This was far lengthier than I’d hoped, took me way more time, and well… Please give it a read, if you’re Indian, Dharmic, an American who wants to know more about the American people’s vehement protests for India’s human rights, other people of South Asian descent (including Pakistanis), or want a more accurate understanding of British imperialism such as how they lied about the “abolition” of slavery. This will probably also be of serious interest to those of you who are a British Hindu or any person thinking of moving to the UK or if you want a clearer picture of what Britain got away with under British imperialism and how that is negatively impacting the UK now.

5/28/2025 Slight Update: Minor update on typos related to Travancore where I put “Breast Law” in what was a question about the purported “Breast Tax” and please note the End Notes page seem to have a bit of an error of the page moving to the wrong footnote when clicking on them, but the citations are listed in the Bibliography at the end and I added one more to be clearer.

---

Table of Contents for A Hindu Critiques Islam:

1. Chapters 1-3: Doctrinal Failings, Samkhya and Advaita Vedanta Critique, What “Islamophobia” Shields
2. Chapter 4: Social Status and Genocide Denial
3. Chapter 5:  Neoliberalism Empowers Islamism
4. Chapter 6: Did the British Partition of 1947 Gradually Decline the UK and Bolster India?
5. Chapter 7: Islamic Terrorism’s 1st-Generation was Al Qaeda, 2nd-Generation was ISIS, and a 3rd-Generation’s making a Digital Caliphate from “Islamophobia” Censorship
6. Chapter 8: The Partition of Free Speech
7. Chapters 9 and 10: Follies of Islam Repurposed and Islamism Always Creates Failed States

Extras: Islam’s 200-years of Mass Genocide of Iran, Islam’s 500-years of Mass Genocide of India, and judging from Wikipedia, Islamic Terrorism makes-up 58% of all Terror incidents in India between 1980 – 2024 and that’s lowballing it.

---

The pervasive belief that it is unfair to single out Islamic terrorism over other forms of terrorism and that this is some form of deliberate persecution and hate against Muslims ignores the fundamental failures of Islamic theology; it ignores the fact of Islamism’s transnational violence is now reaching a third-generation at the time of writing this. The truth is that Islam is a metaphorical cyanide pill that degrades and destroys everything that seeks a sense of “fairness” by trying to make false equivalents to Islamic terrorism that stem from the problems of Islamic theology itself. Judging purely from the evidence, I would argue that it is more correct to acknowledge the following about each major religion: Casteism is obviously an originally Hindu theological problem and Caste discrimination pertains to a discriminatory legacy that is within Hindu theology regardless of the more ambivalent nature of that history, the view of Cow urine as somehow providing unique benefits is obviously a uniquely Hindu theological problem and more evidence would need to be made to verify such claims on scientific grounds, the rape of innocent children across multiple denominations of Christianity is an overwhelmingly Christian theological problem due to its deranged hatred for consensual sex between unmarried adults and Jesus Christ in the Beatitudes arguing it is a thought crime to feel sensual pleasure for observing pornography of consenting adult women whom a man is not married to, and so forth. Whereas willful ignorance of Christianity’s pedophile rings only impacts their own Christian communities so that the rest of the world can ignore it because it doesn’t personally harm their children, and Judaism’s pedophile scandals by Ultra-Conservative Jewish preachers only impacts their own communities; worth noting is that it is assiduously criticized with a public demand for accountability and prison time from other Jewish preachers – outside of the sexual violence against Jewish children that occur in Jewish communities within New York. The difference is that Islam doesn’t keep any of its problems to itself within its own circumscribed ummah (one nation / one community). At base value, what differentiates Islam from other religions’ problems is that the majority of Muslims around the world make no secret that they will kill anyone who disrespects their religion, even if the disrespect is due to unsubstantiated rumors. Whereas most Jews and Christians happily argue in favor of the Biblical tenant of Thou Shalt Not Kill and Hindus, Buddhists, Jains, and Sikhs happily argue in favor of ahimsa (Non-Violence) and respective versions of Om Shanti (Peace); Islam only has Qisas (Eye for an Eye / Retributive Justice) and promotes the idea of murdering anyone who is perceived to insult Islam. Additionally, Islam has the same problem as Christianity of trying to promote their faith tradition globally due to the nonsensical belief in a Judgment Day prophecy. The depth in which Islamists and even nominal Muslims will obfuscate this problem can be seen in the oft-repeated quote of Quran 5:32:

Yet, they ignore the very next Quranic verse. There is a sense of morbid fascination in how so few Muslims themselves are willing to acknowledge the next verse of Quran 5:33:

How often have you heard from Imams, regular Muslims, the Western corporate news media, and government officials arguing how Islam had nothing to do with violent killings for insulting Islam? How often have you been told it is “radical Islam” and an “off-shoot” but not mainstream Islam? In other words, how often have you been completely lied to by institutions that are meant to give us fact-finding research? For example, how often were we told that FGM was an African issue and not a Muslim issue, despite it being part of the Shafi’i school of Islam? How often do all these institutions obfuscate or plainly lie to us all even after these groups commit the worst sexually violent offenses upon women and little girls in non-Muslim countries? How often were we told when pointing to Pakistan, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, or the Middle East that these were the “minority” of Muslims and that East Asian Muslims did not have these same issues? Well, here are the facts from Pew Research studies from January 28^th, 2025 in which Muslim-majority countries in East Asian countries willfully self-reported their beliefs when the surveys were conducted. Here’s the truth from the 2025 survey, “Comparing Levels of Religious Nationalism Around the World” by Pew Researchers Laura Silver, Jonathan Evans, Maria Smerkovich, Sneha Gubbala, Manolo Corichi, and William Miner:

This is the truth. All the discussions about Hindu Nationalism, Christian Nationalism, and Zionism overwhelmingly ignore the basic fact that they’re just reactions to a globalized Muslim Nationalism that is seeking to transform the entire world with competing Islamist agendas. Terms like Islamophobia only serve to protect the reality of these movements and their corrosive Islamist interests that Islamists really do seek to impose on the non-Muslim world. US journalists and the Neoliberal elite are essentially safeguarding Islamism and trying to destroy nationalist movements that are a protective vanguard from a growing rise in what is an attempt to destroy democratic institutions, civil rights like women’s rights and Free Speech, the rights of children to live free and unharmed from sexual exploitation, and trying to label all criticisms as a racist phobia. The Neoliberal elite’s policies have destroyed the United Kingdom and Sweden by making their civilians vulnerable to Islamic exploitation; it is entirely their fault that the problems of Islamic immigration continue to persist even now. The Neoliberal elite, the Neoliberal economists, and their clown show of the US Corporate media have probably irreversibly destroyed Western Europe too.

Western Universalism as Egoism

When I was growing up in US grade school, studying social studies textbooks briefly mentioning the partition of India in 1947 by Great Britain; the impression given to me was of a people and culture lagging behind the Western world. US teachers often supported this narrative of how I’d “feel superior” for simply being an American when meeting people living in a third-world country. News filled with images and brief online videos of riots in India mentioned communal riots between Hindus and Muslims and largely depicted them as a society lagging behind as further confirmation of what was taught to me in US high school. I was inculcated with the belief that the US was an unstoppable force of power, Great Britain was second-best compared to the US, and the rest of the world was largely in the periphery after World War 2. When I went to college and studied Political Science, a lot of my personal views began to change; I realized that Great Britain splitting India into two with Pakistan and East Pakistan was part of the Realist Theory of International Relations. In brief, the Realist theory of International Relations argues that nation-states are rational and work to exploit pre-existing issues in other countries to weaken them in order to further empower the nation-state seeking to exploit them; the reason for this is that international relations is always assumed to be anarchic without any real rules, norms, or values at all within the Realist theory of International Relations. Why would the Great Britain of 1947 do this? Obviously, to further its own national interests. They had hoped for situations like the four major wars between Pakistan and India that would happen later, so that both Pakistan and India would remain weak enough for the purposes of being put back under British imperialist rule. Despite the events of two World Wars, it likely seemed possible in the minds of those in power in Great Britain at the time due to ruling the Indian subcontinent for approximately 250 years. The US corporate news media and the majority of those with political power treated what was regarded as “third-world” countries to be set further back on a linear transition to modern Western democracies; they didn’t even think of the unique histories of these other countries or try to learn from them, because they saw no value in their histories in the late 1990s and early 2000s. India’s communal riots between Hindus and Muslims was seen as simply the predictable outcome of a third-world country and the US corporate news media largely insinuated that Hindu bigotry was mostly responsible throughout it all. The organized murders of Hindus by Muslim mobs or Muslim serial killers whose stated reasons were that the Hindu victim was rumored or spoke criticism of the Prophet Mohammad like Kamlesh Tiwari in 2019 and Kishan Bharwad in 2022 were purposefully ignored by the US corporate news media because it didn’t fit their narrative of poor, oppressed Muslims. The ethnic cleansing of Kashmiri Hindu Pandits was likewise ignored for not suiting the poor, oppressed Muslim narrative. Instead of the genocide of Hindus and murders over anti-Free Speech beliefs on the part of Muslims, the US corporate news media and greater Western news media only spent attention on larceny crimes of cow stealing by Hindu gangs from lower-income Muslims which barely constituted much crime at all. No significant effort was made to simply interview or talk to regular Hindus of India unless it was to interview a bigoted person to further reinforce bigotry towards all Hindus and to view the Hindus of India as oppressors.

The narrative of the US corporate media circus seemed to be either in the service of Christian missionary objectives, or in protecting a Christian bias, and not actual fact-finding research. Why exactly was no time or attention spent on the Christian terrorist group known as the National Liberation Front of Tripura which India had been at war with for more than twenty-five years? Why were there barely any news stories on the Bodo Christian terrorism that India suffered on August 5^th, 2016 in the Western media[1], like there was an abundance of Hindu gangs stealing cows? Why did the news media depict Christians who sold their own women into sexual slavery only as Marxist groups and obscure the fact that they were Christians? However, the main reason I suggest this is because the narrative of India being a “rape capital” vanished the moment the Catholic Church’s global child rape crimes became more well-known in 2018. Unfortunately, child rape crimes by White Catholic priests upon predominately white children has become so banal even in the United States that it is simply a normal expectation of Catholic communities to have families gathered to hear the names of pedophile priests who managed to evade the US statute of limitations and to have a spokesperson for the Catholic Church simply read off their names in a lengthy list to hundreds of families after the Catholic pedophile priest passes away.[2][3] Apparently, a Catholic parents’ love for the sense-object of Jesus Christ matters more to them than the love they have for their own real-life children. That is, the illusory vision of Jesus Christ in their mind coming to save their eternal souls matters more than the real-life harm committed by Catholic child raping priests upon their own children; who have been made rape victims due to faith in Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. Curiously, no thought went into how numerous the events of Catholic Priests in India raping Christian Indian children must’ve occurred. I learned of one incident second-hand simply because my aunt and grandma had visited a public event made by a local Catholic Indian leader who Indian police later arrested for many cases of pedophilia of young Indian boys and my mother had been the most shocked because she’d only heard positive things about this man from Hindu family members who were more local to the area. It’s amazing how nobody thinks to question the dissonance that other religious communities feel when the so-called revealed and moral word of Jesus Christ is suddenly unveiled to have secretly raped hundreds of children, while Christian non-governmental organizations (NGOs) vilify Hindus as devil worshippers. Yet, anytime Hindus try to look past that and respect communal harmony? Surprise! Mass rape crimes of little kids from a religion that continues to preach that we’re the devil worshippers, while ignoring the fact that multiple denominations of their Christian religion rape children and get away with it! Soon, they’ll start blaming Satan, or more privately the Jews (the scapegoats they always blame for their own religion’s barbaric stupidity), or greedy, selfish people in power. In power of what exactly, a hierarchy of illusion (maya)? They never blame the blatantly idiotic teachings of their religious faith that put more importance on discriminating against women and illusory concepts like souls, ghosts, hell, and the figment of their imagination called Satan. Oh, and don’t express your human right to Free Speech to criticize this organization for literally raping children, because . . . “religious tolerance” must be maintained, even at the expense of the human rights of child victims of their own religion.

What was lost in this self-serving narrative perpetuated by the clown show that is the US Corporate news media was the request for equality and impartiality instead of Islam continuing to be given special treatment. What Hindus of India want is equality and impartiality. Why, for example, are Islamic terrorist attacks so normalized that they’re treated as seasonal natural disasters in India? Why are the victims of Islamic terrorist attacks just treated as body counts in news reports and as statistical numbers, but there’s an immediate attempt by US and other news media to argue against “Islamophobia” and hate crimes against Muslims immediately after Islamic terrorist attacks? Whether the people writing such news articles knew it or not, they were essentially treating all non-Muslim lives as less important and less valuable than Muslim lives. What they probably don’t realize is that after hearing it repeatedly from multiple Islamic terrorist attacks upon multiple countries on a global scale, it just begins to piss everyone off. That is because the perception that Islamic terrorism will fade away or end someday within their lifetime starts to break and it can cause people to snap, especially if it is perceived that Muslim communities already obtained concessions. This same double-standard of treating Muslim lives as more important than non-Muslim lives could be seen during news of the Rohingya massacres by the Myanmar government. Rohingya Islamist militias slaughtered an entire Hindu village of roughly up to ninety-nine people on August 2017 according to a report by Amnesty International published on May 22^nd, 2018 that was titled “Myanmar: New evidence reveals Rohingya armed group massacred scores in Rakhine State” and it didn’t reach anywhere near the level of publicity as Rohingya Muslim news stories.[4] When I shared it on Facebook, I was told by a Muslim that it was ignoring the tragedy of the Rohingya and that somehow several villages that were completely wiped out don’t have it as bad as the Rohingya who support Islamist militias that deliberately kill non-Muslims by slaughtering entire villages of Hindus. I shared it on Twitter and a person of a White European background in their profile picture explicitly told me that Myanmar Hindu lives don’t matter as much and aren’t as important as Rohingya Muslim lives and they made a laugh emoji to mock me for sharing news about multiple village massacres by Rohingya Islamist militias. Now, consider a Jewish person experiencing something similar to this after October 7^th, 2023 after the Hamas terror attack[5], or a British person experiencing something similar to this after the horrific murder of three young girls at a Taylor Swift-themed dance class by Axel Muganwa Rudakubana who was later found to have an al Qaeda training manual in his possession yet the prosecution was too cowardly to infer the obvious motive[6][7][8], or a Swedish person who loses loved ones due to improvised explosives made by people of Syrian or Iraqi descent who subscribe to the Islamic faith, or Americans like myself after the Boston bombings, or the myriad of similar attacks on various African countries, Russia, Iran for being the wrong version of Islam, China prior to the Uyghur concentration camps, and many more examples. Or the recent examples of the Pahalgam terror attack in India and the massacres of Christian communities in Nigeria which both happened in April 2025.[9][10][11] If this continues to be a problem, then how many of us will remain holding onto patience and a commitment to compassion and non-violence towards the small percentage of nominal Muslims? How many Christians will try to continue holding onto teachings of forgiveness or turning the other cheek? How many Jews will continue holding onto Jewish teachings of simply recognizing the attackers as flawed human beings? What will happen if the majority of the world shares the same human pain and has the same common enemy to blame? How many of us are getting fed-up with hearing anything related to Islamic violence and being told to shut up about Free Speech criticisms because we are Islamophobic? I want us all to avoid our worst impulses, but it seems that could just be my naivety.

The egoistic Western Universalist arguments about the rest of the world lagging behind to model themselves after the West had slowly been degrading for decades due to the incompetence of Neoliberal economic policies that weakened the US and the Western world with the Great Recession. The June 30^th – August 5^th, 2024 riots throughout the United Kingdom absolutely shattered any remaining vestiges of that illusion of the world lagging behind the Western model. No longer were news organizations depicting the so-called communal riots in India with implications of backwardness within the insulated halls of the US and European corporate media circuses; no longer could they deceive the US public by treating it as a one-sided falsehood of a poor, oppressed Muslim problem. The news of various Anti-CAA protests from December 2019 – March 2020 in India was portrayed with this egoistic perspective of Hindu backwardness by the US and European corporate media clown show. After the UK riots, that has changed and even recent activities of communal violence such as the Maharashtra violence of March 17^th, 2025 over the legacy of the barbaric Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb and the violence against Hindus by Muslims in West Bengal in India over legal policy changes of the Waqf board do not have the same enthusiasm by the US and European corporate media of attempting to portray them as the fault of supposedly backwards Hindus. Any and all depictions of riots involving Muslims was displayed with more caution and far less attention because they now had to deal with the parallels within the countries that they considered their inner circle of White, European societies. They now knew what it was like to experience the visceral reality; they couldn’t use any feeling of detachment and superiority so that they could label the Hindu victims as the secret perpetrators when it came to how unwilling the majority of Muslims are in adapting any iota of modern values and least of all, human rights. After all, adapting human rights means not carrying out premeditated murder of anyone who insults the Prophet Mohammad, but this basic fact about human rights was ignored by journalists, self-righteous US scholars, the United Nations, and US Presidents Bush, Obama, and Biden when it came to Hindu victims of Islamic violence and often Christian victims of Islamic violence. The only President who has stood up for the disparity in violence inflicted upon both Hindu and Christian victims by Islamist perpetrators is President Donald Trump.

Perhaps the most ironic part about the reactions to Islamic immigration is that it can no longer obscure that Europe has always been overwhelmingly more racist than the United States and that has been attested to by Pew Research surveys since 2016, but because the US was labeled as “Western” and identified itself as such, it obscured the actual facts; while the US was ironically receiving the bulk of accusations of being racist by Western Europeans. I recall a video by Ex-Muslim Atheist and Twitter provocateur, Armin Navabi, arguing that Western countries were the least racist in the world. Unfortunately, he and others who argued this point were merely exploiting the US’s exceptional cultural milestone as a way to obscure the fact that Western Europe is as racist as most other countries in the world. On July 12^th, 2016, Pew Researchers Bruce Drake and Jacob Poushter published an article on Pewresearch.org titled “In views of diversity, many Europeans are less positive than Americans” and the findings are as such:

In other words, once we separate the US from the term “Western” and view the US as unique from Western European cultures, then Western Europe is essentially no different than other countries around the world. Even if we were to grant five of those Western European countries as being average, they’re honestly only the average seen across most of the world if we compare the statistics or look at their comparable responses. In the 2010 – 2014 World Values Survey’s Wave 6 in the PDF file “WV6_Results_By_Country” show the following responses on Question 37 “On this list are various groups of people. Could you please mention any that you would not like to have as neighbors?: People of a different race” on pages 68 – 69 of the total 898 pages of the PDF file:

Western Europe isn’t exceptional like the United States and a few other countries. India, which was often mocked as racist by the jester-journalists of the US corporate media circus, is shockingly average in terms of racial attitudes and far less racist than many Southern European countries. Judging from comparisons of the Pew Research and World Values Survey, apparently even Pakistan and Russia are far less racist than Western European countries with the exceptions of Spain and Sweden. But also judging from this, Sweden and Spain had a shocking rise in racism within approximately five years since the WVS surveys for both countries occurred in 2011 and the Pew Research survey was conducted on March 2016.[1][2] Whether this is due to some quirk of how the surveys were conducted or perhaps the framing of the 37th WVS question was poorly executed; that is beyond the scope of what I can derive from the datasets given. I’m just trying to share information as honestly as I can from the limitations of these survey results. As far as I can see, Western Europe is utterly average in terms of racial views towards others. To put it bluntly, the Right-wing of the United States, often labeled as “racist” for this or that “offensive” statement from the Left-wing of the US, are actually the equivalent of your average Liberal-leaning European in terms of social values towards other ethnic backgrounds.[3] The United States may also deserve to be called the most socially compassionate and least racist society in all of human history. That is not to diminish or ignore policies that do cause harm such as the Supreme Court case of Oliphant vs Suquamish 1978 which is still harming Native Americans to this day or the US’s history of human rights abuses in the past, but it’s best to acknowledge both the good and the bad as impartially as we can based upon the evidence.

Due to accusations of the British news media suppressing the culprits of the surge in crime such as stabbing incidents in the UK, elements of the British public have attempted to portray Pakistani Muslim immigrants as part of an inferior, foreign, and backwards culture in contemporary times compared to Western British culture. Yet, this portrayal lacks any historical or logical basis and conveniently ignores the proverbial elephant in the room: Great Britain created Pakistan in 1947 from the Partition of India. How does it logically follow that Great Britain, which ruled the entirety of the Indian subcontinent for 250 years and imposed laws of appeasement to Islamist interests like Section 295-A to effectively dismantle Free Speech in multiple South Asian countries, should then exclaim the end-product of its own 250 years of imperialist history is a foreign culture? British rulers had ample evidence from rebellions, violent encounters, mutinies, and much more of exactly what would happen from interacting with Islamists; there is honestly no rational or even empirical basis to claim British rulers and administrators of South Asia were wholly ignorant of how violent Islam was for 250 years of their rule. They knew exactly what Islamists were and what aims Islamists wished to achieve; they split India into two pieces at the behest of Islamists and Islamist sympathizers to create a permanent fracture in hopes of weakening both Pakistan and India for the intention of reconquest in the future. British government officials after World War 2 surely weren’t stupid either; they knew about the multiple coups, constitutional crises, and rise of the most extremist forms of Islamism in Pakistan and still chose to willfully import them into British society in the hopes of off-setting the declining birth rates in order to keep increasing the British GDP at the behest of Neoliberal billionaires, lobbying groups, and economists. If you’re British and reading this, then please seriously consider the following: if 250 years of ruling an entire subcontinent where your culture unilaterally influences the colonized country at your full discretion still means that you call that culture foreign because you don’t like the consequences of your imperialist history, then what on earth does the word “foreign” even mean anymore? Your ancestors knew what these people were, your past and present governments knew what these people were, and – in a very real way – your country created them. Your country split India into two pieces knowing that Islamists had extreme and violent beliefs, you gave Islamists an entire country in which they festered their extremism and conspiratorial thinking, you had decades of proof that Islamists weren’t capable of running a country efficiently because of it from Pakistan’s coups and the gradual emergence of Bangladesh in response to Pakistan’s genocidal policies upon them, and then you imported them into your society. What did you think was going to happen? If it is true that British citizens are being stabbed by Pakistani Muslim immigrants or threatened with violence in other ways, then this is somewhat of a metaphorical Frankenstein and Frankenstein’s Monster situation. The Pakistani immigrants are Frankenstein’s monster and the British subjects are the children of Dr. Frankenstein with the monster chasing after them due to their ancestor having created the monster.

