My Dream India Essay Wikipedia Deutsch

"Tocqueville" redirects here. For other uses, see Tocqueville (disambiguation).

Alexis Charles Henri Clérel, Viscount de Tocqueville (;[1]French: [alɛgzi ʃaʁl ɑ̃ʁi kleʁɛl də tɔkvil]; 29 July 1805 – 16 April 1859) was a French diplomat, political scientist, and historian. He was best known for his works Democracy in America (appearing in two volumes: 1835 and 1840) and The Old Regime and the Revolution (1856). In both he analyzed the improved living standards and social conditions of individuals, as well as their relationship to the market and state in Western societies. Democracy in America was published after Tocqueville's travels in the United States and is today considered an early work of sociology and political science.

Tocqueville was active in French politics, first under the July Monarchy (1830–48) and then during the Second Republic (1849–51) which succeeded the February 1848 Revolution. He retired from political life after Louis Napoléon Bonaparte's2 December 1851 coup, and thereafter began work on The Old Regime and the Revolution.[2]

He argued the importance of the French Revolution was to continue the process of modernizing and centralizing the French state which had begun under King Louis XIV. The failure of the Revolution came from the inexperience of the deputies who were too wedded to abstract Enlightenment ideals. Tocqueville was a classical liberal who advocated parliamentary government, but he was skeptical of the extremes of democracy.[2]

Life[edit]

Alexis de Tocqueville came from an old Norman aristocratic family with ancestors who participated in the Battle of Hastings in 1066. His parents, Hervé Louis François Jean Bonaventure Clérel, Comte de Tocqueville, an officer of the Constitutional Guard of King Louis XVI, and Louise Madeleine Le Peletier de Rosanbo, narrowly escaped the guillotine, due to the fall of Robespierre in 1794.[3]

Under the Bourbon Restoration, Tocqueville's father became a noble peer and prefect.[3] Tocqueville attended the Lycée Fabert in Metz.[4]

Tocqueville, who despised the July Monarchy (1830–1848), began his political career in 1839. From 1839 to 1851, he served as deputy of the Manche department (Valognes). In parliament, he defended abolitionist views and upheld free trade, while supporting the colonisation of Algeria carried on by Louis-Philippe's regime. Tocqueville was also elected general counsellor of the Manche in 1842, and became the president of the department's conseil général between 1849 and 1851. According to one account, Tocqueville's political position became untenable during this time in the sense that he was mistrusted by both the left and right, and was looking for an excuse to leave France.[5]

Travels[edit]

In 1831, he obtained from the July Monarchy a mission to examine prisons and penitentiaries in America, and proceeded there with his lifelong friend Gustave de Beaumont. While Tocqueville did visit some prisons, he traveled widely in America and took extensive notes about his observations and reflections.[5] He returned within nine months, and published a report, but the real result of his tour was De la démocratie en Amerique, which appeared in 1835.[6] Beaumont also wrote an account of their travels in Jacksonian America: Marie or Slavery in the United States (1835).[7] During this trip he made a side trip to Lower Canada to Montreal and Quebec City from mid August to early September 1831.[8]

Apart from America, Tocqueville also made an observational tour of England, producing Memoir on Pauperism. In 1841 and 1846, he traveled to Algeria. His first travel inspired his Travail sur l'Algérie, in which he criticized the French model of colonisation, which was based on an assimilationist view, preferring instead the British model of indirect rule, which avoided mixing different populations together. He went as far as openly advocating racial segregation between the European colonists and the Arabs through the implementation of two different legislative systems (a half century before implementation of the 1881 Indigenous code based on religion).

In 1835, Tocqueville made a journey through Ireland. His observations provide one of the best pictures of how Ireland stood before the Great Famine (1845–49). The observations chronicle the growing Catholic middle-class and the appalling conditions in which most Catholic tenant farmers lived. Tocqueville made clear both his libertarian sympathies and his affinity for his Irish co-religionists.[9]

After the fall of the July Monarchy during the February 1848 Revolution, Tocqueville was elected a member of the Constituent Assembly of 1848, where he became a member of the Commission charged with the drafting of the new Constitution of the Second Republic (1848–51). He defended bicameralism (the wisdom of two parliamentary chambers) and the election of the President of the Republic by universal suffrage. As the countryside was thought to be more conservative than the labouring population of Paris, universal suffrage was conceived as a means to counteract the revolutionary spirit of Paris.

During the Second Republic, Tocqueville sided with the parti de l'Ordre against the socialists. A few days after the February insurrection, he believed that a violent clash between the Parisian workers' population led by socialists agitating in favor of a "Democratic and Social Republic" and the conservatives, which included the aristocracy and the rural population, was inescapable. As Tocqueville had foreseen, these social tensions eventually exploded during the June Days Uprising of 1848.[10]

Led by General Cavaignac, the suppression was supported by Tocqueville, who advocated the "regularization" of the state of siege declared by Cavaignac, and other measures promoting suspension of the constitutional order.[10] Between May and September, Tocqueville participated in the Constitutional Commission which wrote the new Constitution. His proposals underlined the importance of his American experience, as his amendment about the President and his reelection.[11]

Minister of foreign affairs (1849)[edit]

