#Thread | A recent thread attempting to exonerate #Churchill of war crimes in India and Bengal has caused a stir.
It seems to skirt the blame on Japan or enemies of the empire and even attempts to make absurd & sensationalist remarks to gain traction.
@AndreasKoureas_
1/16
It seems to skirt the blame on Japan or enemies of the empire and even attempts to make absurd & sensationalist remarks to gain traction.
@AndreasKoureas_
1/16
While reading the thread, it was tough to find responsible quotes that could counter the widely held opinion that it was Churchill, his policies, and his 'hate' for India that led to millions dying in Bengal in the 1940s.
2/16
2/16
It's easy to take the "As someone who has read through thousands of pages of primary sources" route, but a better alternative would be to first critique Churchill's Secret War and spend time and effort in doing that.
3/16
3/16
Perhaps reading another book like "Hungry Bengal" by Janam Mukherjee would be a good learning lesson before tweeting a thread with absurdities.
4/16
4/16
It's rather sensible to read about agriculture in colonial India, revenue policies in Bengal, and a lot that was going on before October 16, 1942.
5/16
5/16
The administration was informed a couple of months before the cyclone that they were faced with a rice famine in Bengal. Further, the cyclone passed 'over the Districts of Midnapore and Twenty-Four Parganas.'
6/16
6/16
Is Japanese presence and defeating Churchill's Britain in #Burma a defense of 'Scorched Earth' policy? Or denial policies?
Image- Revolutionaries: The Other Story of How India Won Its Freedom by @sanjeevsanyal
7/16
Image- Revolutionaries: The Other Story of How India Won Its Freedom by @sanjeevsanyal
7/16
The allied war brought troops into Bengal leading to government procurement of food grains, hoarding, etc. - all for Churchill's wars and as a consequence of his leadership.
Would that be your argument? @AndreasKoureas_
8/16
Would that be your argument? @AndreasKoureas_
8/16
It's rather telling that in this battle against Japan who sided with Hitler, Churchill was fine with millions dying of starvation. By saying that he was uninformed, you actually tell us about his priorities.
9/16
9/16
Since August 1942, when famine was voiced out, it took a year before the 'Statesman' Churchill learnt of 'severe famine.' How many had died by then?
10/16
10/16
Further, the allies capture Burma about two years later. Where did the aid come from? And if that could be done then, it could have been done earlier too. A case of too little too late?!?
11/16
11/16
Researchers who have scored through many thousands of pages and literature may explore it well.
12/16
12/16
Bring a bit of science into your analysis.
A study by Vimal Mishra @vmishraiit analyzed a soil moisture database cover the years 1870 to 2016 to reconstruct agricultural droughts.
13/16
A study by Vimal Mishra @vmishraiit analyzed a soil moisture database cover the years 1870 to 2016 to reconstruct agricultural droughts.
13/16
The 1943 famine was the only one of the six major famines from 1870-2016 that was not soil-moisture related. The onus of which lies on Prime Minister Churchill.
14/16
14/16
Perhaps, if Birla's interaction with Churchill could be used as an argument for the latter's 'actual' view on India, a million deaths due to scorched earth policy stand as a larger testimony to what he stood for!
15/16
15/16
In conclusion, a detailed critique of Janam Mukherjee's book would be much more informative than a thread full of absurdities.
16/16
16/16
Loading suggestions...