesh are the chakma. They speak an Indi Aryan language related to Bengali and Assamese. It’s possible they could’ve been merged with India. The Mizos on the other hand could’ve been merged with the Chin State and the Nagas could’ve been given independence.

[@awesomestevie27]

Sikh empire literally consisted before 1849 and Sikhs were only 10-12% of population Sikhs laws have lots of tolerance for other religions and races etc

[@user-Aoyon]

Right now 90% of the people living in Chittagong hill tract are bangali.

[@didd2810]

​@@awesomestevie27Autocratic empires ruled by a minority just don't work in India anymore, honey. J&K, Junagadh and Hyderabad were more than clear examples.

[@didd2810]

​@@user-Aoyonbecause they're illegal colonial settlers worse than even the Israelis

[@didd2810]

Hilarious if we have to pretend the Kashmir Valley, a region that is a third of the size of effin Bhutan can be a successful independent state when it's at the crossroads of three nuclear states. Hilarious suggestion. 😂

[@idk_smr_sgh]

I think most of the damn voters were neither Indian nor Pakistani 😭😭

[@parkerprice6787]

Ideas for new partition polls: Spanish American Wars of Independence, and Mexican-American War

[@SameedChowdhury]

Just wanted to add some extra info about Sylhet. Sylhet (pronounced Silet, the h is silent) was the only region in India to really vote for whether it wanted to join India or Pakistan. However, the referendum itself wasn't actually for India or Pakistan, but whether Sylhet should rejoin the province of Bengal after the British put them into Assam instead. When Sylhet asked Bengal to rejoin, they were denied. At first this angered Sylhet, but eventually the Muslims of Sylhet wanted to stay in Assam because it gave them financial opportunities. The poorer Hindus stuck to nationalism and still wanted to rejoin Bengal. In the decades following, this stance soon changed. Rejoining Bengal meant becoming part of Pakistan, while staying in Assam meant becoming part of India. Hindus being a majority meant that the referendum would've been in India's favor, however the Assamese government wanted a homogenous province for their people and rigged the referendum in order to let Pakistan take Sylhet. This involved not allowing politicians to advocate for Assam, instead allowing Pakistan to advocate for Bengal, as well as putting the voting polls in areas with fewer Hindus. In this alternate scenario, the result would depend on which religion was the majority in Sylhet, if the referendum was rigged or not, and if there was even a referendum in the first place. If there IS a referendum, Sylhet likely ends up going to Bengal anyway, rigged or not. If there ISN'T a referendum, there's a good chance that it's not just Sylhet that joins Bengal, but the entire Barak Valley region, and even small parts of Meghalaya and Tripura which all have Syheti Bengalis living there.

[@didd2810]

Few things. First, not just Sylhet, but also NWFP voted but that referendum is considered less reliable because the pro-India Khudia Khitmatgar asked their followers to boycott it. Second, I just find it funny that Assam willingly let go of Sylhet to ensure Assam remains majority Assamese and Hindu. And yet, thanks to illegal migrants, Assam is now 40% Muslim and Bengali. So now they're on their way to become secunda Bangaldesh but without Sylhet.

[@didd2810]

Also Tripura never had any majority Bengali areas. And even if it did, the Tripuri monarch would've never allowed any inch of the land to be acceded. They were incredibly nationalistic.

[@SameedChowdhury]

@@didd2810 For your first point, I'm aware the referendum isn't reliable, however in a althist scenario this likely wouldn't matter. Apparently Chittagong was also offered to Assam and they declined it for the same reason as Sylhet. Not sure if it's true but incredibly funny if it is lol The illegal immigrants also wouldn't matter in this althist scenario, since they wouldn't be nearly the same size. (Also I can't find anything about how many Bengalis are actually immigrants or native Sylheti) Furthermore, the Barak Valley was ALWAYS majority Muslim and Sylheti Bengali. Its hard to find proper sources online however apparently the reason Barak Valley isn't it's own state is because they're too small, so Assam shot itself in the foot by giving Sylhet to Pakistan 😭 About Tripura, my definition of Sylheti Bengali is whoever speaks the language. There are parts (probably extremely small, especially by now) of northern Tripura that speak a dialect with a high intelligibility with Sylheti. I should have put a giant "maybe" in my comment about taking land from Tripura, my bad.

