The diaspora of Hindu colonists were quite unlike the later European ways of colonization. The European colonizer started as a trader too but he acted often with tacit or indeed explicit support of his government. He was accompanied by private militias or the state’s military forces to impose trade practices that would lead to international outrage if practiced today. He never intended to make these countries his own but was there mainly to exploit the resources for the benefit of his homeland. Thus, his strategy was to first gain control over the market and people, impose his laws that would allow him to drain resources away, and finally change the lifestyle and culture of the peoples. The latter was their gift to the colonized: a Eurocentric education, judicial, bureaucratic and political systems. As a ‘mother country’ India too experienced this strategy of colonization herself.
Unlike the European colonizers, Indians went out of their country without any sort of backing of any of the Indian states. These ancient Indians often left their country to settle abroad, not to make fortune and run back to the motherland. It was diaspora in the truest sense. As a result, they ‘Indianized’ the local cultures first in order to make life more acceptable as outsiders. This led to penetration of the Indian civilization, culture, and languages in South East Asia. This took place so peacefully that the indigenous population never felt that their country had been taken over. They enriched the native populations by introducing the art of writing, high degree of culture, improved methods of cultivation, improved handicrafts and introduced new industries. These early waves of migrations laid the foundations for later control and dominion over these regions by Indian kings.
Cultural integration and societal disintegration as consequences
The mark that ancient Indians left on south and south-east Asia can be gauged by scratching the surface of these states. Behind edifices of western European culture reflected in the education, bureaucratic, and political systems, lies cultural and societal linkages to a much earlier epoch. The local peoples of these countries have adopted religions that emanated out of India – Buddhism and Hinduism and later Islam. Their cultural practices are rooted in ancient Indian customs. The wonders of Angkor Vat, the Hindus of Bali, and the temples of Borobodur mark more tangible evidences of this influence. Integrating into the culture, influencing lifestyles and ethnic practices weaved strands of Indian-ness into the islands and nations.
In direct strategic and tactical contrast, the British many centuries later, re-colonised south-east Asia. In Malay speaking countries - Malaysia, Thailand, Bali, Sumatra, and parts of Philippines, the British in the last century, brought about and oragnised migration along religious and racial lines. For instance, they took Tamil ‘coolies’ to build the railway systems, tall and powerful Sikhs as policemen, and the Chinese as administrators. They did not change the Malays' - the indigenous locals - way of life and they did not really bother the British, but their ethnic minority management was such that each group hated the other: the Tamils hated the Sikh cops who hated the Chinese who paid their wages. The consequence now is that the Chinese are very powerful businessmen; the Sikhs still are middle class while a large proportion of Tamils are working and under-class. Many of the Malays have in the meantime converted to Islam and Malaysia and Indonesia are now Islamic states.
No comments:
Post a Comment