ANSWER to Leo1239150


Since I am from the South Asian peninsular region, which is currently occupied by Pakistan, India and Bangladesh, I can speak with a level of profundity on the subject that cannot be done by any outsider to the region.

What you have queried is what is doled out by many years of insipid formal education and by other media including the films.

I can quite easily repudiate everything claimed by these centres. However, the subject matter is quite huge and complicated. And to counter all the fraudulent claims, it would require at least 200 thousand words. Since that is not possible, I will merely list of the things on which you can ponder on at leisure. In case, you want more details, I am willing to elaborate, as soon as I get some spare time.

The following list headings will give you ample things to think about.

  1. There was no India before the formation of a cluster of regions in the South Asian subcontinent, brought together by the English East India Company
  1. There were more than 2000 kingdoms of various sizes, including a few of relatively big size before the setting up of British-India in the region.
  1. Not only was there no single population in the region, inside each kingdom, there were various populations, each very powerfully suppressing the one which came under them.
  1. The English East India Company did not actually conquer any kingdom with a British or English army. In most cases, there were only a few Englishmen who were quite enthusiastically supported by the huge quantity of lower class populations.   [Example: Robert Clive’s first success was with 20 Englishmen and around 180 natives of the peninsula]
  1. If at all the English East India Company did suppress anyone, it was the traditional oppressive feudal classes and the kingly families.
  1. When the English East India Company was dismissed and the reins of rule taken-over by Queen Victoria, there was a change in attitude to the local small-time kings and kingdoms. They were treated as ‘equals’ by the British Monarchy. This more or less was a traitorous action towards the lower classes of the various locations. They, who had supported the Company rule, suddenly found themselves pushed back to the subordination of the local rajas and ranis.
  1. Even in the best period of the British rule in the peninsula, only less than half of the subcontinent was ruled by England. The rest was under the various independent kingdoms of the peninsula. They had their own extremely corrupt bureaucracies and terrible caste systems.
  1. In English-ruled areas, the officialdom was honest and incorruptible. There was no caste-based suppression of any individual.
  1. The British rule in the peninsula was actually an English rule. Even though there were Irish and Scottish elements (I do not know about Welsh) in the British administration, in effect it was solely and purposefully an English rule. And not an Irish or Welsh or Scottish rule.
  1. English language is a planar language. Almost all languages of the peninsula are feudal. This means in each word and sentence, a person can be defined as stinking dirt or as golden featured, in all ordinary communication. English does not have these codes. Hence for the first time in the history of the 2000 and odd kingdoms, a new egalitarian social communication came up.
  1. Speaking about Gandhi, he was not actually from British-India. He was the rich son of the prime minster of Porbunder kingdom. Many persons with means did move to England to enjoy the life and social communication there at that time.
  1. British-India rupee had an exchange value (I am told) of 7 USD at that time. That means British-India was quite rich.
  1. Rich people sent their children to England to become connected to the English society there. Some of these people did join some college or club and promote Free India movements. Actually they had no support base in British-India or in the various independent kingdoms. Some of them did even go to the extent of signing formal agreement and such things on behalf of the ‘people of India’ with no evidence to prove that they had been given such rights by anyone.
  1. Actually there was no ‘great’ Freedom struggle in British-India or in the independent kingdoms.
  1. Due to the English intervention in the independent kingdoms, many caste based discriminations had been abolished in the independent kingdoms.
  1. When Queen Victoria proclaimed the Slavery Abolishment Act, the order was enforced not only in British-India, but also in all the independent kingdoms. Millions of traditionally suppressed populations received liberty.
  1. Due to the feudal content in the native languages, there was no need for any chains to enforce slavery. It is in the words. This is a concept that English cannot understand. From this perspective, the so-called Negro slavery in the US was not actually slavery. It was one of the best social enhancement training in the world, freely given to low-quality populations. In other words, being a slave in the Confederate States of USA would actually be a divine blessing to millions of under-classes in most places in Asia and Africa of contemporary times.
  1. Even though in school textbooks, it is shamelessly taught that the British rule was exploitative and thieving, actually it was the opposite. The locations under the English rule were quite safe and secure.
  1. The English rule did not work for looting British-India. Instead every effort was made to consolidate and protect all natural resources.