Great Britain is being stabbed with the evidence that the legacy of British imperialism was categorically wrong in all respects. To any British reader taking the time to read this; you have a right to argue in favor of your human rights and obviously I would never ever condone the rapes and murders of innocent children like what has been overwhelmingly done by Pakistani Muslim grooming gangs. You have to acknowledge the history that caused this situation though; your country created the conditions and the very country of supposed immigrants that are causing widespread societal issues for you. It is not outrageous to point out that your country essentially created these people. If anything, and please take this statement seriously, your ancestors sacrificed your futures for the sake of their present moment, so that they could maintain dominance in their lifetime without any thought of how your generation would be worse off. If you follow the concepts of the Realist Theory of International Relations, then what your ancestors wanted was for Pakistan and India to keep warring until they weakened enough to be reconquered by Britain; that was why Pakistan was split in two separate sections with India in between, they did it deliberately to cause as much bloodshed and war as possible. Your ancestors knew what the immediate result was going to be, because how on earth could a severely weak country after World War 2; that followed after 250 years of imperialism that consisted of multiple starvation campaigns, a rise in illiteracy, an annihilation of their trade systems, and a massive theft of resources then be able to effectively administer a functioning government from both West Pakistan and East Pakistan? For comparison, India had to settle millions of displaced people immediately after the Partition and that was considered a miracle at the time because the West undoubtedly believed that India would break apart. In a very real way, while it is true that Islamism played the most significant factor in its failures, Pakistan was nevertheless always set-up to fail due to how the 1947 Partition of India was done. By a striking contrast, the 2021 Pew Research survey of India shows that a slight majority of India now argues the Partition of 1947 benefitted India.[4] As India’s GDP has overtaken Great Britain’s as the fifth-largest world economy as of 2021, how is it that the Partition of India in 1947 seems to be bringing about the fall of Great Britain and the rise of India? When your ancestors split India into two pieces, they almost certainly envisioned a future where they took control of the entire Indian subcontinent with it being “obvious” to them that the superior White race would need to be a guiding hand for the “backwards” Indian people. Yet, while the Partition of India in 1947 did bring about multiple wars, approximately over seventy terrorist attacks that can credibly be linked to Islamic terrorist groups that mainly exist in Pakistan and Bangladesh, and Islamism holds influence using British colonial laws like 295-A to keep a stranglehold on Indian society; it now seems that the imperialist dreams of reconquering India and the rest of the subcontinent by your British forebears was really the doom of Great Britain itself.

The so-called right-wing Hindus of India have been warning people of this issue with Islam from the very beginning. They pointed out the unfairness of Muslims being allowed to proselytize while Christians and Hindus cannot do so in Muslim-majority countries, the selective news coverage of violence with Muslims being given more focus than victims of other religious backgrounds, the depiction of Hindus as bigots while Hindus and other religious groups have tried so hard to maintain communal harmony with Muslims, and the anger over constant terrorist attacks being treated as no different than a natural disaster and how the US and Western news media categorically ignore the implications of what that means for the religion of Islam. Even when Hindus of India pointed to examples of Christians being massacred or discriminated against in Bangladesh and Pakistan, it fell to deaf ears in the West and was just chalked up as “bigotry” because having empathy for Christian victims is somehow bigoted when pointing out the perpetrators are violent Muslims. What happened here? The US and Western European media categorically refused to view Hindus as rational human beings with their lives and opinions as being worthy of equal respect. At least for Europe, it is literally destroying their own societies because they’re less equipped to handle Islamist terrorism on the scale that India has been handling it for over seventy years. The murder of Kishan Bharwad in 2022 immediately had the Gujarat anti-Terror taskforce look into possible terrorist links where they found a kill list supplied by two Imams to the murder suspects.[5] The murder of Salwan Momika in Sweden led to the suspects being let go within less than twenty-four hours and the co-protester of a Quran burning protest being charged with supposedly “having expressed contempt for the Muslim ethnic group because of their religious beliefs on four occasions” against people of his own ethnicity who were Muslim, because the Swedish government now chooses to falsely recognize a religious population of 1.9 billion as an ethnicity instead of a group of people with a shared set of mythological beliefs.[6] The Western world is proving surprisingly brittle at handling the threat of Islamism rationally.

Great Britain Failed to Acknowledge the Cruel Truth of its Imperialist History

            I doubt that Great Britain can truly grapple with the problem of Pakistani Muslim violence within their communities without acknowledging their own country’s history in creating the conditions that led to that result and the devastation wrought upon all of India under British colonial rule. A country created in 1947 from the partition of India by Great Britain itself cannot truly be called foreign, especially after 250 years of rule. It merely reveals how colonialism was a one-way street when nothing about the colonized cultures was learned beyond the appreciation for tea. To give a clearer glimpse of how devastating and self-serving British imperialism was and why the British narrative is wholly false, here is a small portion of the late historian Mike Davis’s Late Victorian Holocausts: El Niño Famines and the Making of the Third World, describing the second of four mass starvation campaigns imposed by the British upon India which led to the death toll of approximately between 60 – 80 million throughout India. For a bit of context, three of the four starvation campaigns were done to obtain massive profits from rice without concern for the starvation of all of India under Malthusian economics created by Anglican Christian Minister, Thomas Malthus, who argued in favor of his economic theory which supported population control. The fourth, the Bengal famine, seemed to be part of British military strategy in World War II.

The economic policy of Thomas Malthus influenced the British government to deliberately starve India in the tens of millions on at least four separate occasions to maximize profits from rice exports by creating artificial scarcity. These British state-sponsored starvation campaigns happened from the late 1870s to the early 1900s.[1]  A plethora of rice was fully stockpiled and could have fed the entirety of India on each occasion.[2] However, the British government sold it to overseas markets for maximum financial exports to finance the British military campaigns of the Boer Wars and Wars in Afghanistan[3], they aggressively taxed all Indians to finance their colonial wars despite these taxes furthering conditions of mass starvation because Indian families had even less money to try to keep their families alive[4], the British government imposed internment camps to force Indian people who couldn’t pay the taxes into hard labor for a pittance of rice among thirty Indians each who were then forced to squabble over it[5], and the British didn’t concern themselves with the rise of diseases like cholera epidemics that killed tens of millions in these internment camps and spread throughout the wider society[6], because the specific purpose of British imperialism was to enhance the power and dominance of the British empire over the world, as per the Realist Theory of International Relations. In response to vehement outrage from the US and Indian public from US journalists and US missionaries sharing numerous photographs[7], giving firsthand eyewitness accounts from fellow missionaries and Indians serving in the British government whose peaceful attempts for reform were ignored by British Viceroys[8], and US journalists interviewing victims throughout British-administered India with the help of US missionaries expediting the process to meet with them[9]; the British government created cheaply made poorhouses for a brief time that required 9-hours of hard labor for emaciated males to feed their families before discontinuing them after creating fabricated stories of how they were helping reduce poverty when the information from US missionaries and US journalists repeatedly disproved their arguments through fact-finding research.[10] Here is but a glimpse of what these British imperialist policies wrought:

Famine mortality crested in March 1897. The next month Elgin himself conceded that 4.5 million poor people had perished. Behramji Malabari, the nationalist editor of the Indian Spectator, countered that the real number, plague victims included, was probably closer to 18 million.  At the same time, the Missionary Review of the World, which ordinarily praised British philanthropy, denounced the doublespeak by which the government had downplayed the severity of the crisis and sabotaged missionary efforts to organize prompt international relief. “When the pangs of hunger drive people in silent procession, living skeletons, to find food, dying by the way; the stronger getting a few grains, the feebler perishing, and children, an intolerable burden, are sold at from ten to thirty cents a piece, and when at best a heritage of orphaned children of tens of thousands must remain to the country – this is not ‘impending’ famine – it is grim, gaunt, awful famine itself.” Meanwhile, the agrarian economy of northern India continued to unravel, and the famous jurist and national leader Mahdev Govinda Ranade complained that the “seven plagues which afflicted the land of the Pharaohs in old time were let loose upon us.” In the Punjab, where cattle powered wells and irrigation wheels, the decimation of animals was so great that the standing crops in the fields died because villagers could not lift water from their wells. 58 The most extreme distress, however, was still in the Central Provinces where, as the Indian National Congress charged and Lord Hamilton later conceded, revenue exactions had long threatened the subsistence of the poor. Prophetically, eight years earlier after a severe tax hike, 15,000 protesting peasants had confronted the chief commissioner in front of the Bilaspur railroad station. “Their cry was, ‘bandobast se mar gaya’ – ‘the settlement has killed us!’ ”

The protestors’ words came grimly true in the winter of 1896– 97, when mortality soared in at least one district (Gantur) to an incredible 40 percent (200,000 out of 500,000 residents). In his zeal to maintain fiscal pressure on the peasantry, the Central Provinces’ governor-general took little account of the remarkable siege of natural disaster – three consecutive years of devastating rains, plant rust, caterpillar plagues and black blight – that preceded the drought. Despite the terrible velocity with which famine spread through an already prostrate countryside, Sir Charles Lyall followed Elgin’s lead and downplayed the acuity of the famine. While allowing grain merchants to export the province’s scarce reserves, he refused frenzied pleas to suspend revenue collections or provide village-centered relief as authorized in the famine code. Destitute famine victims were instead herded into hastily improvised poorhouses that set new standards for administrative incompetence and corruption. Reuter’s “special famine commissioner,” F. Merewether, shocked the British reading public with his exposé of suffering and neglect inside the poorhouses of Bilaspur and Jubbulpur. Although an ardent imperialist whose reports usually depicted heroic British district officers battling natural cataclysm and Hindu superstition, Merewether did not mince words about the atrocities that passed for relief in the Central Provinces:

[T] he actual inhabitants of Bilaspur were dying of starvation, while under the supposed aegis of the Government and within their very gates. I mentioned previously that my opinion was that the famine in the Central Provinces was grossly mismanaged. I collected tangible proofs of this daily, till I had to hand a mass of reliable and irrefutable evidence, which showed only too clearly that the officials and those responsible had not, and did not, fully recognized the gravity of the situation. With reference to the poor-house, there can be no doubt that in addition to supineness and mismanagement, there was decided fraud going on, and the poor hopeless and helpless inmates were being condemned by a paternal Government to a slow, horrible, and lingering death by starvation.

 I here came across the first specimens of “Famine Down,” which is produced by long-continued starvation. At certain stages of want a fine down of smooth hair appears all over the bodies of the afflicted. It has a most curious look, and gives the wearer a more simian look than ever.… There were more than a score of souls who had reached this stage, and their bodies were covered from head to foot with the soft-looking black fur.

When Julian Hawthorne, son of the famous New England writer and Cosmopolitan’s special correspondent in India, reached Jubbulpur in April 1897, three months after Merewether, conditions in the Central Provinces had grown even more nightmarish. On the long, hot train ride up the Narmada Valley (“ the great graveyard of India” according to American missionaries), Hawthorne was horrified by the families of corpses seated in the shade of the occasional desert trees. “There they squatted, all dead now, their flimsy garments fluttering around them, except when jackals had pulled the skeletons apart, in the hopeless search for marrow.” In Jubbulpur, he was escorted by the resident American missionary who took him first to the town market, where he was disgusted by the radical existential contrast between “bony remnants of human beings” begging for kernels of grain and the plump, nonchalant prosperity of the local merchant castes.

The poorhouses, meanwhile, were converted cattle-pens terrorized by overseers who, as Merewether had accurately reported, systematically cheated their doomed charges of their pathetic rations. “Emaciation” hardly described the condition of the “human skeletons” Hawthorne encountered:

They showed us their bellies – a mere wrinkle of empty skin. Twenty per cent of them were blind; their very eyeballs were gone. The joints of their knees stood out between the thighs and shinbones as in any other skeleton; so did their elbows; their fleshless jaws and skulls were supported on necks like those of plucked chickens. Their bodies – they had none; only the framework was left.

Hawthorne’s most haunting experience, however, was his visit to the children in the provincial orphanage in Jubbulpur. In imperial mythology, as enshrined in Kipling’s famous short story “William the Conquerer” (published on the eve of the famine in 1896), British officials struggled heroically against all odds to save the smallest famine victims. The Ladies Home Journal (January 1896) version of Kipling’s story had featured a famous woodcut by the American artist W. L. Taylor of a tall British officer walking slowly at the head of a flock of grateful, saved children. “Taylor accentuated the god-like bearing of Scott, as seen through the eyes of William [his love interest], standing at the entrance to her tent. The black cupids are there and a few capering goats …” But as W. Aykroyd, a former Indian civil servant who in his youth had talked to the veterans of the 1896– 97 famine, emphasizes, this idyllic scene was utterly fictional. “No particular attention was … given to children in the famine relief operations.” Far more realistic than Scott’s motherly compassion was the repugnance that Kipling’s heroine William feels when, after dreaming “for the twentieth time of the god in the golden dust,” she awakes to face “loathsome black children, scores of them wastrels picked up by the wayside, their bones almost breaking their skin, terrible and covered with sores.” Hawthorne indeed discovered that “rescue” more often than not meant slow death in squalid, corruptly managed children’s camps. After reminding American readers that “Indian children are normally active, intelligent and comely, with brilliant eyes, like jewels,” he opens the door to the orphanage:

One of the first objects I noticed on entering was a child of five, standing by itself near the middle of the enclosure. Its arms were not so large round as my thumb; its legs were scarcely larger; the pelvic bones were plainly shown; the ribs, back and front, started through the skin, like a wire cage. The eyes were fixed and unobservant; the expression of the little skull-face solemn, dreary and old. Will, impulse, and almost sensation, were destroyed in this tiny skeleton, which might have been a plump and happy baby. It seemed not to hear when addressed. I lifted it between my thumbs and forefingers; it did not weigh more than seven or eight pounds.

Beyond, in the orphanage yard, neglected children agonized in the last stages of starvation and disease. Hawthorne thought it obvious that the overseers, as in the adult poorhouses, were stealing grain for sale with little fear of punishment from their superiors:

“We went towards the sheds, where were those who were too enfeebled to stand or walk. A boy was squatting over an earthen saucer, into which he spate continually; he had the mouth disease; he could not articulate, but an exhausted moan came from him ever and anon. There was a great abscess on the back of his head. Another, in the final stage of dysentery, lay nearly dead in his own filth; he breathed, but had not strength to moan. There was one baby which seemed much better than the rest; it was tended by its own mother.… Now, this child was in no better condition than the rest of them when it came, but its mother’s care had revived it. That meant, simply, that it had received its full allowance of the food which is supposed to be given to all alike. Why had the others – the full orphans – not received theirs?”

Cosmopolitan pointedly published photographs of famine victims from the Central Provinces next to an illustration of a great monument erected to Queen Victoria. Hawthorne, “on his way home from India,” it editorialized, “heard it conservatively estimated in London that a total of more than one hundred millions of dollars would be expended, directly and indirectly, upon the Queen’s Jubilee ceremonies.” But dying children in remote taluks were no more allowed to interrupt the gaiety of the Empress of India’s Diamond Jubilee in June 1897 than they had her Great Durbar of twenty years before. Critics of Elgin were uncertain which was more scandalous: how much he had expended on the Diamond Jubilee extravaganza, or how little he had spent to combat the famine that affected 100 million Indians. When the government’s actual relief expenditures were published a year later, they fell far below the per capita recommendations of the 1880 Famine Commission. As a new Famine Commission reported in 1898: “Our general conclusion is that, as compared with the past, a considerable degree of success as regards economy had been attained in the relief famine.”

The relief works were quickly shut down with the return of the rains in 1898. Hundreds of thousands of destitute, landless people, without any means to take advantage of the monsoon, were pushed out of the camps and poorhouses. As a consequence, the momentum of famine and disease continued to generate a staggering 6.5 million excess deaths in 1898, making total mortality closer to 11 million than the 4.5 million earlier admitted by Elgin. Twelve to 16 million was the death toll commonly reported in the world press, which promptly nominated this the “famine of the century.” This dismal title, however, was almost immediately usurped by the even greater drought and deadlier famine of 1899– 1902.[1]

[1] Davis, Mike. Chapter Five: Skeletons at the Feast (pgs. 141 – 177). Late Victorian Holocausts: El Niño Famines and the Making of the Third World (Essential Mike Davis). Verso Books. Kindle Edition.

It bears noting that genocide was a term coined after the horrors done to Armenian Christians by the Turkish government in the 1910s and gradually had to be added reluctantly by Western governments after the Holocaust of Jewish people by Nazi Germany.[1] If ever we are willing to apply modern standards to the past, such as the case of the earliest recording of genocide purportedly being the Athenian genocide of Melos that Sparta had likely hoped to prevent[2], then what Great Britain did to India was four consecutive, calculated genocides that are well-documented by both fact-finding US journalists and predominately American Christian missionaries.[3] Part of the reason I mock modern US journalists is because they’re not really journalists, if you compare the lengths US journalists of the late 1800s and early 1900s went through meeting people, documenting photos, and giving estimates of either their own statistical research or the government surveys from local British government officials of Indian descent that British Viceroys ignored; the American journalists did vigorous reporting of the depressing impact of British government policies upon India. It was American Christian missionaries unabashed condemnation of British economic policies that forced the more compliant Anglican British Christians to start condemning their own government too. Finally, it was American scholars like historian Mike Davis and also Indian scholars of India like Indian politician Shashi Tharoor who started investigating and researching decades later to compile and reveal the copiously documented evidence.

While the period after World War 2 gradually resulted in a special relationship between the US government and Great Britain, and the Christian missionaries of the 1990s would spread documentaries about how Hindus of India are poor because they’re devil worshippers who need to be converted to Christianity; I saw the beginning of one of these documentaries myself on television when I was a child, I think I may have been around nine-years old; the US Christian missionaries and US journalists of the late 1800s to early 1900s never let whatever negative beliefs they had about Hindus to influence their support for enlightenment values, human dignity, and vehement support for the human rights of all Indians including Hindus and other Dharmic followers. The US missionaries of the 1990s, who to my understanding used British material to learn of India, basically ignored that everything about the British narratives of India were self-serving and categorically proven false by their forebears in Missionary work and US journalism. The late 1800s to early 1900s American Christian missionaries and US journalists were vehemently denouncing British rule in India and doing painstaking work in documenting the depressing realities of British rule. The sentiment about British rule of India was shared by a large percentage of Americans at the time and that is not an exaggeration. When US missionaries returned to the United States to spread the horrifying news of what British government policies had wrought upon India and British Christian missionaries and a few of their politicians did the same for India, the late Mike Davis’s Late Victorian Holocausts lets us know exactly what the results were:

Curzon was responding to new stringencies dictated by the secretary of state for India, Lord George Hamilton. Financing of the Boer War trumped any “philanthropic romanticism” in India. Two years earlier, with the Northwest Frontier in upheaval, the secretary had in fact offered famine aid to Elgin, but now “Hamilton not only did not approach the Treasury for such a grant but also prevented Curzon from seeking it. The wars in China and South Africa made him more conscious of the Indian obligation with regard to the Imperial wars than of his responsibility to relieve the distress of the famine-stricken people.” While refusing appeals to organize a famine charity in England, the secretary pressured Curzon to launch a War Fund in India so that its patriotic subjects could help defray Kitchener’s expenses in the Transvaal. Though he did not interfere with the viceroy’s plan to build a hugely ornate Victoria Memorial Monument in Calcutta, he urged the most ruthless Lyttonian vigilance in policing the relief works.92

Meanwhile, the English public’s famed philanthropic instinct had dried up as completely as the Deccan’s streams and wells. As Herbert Spencer warned of the “rebarbarization” of the English spirit by rampant jingoism, the popular press ignored the new Indian holocaust to focus almost exclusively on the unexpectedly difficult struggle to subdue the Boers.93 “So far as the London Press and periodicals are concerned,” complained a member of the Fabian Society, “India might almost have been non-existent.”94 A desultory Mansion House fund for Indian famine victims raised barely 7 percent of the Lord Mayor’s parallel War Fund for South Africa.95 “India,” wrote an American missionary, “now would have to struggle alone, for the thoughts of every Englishman in the world were centered on South Africa.”96

The most substantial international aid came not from London but from Topeka: 200,000 bags of grain “in solidarity with India’s farmers” sent by Kansas Populists. (American relief organizers were incensed when British officials in Ajmir promptly taxed the shipment.)97 There were also notable contributions from sympathetic Native American tribes and Black American church groups.98[1]

[1] Davis, Mike. Late Victorian Holocausts: El Niño Famines and the Making of the Third World (Essential Mike Davis) (pp. 164-165). Verso Books. Kindle Edition.

In short, White Americans, Native Americans, Black Americans, and apparently even a group of Chinese schoolgirls from a single school in China before they martyred themselves in the Boxer Rebellion[1]; all donated their own hard-earned money to prevent what was then called a famine, which – in a more modern sense – is better understood to be a calculated genocide by Great Britain upon all of India. Brahmins and Dalits alike suffered and starved to death under British rule and the only ones who were possibly spared the worst of it were arguably the Merchant Castes in specific locations due to exploitative practices upon other Castes or possible fears of British government reprisal.[2] Nevertheless, the evidence is overwhelmingly clear thanks to the hard work of US Christian missionaries and US journalists from the time period of the 1870s – 1940s that all Indians throughout all of India suffered what should be understood as four consecutive mass genocides due to deliberate and calculated British government policies. Although they tragically couldn’t prevent the worst effects of British policies upon India, US missionaries, US journalists, and regular people in the US public of all backgrounds were largely the unsung heroes of this tragic tale because they made a decades-long commitment in support of India’s human rights.

 

Britain’s Anti-Hindu Bigotry involved 250 years of dehumanizing Transgenderism

            As a mass death toll of Indian people is never a concern for predominately White, European people due to the lack of perceived value of Indian lives within European culture and especially British culture; given they insist that – despite this massive death toll – that their imperialist project was ultimately a positive; here is an examination of how British policies demonstrably ruined the lives of LGBT people in India from bizarre and creepy laws like the Buggery act of 1533 and the subsequent Section 377 Law, according to the University of Alabama at Birmingham’s Human Rights Blog in an article titled “India’s Relationship with the Third Gender” which reads as follows:

What is the Third Gender?

In April of 2014, the Supreme Court of India formally recognized the existence of a third gender. There is no formal definition of the third gender in India. People who identify as neither man nor woman are commonly referred to as Hijra or transgender. The Hijra have been subject to discrimination, harassment, and persecution for their genderqueer self-identification. Along with the queer community, Hijras have been targeted by law enforcement and government officials under Section 377. This law was used to criminalize any queer sexual acts and has been used to justify discrimination and mistreatment of the LGBTQ+ community since its enactment in British colonial era India.

