@vivek2_@bakaitbaaz@theskindoctor13 1-Uska liya population bihar wali chaiye bihar ma Brahmin + bhumihar 3.66+2.86 ha jo ki 6%+ha or rajput 4% baniya 2.5 % most important yadav 14% ha bihar ma
2-In up rajput 10% Brahmin+bhumihar 13% baniya 3 to 4% ha and yadav 8-9% ha
Up ma rajput yadav vote ko balance karta ha
(Long post, but it settles the matter)
One needs to be absoloute thankless or ignorant to call Maharaja Gulab Singh a traitor. A man who kept on serving Lahore Durbar even after losing 2 brothers and a nephew.
Otoh, Rani Jindan Did Not Go to War to Liberate Punjab from British, she did it to Eliminate Khalsa and consolidate her own Power. Gulab Singh, who saw this clearly and refused to participate in what he recognized as a political manipulation, was the more honest actor in this entire episode. Let's look at the sequence of events:
1. The logic of Jindan Kaur and Lal Singh was purely cynical: if the Khalsa was defeated, the British would restore the court to dominance with Dalip Singh under their protection. If the army somehow won, the kingdom could be expanded. Eitherway, Jindan Kaur and Lal Singh expected to benefit, what they most wanted to eliminate was the army panchayat system that had made the Khalsa ungovernable and had already killed Hira Singh and destabilized every ruler since Ranjit Singh's death. Rani Jindan fought this battle to consolidate her position in the khalsa darbar, which perpetually went against the treaty signed by Maharaja Ranjit Singh with British to never cross Sutlej.
2. At core, this war was a calculated gamble by a regent and her paramour to use the British army as a mechanism to destroy the power of their own army. The Khalsa soldiers who died at those battles were, in a very real sense, sacrificed by the very court leadership this argument asks us to defend.
Why will Gulab singh fight a battle that literally made no sense?
3. Also, the clearest proof that Gulab Singh was not seen as a traitor by the Sikh establishment is that after Sobraon, Lahore Durbar, Rani Jindan and the court unanimously turned to Maharaja Gulab Singh to negotiate the peace terms with the British.
To his credit, Maharaja Gulab Singh even refused to negotiate any personal deal with the British as he was acting as an envoy for Dalip Singh. Gulab Singh successfully negotiated the peace on behalf of the Sikh Empire, secured British withdrawal from Lahore, and protected young Maharaja Duleep Singh's throne. But instead of rewarding him, Lahore Darbar adopted a hostile attitude towards Raja Gulab Singh. He was dismissed from the post of Wazir and Lal Singh was again made the Wazir, and seeing the success of Raja Gulab Singh in conducting negotiations, one more unsuccessful attempt to murder him was made.
4. In reality, Kashmir territories did not belong to the Khalsa army in any personal sense. Critically, it was Wazir Lal Singh not Gulab Singh who handed this land to the British. Lal Singh, the PM of Lahore, was among those who disliked Gulab Singh immensely and in order to kill various birds with one stone, suggested to the British that in lieu of the war indemnity, all the hill territories of the Sikh kingdom including Jammu and Kashmir be given to them. Lal Singh treacherously surrendered the Dogra homelands including the jagirs of the entire Dogra family to the British specifically to harm Gulab Singh. Gulab Singh then used his own resources to buy back this ancestral territory. The real act of treachery was by Lal Singh, not Gulab Singh.
5. Far from being labelled a traitor by the British, British accounts actually acknowledged Gulab Singh's consistent loyalty to the Lahore Darbar during the period when the Dogra family suffered multiple assassinations. Even Governor-General Hardinge, in defending the Treaty of Amritsar to critics, noted that Gulab Singh had personally suffered at the hands of Lahore's factions. Hardinge faced criticism for rewarding Gulab Singh. Hardinge defended the move by claiming Gulab had suffered at Lahore's hands.
6. Mr. Tewari's argument uses the 1822 coronation as "irony" implying ingratitude. In fact it is the opposite. Ranjit Singh elevated Gulab Singh precisely because the Dogras were the most militarily and administratively capable family serving the Sikh Empire. When the empire collapsed after Ranjit Singh's death, it was because his successors eliminated the Dogra pillars he had built not because those pillars turned against him.
7. The personal cost the Dogra family paid in service to the Lahore Darbar is staggering and almost entirely ignored in the "betrayal" narrative. Consider the timeline of Dogra deaths at the hands of Lahore's own court politics:
Dhyan Singh, who served as Wazir to Maharaja Ranjit Singh was the 2nd most powerful man in the Lahore Darbar, he was assassinated in September 1843 when the Sandhanwalia clan murdered both Maharaja Sher Singh and the Wazir on the same day.
Suchet Singh, another of the three Dogra brothers, was also killed.
Then Hira Singh, Dhyan Singh's son who became Wazir after his father was also assassinated in 1844, surrounded and cut down by Khalsa soldiers.
The three Dogra brothers who had built their entire careers in loyal service to Ranjit Singh lost two brothers and a nephew to the very establishment they served.
