Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Rohit Shinde's avatar

"When this is the case, can people really be faulted for working for the East India Company? It was just yet another player in India"

This part is where I often struggle and is a major source of cognitive dissonance for me.. There were varying shades of gray and collaboration here. As you say, I don't hold any grudge against those who simply joined the EIC which was another player. The same continued throughout the independence struggle till 1947.

But is there a truth to the saying that most foreign rulers in India became Indian (including Mughals - except Babur and Aurangzeb) but that wasn't true of the British? There were foreign rulers like Ghori and Ghazni who came here simply to loot. They didn't get the support of the locals. So why should locals actively collaborating with EIC get a free pass?

My understanding is that for most of Indian history, as long as foreigners were willing to integrate, this free for all continued. But there was an Indic consciousness against foreigners wanting to convert the indigenous population. Shouldn't there have been a similar suspicion against the EIC? There were missionaries roaming around lobbying the Imperial Government to allow conversions.

I am not too well read on this part of our history, would like your thoughts on it.

"Skilled soldiers, just as programmers today, joined whoever offered them a better position, and did their best"

While true, there are still morals that would prevent a programmer from working for something like Lockheed Martin or even TikTok, because its controlled by China. A normie SDE wouldn't care between Apple and Facebook, but might care between Weibo and Google.

Expand full comment
1 more comment...

No posts