 

What Is the History of the Third Gender In India?

Although the Hijra have been subject to much hate and discrimination in recent times, this has not always been the case. Hijras were well-respected and revered in ancient India. In fact, Hijras play important roles in many Hindu religious texts. One such text talks about the life of Lord Rama, one of the most virtuous Hindu heroes. At some point, Lord Rama was banished from his kingdom. After being banished, he told his followers that the men and women should wipe their tears and leave him. All of the men and women left. However, a group of people known as the Hijra remained standing before him. They were neither men nor women and refused to leave until Lord Rama returned fourteen years later. This community was praised for showing such loyalty.

Hijras also held religious authority and important court positions and administrative roles in Mughal era India. Believed to have the ability to bless, many would seek out Hijras for blessings during important religious ceremonies.  In ancient India, the Hijras were a community that was respected for being extremely loyal and were well trusted enough to be given important religious and governmental roles. This begs the question. If Hijras played an important role in ancient Indian society, then why are Hijras ostracized and persecuted in modern India?

 

Why Is the Third Gender Ostracized Today?

The answer is due in large part to the British colonization of India. When the British took over direct rule of India and absolved the British East India Company, government officials sought to enforce their western ideas and beliefs on Indians. Lawmakers accomplished this goal by enacting moral laws that banned anything that western society viewed as unclean and dirty. This included the creation of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code which made illegal any “unnatural offenses” that were deemed “against the order of nature.” From when Section 377 was implemented in 1858 to when it was recently deemed unconstitutional on 6 September 2018, Section 377 was used as justification to mistreat and punish Hijras, queers, and the LGBTQ+ community.

The western concept of hating and marginalizing anybody who was not straight and cisgender took hold in Indian society. The Hijra community was forced from a well-respected role as pillars of religious and governmental society to being social outcasts. This social exile is responsible for the socioeconomic and medical difficulties that Hijras face. Hijras are prone to being economically challenged because of the stigmas that they face. They are denied educational opportunities, jobs, and discriminated against in every area of their lives.

 

What are the Social, Economic, and Medical Problems Caused By Lasting Social Stigmas?

Despite gaining their independence from Britain in 1947, India has only recently begun to make progress on removing legislation that has been used to attack the Hijra and LGBTQ+ population. The many decades of subjugation stretching back generations have left a mark. Many of the hateful western views towards LGBTQ+ people have become deeply ingrained in India’s culture. Even with many public relations campaigns along with a growing group of supporters, the vast majority of Indians still are against Hijras. Many Indians don’t respect Hijras worth. Hijras are often called to come to auspicious events such as marriages and child-births for blessings. Many Indians view the Hijras as bringing good luck and warding off evil spirits. Yet because of widespread discrimination, the majority of Hijras are forced to beg for money since they are barred from most employment opportunities. Due to this, some of the common means of living for Hijras are begging, dancing, and prostitution.[1]

[1] “India’s Relationship with the Third Gender.” UAB Institute for Human Rights Blog, The University of Alabama at Birmingham, 29 Oct. 2018, sites.uab.edu/humanrights/2018/10/29/indias-relationship-with-the-third-gender/.

And, just to understand that this really was all Great Britain’s fault with its bizarre, primitive, and backwards Western moral values, here’s BBC journalist Tessa Wong’s article titled “377: The British colonial law that left an anti-LGBTQ legacy in Asia” which goes into a cursory glance at the influence of British culture upon the world. The British finally admit they did something wrong after more than 250-years of exploitation and brutalization of the world:

For much of the past two centuries, it was illegal to be gay in a vast swathe of the world – thanks to colonial Britain.

 

Till today, colonial-era laws that ban homosexuality continue to exist in former British territories including parts of Africa and Oceania.

 

But it is in Asia where they have had a significantly widespread impact. This is the region where, before India legalised homosexual sex in 2018, at least one billion people lived with anti-LGBTQ legislation.

 

It can be traced back to one particular law first conceptualised in India, and one man’s mission to “modernise” the colony.

 

‘Exotic, mystical Orient’

Currently, it is illegal to be gay in around 69 countries, nearly two-thirds of which were under some form of British control at one point of time.

 

This is no coincidence, according to Enze Han and Joseph O’Mahoney, who wrote the book British Colonialism and the Criminalization of Homosexuality.

 

Dr Han told the BBC that British rulers introduced such laws because of a “Victorian, Christian puritanical concept of sex”.

 

“They wanted to protect innocent British soldiers from the ‘exotic, mystical Orient’ – there was this very orientalised view of Asia and the Middle East that they were overly erotic.”

 

“They thought if there were no regulations, the soldiers would be easily led astray.”

 

While there were several criminal codes used across British colonies around the world, in Asia one particular set of laws was used prominently – the Indian Penal Code (IPC) drawn up by British historian Lord Thomas Babington Macaulay, which came into force in 1862.

It contained section 377, which stated that “whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal” would be punished with imprisonment or fines.

 

Lord Macaulay, who modelled the section on Britain’s 16th Century Buggery Act, believed the IPC was a “blessing” for India as it would “modernise” its society, according to Dr Han and Dr O’Mahoney’s book.

 

The British went on to use the IPC as the basis for criminal law codes in many other territories they controlled.

 

Till today, 377 continues to exist in various forms in several former colonies in Asia such as Pakistan, Singapore, Bangladesh, Malaysia, Brunei, Myanmar and Sri Lanka.

 

Penalties range from two to 20 years in prison. In places with Muslim-majority populations which also have sharia law, LGBT persons can also face more severe punishment such as flogging.

 

Lasting legacy

Activists say these laws have left a damaging legacy on these countries, some of which have long had flexible attitudes towards LGBTQ people.

 

Transgenderism, intersex identity and the third gender, for example, have traditionally been a part of South Asian culture with the hijra or eunuch communities.

In India, where for centuries LGBTQ relationships were featured in literature, myths and Hindu temple art, present-day attitudes now largely skew conservative.

 

“It’s in our traditions. But now we are getting so embarrassed about [LGBTQ relations]. Clearly the change happened because of certain influences,” says Anjali Gopalan, executive director of Naz Foundation India, a non-governmental organisation which offers counselling services for the LGBTQ community.

 

One common argument governments have made for keeping the law is that it continues to reflect the conservative stance of their societies. Some, like India, have even ironically argued that it keeps out “Western influence”.

But activists point out that this perpetuates discrimination and goes against some countries’ constitutions which promise equal rights to all citizens.

 

This has a “de-humanising effect” on an LGBTQ person, and can seriously impact their access to education and career opportunities as well as increase their risk of poverty and physical violence, said Jessica Stern, executive director of LGBTQ rights group OutRight International.

 

“If you’re a walking criminal, you’re living with a burden every day. Whether you internalise it or not, it affects you and everyone who loves you,” she told the BBC.

The Covid pandemic has exacerbated these problems, she added.

 

One recent example her group found was in Sri Lanka, where the police were tasked to distribute emergency rations while the country was under curfew – but some in the LGBTQ community were too afraid to come forward due to the country’s anti-sodomy law.

 

“People said they have to risk arrest or risk going hungry… it’s a stark life or death choice they have to make,” said Ms Stern.

 

Some governments, like Singapore, have tried to tread the middle ground by publicly promising never to enforce the law. But the LGBTQ community in the city-state say this is unfair as they live knowing the government could change its mind at any time.

 

Olivia and Irene Chiong left Singapore five years ago for the US, where they got married and are both legally recognised as the mothers of their two daughters – something that would not be possible back home.

 

The lack of rights is one reason they find it difficult to return, as well as the refusal among some Singaporeans including government ministers to acknowledge that there is discrimination.

“I think for me the biggest frustration comes from the fact that Singaporeans think everything’s okay – that as long as gay people keep quiet… keep themselves in the closet, it’s fine!” said Olivia.

 

“There are many rainbow families in Singapore…You can’t just keep sweeping things under the carpet.

 

“The only reason why Singapore is holding so tightly to (377) is because it gives them the illusion of control,” she said.

 

A long road ahead

There has been progress – most notably, of course, with the Indian Supreme Court’s decision in 2018 to repeal 377, following years of legal challenges mounted by determined activists.

 

It was a historic decision and a major step forward for LGBT rights in India. But three years on, there is still a very long way to go in changing cultural attitudes, activists say.

 

“The most common thing we still see in counselling is families wanting their gay sons to get married (to a woman),” said Ms Gopalan.

 

“Everything is linked to the family in India, and marriage is a very big part of our lives. So the first issue is acceptance from the family and then by extension, society.”

 

Activists say more protection is needed, such as anti-discrimination laws. Earlier this month, a court in Chennai ordered officials to draw up plans for reforms to respect LGBTQ rights.

Still, India’s repeal of 377 has helped to lessen the stigma – and inspired other countries.

 

In Singapore and Kenya, activists have used the repeal in legal arguments against their own colonial anti-homosexuality laws.

 

Two centuries after it was used by the British as a legal blueprint, India once again is seen as an example to follow – this time to strike down that very law that was exported across Asia.

 

“It has emboldened others in Asia, unequivocally… it sent a message to all former colonial outposts,” said Ms Stern.

 

“Activists I spoke to have said that if it can happen in India, it can happen here too.”

 

Since I’ve noticed a few ignorant views even from Indians of India who continue to purport the falsehood that we Hindus were somehow not really pro-Third Gender prior to British imperialism, here’s Adi Shankara’s commentary on the Shvestashvatara / Svetasvatara Upanishad 4.3 – that is chapter four, verse three – which reads as follows:

3. You are the woman, You are the man, You are the boy, (and) You are the girl, too. You are the old man tottering with a stick. Taking birth, You have Your faces everywhere.

   The meaning of the verse is clear.[1]

As I suspect there will be aspersions that I’ve taken this passage out of context, I’ll provide a story from the Mahabharata which gives further context supporting this argument. For those unaware, the Mahabharata is a lengthy book of Hindu legends, Hindu myths, anecdotal moral lessons, a list of dynastic ruling families, and scenarios providing philosophical contexts and arguments for an array of concepts within the Hindu tradition. It’s more a book of epics to help give further context to Hindu theology, while also being a theological book itself but of lesser importance as a Smriti text, which are supplementary materials to the main Vedic literature categorized as Shruti such as the Upanishads. I’ve found theological and philosophical arguments and stories ranging from topics like determinism, to transgenderism, and so much more in the Mahabharata itself. Some Hindus believe it to be based more upon real historical events and there are now archaeological findings suggesting the earliest period of the Harrapan civilization is approximately as old as 8000 – 7000 BCE.[1][2]  I’m of the opinion that; while there probably are plenty of historical events written in it; there were likely exaggerations, dynastic political clashes arguing over specific historical events, and mythical events added for the sake of dramatization and for the benefit of respective ruling classes and dynasties within specific historical time periods throughout India’s history. In short, basically like everywhere else in the world where there were dynastic clashes over ruling kingdoms and empires. I do think specific events such as a history of civil wars happened but the specific context, the number of forces on each dynastic side, and the presentation of victories and defeats were probably influenced by whatever dominant Vedic kingdom or empire wanted for the sake of justifying their ultimate victory or to justify their rule over new territories. Whatever the case, that topic is beyond the scope of this book. The Mahabharata’s book thirteen, Anusasana Parva, section twelve presents the following story affirming Transgenderism in ancient Hindu / Vedic society in a purely theological context. This specific translation had an odd doubling of speech marks and I’m unsure why either the translator or editor chose this method, but I decided to leave it as is for the sake of authenticity:

SECTION XII

“‘Yudhishthira said, “It behoveth, O king to tell me truly which of the two viz., man or woman derives the greater pleasure from an act of union with each other. Kindly resolve my doubt in this respect.”

“‘Bhishma said, “In this connection is cited this old narrative of the discourse between Bhangaswana and Sakra as a precedent illustrating the question. In days of yore there lived a king of the name of Bhangaswana. He was exceedingly righteous and was known as a royal sage. He was, however, childless, O chief of men, and therefore performed a sacrifice from desire of obtaining an issue. The sacrifice which that mighty monarch performed was the Agnishtuta. In consequence of the fact that the deity of fire is alone adored in that sacrifice, this is always disliked by Indra. Yet it is the sacrifice that is desired by men when for the purpose of obtaining an issue they seek to cleanse themselves of their sins.[30] The highly blessed chief of the celestials, viz. Indra, learning that the monarch was desirous of performing the Agnishtuta, began from that moment to look for the laches of that royal sage of well-restrained soul (for if he could succeed in finding some laches, he could then punish his disregarder). Notwithstanding all his vigilance, however, O king, Indra failed to detect any laches, on the part of the high-souled monarch. Some time after, one day, the king went on a hunting expedition. Saying unto himself—This, indeed, is an opportunity,—Indra stupefied the monarch. The king proceeded alone on his horse, confounded because of the chief of the celestials having stupefied his senses. Afflicted with hunger and thirst, the king’s confusion was so great that he could not ascertain the points of the compass. Indeed, afflicted with thirst, he began to wander hither and thither. He then beheld a lake that was exceedingly beautiful and was full of transparent water. Alighting from his steed, and plunging into the lake, he caused his animal to drink. Tying his horse then, whose thirst had been slaked, to a tree, the king plunged into the lake again for performing his ablutions. To his amazement he found that he was changed, by virtue of the waters, into a woman. Beholding himself thus transformed in respect of sex itself, the king became overpowered with shame. With his senses and mind completely agitated, he began to reflect with his whole heart in this strain:—’Alas, how shall I ride my steed? How shall I return to my capital? In consequence of the Agnishtuta sacrifice I have got a hundred sons all endued with great might, and all children of my own loins. Alas, thus transformed, what shall I say unto them? What shall I say unto my spouses, my relatives and well-wishers, and my subjects of the city and the provinces? Rishis conversant with the truths of duty and religion and other matters say that mildness and softness and liability to extreme agitation are the attributes of women, and that activity, hardness, and energy are the attributes of men. Alas, my manliness has disappeared. For what reason has femininity come over me? In consequence of this transformation of sex, how shall I succeed in mounting my horse again?’—Having indulged in these sad thoughts, the monarch, with great exertion, mounted his steed and came back to his capital, transformed though he had been into a woman. His sons and spouses and servants, and his subjects of the city and the provinces, beholding that extraordinary transformation, became exceedingly amazed. Then that royal sage, that foremost of eloquent men, addressing them all, said,—’I had gone out on a hunting expedition, accompanied by a large force. Losing all knowledge of the points of the compass, I entered a thick and terrible forest, impelled by the fates. In that terrible forest, I became afflicted with thirst and lost my senses. I then beheld a beautiful lake abounding with fowl of every description. Plunging into that stream for performing my ablutions, I was transformed into a woman!’—Summoning then his spouses and counsellors, and all his sons by their names, that best of monarchs transformed into a woman said unto them these words:—’Do ye enjoy this kingdom in happiness. As regards myself, I shall repair to the woods, ye sons.’—Having said so unto his children, the monarch proceeded to the forest. Arrived there, she came upon an asylum inhabited by an ascetic. By that ascetic the transformed monarch gave birth to a century of sons. Taking all those children of hers, she repaired to where her former children were, and addressing the latter, said,—’Ye are the children of my loins while I was a man. These are my children brought forth by me in this state of transformation. Ye sons, do ye all enjoy my kingdom together, like brothers born of the same parents.’—At this command of their parent, all the brothers, uniting together, began to enjoy the kingdom as their joint property. Beholding those children of the king all jointly enjoying the kingdom as brothers born of the same parents, the chief of the celestials, filled with wrath, began to reflect—’By transforming this royal sage into a woman I have, it seems, done him good instead of an injury.’ Saying this, the chief of the celestials viz., Indra of a hundred sacrifices, assuming the form of a Brahmana, repaired to the capital of the king and meeting all the children succeeded in disuniting the princes. He said unto them—’Brothers never remain at peace even when they happen to be the children of the same father. The sons of the sage Kasyapa, viz., the deities and the Asuras, quarrelled with each other on account of the sovereignty of the three worlds. As regards ye princes, ye are the children of the royal sage Bhangaswana. These others are the children of an ascetic. The deities and the Asuras are children of even one common sire, and yet the latter quarrelled with each other. How much more, therefore, should you quarrel with each other? This kingdom that is your paternal property is being enjoyed by these children of an ascetic.’ With these words, Indra succeeded in causing a breach between them, so that they were very soon engaged in battle and slew each other. Hearing this, king Bhangaswana, who was living as an ascetic woman, burnt with grief and poured forth her lamentations. The lord of the celestials viz. Indra, assuming the guise of a Brahmana, came to that spot where the ascetic lady was living and meeting her, said,—’O thou that art possessed of a beautiful face, with what grief dost thou burn so that thou art pouring forth thy lamentations?’—Beholding the Brahmana the lady told him in a piteous voice,—’Two hundred sons of mine O regenerate one, have been slain by Time. I was formerly a king, O learned Brahmana and in that state had a hundred sons. These were begotten by me after my own form, O best of regenerate persons. On one occasion I went on a hunting expedition. Stupefied, I wandered amidst a thick forest. Beholding at last a lake, I plunged into it. Rising, O foremost of Brahmanas, I found that I had become a woman. Returning to my capital I installed my sons in the sovereignty of my dominions and then departed for the forest. Transformed into a woman, I bore a hundred sons to my husband who is a high souled ascetic. All of them were born in the ascetic’s retreat. I took them to the capital. My children, through the influence of Time, quarrelled with each other, O twice-born one. Thus afflicted by Destiny, I am indulging in grief.’ Indra addressed him in these harsh words.—’In former days, O lady, thou gayest me great pain, for thou didst perform a sacrifice that is disliked by Indra. Indeed, though I was present, thou didst not invoke me with honours. I am that Indra, O thou of wicked understanding. It is I with whom thou hast purposely sought hostilities.’ Beholding Indra, the royal sage fell at his feet, touching them with his head, and said,—’Be gratified with me, O foremost of deities. The sacrifice of which thou speakest was performed from desire of offspring (and not from any wish to hurt thee). It behoveth thee therefore, to grant me thy pardon.’—Indra, seeing the transformed monarch prostrate himself thus unto him, became gratified with him and desired to give him a boon. ‘Which of your sons, O king, dost thou wish, should revive, those that were brought forth by thee transformed into a woman, or those that were begotten by thee in thy condition as a person of the male sex?’ The ascetic lady, joining her hands, answered Indra, saying, ‘O Vasava, let those sons of mine come to life that were borne by me as a woman.’ Filled with wonder at this reply, Indra once more asked the lady, ‘Why dost thou entertain less affection for those children of thine that were begotten by thee in thy form of a person of the male sex? Why is it that thou bearest greater affection for those children that were borne by thee in thy transformed state? I wish to hear the reason of this difference in respect of thy affection. It behoveth thee to tell me everything.’

“‘”The lady said, ‘The affection that is entertained by a woman is much greater than that which is entertained by a man. Hence, it is, O Sakra, that I wish those children to come back to life that were borne by me as a woman.'”

“‘Bhishma continued, “Thus addressed, Indra became highly pleased and said unto her, ‘O lady that art so truthful, let all thy children come back into life. Do thou take another boon, O foremost of kings, in fact, whatever boon thou likest. O thou of excellent vows, do thou take from me whatever status thou choosest, that of woman or of man.’

“‘”The lady said, ‘I desire to remain a woman, O Sakra. In fact, I do not wish to be restored to the status of manhood, O Vasava.’—Hearing this answer, Indra once more asked her, saying,—’Why is it, O puissant one, that abandoning the status of manhood thou wishest that of womanhood?’ Questioned thus, that foremost of monarchs transformed into a woman answered, ‘In acts of congress, the pleasure that women enjoy is always much greater than what is enjoyed by men. It is for this reason, O Sakra, that I desire to continue a woman; O foremost of the deities, truly do I say unto thee that I derive greater pleasure in my present status of womanhood. I am quite content with this status of womanhood that I now have. Do thou leave me now, O lord of heaven.’—Hearing these words of hers, the lord of the celestials answered,—’So be it,’—and bidding her farewell, proceeded to heaven. Thus, O monarch, it is known that woman derives much greater pleasure than man under the circumstances thou hast asked.”‘”[1]

[1] Vyasa. “SECTION XII of Anusasana Parva of the Mahabharata.” Mahabharata, edited by John Bruno Hare, translated by Kisari Mohan Ganguli, Kindle ed., Sacred-Texts.Com, 2005, p. Location 614-Location 681, https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/15477/pg15477-images.html. Accessed 14 May 2025.

