Snakes and Ladders

The Serpent and the Rope, Raja Rao’s second novel, was an immediate success. Its popularity can be measured as it has received maximum number of critical responses, not only in India but from abroad too, among all his novels. Add to that, announcement of the Sahitya Akademi award for the year 1963 attracted greater readership and academic demand. It has been prescribed in the syllabi of many universities. It is the story of Ramaswamy, a young Brahmin from the south India. He goes to France to do research in history, there meets and marries Madeleine, a teacher of history, but drift apart gradually as Ramaswamy comes to realize the gulf between the Indian and Western concepts of love, marriage, and family. It is important to note that the gap

In 1939 World War II broke out in Europe. Britain proclaimed India’s involvement in the war without consulting the Indian people. This led to increased protest and volatility. In 1942 India established a national army and proposed the Quit India Movement. This movement promised to lend Indian military support to Britain in return for complete independence. If they refused this treaty the Indian people promised civil disobedience. In 1947 India was granted its independence and became self governing (Luscombe, 2012). On January 26, 1950 the Republic of India was proclaimed and it drafted a constitution. The first democratic elections were held in 1952. However the Hindus and Muslims were not united and colonial India was divided into Muslim Pakistan and Hindu India (History, 2010).

The Indian resistance against the British empire is one example of opposition against imperialism. Until 1858, India was controlled by the British East India Company. Thereafter, the crown rule replaced the company rule until 1947. “The slow expansion of the Indian role in public affairs would not have occurred without mounting political pressure from Indian society” (Findley 188). The people of India had tried to cause a reform through a political channel, evident through the slow yet steady participation in political affairs from 1858-1947. In this resistance,

British imperialism had a negative impact on the politics of India because of the establishment of the framework for India that leads to their downfall and the Indian Army which they used to control their own kind. According to Dr.Lalvani, the British established the framework for India’s justice system, civil services, loyal army, and the efficient loyal police. (Paragraph #6). While this is true, the framework didn’t include the Indians, because “Of 960 civil offices, 900 are occupied by English men and 60 by natives”(Doc. #2). British laws often benefited the British and were designed to limit the freedom of speech of the Indians, for example, the Rowlatt Act in 1919. (Gandhi). This evidence shows that the British, when creating the framework for the new and improved India wanted to benefit from it while trying to lower the Indian’s and limit the

This lead to the British using the army in wrong ways and the government being mostly white foreigners. The British made the Indian army and military academies to train officers. (According to Dr.Lalvani) However the British ended up using the Indian army against the Indians for example the Amritsar massacre. (Gandhi). The British created a superbly efficient administration over 500 million diverse people. (According to Dr.Lalvani) On the other hand as good as this may be the British government over India consisted of 960 officers, 900 of which were Englishmen. (Document 2). Because of this the Indians felt as if they had no responsibility over their own

When the British assumed control they unified India. The British however, made an unfair government that negatively impacting the politics of India. The government the British had created, gave the Indians little to no say in the decisions being made and mostly only benefit the British. The transition from colonial rule to independence also caused many deaths. Lalvani claims the British administration was “superbly efficient” (Lalvani).

British Imperialism had a negative impact on the politics of India because the British took away control of the country for their benefit and enforced laws that discriminated against Indians. Lavani claims the British “established the framework for India’s justice system, civil service, loyal army, and efficient police force.” However, this framework was not intended for the Indians, but for the British. For example, 94% of government positions were held by Englishman (Doc. #2). These people had “no permanent interest in their well-being” and returned to England after “forty-five or fifty-five years of age with large pensions (Doc. #2).” This shows the British government used India as a source of wealth and controlled the people without

The British constructed an impressively efficient government along with India’s army, however the government and army were used to create unjust laws and control Indians by force. This government they created was “Superbly efficient” all Britain to control 500 million subjects across 17,000 square miles. (Dr Lalvani) This may seem impressive and beneficial to the Indians, but only 60 out of 960 government positions were actually occupied by Indians. (Document 2) This meant that Britain could do anything they to desired to India because it’s people had no control over their own government. To enforce these laws or policies britain constructed India’s armies. This laid the framework for India’s justice system, civil service and efficient police force. The soldiers were trained in new military academies, courtesy of the British. Although, the intention for creating these services were to establish an even tighter hold on India as demonstrated in the Amritsar Massacre, were the Indian army was ordered by a British commander to shoot Indians, killing 400 and wounding 12,00. (Gandhi) This showed how easily Britain could suppress and control India because India had no control over its own

