How many Indians did the British Kill?

[Veritas]

Bourgeois historians and their spawn like to invent ridiculously high numbers of dead during the leaderships of Stalin, Mao, and virtually anyone else that has promoted the red flag. They use this as an excuse to reject Communism outright and say Capitalism is superior.

Might I point out the conveniently little history done on the number of dead in the British raj. The British forced Indian farmers for years to grow commodities for industry in their farms, like indigo for example, and sold food (prepared and processed in Britain) to them at extremely high prices. The population of India during British rule stagnated, which means hundreds of millions of people easily died in India under British control. Even if this is not the case, tens of millions of people were at least documented to have died in their 10 or so famines under British rule.

Why don't leftists use the fact of British tyranny in India as an example against Capitalism?

[Guardia Rossa]

We do, search the Black Book of Capitalism.
Also, this thread for (Slightly exaggerated) numbers: http://www.revleft.com/vb/black-book-capitalism-t131237/index.html?t=131237

[khad]

Because famine deaths only count if you're socialist. For everyone else, it's a market readjustment, safely outside the purview of any state authority.

[RedAnarchist]

I don't think any official source will truthfully state how many actually died, they'll choose as low a number as possible.

[Comrade Jacob]

I've heard the 60 million number being talked about but I don't really know.

[willowtooth]

1.8 billion over 190 years

https://sites.google.com/site/muslimholocaustmuslimgenocide/indian-holocaust

[Invader Zim]

I'm not sure how one would go about computing this. It strikes me as being virtually impossible.

[Synergy]

Because famine deaths only count if you're socialist. For everyone else, it's a market readjustment, safely outside the purview of any state authority.

Kind of unrelated but, when a couple U.S. soldiers are captured/killed it makes headline news but if 25 people get bombed in a village it's either underreported or merely considered "unfortunate."

[Veritas]

I'm not sure how one would go about computing this. It strikes me as being virtually impossible.

How did Robert Conquest come up with the number of dead in the Soviet Union? Simple, he completely pulled it out of his ass based on vague data coming from a list of tragedies, and was able to popularize his numbers by winning the sympathies of the Western bourgeoisie and other cold-warrior bourgeois historians. Thank goodness that idiot died two months ago.

[Antiochus]

1.8 billion over 190 years

https://sites.google.com/site/muslimholocaustmuslimgenocide/indian-holocaust


lol what. Are you aiming to win some sort of stupidity award on this site or what? 1.8 billion? What the fuck are you smoking. This is a serious topic, don't pollute it with numbers literally coming out of your ass. A BASIC curve of India's population between ~1750-1950 will show you that in that whole period, there were a TOTAL of 2 billion Indians who lived and died (due to whatever cause), or less. Yet you are claiming 1.8 billion died excess deaths. Do you even read what you write?

[willowtooth]

lol what. Are you aiming to win some sort of stupidity award on this site or what? 1.8 billion? What the fuck are you smoking. This is a serious topic, don't pollute it with numbers literally coming out of your ass. A BASIC curve of India's population between ~1750-1950 will show you that in that whole period, there were a TOTAL of 2 billion Indians who lived and died (due to whatever cause), or less. Yet you are claiming 1.8 billion died excess deaths. Do you even read what you write?

great more white christian apologism from the asshole, alright so how many did the british raj kill?

[Antiochus]

great more white christian apologism from the asshole, alright so how many did the british raj kill?

Right, the imbecile who LITERALLY is a genocide apologist, is accusing me of it. No. First off, I said your statement was STUPID, I said nothing of the conditions of the British Raj. You peddled off an idiotically high number off a blog,,, yes, that is your "source".

The population of India at the middle of the 18th century was roughly ~130 million (including modern Pakistan). The population of India at the time of partition (including Pakistan) was less than 400 million. A simple analysis would reveal that the total number of humans who lived in India between 1757-1947 would be at the most 2 billion, if that. Yet you are claiming that in a country with population growth, the excess deaths were 1.8 billion.

Seriously, get your head checked. If some idiot said "100 million Jews died during the Holocaust", it would also be scandalous, because such historical revisionism is meant (usually) to trivialize an event.

[willowtooth]

Right, the imbecile who LITERALLY is a genocide apologist, is accusing me of it. No. First off, I said your statement was STUPID, I said nothing of the conditions of the British Raj. You peddled off an idiotically high number off a blog,,, yes, that is your "source".