[@angkitmoirang3042]

If you mean by Bengal the today Bangladesh i must really really thank God. The thought of being part of Bangladesh even frightened me.😂 I m from Barak Valley btw

[@SameedChowdhury]

@@angkitmoirang3042 The referendum was to join East Bengal, the British Indian province, since Sylhet was in the British Indian province of Assam. Not sure what got you thinking about Bangladesh...?

[@TheShySoviet]

I want another partition video, but It’s about the collapse of the Soviet Union

[@Mrcommunist]

It would be really interesting how it will affect Ukraine LOL

[@Cannon530YT]

Interesting mapping video… I’m glad that you have involved the community with this channel!

[@arjunghanekar6140]

I don't think non South Asians realize its not possible for Kashmir for to be independent unless its independence was backed by both the USA and the USSR at the advent of its creation. It simply coudn't have existed, they tried and Pakistan invaded immediately.

[@letsplaywithmegacyborg3098]

kashmir was muslim majority that wanted to join pakistan. they should've acceded to pakistan

[@Nexor1]

Same thing with Hyderabad

[@letsplaywithmegacyborg3098]

@@Nexor1 not really

[@Nexor1]

@@letsplaywithmegacyborg3098 I meant the whole immediate invasion from one of the big powers

[@Sid-wx7gi]

A muslim majority area with a non Muslim (Hindu I think ?) king who wanted to remain independent. But Pakistan invaded and the king agreed to join India. So a part of it is in India and the rest in Pakistan ​@@letsplaywithmegacyborg3098

[@zahranmohammad3880]

I'd like the Sikes-Picot agreement as a vote

[@GPGMusketeertigershark]

Already done in the ww1 video

[@fpoggesi]

Is there a compilation of all the maps the viewers have redrawn? Any chance we can get a world map per the community?

[@enderkatze6129]

It would've been fine if they made like 5-10 states instead i think ...

[@ABCantonese]

2:06 I disagree. Not because of the border, but because of the timing. If the British had let India go as planned in 1948, and kept things in check, you wouldn't have had the blood baths that were Lahore and everywhere else along the border. Do you think the massacres would've happened if there were some sort of police control? Sure, Kashmir will always be an issue, but if it wasn't for Kashmir, everything between the two would be fine. I guess if Kashmir was formally split early on, things would be settled.

[@hf_61]

people keep saying China is aggressive while the Indians keep annexing neighbours lands illegally, I will remember you Skkim😢Poor all neighbours around India

[@TDenterpriser]

A poll on the fate of the axis powers after World War Two would be awesome

[@kestrel5895]

"Germany keeps everything from Alsace to Poland"

[@TDenterpriser]

While yes there would be options to determine the new border between Germany and Poland. Whether the Austria should remain apart of Germany it can include much more. Such as alternative divisions to Germany such as the morgathua plan, Churchills plan, the Roosevelt plan, Stalins plan for a united neutral Germany, or Kaufmans dismemberment cause why not. An option if Japan should be divided or not. Alternative partitions of indochina and Korea. Whether to interpolate one of the Dutch plans for expanding into German territory. The fate of trieste. If Yugoslavia is allowed to annex Bulgaria. Yugoslav expansion into Austria. the fate of the Saarland. Alternative fates to Italys colonies such as the Eritrea. Whether the Soviets withdraw from persia or not as well as their lands taken as part of the Molotov Ribbentrop pact. As well as the level of Soviet presence in Eastern European states such as Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, Albania, and Greece. If Slovakia should remain apart of Czechoslovakia. If the United States of America can buy Greenland, etc. This is just what I could think of so there would be quite a bit of variation of what could happen lol

[@kestrel5895]

@@TDenterpriser I like all your ideas tbh but if I learnt anything from the previous times is that most voters will vote for anything damaging the USSR without thinking about the consequences just like the ww1 video

[@Cannon530YT]

*_No Germany?_* 😏

[@TDenterpriser]

@@kestrel5895lol what’s wrong with that. All you’d be doing is collapsing the ussr quicker and shortening the cold war

[@bobemor]

I feel like an option to unite Kashmir and Punjab could be an interesting potentially viable third state solution (assuming the thin border region is also granted). Would then have a clear nation for each major religion.

