Gandhi convinced Indians to reject the British institutions and materials in a peaceful manner, this trend was eventually recognized as "Swadeshi." Because of these endeavors Gandhi got uncontrollably famous, when the first Prime Minister of the free India—gave his popular Independence speech in 1947, he labelled Gandhi as "The Father of our Nation who… held up high the
The Main idea of this legislation is that it strictly forbade American settlers from expanding west of the Appalachian Mountains. In the text it states, “any lands, not having been ceded to or purchased by us, are reserved to the said Indians” (Source 1). This is after the colonists had already occupied almost the entirety of the land east of the Appalachians and were eager for more territory. Therefore, they were enraged by this new prescribed policy and the untimely halt of expansion. The source is very biased in that it only takes into consideration the wellbeing Great Britain.
Sedition Act 1948 was enacted by British colonial government in 1948 to combat communists. Communists are the person who support communism which is an organisation or society that government owns everything including land, oil, factories and etc. They do not have any private property. This Act was amended through an Emergency Ordinance 1971, not long after the incident of May 1969 also known as May 13 incident, the darkest history after independence of Malaysia. This Sedition Act is to criminalise any questioning on citizenship (Part 3), national language (Article 152), special position of Malays and the rights of other races (Article 153) and the Rulers’ sovereignty (Article 181) of the Federal Constitution.
The 3rd estate revolted against the king and formed a National Assembly to be heard and represented. Another important political cause of the Democratic Revolutions can be found in Document #1. The document was created by Thomas Jefferson, who was a colonial leader. The document was written in Philadelphia of July 4, 1776 for the British government, colonist, and congress to say why they want their independence. The British colonist wanted their freedom and didn’t want to be in control of the king any longer.
The history of India was being constructed in such a way by the British that the imposition of British rule would become a necessity so as to bring in law and order. William Henry Sleeman , Resident of Lucknow( 1849-1856) wrote “Journey through the kingdom of Oudh” in 1851 at the request of Dalhousie in order to get information about the actual conditions prevailing in Awadh. Sleeman on his part confirmed the inability of the Nawab to govern Awadh. Sleeman found the aristocracy of Lucknow as being responsible for alienating the Nawab from the people.The basic theme that emerges from the story is that of detachment of India’s ruling classes which helped the British officials in taking over Awadh without opposition.The story depicts intolerance in the form that when their country needed them the most, both of them were busy playing chess without even realizing what was happening in their country and by the end of the story they both ended up in an argument against each other regarding the game chess and drove out their own swords and killed each other. This act of their 's show how intolerant they were towards their own families and country.
Therefore, they started to oppress rebellion. They arrested and killed thousands of people. From now on, British rule lost its legitimacy in India as a result of violence and crime. Every Indian was talking about free and independent India. British rule invited Gandhi to discuss the future of India but they were still insisting on a rule under British Empire.
CRUSHING OPPOSITION Amir Abdul Rahman Khan did not allow any power inside the country to stand against the reforms he launched as needed to implement the plans he had to create national unity and bring about unification. Whether Pashtoon, Uzbeck, Hazaras or Barikzai, Dorani. Ghilzai, Mullah. landholder, landowner, feudal, clergy, or an ordinary citizen were all being treated the same. Any person or force attempting to oppose the Amir and his plans would be eliminated through intoxication, blinding, hanging, throwing into wells, burning with boiling oil, decapitation, exiling, burying alive, and firing squad.
The ease, with which the Indian state accedes, makes it easier for the enigmatic groups to resort to the courts and shout that they are offended. And the courts have to admit their complaints by virtue of the principles couched under sections 153 A, 292 and 295 A of the Indian Penal Code 1872 (IPC), giving a license to anyone to complain that his or her sentiments are hurt. This is what I would like to call a clash of predicates. How should freedom of speech and expression work in our country? It should be noticed that no book or other media, ever demolished a mosque or entered a railway station or hotel and killed people; no book ignited and blasted crowded places and looked away from communal violence.
As most of the policies in India are still depending on the research done during the colonial times, the same can be said of the National Tribal Policy 2006. Reading through the draft, makes it very evident that the drafting committee has not involved any of the genuine tribal representatives in the policy framing, i.e. information from the Gram Sabhas in the fifth schedule areas have failed to cascade upstream through the Tribal Advisory Council (TAC), and the same about the 6th schedule areas through the autonomous councils to the Ministry of Tribal Affairs. The draft policy clearly shows that the ministry have failed in understanding the concept of tribe and have just stuck on to the layman’s stereotype notion of the word tribe or tribal, a trivially touching upon the idea of scheduling and de-scheduling tribes and the questions on the present form of reservation excluding certain tribal communities in favour of another. The approach of the ministry has been of a kind suggesting that the tribals as a group are incapable of making their own decisions and hence the govt.
Chick (2002) has reported that a strong-willed separatist leader, Syed Ali Shah Geelani has rejected India's Kashmir plan as he called this effort by the Indian government to gain favour in the international community. The main important points that the package included is the suggestion to the state to straight away set free all the young people confined for stone-throwing, reopen schools, make R5 lakh ex-gratia reparation to the families of the 108 individuals who lost their lives in the protests, redeploy security forces and decreasing their bunkers and check posts (Tikku, 2010). Tikku (2010) added that Kashmiri people dislike the habitation of security people or central paramilitary forces thus the re-deployment of personnel is an important