  1. Trade was free in British-India. However, in the independent kingdoms, trade was monopolised by the government. People were forced to sell their commodities to the government warehouses. To get adequate payment for their items, they were forced to pay bribes. Many people resorted to smuggling their commodities into British-Indian areas. The kingdoms imposed heavy punishments to stop this.
  1. The English rulers brought in the concept of public education. This provided to the children of the non-feudal classes an opportunity to study for the first time in at least 2000 years!
  1. Even though the traditional social bosses tried their level best to block it, the English government promoted English education to all those who desired to have it. This led to the intellectual development of the lower classes. However, the English administrators did not understand that they were providing this to very cunning populations, who traditionally had all practised the art of deceit and suppression on all those who came under them. Those who received English, tried to see that others did not get it.
  1. Almost all of the national governmental revenue was utilised to build up infrastructure for common use, in a land with zero infrastructure for the common man.
  1. Roads, bridges, schools, colleges, universities, medical colleges, museums, dams, water supply, police departments, judiciary, postal department, hospitals, veterinary hospitals, warehouses, public rest houses, public toilets, Sanitation department, industrial training, export of goods, import of goods, land registration, for the first time, the common man’s right to own land was established, &c. &c. &. The list is long. I can’t remember everything. I forgot to mention Railways.
  1. During the Second World War, 3 million soldiers from the peninsula region stood stolidly under the Union Jack. They were betrayed by Clement Atlee, the Satan. They were handed over to feudal language speaking officials of the newly formed Pakistan and India. Even though a huge amount had been handed over for the pension benefit, nothing was given to them. Many went into terrible penury.
  1. In 1919, an Irish military commander crushed a communal strife in Amritsar with a sort of unwarranted shooting, in which around 150 people died and many were injured. He was Irish. So his natural reaction to the local feudal languages would be more pre-emptive. For Irish also is a feudal language, I think. In 1947, a terrible communal rioting took place in the northern parts of the subcontinent, when the location was summarily divided into two nations.  No military leader did any shooting. One million people died –burnt or hacked. Women were taken hostage and molested for days.  No native ‘leader’ was bothered.
  1. Native leaders of both Pakistan and India were novices at best and cunning politicians at worst. They were simply handed over the huge number of administrative and military apparatus by the stupid British Labour Party politicians.
  1. Both Pakistan as well as Indian leaders immediately used the newly received parts of the erstwhile British-Indian army to intimidate all the kingdoms in their proximity. Many did not surrender to these intimidation. The political leaders send their armies to capture the kingdoms.
  1. Even now, there are many rebellions going on for so many decades. The freedom fighters are dubbed terrorists and tortured in small-time police stations and army garrisons. Women folks suffer most. No media dare report all this.
  1. The tribal populations who had nothing to do with the formation of the new nations did not know that they had literally been handed over to political systems which they had no affinity for. They were literally plundered by the local police and forest department staff. Their women were forced to produce hybridised children. They were taught the languages of the various Indian states and addressed in the pejorative part of the word codes.
  1. Gandhi is currently taught to be the ‘father of the nation’. However, there is no such mention in any statutory writings. Both he as well as Nehru was in the midst of terrible scandals connected to certain clandestine affairs in Gandhi’s ashram. The newspapers were full of it, with some even bringing out cartoons about the shady affairs. In fact, Gandhi was a burden for the new nation. He was killed in an unexplained incident which was quite cunningly described as the handiwork of Hindu Communalism. Hindu Communalism had nothing to gain from Gandhi’s death. Nor was there anything that could spur and antipathy for Gandhi.  However, his death gave Nehru a much required prop up. For, there was a real terror that Nehru would not become the prime minister. In fact, the Congress party did not like both Gandhi as well as Nehru. It wanted another local leader to be the PM. However, Nehru was at home in England, having studied there. He could manage from that side. British Labour Party was acting as a fool and a national traitor, as always.
  1. Currently around 90% of the Indian population live worse than slaves. However, you would not get to converse with them. They are maintained in the lower part of the languages. Naturally no one wants them to learn English. Once they learn English, they would start having claims and rights. Like the blacks in the USA.
  1. Now, about your word ‘equality’. The word as understood in English has no corresponding word in feudal languages. This is one of the most dangers that England faces now. It does not understand the others who speak other languages.