A supporter of Cavaignac and of the parti de l'Ordre, Tocqueville, however, accepted an invitation to enter Odilon Barrot's government as Minister of Foreign Affairs from 3 June to 31 October 1849. There, during the troubled days of June 1849, he pleaded with Jules Dufaure, Interior Minister, for the reestablishment of the state of siege in the capital and approved the arrest of demonstrators. Tocqueville, who since February 1848 had supported laws restricting political freedoms, approved the two laws voted immediately after the June 1849 days, which restricted the liberty of clubs and freedom of the press.[12]

This active support in favor of laws restricting political freedoms stands in contrast of his defense of freedoms in Democracy in America. According to Tocqueville, he favored order as "the sine qua non for the conduct of serious politics. He [hoped] to bring the kind of stability to French political life that would permit the steady growth of liberty unimpeded by the regular rumblings of the earthquakes of revolutionary change.″[12]

Tocqueville had supported Cavaignac against Louis Napoléon Bonaparte for the presidential election of 1848. Opposed to Louis Napoléon's 2 December 1851 coup which followed his election, Tocqueville was among the deputies who gathered at the 10th arrondissement of Paris in an attempt to resist the coup and have Napoleon III judged for "high treason", as he had violated the constitutional limit on terms of office. Detained at Vincennes and then released, Tocqueville, who supported the Restoration of the Bourbons against Napoleon III's Second Empire (1851–71), quit political life and retreated to his castle (Château de Tocqueville).[13]

Against this image of Tocqueville, biographer Joseph Epstein has concluded: "Tocqueville could never bring himself to serve a man he considered a usurper and despot. He fought as best he could for the political liberty in which he so ardently believed – had given it, in all, thirteen years of his life [....] He would spend the days remaining to him fighting the same fight, but conducting it now from libraries, archives, and his own desk."[13] There, he began the draft of L'Ancien Régime et la Révolution, publishing the first tome in 1856, but leaving the second one unfinished.

Death (1859)[edit]

A longtime sufferer from bouts of tuberculosis, Tocqueville would eventually succumb to the disease on 16 April 1859. He was buried in the Tocqueville cemetery in Normandy.

Tocqueville's professed religion was Roman Catholicism.[14] He saw religion as being compatible with both equality and individualism, and felt that religion would be strongest when separated from politics.[5]

Democracy in America[edit]

Main article: Democracy in America

In Democracy in America, published in 1835, Tocqueville wrote of the New World and its burgeoning democratic order. Observing from the perspective of a detached social scientist, Tocqueville wrote of his travels through America in the early 19th century when the market revolution, Western expansion, and Jacksonian democracy were radically transforming the fabric of American life.[5]

One purpose of writing Democracy in America, according to Joshua Kaplan, was to help the people of France get a better understanding of their position between a fading aristocratic order and an emerging democratic order, and to help them sort out the confusion.[5] Tocqueville saw democracy as an equation that balanced liberty and equality, concern for the individual as well as for the community.

Tocqueville was an ardent supporter of liberty. "I have a passionate love for liberty, law, and respect for rights", he wrote. "I am neither of the revolutionary party nor of the conservative....Liberty is my foremost passion." He wrote of "Political Consequences of the Social State of the Anglo-Americans" by saying: "But one also finds in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to want to bring the strong down to their level, and which reduces men to preferring equality in servitude to inequality in freedom".[15]

The above is often misquoted as a slavery quote because of previous translations of the French text. The most recent translation from Arthur Goldhammer in 2004 translates the meaning to be as stated above. Examples of misquoted sources are numerous on the internet;[16] the text does not contain the words "Americans were so enamored by equality" anywhere.

His view on government reflects his belief in liberty and the need for individuals to be able to act freely while respecting others' rights. Of centralized government, he wrote that it "excels in preventing, not doing."[17]

He continues to comment on equality by saying: "Furthermore, when citizens are all almost equal, it becomes difficult for them to defend their independence against the aggressions of power. As none of them is strong enough to fight alone with advantage, the only guarantee of liberty is for everyone to combine forces. But such a combination is not always in evidence."[18]

Tocqueville explicitly cites inequality as being incentive for poor to become rich, and notes that it is not often that two generations within a family maintain success, and that it is inheritance laws that split and eventually break apart someone's estate that cause a constant cycle of churn between the poor and rich, thereby over generations making the poor rich and rich poor. He cites protective laws in France at the time that protected an estate from being split apart among heirs, thereby preserving wealth and preventing a churn of wealth such as was perceived by him in 1835 within the United States of America.

