QA：印度人怎么看待英國統(tǒng)治時期？
Was British rule in India benevolent?
譯文簡介
如果死亡是仁慈的，那么英國人在印度的統(tǒng)治就是仁慈的。
正文翻譯
Was British rule in India benevolent?
英國在印度的統(tǒng)治是仁慈的嗎？
英國在印度的統(tǒng)治是仁慈的嗎？
評論翻譯
很贊 ( 3 )
收藏
I wish I were commander-in-chief in India ... I should proclaim to them that I considered my holding that appointment by the leave of God, to mean that I should do my utmost to exterminate the race
-- Charles Dickens (1857)
If death were benevolent, then Brits were benevolent in India.
Criminal Negligence: When the British took India, it had the second highest GDP in the world and was termed as the "crown jewel of the empire". It was the land to which Christopher Columbus and Vasco da Gama risked their lives to find a route. By the time they left, this is what India looked like. Under the company, India was denied the adoption of a lot of key technologies, although historically Indians were quick to adopt best of overseas technologies. Since independence, some improvement has been made to wipe out famines and improve life expectancy.
Famines ravaged India. One of them in 1876-78 killed 10 million people from where I come from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Famine_of_1876%E2%80%931878
(Until the 18th century we had only 18 recorded famines. However, just in 25 years since 1875 we had that many and far more brutal).
Brutal reprisals: Plenty of new research has uncovered systematic brutality, especially following India's first rebellion in 1857. Between 1-10 million Indians disappeared. All the fighting Indian soldiers were slaughtered. India's secret history: 'A holocaust, one where millions disappeared...'
Economic plunder. When Brits arrived (in 1700s) India accounted for 25% of world GDP. By the time they left in 1947, India's share was reduced to about 2%. [Zoom to get a better view]. Since the British left, we are now back to growing ways (see the yellow worm, slowly clawing back).
Wars: Britain pulled India's men into wars that had nothing to do with India. Over 1.3 million men served in the World War I and over 2 million served in World War II (with over 87000 men died in it). But, that was not the worst part. Britain took us into war with China (with whom we had a completely peaceful relationship for 5000 years). The Opium wars (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium_Wars) is not only responsible for the current state of world drug trade, but also is the reason for the current disputed border between India & China. British India also fought with Afganistan and other countries with whom we were in historic good terms.
In a nation that invented the decimal system and is renowned historically for mathematics, science and arts, British institutional apathy and bad policies reduced the literacy rate to 12% at the time of independence in 1947. Since then, the rate multiplied five-fold (see the acceleration after 1951). Look at the first 5 decades and the last 5 of 20th century as a proof of British "benevolence" at work.
Jallianwalabagh Massacre. Hundreds of Indians, peacefully marching were surrounded and fired by a British general. This is one of the saddest days in modern Indian history. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jallianwala_Bagh_massacre This is just one of the many examples where British government was ruthless & brutal on Indian populace.
In 1950, life expectancy in India (31 years) was less than half that in the US (68 years). But by 2005, India (64 years) was not far behind the US (77 years).
Source: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/opinion/sa-aiyar/swaminomics/Our-greatest-achievement-longer-lives/articleshow/2291641.cms? India had extremely low life expectancy during the British rule. This screwed up our economy & society in so many ways.
When Brits left India, they intentionally made the accession ambivalent to divide the nation into 1000s of princely states. Luckily for India, Churchill was voted out of power and India had a great nation builder who rebuilt the nation out of 1000s of princely states each wanted to have its own nation. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_integration_of_India
While Indian mainland had slightly better prisons, the Raj exported many freedom fighters to the brutal jail in Andaman Islands where they were put into inhuman torture. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cellular_Jail
At the end of the 18th century, Hindus and Musli... finally started to get back together in the last stages of Mughal era (See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bahadur_Shah_II Zafar explicitly stated that both Hinduism and Islam shared the same essence.). However, the Brits came in and destroyed the fragile integration process. The British had the historic "Divide and Rule" policy that ultimately climaxed in India-Pakistan partition in 1947. The event killed millions and displaced dozens of millions of people.