[@kalkuttadrop6371]

With hindsight, while the original wasn’t the worst option, it was basically a ‘Hindu Half Vs Muslim Half’, which isn’t how it worked out with Bangladesh gaining independence. So I’d not partition them, keeping West Bengal with Bangladesh(which made sense when it was just a flat Muslim-Hindu split, but not if Bangladesh is independent). With hindsight that’s just logical. And with that done give the Sikh’s their own thing

[@phoenixdemarino6655]

Africa. Either the scramble, or decolonization, either would be interesting

[@tea7795]

punjab state would collapse in a matter of weeks and probably be this timelines kashmir. hyderabad would be conquered eventually similarly to goa and the dogra rulers of kashmir would have gotten overthrown sooner or later, the thing that triggered the firsti indo-pakistan war was a muslim revolt in kashmir after all. Bengal state would be more powerful and influential in this timeline but probably some sectarian woes over religion, they would not be as close to india in this timeline too I predict. my family originate from the punjab state and would probably get caught up in the fighting so i might not exist in this timeline :/

[@didd2810]

The revolt was by Muslims but not for Islam but taxation and not in Kashmir but Poonch. Poonchis are not Kashmiris. I don't know about Pakistani Poonchis but Indian Poonchis would be very annoyed if you call them that.

[@didd2810]

Also Bengal would probably break up quickly and violently a la India. Even the original free state proposed was a replica of the Lebanese govt. If it's not clear, this would've anyways led to at least a civil war if not alternate genocide anyways.

[@tea7795]

@@didd2810 Muslims were being oppressed by the maharaja anyways there would have been some sort of revolt soon enough as many Muslims were veterans of ww2 and had combat experience. Maybe even India will secretly support it to get an excuse to annex Kashmir.

[@tea7795]

@@didd2810 I’m not so sure about bengal personally since I don’t know too much on how partition was handled there. I’m sure there would be intercommunal violence of some sort at the minimum

[@rishavkumar1250]

​@@tea7795 I am a bengali hindu from Indian bengal , ... and we wouldn't want to live with the Bangladeshis...

[@TesterIsDone]

It would be cool if you added like 5 options per question and then used IRV to determine a winner, rather than a plurality winning

[@GustavSvard]

Voting on carving up Europe a few times, then Africa, then India. Whats' left... Re-draw the US states! Let's say there's a clause in the constitution that the states should be redrawn every 200 years.

[@matthiuskoenig3378]

make it every 100 years

[@3dMASTER_anime]

good think thanks brother

[@_Anmo_]

And everyone forgot about Rahingya

[@Abdus_VGC]

India was never meant to be divided

[@oatdilemma6395]

Thanks to the British India is now united

[@ZOMBIEo07]

It was never united in its entire history. If Britain didnt do it, Indian sub-continent would be split like todays europe.

[@whoisjoe5610]

​@@ZOMBIEo07 False, there were several centralised and United empires throughout Indian history, saying it wouldn't have been united even with modern technology and nationalism is intellectually inconsistent

[@ZOMBIEo07]

@@whoisjoe5610 Why would the states ever unite? Look at europe, or south america, or african countries, the arab countries. The empires that "united" India were invaders that conquered the people and didnt control all of the sub-continent.

[@whoisjoe5610]

@@ZOMBIEo07 Why would the states unite OTL either? Because it happened historically, multiple times, and each time resulted in the flourishing of arts, culture and the economy? You are also acting as if the British were the ones who created the Indian identity whereas that is the exact opposite of what they wanted to do, which is to keep people divided and fighting amongst themselves. It was the Indian nationalists and liberals who created the Indian national identity and the concept of India as a nation state once again, although this was heavily inspired by old ideas that were written thousands of years ago in the classical era by imperial philosophers who lived when India was a unified country. Look up Chanakya's thoughts on national identity in Aryavarta which was written in the 3rd century BCE which describes "Bharatvarsam" and the people living amongst it as a people sharing common heritage.

[@llawliet57807]

Kashmir situation is more complex then it seems. What foreign people call 'kashmir' is actually a union of Kashmir valley jammu region ladakh and gilgit baltistan into a single state which was done when the dogras of jammu conquered the whole area. Otherwise all theses regions have their own culture identity language etc. So for a pebliscite to happen first you have to divide the whole region and then do a voting separately

[@didd2810]

And even then it's difficult because Pir Panjal and Kishtwar are communally and ethnically too mixed.