On civil and political society and the individual[edit]

Tocqueville's main purpose was to analyze the functioning of political society and various forms of political associations, although he brought some reflections on civil society too (and relations between political and civil society). For Tocqueville as for Hegel and Marx, civil society was a sphere of private entrepreneurship and civilian affairs regulated by civil code.[19] As a critic of individualism, Tocqueville thought that through associating, the coming together of people for mutual purpose, both in public and private, Americans are able to overcome selfish desires, thus making both a self-conscious and active political society and a vibrant civil society functioning according to political and civil laws of the state.[5][19]

According to political scientist Joshua Kaplan, Tocqueville did not originate the concept of individualism, instead he changed its meaning, and saw it as a "calm and considered feeling which deposes each citizen to isolate himself from the mass of his fellows and to withdraw into the circle of family and friends ... with this little society formed to his taste, he gladly leaves the greater society to look for itself".[5] While Tocqueville saw egotism and selfishness as vices, he saw individualism as not a failure of feeling, but as a way of thinking about things which could have either positive consequences such as a willingness to work together, or negative consequences such as isolation, and that individualism could be remedied by improved understanding.[5]

When individualism was a positive force and prompted people to work together for common purposes, and seen as "self-interest properly understood", then it helped to counterbalance the danger of the tyranny of the majority, since people could "take control over their own lives" without government aid.[5] According to Kaplan, Americans have a difficult time accepting Tocqueville's criticism of the stifling intellectual effect of the "omnipotence of the majority", and that Americans tend to deny that there is a problem in this regard.[5]

Others, such as the Catholic writer Daniel Schwindt, disagree with Kaplan's interpretation, arguing instead that Tocqueville saw individualism as just another form of egotism, and not an improvement over it.[20] To make his case, Schwindt provides citations such as the following:

Egoism springs from a blind instinct; individualism from wrong-headed thinking rather than from depraved feelings. It originates as much from defects of intelligence as from the mistakes of the heart. Egoism blights the seeds of every virtue; individualism at first dries up only the source of public virtue. In the longer term it attacks and destroys all the others and will finally merge with egoism.[20]

On democracy and new forms of tyranny[edit]

Tocqueville warned that modern democracy may be adept at inventing new forms of tyranny, because radical equality could lead to the materialism of an expanding bourgeoisie and to the selfishness of individualism. "In such conditions, we might become so enamored with 'a relaxed love of present enjoyments' that we lose interest in the future of our descendants...and meekly allow ourselves to be led in ignorance by a despotic force all the more powerful because it does not resemble one", wrote The New Yorker's James Wood.[21] Tocqueville worried that if despotism were to take root in a modern democracy, it would be a much more dangerous version than the oppression under the Roman emperors or tyrants of the past who could only exert a pernicious influence on a small group of people at a time.[5]

In contrast, a despotism under a democracy could see "a multitude of men", uniformly alike, equal, "constantly circling for petty pleasures", unaware of fellow citizens, and subject to the will of a powerful state which exerted an "immense protective power".[5] Tocqueville compared a potentially despotic democratic government to a protective parent who wants to keep its citizens (children) as "perpetual children", and which doesn't break men's wills but rather guides it, and presides over people in the same way as a shepherd looking after a "flock of timid animals".[5]

On American social contract[edit]

Tocqueville's penetrating analysis sought to understand the peculiar nature of American political life. In describing the American, he agreed with thinkers such as Aristotle and Montesquieu that the balance of property determined the balance of political power, but his conclusions after that differed radically from those of his predecessors. Tocqueville tried to understand why America was so different from Europe in the last throes of aristocracy. America, in contrast to the aristocratic ethic, was a society where hard work and money-making was the dominant ethic, where the common man enjoyed a level of dignity which was unprecedented, where commoners never deferred to elites, and where what he described as crass individualism and market capitalism had taken root to an extraordinary degree.

Tocqueville writes: "Among a democratic people, where there is no hereditary wealth, every man works to earn a living.... Labor is held in honor; the prejudice is not against but in its favor."[22]

Tocqueville asserted that the values that had triumphed in the North and were present in the South had begun to suffocate old-world ethics and social arrangements. Legislatures abolished primogeniture and entails, resulting in more widely distributed land holdings. This was a contrast to the general aristocratic pattern in which only the eldest child, usually a man, inherited the estate, which had the effect of keeping large estates intact from generation to generation.[5]

In America, in contrast, landed elites were less likely to pass on fortunes to a single child by the action of primogeniture, which meant that as time went by, large estates became broken up within a few generations which, in turn, made the children more equal overall.[5] It was not always a negative development, according to Joshua Kaplan's interpretation of Tocqueville, since bonds of affection and shared experience between children often replaced the more formal relation between the eldest child and the siblings, characteristic of the previous aristocratic pattern.[5] Overall, in the new democracies, hereditary fortunes became exceedingly difficult to secure and more people were forced to struggle for their own living.

This rapidly democratizing society, as Tocqueville understood it, had a population devoted to "middling" values which wanted to amass, through hard work, vast fortunes. In Tocqueville's mind, this explained why America was so different from Europe. In Europe, he claimed, nobody cared about making money. The lower classes had no hope of gaining more than minimal wealth, while the upper classes found it crass, vulgar, and unbecoming of their sort to care about something as unseemly as money; many were virtually guaranteed wealth and took it for granted. At the same time in America, workers would see people fashioned in exquisite attire and merely proclaim that through hard work they too would soon possess the fortune necessary to enjoy such luxuries.

Despite maintaining with Aristotle, Montesquieu, and others that the balance of property determined the balance of power, Tocqueville argued that, as America showed, equitable property holdings did not ensure the rule of the best men. In fact, it did quite the opposite. The widespread, relatively equitable property ownership which distinguished the US and determined its mores and values also explained why the US masses held elites in such contempt.