The point being that the United Kingdom absolutely never brought anything but violence, hate, despair, racism, theft of resources, and victim-blaming upon all of the Indian subcontinent. The imposition of “Western values” brought Europe’s backwardness into Indian society and the only reason it has been ignored for so long is specifically because Europe continues to devalue the lives of all Indians of India and vilifies Hindu culture as an easy target because most Hindus genuinely strive for non-violence and harmony. While it is a very good thing that former Prime Minister Theresa May acknowledged this wrongdoing on behalf of the UK back in 2018, it should not be taken out of the general context and in isolation of, the other crimes against humanity that Great Britain committed upon India, other South Asian countries, Ireland, Tasmania, Jamaica, Southeast Asian countries, and various African countries.[1]

 

British Imperialism Did Not Bring India Democracy

Any claims that it brought a Republic form of government cannot be substantiated given that Indians did all the hard work for that establishing the Republic of India on January 26^th, 1950 which was three years after British colonialism had ended; such narratives ignore the inconvenient history that Great Britain was only briefly a Republic for approximately eleven years in the mid-1600s before Royalists returned it back to a Monarchy and slaughtered every last person who signed off on the public execution of England’s King Charles I. The term “Western democracies” helps to obscure the historical fact that England slaughtered the only known Republic in its land out of existence, its monarchy remains above the law even now in the UK, and all failings of either it or Canada reveal the failings of monarchy and not a democratic republic. I’ve written this piece before, but I find it most fitting to share it here and I’ll keep it circumscribed to the UK for the purposes of this chapter. The British monarchy’s legal impositions upon British society cannot be ignored:

The examples in the UK include the Racial and Religious Hatred Act of 2006 (and put in effect around October 2007 in the UK) which is anti-Free Speech[2], the connectedness of the UK government and the Church of England which is far removed from the US’s staunch belief in the Separation of Church and State[3], the fact the upper house of their parliament (the House of Lords) are determined by peerage and a special unelected committee and not by democratic process[4], the fact the British government can issue threats of lawsuit via D-Notices to the British press[5], the fact they’re still officially a monarchy as a government with British people officially recognized as subjects of the British crown and not as citizens[6], and the fact that the Royal family still holds wealth by an organization known as the Crown Estate that classifies itself as neither government nor part of the monarchy which is unelected[7]; these are serious social differences, not something that we should roll our eyes about. The previous monarch was able to prevent the British public from knowing how much money she has by refusing “the King’s / Queen’s Consent” which is a legal policy in British lawmaking that the current reigning King or Queen has to consent for bills to be debated in the British parliament[8]; this was regarding money she obtains from British taxpayers to fund her family’s lavish lifestyle. Even worse, according to The Guardian, the British government actively hide how powerful this method of influence on British law really is, so if you were to research it from the British Monarchy’s website, you wouldn’t have a clear understanding of how disturbingly powerful it is in the British rule of law or how the previous monarch used it to hide her wealth assets pertaining to land ownership from the British public.[9][10] While the British public may try to argue that the House of Commons can pass bills without the House of Lords in some cases the legal basis seems to be the British Monarch delegating them the power to do so in the first place; if the reigning Monarch doesn’t delegate the power as a condition, then it doesn’t seem possible.[11] Moreover, they still must face Royal Assent from the Monarch and thus the Monarch must approve it both prior to and after the bill is debated. The only argument against it is that the Monarchy that holds a power imbalance in an unequal system chooses not to abuse it in most cases; likely because it doesn’t serve their self-interests for every bill. Furthermore, the fact that the House of Lords can amend bills at their committee stage and force a vote that can lead to the bill failing during the debate portion essentially equalizes monarch approved and race-based peerage systems and treats them equivalent to democratically elected officials in the House of Commons in the British parliamentary system regardless.[12] The House of Lords consists roughly of eight-hundred people, ninety-two by race-based peerage, twenty-five via the Church of England’s representatives, and the rest approved by the Monarchy or the Monarch’s special unelected committees that keeps itself hidden from public scrutiny in the interests of the British Monarchy.[13] Finally, the House of Lords can amend the bills in both the Report Stage and Third Reading stage, the claims that it is usually just for “clarity” doesn’t mean that this power cannot be abused by these unelected officials who are already imposing their will via unelected means upon what seems to be a very limited democratic process in scope.[14] In fact, this system of abuse, although reduced, is still in effect because the 1949 Parliament act still allows the House of Lords to delay bills for one-year at their discretion.[15]

While the Republic of India also holds control over Hindu temples, it is something many Hindus staunchly do not want and have repeatedly argued for Hindu temples to be free of government confines, because it is simply another form of appeasement where Hindu temples are regulated by the government.[16][17] Hindu religious schools must spend their own expenses of up to twenty-five percent for free education to underserved children, while no such imposition is placed upon Islamic and Christian schools or religious places. It reduces the ability of India to educate all of its children just to cater to primarily Christian bigotry against Hindus by depriving Hindu children of equal opportunities due to increased school closings of specifically Hindu religious schools as a result of this policy, essentially causing the opposite of its likely intent due to higher costs imposed upon Hindu religious schools.[18][19] In effect, the only place a Hindu can freely be a Hindu is in the United States. While this double-standard began under Islamic rule in India through the Jizya (Toleration Tax), Hindus had to pay a “holy dip” tax for participation in Kumbh Mela festivals from 1895 – 1940 under British colonial rule.[20] Starting from the British East India company, there was a levied tax of the Jagannath temple in Puri, Odissa of India; for Hindus who participated in journeying to it. It was briefly cancelled for three years and then began again from approximately between 1806 – 1840 from what surviving records show and of course, the specific intent was to increase Christian conversions in recognition of the fact that Britain was a Christian nation and to deliberately weaken Hinduism.[21][22][23] The performance of Sati – widowers burning themselves after their husband’s passing – was criticized and reformed by the indigenous Bengal Renaissance from people such as Hindu reformer, Ram Mohan Roy and not by British imperialists.

British Imperialism Supported Casteism when Convenient for its Self-Interests

To top it all off, even despite the pro-Christian bigotry towards Hindus that came from British imperialism, this did not stop British imperialists from worshipping their true god, the entwined worship of Jesus Christ with British nationalism which is the very essence of Anglicanism. During the 1820s, Shanar Christians protested against a dehumanizing and mandatory Caste-based social custom that lower-caste women remain topless, to publicly display their lower social status at the behest of upper-caste male Hindus; this was within the village of Neyoor in the State of Tamil Nadu (now apparently part of Southern Kerala). This led to shameful and widespread violence by Hindus upon Christians who insisted their caste-based discriminatory custom be upheld. The situation became so violent that British troops were called in to end the unrest. Reverand Isaac Henry Hacker of the Church of England explains what Anglican missionaries recorded in his book. The British troops ended it by enthusiastically supporting dehumanization, Casteism, and inflicted their own merciless violence upon Shanar Christians in Tamil Nadu for violating what is misnamed the Breast Tax in modern times. On page 38 of “A Hundred Years in Travancore” by Reverand Isaac Henry Hacker, it reads as follows:

The removal of Mr Mead to the new station at Neyoor seemed to arouse all the slumbering fires of persecution. Occasion was taken to object to the wearing of upper cloths by Christian women, but there is no doubt the better classes looked with great disfavour on the steady advancement of the Shanars and Pariah converts of the mission. From persecution of individuals they went further, and riotous bands attacked and burnt the houses and chapels of Christians. An attack was even made upon Mr Mead. Early in 1829 news of a plot to assassinate him came to Mr Mead’s ears, and he had to obtain military protection from Fort Udaigiri, and for a fort night was under the care of British troops. The official enquiry made by the Dewan and other officials into these riots was remarkable for the fact that the sufferers (the Shanar Christians) were treated as the culprits, and were chained, flogged, and imprisoned, and many of them sent to the central prison at Quilon. The enquiry was distinctly unfavourable to the Christians. The favourable order as to women’s dress made to Mr Mead in 1823 was cancelled, and Christians were ordered to respect the ancient caste customs, especially those inculcating submission to the higher castes. The proclamation is remarkable also for the first appearance of the order peculiar to Travancore that no place of worship should be erected without Government permission being first obtained. This order has within recent years been revived, and is now added to the statute book as a regular law. The persecution seems to have worn itself out and to have gradually subsided, Mr Mead counselling submission and diligently exercising himself in getting condemned Christians liberated.[1]

[1] Hacker, Isaac Henry. “CHAPTER III: THE GROWTH OF FORTY YEARS, 1816-1856.” A HUNDRED YEARS IN TRAVANCORE BY I. H. HACKER, PDF ed., THE LONDON MISSIONARY SOCIETY, pp. 38–38, https://ia600207.us.archive.org/20/items/100YearsInTravancore/100YearsInTravancore.pdf. Accessed 18 May 2025.

When I first learned of the general information of this story in 2018, and read blogs about it online, I was given the depiction that the benevolent hand of Great Britain came to stop the “savage” Hindus from mistreating lower-caste Indian converts to Christianity and that Great Britain had eventually outlawed it due to their vigorous support for an emerging consciousness towards Western values but with gradual missteps. This was the image the British presented to the world to justify their imperialism of India, but this is not true even in the case of unambiguous Casteism in India. I noticed the details stopped making sense even among supposed Christians from Tamil Nadu and Kerala posting online about the benevolent, guiding hand of the “superior” Christian nation-state of Great Britain. How was it that the Breast social custom had continued over a century later and needed outlawing again? How could it both be true that there was strict Caste observance and that British influence had changed the society, but the purported positive effect of British influence didn’t last? Why had it incorrectly been called the Breast Tax, when Christian missionaries in the 1820s called it a Caste-enforced Breast social custom without any mention of a Breast Tax? From what little I could find on the subject; it was the vigorous peaceful protests from Christian Indians themselves that removed it years after British imperialism. How could Great Britain have helped “outlaw” it, if Anglican missionary accounts state that British governing officials supported the Breast custom as official British government law imposed upon the lower-Caste Shanar Christians of Travancore, and this imposition was put into legal effect after British troops put Shanar Christians into prisons where they were chained and whipped? A lot of superstition and falsehoods exist about this story, such as the story of Nangeli, which is apparently a hoax as no record of this person exists.[1] Too many details about the so-called “breast tax” don’t add-up and were possibly never recorded; the simple fact that it wasn’t a tax, but a social custom was never corrected about the story.[2][3] Christianity was flourishing briefly in the area, slightly over a decade prior to the upper-caste Hindu riots, until a severe British poll tax was implemented. For some context, a British poll tax is not a tax on voting like in the US context of the name, it appears to have been a tax on the assessed value of movable property for each individual.[4][5] In other words, British troops had full military control of this area and were undoubtedly the ones who had put Shanar Christians into prisons to torture them approximately ten – twenty years later. From page 27 of “A Hundred Years in Travancore” by Reverand Isaac Henry Hacker:

In 1810 two events of importance to the infant mission occurred. They were the retirement of Colonel Macaulay and the appointment of Colonel Munro and the accession to the throne of Travancore of H. H. Lakshimi Bai. From this date began the strenuous rule of Colonel Munro. He seems to have taken a lively interest in Ringeltaube’s work, and to have had a great personal liking for the man himself. One of Ringeltaube’s early difficulties arose from the fact that his converts sought to use his influence with the Resident to gain special privileges for themselves, especially remission of State labour and taxes. But the missionary would have no converts on these terms, and actually went so far as to appoint one of his Christians to superintend the payment of Poll tax and services by his Christians. In 1814, however, when very severe famine reduced the people to a state of starvation, Ringeltaube appealed to the Resident and secured the exemption of his Christians from the operation of the Poll tax. His honesty, however, is shown in that he engaged to give to each of his Christians a certificate which was to be held to exempt him for one year only. With a sane man at the head of the mission such as Ringeltaube, there was not likely to be a rush of converts eager only to secure release from taxation. That such a rush did take place we have evidence in Ringeltaube’s own words. He says in a report to Colonel Munro in 1813, and speaking of 1810, “There was a rush of five thousand Shanars upon me who had been long waiting for an opportunity to shake off the Poll tax and service attached to their caste, and which they hoped to effect by connecting themselves with me. All my solemn declarations to the contrary were of no avail, until that sovereign instructor, painful experience, convinced them of their mistake. As soon as the people were convinced that no temporal advantages were to be obtained, their zeal for the Protestant religion collapsed”; and yet in 1811 we find he baptized nearly four hundred persons, including children.[1]

This British poll tax seems to have been conflated and confused for an anonymous Kerala King’s supposed “tax” that did not exist. Even more confusing, the documentation written by Anglican Christian missionaries make it clear that British troops had full governing control of the supposed Kingdom of Travancore, they imposed their own tax policies upon the populace that caused a famine, and jointly worked with the Diwan to put Christian Indians into prisons to torture them as a reaction to caving in to upper-caste Hindu bigotry against lower-castes who had converted to Christianity. Given this historical information by eyewitness accounts from British Anglican missionaries, how could Great Britain claim to have been the cause of the removal of the Breast social custom when they explicitly upheld Casteism to the point they supported the torture of Christian Indian victims, as official British government policy? Was the story of a Kerala King outlawing it in Tamil Nadu even verified outside British sources? And why would a Kerala King need to outlaw it, if British troops were in charge of the area and effectively governing the location under British rule of law superseding the princely state to the point that Anglican Christian missionaries could ask British officials to force the Diwan to change policies, and then with the Diwan’s joint support, imprisoned and tortured the lower-caste Shanar Christians? The context in the Anglican Missionary books clearly is referring to the “Government” as the British government and refers to British laws in the context of the book itself, it is not referring to the laws of a princely state which it regards as social custom. Pages 46 – 48 seem to further repudiate this idea that British government policy had any influence in ending the breast social custom:

If the progress of the mission is to be gauged by the measure of opposition it arouses, then this decade was the most prosperous of all. It was in the beginning of this year that the third, last, and most determined persecution arose against the Christians, ostensibly on account of the wearing by men and women of the upper cloths which were held to mark off the higher castes. With this was mixed up also the demands for forced labour and Sunday work, all of which were resolutely refused by Christians. Much of the blame for the disturbances has been attached to the British Resident who was in office from 1840 to 1860.

General Cullen, after long residence in Travancore, regarded it as a retreat to be preserved from the intrusive changes of the Western world. The agitation against slavery had received no help from him, and he could hardly be interested because certain people wanted to wear more clothes than the climate demanded or their neighbours thought lawful. But the controversy was carried abroad. English newspapers in Madras took the matter up. Travancore manners and customs were dragged into the fierce light of publicity, and something had to be done. General Cullen’s most redoubtable antagonist was John Cox of Trevandrum, though Baylis of Neyoor and Whitehouse of Nagercoil were not less strenuous. Cases of individual cruelty were frequent, and armed mobs attacked and burned chapels and houses and terrorised peaceful communities. Cases were brought forward by the missionaries when Christians were actually beaten to death under the orders of minor officials, and all appeals for justice were refused or delayed. There is no doubt that the uprising of the higher classes was due to a desire to recover by force the authority over the lower castes, which they had lost by the abolition of slavery. If the civil laws of the realm denied them superiority, then they would insist on caste rule and old custom to keep in subjection those who attempted to rise. A curious, and to some an inexplicable argument for this oppression, was devised from the Queen’s Proclamation of Sovereignty which was issued at Delhi in 1858. In the course of that document, Her Majesty declared her determined neutrality in matters religious. Now to one who knows the Indian mind it is a familiar idea that to say that no one is ordered to become a Christian is equivalent to say that all are ordered not to become Christians. Further, no doubt exaggerated reports of the Mutiny reached Travancore, and the idea grew that the English power was on the wane. In the end of 1858 and beginning of 1859 the disturbances reached their height, and in Pareychaley, Neyoor, and Nagercoil districts, many chapels and schools were burnt, catechists were flogged, and Christians’ houses were pillaged. The Dewan himself proceeded to the district, and a number of native troops under Captain Daly were ordered down to ensure quiet. An appeal was now made by the missionaries to the British Government then represented in Madras by Sir Charles Trevelyan, brother-in-law of Lord Macaulay.

Sir Charles took very prompt action, and the Raja very reluctantly issued an order in 1859 allowing Shanar women to wear coarse upper cloths. The recent transfer of authority from the East India Company to the Queen is curiously reflected in one sentence of Sir Charles’ despatch. He says, “I should fail in respect to Her Majesty if I attempted to describe the feelings with which she must regard the use made against her own sex of the promises of protection so graciously accorded by her.” This was nearly fifty years ago. and yet to this day caste rule and common custom have so far prevailed that low-caste women still move about in the public streets in the style of dress repudiated by Christian women so long ago. The custom is not so common south of the Capital, but from Trevandrum northwards the only dress of the low-caste non-Christian women is the loincloth, and caste rule refuses them anything more. Just as these troubles came to an end came the Revs. James Duthie to Nagercoil and Samuel Mateer to Pareychaley, two names closely associated with the Travancore mission, one for over thirty years, and the other to this day.[1]

[1] Hacker, Isaac Henry. “CHAPTER IV: FROM JUBILEE TO CENTENARY, 1856-1906.” A HUNDRED YEARS IN TRAVANCORE BY I. H. HACKER, PDF ed., THE LONDON MISSIONARY SOCIETY, pp. 46-49, https://ia600207.us.archive.org/20/items/100YearsInTravancore/100YearsInTravancore.pdf. Accessed 18 May 2025

It’s curious that the Anglican British missionaries emphasize the Travancore Diwan’s policy being changed by British government threats, but they ignore the clear contradiction of their earlier statement that British government officials made it local law that lower-caste women had to follow the caste-based discriminatory policies; which was mentioned earlier in the book in the section mentioning the 1820s. The Anglican British missionaries also contradicted themselves by stating that the British Queen wanted the emancipation of women and that she wanted to remain neutral to local customs. What exactly happened here and how did so many Anglican missionaries dismiss the fact that their own British laws were supporting Casteism in Travancore at this point? There’s no mention of them removing the impositions from British lawbooks in the area after a brief mention of their existence, but only that the Diwan made a public speech removing it within his own legal capacity which would have been overruled by British law regardless due to the British having the stronger military force.

I can only give my own personal opinion based upon the limited evidence. The obscurity around this time period seems to be due to the lack of pushback, unlike the time period of the 1870s to the early 1900s where US missionaries and US journalists were vehemently condemning what was happening and copiously documenting the evidence for the world to see. Anglican British missionaries don’t demonstrate as much critical thinking as US Christian missionaries and especially US journalists. Unfortunately, in Travancore, they’re the only recorded eyewitness accounts, to the best of my knowledge. They don’t demonstrate any condemnation for the British poll tax forced upon the residents of Travancore and only claimed to have a limited ability to exempt Christian Indian converts to the brutal tax policy that was apparently causing a famine prior to even the better documented period of the 1870s. In the end, the British chose their own greed even at the earliest recorded stages, they enforced a brutal tax policy that would cause a deliberate theft of India’s resources in Travancore just as it did in later years of their rule, and Anglican Christian missionaries seemed to bow to pressure and justified the brutal exploitation by arguing to their Anglican Christian readership in Britain and likely the US that it brought in more Christian converts. Later, the Anglican Christians of Britain tried to present it as exclusively the fault of belligerent Hindus after British policies seemed to be deliberately starving all the people of Travancore. What the upper-caste Hindus did was obviously unjustifiable, but the context of British policies that seem to be in full control of the region judging purely from the Anglican British missionary accounts.

Essentially, the Anglican British Christian statements are the accounts of the useful idiots of British empire, whereas the US missionaries and US journalists are actually the initially neutral observers who proceeded to condemn what was going on and mock what they argued as the thoroughgoing incompetence of British governing policies in India from the time periods mostly between 1870s – 1940s due to their own evidence-based research. While some may want to claim a neutral stance or a middle-ground, this ignores the fact that the British accounts are purely self-serving and they have repeatedly demonstrated willingness to lie to protect the image of their empire. The reason for the British government surveys within India admitting to famine mortalities seems to be due to ethnically Indian government officials and critical US journalists hoping to argue reform through sparking outrage; while the upper-echelons of the Viceroys, who were exclusively English-origin rulers, willfully ignored them.[1] It seems more accurate to say that any resource that is using British government accounts of events is honestly no different than Nazi-sympathizers using exclusively Nazi propaganda accounts of the Jewish Holocaust and proclaiming them to be a neutral source. This really is not an exaggeration and that is obviously not meant to ridicule any Holocaust victims, but rather to express the serious logical errors in viewing British “historians” as a neutral source even on supposedly “obvious” claims. The British government is not neutral in the extraction of resources from India to sustain the British empire and its wars with fellow European countries in a serious bid to conquer the entire world. That was what they were doing and that was their main focus of interest throughout their centuries of imperialism from the 1500s – 1900s. The hoax of Nangeli, even the implications of the social context of the story, clearly never mention that British local laws were in direct legal effect upon Travancore and the Anglican British missionaries never mention any person or event like Nangeli in their eyewitness accounts from the significant portions of the chapters I read.[2] There is no mention of her at all in the explanation of the Travancore Diwan abolishing it nor does the story of Nangeli mention the British local laws keeping it enforced after the supposed abolition by the Diwan.[3] The hoax of Nangeli was likely perpetuated to hide the fact that British economic and taxation policies were deliberately meant to bleed India dry and to obscure the proof of it in their torture of Shanar Christians to appease the sentiments of Casteism. The events within Travancore appear to be more explicitly violent; either the British government itself or Anglican British Christians likely fabricated the story of Nangeli to hide their deliberate brutalization of lower-caste Christian Indians and especially to hide the aggressive tax policies causing mass starvation, as part of British governing policy.

 

The South Asian Exception to the British Abolition of Slavery

            The United Kingdom’s oft-celebrated Slavery Abolition Act of 1833, preached with such zeal from British lips and from some ignorant Ex-Muslim atheists, deliberately obfuscates and ignores the fact that the ancestors of modern-day Indians, Bangladeshis, Sri Lankans, and Pakistanis were still being enslaved, almost certainly physically and sexually exploited, and shipped off for hard labor after this purported “abolition” of slavery took effect on August 1^st, 1834. Section Sixty-Four of the Slavery Abolition Act of 1833 reads as follows:

In other words, Great Britain “ended” slavery . . . if you stop seeing South Asians as people worthy of any human rights and ignore the fact the British were still enslaving and shipping them overseas to maximize their own profits in full faith to Jesus Christ and England, as per their Anglican faith. The territories being referenced were India before the Partition of 1947 by the British and Sri Lanka, which they called Ceylon. Furthermore, it is very bizarre that supposed scholars keep arguing that Britain outlawed slavery, but never bothered to read the actual law itself in which section 64 clearly states that those territories held in and around India were exempt from being free from slavery. This geopolitical fact is further reinforced by the increased population of what is now known as Rohingya Muslims brought under British authority to Myanmar:

What were the mental gymnastics of people who mention that the British purportedly ended slavery, while consequentially ignoring the fact that the Rohingya . . . exist? I’ve learned from doing my own research that history is better viewed as a continuum, there is no real way to separate historical events into neat sections and claim it as objective history; while Muslims started emerging in Rohingya around the 1400s, it seems that the majority of them came from the British slave trade in the 1800s and 1900s. The Rohingya terrorist threat that Hindus and Buddhists of Myanmar suffer is thus another example of the historic consequences of British colonialism.[1] Obviously, the Myanmar junta’s crackdown should have only been towards the armed militia groups affiliated with Islamic terrorism, they could have also done a crackdown on other serious crimes like violence against non-Muslim women by Islamist men, and not the state-sponsored violent massacres against all the Rohingya Muslims in what amounts to collective punishment; making Rohingya Muslims effectively stateless obviously won’t bring peace but neither should we be obscuring the fact that so much of Islamic violence is due to British colonial stupidity.

While certain groups of Western Ex-Muslim atheists and the British public continue to praise Britain for “ending slavery” the regular Rohingya Muslims, and those who were slaughtered from the violence of Islamist Rohingya terrorist groups, are all still suffering the consequences of Great Britain’s slave trade in the 1800s and 1900s that continued far past the purported abolition. India and Bangladesh are still grappling with the ramifications of British greed and narcissism, while the British and ignorant Western Ex-Muslim atheists continue to praise the British empire for something easily disproven by meeting most Rohingya sheltered and suffering in refugee camps across South Asia or reading about the tragic truths of their history. The very reason the Rohingya themselves are obfuscating details and calling themselves the Rohingya is because they’re rationally afraid of deportations from all countries in the region, being left stateless with their families having no means to support themselves if they’re forbidden to resettle back in Myanmar, and possibly starving to death once the world forgets about them. As tragic as it is, Myanmar scholars pointing out the majority of the Rohingya are a more recent group of people are mostly right judging from the general information. The reason the Western corporate media circus refers to their historical roots as “Muslim laborers” and then tries to conflate the scant few Muslims who can claim heritage from the 1400s as their past, is to protect Great Britain’s image over the consequences of the British slave trade continuing unimpeded past August 1^st, 1834.[2][3] They would rather protect the history of the slave-owners than give a truthful accounting to help provide a more compassionate understanding for the Rohingya Muslims who still today suffer the long-term effects of the British slave trade.