[@lian0013]

The North Eastern part of India ia a big doozy. I expected more people to vote on that. The Naga community themselves want a separate country as Nagaland which includes some parts of Assam, Arunachal and Manipur. Manipur on the other hand are already in a bloody conflict due to Burmese immigrants and conflict between local tribes... On the other hand Assam as well wants to be a separate country as ULFA demands...Sorry if I got any info wrong.

[@didd2810]

@@lian0013 tbf, including parts of the state is trickier than anything else. It's irredentist. That's why they even call it Greater Nagaland/Nagalim. The other states won't agree without confrontation. Also, ULFA in Assam is dead. It was pretty big back in its heyday (around 80s to 90s) but now things have changed drastically. It's almost like it never existed when you go to Assam. Assamese have completely shifted and have become fulltime mainstream Indians in these last two decades. I see no possible return of ULFA or secessionism among Assamese anymore. However, among non-Assamese in Assam such as Bodos, Bengalis, etc. I can't say.

[@What-thaW]

I love these videos so much

[@justinian-the-great]

Imagine doing this for the collapse of Yugoslavia! Lol, it would be a dumpsterfire!

[@azazelazel]

A united Bengal not defined by religion is definitely the way to go. I think there should also realistically be a united Punjab, whether that's as part of India or as an independent state. It has only done harm dividing communities based on religious affiliation.

[@concept5631]

I voted for Big Bengal because they deserve to have nice things.

[@azlanadil3646]

IDK, I feel like the Muslim majority in the province would most likely still try to unify with Pakistan. Edit: I mean Punjab not Bengal. An independent Bengal… you know literally exists.

[@awesomestevie27]

Before the British and before 1849 the panjab was controlled by the Sikhs despite them being 10-12% of the population (well Sikh empire consisted of parts of then Afghanistan and Kashmir)

[@pritsingh9766]

Hahaha bangladeshi luring Bengali Hindus .I don't know about bengali Hindus but punjabi hindus here know what happens when you are surrounded by miya population. I would rather live among my own Himachali, haryanvi, Rajasthani ,dogra brothers than living among Miya punjabis.

[@mimorisenpai8540]

For punjab situation actually complicated because not only divided by religious but linguistics and caste too

[@arghaargha00000]

Succession of Texas, California, Alaska, Hawai, Southern states of USA Succession of Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales, Succession of Catalonia, France's overseas territories, Tibbat, Taiwan, Hokkaido, Palestine, Gaza, Kurdistan, Southern Italy, East Germany, Western Ukraine,

[@minskdhaka]

If India was gonna be partitioned two ways, all of Bengal and all of Punjab should have gone to Pakistan. If it was going to be partitioned three ways, a united Bengal should have become the third independent dominion to emerge there.

[@marcus7564]

I can't see an independent Hyderabad and Punjab being viable, especially the former.

[@a_simple_atheist]

Make a video about an alterrnate history where british raj faces the same fate as yugoslavia. Multiple independent states. Lot of war....

[@sirloinofice]

Well if it was really decided by me then the British would have locked Jinnah and Nehru in a room and let them figure it out. This is my solution to all post colonial border disputes. Lock both sides in a conference room until they come to an agreement.

[@didd2810]

Nehru would've stayed in that room till Jinnah died of TB. And then Nehru died of the same

[@Trollge398]

​@@didd2810either that or one kills the other

[@D2RCR]

This map would make for a VERY interesting alternate history video.

[@OBIIIIIIIII]

Creating new states is good and all but theres an assumption neither country just invades whenever they fancy and create an even worse war for either the little country fighting for its independence or india and pakistan fighting a proxy war or just a straight out war

[@aniketghosh6993]

Creating new states like this won't just risk proxy wars or wars of conquest, but even more exoduses. The numbers and financial dominance of Hindus in a United Bengal might protect them, but Sikhs and Hindus would probably get purged from that Punjab state like irl in Pakistan and Kashmir (and this happened in Kashmir while it was under Indian administration).

[@MIKE_THE_BRUMMIE]

My vision would have been to push Islam over the border of Afghanistan

[@mellon4251]

I wanna vote for the threaty of Westphalia😃

[@deadgavin4218]

i wanted it to be messy but thats a rather stylish map

[@dhope214able]

As a certified Indian, I approve of these borders (and agree that they will cause conflicts that will last for generations to come) 😎

[@anupamsatpathi2071]

I am from West Bengal, India🇮🇳 and don't approved this idea.

