Ok, I’m Indian. My family moved to America when I was quite little, and it’s been about 8 years since then. I have a pretty big friend group, and a few of them are big history buffs. One of the history buffs and I got into an argument (it’s been so long and become so complicated that I have no idea how it started) about whether “British Raj” was a country. The friend thinks it was, while I think it was simply a time period in Indian history. After I told him this, he said “no it wasn’t, India wasn’t even a country till the British left India and British Raj was over (in 1947). Now I’m not a big history guy, so all of my information comes from my Indian family members, meaning a lot of it may be biased due to nation pride. However I’m fairly certain India has been a country since long before then. My friend claims it wasn’t because the different states weren’t unified, and it was an empire, subcontinent, or region, but never a real country until 1947. All of the other history buffs support him and so the rest of the friend group is basically on his side because they trust his historical knowledge more than mine (which is fair). However the friend has also said that the British made India better, which is just objectively wrong as they stole all of its natural resources and left it more divided than ever before, which makes me trust his reasoning even less. So, people of reddit, who is right?
Submitted April 17, 2020 at 05:34AM by atla795 https://ift.tt/2KaJdrz