On majority rule and mediocrity[edit]

Beyond the eradication of old-world aristocracy, ordinary Americans also refused to defer to those possessing, as Tocqueville put it, superior talent and intelligence, and these natural elites could not enjoy much share in political power as a result. Ordinary Americans enjoyed too much power, claimed too great a voice in the public sphere, to defer to intellectual superiors. This culture promoted a relatively pronounced equality, Tocqueville argued, but the same mores and opinions that ensured such equality also promoted mediocrity. Those who possessed true virtue and talent were left with limited choices.[5]

Tocqueville said that those with the most education and intelligence were left with two choices. They could join limited intellectual circles to explore the weighty and complex problems facing society, or they could use their superior talents to amass vast fortunes in the private sector. Tocqueville wrote that he did not know of any country where there was "less independence of mind, and true freedom of discussion, than in America".[5]

He blamed the omnipotence of majority rule as a chief factor in stifling thinking: "The majority has enclosed thought within a formidable fence. A writer is free inside that area, but woe to the man who goes beyond it, not that he stands in fear of an inquisition, but he must face all kinds of unpleasantness in every day persecution. A career in politics is closed to him for he has offended the only power that holds the keys."[5] Tocqueville, in contrast to previous political thinkers, argued that a serious problem in political life was not that people were too strong, but that people were "too weak" and felt powerless; the danger is that people felt "swept up in something that they could not control", according to Kaplan's interpretation of Tocqueville.[5]

On US slavery, Blacks and Indians[edit]

Uniquely positioned at a crossroads in American history, Tocqueville's Democracy in America attempted to capture the essence of American culture and values. Though a supporter of colonialism, Tocqueville could clearly perceive the evils that black people and natives had been subjected to in America. Tocqueville devoted the last chapter of the first volume of Democracy in America to the question while his travel companion, Gustave de Beaumont, wholly focused on slavery and its fallouts for the American nation in Marie or Slavery in America. Tocqueville notes that among the races that exist in America:

The first who attracts the eye, the first in enlightenment, in power and in happiness, is the white man, the European, man par excellence; below him appear the Negro and the Indian. These two unfortunate races have neither birth, nor face, nor language, nor mores in common; only their misfortunes look alike. Both occupy an equally inferior position in the country that they inhabit; both experience the effects of tyranny; and if their miseries are different, they can accuse the same author for them.[23]

Tocqueville contrasted the settlers of Virginia with the middle-class, religious Puritans who founded New England, and analyzed the debasing influence of slavery:

The men sent to Virginia were seekers of gold, adventurers without resources and without character, whose turbulent and restless spirit endangered the infant colony. ... Artisans and agriculturalists arrived afterwards...hardly in any respect above the level of the inferior classes in England. No lofty views, no spiritual conception presided over the foundation of these new settlements. The colony was scarcely established when slavery was introduced; this was the capital fact which was to exercise an immense influence on the character, the laws and the whole future of the South. Slavery...dishonors labor; it introduces idleness into society, and with idleness, ignorance and pride, luxury and distress. It enervates the powers of the mind and benumbs the activity of man. On this same English foundation there developed in the North very different characteristics.[24]

Tocqueville concluded that removal of the Negro population from America could not resolve the problem as he writes at the end of the first Democracy:

If the colony of Liberia were able to receive thousands of new inhabitants every year, and if the Negroes were in a state to be sent thither with advantage; if the Union were to supply the society with annual subsidies, and to transport the Negroes to Africa in government vessels, it would still be unable to counterpoise the natural increase of population among the blacks; and as it could not remove as many men in a year as are born upon its territory within that time, it could not prevent the growth of the evil which is daily increasing in the states. The Negro race will never leave those shores of the American continent to which it was brought by the passions and the vices of Europeans; and it will not disappear from the New World as long as it continues to exist. The inhabitants of the United States may retard the calamities which they apprehend, but they cannot now destroy their efficient cause.

In 1855, he wrote the following text published by Maria Weston Chapman in the Liberty Bell: Testimony against Slavery

I do not think it is for me, a foreigner, to indicate to the United States the time, the measures, or the men by whom Slavery shall be abolished.

Still, as the persevering enemy of despotism everywhere, and under all its forms, I am pained and astonished by the fact that the freest people in the world is, at the present time, almost the only one among civilized and Christian nations which yet maintains personal servitude; and this while serfdom itself is about disappearing, where it has not already disappeared, from the most degraded nations of Europe.
An old and sincere friend of America, I am uneasy at seeing Slavery retard her progress, tarnish her glory, furnish arms to her detractors, compromise the future career of the Union which is the guaranty of her safety and greatness, and point out beforehand to her, to all her enemies, the spot where they are to strike. As a man, too, I am moved at the spectacle of man's degradation by man, and I hope to see the day when the law will grant equal civil liberty to all the inhabitants of the same empire, as God accords the freedom of the will, without distinction, to the dwellers upon earth.[25]

On policies of assimilation[edit]

According to Tocqueville, assimilation of Black people would be almost impossible and this was already being demonstrated in the Northern states. As Tocqueville predicted, formal freedom and equality and segregation would become this population's reality after the Civil War and during Reconstruction – as would the bumpy road to true integration of Black people.