Unfortunately, another problem is that the US and Western media circus continues to blithely lie and claim that Rohingya Islamist men raping Myanmar women wasn’t happening regarding stories similar to the Pakistani grooming gang scandal of the UK.[4] This is despite the fact that the Quran and Islamic theology itself teaches Muslims to capture and rape women, including little girls, for the purposes of conversion to Islam under the divine command of the Abrahamic God. If Western and US organizations continue protecting Islamist rapists, then they should not be surprised by increased violence against Muslims or their dwindling credibility. They need to report news impartially, even when it shows disproportionate evidence of Muslim men being more likely to rape young girls. Impartiality is not seeking the fallacy of the middle-ground, but rather treating all human lives as equal by giving as impartial an accounting of the facts as possible. The selective reporting of only Rohingya Muslim victims is not going to convince anyone to concern themselves when there is no honest acknowledgement of what Islam itself teaches Muslim men to commit upon “slave girls” within the Quran itself such as Quranic verses 23:5-6. Frankly, ignoring this fact is devaluing all non-Muslim lives and people are becoming more aware of discrepancies in reporting; to most people across the world, it appears to be a steadfast support for Muslim rapists by the US and Western media circus. That is how it appears to any outside observer now and I struggle to see how that is the wrong view, given what is being protected.

 

Pakistan is the true Scion of British Imperialism

            Pakistan is the true heir of the British empire, not India. Pakistan is currently a little over 77 years old after the British partition of India in 1947. India maintains its roots in a very ancient civilization that current evidence suggests existed for approximately 7000 – 8000 years.[5][6] Pakistan is the abomination of Islamic and British imperialist powers having committed their respective, uninterrupted, and whitewashed mass genocides. When examined carefully India’s cultural traditions can credibly be argued to rival ancient Greek philosophy and often surpasses it in terms of topics pertaining to psychology and physiology in terms of breathing exercises. Pakistan’s entire identity and government is founded upon trying to rationalize whether an illiterate, pedophile warlord from the 7^th century would approve or disapprove their personal behavior in modern times; they chose that over living in a Democratic Republic.

Great Britain split India for the dreams of reconquest, but it now appears that all they really did was extricate and substantially weaken the cyanide poisoning that is Islam from India’s body politic. After the poison of Islam became even more corrosive within Pakistan, the British foolishly ingested it into their body politic with the misguided belief that Western Universalism was a natural vaccine. To be blunt, judging strictly from how it was portrayed in my US schooling, the British only saw the Hindu-Muslim divide as a group of ignorant, angry, and brown savages too dumb to govern themselves. As of now, it seems quite clear that the cyanide pill of Islam is more fatal to Western culture since Britain still refuses to do a national inquiry into Pakistani Muslim grooming gangs as of writing this, and it was India that slowly built-up the immunity through the body politic of Hindutva and the BJP being more critical of the murderous, pedophilic cult that is Islam. All of the assumptions and arguments I was taught in high school social studies classes postulating India’s backwardness, slowness to adapt to Western values of the Enlightenment, and the supposed inflexibility of India due to Casteism were all categorically disproven by the hard work, ambition, selflessness, and compassion of India itself. In the end, after going through college classes in Political Science, I slowly unlearned my Western-induced bigotries and actually decided to read what British imperialism was like for India’s history, while I was working on my dissertation for graduate studies due to becoming more sensitive to topics related to genocide being covered in electives I had taken. In my view, Britain’s supposed historians should never have been taken seriously, because the US missionary and US journalists categorically debunked all of their claims through fact-finding research during the time of supposed “famines” that British rulers clearly did deliberately and it can be proven they did because the same policies were used upon Ireland too. When reading large portions of both The Graves Are Walking: The Great Famine and the Saga of the Irish People by John Kelly and The Famine Plot: England’s Role in Ireland’s Greatest Tragedy by Tim Pat Coogan; I was struck by how similar the policies imposed upon Ireland leading to the Potato “famine” of 1845 – 1854 were to what was done to India. I couldn’t finish either book due to the deep depression they gave me, especially because I was also reading through the majority of Late Victorian Holocausts by Mike Davis at the time. I’m still too afraid to start reading the book about Tasmania’s genocide under British rule or any books on what the British did to the Boers and Black Africans like Kenyans in Africa. Whereas Germany is appropriately criticized for the Nazi’s committing the Jewish Holocaust, no such sympathies exist for any who suffered British colonialism.

Let us be clear: Pakistani grooming gangs have absolutely nothing to do with revenge-based colonial motives; it is coming from Pakistan willfully imbibing Islamism from countries like Saudi Arabia and what Islam itself teaches regarding the treatment of women and young girls. As an anecdote, when I confronted my parents with the real history of British colonialism, with facts that even they weren’t aware of, we had a family discussion in my parents’ living room; my Father shrugged his shoulders and said “What can we do?” and went on to explain that it would obviously be wrong to vilify British people living today for what their ancestors did to ours. My Mother and Father both proceeded to insist that Hinduism teaches them non-violence and to help others, not to cause other people problems or to hate; we don’t have to like the British, but hate is too far. We shouldn’t concern ourselves with what the British do as they’re not important to our lives, we live happily in the United States where we hardly ever feel discrimination of any kind, and India is improving under Prime Minister Modi’s policies which proves Great Britain’s bigoted ancestors were wrong. Therefore, why should we care about this and cause problems for others? I felt bitter about their response. At the time, I recognized the political brilliance under the Realist Theory of International Relations and I hated Britain for it; Great Britain extracted resources from India, kept using pre-existing issues to further harm India, starved approximately between 60 – 80 million people to death on purpose to keep their war economy going during the times of their colonial rule, split India to pieces, used the images and social problems that came after that mass death toll that they caused to dehumanize Indians as savage rapists in the Western news media, and they knew that they would get away with all of it and these actions would never come to harm them. They got away with it and that was that; human rights were just key terms for essay writing, nothing of consequence would ever happen regarding this brutal history. The British actually had a policy of erasing their colonial crimes and the British public’s myths of the “civilizing missions” of other countries persisted regardless of the weight of evidence of their ancestors’ genocidal violence.[7][8] A YouGov UK poll titled “British Attitudes to the British Empire” published on January 29^th, 2025 found that thirty-three percent of Britons agreed with the claim that the British empire was “More something to be Proud of” and the majority of the thirty-nine percent agreed it was “Neither something to be proud of nor ashamed of” in the survey results.[9] Yet, when it came to the topic of the curriculum for how their empire would be taught in schools, seventy-eight percent of Britons supported the statement that “Teaching should contain a mixture of positive and negative aspects of the British Empire, so pupils are given a comprehensive balanced view” with an additional six percent supporting the statement “Teaching should concentrate on mainly the positive aspects of the British Empire, so that pupils are taught to be proud of Britain’s history and accomplishments” but this supposedly “balanced” approach runs amok of the “middle-ground fallacy” because it’s not valuing the human rights of the people that were colonized objectively.[10] In the same way that there is no “balanced” way of stating the fact-finding research when it comes to the Nazi Holocaust of Jewish people or the US dehumanization and discrimination against Native Americans which is still regrettably upheld by US law; there’s no “balanced way” of stating Boers were put into concentration camps, Irish and Indian people were deliberately starved to death, and Kenyans were tortured and massacred among many other atrocities committed by the British empire.[11][12]

What happened as a consequence of the UK peddling and holding onto their narrative falsehoods was completely unexpected. The systematic erasure, denial, and calculated half-truths regarding Britain’s colonial legacy within the consciousness of the British public left them completely unprepared to deal with the reality of Islamism, because they kept peddling the falsehood that Muslims were an aggrieved minority population in India and clearly had no knowledge of the true history. This was despite the fact that Hindus of India continuously mentioned that young girls were historically kidnapped by Muslim warlords for centuries. Due to Britain’s own willful whitewashing of history, it left them utterly unprepared for the very real harm that Islamism causes in societies. They failed to even recognize the cultural contexts of why Hindus committed certain behaviors like Sati, seeing it as simply uncivilized barbarism. The practice of Sati – of women throwing themselves into the fire and burning themselves alive – is generally known to have increased under Islamic rule. A British person reading this may roll their eyes and ask “So what?” without any critical thinking involved. What was so horrible about Islamic rule that would cause women to willfully burn themselves alive? Muslim men forcibly kidnapping Hindu women to make them into sex slaves, committing gang rapes upon these women, and prostituting them to other Muslim men just like what is happening in the United Kingdom now. In other words, Hindu women wanted to avoid being made sex slaves and avoid being forced into situations no different from the Pakistani Muslim grooming gangs that currently exist in the United Kingdom. Islam would teach these men that gang raping women was less objectionable than having them suffer the eternal torment of fires in hell. Hindu women apparently responded to this by willfully burning themselves as an act of defiance that made it unambiguously clear that they preferred the eternal fires of Islamic hell over being gang raped, turned into a sex slave for a Muslim warlord, and being prostituted to other Muslim men.

 

Four Final Thoughts with a set of questions for British Hindus

            Four personal views I’ve inculcated from researching all this history in my personal time was the following: fact-finding research absolutely matters more than anything else regardless of how disproportionate the painful truths of the information is; they matter more than labels. Whereas the BBC interviewed people in Sweden arguing that Muslim kids throwing hand grenades at Swedish preschools shouldn’t negative reflect the Left-leaning parties; Mike Davis, a Marxist-Environmentalist, did not allow the identity of being a Marxist to skew his views on the objective facts. The US Christian missionaries and US journalists of the late 1800s and early 1900s that Mike Davis copiously cited did not allow their views of being Christian to ignore the plight of all Indians suffering under British starvation campaigns including Hindus and other Dharmic followers. Reading only the British side and believing it to be “objective” by ignoring how self-serving their imperialist narrative is, ironically ignores the salient fact that regular Americans were ubiquitously the unsung heroes of this period of India’s history. Even though they ultimately failed due to the ubiquity of British colonial policy at the time, US Christian missionaries and US journalists were so sincere about stopping it that they tried to do a food drive to save as many lives as possible in India; regular Americans of various ethnic backgrounds and a school of Chinese schoolgirls all donated to help. Socialist and world-renown Historian Will Durant wrote The Case for India in defense of the human rights of all Indians because he was genuinely disgusted by British policies; late in life, he took his Last Sacraments and returned to his Catholic faith before he passed away.[13] The personal identities, racial identities, political views, and religious views of these people did not interfere with a rational and empirical outlook on what human rights for all people should be and they were completely sincere about their commitments to the human rights of all of India. Ever since US news media got bought and sold by US billionaires, we don’t see this commitment anymore or any real attempt at investigative journalism unlike actual investigative journalism from Revealnews.org and Propublica. They push narratives over fact-finding research to please the Neoliberal elites and that’s why I call them jester-journalists, because they’re not real journalists and they usually don’t care about fact-finding research.

Second, I don’t understand what the point is of worshipping mythologized figures like Jesus Christ and the Prophet Mohammad given this history. What Indians, the Irish, Tasmanians, Africans, and numerous others suffered under British imperialism was clearly far worse than Jesus Christ purportedly suffering three days in hell according to Christian theology or the Prophet Mohammad being attacked and fighting those enemy tribes who wouldn’t submit to his insanity according to Islamic theology and the history of Islam. What is the point of worshipping Jesus Christ as a Messiah in Christianity or Islam and worshipping the Prophet Mohammad in Islam? What regular people endured under European imperialism was far worse and more brutal than anything either of these two venerated figures presumably experienced; that’s just a fact. As an Indian, your ancestors in the 1800s – early 1900s suffered worse than anything either Jesus Christ or the Prophet Mohammad suffered; this applies to other South Asians, the Irish, the Tasmanians, the Boers, so many different Black African groups, and so on. They all experienced a hell far worse than anything the fantasy books of the Bible and the Quran proclaim, no judgment day ever happened during those times of British imperial rule where US Christian missionaries themselves compared it to the fantasy stories of the plagues of Egypt in the Bible, and those trying to survive starvation struggled and suffered to make the lives of everyone descended from them better than how they had it under European imperialism. They underwent and surpassed suffering far crueler and viler than any Abrahamic Judgment Day prophecy for decades upon decades, they never sought revenge for any of the calculated violence inflicted upon them, and they lived long enough to create a better life for all their future descendants who did the same for theirs – and if you’re descended from them then please consider what that means to you personally. Why do we bother with myths, especially Judgment Day myths, when this demonstrably proves that we never needed it?

Third, I’m unsure how paradoxical this may seem, but this history made me believe that the Ubermensch philosophical concepts of Friedrich Nietzsche had a lot more of a biological component than most people were willing to accept. Whether this is an interpretative social perspective on the evolutionary science of natural selection or it is actually an aspect of our natural desire for survivability, I cannot say for sure. What I mean is that even just being able to live in a poorly sustained farming village decades after British imperialism was more of a shocking miracle than most people are aware of; given what Indians went through under British colonial oppression. Pursuing a dream of simply living a quiet life in a farming village without too much to worry about was probably vastly more miraculous to people immediately after the British left; due to entire generations being worked and starved to death with the emaciated survivors forced to slowly pick-up the pieces. That video I had watched when I was around nine-years old of this ignorant White Christian guy insinuating Hindus were devil worshippers as a means to explain poverty will probably never know how much of a privileged ignoramus that he was. It was a miracle that India was even able to survive with its fertility rates essentially grounded to a halt under British imperialism.[14] India being free of that brutality had more to do with the skyrocketing fertility rates than most are aware of. It was a real struggle for existence and survival and undoubtedly left a crime rate that wasn’t normal; it could only slowly be reduced with each successive generation working to improve the quality of life for everyone else with personal goals likely aligning to slowly improve the community. Under Prime Minister Narendra Modi, far more could finally be done to make personal dreams, improved education rates, and community security into a sustainable reality without the Indian National Congress party playing identity politics. It’s only now that they’re emerging out of the hellhole that Britain forced upon them. Variations of these social issues and the struggle to overcome them undoubtedly hold true for all people who were harmed under European Imperial rule.

Finally, in fairness to Anglicanism, I believe that Anglican Priest and poet George Herbert from 1640 provides a very good quote from among his collections, from proverb 524 from his book, Outlandish Proverbs (1640), which states the following: “Living well is the best revenge”[15] which is a sentiment that I can agree with. I believe that British Hindus are uniquely poised to rejoice in this sentiment, if they wish and this last paragraph is primarily for them. I will not presume motives for why any person of Indian descent would swear allegiance to the Anglican monarchy of Great Britain and choose to become a British citizen, I’m sure the reasons are multi-faceted and each of us has our own individual values before anything else. I honestly don’t know much about contemporary British culture and I will not presume to understand your experience. What I want to ask any British Hindu who decides to read this (including any converts to Hinduism like White Hindus and any Dharmic faith tradition, not just fellow Indians) is the following: What is the point of staying faithful to a capricious, self-serving, self-absorbed, and pretentious Monarchy of inbreds who do not value your children’s lives enough to conduct a national inquiry into the Pakistani grooming gangs throughout the UK? What is the point of having to take the time to teach your daughters in your mandirs, gurdwaras, various Buddhist temples, and other Dharmic temples how to avoid Pakistani Muslim rapists who seek to groom them when your police force refuses to do their jobs to avoid looking “racist” and “Islamophobic” when your daughters’ lives are in danger?[16] You are among the wealthiest, well-educated, and hard-working diaspora in the United Kingdom and the economy of the UK is not going to recover due to the fact that – whether you want to accept it or not – a Monarchy can never be as competent as a Republic. They care more about people who are raping innocent young girls, predominately White girls, than they do about protecting your families from harm despite all the effort, service, compassion, and commitment you’re trying to show them. As the UK government create Islamophobia councils over your objections to how it could harm Free Speech[17], as they proclaim “Hindu Nationalism” is an equivalent threat to Islamic terrorism and Islamism[18], and as they blithely ignore your compassionate pleas to listen to you because they no longer regard you as worthy of human dignity and respect[19]; they now repeat the same double-standards of bigotry and show you only contempt. For those of you who descend from countries brutalized by British imperialism like India was, despite all your sacrifices and faith in your allegiance to the British Monarchy, they’re dehumanizing you just as how their ancestors dehumanized yours. This is who they were and have always really been. Self-serving, shameless, hateful, and never regarding your views as worthy of serious consideration. Well, guess what? You have options; you don’t have to live with these dangers of incompetent governance that refuses to solve problems, the credible fears that Pakistani grooming gangs will target your daughters, or any future “communal riots” like what mostly Muslim Indians do in India.

Make a serious effort to come live in the United States of America; come to the land where you’re almost certainly guaranteed to be making more money than in the UK, where your daughters don’t have to live in fear of Pakistani Muslim grooming gangs because the UK police and UK government don’t want to be called racist and would protect child predators over your daughters’ safety, where your religious councils don’t have to argue about Free Speech rights and you’re simply guaranteed it as an inalienable right from Thomas Jefferson’s arguments in the US Constitution, and where you don’t have to deal with an inbred, self-serving Monarch stripping you of all your accomplishments for the crime of being “Islamophobic” for making criticisms of Islam when Hindus and Christians are being attacked in Bangladesh. Or, if that is too much and you are part of an older generation, consider moving back to India and starting a business or working there. There are surely numerous ventures that many business-savvy Hindus can research and do; in my own studies, I had learned that tampons were an overlooked market that makes billions in revenue every year because women in families largely choose the same brand for all their lives; but I’m sure you can come-up with your own ideas. The point is, you have options, you’re probably paying among the highest in taxes in the UK, and they are taking you for granted. You should not have to struggle to be listened to by people who want to capitulate to Islamism. Even if the US and India aren’t personally appealing to you, you don’t have to go begging to be heard from a worthless Monarchy, you can live better and safer in other countries that should be willing to take such high-quality prospects to improve their own countries. Even a short distance away, you could just go to Ireland, a people who suffered under British colonial rule too, and perhaps find a way to make it work there. Speaking as a born and raised Indian American of the Hindu tradition, I’ve never been discriminated against for being Hindu in the US and I believe the discrimination against Indian Americans is far overblown. If you’re seriously thinking about it, then I recommend that you come to the US where Hindus can really be free to express ourselves and safe from Pakistani Muslim grooming gangs. Finally, allow me to leave you with my favorite verse from Chapter Four of the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad:

---

Chapter 6

1. Alden, Chris. “Britain’s Monarchy.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 16 May 2002, theguardian.com/world/2002/may/16/qanda.jubilee.
2. “Article 30 : Discrimination against Hindus by the Indian State.” HHR News, Hindu Human Rights, 16 Dec. 2013, hinduhumanrights.info/article-30-discrimination-against-hindus-by-the-indian-state/.
3. Batchelor, Tom. “14 Dead in Terror Attack on Market in India.” Express.Co.Uk, Express.co.uk, 5 Aug. 2016, http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/696937/India-terror-attack-shooting-Kokrajhar-market-Assam. For reference:
   

   “The massacre in the state of Assam was reportedly carried out by Bodo militants – a predominantly Christian armed separatist group which aims to create a separate homeland for the Bodo people. A group of at least three assailants opened fire at a market in Balajan Tiniali, around two miles from the town of Kokrajhar, possibly using grenades to kill shoppers among the stalls of fruit and vegetables. A police official said: “There were definitely three to four attackers. One of them has been neutralised.” Police shot one attacker dead in a gun battle that lasted 20 minutes and grenades, an AK-47 and other weapons were recovered from the area.” And further in the article: “Graphic images seen by Express.co.uk appeared to show the bloodied bodies of several of the dead. Assam, best known in the UK as a major tea producer, is a remote and underdeveloped state close to China and bordering Bhutan which has suffered from years of ethnic and tribal tensions. But it is the first such attack Assam that has taken place in broad daylight in a public place, despite a long-history of militant links, the Times of India reported. Violence in Assam has fallen in recent years as more militant groups have called ceasefires. However attacks by one community against another are not uncommon. Militants fighting for a Bodo homeland killed at least 70 people, most of them tea-plantation workers, in a series of attacks in Assam in late 2014. The Bodos are an indigenous group of around 1,000,000 people based in north-east India and majority Hindu, with around 10 per cent said to be Christian.”

