• CaptObvious@literature.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    It isn’t clear that Britain’s carving up other peoples’ countries to make new ones ever worked out. Why would this be any different?

  • LalSalaamComrade@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 months ago

    South Indian from a minority group here. The partition was pretty fucking stupid. I’d rather if there were no partition, but federation of power to states, divided on linguistic basis. India has a sub-nationalism problem. Kannada and Malayali chauvinists destroyed not just mine, but countless languages and cultures. Similarly, Bengali destroyed the tribal culture in Orissa and Jharkhand, and Hindi language in cow-belt areas.

    • someguy3@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      When you say federation of power to states, do you mean you would want a federal government with several smaller states/provinces with substantial powers? Or several small countries?

      • LalSalaamComrade@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        European Union kind, but with the concept of India still being a country, governing not states, but sub-nationalities. Some amount of centralization should still exist with respect to defense, unequal fund allocation and the likes. Oh, and I forgot to add this - dual citizenship should be enforced compulsorily. Single citizenship is what’s caused dangerous, destructive territorial nationalism primarily on the basis of Hindi and Hindu identity.

  • Throwaway@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Nothing wpuld have made it better. Best thing would have been leaving them alone, that way when they fought, the UK wouldnt be blamed.