Assimilation, however, was the best solution for Native Americans and since they were too proud to assimilate, they would inevitably become extinct. Displacement was another part of America's Indian policy. Both populations were "undemocratic", or without the qualities, intellectual and otherwise, needed to live in a democracy. Tocqueville shared many views on assimilation and segregation of his and the coming epochs, but he opposed Arthur de Gobineau's theories as found in The Inequality of Human Races (1853–55).[26]

On the US and Russia as future global powers[edit]

In his Democracy In America, Tocqueville also forecast the preeminence of the United States and Russia as the two main global powers. In his book, he stated:

"There are now two great nations in the world, which starting from different points, seem to be advancing toward the same goal: the Russians and the Anglo-Americans... Each seems called by some secret design of Providence one day to hold in its hands the destinies of half the world."[27]

On civil jury service[edit]

De Tocqueville believed that the American jury system was particularly important in educating citizens in self-government and rule of law.[28] He often expressed how the civil jury system was one of the most effective showcases of democracy because it connected citizens with the true spirit of the justice system. In his 1835 treatise, Democracy in America, he explained:

"The jury, and more especially the civil jury, serves to communicate the spirit of the judges to the minds of all the citizens; and this spirit, with the habits which attend it, is the soundest preparation for free institutions. . . . It invests each citizen with a kind of magistracy; it makes them all feel the duties which they are bound to discharge toward society; and the part which they take in the Government." [29]

Tocqueville believed that jury service not only benefited the society as a whole, but enhanced jurors’ qualities as citizens. Because of the jury system "they were better informed about the rule of law, and they were more closely connected to the state. Thus, quite independently of what the jury contributed to dispute resolution, participation on the jury had salutary effects on the jurors themselves." [28]

1841 discourse on the Conquest of Algeria[edit]

French historian of colonialismOlivier LeCour Grandmaison has underlined how Tocqueville (as well as Michelet) used the term "extermination" to describe what was happening during the colonization of Western United States and the Indian removal period.[30] Tocqueville thus expressed himself, in 1841, concerning the conquest of Algeria:

As far as I am concerned, I came back from Africa with the pathetic notion that at present in our way of waging war we are far more barbaric than the Arabs themselves. These days, they represent civilization, we do not. This way of waging war seems to me as stupid as it is cruel. It can only be found in the head of a coarse and brutal soldier. Indeed, it was pointless to replace the Turks only to reproduce what the world rightly found so hateful in them. This, even for the sake of interest is more noxious than useful; for, as another officer was telling me, if our sole aim is to equal the Turks, in fact we shall be in a far lower position than theirs: barbarians for barbarians, the Turks will always outdo us because they are Muslim barbarians.

In France, I have often heard men I respect but do not approve of, deplore that crops should be burnt and granaries emptied and finally that unarmed men, women, and children should be seized. In my view these are unfortunate circumstances that any people wishing to wage war against the Arabs must accept. I think that all the means available to wreck tribes must be used, barring those that the human kind and the right of nations condemn. I personally believe that the laws of war enable us to ravage the country and that we must do so either by destroying the crops at harvest time or any time by making fast forays also known as raids the aim of which it to get hold of men or flocks.[31][32]

Whatever the case, we may say in a general manner that all political freedoms must be suspended in Algeria.[33]

Tocqueville thought the conquest of Algeria was important for two reasons: first, his understanding of the international situation and France's position in the world, and, second, changes in French society.[34] Tocqueville believed that war and colonization would "restore national pride, threatened", he believed, by "the gradual softening of social mores" in the middle classes. Their taste for "material pleasures" was spreading to the whole of society, giving it "an example of weakness and egotism".[35]

Applauding the methods of General Bugeaud, Tocqueville went so far to claim that "war in Africa is a science. Everyone is familiar with its rules and everyone can apply those rules with almost complete certainty of success. One of the greatest services that Field Marshal Bugeaud has rendered his country is to have spread, perfected and made everyone aware of this new science."[35]

Tocqueville advocated racial segregation in Algeria with two distinct legislations, one for European colonists and one for the Arab population.[36] Such a two-tier arrangement would be fully realised with the 1870 Crémieux decree and the Indigenousness Code, which extended French citizenship to European settlers and Algerian Jews, whereas Muslim Algerians would be governed by Muslim law and restricted to a second-class citizenship.

Tocqueville's opposition to the invasion of Kabylie[edit]

In opposition to Olivier Le Cour Grandmaison, Jean-Louis Benoît claimed that given the extent of racial prejudices during the colonization of Algeria, Tocqueville was one of its "most moderate supporters". Benoît claimed that it was wrong to assume Tocqueville was a supporter of Bugeaud, despite his 1841 apologetic discourse. It seems that Tocqueville modified his views after his second visit to Algeria in 1846; he criticized Bugeaud's desire to invade Kabylie in an 1847 speech to the Assembly.

Although Tocqueville had favoured retention of distinct traditional law, administrators, schools, etc., for Arabs who had come under French control, he judged the Berber tribes of Kabylie (in his second of Two Letters on Algeria, 1837) as "savages" not suited for this arrangement; they would best be managed, he argued, not by force of arms, but by the pacifying influences of commerce and cultural interaction.[37]

Tocqueville's views on the matter were complex. Even though in his 1841 report on Algeria he applauded Bugeaud for making war in a way that defeated Abd-el-Kader's resistance, he had advocated in the Two Letters that the French military advance leave Kabylie undisturbed, and in subsequent speeches and writings he continued to oppose intrusion into Kabylie[citation needed].

