AHC : Anglo-Afro-Indian 'Mega Culture'

Saphroneth

Banned
The problem with the concept of equality between peoples in the Empire is that you're effectively asking everyone to kneel before the Indians, as they will be the most numerous group BY FAR. Why would the British want to be ruled by the Indians any more than the Indians wanted to be ruled by them?

Well, that's the whole point of this thread, isn't it? It's exploring the idea of it being not "Indians" and "British", but "British" and "British" culturally and that overriding ethnic considerations.
 

GdwnsnHo

Banned
Well, that's the whole point of this thread, isn't it? It's exploring the idea of it being not "Indians" and "British", but "British" and "British" culturally and that overriding ethnic considerations.

That really was the point I made this thread.

So far we have attempts to create a mixed elite, with varying approaches, and a reference to the Taisho Government of Japan.

Though @Chazmo - the argument of a small minority preserving its culture from others without any exchange is proven false with two parts of British history.

1) Anglo-Saxon & Norman mixed to create English, and the Normans weren't exactly about to drown Britain in people. Eventually the French aspects merged into English - see the language, all our words involving power, and office have latin roots, high-culture have french roots, and homely words have german roots.

2) The modern British curry obsession, (and tea) - whilst there are plenty of 'British Curries' (for good or ill) there is still an intense love for good Indian curry. There probably other exchanges that existed, but I'm no great anthroplogist, and beyond adopting words, food, drink, and importing philosophies (Karma for example) I'm somewhat ignorant.
 
Maybe a slower expansion of the Raj might help. If British control is confined to a few coastal provinces and cities, these could be more easily Anglicised than a whole Subcontinent. Then, when British rule expands further, the new provinces would be Anglicised more easily still (since you'd have the effects of a British elite plus that of an Anglicised region next door), and so on.
 
Well, that's the whole point of this thread, isn't it? It's exploring the idea of it being not "Indians" and "British", but "British" and "British" culturally and that overriding ethnic considerations.

When has something like this ever successfully happened in history? Two lands of very different income levels, religious backgrounds, language and race, thousands of miles apart, sharing the same identity?
 
Top