Even after these catastrophic family losses, Gulab Singh did not flee, raise rebellion, or join the British. He stayed. He returned to Lahore when summoned after Sobraon, accepted the role of peace negotiator on behalf of the same court that had killed his family, and only struck an independent arrangement after Rani Jindan herself dismissed him and made yet another attempt on his life. A man who truly wanted to betray the Lahore Darbar had every reason and opportunity to do so far earlier but did not. The accusation of betrayal must be measured against this extraordinary record of continued service despite personal devastation.
8. The Interesting part: Sikhs would have won, they lost because of their own incapable leadership not because of Dogras. At Ferozeshah, when the Khalsa had the exhausted British force at their mercy, Tej Singh misread a British withdrawal as a flanking manoeuvre and retreated, allowing the British to escape what could have been a catastrophic defeat. At Sobraon, Tej Singh secretly corresponding with Governor-General Hardinge destroyed the bridge over the Sutlej when he fled, trapping his own men between the British and the river where 10,000 Sikhs were killed. These were the men responsible for the defeats at Aliwal and Sobraon. Gulab Singh, sitting in Jammu with his troops intact, had nothing to do with these catastrophic command failures.
Sikh Empire collapsed because of factionalism, intrigue, assassinations, and incompetent leadership after Ranjit Singh's death. Blaming Gulab Singh for that collapse is historical scapegoating.
@ManishTewari - I hope you will read it. All of this information is common knowledge; I have merely placed it in perspective.
CC @vikramaditya_JK@VikramadityaSum@dryadusingh@jamwal_rocky@j71623767@VoiceofDogras@KhajuriaManu@aanachronist
श्रीरामजन्मभूमि तीर्थ क्षेत्र ट्रस्ट का वो कौन सा पदाधिकारी था जिसका ड्राइवर भी मालामाल हो गया? सोचिए कि कितना पाॅवरफुल होगा वो कि उसके ड्राइवर का भतीजा भी राम लला को अर्पण किए जाने वाले करोड़ों के चढ़ावे की गिनती में ड्यूटी पर लगाया गया था। नाम पत.....साॅरी आई मीन पता कीजिए।
Hundreds of research studies show men are as likely as women to be victims of domestic violence.
The global #MenToo campaign seeks to assure that male victims of domestic violence are heard, believed, and have equal access to services.
Johnny Depp’s case opened the world’s eyes — but millions of men still suffer in silence.
I’m a man and I was abused by… her.
Raj Shamani asked MS Dhoni about his biggest childhood insecurity and Dhoni replied in a very calm manner🎙;
My childhood was just like everyone else's, there was no insecurity in it I used to wake up at 5::30, have breakfast, go to school, and then play sports in the evening. That's all my childhood was like : Just like other's, without any insecurity😭❤🔥
@aegononx@abhisayk000@SiddharthKG7@RMi1423613 Still indian govt have diplomatic relations and trade relations with china, every 2 day US govt bully india and MEA can't issue a statement..it is not the classic case of selling the sovereignty
Whatever you are writing is fancy lines from civics book no relations with reality
@aegononx@abhisayk000@SiddharthKG7@RMi1423613 Classic case of "sada kutta kutta twada kutta Tommy"....
This is intellectual dishonesty of people like you....give fancy adjectives to the same act and hide the same crime you blame monarchy for....
Pakistan have POK, chaina have askai chin...
@aegononx@SiddharthKG7@RMi1423613 Do you know about Pakistan attack on Jaisalmer in 1948 ..same indian republic did't provide any support not for own people..Nehru,patel type traitor stoped picking calls
Those monarch collectively faught and defeated the invaders
Indian republic still hide this treachery
@aegononx@SiddharthKG7@RMi1423613 Text book defination which only exist in books not in reality
Those kings were ruling independent state, protecting own people and kingdoms self interest
And modern republic india also sold their own people to tyrants in Pakistan,bangladesh, sri lanka and Bhutan or in Manipur
@aegononx@SiddharthKG7@RMi1423613 NSA son lives in US, foreign minister son lives in US,
Almost every minister son and daughter lives outside india
Those traitor monarch and their kids still live in india
@aegononx@SiddharthKG7@RMi1423613 Tumhari defination ka hisab se koi ladne wala tha hi nahi sab collaborator he tha
Meri knowledge ma to aaise koi king tha he nahi jisne kabi collaborate na kia ho
Even in modern republic tum log usse diplomacy, strategic autonomy, independent foreign policy ka naam dete ho
@SiddharthKG7@RMi1423613 In monarchy they are 20% corrupt but 80% work for betterment of the people but in democracy administrative class is absolutely corrupt and rotten
Even today every monarchy have better quality of life then these so called democratic republics...
@SiddharthKG7@RMi1423613 These illiterate idiots don't understand kings become king because of people they look after, protect them, fight for them, they have better leadership skill then normal masses
No king and kingdom ever survived without the support and hardwork of people and truthfulness of king