PERSONAL STYLE OF RULES IN INDIA
If anyone asked me to choose between British rule and Muslim rule, I would go for British rule. This is not that I don’t love my Muslim brothers but the effect that the British made while ruling has better impact up to date. Can any Muslim name one university that was founded by a Muslim while ruling! The British on contrary came up with a good number of schools and colleges that are still performing up to present and coping so well with the changing technology. It therefore becomes difficult to point fingers to the British for having ruled the Indians. Infant, they should be given a credit. Sultan Mahmud converted capital of Ghazana to Islamic Culture center at the end of the tenth century. (Kimball, 1998)
The British brought an impact in India to the extent that some Indians failed to know when the British had left. There was a case of a certain politician who was campaigning saying that he had struggled to ensure the exit of the British from the country but surprisingly a humble man asked if there were ever been a British in that country. He had no idea that the British had lasted in there authority for almost 100 years before it received its independence on august 15th 1947. It was confirmed that the services rendered by Indians, 99% was being used outside the country while the remaining percentage was utilized locally. (Kimball, 1998)
In conclusion, the growth of the Indian government has stagnated due to the people’s ignorance and the poor governance after the British rule. Some leaders were so egocentric that they didn’t care about the end results at the end of it all. The fact that most Indians preferred cricket in their sports that was introduced by British shows the impact the British brought in that country. Generally, comparing the ruling of the Muslims and that of British ruling, the British ruling had a positive impact more than that of Muslims.
Kimball, W. (1998): Forged in war, Harper Perennial