Comments by "agon noga" (@agonnoga6100) on "Manu Pillai on India's Maharajas and their 'alliances' with the British Raj" video.

There was never any country called India prior to East India Company/British occupation of several kingdoms in South Asia many of whom were already under centuries of foreign occupation. The word India, is a Greek word for the region we call Pakistan today. The word Hindu, is originally a Persian name not for a religion, but for people living around Sindhu river whom we call Pakistanis today. Only little more than 50% of today's India was British India. The rest, were 565 autonomous princely kingdoms who weren't parts of British India. Nehru's Kashmir; Tata, Godrej, Patel, Gandhi's Gujarat; Birla, Modi, Dalmia etc Rajputana aka Rajasthan were not parts of British India but people from these places were dominating both the politics and economy of British India while not being subjects of the Raj as their kings were allies of the British. That legacy, continues till this day. Without the support of the kings of Rajputana, East India Company would have been thrown out of India in 1857. It is only after this event that we see rise of many Marwari Gujarati and Parsi business houses in British India. Congress, a political party was created by the British to help them rule India not to lead India to independence which is why people like Gandhi Patel Nehru Birla were opposed to independence of India as their land wasn't under British occupation but people like Bose, Bhagat Singh were dead against the British as their lands were under British occupation. Our history books are completely silent about these facts as Congress, which took over from the British, has whitewashed Indian history and covered up uncomfortable parts of the history of the Indian subcontinent. Our history books are also completely silent about 600 years of Chinese and Burmese occupation of Kamrupa aka North East before the British got it back from Burma in circa 1800 AD. We have to question everything we have been taught and history needs to be rewritten.
6
It is Kshatriyas who have been helping foreigners invade and defeat India and Indians. Read real history.
6
@joyid ask yourself, how can ethnic Chinese or Burmese become "Indian tribal" when India is a Greek name of today's Pakistan?? This is what happens when history of a place is erased due to nefarious reasons.
4
@vakarthi4 First of all I am from Assam. Indo Aryan Bengalis, are not "Melaccha" or tribals. There used to be a very advanced Vedic civilization close to today's Bengalis stretching from today's Bengal Bangladesh Kamrupa aka north east to Srivijaya which is today's Malaysia Indonesia. Today's Thai culture language etc have ties with Bengali culture language. Kamboj aka Cambodia, Champa aka Vietnam used to be part of Vedic civilization. What is known as Mekong river is Meigonghe in Chinese which is Ma Gange/Ma Gonga in Sanskrit/Bengali. Capital of Brunei, Bandar Seri Bagawan is actually Bandar Shri Bhagwan in Sanskrit. The French archeologists are digging out an entire city in Cambodia known as Mahendra Parvata. There was no Tibetan invasion of North East. If Melacchas were Tibetan then all historical artefacts and evidences would be Tibetan and not Bengali. Tai are Dai Chinese from Yunnan in China. The same Dai Chinese invaded Vedic/Hindu South East Asia from 1000 AD changing the demography and thereby the culture of the region from Hindu to Sino. Yes Ahoms, Thai, Meitei, Vietnamese are all Dai Chinese from Yunnan. They are not natives of India or South East Asia. The British invaded and occupied Burma from circa 1820s to 1942 and with the defeat of Japanese for few more years from 1944/45. So, British occupation of Burma was for more than 100 years which is how lakhs of Indians from all over the subcontinent settled in large numbers in Burma prior to their forced eviction from Burma in the 1960s by the Burmese government. None of this is covered in our history books or discussed in the mainstream media.
2
@vakarthi4 Dai are a Chinese ethnicity from Yunnan which is very much a part of China. So denying people from China as Chinese is simply ridiculous or desperation to hide an uncomfortable truth. Dai Chinese are from southern China and they have nothing to do with Hinduism. The ones who settled in India, adopted Hinduism and local Bengali culture and customs. Same thing happened in South East Asia where they adopted Buddhism followed by Islam due to the influence of the Arab traders. This is how Brunei, Indonesia and Malaysia became muslim from Hindu/Buddhist. There is no evidence of any Melaccha people in North East. The most ancient archeological anthropological cultural historical evidences in north east are all Bengali followed by Chinese, Afghan, Turkic and Burmese. Ex CM Tarun Gogoi is an ethnic Chinese Ex CM Sarbananda Sonowal is ethnic Burmese Current CM Himanta Biswa Sarma is UP Bihari.