In the debate about the 1846 extraordinary funds, Tocqueville denounced Bugeaud's conduct of military operations, and succeeded in convincing the Assembly not to vote funds in support of Bugeaud's military columns.[38] Tocqueville considered Bugeaud's plan to invade Kabylie, despite the opposition of the Assembly, as a seditious act in the face of which the government was opting for cowardice.[39][40]

Report on Algeria (1847)[edit]

In his 1847 Report on Algeria, Tocqueville declared that Europe should avoid making the same mistake they made with the European colonization of the Americas in order to avoid the bloody consequences.[41] More particularly he reminds his countrymen of a solemn caution whereby he warns them that if the methods used towards the Algerian people remain unchanged, colonization will end in a blood bath.

Tocqueville includes in his report on Algeria that the fate of their soldiers and finances depended on how the French government treats the various native populations of Algeria, including the various Arab tribes, independent Kabyles living in the Atlas Mountains, and the powerful political leader Abd-el-Kader. In his various letters and essays on Algeria, Tocqueville discusses contrasting strategies by which a European country can approach imperialism. In particular, the author differentiates between what he terms 'dominance' and a particular version of 'colonization'.[42]

The latter stresses the obtainment and protection of land and passageways that promise commercial wealth. In the case of Algeria, the Port of Algiers, and the control over the Strait of Gibraltar, were considered by Tocqueville to be particularly valuable. Direct control of the political operations of the entirety of Algeria, however, was not. Thus the author stresses domination over only certain points of political influence as a means to colonization of commercially valuable areas.[42]

Tocqueville argued that domination via violent means, though unpleasant, is necessary for colonization and justified by the laws of war. Such laws are not discussed in detail; however, given that the goal of the French mission in Algeria was to obtain commercial and military interest as opposed to self-defense, it can be deduced that Tocqueville would not concur with Just war theory's jus ad bellum criteria of just cause. Further, given that Tocqueville approved of the use of force to eliminate civilian housing in enemy territory, his approach does not accord with Just War Theory's jus in bello criteria of proportionality and discrimination.[43]

The Old Regime and the Revolution[edit]

Main article: The Old Regime and the Revolution

In 1856, Tocqueville published The Old Regime and the Revolution. The book analyzes French society before the French Revolution—the so-called "Ancien Régime"—and investigates the forces that caused the Revolution.

References in popular literature[edit]

Tocqueville was quoted in several chapters of Toby Young's memoirs, How to Lose Friends and Alienate People, to explain his observation of widespread homogeneity of thought even amongst intellectual elites at Harvard University, during his time spent there. He is frequently quoted and studied in American history classes. Tocqueville is the inspiration for Australian novelist Peter Carey in his 2009 novel, Parrot and Olivier in America.[44]

Works[edit]

  • Alexis de Tocqueville and Gustave de Beaumont in America: Their Friendship and Their Travels, edited by Oliver Zunz, translated by Arthur Goldhammer (University of Virginia Press, 2011), 698 pages. Includes previously unpublished letters, essays, and other writings.
  • Du système pénitentaire aux États-Unis et de son application en France (1833) – On the Penitentiary System in the United States and Its Application to France, with Gustave de Beaumont.
  • De la démocratie en Amérique (1835/1840) – Democracy in America. It was published in two volumes, the first in 1835, the second in 1840. English language versions: Tocqueville, Democracy in America, trans. and eds, Harvey C. Mansfield and Delba Winthrop, University of Chicago Press, 2000; Tocqueville, Democracy in America (Arthur Goldhammer, trans.; Olivier Zunz, ed.) (The Library of America, 2004) ISBN 978-1-931082-54-9.
  • L'Ancien Régime et la Révolution (1856) – The Old Regime and the Revolution. It is Tocqueville's second most famous work.
  • Recollections (1893) – This work was a private journal of the Revolution of 1848. He never intended to publish this during his lifetime; it was published by his wife and his friend Gustave de Beaumont after his death.
  • Journey to America (1831–1832) – Alexis de Tocqueville's travel diary of his visit to America; translated into English by George Lawrence, edited by J.-P. Mayer, Yale University Press, 1960; based on vol. V, 1 of the Œuvres Complètes of Tocqueville.
  • L'Etat social et politique de la France avant et depuis 1789 – Alexis de Tocqueville
  • Memoir On Pauperism: Does public charity produce an idle and dependant class of society? (1835) originally published by Ivan R. Dee. Inspired by a trip to England. One of Tocqueville's more obscure works.
  • Journeys to England and Ireland, 1835.