4. Bengrut, Dheeraj. “New Evidence Suggests Harappan Civilisation Is 7,000 to 8,000 Years’ Old.” Hindustan Times, Hindustan Times, 22 Dec. 2023, hindustantimes.com/cities/pune-news/new-evidence-suggests-harappan-civilisation-is-7-000-to-8-000-years-old-101703182904001.html.
5. “Brooklyn Diocese Lists Names of 108 Priests Accused of Abuse.” AP News, AP News, 15 Feb. 2019, apnews.com/general-news-ae576a17118b4a45bdb0ba4943e880dc.
6. CANTON, NAOMI. “British Hindus Object to Islamophobia Council in UK, Call for Hatred against All Religions to Be Recognised.” The Times of India, TOI, 18 Feb. 2025, timesofindia.indiatimes.com/nri/british-hindus-object-to-islamophobia-council-in-uk-call-for-hatred-against-all-religions-to-be-recognised/articleshow/118337929.cms.
7. Canton, Naomi. “Two Leading British Indian Community Figures Rami Ranger and Anil Bhanot Stripped of Their Honours by the King.” The Times of India, TNN, 7 Dec. 2024, timesofindia.indiatimes.com/nri/other-news/two-leading-british-indian-community-figures-rami-ranger-and-anil-bhanot-stripped-of-their-honours-by-the-king/articleshow/116056259.cms.
8. Chhabhadiya, Neelam. “Sexual Grooming amongst Hindu Girls.” National Hindu Students Forum UK, NHSF (UK), 9 Nov. 2017, nhsf.org.uk/2017/11/sexual-grooming-amongst-hindu-girls/.
9. Clarke, Jennifer, and Tom Edgington. “What Is the House of Lords, How Does It Work and How Is It Changing?” BBC News, BBC, 5 Sept. 2024, bbc.com/news/uk-politics-63864428.
10. “CPS Authorises Two Further Charges against Axel Rudakubana.” CPS Authorises Two Further Charges against Axel Rudakubana | The Crown Prosecution Service, The Crown Prosecution Service, 29 Oct. 2024, cps.gov.uk/mersey-cheshire/news/authorises-two-further-charges-against-axel-rudakubana.
11. Davis, Mike. Late Victorian Holocausts: El Niño Famines and the Making of the Third World (Essential Mike Davis). Verso Books. Kindle Edition.
12. Davis, Mike. Chapter Five: Skeletons at the Feast (pgs. 141 – 177). Late Victorian Holocausts: El Niño Famines and the Making of the Third World (Essential Mike Davis). Verso Books. Kindle Edition.
13. Davis, Mike (2002-06-17). Late Victorian Holocausts: El Nino Famines and the Making of the Third World (p. 151-158). Verso Books. Kindle Edition.
14. Davis, Mike. Late Victorian Holocausts: El Niño Famines and the Making of the Third World (Essential Mike Davis) (pp. 164-165). Verso Books. Kindle Edition.
15. De, Abhishek. “US-Based Techie, IAF Official among 26 Killed in Attack. Who Were the Victims?” India Today, India Today, 23 Apr. 2025, indiatoday.in/india/story/pahalgam-terror-attack-kashmir-full-list-of-victims-released-2713232-2025-04-23. For reference:
    

    Among the deceased was a Navy officer, Lieutenant Vinay Narwal from Haryana’s Karnal, who got married only four days ago and was on a honeymoon with his wife. Wedding photo of Lt Vinay Narwal. “We were just having bhelpuri… and then he shot my husband. The gunman said my husband was not a Muslim and then shot him,” the officer’s wife said. IAF official Tage Hailyang and Intelligence Bureau officer Manish Ranjan were among those from the security forces who were shot dead in one of the most heinous attacks ever in the Valley. Manish Ranjan was a Central Intelligence Bureau officer from Bengal’s Purulia district. Ranjan, who was currently posted in Hyderabad, was on a family vacation in Jammu and Kashmir when he was shot dead by terrorists. While his family members were left unharmed, Ranjan was shot at point-blank range and succumbed to his injuries on the spot. Two businessmen from Maharashtra’s Pune, Santosh Jagdale and Kaustubh Ganbote, sustained gunshot wounds in the dastardly terrorist attack in Pahalgam on Tuesday and later succumbed. File photo of Santosh Jagdale Jagdale was part of a five-member group, which also included his wife Pragati, daughter Asavari, Kaustubh Ganbote and Sangita Ganbote, who travelled to Pahalgam on Tuesday. File photo of Kaustubh Ganbote “There were several tourists around, but the terrorists specifically targeted male tourists after asking whether they were Hindu or Muslim,” Jagdale’s daughter told PTI.

16. “Dhandhuka Murder: 3 Accused in Police Remand for 10 More Days.” The Indian Express, Express News Service, 7 Feb. 2022, web.archive.org/web/20220207041105/https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/ahmedabad/dhandhuka-murder-accused-police-remand-ahmedabad-7760401/.
17. Drake, Bruce, and Jacob Poushter. “In Views of Diversity, Many Europeans Are Less Positive than Americans.” Pew Research Center, Pew Research Center, 12 July 2016, pewresearch.org/short-reads/2016/07/12/in-views-of-diversity-many-europeans-are-less-positive-than-americans/.
18. Easwaran, Eknath. Brihadaranyaka Upanishad (p. 114). The Upanishads (Easwaran’s Classics of Indian Spirituality Book 2) (p. 114). Nilgiri Press. Kindle Edition.
19. Eddy, Sherwood. Chapter I: The People of India (pg. 25). “India Awakening: Eddy, Sherwood, 1871-1963: Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming.” Google Books, Princeton University. Presented by THE PHILADELPHIAN SOCIETY, 1912, https://books.googleusercontent.com/books/content?req=AKW5QacOjZvyVCZx7JC45zx-pVd69QF_LrzHGBABHlS0BgDJfJNrm__UimdC_tajRdFAHCb5Fc7s5prfnZA5v_2kgrvVs4xCvYzw1DKcpY23MeNI5J8FL0u6HNfHT7PxHtR030sgoOXaVi2VVNswh-gOIXN1b3AXji1BPyqoV7tUxYhdPLpdQuhOJN4ZANy_ogTdNlHu-y2H5b4AjSlU2JuiFYgTcUCL8Vq9uZmSqw0z2tmvo4YOh6dUG_d4PblBcVWG-3kj6edg PDF edition.
20. Evans, Rob, and David Pegg. “Revealed: Queen Lobbied for Change in Law to Hide Her Private Wealth.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 7 Feb. 2021, theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/07/revealed-queen-lobbied-for-change-in-law-to-hide-her-private-wealth.
21. G, Ananthakrishnan. “On PIL Seeking to Free Temples from Govt Control, SC Seeks More Material in Support.” The Indian Express, The Indian Express, 1 Sept. 2022, web.archive.org/web/20220902050836/https://indianexpress.com/article/india/on-pil-seeking-to-free-temples-from-govt-control-sc-seeks-more-material-in-support-8125936/. For reference:
    

    The court was hearing a PIL by advocate Ashwini Upadhyay, who urged it to declare that Hindus, Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs have rights to administer their religious places without state intervention — like similar rights Muslims, Christians and Parsis enjoy.Datar said Upadhyay’s plea had challenged Endowment Acts of various states and said that only Hindu endowments are regulated, while others are not. He said similar petitions had been raised in a pending plea by Dayananda Saraswati.Datar said the laws are a “direct violation of Article 26(b). I have a right to manage my temples.”Article 26 (b) deals with freedom to manage religious affairs, subject to public order, morality and health.

Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, also appearing for the petitioner, said thousands of temples had closed down due to lack of funds.

But the CJI called these “sweeping statements” and asked “where are the documents” to support the contention.

Sankaranarayanan said even if the issue of mismanagement is ignored, “the legal issue is much larger”.

As he referred to revenue from Tirupati, Justice Bhat said, “This could be a debate. After all, if it is a seat of the temple, it is by the people. So it has to go back to people in some form. So the town of Tirupati is benefitted. You have universities, a whole range of services…which have come up.”

But Sankaranarayanan said many of these are through private endowments.

“Maybe,” Justice Bhat said, “but then this is also through state enterprise. We have colleges even in Delhi [under Tirupati trust]; there are universities. What you mentioned could be different. I am not talking of that.”

Sankaranarayanan asked why only one religion is used for this.

Justice Bhat replied, “One understands where you are getting at. The point is the scale of offerings, maybe Tirupati or even in Shirdi, so colossal…. Are you suggesting that it should be outside the pale of regulation or it should only be with those centres?”

“We are saying that please have an even scale for everybody,” Sankaranayayanan said. “In a secular state, you have to distance the Church from the State. If the State is going to get proximate with one religion, there is a problem. We have to correct that.”

The senior counsel said he was not asking the court to legislate on the point but to strike down laws which violate Article 14.

Justice Bhat said, “That is one case. You will then be left with what…. The wealth that is generated, nobody is there to regulate…no law to account to. Nobody to audit this, and you will be [the] centres of power in your own way.”

He said, “You can’t compare (case of temples) with the other religions. They may have their own systems of checks and balances — I don’t know that — but the scale (in the case of temples) definitely is different.”

Sankaranarayan pointed out that similar issues had already been looked into by the court in the Padmanabha Swamy temple case when some PIL petitioners had raised the issue of mismanagement.

21. Gautam, Swati. “The Breast Tax That Wasn’t.” Kerala | The Breast Tax That Wasn’t – Telegraph India, Telegraph India, 13 Jan. 2021, telegraphindia.com/culture/style/the-breast-tax-that-wasnt/cid/1803638.
22. Greenslade, Roy. “The D-Notice System: A Typically British Fudge That Has Survived a Century.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 31 July 2015, theguardian.com/media/2015/jul/31/d-notice-system-state-media-press-freedom.
23. Hacker, Isaac Henry. A HUNDRED YEARS IN TRAVANCORE BY I. H. HACKER, PDF ed., THE LONDON MISSIONARY SOCIETY, pp. 27–27, https://ia600207.us.archive.org/20/items/100YearsInTravancore/100YearsInTravancore.pdf. Accessed 18 May 2025.
24. Hacker, Isaac Henry. “CHAPTER II: THE RINGELTAUBE PERIOD, 1806-1816.” A HUNDRED YEARS IN TRAVANCORE BY I. H. HACKER, PDF ed., THE LONDON MISSIONARY SOCIETY, pp. 27–27, https://ia600207.us.archive.org/20/items/100YearsInTravancore/100YearsInTravancore.pdf. Accessed 18 May 2025. For Reference on Page 27:
    

    In 1810 two events of importance to the infant mission occurred. They were the retirement of Colonel Macaulay and the appointment of Colonel Munro and the accession to the throne of Travancore of H. H. Lakshimi Bai. From this date began the strenuous rule of Colonel Munro. He seems to have taken a lively interest in Ringeltaube’s work, and to have had a great personal liking for the man himself. One of Ringeltaube’s early difficulties arose from the fact that his converts sought to use his influence with the Resident to gain special privileges for themselves, especially remission of State labour and taxes. But the missionary would have no converts on these terms, and actually went so far as to appoint one of his Christians to superintend the payment of Poll tax and services by his Christians. In 1814, however, when very severe famine reduced the people to a state of starvation, Ringeltaube appealed to the Resident and secured the exemption of his Christians from the operation of the Poll tax. His honesty, however, is shown in that he engaged to give to each of his Christians a certificate which was to be held to exempt him for one year only. With a sane man at the head of the mission such as Ringeltaube, there was not likely to be a rush of converts eager only to secure release from taxation. That such a rush did take place we have evidence in Ringeltaube’s own words. He says in a report to Colonel Munro in 1813, and speaking of 1810, ” There was a rush of five thousand Shanars upon me who had been long waiting for an opportunity to shake off the Poll tax and service attached to their caste, and which they hoped to effect by connecting themselves with me. All my solemn declarations to the contrary were of no avail, until that sovereign instructor, painful experience, convinced them of their mistake. As soon as the people were convinced that no temporal advantages were to be obtained, their zeal for the Protestant religion collapsed”; and yet in 1811 we find he baptized nearly four hundred persons, including children.

25. Hacker, Isaac Henry. “CHAPTER III: THE GROWTH OF FORTY YEARS, 1816-1856.” A HUNDRED YEARS IN TRAVANCORE BY I. H. HACKER, PDF ed., THE LONDON MISSIONARY SOCIETY, pp. 38–38, https://ia600207.us.archive.org/20/items/100YearsInTravancore/100YearsInTravancore.pdf. Accessed 18 May 2025. For Reference on Page 38:

The removal of Mr Mead to the new station at Neyoor seemed to arouse all the slumbering fires of persecution. Occasion was taken to object to the wearing of upper cloths by Christian women, but there is no doubt the better classes looked with great disfavour on the steady advancement of the Shanars and Pariah converts of the mission. From persecution of individuals they went further, and riotous bands attacked and burnt the houses and chapels of Christians. An attack was even made upon Mr Mead. Early in 1829 news of a plot to assassinate him came to Mr Mead’s ears, and he had to obtain military protection from Fort Udaigiri, and for a fort night was under the care of British troops. The official enquiry made by the Dewan and other officials into these riots was remarkable for the fact that the sufferers (the Shanar Christians) were treated as the culprits, and were chained, flogged, and imprisoned, and many of them sent to the central prison at Quilon. The enquiry was distinctly unfavourable to the Christians. The favourable order as to women’s dress made to Mr Mead in 1823 was cancelled, and Christians were ordered to respect the ancient caste customs, especially those inculcating submission to the higher castes. The proclamation is remarkable also for the first appearance of the order peculiar to Travancore that no place of worship should be erected without Government permission being first obtained. This order has within recent years been revived, and is now added to the statute book as a regular law. The persecution seems to have worn itself out and to have gradually subsided, Mr Mead counselling submission and diligently exercising himself in getting condemned Christians liberated.

26. Hacker, Isaac Henry. “CHAPTER IV: FROM JUBILEE TO CENTENARY, 1856-1906.” A HUNDRED YEARS IN TRAVANCORE BY I. H. HACKER, PDF ed., THE LONDON MISSIONARY SOCIETY, pp. 46-49, https://ia600207.us.archive.org/20/items/100YearsInTravancore/100YearsInTravancore.pdf. Accessed 18 May 2025. For reference:
    

    If the progress of the mission is to be gauged by the measure of opposition it arouses, then this decade was the most prosperous of all. It was in the beginning of this year that the third, last, and most determined persecution arose against the Christians, ostensibly on account of the wearing by men and women of the upper cloths which were held to mark off the higher castes. With this was mixed up also the demands for forced labour and Sunday work, all of which were resolutely refused by Christians. Much of the blame for the disturbances has been attached to the British Resident who was in office from 1840 to 1860.

General Cullen, after long residence in Travancore, regarded it as a retreat to be preserved from the intrusive changes of the Western world. The agitation against slavery had received no help from him, and he could hardly be interested because certain people wanted to wear more clothes than the climate demanded or their neighbours thought lawful. But the controversy was carried abroad. English newspapers in Madras took the matter up. Travancore manners and customs were dragged into the fierce light of publicity, and something had to be done. General Cullen’s most redoubtable antagonist was John Cox of Trevandrum, though Baylis of Neyoor and Whitehouse of Nagercoil were not less strenuous. Cases of individual cruelty were frequent, and armed mobs attacked and burned chapels and houses and terrorised peaceful communities. Cases were brought forward by the missionaries when Christians were actually beaten to death under the orders of minor officials, and all appeals for justice were refused or delayed. There is no doubt that the uprising of the higher classes was due to a desire to recover by force the authority over the lower castes, which they had lost by the abolition of slavery. If the civil laws of the realm denied them superiority, then they would insist on caste rule and old custom to keep in subjection those who attempted to rise. A curious, and to some an inexplicable argument for this oppression, was devised from the Queen’s Proclamation of Sovereignty which was issued at Delhi in 1858. In the course of that document, Her Majesty declared her determined neutrality in matters religious. Now to one who knows the Indian mind it is a familiar idea that to say that no one is ordered to become a Christian is equivalent to say that all are ordered not to become Christians. Further, no doubt exaggerated reports of the Mutiny reached Travancore, and the idea grew that the English power was on the wane. In the end of 1858 and beginning of 1859 the disturbances reached their height, and in Pareychaley, Neyoor, and Nagercoil districts, many chapels and schools were burnt, catechists were flogged, and Christians’ houses were pillaged. The Dewan himself proceeded to the district, and a number of native troops under Captain Daly were ordered down to ensure quiet. An appeal was now made by the missionaries to the British Government then represented in Madras by Sir Charles Trevelyan, brother-in-law of Lord Macaulay.

Sir Charles took very prompt action, and the Raja very reluctantly issued an order in 1859 allowing Shanar women to wear coarse upper cloths. The recent transfer of authority from the East India Company to the Queen is curiously reflected in one sentence of Sir Charles’ despatch. He says, “I should fail in respect to Her Majesty if I attempted to describe the feelings with which she must regard the use made against her own sex of the promises of protection so graciously accorded by her.” This was nearly fifty years ago. and yet to this day caste rule and common custom have so far prevailed that low-caste women still move about in the public streets in the style of dress repudiated by Christian women so long ago. The custom is not so common south of the Capital, but from Trevandrum northwards the only dress of the low-caste non-Christian women is the loincloth, and caste rule refuses them anything more. Just as these troubles came to an end came the Revs. James Duthie to Nagercoil and Samuel Mateer to Pareychaley, two names closely associated with the Travancore mission, one for over thirty years, and the other to this day.

27. “How Members Are Appointed – UK Parliament.” http://Www.Parliament.Uk, UK Parliament, http://www.parliament.uk/business/lords/whos-in-the-house-of-lords/members-and-their-roles/how-members-are-appointed/. Accessed 17 May 2025.
28. Humphries, Jonny. “Axel Rudakubana: ‘evil’ Southport Killer Jailed for Minimum 52 Years.” BBC News, BBC, 23 Jan. 2025, bbc.com/news/articles/c4gweeq1344o.
29. “India’s Relationship with the Third Gender.” UAB Institute for Human Rights Blog, The University of Alabama at Birmingham, 29 Oct. 2018, sites.uab.edu/humanrights/2018/10/29/indias-relationship-with-the-third-gender/.
30. “Israel/OPT: Amnesty International’s Research into Hamas-Led Attacks of 7 October 2023 and Treatment of Hostages.” Amnesty International, Amnesty International Public Statement, 2 Dec. 2024, amnesty.org/en/documents/mde15/8803/2024/en/.
31. Jain, Sagaree. “Theresa May ‘deeply Regrets’ Colonial Anti-LGBT Laws.” Human Rights Watch, Human Rights Watch Dispatches, 18 Apr. 2018, hrw.org/news/2018/04/18/theresa-may-deeply-regrets-colonial-anti-lgbt-laws.
32. Kurlantzick, Joshua. “Genocide in Burma.” Washington Monthly, 11 June 2016, washingtonmonthly.com/2016/06/11/genocide-in-burma/. For reference:

A genocide, according to the internationally accepted definition, is a campaign of violence conducted against one defined group, with the intention of eradicating them in whole or in part. Ibrahim shows that, starting in 2011 and 2012, the Rohingya in western Myanmar were not simply attacked by gangs or roving bands of thugs infuriated by reports (many untrue) of Rohingya raping Buddhist women or of fistfights between Rohingya and Buddhist Rakhine shopkeepers. Instead, the Rohingya faced what appears to be an organized campaign to target their homes, property, and lives. There may have been an additional incentive; as Myanmar began to open up to foreign investment in the 1990s, it became clear that Rakhine State was quite rich in minerals.

 

The exact genesis of the violence in western Myanmar in 2012 remains unclear. It may have started with Rohingya men raping and murdering a Rakhine girl, and then Rakhine Buddhist vigilantes murdering Rohingya bus travelers. Local police and army units stood around while the vigilantes pulled people off the bus and killed them, according to accounts of the attack by survivors.

After the rape and then the unrest in four townships in western Myanmar, Rakhine politicians and monks spent months vilifying the Rohingya and calling for violence against the minority group. In October 2012, four months after the bus incident, violence erupted throughout Rakhine State, with a clear pattern of attacks. Groups of Buddhists were armed with swords, machetes, guns, Molotov cocktails, and even earth-moving equipment to raze Rohingyas’ homes and businesses; they had stockpiled weapons for months. The attacks appeared strikingly similar across Rakhine State, clearly designed to change the ethnic composition of the region.

33. Kurungot, Avinash. “Kumbh Mela and Taxation: A Historical and Economic Perspective.” Taxscan, TAXSCAN, 14 Feb. 2025, taxscan.in/the-kumbh-mela-tax-a-price-paid-on-spirit-and-soul/489753/#.
34. “Legalized Hinduphobia – RTE Law, Hurts Hindus Part 1.” PGurus, 23 Sept. 2016, pgurus.com/diary-of-a-second-class-citizen-how-rte-has-hurt-hindu-educational-bodies-part-1/.
35. Lewis, Paul, and David Pegg. “How the British Royal Family Hides Its Wealth from Public Scrutiny.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 5 Apr. 2023, theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/apr/05/how-the-british-royal-family-hides-its-wealth-from-public-scrutiny.
36. Maizland, Lindsay, and Eleanor Albert. “What Forces Are Fueling Myanmar’s Rohingya Crisis?” Council on Foreign Relations, Council on Foreign Relations, 23 Jan. 2020, cfr.org/backgrounder/rohingya-crisis.
37. “Making Laws: House of Lords Stages – UK Parliament.” Https://Www.Parliament.Uk/Business/Lords/Work-of-the-House-of-Lords/Making-Laws/, UK Parliament, parliament.uk/business/lords/work-of-the-house-of-lords/making-laws/. Accessed 17 May 2025.
38. Monbiot, George. “Deny the British Empire’s Crimes? No, We Ignore Them | George Monbiot.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 23 Apr. 2012, theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/apr/23/british-empire-crimes-ignore-atrocities.
39. Mukul, Sushim. “Hindu Nationalism, Khalistani Extremism among New Threats: Leaked UK Govt Report.” India Today, India Today, 29 Jan. 2025, indiatoday.in/world/uk-news/story/uk-leaked-report-hindu-nationalism-pro-khalistani-extremism-threats-britain-islamist-left-wing-2671734-2025-01-29.
40. Mulligan, Gerard. “Genocide in the Ancient World.” World History Encyclopedia, https://www.worldhistory.org#organization, 27 Jan. 2013, worldhistory.org/article/485/genocide-in-the-ancient-world/.
41. “Myanmar: New Evidence Reveals Rohingya Armed Group Massacred Scores in Rakhine State.” Amnesty International, Amnesty International, 22 May 2018, amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2018/05/myanmar-new-evidence-reveals-rohingya-armed-group-massacred-scores-in-rakhine-state/.
42. Norton-Taylor, Richard, et al. “Britain Destroyed Records of Colonial Crimes.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 17 Apr. 2012, theguardian.com/uk/2012/apr/18/britain-destroyed-records-colonial-crimes?newsfeed=true.
43. “Outlandish Proverbs (1640) | Jack Horntip Collection Blog.” Edited by Jack Horntip. Translated by George Herbert, Outlandish Proverbs (1640), Jack Horntip Collection Blog, http://www.horntip.com/html/books_&_MSS/1600s/1640-68–1876_musarum_deliciae__wit_restored__and__wits_recreations_(HC)/1640_outlandish_proverbs.htm. Accessed 23 May 2025. For reference: Proverb 524. Living well is the best revenge.
44. Pandey, Jhimli Mukherjee. “Indus Era 8,000 Years Old, Not 5,500; Ended Because of Weaker Monsoon: India News.” The Times of India, TOI, 29 May 2016, timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Indus-era-8000-years-old-not-5500-ended-because-of-weaker-monsoon/articleshow/52485332.cms.
45. “Pilgrim Tax—India – Hansard – UK Parliament.” UK Parliament, Hansard, hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/1831-10-14/debates/a954d490-d962-4650-8d39-f1dd71072012/PilgrimTax%E2%80%94India. Accessed 18 May 2025.
46. “Poll Tax.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica, inc., http://www.britannica.com/topic/poll-tax. Accessed 22 May 2025. For reference: poll tax, in English history, a tax of a uniform amount levied on each individual, or “head.” Of the poll taxes in English history, the most famous was the one levied in 1380, a main cause of the Peasants’ Revolt of 1381, led by Wat Tyler. In the United States, most discussion of the poll tax has centred on its use as a mechanism of voter suppression directed originally at African Americans, especially in Southern states.
47. “Poll Tax.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 2 Apr. 2025, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poll_tax#Great_Britain. For reference:

Great Britain

The poll tax was essentially a lay subsidy, a tax on the movable property of most of the population, to help fund war. It had first been levied in 1275 and continued under different names until the 17th century. People were taxed a percentage of the assessed value of their movable goods. That percentage varied from year to year and place to place, and which goods could be taxed differed between urban and rural locations. Churchmen were exempt, as were the poor, workers in the Royal Mint, inhabitants of the Cinque Ports, tin workers in Cornwall and Devon, and those who lived in the Palatinate counties of Cheshire and Durham.

