What Are The Causes Of The Partition Of India

“India has never been a symbol of unity of Hindu-Muslim civilization. It is not possible for the British Government to create homogeneity between Hindu and Muslim culture and civilization as the two systems are distinctively opposed to each other. There is no way other than the partition of India”

The general cause of the Indian Independence Movement was India’s desire for independence from British, French and Portuguese Rule. The aim of the movement was “Swaraj, a self-governing India” (Sharma, 2005, p. 22). One, more specific, cause of the Indian Independence Movement took place in 1905 when the province of Bengal was divided into two provinces,

There was a high food shortage in 1946 and this caused many to ration. World War II left a deep wound in India as two and a half million Indian soldiers were sent to aid the allies and 24,000 killed. Many were unemployed as they lost their jobs after the war since there was no need for war production. Gandhi’s party, Indian national congress, created in 1885 seemed it would be the power that ruled after Britain left. This changed, however, as the All Muslim league became popular during World War II. Muslims were a minority compared to the Hindus. The Partition of 1947 created Pakistan, where the Muslims would live, and India, where the Hindus would live.

Many people believe that in the 1940’s most of India’s problems involving independence was to do with divisions within India rather than British imperialism. In this essay I will be looking at both points of view and finally giving my opinion. I will be using three sources also to help me show both sides of the story. I will also be using my further knowledge to add a wider range of knowledge.

Throughout the years many historians have compilated and examined why Indian people were so desperate to gain back their independence from the British Empire during their rule over India, from 1612 to 1947. The reasoning can most definitely be found as the British discriminated against Indian people as they believe that they were inferior; it is no surprise that Indian people fought so hard for their independence. Throughout the British Raj, they placed and put forward unbelievably racist acts and laws which discriminated against Indian people. Which of course led to Indians to rebel against the British rule and which the British reacted with causing massacres. Explaining the nationalistic many India’s felt during the British Raj.

"The Philosophy of War." Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Alexander Moseley, n.d. Web. 28 May 2017.) Wars historical context that has been one of the critical challenges that affects people in and out of its boundaries, has since translated into literatures

This story indicates if people always try to avoid a conflict and not try to resolve it, the consequences will become more

The purpose of this historical inquiry is to analyze to what extent did British Imperialism have an effect on shaping modern India? The main source that will be discussed in this paper is the seventh book of the Spotlight on History Series called The British Raj, which explains the reasons behind the conflicts between the British Empire and Indian nationalism and assess the achievements of a memorable relationship.

Throughout the year’s many historians have compilated and examined why Indian people were so desperate to gain back their independence from the British Empire during their rule over India, from 1612 to 1947. The reasoning can most definitely be found as the British discriminated against Indian people as they believe that they were inferior; it is no surprise that Indian people fought so hard for their independence. Throughout the British Raj, they placed and put forward unbelievably racist acts and laws which discriminated against Indian people. Which of course led to Indian’s rebelling against the British rule and thus many massacres and rebellions occurred during their ruling. Thus, answering why Indian people fought so desperately for

The ongoing conflict between India and Pakistan has been the subject of speculation and study by political scientists and historians for a number of years. The ethnic conflict seems to have been sparked at the very beginning in 1947, when the British used Muslim and Hindu mercenaries against each other before the area finally split into today’s countries of India and Pakistan (Spiegel et al. 2015, 185). The timeline since then has been full of conflicts, both major and minor. Brutal tactics used by security forces and a high rate of unemployment have added to the issue (BBC News 2016).

Today, India is a free country, but this country’s history to freedom was not pleasant. Britain, a country that occupied many territories, came to conquer India for its valuables. During this time, they treated Indians poorly and stole all the goods of the country to trade. This rule continued for nearly two-hundred years, and India struggled to fight for freedom from 1857 to 1947. On August 15, 1947, India finally gained its independence through the India Independence Act passed by the British House of Common. The British House of Commons is the UK parliament that is part of the legislative branch. The act stated that India would be divided into two dominions, India and Pakistan, thus granting Pakistan independence on August 14 and Indian independence on August 15. Marc Aronson, in his book Race, explores and examines the concept of race where the reasoning behind racial discrimination can be seen. Aronson provides the four pillars of race, which show an ideology behind racism that occurs universally. During the British-rule in India, the British racially discriminated Indians. As a result of the discrimination, Britain

The Causes of Indian Independence in 1947 In 1947 India was declared an independent country from Britain, after years of peaceful and violent protests, pressure from all sides, and numerous promises. Not only this, but Pakistan was also formed by partitioning the country into two, providing a separate homeland for the Muslims of India. Although independence was greeting with relief from all, partition came with riots, millions of murders and a hatred between countries that has not healed up even by today. The word "inevitable" in the essay title implies something which was almost 'destined' to happen from the beginning, and the course of action could not be averted under any circumstances.

In 1940 the all-Indian Muslim league declared its desire for a 'Pakistan' meaning 'land of the pure' under the confederation of an all Hindu state called 'Hindustan' or the 'land of the Hindus'. however a 'Pakistan' under the Indian rule seemed impossible, and

The Partition of India in August, 1947 was a significant event in history that accounted for the separation of one of the world’s oldest civilization into two, independent nations – Pakistan and India. Like many other wars in history, The Partition of India was instigated by religious, political and social conflict. This resulted in violence, discrimination and the largest human displacement in contemporary history. While the Partition was well-studied, much of our understanding was focused on the political side of history, not the human side of it. This was why oral history played an important role in manifesting the complexity of a historical event. Our focus here is Maya Rani’s testimony from Butalia’s book, The Other Side of Silence:

Before the Partition of India, in 1947, India was considered a country with a reasonably peaceful history. However, during and after the Partition, sexual violence, both towards men and women, escalated, resulting in the rape and abduction of over 80,000 women. Cracking India, by Bapsi Sidhwa, tells a story that highlights these violent acts by both Muslims and Hindus, through the eyes of a disabled young Parsi girl named Lenny, who witnesses first hand the violence of Partition when she mistakenly participates in the abduction of her ayah, Shanta. Throughout Cracking India, Lenny observes as the religions involved in Partition become increasingly violent towards both men and women, within their own religions and against others.