Final note: Most of us have nothing against the present Britain or British people, for 5 reasons:
Most of the horrors happened when none of the present Brits were born. 3 generations have come since the time of Indian independence.
Most of the British public had nothing to do with the colonial Raj. Though they indirectly benefited, they had no direct hand. In fact, a good chunk of the British public were sympathetic to Gandhi's struggle.
A lot of what they did was not inconsistent with the morals that were held by the world then. Many of the things like slavery were legal then. We can judge people only against the morals of their era and not by the morals of the present era.
Things could have been worse, had India come fully under another colonial power such as the French, Spanish or later the Germans or Japanese. The British Empire was the least of the colonial evils.
And finally, a lot of us appreciate the finer aspects of British culture. Apart from Cricket, Tea, English language, Victorian era architecture we are thankful for the Indian railways, postal, army and banking systems and the common law structure.
“我希望我是印度的總司令......然后我會向他們宣布，既然我在上帝的許可下?lián)芜@一職務，這就意味著我應該盡最大努力來消滅這個種族?！?br /> --查爾斯-狄更斯（1857年）
如果死亡是仁慈的，那么英國人在印度的統(tǒng)治就是仁慈的。
1. 對發(fā)展犯罪般的疏忽：當英國占領(lǐng)印度時，它的GDP位居世界第二，被稱為“帝國皇冠上的明珠”?？死锼雇懈ァじ鐐惒己屯咚箍啤み_伽馬冒著生命危險尋找前往印度的路線。而當他們離開時，下圖就是印度的樣子。在該公司的領(lǐng)導下，印度沒有采用許多關(guān)鍵技術(shù)，盡管歷史上印度人很快就會采用最好的海外技術(shù)。只有在自獨立之后，才在消除饑荒和提高預期壽命方面取得了一些進展。
1.1 饑荒蹂躪了印度。其中僅在 1876-78 年間就殺死了 1000 萬人，數(shù)據(jù)來源：
1.2 殘酷的報復：大量新的研究揭示了系統(tǒng)性的暴行，特別是在1857年印度第一次叛亂之后。100萬至1000萬印度人失蹤。所有起義的印度士兵都被屠殺了。印度的秘史：“一場大屠殺，數(shù)百萬人失蹤......”（鏈接）
1.3 經(jīng)濟掠奪：當英國人到達印度時（1700年代），印度占世界GDP的25%。到1947年他們離開時，印度的份額已降至約2%。自從英國人離開后，我們現(xiàn)在又回到增長模式（見黃色柱狀，正慢慢地爬回去）。
2. 戰(zhàn)爭：英國將印度的人拉入與印度無關(guān)的戰(zhàn)爭。超過130萬人在第一次世界大戰(zhàn)中服役，超過200萬人在第二次世界大戰(zhàn)中服役（超過87000人死于第二次世界大戰(zhàn)）。但是，這還不是最糟糕的部分。英國帶領(lǐng)我們與中國開戰(zhàn)（我們與中國保持了 5000 年完全和平的關(guān)系）。鴉片戰(zhàn)爭（見：http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium_Wars）不僅是造成世界毒品貿(mào)易現(xiàn)狀的原因，也是目前印度和中國之間邊界有爭議的原因。英屬印度還與阿富汗和其他國家作戰(zhàn)，雖然歷史上我們與他們保持著良好關(guān)系。
3. 在一個發(fā)明了十進制系統(tǒng)并以數(shù)學、科學和藝術(shù)而聞名的國家，英國制度的冷漠和糟糕的政策將1947年印度獨立時的識字率降低到12%。從那時起，這一比率增加了五倍（參見1951年后的加速）?？纯?0世紀的前5個十年和后5個十年的對比，作為英國“仁慈”的證明。
4. 賈利安瓦拉巴格大屠殺。數(shù)百名和平游行的印度人被一名英國將軍下令包圍并開槍。這是現(xiàn)代印度歷史上最悲傷的日子之一。 這只是英國政府對印度民眾無情和殘酷的眾多例子之一。
5. 1950年，印度的預期壽命（31歲）不到美國的一半（68歲）。但到2005年，印度（64歲）并不落后于美國（77歲）。在英國統(tǒng)治期間，印度的預期壽命極低。這在很多方面搞砸了我們的經(jīng)濟和社會。
