WI no partition of India

Well, if you think about it, balanced biographies are very hard to find. For instance, Freedom at Midnight was written by Dominique LaPierre and Larry Collins, but it had a warmer view towards Gandhi, due to it being made with the cooperation of the Indian government at that time. The one run by Indira Gandhi. Newer ones have a much more cynical perspective, whether they are written by Indians or not.

Yeah. A famous recent biography of Malcom X supposedly 'smashed' down his 'myth', and was criticised.
 
If you remember 'em, send me a PM or something, if not, Freedom by Midnight should be sufficient to keep me busy reading up on this.
Now, just to tell you, Freedom at Midnight has a much warmer view of the Indian Independence movement, so it doesn't mention any of Gandhi's flaws, nor even Nehru's, since it was made in the 70s, with government sources in the Indira Gandhi administration.
 
Now, just to tell you, Freedom at Midnight has a much warmer view of the Indian Independence movement, so it doesn't mention any of Gandhi's flaws, nor even Nehru's, since it was made in the 70s, with government sources in the Indira Gandhi administration.

So what does it cover that makes you recommend it exactly?
 
If you remember 'em, send me a PM or something, if not, Freedom by Midnight should be sufficient to keep me busy reading up on this.
Oh yeah, and Gandhi himself had written an article in his South Africa days about his views on black Africans. I had found a scanned copy online, but I don't have the link...you should be able to google it,though.
 
So what does it cover that makes you recommend it exactly?
Just the overall independence movement. It's pretty interesting, and it shows a bit more stuff about the Princely States, too. If you want to find books that take a cynical perception of Gandhi, Nehru or Jinnah, you'll have to find more recent books...GAH! Why can't I remember which books I had read????:mad:
 
Just the overall independence movement. It's pretty interesting, and it shows a bit more stuff about the Princely States, too. If you want to find books that take a cynical perception of Gandhi, Nehru or Jinnah, you'll have to find more recent books...GAH! Why can't I remember which books I had read????:mad:

Yeah, but how about a realistic, not cynical, fair and balanced view of him?

You seems to have an axe to grind with him, frankly.
 
Yeah, but how about a realistic, not cynical, fair and balanced view of him?
That's very hard to find. With Gandhi, it's one extreme or the other. Sort of like Malcolm X and MLK, in that regard. The wikipedia article on him has quite a bit about his history, as well, in regard to his views on black people.
 
That's very hard to find. With Gandhi, it's one extreme or the other. Sort of like Malcolm X and MLK, in that regard. The wikipedia article on him has quite a bit about his history, as well, in regard to his views on black people.

Also, one have to remember the guy came from another century, by now.

It's the scorn Churchill shown your people, and had some glee about a war with some african people, where they would be 'reaped'. 'Of course, we will win. Of course, they will be reaped.' Or something like this.

Like some sport. A game.
 
Also, one have to remember the guy came from another century, by now.

It's the scorn Churchill shown your people, and had some glee about a war with some african people, where they would be 'reaped'. 'Of course, we will win. Of course, they will be reaped.' Or something like this.

Like some sport. A game.
Even with Churchill, you will find extremes in his biographies. Very rarely will the same biographer who called him the saviour of the free world also call him a racist and a bigot.
 
Even with Churchill, you will find extremes in his biographies. Very rarely will the same biographer who called him the saviour of the free world also call him a racist and a bigot.

So was the hypocrisy of WW2... freedom and peace. For the occidentals and whites, first. Maybe later more. Maybe.
 
So was the hypocrisy of WW2... freedom and peace. For the occidentals and whites, first. Maybe later more. Maybe.
Anyways I think we're getting away from the core of the thread.:D:p

So what would the consequences of a united India be? Economically could we see a large rivalry with China?Possibly some sort of intervention in Tibet or the like?
 
Would it have any ripples on affairs in the Middle East?

Those could be interesting.
Definitely would have huge ripples in the Cold War and Afghanistan. India won't want the Taliban in the country at all, as it wouldn't give them any strategic assets. Hell, the Soviet-backed Republic could survive as India wouldn't be funneling the arms from the US to support the mujahedin.
 
Maybe USA and others will see India in a more serious sight, and will discretely try to help the nation, and pulls it closer..
 
Maybe USA and others will see India in a more serious sight, and will discretely try to help the nation, and pulls it closer..

It's a nice strategic partner if the idea of Communism being a monolith remains present in U.S. foreign policy during the first decade or so of the Cold War.
 
It's a nice strategic partner if the idea of Communism being a monolith remains present in U.S. foreign policy during the first decade or so of the Cold War.

Yeah, but again, remmeber first that the indian leaders went for a vague socialism, not a communism per see, except for the keralans and all.

But then, indian may turn more to center with time, and so..
 
Yeah, but again, remmeber first that the indian leaders went for a vague socialism, not a communism per see, except for the keralans and all.

But then, indian may turn more to center with time, and so..

True, but social democracy was strong in Europe during the same period, so a left-leaning, but pro-U.S. India seems vaguely possible.
 
Top