Skip to content

The Greatest Genocide…the BRUTish in India….1908 Article : Atlantic Monthly….

June 30, 2019


As I find hidden history in the nooks and crannies of the web….. just sharing.

Real history, if fully told, would make most people’s heads explode. We’ve been living under a blanket of such deep lies.

Wake up:

Via the Atlantic Monthly, October 1908…


… we must first of all get clearly in mind the fact that India is a subject land. She is a dependency of Great Britain, not a colony. Britain has both colonies and dependencies. Many persons suppose them to be identical; but they are not. Britain’s free colonies, like Canada and Australia, though nominally governed by the mother country, are really self-ruling in everything except their relations to foreign powers. Not so with dependencies like India. These are granted no self-government, no representation; they are ruled absolutely by Great Britain, which is not their “mother” country, but their conqueror and master.

Why is England in India at all? Why did she go there at first, and why does she remain? If India had been a comparatively empty land, as America was when it was discovered, so that Englishmen had wanted to settle there and make homes, the reason would have been plain. But it was a full land; and, as a fact, no British emigrants have ever gone to India to settle and make homes. If the Indian people had been savages or barbarians, there might have seemed more reason for England’s conquering and ruling them. But they were peoples with highly organized governments far older than that of Great Britain, and with a civilization that had risen to a splendid height before England’s was born. Said Lord Curzon, the late Viceroy of India, in an address delivered at the great Delhi Durbar in 1901: “Powerful Empires existed and flourished here [in India] while Englishmen were still wandering painted in the woods, and while the British Colonies were a wilderness and a jungle. India has left a deeper mark upon the history, the philosophy, and the religion of mankind, than any other terrestrial unit in the universe.” It is such a land that England has conquered and is holding as a dependency. It is such a people that she is ruling without giving them any voice whatever in the shaping of their own destiny. The honored Canadian Premier, Sir Wilfred Laurier, at the Colonial Conference held in London in connection with the coronation of King Edward, declared, “The Empire of Rome was composed of slave states; the British Empire is a galaxy of free nations.” But is India a free nation? At that London Colonial Conference which was called together for consultation about the interests of the entire Empire, was any representative invited to be present from India ? Not one. Yet Lord Curzon declared in his Durbar address in Delhi, that the “principal condition of the strength of the British throne is the possession of the Indian Empire, and the faithful attachment and service of the Indian people.” British statesmen never tire of boasting of “our Indian Empire,” and of speaking of India as “the brightest jewel in the British crown.” Do they reflect that it is virtually a slave empire of which they are so proud; and that this so-called brightest jewel reflects no light of political freedom?

Crossing over from this side to London, we sail from there to India in a magnificent steamer. On board is a most interesting company of people, made up of merchants, travelers, and especially Englishmen who are either officials connected with the Indian Government or officers in the Indian army, who have been home on furlough with their families and are now returning. We land in Bombay, a city that reminds us of Paris or London or New York or Washington. Our hotel is conducted in English style. We go to the railway station, one of the most magnificent buildings of the kind in the world, to take the train for Calcutta, the capital, some fifteen hundred miles away. Arrived at Calcutta we hear it called the City of Palaces; nor do we wonder at the name. Who owns the steamship line by which we came to India? The British. Who built that splendid railway station in Bombay? The British. Who built the railway on which we rode to Calcutta? The British.

To whom do these palatial buildings belong? Mostly to the British. We find that Calcutta and Bombay have a large commerce. To whom does it belong? Mainly to the British. We find that the Indian Government, that is, British rule in India, has directly or indirectly built in the land some 29,000 miles of railway; has created good postal and telegraph systems, reaching nearly everywhere; has established or assisted in establishing many schools, colleges, hospitals, and other institutions of public benefit; has promoted sanitation, founded law courts after the English pattern, and done much else to bring India into line with the civilization of Europe. It is not strange if we soon begin to exclaim, “How much are the British doing for India! How great a benefit to the Indian people is British rule!” And in an important degree we are right in what we say. British rule has done much for India, and much for which India itself is profoundly grateful.