6. 當英國人離開印度時，他們故意把加入印度的事情弄得很曖昧，將國家劃分為1000多個土邦。對印度來說，幸運的是，丘吉爾被趕下了臺，印度有了一個偉大的國家建設者，在每個邦都想擁有自己的國家的時候，他在1000多個土邦中重建了國家。參閱： http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_integration_of_India
7. 雖然印度本土有稍微好一點的監(jiān)獄，但英國人將許多自由戰(zhàn)士運送到安達曼群島的殘酷監(jiān)獄，在那里他們受到了非人的折磨。http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cellular_Jail。
8. 18世紀末，在莫臥兒時代的最后階段，印度教徒和穆斯林終于開始重歸于好（見：http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bahadur_Shah_II 扎法爾明確表示，印度教和伊斯蘭教都有相同的本質(zhì)）。然而，英國人的到來破壞了這個脆弱的融合過程。英國人制定了歷史性的“分而治之”政策，最終在1947年的印度-巴基斯坦分治中達到高潮。這一事件導致數(shù)百萬人死亡，數(shù)千萬人流離失所。
最后說明：我們大多數(shù)人并不敵視現(xiàn)在的英國或英國人，原因有5個：
1. 大多數(shù)恐怖事件發(fā)生在現(xiàn)在的英國人都沒有出生的時候。自印度獨立以來，已經(jīng)過了有3代人了。
2. 大多數(shù)英國公眾與殖民地印度無關(guān)。雖然他們間接受益，但他們沒有直接參與。事實上，有相當一部分英國公眾對甘地的斗爭表示同情。
3. 他們的所作所為與當時世界所持有的道德并不矛盾。許多像奴隸制這樣的事情在當時都是合法的。我們只能根據(jù)他們時代的道德來判斷人們，而不是根據(jù)當今時代的道德來判斷。
4. 如果印度完全處于另一個殖民大國之下，如法國、西班牙或后來的德國人或日本人，情況可能會更糟。大英帝國是殖民帝國中罪惡最小的。
5. 最后，我們很多人都欣賞英國文化中精致的方面。除了板球，茶，英語，維多利亞時代的建筑，我們也感謝留下了印度鐵路，郵政，軍隊和銀行系統(tǒng)以及日常法律結(jié)構(gòu)。
This is a very fair and balanced view of things. For a long time, I had thought of the Raj as a good thing for India because it gave the country all of the good things about British culture and united India when it was disunited. But that’s only looking at India from a modern perspective. Independent India was able to keep the British infrastructure and legal system and get rid of the British economic exploitation and oppressive colonial government—and all we see today are the good parts of the British legacy.
But India could have pulled itself together on its own and become a great, united nation again, without having to suffer through centuries of foreign colonial rule. Turkey and China both did it, and I’m sure India could have too.
這是一種非常公平和平衡的觀點。很長一段時間以來，我一直認為大英帝國的統(tǒng)治對印度來說是一件好事，因為它給了這個國家所有關(guān)于英國文化的好處，并在印度分裂時統(tǒng)一了印度。但這只是從現(xiàn)代的角度來看待印度。獨立的印度能夠保留英國的基礎設施和法律體系，擺脫英國的經(jīng)濟剝削和壓迫性的殖民政府——我們今天看到的只是英國遺產(chǎn)的美好部分。
但是，印度本來可以靠自己的力量團結(jié)起來，再次成為一個偉大的、統(tǒng)一的國家，而不必經(jīng)歷幾個世紀的外國殖民統(tǒng)治的痛苦。土耳其和中國都做到了，我相信印度也可以做到。
The biggest thing India lost was the ability to participate in the industrial revolution. India was a leading textile producer in the 1700s and the Industrial Revolution started 20 years after the colonization. India could have soundly transitioned and indeed some of the independent states in India did try to transition to industrialization [Bangalore is a part of one such independent state with Asia’s first electrification & other engineering innovations], but they were too few.
