yes but SA's National Party severed such links with Brits. Of course subterfuge was going on, but not possible at that level
-
-
Replying to @i_contemplate_ @LenteCurrite
the National Party election in the 40s, and the new 'apartheid' regime itself was opposed by Brits
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @i_contemplate_
The fundamental nature of the state didn't change. Brits would have had enough handles. If they severed, then it would make
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @LenteCurrite @i_contemplate_
Brits even more obsessed about revenge. They would have had contacts among Blacks too.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @LenteCurrite
I'm not comfortable with 'God of the Gaps' arguments like this. You could be right but no indication so far that's the case.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @i_contemplate_ @LenteCurrite
Believe it or not, people can be venal and self-serving, forgetting larger purposes. doesn't have to be intel
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @i_contemplate_
Of course. But the old masters can help such things along. Like they helped with India's partition. Created Muslim league
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @LenteCurrite @i_contemplate_
and Pak movement out of thin air. Even Ambedkar was seen writing that Brits used to give to the league more than what even
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @LenteCurrite @i_contemplate_
Brits had power in the world arena far disproportionate to their size. They involve/mediate even b/w giants like US & USSR.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Makes sense. Will read more.
-
-
Replying to @i_contemplate_
Here it is (Ambedkar): http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00ambedkar/ambedkar_partition/411.html …
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.