(edit title) Job discrimination based on heritage? Hard time getting callbacks Options

[Twiceshy]

The Indian GDP per capita was in steady decline from 1600 through to approx 1780, the decline

And East India Co exploitation started around 1612. This is more in favour of my argument than yours.

It is fair to say that the British didn't manage to turn it around until the latter part towards indian independence.

It is fair to say that the British goal was not to turn Indian local GDP around. Rather suck out any values that were there, with no major concern for sustainability

Let's not forget also that during the 1800's European industrialisation also had a significant price and wage pressure on the indian economy, which would have happened ... (show full quote)

Let's not forget also that during the 1800's European industrialisation also had a significant price and wage pressure on the indian economy, which would have happened even without the British being there ... (hide full quote)

So how much did destroyed Indian textile mills and outlawing the processing of their own raw materials put pressure on the local Indian industry? Industrialisation in the UK without colonisation of India would have generated masses of wealth for India due to cotton and other raw materials. Much as your tea-addiction led to massive wealth for China (which of course led to that other British atrocity, the opium wars. A phony war to turn Chinese into junkies to generate a demand for that one product you had to offer them). This is all pretty elementary stuff. Even your homeboy David Lean will give you the basics re. this.
Also, Gandhi, that you try to lean on further down for other rhetorical purposes, will also school you about the seriousness of this exploitation. You can't have your cake and eat it too, you know. IE, you just debunked one of your own claims.

The atrocities that took place are indeed shameful acts, though they didn't impact the economy as you try to imply. The economy was in steady decline long before they took ... (show full quote)

The atrocities that took place are indeed shameful acts, though they didn't impact the economy as you try to imply. The economy was in steady decline long before they took place. As for Zamindar system! That was just a longer name for something that already existed. ... (hide full quote)

I don't believe you care about these shameful acts at all, but that is beside the point. The Zamindar system was institutionalised due to your help. Of course there have always been loansharks (duh). Also cute that you don't believe that murder and imprisonment of hundreds of thousands would affect GDP. Especially if the prison terms were dealt out to the educated classes. I feel like I should lecture you about post Pol Pot Cambodia now... but I think you understand what I am driving at.

The British position was for a united India (initially even Ghandi supported that position), it was the Indians themselves that wanted to split the country, which was later su ... (show full quote)

The British position was for a united India (initially even Ghandi supported that position), it was the Indians themselves that wanted to split the country, which was later supported by Ghandi. Even today there are many Hindu ideologues that refer to Ghandi as the "Father of Pakistan" and not the father of India! ... (hide full quote)

There is no relevant character in Indian history named Ghandi. If you mean Gandhi... that's something else. Relying on Gandhi as anything else than a figure-head, is a mistake. Nehru, Jinnah, Bose etc were where it was at. Besides, they were just stuck with doing the best of trying to clean up YOUR mess, having to tie together a country based on borders YOUR greed had acquired. IE, if you mess it up, the ramifications are your responsibility.

Also, "The British Position" in this matter is completely irrelevant. Mountbatten the prat was eminently unsuitable to set Indian policy. He was not suited for anything else than posing in a uniform. I am quite grateful for the suitable ending he had (although RIP the poor innocent boy that got killed alongside him).

one can lay the blame for the series of natural disasters and the Japanese invasion and air-strikes that were the main contributing factors to the 1943 famine!

How convenient. Japanese air-strikes on the Indian peninsula were few and far between. I've been to the memorials myself. Not a large bunch of names there. The Japanese land invasion that got turned back at the cricket ground in Imphal did (naturally) not affect food production very much, considering that they only held a sliver of Indian land. And finally, if you decide to defend your interest in India on Indian territory, the responsibility is yours.

The British themselves lost almost 300 ships sunk by the axis powers

Did you add the dinghys to this calculation? Absolute nonsense.

trying to ship food to those in the famine struck region.

OK. See this as your challenge. Where was this food coming from? Where is the list of the 300 ships?

[djmarko]

Exactly.If there is choice between a highly qualified non-Swede vs average qualified Swede.The job will still go to the Swede.It is just how it is. Safe.Only smart management ... (show full quote)

Exactly.
If there is choice between a highly qualified non-Swede vs average qualified Swede.
The job will still go to the Swede.

It is just how it is. Safe.
Only smart management know that the highly qualified will be the beneficial one.
Look at Spotify. ... (hide full quote)

very correct! for big multi-national companies in Sweden, you have to hire the best and qualified! i have first hand experience what happened to the old Sony Ericsson manufacturers, Silicon valley took them out with their diverse R&D employees!