[@fushhiii]

You are not Indian to begin with to approve something. As a Indian myself I don't approve this borders

[@braunschweig-mapping-01]

@@fushhiii i think its a joke

[@SirAroace]

can we get a print-out of the final map?

[@garion742]

Man, how did I miss the poll? 😢 Ah well still a good video For the next video maybe the partition of Africa from the Berlin Conference?

[@renegade-ginger]

I'll always remember that I made a map for a speculative north-south split between an INC-run Bharat and a big Pakistan for a RP-type thingy for a class centered on worldwide post-colonial history. It was a pretty cool concept and I wound up using something similar in my own teaching. The map was never actually supposed to be what was taken as the final offer (not like we expected them to be cool with us taking Bihar after all) because my faction within the Muslim League was hoping for a decentralized federal state. We wound up getting the Federation primarily with backing from the Sikhs and Jains. What was really crazy though was that somehow that map I made found itself off my university's online service to Indian Facebook where it was being used by some Hindu ultranationalists as anti-Muslim propaganda. I found it going around Reddit a couple years back (for context, this course I took was like a decade ago) and frankly I was just kind of baffled that I had to explain this to a bunch of subreddits saying 'hey I made that for something totally unrelated to how you found this, maybe don't spread disinformation.' The moral of the story: be careful when ya make reasonably good-quality althist stuff. Ya never know what wackos are going to try and weaponize it. ALWAYS ADD A WATERMARK TO YOUR STUFF ARTISTS!

[@RKNGL]

Honestly I don't hate it. Hyderabad is the craziest and worst looking but it would really have to build a dynamic with India to survive. Bengal, Punjab, and Kashimer really do solve a lot of problems. They can simply be self determined spheres of influence of India and Pakistan.

[@nrubikk8595]

Viewer vote on: - The treaty after the first balkan war (includes the into-turkish war and wild card ideas such as those after ww1) - The Polish partition - A possible Partition of AMERICA in various different points of early exploration (1501 [First slaves brought to America by Spain] ; 1519 [Spain conquers Mexico] ; 1524 [The French explore the coast of New England and the New York Bay]

[@nrubikk8595]

Italo-Turkish*

[@ASH9366]

More Trouble in this region 😔😕😔 Nightmare 😂 😧 😅

[@L123-mapping]

Question: how do you make your maps so accurate without using any layers?

[@3bostonboys]

Everyone likes more countries on the map… unless it’s the Holy Roman Empire

[@matthiuskoenig3378]

people have been conditioned to hate on the HRE despite it being a long lasting and relatively stable institution.

[@siyacer]

i voted

[@jojo.s_bekaar_adventures]

India: "A Hindu dominant state ruled by a Muslim? We'll annex it." (Hyderabad) Also India: "A Muslim dominant state ruled by a Hindu? We'll annex it." (Kashmir)

[@flyingfrogs4744]

Pakistan invaded first

[@nikhiljoshiPi]

As she ought to. There is something called offensive defense.

[@axel665]

Let's be real it was never gonna be independent both countries wanted it

[@D_402S-h2z]

Pakistan invaded first. India didn't care about Kashmir at all until Raja Hari Singh approached India to protect them. It wasn't annexation.

[@axel665]

@@D_402S-h2z well we tried to coerce Hari Singh to join india but yeah mostly pakistan tribals invading was the one who forced him to join india

[@TheMonarchOfTetris]

love these videos maybe do the colonization of Africa in the congress of Berlin next

[@alecnygard1769]

I can’t find the other previous videos in the series 😢

[@Cannon530YT]

EmperorTigerstar Channel>Playlist>History Decided by YOU

[@MongoIndyleo]

Would've been better if it all just remained one state. I think the most stable system would've been to somehow revive the Mughal Empire with a Sunni Muslim as its King/Emperor to symbolically protect the Muslim minority in the country. But both Muslims and Hindus would continue to live side by side as they had done for 1000 years before.

[@unknownme7177]

Exactly 💯 I agree with you.

[@AdityaFSen]

Partition was the great tragedy of colonial rule. The Indian identity was one based on negation, as the union was fundamentally a collection of disperate princely states deciding (with a bit of arm twisting from Sardar Patel) that they had more in common with each other as Indians. What it meant to be Indian was to recognise that which we had in common with people. Now we bicker over which plots of land (and by extension the people therein) belong to whom, and endlessly feed the more violent, reactionary politics in each other's countries. Hindu Muslim bhai-bhai. Jai hind.