See also[edit]

General:

References[edit]

  1. ^"Tocqueville". Random House Webster's Unabridged Dictionary.
  2. ^ abHansen, Paul R. (February 2009). Contesting the French Revolution. Wiley-Blackwell. p. 3. ISBN 978-1-4051-6084-1. 
  3. ^ abKahan, Alan S. (2013). "Alexis de Tocqueville". In Meadowcroft, John. Major conservative and libertarian thinkers. 7. Bloomsbury. ISBN 9781441176998. Retrieved 25 May 2017. 
  4. ^"Le lycée Fabert: 1000 ans d'histoire". Lycée Fabert (in French). Archived from the original on 8 July 2010. Retrieved 18 September 2010. 
  5. ^ abcdefghijklmnopqrstJoshua Kaplan (2005). "Political Theory: The Classic Texts and their Continuing Relevance". The Modern Scholar.  
  6. ^ Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). "Tocqueville, Alexis Henri Charles Maurice Clerel, Comte de". Encyclopædia Britannica. 26 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. p. 1043. 
  7. ^Gustave de Beaumont, Marie ou l’Esclavage aux États-Unis.Archived 21 May 2015 at the Wayback Machine.
  8. ^http://www.ameriquefrancaise.org/en/article-466/Alexis_de_Tocqueville%E2%80%99s_visit_to_Lower_Canada_in_1831.html
  9. ^Alexis de Tocqueville, Journey in Ireland, July–August 1835, Catholic University of America Press, Washington, D.C, 1990.
  10. ^ ab"Regularization" is a term used by Tocqueville himself, see Souvenirs, Third part, pp. 289–90 French edn (Paris, Gallimard, 1999).
  11. ^Coutant Arnaud, Tocqueville et la constitution democratique, Paris, Mare et Martin, 2008, 680 p. See also http://www.arnaud-coutant.fr/ or http://www.arnaud.coutant.over-blog.com.
  12. ^ abJoseph Epstein, Alexis De Tocqueville: Democracy's Guide, HarperCollins Publishing, 2006, p. 148.
  13. ^ abEpstein, Alexis De Tocqueville: Democracy's Guide (2006), p. 160.
  14. ^Tocqueville, Alexis de. Democracy in America, Chicago: University of Chicago, 2000, pp. 282–83.
  15. ^See Volume One, Part I, Chapter 3.
  16. ^
The Fabert School in Metz, where Tocqueville was a student between 1817 and 1823
Tocqueville at the 1851 "Commission de la révision de la Constitution à l'Assemblée nationale".

This page is about the Republic of India. For other uses, see India (disambiguation).

Republic of India

भारत गणराज्य
Bhārat Gaṇarājya

Motto: "Satyameva Jayate" (Sanskrit)
"Truth Alone Triumphs"

National song
Vande Mataram
"I Bow to Thee, Mother"[a][3]

Area controlled by India shown in dark green;
claimed but uncontrolled regions shown in light green.

CapitalNew Delhi
Largest cityMumbai
18°58′30″N72°49′33″E / 18.97500°N 72.82583°E / 18.97500; 72.82583
Official languagesHindi
English[4][5]
Recognised regional languages
National languageNone[7][8]
Religion79.8% Hinduism
14.2% Islam
2.3% Christianity
1.7% Sikhism
0.7% Buddhism
0.4% Jainism
0.9% others[9][10]
DemonymIndian
GovernmentFederalparliamentary
republic

• President

Ram Nath Kovind

• Vice-President

Venkaiah Naidu

• Prime Minister

Narendra Modi

• Chief Justice

Dipak Misra

• Speaker of the Lower House

Sumitra Mahajan
LegislatureParliament of India

• Upper house

Rajya Sabha

• Lower house

Lok Sabha
Independence from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland

• Dominion

15 August 1947

• Republic

26 January 1950
Area

• Total

3,287,263[11] km2 (1,269,219 sq mi)[b] (7th)

• Water (%)

9.6
Population

• 2016 estimate

1,293,057,000[12] (2nd)

• 2011 census

1,210,854,977[13][14] (2nd)

• Density

395.9/km2 (1,025.4/sq mi) (31st)
GDP (PPP)2016 estimate

• Total

$8.727 trillion[15] (3rd)

• Per capita

$6,664[15] (122nd)
GDP (nominal)2016 estimate

• Total

$2.384 trillion[15] (7th)

• Per capita

$1,820[15] (141st)
Gini (2009)33.9[16]
medium · 79th
HDI (2014) 0.609[17]
medium · 130th
CurrencyIndian rupee (₹) (INR)
Time zoneIST(UTC+05:30)

• Summer (DST)

NA (UTCNA)
DST is not observed
Date formatdd-mm-yyyy
Drives on theleft
Calling code+91
ISO 3166 codeIN
Internet TLD

.in

The Republic of India (Hindi: भारत गणराज्य) is a country in Asia. It is at the center of South Asia. India has more than 1.2 billion (1,210,000,000) people, which is the second largest population in the world.[19] It is the seventh largest country in the world by area and the largest country in South Asia. It is also the most populous democracy in the world.[20][21][22]

India has seven neighbours: Pakistan in the north-west, China and Nepal in the north, Bhutan and Bangladesh in the north-east, Myanmar in the east and Sri Lanka, an island, in the south.

The capital of India is New Delhi. India is a peninsula, bound by the Indian Ocean in the south, the Arabian Sea on the west and Bay of Bengal in the east. The coastline of India is of about 7,517 km (4,671 mi) long.[23] India has the third largest military force in the world and is also a nuclear weapon state.[24]

India's economy became the world's fastest growing in the G20 developing nations in the last quarter of 2014, replacing the People's Republic of China.[25] India's literacy and wealth are also rising.[26] According to New World Wealth, India is the seventh richest country in the world with a total individual wealth of $5.6 trillion.[27][28] However, it still has many social and economic issues like poverty and corruption. India is a founding member of the World Trade Organisation (WTO), and has signed the Kyoto Protocol.