48. Power, Samantha. “A Problem from Hell”: America and the Age of Genocide. Reissue ed., Harper Perennial, 2007.
49. Prakash, A Surya. “Why Should the Government Run Hindu Temples?” The New Indian Express, The New Indian Express, 13 Jan. 2022, newindianexpress.com/opinions/2022/Jan/13/why-should-the-government-run-hindu-temples-2406605.html.
50. Preston, Heather. “Nigerian Bishop Demands Action after 200 Christians Murdered in Week of Violence – Premier Christian News: Headlines, Breaking News, Comment & Analysis.” Premier Christian News, Premier Christian News, 22 Apr. 2025, premierchristian.news/us/news/article/nigerian-bishop-demands-action-200-christians-murdered-week-of-violence.
51. Rajyaguru, Dipen. “The Hindu Council UK’s Concerns on the Recently Leaked Home Office Extremism Report.” Hindu Council UK, Hindu Council UK, 2 Feb. 2025, hinducounciluk.org/2025/02/02/the-hindu-council-uks-concerns-on-the-recently-leaked-home-office-report/.
52. “Swedish Court Convicts Quran Burner of Hate Crimes, Days after His Ally Was Killed | The Times of Israel.” Www.Timesofisrael.Com, Times of Israel, 3 Feb. 2025, www.timesofisrael.com/swedish-court-convicts-quran-burner-of-hate-crimes-days-after-his-ally-was-killed/.
53. Riches, Chris, and Paul Jeeves. “Southport Killer Axel Rudakubana Read Al-Qaeda Training Manual for Sick Tips.” Express.Co.Uk, Express.co.uk, 23 Jan. 2025, express.co.uk/news/uk/2004398/southport-killer-axel-rudakubana-al-qaeda.
54. Ruland, Sam, et al. “List: Names, Details of 301 Pa. Priest Sex Abuse Allegations in Catholic Dioceses.” York Daily Record, York Daily Record, 18 Aug. 2018, ydr.com/story/news/2018/08/14/pa-grand-jury-report-catholic-clergy-sexual-abuse-names-details-catholic-dioceses/948937002/.
55. Sahgal, Neha, et al. “Religion in India: Tolerance and Segregation.” Pew Research Center, Pew Research Center, 29 June 2021, pewresearch.org/religion/2021/06/29/religion-in-india-tolerance-and-segregation/#2cadb6b1e440f0bf00cd84d9a5e73d3a.
56. Schroth, Raymond A. “New Jersey Opinion; the Rise, and Fall and Rise Again of Willdurant, Truth-Seeker.” Https://Www.Nytimes.Com/1985/12/08/Nyregion/New-Jersey-Opinion-the-Rise-and-Fall-and-Rise-Again-of-Willdurant-Truth-Seeker.Html, The New York Times, 8 Dec. 1985, nytimes.com/1985/12/08/nyregion/new-jersey-opinion-the-rise-and-fall-and-rise-again-of-willdurant-truth-seeker.html.
57. Shankara, Adi. “Chapter 4.” Svetasvatara Upanishad with the Commentary of Sankaracarya, translated by Swami Gambhirananda, 4th ed., Advaita Ashrama, Kolkata, West Bengal, 2009, pp. 143–143. For Reference on page 143: 3. You are the woman, You are the man, You are the boy, (and) You are the girl, too. You are the old man tottering with a stick. Taking birth, You have Your faces everywhere. The meaning of the verse is clear.
58. Sharma, Yashraj. “What Is the Resistance Front, the Group Claiming the Deadly Kashmir Attack?” Al Jazeera, Al Jazeera, 24 Apr. 2025, aljazeera.com/news/2025/4/23/what-is-the-resistance-front-the-group-behind-the-deadly-kashmir-attack. For reference: New Delhi, India — Even as news of the deadliest attack on Indian-administered Kashmir’s tourists in decades filtered in on social media platforms and television screens, a message appeared on Telegram chats.The Resistance Front (TRF), a little-known armed group that emerged in the region in 2019, claimed responsibility for the attack in which at least 26 tourists were killed and more than a dozen others were injured on Tuesday.

61. Silver, Laura, et al. “Comparing Levels of Religious Nationalism around the World.” Pew Research Center, Pew Research Center, 28 Jan. 2025, pewresearch.org/global/2025/01/28/comparing-levels-of-religious-nationalism-around-the-world/.
62. “Slavery Abolition Act (1833) | An Act for the Abolition of Slavery throughout the British Colonies; for Promoting the Industry of the Manumitted Slaves; and for Compensating the Persons Hitherto Entitled to the Services of Such Slaves.  [28th August 1833.].” Legislation on the Slave Trade, pdavis.nl, http://www.pdavis.nl/Legis_07.htm. Accessed 20 May 2025. For reference:LXIII. And be it further enacted, That within the Meaning and for the Purposes of this Act every Person who for the Time being shall be in the lawful Administration of the Government of any of the said Colonies shall be taken to be the Governor thereof.LXIV. And be it further enacted, That nothing in this Act contained doth or shall extend to any of the Territories in the Possession of the East India Company, or to the Island of Ceylon, or to the Island of Saint Helena.
63. “SLAVERY ABOLITION ACT 1833.” Slavery Abolition Act, 1833, Section 64, Government of Ireland: electronic Irish Statute Book (eISB), http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1833/act/73/section/64/enacted/en/html. Accessed 20 May 2025.
64. Smith, Matthew. “British Attitudes to the British Empire.” YouGov, YouGov UK, 29 Jan. 2025, yougov.co.uk/society/articles/51483-british-attitudes-to-the-british-empire.
65. Srinivasan, Kaushik. “How a British Tax Scheme at the Jagannath Temple Became a Political Controversy.” Brown History, Brown History, 30 Mar. 2023, brownhistory.substack.com/p/how-a-british-tax-scheme-at-the-jagannath.
66. “Surat Al-Mā’Idah (the Table Spread) – سورة المائدة.” The Noble Qur’an, https://legacy.quran.com, legacy.quran.com/5/32. Accessed 30 Apr. 2025. For Reference:

Sahih International

Because of that, We decreed upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land – it is as if he had slain mankind entirely. And whoever saves one – it is as if he had saved mankind entirely. And our messengers had certainly come to them with clear proofs. Then indeed many of them, [even] after that, throughout the land, were transgressors.

 

Muhsin Khan

Because of that We ordained for the Children of Israel that if anyone killed a person not in retaliation of murder, or (and) to spread mischief in the land – it would be as if he killed all mankind, and if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of all mankind. And indeed, there came to them Our Messengers with clear proofs, evidences, and signs, even then after that many of them continued to exceed the limits (e.g. by doing oppression unjustly and exceeding beyond the limits set by Allah by committing the major sins) in the land!.

 

Pickthall

For that cause We decreed for the Children of Israel that whosoever killeth a human being for other than manslaughter or corruption in the earth, it shall be as if he had killed all mankind, and whoso saveth the life of one, it shall be as if he had saved the life of all mankind. Our messengers came unto them of old with clear proofs (of Allah’s Sovereignty), but afterwards lo! many of them became prodigals in the earth.

 

Yusuf Ali

On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person – unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land – it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came to them Our messengers with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land.

 

Shakir

For this reason did We prescribe to the children of Israel that whoever slays a soul, unless it be for manslaughter or for mischief in the land, it is as though he slew all men; and whoever keeps it alive, it is as though he kept alive all men; and certainly Our messengers came to them with clear arguments, but even after that many of them certainly act extravagantly in the land.

 

Dr. Ghali

On that account We prescribed for the Seeds (Or: sons) of Israel) that whoever kills a self-other than for (killing another) self or (Literally: nor) for corruption in the earth-then it will be as if he had killed mankind altogether; and whoever gives life to it, (i.e., a self) then it will be as if he had given life to mankind altogether. And indeed Our Messengers have already come to them with supreme evidences; thereafter surely many of them after that are indeed extravagant in the earth.

 

65. “Surat Al-Mā’Idah (the Table Spread) – سورة المائدة.” The Noble Qur’an, legacy.quran.com, legacy.quran.com/5/33. Accessed 30 Apr. 2025. For Reference:
    

    Sahih International

Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment,

 

Muhsin Khan

The recompense of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and do mischief in the land is only that they shall be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off on the opposite sides, or be exiled from the land. That is their disgrace in this world, and a great torment is theirs in the Hereafter.

 

Pickthall

The only reward of those who make war upon Allah and His messenger and strive after corruption in the land will be that they will be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet on alternate sides cut off, or will be expelled out of the land. Such will be their degradation in the world, and in the Hereafter theirs will be an awful doom;

 

Yusuf Ali

The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter;

 

Shakir

The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement,

 

Dr. Ghali

Surely the only recompense of (the ones) who war against Allah and His Messenger and (diligently) endeavor to do corruption in the earth, is that they should be (all) massacred or crucified, or that their hands and legs should be cut asunder alternately or that they should be exiled from the land. That is a disgrace for them in the present (life), (Literally: the lowly “life”, i.e., the life of this world) and in the Hereafter they will have a tremendous torment.

66. “The Crown Estate FAQs: Find Answers to Commonly Asked Questions.” The Crown Estate, The Crown Estate, 2025, thecrownestate.co.uk/about-us/faqs#whoownsthecrownestate.
67. “The Parliament Act 1949 (Updated November 2005).” http://Www.Parliament.Uk, HOUSE OF LORDS LIBRARY, http://www.parliament.uk/globalassets/documents/lords-library/hllparlact1949.pdf. Accessed 17 May 2025.For Reference:
    

    Doubts as to the validity of the Parliament Act 1949Doubts as to the validity of the 1949 Act have been expressed by eminent constitutional lawyers, particularly Sir William Wade, Professor Hood Phillips and Professor Zellick. The original suggestion came from H. W. R. Wade (later Sir William Wade) in ‘The basis of legal sovereignty’ (Cambridge Law Journal, 1955, pp. 172-197) which he further developed in successive editions of his book, Administrative Law. Thus he argues that Acts passed under the Parliament Acts are delegated and not primary legislation:

The sovereign legal power in the United Kingdom lies in the Queen in Parliament,

acting by Act of Parliament. An Act of Parliament requires the assent of the Queen,

the House of Lords, and the House of Commons, and the assent of each House is

given upon a simple majority of the votes of members present. This is the one and

only form of sovereign legislation, and there is no limit to its legal efficacy. It is true

that Acts may be passed without the assent of the House of Lords under the

procedures provided by the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949; but these confer

delegated, not sovereign, powers, for legislation passed under them owes its validity

to their superior authority, and this is the hallmark of delegated legislation. Sovereign

legislation owes its validity to no superior authority: the courts accept it in its own

right. Furthermore, no Act passed under the Parliament Acts can prolong the life of a

Parliament beyond five years, whereas the power of a sovereign Act is boundless.

 

(Sir William Wade, Administrative Law (8th ed., 2000), pages 25-26)

 

Hood Phillips took the same approach in Reform of the Constitution (1970, pages 91-94)

which he re-stated in the 7th edition of Constitutional and Administrative Law, basing his

reasoning on the principle of delegatus non potest delegare (a delegate cannot enlarge on his

own power). Thus he states:

 

It is a mistake to suppose that Parliament in 1911 “conferred” on the House of Lords

power to “delay” legislation for certain periods, and that “Parliament” in 1949

reduced this period. At common law the consent of the Lords was essential to the

passing of any legislation. In 1911 the power of the Lords to reject Bills was

restricted, but the upper House retained thereafter any power that was not expressly

abrogated. The Parliament Act 1911 may be said to have delegated a lawmaking

power to the Monarch and the Commons under certain specific conditions, and it is

submitted that it is not open to them as delegates to enlarge that power as they

purported to do in 1949. If this argument is sound in relation to a reduction of the

delaying period, it may also apply to a Bill to abolish the Second Chamber (the

existence of which is implied by the provisions of the Parliament Act 1911), and

possibly also to a Bill to alter the composition of the House of Lords. It may be that

the consent of the Lords would be necessary for the validity of any of these measures.

 

(O. Hood Phillips, Constitutional and Administrative Law (7th ed., 1987), page 149)

 

Hood Phillips further argues that:

 

The provision of section 3 of the Parliament Act 1911 that the Speaker’s certificate

shall be conclusive for all purposes, and shall not be questioned in any court of law,

certainly appears to raise a difficulty; but the House of Lords in its judicial capacity

has decided that where a statute states that an instrument such as an order or

certificate shall be “conclusive evidence” or words to that effect, this implies that the

instrument has been properly made, and does not extend to some purported order or

certificate which was beyond the power of the maker to make. This principle could

be applied to a certificate signed by the Speaker in misconstruction of the power

conferred on him by the Parliament Act 1911.

 

(ibid.)

In the 8th edition of Hood Phillips, 2001, written by Paul Jackson and Patricia Leopold, these

arguments are posited as follows:

Indeed, we may doubt whether the measure calling itself “the Parliament Act 1949” is

valid. The Parliament Act 1911, of course, received the consent of the House of

Lords; but the “Parliament Act 1949” – designed to reduce still further the period

during which the Lords might delay a public Bill other than a Money Bill – did not

receive the consent of the Lords but purported to be passed in accordance with the

provisions of the Parliament Act 1911. It therefore offended against the general

principle of logic and law that delegates (the Queen and Commons) cannot enlarge

the authority delegated to them. We are not, of course, arguing – as it is impossible in

English law to argue – that an Act of Parliament is invalid; what we are questioning is

whether the measure called “the Parliament Act 1949” bears the character of an Act of

Parliament. In other words we are contending that the Parliament Act 1911, as an

enabling Act, cannot itself be amended by subordinate legislation of the Queen and

Commons. …

It has been suggested that the argument raised in earlier editions has been undermined

by the decision of the House of Lords in Pepper v. Hart. It is true that an examination

of Hansard reveals the belief of government ministers that the procedures of the 1911

Act could be used to amend the 1911 Act itself. But it is equally clear that section 4

of the Act – which required legislation passed without the consent of the House of

Lords to be introduced by the special words of enactment which explicitly refer to the

1911 Act – was introduced by peers who did not wish to see its procedures used to

further reduce the powers of the House.

(O. Hood Phillips and Jackson on Constitutional and Administrative Law (8th ed.,

2001, by Paul Jackson and Patricia Leopold), page 80)

Graham Zellick also considers that the 1949 Act is delegated legislation:

 

The courts say they will apply whatever Parliament enacts; so although Parliament

may be able to alter its own structure – though even this is denied by some authorities

– it must do so in the manner prescribed at the time … But of course, Parliament can

authorise other bodies to legislate and more legislation today is the product of powers

delegated by Parliament than of Parliament itself. And this is what the Parliament Act

6

1911 does: it says that in certain circumstances a body consisting of Queen and

Commons alone may legislate, and may legislate on any topic, except to extend the

duration of Parliament (s. 2(1)), but only after the Lords have rejected the Bill. What

is then enacted is in fact a species of delegated legislation.

 

(Graham Zellick, ‘Is the Parliament Act ultra vires?’, New Law Journal, 1969,

page 716)

 

Consequently he argues that:

 

If the legislative body under the Act of 1911 is not the Queen-in-Parliament, but a

body distinct and subordinate, it can have no power to amend its constituent

instrument, the Act of 1911, unless that Act itself expressly provides for it, which it

does not. Amendment of the parent Act, then, can be accomplished only by the

delegating authority, the Queen-in-Parliament.

 

(ibid.)

 

Therefore he contends that the 1949 Act is invalid:

 

Any statute passed according to the provisions of the Act of 1911 is as good as any

statute receiving the assent of the Queen, Lords and Commons, unless it purports

either to amend the Act of 1911, or to extend the length of Parliament. Since the Act

of 1949 attempts to do the former, it has attempted the impossible, and is, therefore,

no statute at all, for it has exceeded the powers conferred on the law-making body.

 

(ibid.)

 

A similar approach was adopted by Michael Shrimpton in his Counsel’s Opinion on the

House of Lords Bill (8th April 1999) in which he advised a number of hereditary peers on

various constitutional questions arising from the House of Lords Bill 1998-99. Adopting

arguments similar to those advanced by Wade, Hood Phillips and Zellick he advised that the

1949 Act and the Acts passed under it were ultra vires the 1911 Act and therefore if the

House of Lords Bill were passed under the provisions of the Parliament Acts it also would be

ultra vires (paragraphs 3, 43-66).

 

Earlier, Peter Mirfield advanced similar arguments in relation to a House of Lords abolition

Bill using the Parliament Acts (‘Can the House of Lords lawfully be abolished?’, Law

Quarterly Review, 1979, pages 36-58).

 

68. “The Parliament Acts – UK Parliament.” Www.Parliament.Uk, UK Parliament, parliament.uk/about/how/laws/parliamentacts/. Accessed 17 May 2025.
69. Torrance, David. “The Relationship between Church and State in the United Kingdom – House of Commons Library.” UK Parliament, House of Commons Library, 14 Sept. 2023, commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8886/.
70. Tripathy, Manorama. “A Brief History of the Pilgrim Tax in Puri.” Magazines.Odisha.Gov.In, Odisha Review, Jan. 2014, magazines.odisha.gov.in/Orissareview/2014/Jan/engpdf/62-69.pdf. For Reference: Page 63

This was the state of affairs when the British East India Company took over the administration of Odisha in 1803. Colonel Harcourt occupied Puri on 18 September 1803 after which the Pilgrim Tax was immediately withdrawn. Lord Wellesley, the Governor General, was opposed to the collection of this tax. He underlined the need for maintaining cordial relationship with the priests of the temple and securing their good will. His enthusiasm for protecting and developing the Puri temple was widely appreciated. The Puri priests reciprocated by showering praise on Wellesley with a poetic eulogy composed in Sanskrit.8

In March 1805, Charles Groeme, the Collector of the Puri Sub-division was asked to submit a report on the affairs of the Jagannatha temple. In his report submitted on 10 June 1805, Groeme recommended the imposition of the Pilgrim Tax. Accordingly, Regulation XII was passed on 5 September 1805, and James Hunter appointed as the Collector of Pilgrim Tax at Puri. Collection of Pilgrim Tax took place at Athara Nala for pilgrims coming from the north and Loknath Ghat for those coming from the south. The system was formally inaugurated on 22 January 1806. On the first day, no tax was collected. As many as ninety-six pilgrims were allowed to enter the temple without any payment.On the second day, Rs.10/- was collected as Pilgrim Tax from five pilgrims at the rate of Rs.2/-per head. Gradually, the practice gained momentum and by the end of 30 April 1806, Rs.72,688 had been collected. The amount raised between 1806-07 and 1825-26 was Rs.21,97,680 giving an average annual revenue of Rs.1,09,884. 9

The tax-paying pilgrims were divided into four classes, laljatri, neemlaljatri, bhurrangjatri and panchatirthi. The first group was called laljatri because they were issued a red pass, which was considered as pass for the privileged classes. The laljatris coming from Athara Nala paid Rs.10/- for a pass and those arriving from Loknath Ghat paid Rs.6/-. They were allowed to visit the temple at any time when it was open, but they had to be attended by their Panda. The pass was valid for thirty days. In case they wanted to visit the temple without a Panda, they had to pay an additional amount of Rs.10/- to the Collector. The neemlaljatris paid Rs.5/- at Athara Nala and Rs.3/- at LoknathGhat. They were allowed to visit the temple for ten days during the Rath Yatra and for seven days on all other occasions, apparently accompanied by their Panda. The amount charged for bhurrangjatri and panchatirthi pilgrims was Rs.2/- at both Atharanala and Loknath Ghat. The bhurrangjatris were allowed to enter the temple for five days during Rath Yatra and four days in other seasons. The panchatirthis were not allowed into the temple, but permitted to worship from outside for a period extending up to sixteen days.10

71. “SECTION XII of Anusasana Parva of the Mahabharata.” Mahabharata, edited by John Bruno Hare, translated by Kisari Mohan Ganguli, Kindle ed., Sacred-Texts.Com, 2005, p. Location 614-Location 681, https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/15477/pg15477-images.html. Accessed 14 May 2025.
72. Windsor, Elizabeth Alexandra Mary. Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006, UK Home Office, 1 Oct. 2007, legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/1/data.pdf. For Reference: The Home Office of the UK states it was officially enacted on October 1st, 2007 on “https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2007/2490/made” which reads as follows: Commencement 2.—(1) Apart from the provisions mentioned in paragraph (2), the 2006 Act comes into force on 1st October 2007.
73. Wong, Tessa. “377: The British Colonial Law That Left an Anti-LGBTQ Legacy in Asia.” BBC News, BBC, 28 June 2021, bbc.com/news/world-asia-57606847.
74. “World Values Survey Association.” WVS Database, World Values Survey, 12 Sept. 2018, worldvaluessurvey.org/WVSDocumentationWV6.jsp. Initially published on 4/29/2014 but updates and corrections were made on 9/12/2018.

 

---

End Notes

[1] “Myanmar: New Evidence Reveals Rohingya Armed Group Massacred Scores in Rakhine State.” Amnesty International, Amnesty International, 22 May 2018, www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2018/05/myanmar-new-evidence-reveals-rohingya-armed-group-massacred-scores-in-rakhine-state/.

[2] “SLAVERY ABOLITION ACT 1833.” Slavery Abolition Act, 1833, Section 64, Government of Ireland: electronic Irish Statute Book (eISB), http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1833/act/73/section/64/enacted/en/html. Accessed 20 May 2025.

[3] “Slavery Abolition Act (1833) | An Act for the Abolition of Slavery throughout the British Colonies; for Promoting the Industry of the Manumitted Slaves; and for Compensating the Persons Hitherto Entitled to the Services of Such Slaves.  [28th August 1833.].” Legislation on the Slave Trade, pdavis.nl, http://www.pdavis.nl/Legis_07.htm. Accessed 20 May 2025.

[4] Kurlantzick, Joshua. “Genocide in Burma.” Washington Monthly, 11 June 2016, washingtonmonthly.com/2016/06/11/genocide-in-burma/.