In the case of politics in Africa and India, both were completely different because of how they were ruled by the European nations. In Africa the natives thought they had political power, but the reality was that all politics, and decisions were made by the European’s. The natives thought that the leaders, and chiefs were making the decisions, but the indirect governing style the Europeans were using on their territories was to do exactly this. They tricked the public to keep the peace and avoided any revolts or rebellion from taking place in the country. The same cannot be said about India though. In India the direct governing style was in place. This meaning that all the previous leaders, and officials were replaced by the European officials,

The Indians were easily manipulated by the thought of partial autonomy with the British Empire rather than fighting for a self-governing rule from the beginning (A&E Television Networks, LLCA&E Television Networks, LLC, 2016). This goal of partially governing themselves is what drove the martial forces of India to assist the British and subsequently opened fire on their own people during the massacre. These Indians also believed that they were looking at the bigger picture, that if they remained loyal, they would be rewarded. Luckily, non-violence leader Mahatma Ghandi, realised that this was not right, not right for the people of India. (A&E Television Networks, LLCA&E Television Networks, LLC, 2016) (Beazley & Almond, 2002, p. 151) That India was entitled to their own government and to be able to put themselves first rather than

“Escape from the Rooster Coop” A Critical Analysis of Character Traits of The White Tiger’s Protagonist In a country where corruption runs rampant, it can be difficult to dig oneself out of the depths of poverty. Set in India, Aravind Adiga’s novel, The White Tiger, follows the protagonist Balram Halwai and his journey from rags to riches. Balram is born in poor, rural India, which he refers to as the “Darkness.” He earns the name “White Tiger” by a school inspector, as he is clever and unique, like the rare white tiger of the jungle.

Through the study of human history it is evident authoritative and monarch governments prevailed as legitimate authorities but with careful considerations these political systems were seen as inaccurate by many. New political systems, functions and responsibilities soon began to surface. Democracy was among these new political systems and argues for the influence of citizens in politics and the protection of rights (Dahl, 1998, p. 44). Democracy can be found through many political systems around the world particularly in first world countries such as Canada and the United States of America. Fortunately the notions of democracy can also be found in some developing countries such as India. ¬¬¬Although democratic views and notions are found throughout Indian politics and its associated practices India does not prove to be completely democratic in relation to Robert Dahl’s criteria of democracy highlighted in his book, On Democracy. Robert Dahl, a political scientist and professor, sets up 5 criteria of democracy that includes effective participation, voting equality, enlightened understanding, inclusion and control of agenda (Dahl, 1998, p. 36-7). He argues that a sense of true democracy is founded when all 5 criteria of democracy are fulfilled (Dahl, 1998, p. 36). Unfortunately India is unable to accommodate the criteria of voting equality and effective participation due to its

The recent experience of India’s post-colonial populist democracy with Moditva (the rise of Narendra Modi as India’s prime minister by mobilizing varied sections of the Indian population: corporates, media, middle classes, Hindutva activists, a section of Other Backward Classes and Dalits along with the poor) has fundamentally challenged the liberal conception of democracy. It is interesting to note that a person widely regarded as anti-minorities while ignoring the normative principle of ‘rule of law’ when protecting the minorities from majoritarian violence, gets elected by popular mandate. In this respect, Moditva (‘Modified’ version of Hindutva) might pose possible threats to India’s democratic processes in future.

India being such a diverse country with multiple languages, cultures, ethnic groups and religious divisions, and the fact that it is a country with a large portion of its population being poor, in the context of political science, democracy in India should not have survived. India has a per capita income of below $3000, with high poverty rates and low literacy, ethnic politics is a feature of Indian politics and despite its diversity and violent insurgencies, democracy has survived in India. This makes India an outlier and a unique outcome. India has been able to conduct free and regular elections over the years, which has allowed it to remain democratic since its inception. Even though it was seen that Congress dominated in the early years, and remained in power for a long period of

Even after 62 years of India’s independence, the plight of common man has worsened. Corrupt public servants, corrupt judges, corrupt police, etc are proving to be parasites leading 5-star lifestyles at taxpayer's expense. They in their greed for money, bribe are aiding & abetting terrorists, separatists, naxalites, underworld mafia, etc covertly & overtly, backstabbing our motherland. These corrupt public servants are crueler than Jalianwallah Bagh butcher General Dyer of British army. If Mahatma Gandhi was alive today, he would have been disgusted with the present way of democratic government, functioning of public servants & would have died heart broken. If our freedom martyrs like