The viceroys of India were English who were doing temporary work in India and didn’t know/care about building domestic industrial capacity. Thus, India lost all its textile production to Britain.
印度失去的最重要的東西是參與工業(yè)革命的能力。印度在17世紀是一個領(lǐng)先的紡織品生產(chǎn)國，工業(yè)革命是在殖民化20年后開始的。印度本可以順利過渡，事實上，印度的一些獨立國家也曾試圖向工業(yè)化過渡（班加羅爾就是這樣的獨立國家之一，擁有亞洲第一個電氣化和其他工程創(chuàng)新），但他們太少了。
印度的總督是英國人，他們只當在印度的工作是做臨時工，不知道/不關(guān)心建立印度國內(nèi)工業(yè)的能力。因此，印度的紡織品生產(chǎn)全部輸給了英國。
India was deliberately kept out of industrialization. The lack of Indian industries benefited the English who exported the Indian resources to Britain, supplemented the revolution and used the huge Indian market to plunder the wealth. Systematically, the flourishing Indian industries were eliminated to create the English market monopoly.
印度被故意排除在工業(yè)化之外。印度工業(yè)的匱乏使英國人受益匪淺，他們把印度資源出口到英國，補充英國的工業(yè)革命，利用巨大的印度市場掠奪財富。系統(tǒng)地，繁榮的印度工業(yè)被淘汰，創(chuàng)造了英國市場的壟斷。
After reading the comments I am not sure if the invasion helped us or them or whatever people glorifying the british rule are trying to say, but I wished they would have never invaded. I don't know what we would have lost by that or gained but at least we would have had an identity of our own, instead of blindly following whatever it is that west brings to the plate nowadays. May be in that scenario we would have treated our languages and culture with a little bit of more respect, instead of trying to copy the west. Not saying that there culture is bad, but it's better to be the first you than to be a second someone. Though I do applaud the removal of sati, dowry or any such systems by the British rule, if they actually did that(sorry not an history buff, neither interested in searching).
看完評論后，我不確定入侵是幫助了我們還是幫助了他們，或者不管那些美化英國統(tǒng)治的人想說什么，我都還是希望他們從未入侵過印度。我不知道我們會因此失去什么或得到什么，但至少我們會有自己的身份，而不是盲目地追隨西方現(xiàn)在帶來的東西。也許在這種情況下，我們會更加尊重我們的語言和文化，而不是試圖復制西方。不是說人家的文化不好，但做自己總比模仿別人要好。雖然我很贊賞英國統(tǒng)治者對殉夫自焚、嫁妝或任何此類糟粕制度的消除，前提是他們真的做到了的話（對不起，我不是歷史愛好者，也沒有興趣去搜索）。
Balaji, Liked your answer and reasoning. However I am a bit surprised that the most biggest legacy the British has left to its colonies .. Corruption has been forgotten. Starting their pursuits as traders, the early Britishers never bothered about ethics or governance. The profits of trade was far less to East India Company when compared to the profits earned by Individuals. Unfortunately, this approach continued even when Governance become the main 'trade'. Starting from Robert Clive, Warren Hastings, Lord DalHousie even to Lord Mountbatten all of them were involved in organized corruption and had Parliamentary proceedings against each of them. This has left a deep wound in country governance even till date. As one author said, In 1700 and 1800s Britain biggest export to the world is Corruption. :) .
巴拉吉，我很喜歡你的回答和推理。然而，我有點驚訝的是，英國人留給其殖民地的最大遺產(chǎn)--腐敗卻被遺忘了。早期的英國人以商人的身份開始他們的追求，從不關(guān)心道德或治理。與個人所得的利潤相比，東印度公司的貿(mào)易利潤要少得多。不幸的是，即使在治理成為主要的“貿(mào)易”時，這種做法仍在繼續(xù)。從羅伯特·克萊夫、沃倫·黑斯廷斯、達爾豪斯勛爵到蒙巴頓勛爵，他們都參與了有組織的腐敗，英國議會對他們每個人都進行了訴訟。直到今天，這都給印度的國家治理留下了深深的創(chuàng)傷。正如一位作者所說，在1700年和1800年代，英國對世界最大的出口是腐敗。:)
I think the last point of appreciation is a surely a disagreement. Though not sure of postal, army and banking system, railways certainly can’t be treated as their gift to India (as Brits often cherish). Referring to Shashi Tharoor’s (Indian politician) recent book on British Era, railways were used only for Britain’s personal profit and the developmental amounts were paid by Indians (in various forms of taxes) and still they were only allowed to travel in lower class coaches like animals. Many other points against the Brits’ so called “gift” to India.