But have we seen all? Is there no other side? Have we discovered the deepest and most important that exists? If there are signs of prosperity, is it the prosperity of the Indian people, or only of their English masters? If the English are living in ease and luxury, how are the people of the land living? If there are railways and splendid buildings, who pay for them? and who get profits out of them? Have we been away from the beaten tracks of travel ? Have we been out among the Indian people themselves, in country as well as in city? Nearly nine-tenths of the people are ryots, or small farmers, who derive their sustenance directly from the land. Have we found out how they live? Do we know whether they are growing better off, or poorer? Especially have we looked into the causes of those famines, the most terrible known to the modern world, which have swept like a besom of death over the land year after year, and which drag after them another scourge scarcely less dreadful, the plague, their black shadow, their hideous child? Here is a side of India which we must acquaint ourselves with, as well as the other, if we would understand the real Indian situation.

The great, disturbing, portentous, all-overshadowing fact connected with the history of India in recent years is the succession of famines. What do these famines mean ? Here is a picture from a recent book, written by a distinguished British civilian who has had long service in India and knows the Indian situation from the inside. Since he is an Englishman we may safely count upon his prejudices, if he has any, being not upon the side of the Indian people, but upon that of his own countrymen. Mr. W. S. Lilly, in his India and Its Problems,writes as follows:—

“During the first eighty years of the nineteenth century, 18,000,000 of people perished of famine. In one year alone—the year when her late Majesty assumed the title of Empress—5,000,000 of the people in Southern India were starved to death. In the District of Bellary, with which I am personally acquainted,—a region twice the size of Wales,—one-fourth of the population perished in the famine of 1816-77. I shall never forget my own famine experiences: how, as I rode out on horseback, morning after morning, I passed crowds of wandering skeletons, and saw human corpses by the roadside, unburied, uncared for, and half devoured by dogs and vultures; how, sadder sight still, children, ‘the joy of the world,’ as the old Greeks deemed, had become its ineffable sorrow, and were forsaken by the very women who had borne them, wolfish hunger killing even the maternal instinct. Those children, their bright eyes shining from hollow sockets, their nesh utterly wasted away, and only gristle and sinew and cold shivering skin remaining, their heads mere skulls, their puny frames full of loathsome diseases, engendered by the starvation in which they had been conceived and born and nurtured—they haunt me still.” Every one who has gone much about India in famine times knows how true to life is this picture.

Mr. Lilly estimates the number of deaths in the first eight decades of the last century at 18,000,000. This is nothing less than appalling,—within a little more than two generations as many persons perishing by starvation in a single country as the whole population of Canada, New England, and the city and state of New York, or nearly half as many as the total population of France! But the most startling aspect of the case appears in the fact that the famines increased in number and severity as the century went on. Suppose we divide the past century into quarters, or periods of twenty-five years each. In the first quarter there were five famines, with an estimated loss of life of 1,000,000. During the second quarter of the century there were two famines, with an estimated mortality of 500,000. During the third quarter there were six famines, with a recorded loss of life of 5,000,000. During the last quarter of the century, what? Eighteen famines, with an estimated mortality reaching the awful totals of from 15,000,000 to 26,000,000. And this does not include the many more millions (over 6,000,000 in a single year) barely kept alive by government doles.

What is the cause of these famines, and this appalling increase in their number and destructiveness? The common answer is, the failure of the rains. But there seems to be no evidence that the rains fail worse now than they did a hundred years ago. Moreover, why should failure of rains bring famine? The rains have never failed over areas so extensive as to prevent the raising of enough food in the land to supply the needs of the entire population. Why then have people starved? Not because there was lack of food. Not because there was lack of food in the famine areas, brought by railways or otherwise within easy reach of all. There has always been plenty of food, even in the worst famine years, for those who have had money to buy it with, and generally food at moderate prices. Why, then, have all these millions of people perished? Because they were so indescribably poor. All candid and thorough investigation into the causes of the famines of India has shown that the chief and fundamental cause has been and is the poverty of the people,—a poverty so severe and terrible that it keeps the majority of the entire population on the very verge of starvation even in years of greatest plenty, prevents them from laying up anything against times of extremity, and hence leaves them, when their crops fail, absolutely undone—with nothing between them and death, unless some form of charity comes to their aid. Says Sir Charles Elliott long the Chief Commissioner of Assam, “Half the agricultural population do not know from one halfyear’s end to another what it is to have a full meal.” Says the Honorable G. K. Gokhale, of the Viceroy’s Council,”From 60,000,000 to 70,000,000 of the people of India do not know what it is to have their hunger satisfied even once in a year.”