2
@vakarthi4 Dali Kingdom was conquered by the Mongols in 1253 which is what drove so many of Dai Chinese to these sparsely populated Kamrupa. Like I said before, Chinese history is several thousand years old. And the size of the kingdom rose and fell assimilating several ethnicities who are all of the mongoloid race. But, Dai/Tai people are by no way related to Indic/Vedic civilization. Similarly, Biharis have a long history just like the Tamils. Both are separate ethnicities but part of the same Indic civilisation. Can we say Dai or Tai people are from Indic civilisation?? Can we say Turkic, Pathan or British as part of Indic civilisation?? Buddhism has been followed across East and South East Asia. But that does not mean they were parts of Indic civilisation. What will you call a Dai invasion of Kamrupa as if not Chinese invasion?? Shan State of Burma, borders Yunnan in China. The Ahoms came Yunnan and not Shan State in Burma which like North East India and rest of South East Asia were incorporated into the Dai Chinese kingdoms. The original natives of Burma were not mongoloid but Indic. Thai, Ahom, Meitei and vast majority of the mongoloid people of South East Asia are Dai Chinese that's why by blood they are similar. But by culture different as they adopted local culture and got assimilated with the local population. But, Dai people are originally from Yunnan which is a part of China and people of Yunnan consider themselves Chinese unlike the Tibetans. North East was also invaded and occupied by the Burmese for several centuries. It is from the Burmese that the British freed Assam and integrated with India after several centuries of foreign occupation. No history book ever mentions this. PS: You have provided a short link without any explanation of the history or origin of Melaccha dynasty.
2
@vakarthi4 People of Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam and Burma don't consider themselves Chinese infact many of these nations have hostile relations with China and have even went to war several times. But, this doesn't changes the fact that they originated in China. This is from Wikipedia about the Bai aka Dai people and their closeness to Han Chinese contrary to what you have claimed. "The Bai people are one of the most sinicized minorities in China. Although technically one of China's 55 official ethnic groups, it is difficult to qualify them as a distinct ethnic minority. As early as the 1940s, some rejected their non-Chinese origin and preferred to identify themselves solely as Chinese. The Bai ethnic label was not widely used or known until 1958. Today the Bai people accept minority status for pragmatic reasons but are culturally nearly indistinguishable from Han Chinese." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bai_people But, have those who have come from parts which are in China and Burma, consider themselves as Indians?? Why do you think there's such unrest in north east starting from 1947 when Phizo said he wouldn't accept black rule over white rule?? Why China and Burma have been helping insurgencies in north east right from 1947? From where does so many insurgent groups get the unlimited flow of money and advanced weaponry which even one of the strongest professional army created by the British finds it difficult to counter?
2
@vakarthi4 China, like India is a collection of ethnicities. The various Indianised ethnicities form the Indian indentity. Similarly, Han doesn't means China or Sino, but one of the 55 sinic ethnicities of China. You are mixing things up. True, but, even after settling in India for centuries and adopting the local culture and customs, hasn't stopped clashes and tensions with the natives till this day which is the root cause of insurgencies in north east. Similarly, the Turkic settlers also face similar problems in the places they have settled in India, like Hyderabad, Kashmir and parts of UP MP. Something similar can also be said about the Parsis who have adopted local culture and customs, but have done everything to keep themselves separate from the natives although they don't have violent relations with the natives.
2
@vakarthi4 What you are saying is similar to Hindu Hindi Hindustan identity being conflated with the idea of India. Only a tiny minority, tick all three boxes Similarly, Sino includes, Mongolian, Manchurian and various other ethnicities apart from Han who are the dominant community just like Hindi is the dominant community in India. But, Indian identity also includes Tamil, Odiya, Marathi, Gujarati, Kashmiri, Malayali, kannad, Bengali, Punjabi, East Indian Catholics, Assamese, Manipuri, Rajasthani, Maithili apart from 100 other identities.
2
@mudra5114 the Rajputs also allied with the Mughals which is why few Mughals could capture and create today's India.
2
@zil1832 you need history lessons from a "Kraut" who has never been to India and gets information from a book written by a person who has also never been to India?? No wonder, you understood nothing from that video! 😂😂😂😂😂😂
1
@zil1832 knucklehead can repeat only the same thing over and over again.
1
@zil1832 these things have been mentioned in that kraut's video?? Did you even watch that video let alone understanding anything mentioned in the video??
1
@vakarthi4 Han Chinese are one of the several Chinese ethnicities, but Dai Chinese are as Chinese as a Tamil or Bihari is indian although both speak different languages and culturally are very different. Tibetans are very different from Chinese who are known to invade or migrate to other nations. The Tibetans never went out of their kingdom neither allowed anyone to enter the kingdom. Which is why it is often referred to as the forbidden Kingdom where outsiders could be put to death for venturing into the country uninvited.
1
@vakarthi4 today, Yunnan is in China and even if we take Shan State as the home of Dai people it is Burma. So, it still remains a Chinese or Burmese invasion. And if you read my original comment, I have mentioned that initially north east was invaded by Chinese followed by the Burmese. Dai people are not natives of Shan State as these were populated with Indic people just like Thailand. Demography of North East India and South East Asia changed after the Dai invasion from Yunnan province which is in China today and whose natives consider themselves as Chinese. PS: Talking about Thailand, there's a Thai movie called Ong Bak 2. The story of this movie is of ancient Thailand where culture customs names depicted are all indian. Even the name of one city in Thailand in that movie is Ayodhya!!
1
@vakarthi4 👍
1