我對贊賞部分里的最后一點表示不同意。雖然不確定郵政、軍隊和銀行系統(tǒng)是不是，但鐵路肯定不能被當作他們留給印度的禮物（就像英國人經(jīng)常懷念的那樣）。參考沙希-塔魯爾（印度政治家）最近關(guān)于英國統(tǒng)治時代的書，英屬印度時期鐵路只用于英國的利益，印度人支付了發(fā)展的金額（各種形式的稅收），但他們卻只被允許像動物一樣乘坐低等客車。書中還有許多其他觀點反對英國人對印度的所謂“禮物”。
these 5 points glorify Britain too much, did you forget that Britain was the largest empire in world history therefore they had many other colonies which they would have done similar things like they done in india thats what sets Britain apart from the rest, sry balaji but i wont give an upvote since you put these 5 things glorifying the British, the sins they committed far outweigh the good things they done for india, so tell me has Britain apologised to us like they did with the other colonies?
這 5 點太美化英國了，你忘了英國是世界歷史上最大的帝國，因此他們有許多其他殖民地，他們會做類似的事情，就像他們在印度所做的那樣，這就是英國與眾不同的地方，對不起巴拉吉。但這次我不會點贊，因為你用這 5 件事美化了英國， 他們犯下的罪孽遠遠超過他們?yōu)橛《人龅暮檬拢愿嬖V我英國是否像對待其他殖民地那樣向我們道過歉？
While my blood heated up reading the first few passages, it cooled reading the last passage.
在閱讀前幾段的時候我血壓都要爆表了，閱讀最后一段時冷卻了下來。
Sir, you forgot to mention the “The Bengal Famine of 1943”. It was one of the worst GENO.... ever recorded in history.
先生，你忘了提到“1943年的孟加拉饑荒”。這是歷史上最嚴重的種族滅絕之一。
One man's benevolence is another man's humiliation.
If:
a smart, savvy man knocked on your door,
made obeisance and requested a room to live in,
flattered you and gave you gifts, gained your trust and bribed your friends away,
then started giving you counsel on how to run your home; slowly started re-arranging your home,
eventually took over your best room, your best linen and best china, and your business and livelihood,
took your kids' toys away, and decided what they should and should not learn in school, decided what career they should choose,
and then one day, got hold of your bank cards and cheque books and started writing large cheques to himself,
spent your money to make his own place bigger, his business better and clothe/feed/educate his family better,
built an extension to your house to make his stay more comfortable - with your money,
bought new appliances and gadgets, with your money, all of which he kept primarily for his own use,
made you and your family work hard to feed his needs, made you dress to please him, talk in his accent to please him,
killed your first-born when he dared to protest at the this mistreatment,
smartly eliminated further opposition by getting your kids to fight among themselves,
played God with you in his moments of expansiveness by 'improving' you,
fed you and your family scraps from his table, and put your kids to fighting his battles elsewhere,
starved one of your kids to death by stashing your food away behind locked doors,
even re-wrote the story of your family so that you never can explain to someone what your life would have been if he hadn't interfered,
and, eventually boasted to the world about all the wonderful changes he has brought to your house…h(huán)ow he brought new technology to your home, and how he has taught you to talk/walk/behave more fittingly like him…
Then:
even if other people believed him, would you? and would you call him benevolent?