And the people are growing poorer and poorer. The late Mr. William Digby, of London, long an Indian resident, in his recent book entitled “Prosperous” India,shows from official estimates and Parliamentary and Indian Blue Books, that, whereas the average daily income of the people of India in the year 1850 was estimated as four cents per person (a pittance on which one wonders that any human being can live), in 1882 it had fallen to three cents per person, and in 1900 actually to less than two cents per person. Is it any wonder that people reduced to such extremities as this can lay up nothing? Is it any wonder that when the rains do not come, and the crops of a single season fail, they are lost? And where is this to end? If the impoverishment of the people is to go on, what is there before them but growing hardship, multiplying famines, and increasing loss of life?

Here we get a glimpse of the real India. It is not the India which the traveler sees, following the usual routes of travel, stopping at the leading hotels conducted after the manner of London or Paris, and mingling with the English lords of the country. It is not the India which the British “point to with pride,” and tell us about in their books of description and their official reports. This is India from the inside, the India of the people, of the men, women, and children, who were born there and die there, who bear the burdens and pay the taxes, and support the costly government carried on by foreigners, and do the starving when the famines come.

What causes this awful and growing impoverishment of the Indian people? Said John Bright, “If a country be found possessing a most fertile soil, and capable of bearing every variety of production, and, notwithstanding, the people are in a state of extreme destitution and suffering, the chances are there is some fundamental error in the government of that country.”

Perhaps the greatest of all the causes of the impoverishment of the Indian people is the steady and enormous drain of wealth from India to England, which has been going on ever since the East India Company first set foot in the land, three hundred years ago, and is going on still with steadily increasing volume. England claims that India pays her no “tribute.” Technically, this is true; but, really, it is very far from true. In the form of salaries spent in England, pensions sent to England, interest drawn in England on investments made in India, business profits made in India and sent to England, and various kinds of exploitation carried on in India for England’s benefit, a vast stream of wealth (“tribute” in effect) is constantly pouring into England from India. Says Mr. R. C. Dutt, author of the Economic History of India(and there is no higher authority), “A sum reckoned at twenty millions of English money, or a hundred millions of American money [some other authorities put it much higher], which it should be borne in mind is equal to half the net revenues of India, is remitted annually from this country [India] to England, without a direct equivalent. Think of it! One-half of what we [in India] pay as taxes goes out of the country, and does not come back to the people. No other country on earth suffers like this at the present day; and no country on earth could bear such an annual drain without increasing impoverishment and repeated famines. We denounce ancient Rome for impoverishing Gaul and Egypt, Sicily and Palestine, to enrich herself. We denounce Spain for robbing the New World and the Netherlands to amass wealth. England is following exactly the same practice in India. Is it strange that she is converting India into a land of poverty and famine?”

It is said that India is incapable of ruling herself. If so, what an indictment is this against England! She was not incapable of ruling herself before England came. Have one hundred and fifty years of English tutelage produced in her such deterioration? As we have seen, she was possessed of a high civilization and of developed governments long before England or any part of Europe had emerged from barbarism. For three thousand years before England’s arrival, Indian kingdoms and empires had held leading places in Asia. Some of the ablest rulers, statesmen, and financiers of the world have been of India’s production. How is it, then, that she loses her ability to govern herself as soon as England appears upon the scene? To be sure, at that time she was in a peculiarly disorganized and unsettled state; for it should be remembered that the Mogul Empire was just breaking up, and new political adjustments were everywhere just being made,—a fact which accounts for England’s being able to gain a political foothold in India. But everything indicates that if India had not been interfered with by European powers, she would soon have been under competent governments of her own again.

6 Comments leave one →
  1. Egghead permalink
    June 30, 2019 12:31 pm

    First of all, if you want an honest and informing discussion (rather than simply a ‘poor pitiful me’ whine), you would have to indicate with (English grammar, ahem) quotation marks what part of this ‘essay’ is a direct quotation versus is your own opinion (although I presume that your selection and dissemination of material indicates your opinion).

    Second of all, off the top of my head, I can think of many root ‘causes’ of India’s poverty other than England: Islam (Pakistan, anyone?), the caste system, suttee (which I’ve heard attributed as a cultural reaction to the adoption of Islam – like the ‘honor’ killings of Hispanics), lack of basic human and women’s rights, fatalism based in Indian religion and then culture (i.e. ‘the poor deserve to be poor due to past lives’), lack of basic sanitation, and the ‘brain drain’ whereby the ‘smartest’ Indians immigrate to Western (English speaking) countries (and then presumably send money back to India, at least in the form of regular visits to the ‘old country’ if nothing else).