The population of India at the middle of the 18th century was roughly ~130 million (including modern Pakistan). The population of India at the time of partition (including Pakistan) was less than 400 million. A simple analysis would reveal that the total number of humans who lived in India between 1757-1947 would be at the most 2 billion, if that. Yet you are claiming that in a country with population growth, the excess deaths were 1.8 billion.

Seriously, get your head checked. If some idiot said "100 million Jews died during the Holocaust", it would also be scandalous, because such historical revisionism is meant (usually) to trivialize an event.

i am not a genocide apologist you fucking asshole, your a racist white christian you defend the american 2003 invasion of iraq and now your defending english colonization of india. i have no idea what kind of moron thinks he can determine how many people were born in india over 300 years based on "population curves" as you call it (which you havent sourced) when we don't even know if the europeans killed 5 million or 100 million native americans

your making up numbers to defend british colonialism. i mean really who gives a fuck if we say 1.8 billion were killed or that 10 million died in the holocaust? I even defended you in the Iraq thread by saying "if your saying that americans committed genocide against sunni arabs then I 100% agree with you" instead you defended america and george fucking bush.... some fucking communist you are.... you piece of white supremacist imperialist pigshit

yes my source is not an official source but only a right wing peice of shit like you would request "official" sources for a subect like this. Who would you like me to source? fox news? amnesty international? maybe you would like a quote from rupert murdoch directly? you white supremacist peice of pig shit

any whoozle this is the learning forum its against the rules to debate you like this if you want to talk too me send me a pm im not responding in this specific thread again

[Antiochus]

Tell me, if you died and were dissected, would your brain's gray matter even fill a teacup? Doubt it.


i am not a genocide apologist you fucking asshole, your a racist white christian you defend the american 2003 invasion of iraq and now your defending english colonization of india.

Yes you are, and you were called out about it by over a dozen users.


your making up numbers to defend british colonialism.

Right, I am the one "making up numbers", not you. I never gave a figure for this thread because I am not a fucking lobotomized monkey like yourself.


your a racist white christian

lol. Try harder.


instead you defended america and george fucking bush

Wow, stupidity at its finest. Off course I did no such thing. I won't bother trying to explain it away since its perfectly clear to everyone how stupid you are.


kind of moron thinks he can determine how many people were born in india over 300 years based on "population curves" as you call it (which you havent sourced)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_India#History

Seriously, "sourced". Your "source" (a geocite written by someone as stupid as you) claims 1.8 BILLION Indians were killed by the British. A simple integration of the population of India will show that between 1757-1947, not even 2 billion people lived on the subcontinent, LOL!


who gives a fuck if we say 1.8 billion were killed or that 10 million died in the holocaust?

Do you even read what you write? Never mind the fact that the thread is explicitly asking for a specific (and factual) number. What a slimy little **** you are.


maybe you would like a quote from rupert murdoch directly?

Well idk. You and Rupert Murdoch both engage in bombastic, idiotic and completely anti-intellectual bullshit aimed at riling the most depraved segments of society. Maybe you should apply for a job at Fox News.

[Lord Testicles]

This is the learning forum so that'll be an infraction for you both, now cut out the flaming.

http://www.revleft.com/vb/read-before-posting-t182306/index.html

[Khalistani]

What the British did in India during the famines of Bengal is without question, undeniably evil.

However, many people from minority communities (Sikhs, Buddhists, Christians, Parsees, Sufis, Tribal castes, etc. etc.) would tell you that they felt more protected under British administration than Indian administration, and they are slowly destroying our communities far more than any engineered famine had a chance of doing.

Ask any Naxalite, any Assamese, any Sikh, any Kashmiri how they feel about India, and they'll all spit on the name.

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

Uhm, I don't think it's "genocide apologism" to point out that there barely enough people on the entire planet to commit a genocide of nearly 2 billion people in the 1700s-1800s. I don't know what other accusations you guys are flinging each other, but that much is obvious. A genuine critique of Imperialism should not be done through numbers summoned out of thin air.

Millions did die of famines brought about by British policies, massacre, and general impoverishment, and may well possibly exceed the numbers thrown around about the USSR. Unfortunately, I doubt any good numbers really exist. There were lots of small incidents, which probably were never sufficiently recorded. Also, there's a question of definition, since many of the authorities in India at the time weren't British officers and businessmen, but local princes and rajas who were vassals of the British. They may not have been the best record keepers of such events either, and may have also committed massacres independently of (but with the allowance of) British authorities.