一個人的仁慈對另一個人來說就是羞辱。
如果：
● 一個聰明的、精明的人敲開了你的門
● 向你行禮，并要求你給他一個房間住
● 諂媚你，送你禮物，取得你的信任，賄賂你的朋友
● 然后開始給你提供關(guān)于如何管理你的家的建議；慢慢開始重新安排你的家
● 最終接管了你最好的房間、最好的床單和最好的瓷器，以及你的生意和生計
● 把你孩子的玩具拿走，決定他們在學校應該和不應該學什么，決定他們應該選擇什么職業(yè)
● 然后有一天，掌握了你的銀行卡和支票簿，開始給自己開大額支票
● 花費你的錢，使他自己的地方更大，他的生意更好，使他的家人得到更好的衣服/食物/教育
● 用你的錢給你的房子擴建，讓他住得更舒服
● 用你的錢買了新的電器和小工具，這些都是他主要留給自己使用的
● 讓你和你的家人努力工作以滿足他的需求，讓你的穿著打扮來取悅他，用他的口音說話來取悅他
● 當你的長子敢于抗議這種虐待時，他殺了他
● 巧妙地通過讓你的孩子們互相爭吵來消除進一步的反對
● 在他心情好的時候通過“改善”你的處境來扮演天神
● 給你和你的家人吃他桌子上的殘羹剩飯，讓你的孩子在其他地方為他戰(zhàn)斗
● 把你的食物藏在上鎖的門后，把你的一個孩子餓死
● 甚至改寫了你的家庭故事，使你永遠無法向別人解釋，如果他不干涉，你的生活會是什么樣子
● 并且，最終向全世界吹噓他給你們家?guī)淼乃衅婷钭兓?.....他如何給你們家?guī)硇录夹g(shù)，以及他如何教你們說話/走路/行為更像他......
然后：
● 即使其他人相信他，你會嗎？ 你會說他是仁慈的嗎？
Best answer ever. The Brits pretty much messed up our country. I don’t know what their people are reading in their history books about ‘civilizing’ us (when we already had a rich culture and civilization), their reign was no less than Hitler’s holocaust.
有史以來最好的答案。英國人幾乎完全搞砸了我們的國家。我不知道他們的人民在歷史書上讀到的關(guān)于“文明化”我們（當時我們已經(jīng)擁有豐富的文化和文明）的內(nèi)容是什么，他們的統(tǒng)治不亞于希特勒的大屠殺。
When the Britishers landed on a port in India, we Indians threw flowers on them. If instead of flowers we had thrown stones, India would've never gone under their rule.
當英國人登陸印度的一個港口時，我們印度人向他們投擲鮮花。如果我們?nèi)拥氖鞘^而不是鮮花，印度永遠不會受到他們的統(tǒng)治。
And would be doing exactly what now?
現(xiàn)在的印度到底會怎么樣？
Doing a lot better, only the map would be slightly different than today!
會做得更好，只是地圖會和今天略有不同！
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
By a lot better do you mean throwing widowed women onto fires, practicing slavery, being murdered by the thuggees for trying to run a business and not having any form of modern medicine such as vaccine technology?
你的意思是把寡婦扔進火里，實行奴隸制，因為試圖經(jīng)營企業(yè)而被暴徒謀殺，沒有任何形式的現(xiàn)代醫(yī)學，如疫苗技術(shù)，這叫要好得多？
Even today we are suffering the consequences of that benevolence in the form of a divided subcontinent,disputed borders and terrorism.
This benevolence was also instrumental in subdueing our confidence in our own culture.
即使在今天，我們?nèi)栽谠馐苓@種“仁慈”的后果，其形式是次大陸分裂、邊界爭議和恐怖主義。
這種仁慈也造成了我們對自己的文化缺乏信心。
I don't like British. However, only good thing about their rule was to bring a large subcontinent of various languages,religions and castes under a single Political umbrella, paving the way for Independent India , as we see it today. The British motive was however self serving.
我不喜歡英國人。然而，他們的統(tǒng)治唯一的好處是將各種語言，宗教和種姓的整個次大陸置于一個單一的政治保護傘下，為我們今天看到的獨立印度鋪平了道路。當然了，英國的動機是自私的。
I want to drink british blood now!
我現(xiàn)在想喝英國人的血！
You took the words out of my mouth...
Well said! Quite Appropriate!