[@Distress.]

Without partition india would've immediately decend into civil war. The most successful countries are mono religious.

[@pritsingh9766]

Hindu-MusIim bhai bhai won't work at places where musLems are majority. Go and ask Afghan Hindus ,Buddhists and sikhs about this .

[@Nexor1]

@@pritsingh9766why don’t we ask some indian Muslim’s about their fun experiences?? Afghanistan is the most extreme example run by TERRORISTS??? As a child of pakistani immigrants I honestly don’t care much anymore about Pakistan it’s just a sad hopeless dream but the reason we wanted our own country is we were scared what would happened to muslims in a Hindu state maybe a unite India could’ve worked but tensions were high

[@warpdrive9229]

@@Nexor1 Chill. India has more muslims than Pakistan and more mosques than all of middle east combined. 200 million muslims! They are safe.

[@warpdrive9229]

@@Nexor1 Compare that to Pakistan where Christians and Hindus are 2%-3% and are treated at subhumans and their numbers are dwindling. They are different by orders of magnitude.

[@danielescalantedemedeiros.]

I need Treaty of Trianon decided by YOU

[@EmperorTigerstar]

That's the first one! We did all the World War I treaties in 1 video.

[@danielescalantedemedeiros.]

@@EmperorTigerstar Oh is true lmao

[@svenrio8521]

Wait, this isnt Potential History 😳

[@august8696]

what would you do if one of these polls went completely historical

[@baltasarjimenez2091]

When did this vote happen??? I didn't hear anything about it in your last video!

[@m79316]

Check community posts

[@kommandantgalileo]

Now let's do Africa

[@Mr_Godmode]

Independent Sikkim yay

[@didd2810]

China would've gobbled them up anyways. Which is one reason why Sikkimese have never voiced any sentiment of separatism yet.

[@Mr_Godmode]

@@didd2810 could’ve been like Bhutan and India does the foreign policy but I agree being in India probably works best for them I just find it a really cool nation

[@svanimation8969]

​@@Mr_Godmodeindias plan was to keep them like that but sikkim King had some other plans Ikyk

[@didd2810]

@@Mr_Godmode not exactly because Sikkim is at a way more strategic location. It's right on top of what's called Chicken neck which is a small sliver of land that joins mainland India to it's northeast that's probably a population of some 50 million people. If China annexed Sikkim or even turned them into useful puppets, they're a running distance away from choking India completely there and potentially annexing that entire region for themselves. Also, funnily the Chinese are already gobbling up Bhutanese land as we speak. They took kilometers of Bhutanese land and are now threatening this tri-point between India, Bhutan and itself.

[@didd2810]

@@svanimation8969 to be fair, it was mostly paranoia from Gandhi, because China of course but also the Sikkimese King had just married this random American teenager which scared them thinking she was some CIA shill. That and the Nepali majority in Sikkim were afraid the King would kick them out because they were originally migrants there. And it may have taken place if they Sikkim didn't join India because a few decades ago, Bhutan forced it's Nepali population out.

[@joaobarrosleal]

I think videos for treaties of the 7 Years War and American Revolutionary would be cool

[@jackyex]

I'm still a bit surprised there wasn't a option for a Christian State in the Seven sisters region.

[@occam7382]

I'm surprised there was no option to give the Northwest Frontier Provinces to Afghanistan, or anything on Balochistan.

[@pladica]

Tbf a lot if not most of the Christianization of the Northeast happened post partition

[@prn_97_]

because Christians do not demand their own countries

[@3dMASTER_anime]

i surprise too why not any balochistan and on your answers they are tribe nehru count them as indigenous people in hindu according to constitution even they pray christ go church but their real religion is animism and christ 😊😊

[@jackyex]

@@occam7382 that's true, Afghanistan still claimed the northwest territories.

[@TinIssei-ho2co]

I want to see everybody voting for Decolonization.

