The Difficulty Of English Indian Friendship

Even though there are many articles show us much information at these times, the details may be so different from each other that the Colonial Era is still in mystery for most of us today. For instance, some of us may know the Native Americans as brutal and cruel people without understanding deeply about their life. Baily describes their life before the arrivals of the Europeans as a peaceful life and rich culture. He tells us that they have their own civilization from the organization of family and the country 1. The author also explores the foundation of new societies as bloody and costly ways when the Europeans from many countries came to Indian land. The evidence is that there are many terrifying encounter among these countries because of the conflict in building their own society

The memoir starts with Orwell describing the tendency of defiance and disobedience that had grown in India since it became a British colony. Indeed, “the anti European feeling was very bitter” (256) among the native population. Orwell who was on the frontline of this crisis could testify about how “the young Buddhist priests who had nothing to do but jeer at Europeans” (256) were causing him trouble. However, as surprising as it is, Orwell himself is opposed to Imperialism. He thinks that for Imperialism to sustain, there is a “dirty job” of mistreating and terrorizing the natives on an everyday basis that policemen like him were responsible of. Imperialism seeks for imposing its conformity to the Indian population by gaining their compliance.

British penetration of India during the period of indentureship, history attests that neither the scale nor the time period of this penetration can match the reality of the impact of the Slave Trade and Slavery on Africans and their Motherland. But while the enslaved Africans - unlike the indentured Indians - had their ancestral cloak ripped from them, the White man could not take the living nucleus of their culture and its memory from them. So (as they say 'whoever

Examining the complex relationship between Indians and early English colonists, Karen Kupperman notes that English writers on colonization described Indian societies as viable civilizations and regarded economic prosperity in the New World as a viable option. Potential colonists saw the native peoples as potential trading partners and friendly and receptive to European settlements. This positive view, however, contrasted with other descriptions of savagery that grew out of cultural assumptions and misunderstandings about gender roles, matrilineal societies, clothing, diet, religious worship, and most critically, notions of individual property ownership and land use. The English and the Indians each viewed one another through their own frames of reference and understandings of how human societies should function. All of this contributed to the marginalization of Indians from English colonial society. In light of the conflicting nature of English-Indian relations, the decimation of the Indian population through disease, and the increasing difficulty and expense of indentured servants, the English eventually turned to African slaves for

Relations between the American Indians and the English, as well as between the Spanish and the Native Americans, were much more hostile than those between the American Indians and the French. Firstly, the French treated the American Indians with respect on all accounts of their culture. Secondly, the English showed no mercy or reason to American Indians occupying native land. Lastly, instead of attempting to take advantage of the indigenous people of North America, the French established trade relationships. For nearly the entire colonization period, the French remained allied with the American Indians.

Growing up in America, more specifically in New England, students were taught that the relationship between the Indians and the English, was all well and good, but the truth is that the English basically killed the Indians, so the Thanksgiving that we know and love, is all a sham. Because of the Indians in America not being exposed to disease, they had no built up immunity to sickness, although, if the English had never come to America, they would still be running this country.

One of the greatest examples of Imperialism with the tense relationship between Britain and India. It’s a strong showcase that compares both pros and cons of Imperialism. The colonization of India started with the development of the East India Company. First of all the dominion and influence over India allowed many economic growths, which included a strong trade system thanks to India’s very promising amount of raw materials, British could export back to themselves raise money to develop new companies “India became an agricultural colony of Industrial England, supplying raw materials and providing marks for England’s industrial goods.” (Nehru). Since they had a surplus amount of materials they could sell it for very cheap, therefore changing the economy, and the market trends. India became the best sources for raw materials, production, and allowed companies to develop in Britain. The main reason why the manufactured goods were able to be sold at a cheap price was because of the law set in India that allowed foreign goods free entry without having to pay “The East India Company held a monopoly on the export of Indian goods and British goods had free entry into India” (Nehru). This was mainly allowed because of the British ideological views on Indian people, how they are below them. The Indian crafters were being taxed a lot of money when they are leaving the country. The British government made sure to set a tariffs on the Indian textiles. This

An empire on is ways to conquer the world to decorate its dear crown could not mistakenly forget to collect its chief jewel. The country of diversity, riches and abundant resources caught the avaricious eyes of the British right after the British gained political power in France in 1763. India’s peaceful atmosphere and lack of being politically unified, due to its vast culture and diversity, paved the way for the British to capture more than just a trading agreement with the British East India Company. Although the British are worthy of receiving partial credit for modernizing India, the negative effects cannot be overlooked since far more damage had been done than rectification. They greedily fueled their economy while draining India’s, socially impacted their jewel in a negative manner in the name of modernization and tore apart the land of diversity and culture while stealing words from the oppressed.