    The ‘English’ to whom you refer have their own caste system under which actual English people and other Westerners have suffered greatly, but it is far safer for you to call out your ‘villains’ as ‘English’ than to accurately identify them. Oh, but at least, Indians are, for now, ‘allowed’ to complain about foreign villainy as long as you attribute it to the ‘wrong’ villains – in the same way that blacks are ‘allowed’ to complain about slavery as long as blacks attribute it to the ‘wrong’ villains. Your ‘earnest’ but very self-serving misattribution of cause and blame serves the purpose of the actual villains as those villains continue genociding the white race from the face of the earth.

    Please note that there are currently BILLIONS more Indians (and Asians and Africans) on the earth than steadily diminishing white people. Who will you blame when the actual villains have successfully eliminated the white race?

    Oh, and who will send INFINITE money to the third world when the whole world is the third world? Do you know the story of the goose who laid the golden eggs? Well, that goose was a white goose!

    • June 30, 2019 1:28 pm

      Egghead, I have two questions for you… 1) Have you ever been to India? 2) Are you familiar with the concept of deep history and cybernetics? Do let me know, or I’ll remove your strangely toned comment. Cheers….

      • Egghead permalink
        June 30, 2019 5:45 pm

        I have never been to India (although I love Indian food – and I have a general sense that reincarnation exists and that I may very well have been an Indian in a past life). I am well read, and I know more about India than most white Westerners.

        My white friend worked at the U.S. embassy in India for a year. I told her not to go because I know that the poverty in India is oppressive. Based on her experience in other countries including Africa, she naively dismissed me out-of-hand and then she paid dearly with her own money to return home to the U.S. a year early – because she learned firsthand that the poverty in India is oppressive.

        I like Indians, but I know that Indians would rather live under ‘English’ rule than Islamic rule. One rather doubts that Indians are clamoring to migrate to Islamic countries.

        One also rather doubts that Indians who immigrate to the West are clamoring to live under the ‘worst’ elements of Indian culture and governance. I know an educated and employed upper middle class Indian lady in the U.S. in an arranged marriage who wishes that she had been able to pick her own husband (as opposed to her being a modern mail order bride from India).

        I know another educated and employed upper middle class Indian-American lady who was thrilled at the idea of visiting her relatives in the ‘old country.’ Upon arriving in India, she tried to take a taxi to get to her relatives, but the taxi driver drove her off course and tried to rape her. After a lucky escape, she turned around and went back to the airport and flew straight back to the white U.S.

        White U.S. Christian radio describes the poverty of India in regular campaigns for monetary donations to help house, feed, clothe, and educate the sexually exploited girls and boys who are born into Indian brothels. Does Indian Hindu radio raise funds for exploited Indian children? Does Indian Hindu radio raise funds for exploited white children in the U.S.? One rather doubts.

        I am generally familiar with your background because I looked you up years ago when I joined this blog. I know that you are smart, but so am I.

        I am asking you (and your Indian readers) to understand that white people have been muzzled for a long time now and that white people have not been ‘allowed’ to address being unfairly blamed for a long litany of minority woes without getting appropriate credit (let alone reciprocation) for benefitting minorities on a tremendous scope and scale.

        That sense of unease you have with my ‘tone’ is you hearing an unfiltered truth for the first time in this ‘politically correct’ world – and you feeling surprised by and uncomfortable with that truth.

      • Egghead permalink
        June 30, 2019 6:09 pm

        It is more convenient to speculate about deep history than it is to examine actual history or current events.

        The truth is that Islamists actively genocided millions of Indians over time via war. Islamist-conquered Indians were, are, and will be an existential threat to Hindu Indians (especially women and children – especially at shared borders).

        The truth is that international ‘traders’ use war and famine to control indigenous populations via poverty.

        The truth is that international ‘traders’ label themselves as ‘citizens’ of individual countries without sharing the genetics, culture, religion, or goals of the indigenous and without caring about the welfare of the indigenous and, at times, with the goal to cull and/or genocide the indigenous.

        The truth is that white people have been, are being, and will be as abused by international ‘traders’ as various minority peoples.

        The truth is that white people are the people who are currently facing replacement and genocide by international ‘traders.’

        The population numbers tell the truth. It is white people who are marked to be the genocided race.

  2. July 17, 2019 4:49 am

    Hello dear Vivek, I am going to India in November🕉🙏🏼💖😊🌟🕊where are you? It would be so wonderful if I could see you🌝🌝🌝🌝🌝

    Sent from my iPhone


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s