[5]Pandey, Jhimli Mukherjee. “Indus Era 8,000 Years Old, Not 5,500; Ended Because of Weaker Monsoon: India News.” The Times of India, TOI, 29 May 2016, timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Indus-era-8000-years-old-not-5500-ended-because-of-weaker-monsoon/articleshow/52485332.cms.

[6] Bengrut, Dheeraj. “New Evidence Suggests Harappan Civilisation Is 7,000 to 8,000 Years’ Old.” Hindustan Times, Hindustan Times, 22 Dec. 2023, www.hindustantimes.com/cities/pune-news/new-evidence-suggests-harappan-civilisation-is-7-000-to-8-000-years-old-101703182904001.html.

[7] Norton-Taylor, Richard, et al. “Britain Destroyed Records of Colonial Crimes.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 17 Apr. 2012, www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/apr/18/britain-destroyed-records-colonial-crimes?newsfeed=true.

[8] Monbiot, George. “Deny the British Empire’s Crimes? No, We Ignore Them | George Monbiot.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 23 Apr. 2012, www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/apr/23/british-empire-crimes-ignore-atrocities.

[9] Smith, Matthew. “British Attitudes to the British Empire.” YouGov, YouGov UK, 29 Jan. 2025, yougov.co.uk/society/articles/51483-british-attitudes-to-the-british-empire.

[10] Smith, Matthew. “British Attitudes to the British Empire.” YouGov, YouGov UK, 29 Jan. 2025, yougov.co.uk/society/articles/51483-british-attitudes-to-the-british-empire.

[11] Monbiot, George. “Deny the British Empire’s Crimes? No, We Ignore Them | George Monbiot.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 23 Apr. 2012, www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/apr/23/british-empire-crimes-ignore-atrocities.

[12] Norton-Taylor, Richard, et al. “Britain Destroyed Records of Colonial Crimes.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 17 Apr. 2012, www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/apr/18/britain-destroyed-records-colonial-crimes?newsfeed=true.

[13] Schroth, Raymond A. “New Jersey Opinion; the Rise, and Fall and Rise Again of Willdurant, Truth-Seeker.” Https://Www.Nytimes.Com/1985/12/08/Nyregion/New-Jersey-Opinion-the-Rise-and-Fall-and-Rise-Again-of-Willdurant-Truth-Seeker.Html, The New York Times, 8 Dec. 1985, www.nytimes.com/1985/12/08/nyregion/new-jersey-opinion-the-rise-and-fall-and-rise-again-of-willdurant-truth-seeker.html.

[14] Davis, Mike. Late Victorian Holocausts: El Niño Famines and the Making of the Third World (Essential Mike Davis). Verso Books. Kindle Edition.

[15] “Outlandish Proverbs (1640) | Jack Horntip Collection Blog.” Edited by Jack Horntip. Translated by George Herbert, Outlandish Proverbs (1640), Jack Horntip Collection Blog, http://www.horntip.com/html/books_&_MSS/1600s/1640-68–1876_musarum_deliciae__wit_restored__and__wits_recreations_(HC)/1640_outlandish_proverbs.htm. Accessed 23 May 2025. For reference: Proverb 524.  Living well is the best revenge.

[16] Chhabhadiya, Neelam. “Sexual Grooming amongst Hindu Girls.” National Hindu Students Forum UK, NHSF (UK), 9 Nov. 2017, www.nhsf.org.uk/2017/11/sexual-grooming-amongst-hindu-girls/.

[17] CANTON, NAOMI. “British Hindus Object to Islamophobia Council in UK, Call for Hatred against All Religions to Be Recognised.” The Times of India, TOI, 18 Feb. 2025, timesofindia.indiatimes.com/nri/british-hindus-object-to-islamophobia-council-in-uk-call-for-hatred-against-all-religions-to-be-recognised/articleshow/118337929.cms.

[18] Mukul, Sushim. “Hindu Nationalism, Khalistani Extremism among New Threats: Leaked UK Govt Report.” India Today, India Today, 29 Jan. 2025, www.indiatoday.in/world/uk-news/story/uk-leaked-report-hindu-nationalism-pro-khalistani-extremism-threats-britain-islamist-left-wing-2671734-2025-01-29.

[19] Rajyaguru, Dipen. “The Hindu Council UK’s Concerns on the Recently Leaked Home Office Extremism Report.” Hindu Council UK, Hindu Council UK, 2 Feb. 2025, hinducounciluk.org/2025/02/02/the-hindu-council-uks-concerns-on-the-recently-leaked-home-office-report/.

[1] Davis, Mike. Late Victorian Holocausts: El Niño Famines and the Making of the Third World (Essential Mike Davis). Verso Books. Kindle Edition.

[2] Hacker, Isaac Henry. A HUNDRED YEARS IN TRAVANCORE BY I. H. HACKER, PDF ed., THE LONDON MISSIONARY SOCIETY, pp. 27–27, https://ia600207.us.archive.org/20/items/100YearsInTravancore/100YearsInTravancore.pdf. Accessed 18 May 2025.

[3] Hacker, Isaac Henry. A HUNDRED YEARS IN TRAVANCORE BY I. H. HACKER, PDF ed., THE LONDON MISSIONARY SOCIETY, pp. 27–27, https://ia600207.us.archive.org/20/items/100YearsInTravancore/100YearsInTravancore.pdf. Accessed 18 May 2025.

 

 

[1] Hacker, Isaac Henry. “CHAPTER II: THE RINGELTAUBE PERIOD, 1806-1816.” A HUNDRED YEARS IN TRAVANCORE BY I. H. HACKER, PDF ed., THE LONDON MISSIONARY SOCIETY, pp. 27–27, https://ia600207.us.archive.org/20/items/100YearsInTravancore/100YearsInTravancore.pdf. Accessed 18 May 2025.

[1] Gautam, Swati. “The Breast Tax That Wasn’t.” Kerala | The Breast Tax That Wasn’t – Telegraph India, Telegraph India, 13 Jan. 2021, www.telegraphindia.com/culture/style/the-breast-tax-that-wasnt/cid/1803638.

[2] Hacker, Isaac Henry. “CHAPTER III: THE GROWTH OF FORTY YEARS, 1816-1856.” A HUNDRED YEARS IN TRAVANCORE BY I. H. HACKER, PDF ed., THE LONDON MISSIONARY SOCIETY, pp. 38–38, https://ia600207.us.archive.org/20/items/100YearsInTravancore/100YearsInTravancore.pdf. Accessed 18 May 2025.

[3] Gautam, Swati. “The Breast Tax That Wasn’t.” Kerala | The Breast Tax That Wasn’t – Telegraph India, Telegraph India, 13 Jan. 2021, www.telegraphindia.com/culture/style/the-breast-tax-that-wasnt/cid/1803638.

[4] “Poll Tax.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica, inc., http://www.britannica.com/topic/poll-tax. Accessed 22 May 2025.

[5] “Poll Tax.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 2 Apr. 2025, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poll_tax#Great_Britain.

[1] Jain, Sagaree. “Theresa May ‘deeply Regrets’ Colonial Anti-LGBT Laws.” Human Rights Watch, Human Rights Watch Dispatches, 18 Apr. 2018, www.hrw.org/news/2018/04/18/theresa-may-deeply-regrets-colonial-anti-lgbt-laws.

[2] Windsor, Elizabeth Alexandra Mary. Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006, UK Home Office, 1 Oct. 2007, www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/1/data.pdf. For Reference: The Home Office of the UK states it was officially enacted on October 1st, 2007 on “https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2007/2490/made” which reads as follows: Commencement

2.—(1) Apart from the provisions mentioned in paragraph (2), the 2006 Act comes into force on 1st October 2007.

[3] Torrance, David. “The Relationship between Church and State in the United Kingdom – House of Commons Library.” UK Parliament, House of Commons Library, 14 Sept. 2023, commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8886/.

[4] “How Members Are Appointed – UK Parliament.” http://Www.Parliament.Uk, UK Parliament, http://www.parliament.uk/business/lords/whos-in-the-house-of-lords/members-and-their-roles/how-members-are-appointed/. Accessed 17 May 2025.

[5] Greenslade, Roy. “The D-Notice System: A Typically British Fudge That Has Survived a Century.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 31 July 2015, www.theguardian.com/media/2015/jul/31/d-notice-system-state-media-press-freedom.

[6] Alden, Chris. “Britain’s Monarchy.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 16 May 2002, www.theguardian.com/world/2002/may/16/qanda.jubilee.

[7] “The Crown Estate FAQs: Find Answers to Commonly Asked Questions.” The Crown Estate, The Crown Estate, 2025, www.thecrownestate.co.uk/about-us/faqs#whoownsthecrownestate.

[8] Evans, Rob, and David Pegg. “Revealed: Queen Lobbied for Change in Law to Hide Her Private Wealth.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 7 Feb. 2021, www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/07/revealed-queen-lobbied-for-change-in-law-to-hide-her-private-wealth.

[9] Evans, Rob, and David Pegg. “Revealed: Queen Lobbied for Change in Law to Hide Her Private Wealth.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 7 Feb. 2021, www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/07/revealed-queen-lobbied-for-change-in-law-to-hide-her-private-wealth.

[10] Lewis, Paul, and David Pegg. “How the British Royal Family Hides Its Wealth from Public Scrutiny.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 5 Apr. 2023, www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/apr/05/how-the-british-royal-family-hides-its-wealth-from-public-scrutiny.

[11] “The Parliament Act 1949 (Updated November 2005).” http://Www.Parliament.Uk, HOUSE OF LORDS LIBRARY, http://www.parliament.uk/globalassets/documents/lords-library/hllparlact1949.pdf. Accessed 17 May 2025.

[12] “Making Laws: House of Lords Stages – UK Parliament.” Https://Www.Parliament.Uk/Business/Lords/Work-of-the-House-of-Lords/Making-Laws/, UK Parliament, www.parliament.uk/business/lords/work-of-the-house-of-lords/making-laws/. Accessed 17 May 2025.

[13] Clarke, Jennifer, and Tom Edgington. “What Is the House of Lords, How Does It Work and How Is It Changing?” BBC News, BBC, 5 Sept. 2024, www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-63864428.

[14] “Making Laws: House of Lords Stages – UK Parliament.” Https://Www.Parliament.Uk/Business/Lords/Work-of-the-House-of-Lords/Making-Laws/, UK Parliament, www.parliament.uk/business/lords/work-of-the-house-of-lords/making-laws/. Accessed 17 May 2025.

[15] “The Parliament Acts – UK Parliament.” Www.Parliament.Uk, UK Parliament, www.parliament.uk/about/how/laws/parliamentacts/. Accessed 17 May 2025.

[16] Prakash, A Surya. “Why Should the Government Run Hindu Temples?” The New Indian Express, The New Indian Express, 13 Jan. 2022, www.newindianexpress.com/opinions/2022/Jan/13/why-should-the-government-run-hindu-temples-2406605.html.

[17] G, Ananthakrishnan. “On PIL Seeking to Free Temples from Govt Control, SC Seeks More Material in Support.” The Indian Express, The Indian Express, 1 Sept. 2022, web.archive.org/web/20220902050836/https://indianexpress.com/article/india/on-pil-seeking-to-free-temples-from-govt-control-sc-seeks-more-material-in-support-8125936/.

[18] “Article 30 : Discrimination against Hindus by the Indian State.” HHR News, Hindu Human Rights, 16 Dec. 2013, www.hinduhumanrights.info/article-30-discrimination-against-hindus-by-the-indian-state/.

[19] “Legalized Hinduphobia – RTE Law, Hurts Hindus Part 1.” PGurus, 23 Sept. 2016, www.pgurus.com/diary-of-a-second-class-citizen-how-rte-has-hurt-hindu-educational-bodies-part-1/.

[20] Kurungot, Avinash. “Kumbh Mela and Taxation: A Historical and Economic Perspective.” Taxscan, TAXSCAN, 14 Feb. 2025, www.taxscan.in/the-kumbh-mela-tax-a-price-paid-on-spirit-and-soul/489753/#.

[21] “Pilgrim Tax—India – Hansard – UK Parliament.” UK Parliament, Hansard, hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/1831-10-14/debates/a954d490-d962-4650-8d39-f1dd71072012/PilgrimTax%E2%80%94India. Accessed 18 May 2025.

[22] 1.       Tripathy, Manorama. “A Brief History of the Pilgrim Tax in Puri.” Magazines.Odisha.Gov.In, Odisha Review, Jan. 2014, magazines.odisha.gov.in/Orissareview/2014/Jan/engpdf/62-69.pdf. For Reference: Page 63

[23] Srinivasan, Kaushik. “How a British Tax Scheme at the Jagannath Temple Became a Political Controversy.” Brown History, Brown History, 30 Mar. 2023, brownhistory.substack.com/p/how-a-british-tax-scheme-at-the-jagannath.

 

[1] Pandey, Jhimli Mukherjee. “Indus Era 8,000 Years Old, Not 5,500; Ended Because of Weaker Monsoon: India News.” The Times of India, TOI, 29 May 2016, timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Indus-era-8000-years-old-not-5500-ended-because-of-weaker-monsoon/articleshow/52485332.cms.

[2] Bengrut, Dheeraj. “New Evidence Suggests Harappan Civilisation Is 7,000 to 8,000 Years’ Old.” Hindustan Times, Hindustan Times, 22 Dec. 2023, www.hindustantimes.com/cities/pune-news/new-evidence-suggests-harappan-civilisation-is-7-000-to-8-000-years-old-101703182904001.html.

 

[1] Shankara, Adi. “Chapter 4.” Svetasvatara Upanishad with the Commentary of Sankaracarya, translated by Swami Gambhirananda, 4th ed., Advaita Ashrama, Kolkata, West Bengal, 2009, pp. 143–143. For Reference on page 143: 3. You are the woman, You are the man, You are the boy, (and) You are the girl, too. You are the old man tottering with a stick. Taking birth, You have Your faces everywhere. The meaning of the verse is clear.

 

[1] Eddy, Sherwood. Chapter I: The People of India (pg. 25). “India Awakening: Eddy, Sherwood, 1871-1963: Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming.” Google Books, Princeton University. Presented by THE PHILADELPHIAN SOCIETY, 1912, https://books.googleusercontent.com/books/content?req=AKW5QacOjZvyVCZx7JC45zx-pVd69QF_LrzHGBABHlS0BgDJfJNrm__UimdC_tajRdFAHCb5Fc7s5prfnZA5v_2kgrvVs4xCvYzw1DKcpY23MeNI5J8FL0u6HNfHT7PxHtR030sgoOXaVi2VVNswh-gOIXN1b3AXji1BPyqoV7tUxYhdPLpdQuhOJN4ZANy_ogTdNlHu-y2H5b4AjSlU2JuiFYgTcUCL8Vq9uZmSqw0z2tmvo4YOh6dUG_d4PblBcVWG-3kj6edg PDF edition.

[2] Davis, Mike. Late Victorian Holocausts: El Niño Famines and the Making of the Third World (Essential Mike Davis). Verso Books. Kindle Edition.

 

[1] Power, Samantha. “A Problem from Hell”: America and the Age of Genocide. Reissue ed., Harper Perennial, 2007.

[2] Mulligan, Gerard. “Genocide in the Ancient World.” World History Encyclopedia, https://www.worldhistory.org#organization, 27 Jan. 2013, www.worldhistory.org/article/485/genocide-in-the-ancient-world/.

[3] Davis, Mike. Late Victorian Holocausts: El Niño Famines and the Making of the Third World (Essential Mike Davis). Verso Books. Kindle Edition.

 

[1] Davis, Mike. Late Victorian Holocausts: El Niño Famines and the Making of the Third World (Essential Mike Davis). Verso Books. Kindle Edition.

[2] Davis, Mike. Late Victorian Holocausts: El Niño Famines and the Making of the Third World (Essential Mike Davis). Verso Books. Kindle Edition.

[3] Davis, Mike. Chapter Five: Skeletons at the Feast (pgs. 141 – 177). Late Victorian Holocausts: El Niño Famines and the Making of the Third World (Essential Mike Davis). Verso Books. Kindle Edition.

[4] Davis, Mike. Chapter Five: Skeletons at the Feast (pgs. 141 – 177). Late Victorian Holocausts: El Niño Famines and the Making of the Third World (Essential Mike Davis). Verso Books. Kindle Edition.

[5] Davis, Mike. Chapter Five: Skeletons at the Feast (pgs. 141 – 177). Late Victorian Holocausts: El Niño Famines and the Making of the Third World (Essential Mike Davis). Verso Books. Kindle Edition.

[6] Davis, Mike. Late Victorian Holocausts: El Niño Famines and the Making of the Third World (Essential Mike Davis). Verso Books. Kindle Edition.

[7] Davis, Mike. Chapter Five: Skeletons at the Feast (pgs. 141 – 177). Late Victorian Holocausts: El Niño Famines and the Making of the Third World (Essential Mike Davis). Verso Books. Kindle Edition.

[8] Davis, Mike. Chapter Five: Skeletons at the Feast (pgs. 141 – 177). Late Victorian Holocausts: El Niño Famines and the Making of the Third World (Essential Mike Davis). Verso Books. Kindle Edition.

[9] Davis, Mike. Chapter Five: Skeletons at the Feast (pgs. 141 – 177). Late Victorian Holocausts: El Niño Famines and the Making of the Third World (Essential Mike Davis). Verso Books. Kindle Edition.

[10] Davis, Mike. Chapter Five: Skeletons at the Feast (pgs. 141 – 177). Late Victorian Holocausts: El Niño Famines and the Making of the Third World (Essential Mike Davis). Verso Books. Kindle Edition.

 

 

[1] Drake, Bruce, and Jacob Poushter. “In Views of Diversity, Many Europeans Are Less Positive than Americans.” Pew Research Center, Pew Research Center, 12 July 2016, www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2016/07/12/in-views-of-diversity-many-europeans-are-less-positive-than-americans/.

[2] “World Values Survey Association.” WVS Database, World Values Survey, 12 Sept. 2018, www.worldvaluessurvey.org/WVSDocumentationWV6.jsp. Initially published on 4/29/2014 but updates and corrections were made on 9/12/2018.

[3] Drake, Bruce, and Jacob Poushter. “In Views of Diversity, Many Europeans Are Less Positive than Americans.” Pew Research Center, Pew Research Center, 12 July 2016, www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2016/07/12/in-views-of-diversity-many-europeans-are-less-positive-than-americans/.

[4] Sahgal, Neha, et al. “Religion in India: Tolerance and Segregation.” Pew Research Center, Pew Research Center, 29 June 2021, www.pewresearch.org/religion/2021/06/29/religion-in-india-tolerance-and-segregation/#2cadb6b1e440f0bf00cd84d9a5e73d3a.

[5] “Dhandhuka Murder: 3 Accused in Police Remand for 10 More Days.” The Indian Express, Express News Service, 7 Feb. 2022, web.archive.org/web/20220207041105/https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/ahmedabad/dhandhuka-murder-accused-police-remand-ahmedabad-7760401/.

[6] Reuters. “Swedish Court Convicts Quran Burner of Hate Crimes, Days after His Ally Was Killed | The Times of Israel.” Www.Timesofisrael.Com, Times of Israel, 3 Feb. 2025, www.timesofisrael.com/swedish-court-convicts-quran-burner-of-hate-crimes-days-after-his-ally-was-killed/.

 

 

[1] Batchelor, Tom. “14 Dead in Terror Attack on Market in India.” Express.Co.Uk, Express.co.uk, 5 Aug. 2016, http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/696937/India-terror-attack-shooting-Kokrajhar-market-Assam.

[2] Ruland, Sam, et al. “List: Names, Details of 301 Pa. Priest Sex Abuse Allegations in Catholic Dioceses.” York Daily Record, York Daily Record, 18 Aug. 2018, www.ydr.com/story/news/2018/08/14/pa-grand-jury-report-catholic-clergy-sexual-abuse-names-details-catholic-dioceses/948937002/.

[3] “Brooklyn Diocese Lists Names of 108 Priests Accused of Abuse.” AP News, AP News, 15 Feb. 2019, apnews.com/general-news-ae576a17118b4a45bdb0ba4943e880dc.

[4] “Myanmar: New Evidence Reveals Rohingya Armed Group Massacred Scores in Rakhine State.” Amnesty International, Amnesty International, 22 May 2018, www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2018/05/myanmar-new-evidence-reveals-rohingya-armed-group-massacred-scores-in-rakhine-state/.

[5] “Israel/OPT: Amnesty International’s Research into Hamas-Led Attacks of 7 October 2023 and Treatment of Hostages.” Amnesty International, Amnesty International Public Statement, 2 Dec. 2024, www.amnesty.org/en/documents/mde15/8803/2024/en/.

[6] “CPS Authorises Two Further Charges against Axel Rudakubana.” CPS Authorises Two Further Charges against Axel Rudakubana | The Crown Prosecution Service, The Crown Prosecution Service, 29 Oct. 2024, www.cps.gov.uk/mersey-cheshire/news/authorises-two-further-charges-against-axel-rudakubana.

[7] Riches, Chris, and Paul Jeeves. “Southport Killer Axel Rudakubana Read Al-Qaeda Training Manual for Sick Tips.” Express.Co.Uk, Express.co.uk, 23 Jan. 2025, www.express.co.uk/news/uk/2004398/southport-killer-axel-rudakubana-al-qaeda.

[8] Humphries, Jonny. “Axel Rudakubana: ‘evil’ Southport Killer Jailed for Minimum 52 Years.” BBC News, BBC, 23 Jan. 2025, www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4gweeq1344o.

[9] De, Abhishek. “US-Based Techie, IAF Official among 26 Killed in Attack. Who Were the Victims?” India Today, India Today, 23 Apr. 2025, www.indiatoday.in/india/story/pahalgam-terror-attack-kashmir-full-list-of-victims-released-2713232-2025-04-23.

[10] Preston, Heather. “Nigerian Bishop Demands Action after 200 Christians Murdered in Week of Violence – Premier Christian News: Headlines, Breaking News, Comment & Analysis.” Premier Christian News, Premier Christian News, 22 Apr. 2025, premierchristian.news/us/news/article/nigerian-bishop-demands-action-200-christians-murdered-week-of-violence.

[11] Sharma, Yashraj. “What Is the Resistance Front, the Group Claiming the Deadly Kashmir Attack?” Al Jazeera, Al Jazeera, 24 Apr. 2025, www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/4/23/what-is-the-resistance-front-the-group-behind-the-deadly-kashmir-attack.