Mr. Cook makes a strong case in his attempt to understand the causes and contributing factors behind the segregation along race, class and gender lines which were so prevalent in British ruled India, but also strictly observed within Britain and her other colonies. In “Conflicting Ideologies in British India, 1875-1900” he cites factors both specific to India, in particular the suppressed revolt of 1857, and those more external, like the “hardening racism” in Europe. The substantial losses, both financial and in human lives, associated with the revolt of 1857 resulted in a significant decline in trust and an increasing hesitancy to risk “antagonizing Indian sensibilities”. Since the revolt was viewed as retaliation for British attempts to Westernize India, this fearful reluctance to continue along the path previously envisioned by some which ultimately resulted in Britain’s empowerment, modernization and civilizing of the native Indians to a place of independent governance and administration, became less appealing but also served as additional justification for European society’s changing perception of race. The elite Anglicized Indians had not only dared to challenge British authority and administrative processes, but they had dared to utilize their Western teachings to do so. This clearly barbaric application of treasured knowledge, which the British perceived they had bestowed upon the fortunate Indians as a gift, was viewed as further proof of the inability to

From the time you are young and learning about the 13 original colonies, you are exposed to Imperialism. Imperialism being a “mother country” who takes over another (or several) different, less powerful nations to collect more income, obtain more resources and spread their culture. About 300 years ago India was desirable because of their rich land for crops and the large population of people to work. India was so irresistible to the British that their rule over them lasted about 200 years, although they helped create a uniform government, develop a modern infrastructure and founded universities, it resulted in great damage to the Indians. Including, no control over their own government, destruction of beautiful, healthy land and millions of deaths.

The manner of how British imperialism was done atrocious, they had little regard for India’s feelings and seemed to be in India solely for the enjoyment of their superior power. The main historic meaning behind the British coming to the “rescue” was for trading. Seemingly not interested in the cultural value of India, the British only absorbed India's financial potential. Money had a major factor in the British's journey, although they also believed they had an obligation to all Indian people to share their superiority. Of course, our familiarity with the poem White man's Burden is undeniable. Even after being read so many times this poem always comes to the same conclusion, the British wanted someone to control. By eradicating the culture they controlled the Indian religion. By controlling the citizen’s goods they had authority over the money. By their promise of protection, they controlled all of

Mary Rowlandson’s “A Narrative of the Captivity and Restoration of Mrs. Mary Rowlandson” and Benjamin Franklin’s “Remarks Concerning the Savages of North America” are two different perspectives based on unique experiences the narrators had with “savages.” Benjamin Franklin’s “Remarks Concerning the Savages…” is a comparison between the ways of the Indians and the ways of the Englishmen along with Franklin’s reason why the Indians should not be defined as savages. “A Narrative of the Captivity…” is a written test of faith about a brutally traumatic experience that a woman faced alone while being held captive by Indians. Mary Rowlandson views the Indians in a negative light due to the traumatizing and inhumane experiences she went through

There has been an archaic existing fear of anything different from the norm becoming present, however having something different may bring about positive change, diversity, and new knowledge. Yet people are reluctant to accept something different and instead make efforts to change the differences to match the way things normally and dominantly are. This fear and reaction is the reason for why efforts of assimilation occur, so that the dominant can integrate the minority and to conform to the dominant culture. Writer Sarah Ahmed discusses the issues of migration, assimilation, and what it really means to be happy in her chapter “Melancholic Migrant.” She traces the links between white culture and happiness; the idea of the whiter you are the happier you are. Ahmed presents arguments of other scholars, like Trevor Phillips, that present the notion of migration being the root of unhappiness in communities with people of different racial backgrounds living together and running into conflicts (122). She goes on to explore how the British government tries to resolve these diversity conflicts among their British citizens and Asian immigrant population. The British Empire promoted civilized kind of pleasure that they assumed could not be found in the Indian culture, but only in the British culture. Based on the excuse of Indians being uncivilized the British made attempts to colonize them. The British held the belief that India does not have culture and thus the

A Passage To India by E. M. Forster is a rich, postcolonial novel delving into the possibility of sustaining a personal friendship between an English person and an "Indian" person. This topic is being discussed in the beginning of the novel at the home of Hamidullah, "... they were discussing as to whether or no(t) it is possible to be friends with an Englishman. Mahmoud Ali argued that it was not, Hamidullah disagreed, but with so many reservations..." (Forster 7) Aziz, who the novel centers around, has the disposition to just shut them out and ignore them and all will be jolly. Of course, later, we find Aziz does not shut them out and rather

E.M. Forster’s classic novel “A Passage to India” tells the story of a young doctor, Dr. Aziz, and his interactions with the British citizens who are residing in India during the time of the British Raj. Throughout the novel, the reader gets many different viewpoints on the people and the culture of India during this point in history. The reader sees through the eyes of the Indian people primarily through the character of Dr. Aziz, and the perceptions of the British through the characters of Mr. Fielding, Adela Quested, and Mrs. Moore. Through the different characters, and their differing viewpoints, the reader can see that Forster was creating a work that expressed a criticism that he held of the behavior of the British towards their Indian subjects.