你簡直就是我的嘴替啊...
說得好！相當恰當！
The very worst chapter in our history that smashed to smithereens all we created from Indus Valley Civilisation to the Great Mughals.Had the masses in rest of India joined the common peasantry in Awadh during 1857's first war of independence, we would certainly had thrown the 100,000 Brits who strangulated our grand nation from north to south into the Arabian Sea, saving the heart and core of our country..or the Aryavarta, which unfortunately now lay truncated into Nepal,India,Bangladesh,Pakistan and Afghanistan.
這是我們歷史上最糟糕的一章，它將我們從印度河谷文明到大莫臥兒王朝所創(chuàng)造的一切砸得粉碎。如果印度其他地區(qū)的群眾在1857年第一次獨立戰(zhàn)爭期間加入阿瓦德農(nóng)民的斗爭，我們肯定會把從北到南扼殺我們偉大國家的10萬英國人扔進阿拉伯海，拯救我們國家的心臟和核心......或雅利安·伐爾塔，不幸的是，它現(xiàn)在被截斷為尼泊爾、印度、孟加拉國、巴基斯坦和阿富汗。
（譯注：雅利安·伐爾塔，含義為高貴者的領(lǐng)土，或雅利安人的神圣國土，在古梵語中是指北印度。是由喜馬拉雅山的犍陀羅至溫迪亞山脈，孟加拉灣至阿拉伯海）
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
we lost because our own betrayed us. It was 5 kingdoms vs rest of India with few Brits.
我們輸了，因為我們自己背叛了我們。那是5個王國對印度其他地區(qū)和少數(shù)英國人的戰(zhàn)爭。
You are right Piyush, but the larger problem lay within about why the great war of independence failed to enthusiase the man on the street in other parts of India barring Awadh.For e.g. East India Company was the first to employ lower castes as professional soldiers.Many common people elsewhere in India did not see clear alternative to the British other than the same old Brahmanical system that had enveloped them over centuries,irrespective of who the ruler was.
你是對的，但更大的問題在于，為什么偉大的獨立戰(zhàn)爭沒能讓除阿瓦德以外的印度其他地區(qū)的人熱心起來，例如，東印度公司是第一個雇用低種姓作為職業(yè)軍人的公司。印度其他地方的許多普通人除了幾個世紀以來籠罩著他們的古老的婆羅門教體系外，沒有看到有英國人之外的明確選擇，無論統(tǒng)治者是誰。
I would also take responsibility for being a fool pretending to be a 'nice guy' while my guest duped me for so long
我認為這個假裝自己是個好人卻被門客愚弄甚至反客為主的傻瓜也有責任
You've portrayed only the negative aspects. What about the positive ones? The ghats and roads that they built are still better than the horrible potholed crap that we drive on these days. Trains still run on the tracks that they laid.
We spit and shit on the roads and treat our country like a dustbin. Indians needed a dictator then, and they desperately need one now. Only caveat is to get one who has the good of the country at heart and doesn't let the power corrupt him or her absolutely. Easier said than done, I guess.
你只描繪了消極的一面。積極的呢？他們修建的高架橋和道路仍然比我們現(xiàn)在行駛的可怕的坑洼不平的垃圾要好。火車仍然在他們鋪設的軌道上運行。
我們在道路上吐痰和拉屎，把我們的國家當作一個垃圾桶。印度人當時需要一個獨裁者，他們現(xiàn)在也迫切需要一個。唯一需要注意的是，要找一個心里裝著國家利益的人，不要讓權(quán)力絕對腐蝕他或她。我想，說起來容易，做起來難。
You do know that they only did it so they could loot us more efficiently don't you?
Indians needed a dictator? Really? You don't think the kingdoms/empires that came before them never thought of modernisation? You think without british infrastructure could never have been made? You need to reread history.
你知道他們這樣做只是為了更有效地掠奪我們，不是嗎？印度人需要一個獨裁者？認真的？你不知道之前的那些王國/帝國已經(jīng)想過要現(xiàn)代化了嗎？你認為沒有英國基礎設施就不可能建成？你需要重新讀讀歷史。