The above-mentioned words I wrote on the spur of the moment. In case you did read the whole listing, and you have a query, I would be happy to elaborate.

To know more about Gandhi, follow this writing of mine.

For knowing about Feudal languages, follow this link


Divine language versus those with satanic disposition


Here I am taking a detour from my planned route. This has been caused by the discussion I had with veteran09 in the last post.

He mentions thus: QUOTE: I have heard other people rejoicing in Shakespearean Composition; and of The King James Bible too. I have not seen, as yet, the wonders of Our GOD given Language, as I believe others like yourself can SEE !!! END OF QUOTE

I have been mentioning the issue of languages being software with very powerful compositions that can literally reach out to the capacities of actual softwares (mantra) in the physical world, in human social life and in defining both anthropological features as well as animal dispositions.

I am not a Shakespeare fan. However, this does not influence my contention that the works of Shakespeare has nothing to do with my contentions. In fact, even though Shakespeare writings do contain awesome content features, there is no saying that these kinds of things, or even more, are not there in other human languages and in the currently un-detected literary content in animal communication systems.

In fact, the beauty that I can discern in some of the literary creations in the native vernaculars around me is spellbinding, and not even contemplate-able in English. Yet, it is like saying that the mesmeric melody that is embedded in the howling of the jackals can be enjoyed in full only by jackals. To enjoy the beauty that is there in the local vernacular literary creations actually requires a mental, physical and attitudinal transformation into a human being of the native type to some extent. For a native-English individual, there is no gain in arriving at this transformation, just to enjoy this transient beauty.

I am aware of the style of writing in King James Version of Bible. This again is not the point here. In fact, when people mention all these to mention that beauty of English, they are actually deluding the native-Englishman and leading him astray.

I do not know how to explain what I am contending. Let me try.

Decoding a single negativity

I am just mentioning the police department structure over here.
1. DGP (Director General of Police)
2. IGP (Inspector General of Police)
3. DGP (Deputy Inspector General of Police)
4. SP (Superintendent of Police) / AIGP (Assistant Inspector General of Police)
5. ASP (Assistant Superintendent of Police)
6. DySP (Deputy Superintendent of Police)
7. Inspector of Police
8. Sub Inspector of Police
9. Assistant Inspector of Police
10. Head Constable
11. Constable

The hierarchy is clear. It is quite a simple positional hierarchy, which can be understood in English.

However, that is not the only hierarchy running through the line-up of actual persons in a feudal language world. It may easily be noticed that all the individuals in the chain of command are connected in the software of English by very singular codes of YOU, HE, HIS, HIM, HIS, SHE, HER, HERS, HER, THEY, THEIR, THEIRS, THEM, WE, OUR, OURS, US &c.

This is a very candid area of difference. In a feudal language, each one of these individual word links does come in a multiplicity of words. For instance, in the languages of the northern parts of the subcontinent, for the English word YOU, there is this array of words: Aap, Thum and Thoo. For languages of the south, the word array can be Saar (Thaangal), Ningal and Nee.

Actually there are more. I do not want to insert confusion here by bringing in the whole lot here.

Looking at the southern version of the languages, the police hierarchy can be mentioned as for each link in the command chain as Thaangal towards the top and Nee towards the bottom. However, this is a very simplistic version. The reality is much more complex.

The terror in the scheme of things is that actually in private locations, the individuals in the link do not really follow this ideal hierarchy of words. For, when their officers are junior to them in age, the juniors do use the pejorative words for referring to their seniors. I leave this point here. It will lead to another location if I follow this path.

Now, if we look at each link in the command chain, top is the Golden ‘Thaagal’ and the bottom is the degraded ‘Nee’.

That means that there are there eleven layers of this code link: Thaangal-Nee. The top man naturally will have golden features, and the bottom man will have a lowered standards. Beyond that, each layer can be connected to any layer in the command chain. This means a Thaangal on the mountain peak to a Nee in the gorge.

If this ideal situation continues, the constable is at the bottom layer. He or she has the most negative mental disposition in the language code layer.

