What if the 1947 Indian Partition Had Never Happened?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 08:35:35 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Discussion
  History
  Alternative History (Moderator: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee)
  What if the 1947 Indian Partition Had Never Happened?
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: What if the 1947 Indian Partition Had Never Happened?  (Read 8535 times)
Frodo
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,511
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: January 17, 2010, 11:01:41 PM »
« edited: December 18, 2013, 09:29:57 PM by Frodo »

How differently would the trajectory of history on the Indian sub-continent to the present day be if British India had remained whole after independence?  

Here's a map of British India at the eve of independence in 1947:

Logged
Bo
Rochambeau
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,986
Israel


Political Matrix
E: -5.23, S: -2.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: January 17, 2010, 11:22:01 PM »

Muslims in India would be fighting to have their own state, either though political/diplomatic means, through military means, or both. They would refuse to live under Hindu rule, kind of like how the Palestinian Arabs refuse to live under Jewish/Israeli rule.
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,207
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: January 18, 2010, 06:58:55 AM »

Hard to say. India as a whole might conceivably have evolved an ultra-federal structure. Which might conceivably have been a very good thing. Or alternatively, division might have happened at a later date - though Bangladesh would presumably be part of India.
Flight of most Hindus and just about all Sikhs from what is now Pakistan would probably have occurred anyways, over a longer period and with somewhat less bloodshed. The Indian side of the old Punjab might not be as cleansed of Muslims as it is now, though.
Logged
Sbane
sbane
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,303


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: January 18, 2010, 01:18:20 PM »

Yeah by 1947 the die was cast. Partition was bound to happen sooner or later. Maybe if the British hadn't tried to divide the country on religious lines in previous years........
Logged
Beet
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,806


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: January 18, 2010, 01:23:13 PM »

India would be the world's most populous nation by a significant margin.
Logged
Sbane
sbane
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,303


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: January 18, 2010, 04:11:46 PM »

India would be the world's most populous nation by a significant margin.

And I bet the Muslims would be having kids at a higher rate than they are having currently in Pakistan and Bangladesh, so the population would have been likely even higher than what it is now.
Logged
phk
phknrocket1k
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,906


Political Matrix
E: 1.42, S: -1.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: January 18, 2010, 04:19:47 PM »
« Edited: January 18, 2010, 04:23:43 PM by phknrocket1k »

Communal tensions would be pretty high.

It's just that one should think a country that is conceivably 33% Muslim would alarm Hindus and Sikhs quite a bit. Similar to how even some liberal Whites would be "concerned" if the country went from 12% to 33% Black.
Logged
Sbane
sbane
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,303


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: January 18, 2010, 04:50:06 PM »

Communal tensions would be pretty high.

It's just that one should think a country that is conceivably 33% Muslim would alarm Hindus and Sikhs quite a bit. Similar to how even some liberal Whites would be "concerned" if the country went from 12% to 33% Black.

Yup, which is why I say that partition was a foregone conclusion by 1947.
Logged
Хahar 🤔
Xahar
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,731
Bangladesh


Political Matrix
E: -6.77, S: 0.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: January 18, 2010, 05:35:06 PM »

Bengal would have been a far better place.
Logged
Sbane
sbane
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,303


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: January 18, 2010, 07:44:20 PM »

Bengal would have been a far better place.

Why?

I think Pakistan would have left India even if partition didn't happen in 1947, but I am not sure about Bangladesh.
Logged
Хahar 🤔
Xahar
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,731
Bangladesh


Political Matrix
E: -6.77, S: 0.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: January 19, 2010, 09:28:37 PM »

Bengal would have been a far better place.

Why?

I think Pakistan would have left India even if partition didn't happen in 1947, but I am not sure about Bangladesh.

Precisely. There was no reason for it to be divided. Bengal is not the Punjab.
Logged
JoeBrayson
Rookie
**
Posts: 51
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: March 06, 2010, 03:32:04 PM »

There would certainly be civil war with the various religious/nationalist factions fighting for control and this conflict could still be continuing in the present day. India was (and still is) a huge melting pot of cultures which would mean that conflict would've been inevitable. In the west muslim groups would be fighting for a homeland, whilst in the east national movements in Burma & Bhutan would be fighting for self determination. This is why partition was necessary and due to this, today India is relatively peaceful except for Kashmir.
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,207
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: March 06, 2010, 03:52:22 PM »

Keeping Burma within India would indeed have been impossible after 1945.
But nobody* wanted that and nobody except the British had ever considered Burma part of India in the first place, so...

*Except the Indian community in Burma of course. Whose existence was, of course, a consequence of the British insistence on administering Burma as a province of India.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.036 seconds with 14 queries.