[@Joscat60]

Well gang, we've done it: peace in India

[@Cannon530YT]

To quote the video: " *NO* "

[@ishaandivgi7635]

With Hyderabad in the middle, definitely not 😂😂😂

[@memeconsumer773]

@@Cannon530YT *at the low, low cost of millions of casualties

[@RKNGL]

​@@memeconsumer773Millions died in our timeline, it has to make up for the million dead from forced migrations, upto 2 million dead from the Pakistan-India wars, and another upto 3 million from the Liberation of Bangladesh. Forcing a potentially more diplomatic game could have been better for the whole especially if those regions eventually joined willingly or were independent satellite states.

[@memeconsumer773]

@@RKNGL Like, I agree with most the stuff but the 2 million from the Indo Pakistani wars?, they dont even reach 100, 000. In the most deadliest (71) around 35000 died, 30,000 of which were Bengali rebels.tbf there were also more bloodshed in Bangladesh after liberation when 500,000 were killed under the new goverment

[@arranssabapathy]

Religious partition of Bengal, but CHT is still in Bangladesh? CHT is more culturally related to Mizoram and Tripura, so probably should have joined India- remember; India was a "non-Muslim" state, not a Hindu one, and funnily enough, expecting to be awarded to India, tribal leaders in CHT actually raised Indian flags on the day of partition only to be awarded to Bangladesh.

[@crazyboris1625]

Just a little nitpick, you pronounced Sikkim wrong (both "i"s are like the i in "it") and it wasn't a princely state but a protectorate like Bhutan.

[@VaePomegGlitch]

I really love the cutaways to black where the video itself tells you NO

[@reavercity568]

Partition of Europe after Neapleon

[@antorseax9492]

Congress of Vienna has already been done.

[@reavercity568]

@@antorseax9492 damn i missed it

[@HelloHi-g2u]

This would actually be amazing for a lot of reasons I think. I wish it had turned out this way.

[@NSq12]

You could have added the option of Dravida Nadu

[@didd2810]

It would crumble the day they talk about where the capital should be 😂

[@svanimation8969]

​@@didd2810😂🎉

[@braunschweig-mapping-01]

@@didd2810 as a tamil why does that make sense

[@KnuxMaster368]

5:53 the ruler wanted to remain independent, perhaps it made that vote lopsided

[@md_studios9819]

do a video on the serbo-bulgarian war

[@CodeZero587]

Mr . Patel has a slight opinion, ☝️🗿.

[@danielbickford3458]

Kind of curious what would have happened if the British went eff it you wanted Independence so bad you get to deal with this on your own, and burns bureaucracies and bugged out and let the locals deal with the ensuing mess

[@shaesmith2831]

I mean we kinda did that unfortunately. We just went “we’ll split this sub-continent in half and you can deal with the rest” and millions died because of it. I know it’s waaaaay too late now but I wish we tried to focus on creating (or helping to create, we shouldn’t have led it) a united Indian identity rather than focusing on religious lines. Would it have worked? Maybe but maybe not. But I think it would’ve been a better outcome than the current situation between India and Pakistan

[@danielbickford3458]

@@shaesmith2831 Fair enough. Mind you my idea was less let's split this up more along the lines of you're on your own from the get-go

[@shaesmith2831]

@@danielbickford3458 yeah I suppose it depends how it happens. If it was a revolution like America maybe it could’ve worked. However with British colonialism we tended to educate *some* of the locals to rule on our behalf. So I imagine for the worse case scenario you’re thinking of either they flee India or we “get rid of them” (Trying to avoid TOS lol). I think worse case is india becomes like China in the 20’s and 30’s, just a bunch of war lords trying to take as much personal power as possible while whatever actual government exist only actually controls a small area. It’s an interesting (altho admittedly dark) alternative history scenario

[@chinsaw2727]

It was actually the Indian’s and Pakistani’s idea to invite the British to solve the dispute. Originally, the Indian and Pakistani leaders were going to work together on deciding the border. Its just that neither side trusted the other, so they went to a “neutral” third party to draw the border… the United Kingdom… their colonizer, who was getting rather sick of the sub-continent by this point. The British sent a guy to do what the British do best, draw a line on a map with very little regard for the people who live there. Blame Britain all you want for the border, (and you should, they deserve it) but don’t forget that it was India’s and Pakistan’s idea to have the British draw it.

[@danielbickford3458]

@@chinsaw2727 I'm not that familiar with Indian history, so the more you know. Would make for an interesting alternate history them inviting someone else to draw the line

[@dan_mer]

They really screwed the Hindu living in the coast of Bangladesh, didn't they?