At this point, I need to stop.

And then mention these two items.

When one moves socially at the level of the DGP, IGP, SP etc., the constable-level looks quite mean and dirty. However, that is not the exact truth. At each level, the individuals do garner people to be below them. That is, a lot of people whom they can address as Nee (degraded).

Here, they are the leaders of these subordinated people. Each level of subordination reflects in the mind, mood and expression of the affected person. That is why, in India, the class of people who traditionally are upper-class (via caste or profession or financial acumen), do generally have superior looks, while the downtrodden ‘Nee’ group have a distorted facial and physical features.

However, the essential social terror is in going under the lowest of any hierarchy. That is, being abused by pejorative words (Nee &c.) by a DGP or IGP or even SP can be borne. However, being addressed as Nee by a constable can be an unbearable mental taunt. It is worse than being touched by an untouchable individual in the caste hierarchy.


Picture taken from Castes and tribes of Southern India by Edgar Thurston.

Point for extrapolation: Lower castes, though suppressed, are actually very crude, rude and quite oppressive at their own level to those who come under them. Coming under them is worse than being directly under the upper castes.

It is a complicated world.

This is where English stands divinely supreme. There are no terrible hidden codes that can literally pour excrements into the depth of a human soul.

When mentioning stories of the great ‘freedom struggle’ in ‘India’, historians purposefully leave out the great liberation that the lower class received by just being under the English rule. For, being under the great ‘Indian leaders’ was actually an experiences of being transported back to the excrement part of their communication, for especially the lower classes.

In fact, the actual experience of the English rule, as experienced by the natives of the subcontinent differed due to a variety of reasons, including where in the language codes their stood. Beyond that there would be marked difference in the way the different constituents of the Great Britain were experienced in the subcontinent: viz. the English, the Welsh, the Irish and the Scots. And also, Continental Europeans also did piggyback ride inside the location, using their white skin colour as a serviceable camouflage.

PS: I have dealt with only a very small part of the huge software codes inside a feudal language. There is a huge domain remaining.

2. Look at this image of British sailors arrested by Indian policemen. It might give some hint as to why the natives of the subcontinent rallied under the English. NEWS

3. I do not want to go into the language code issues in this write-up. For a lot of things are there to be mentioned, apart from the language-code issue.

Philosophising towards cataclysmic irrelevance!


I am speaking of the South Asian peninsular region, which is currently occupied by Pakistan, India and Bangladesh.

On reading the last three posts, the reader might get an erroneous feeling.

That I am promoting a feeling that the history of the various places in the subcontinents as well as of the English interaction with the society was connected with kings and queens and princes.

It is not true. The south Asian peninsular region which was to become British-India in history was populated by a huge number of populations. When modern insipid historians speak about the history English colonialism, they miss this very essential component.

It was this component that stood as the pivot, which levered up the English rule, and pulled down the ancient oppressive rulers of the 2000 and odd locations in the subcontinent. Yet, they and their aspirations remain unmentioned in current-day history writings.


Picture taken from LINK

It is my intention to bring focus on what really happened in this South Asian subcontinent that English colonialism simply rode up to the towering heights, on the swelling emotional support that this un-mentioned component lend to it.

To do this, there would be a need to go into the intimate details of what really happened. Such vital details do not show up in desultory academic statements that now are crammed in school textbook histories. The aim here is not to write another useless academic history book.

Along with this, there might be a parallel need to contemplate upon pristine-England, quite green and fair, of the yesteryears. That is, till about the end of the 2nd World War. Even though VICTORIAN-age is what is generally mentioned with rare adulation in this regard, there need be no doubt that even before the advent of this age, England was always better in various items, when compared to other geographical locations of contemporary times.

If anyone thinks that there are historical evidences of many misdemeanours that took place in England, in the medieval and ancient times, the only retort that should be offered is that most other geographical locations with much more terrible delinquencies, simply did not have any system of keeping historical records at all.

As Somerset Maugham once mentioned, the newer generations do not know anything much before the day they were born. There was an England that was different from the England that manages to survive today.

The current-day England is something that can be mentioned as overrun by many things that should never have been allowed unsupervised entry.

On one side, it is burdened by an overwhelming and overbearing clasp of an historical guilt, promoted by all insidious persons with real ulterior aims. That of being a nation that had looted many nations in the world.

On another side, even though it had spearheaded the blossoming of scientific and industrial growth, everything seems to have slipped into the hands of low-quality societies, who have barged in, with a very ferocious mood of competition and conquest.

The England of yore was a land of instinctive trainers. The tone of the social system was soft and refined. Now, the presence of outsiders with very boisterous traits are more or less erasing the quaint quality of Englishness, and possibly redefining human behaviours.

It is indeed true that in the South Asian subcontinent, the earlier English traders were looked upon as effeminate and quite soft. Yet, the power of harmonious enterprise that this afforded to the English side was apparent only when the native kings tried their attacks on the serene English trading centres, using totally uncouth and boisterous rowdy folks under them.

However, as of now inside England, this very high stamina and yet quite soft social communication pattern is being distorted by a non-English social training which is slowly diffusing inside.

On another side, technical toys and gadgets that silently import mental intentions of totally alien-to-English social systems might be training the new generation. And posterity.

Then there is the problem of utterly unbridled pornography spreading terrible social disconnection in the land. Pornography in itself is not the problem. For, English pornography is not an unknown thing in England, even during the heights of the Victorian era. However, it would have been good if alien cultures are not allowed the leeway to redefine male – female social relationships.

Apartheid on populations that define non-reclusive female as ‘sluts’, would have been correct. But then, current-day academic studies have more or less negated all social intelligence under the barrage of a totally un-understood idea of ‘human equality’.

Then there is the US. It has become a great English nation run totally amok. With so many anti-English vested interests taking command over everything including the English language, and inputting errors into everything that the US had received from the heritage of England.

No true native-English nation would dare to claim preponderance over England. It then becomes the heights of silliness. Current-day US is a burden on England. Hopefully, there is solace in the offing, before long.

At another location, there is British democracy gone insane. The very PM demanding the surrender of the kingdom to extra-national lobbies and oligarchies, run by historical enemies.

Totally gullible persons have shoved themselves into positions of policymaking. They are falling for the deceitful ploys of population lobbies, which have a much focused aim of conquest. Any sensible policymaker should know that when extra-national interests showcase a sympathy-garnering story or picture, it is just a gimmick and a tool for hoodwinking the nation into deluded and idiotic complacency.

Technical skills, talents, expertises, geniuses &c. are dime-a-dozen in many nations. However, none of them can create an England. If they are all allowed to rush in, what remains is not a nation of great talents, expertise, skill and genius. Instead what would come about would be an unbearable nation, from which all persons of soft refinement would have to run off.

Down the slippery slopes of irresponsible desultory philosophising is the call for abolishing monarchy in the kingdom. People who do it do not know what they are proposing. The political structure of England has evolved over the centuries. Each and every individual subject in the kingdom is connected by slender, yet powerful strings to a central focus. It has now become a fashion to disparage this focus of emotional conjoining. The senseless aim seems to be to turn England into a wasteland. There is much to be mentioned about the unforeseen dangers in pulling down the grand apparatus of English monarchy.

England has a very unique heritage. It is connected to the supernatural language software it is in possession of. Even though various populations all around the globe have taken this software hostage, and are dismantling and manhandling it, to suit their own nefarious purposes, this software has been delivered by providence to England. There is much to be said about this possession.

It is the divine duty of England to remain pure and pristine.

To be continued…

The wider streaks of Anglophilia, historically!

The aim of this writing is not a paraphrasing on Anglophilia. However, since this theme has been touched upon, I will try to mention a few things more.

I had written commentaries on two books of the English Colonial period, pertaining to a small kingdom in the southern-most end of the South Asian peninsular region. Currently this kingdom is occupied by India.  The books are Travancore State Manual written by a native historian (V Nagam Iyya), and Native Life in Travancore written by REV Samuel Mateers of the London Missionary Society. Both books belong to the commencing years of the 1900s.

I do not belong to Travancore. I think I was interested in the sociological aspects of the populations therein.  However, when I went for reading the first book, a very ferocious input that struck me was the very evident pro-England stance of the most prominent personality in the book. That was the king (Marthanda Varma) who created the modern kingdom therein.

I am simply inputting the quotes from the book here:

  1. In 1750 A.D. the French attempted to form a settlement at Colachel. It does not appear that they were successful. In the next year the Rajah of Travancore wrote to the King of Colastria ‘advising him not to put any confidence in the French, but to assist the English as much as he could’”.
  2. On his deathbed, this is the advice given by the king to the heir to the throne:

“That, above all, the friendship existing between the English East India Company and Travancore should be maintained at any risk, and that full confidence should always be placed in the support and aid of that honourable association.”

  1. The two armies met near Calacaud and after a very hot engagement the army of Maphuze Khan was put to flight. But the Travancore army, however, retired home to avoid causing offence to the English Company.

In the same history, there is another remarkable event. The queen of the kingdom asking an English East India Company official (Col Munro) to become the divan (Prime Minister) of the kingdom.

QUOTE: Rani wrote that “there was no person in Travancore that she wished to elevate to the office of Dewan and that her own wishes were that the Resident should superintend the affairs of the country as she had a degree of confidence in his justice, judgement and integrity which she could not place in the conduct of any other person” END OF QUOTE

The fear of treacherous usurping of power is there as an undercurrent in the subcontinent since times immemorial. It is there in the history of how Sultan Tipu’s father (a Moroccan) became a king.  It is there in the history of all kingdoms including that of the Mugal kings and of the kings of the Slave dynasty of Delhi.

However, there was a Lucifer in the offing in England, arriving to negate all this trust.

Many years ago, I simply did a search for the word: ENGLISH in a pdf book of Mein Kampf. I had expected a torrent of profanities on the English from Adolf Hitler. It was a big surprise that Hitler had the feel of an anglophile. For throughout the book, there is a grudging admiration for the English. How it later changed into a mood for conquest of England is not a mystery to me.  There would be ample codes in the German language to do that.

I remember reading somewhere many years ago, the frank admiration that Bismarck had for England, while he had a brooding disdain for the French.  I think he did say something to the effect: The friendship of France will not compensate for the displeasure of England. (I write from my memory).

Then what about Napoleon? In-spite of all his ambitions on England, when he was in dire straits, he dared to approach only a British ship. If he had done the same with anyone else, including the Prussians and the Russian, it goes without saying that he would have been beaten into a pulp then and there.

Remember what happened to Mussolini.


If Hitler had been surrounded by an English army, he would not have committed suicide. If Napoleon had been surrounded by a Russian army, he would have committed suicide.

A note: Non-English world is an entirely different world. If policymakers do not know the ingredient of this contention, they are literally walking blindfold, taking the English nation to its doom.

2. The ambit and amplitude of Anglophilia, globally!


From inside England, Anglophilia might seem quite a silly mental condition. For, the English might seem to be the most common place people in the world. Yet, the exact fact is that it is not easy to reach this very common level of human existence for almost all other human populations in the world.

Outsiders who have had the occasion to experience it in even a minute amount of time have felt its catching feeling. I do not want to take the discussion to why it is so here. For, the planned route of this writing is to a different pathway.

The fact is that during the English colonial days, Anglophila was a mental state that very pointedly approached the level of a spiritual religion.  The word ‘England’ did evoke a very special feeling. If this be so, then it might be quite correct to mention that England was a sort of Mecca for this spiritual fraternity.

As of now, this spiritual feeling is in recess all over the world. For, everywhere a very concerted campaign is going on, decrying every aspect of England, English colonialism, English ancestry as well as English way-of-life. Still, there are many persons who do hold on to a feeling that England has some spiritual superiority.

The question that the native-English might need to delve upon might be as to why does such a feeling exist in the outside world.  If an answer could be found in this, a feeling to clean-up the nation of all irascible elements, including ‘multiculture’ might come up.

The actual attraction for all other native-English nations, viz.  Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the USA, and for all English systems – communication, way of life, dressing standards, professional behaviour &c.  are just a extension of this mood. There were also persons who got captivated by the English Classical literature. Everything was of the most exotic content, when compared to what was available in other locations. Yet, the most paradoxical fact was that everything about English was quite plain and simple. While others were of the complicated twists and turns.

But then, the aspiration to swarm into native-English nations are not actually due to any anglophilia,. Rather it was just the roguish aim to breach into quality locations. When such persons, after entry, start making various claims on their new location of domicile, it smacks of disgusting rascality.

Anglophilia has been seen in many persons. Even Voltaire had it, I think.  As to the immensity of populations all around the world who shouldered the English Empire, a great empathy for England was there. There was always a feeling that the common English man was dependable, committed to his word, would not act treacherous and would be fair in dealings. It was in this global understanding of the English that Great Britain destroyed in a momentous moment of political insanity. This statement requires a huge writing to substantiate.

Around 3 million native-soldiery from the South Asian peninsular region (currently Bangladesh, India & Pakistan) stood stolidly loyal to the Union Jack in the 2nd World War. There were a lot of persuasions on them to join the Japanese side. Yet, even when they were held captivities of the Japs, only few crossed sides and that too just to escape the tortures of Japanese captivity.

In my own personal case, I have heard of my mother’s grandfather singing praise of the ‘Mother Queen’ Victoria, for delivering him and his family from centuries of social slavery. No one nowadays would make such an admission about his or her own ancestry. For over here, everyone now speaks of a grand ancestry connecting to the Vedic religion, dating back to presumably some 7000 years in some far-off location in the north-western areas beyond the peninsula.  His own son became a rich textile merchant and had no qualms of disowning the gratitude. He liked to show-off his mental stamina by declaring his passion for driving out the English rule.  His was a solitary stance. Not many people took this stand, other than for other profit-motivated reasons.


To be continued….


I had been thinking on writing a series of posts under the above heading for quite some time.

The term ‘Evil England’ could also have been worded as ‘Decadent England’, ‘Deluded England’, ‘Disarrayed England’, ‘Distracted England’, ‘Distorted England’, ‘Dim-witted England’ &c. with equal sufficiency. However, four Es coming in a line looked interesting. So, I decided to use the given heading.

My aim is to write around 500 words regularly; if possible daily. Though it might take only around 10 to 20 minutes of my time, getting the exact amount of time and mood to write might be the problem.

Even though I can very easily be mistaken for an anglophile, I am not actually one. My stance has been that of an observer on the effect of language codes and such other things. It might be a predestined coincidence that I came upon English, wherein I found a most fabulous difference.

However, I do not aim to write about the language codes in this series.

My aim would be to explain English colonialism and English colonial incidences, standing on the other side of the fence, right in the unfathomable depths.

Even though I am not academically a student of history, I am quite aware of many things that might not have arrived in the pages of the history books. History books, and such other academic stuff, I find quite shallow, and written with various kinds of aims and prejudices.

Many of the current-day historical writings about English colonialism are mere superficial declarations, based on the modern-day writers’ experiences with his or her own social conditions, personal experiences and fixations.

The original England that created an Empire was different even from what I understand is being taught even in the school classrooms of Great Britain. In other nations, England is generally taught as a very sly nation, with very crooked ambitions and totally sinister intentions. Even the best deeds of the English colonialism have been quite freely misinterpreted, and published as those with deep ulterior motives.

As an individual, I have had the quite quirk-some fate of standing on vantage locations, from where I could see both sides of various items. When I say this much, it is not a display of shallow verbal pedantry.

I do know that modern-day England sees no use in reconnecting to English colonialism. It might be a sort of a bad nightmare for most native-English people. In that, most of the current-day national problems might be imagined to be an upshot of this historical misdemeanour. Actually, English colonialism was not a misdemeanour at all. As an actual fact, it was a fabulous deed that was possibly preordained in England’s fate.

The misdemeanour that England did with regard to English Colonialism was connected to that the emotional sympathy for the Empire was made to go dry. A lot of written text has come out decrying everything that English Colonialism did. Many things that the colonialists did, do smack of foolishness. But not of sinister intentions, as is being made out.

Actually, the English colonial stance can be defined as an infection of the ‘Bridge on the River Kwai’ Syndrome.

I know that my posture might look quite comical, it does not bother me. For, I write from my convictions and from a location of profound information. Beyond that, I already have around 30 of my own written books behind me. LINK

I hope to continue…