India has the fourth largest number of spoken languages per country in the world, only behind Papua New Guinea, Indonesia, and Nigeria.[29] People of many different religions live there, including the five most popular world religions: Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, and Sikhism. The latter three religions came from the Indian subcontinent along with Jainism.

National Symbols of India[change | change source]

The National emblem of India shows four lions standing back-to-back. The lions symbolise power, pride, confidence, and courage (bravery). Only the government can use this emblem, according to the State Emblem of India (Prohibition of Improper Use) Act, 2005

The name India comes from the Greek word, Indus, ultimately derived from the word sindhu, which in time turned into Hind or Hindi or Hindu. The preferred native name or endonym is "Bharat" in Hindi and other Indian languages as contrasted with names from outsiders.

History[change | change source]

Main article: History of India

Two of the main Classical languages of the world— Sanskrit and Tamil, were born in India. Both of these languages are more than 3000 years old. The country founded a religion called Hinduism, which most Indians still follow. Later, a king called Chandragupt Maurya built an empire called the Maurya Empire in 300 BC. It made most of South Asia into one whole country.[31] From 180 BC, many other countries invaded India. Even later (100 BC  — AD 1100), other Indian dynasties (empires) came, including the Chalukyas, Cholas, Pallavas, and Pandyas.[32] Southern India at that time was famous for its science, art, and writing. The Cholas of Thanjavur were pioneers at war in the seas and invaded Malaya, Borneo, Cambodia. The influence of Cholas are still well noticeable in SE Asia.[33]

Many dynasties ruled India around the year 1000. Some of these were the Mughal, Vijayanagara, and the Maratha empires. In the 1600s, European countries invaded India, and the British controlled most of India by 1856.[34]

In the early 1900s, millions of people peacefully started to protest against British control. One of the people who were leading the freedom movement was Mahatma Gandhi, who only used peaceful tactics, including a way called "ahimsa", which means "non-violence".[35] On 15 August 1947, India peacefully became free and independent from the British Empire. India's constitution was founded on 26 January 1950. Every year, on this day, Indians celebrate Republic Day. The first official leader (Prime Minister) of India was Jawaharlal Nehru.

After 1947, India has had a socialist planned economy. It is one of the founding members of the Non-Aligned Movement and the United Nations. It has fought many wars since independence from Britain, including in 1947-48, 1965, 1971, and 1999 with Pakistan and in 1962 with China. It also fought a war to capture Goa, a Portuguese-built port and city which was not a part of India until 1961. The Portuguese refused to give it to the country, and so India had to use force and the Portuguese were defeated. India has also done nuclear tests in 1974 and 1998, and it is one of the few countries that has nuclear bombs.[36] Since 1991, India has been one of the fastest-growing economies in the world.[37]

Government[change | change source]

India is the largest democracy in the world.[22]

India's government is divided into three parts: the Legislative (the one that makes the laws, the Parliament), the Executive (the government), and the Judiciary (the one that makes sure that the laws are obeyed, the supreme court).

The legislative branch is made up of the Parliament of India, which is in New Delhi, the capital of India. The Parliament of India is divided into two groups: the upper house, Rajya Sabha (Council of States); and the lower house, Lok Sabha (House of People). The Rajya Sabha has 250 members,[38] and the Lok Sabha has 552 members.[38]

The executive branch is made up of the President, Vice President, Prime Minister, and the Council of Ministers. The President of India is elected for five years. The President can choose the Prime Minister, who has most of the power. The Council of Ministers, such as the Minister of Defence, help the Prime Minister. Narendra Modi became the Prime Minister of India on May 16, 2014. He is the 19th Prime Minister of India.

The judicial branch is made up of the courts of India, including the Supreme Court. The Chief Justice of India is the head of the Supreme Court. Supreme Court members have the power to stop a law being passed by Parliament if they think that the law is illegal and contradicts (opposes) the Constitution of India.[39] In India, there are also 24 High Courts.

Geography and climate[change | change source]

India is the seventh largest country in the world. It is the main part of the Indian subcontinent. The countries next to India are Pakistan, Bangladesh, Myanmar, China, Bhutan, and Nepal. It is also near Sri Lanka, an island country.

India is a peninsula, which means that it is surrounded on three sides by water. One of the seven wonders of the world is in Agra: the Taj Mahal. In the west is the Arabian Sea, in the south is the Indian Ocean, and in the east is the Bay of Bengal. The northern part of India has many mountains. The most famous mountain range in India is the Himalayas, which have some of the tallest mountains in the world. There are many rivers in India. The main rivers are the Ganges, the Brahmaputra, the Yamuna, the Godavari, the Kaveri, the Narmada, and the Krishna.

India has different climates.[40] In the South, the climate is mainly tropical, which means it can get very hot in summer and cool in winter.[40] The northern part, though, has a cooler climate, called sub-tropical, and even alpine in mountainous regions.[40] The Himalayas, in the alpine climate region, can get extremely cold. There is very heavy rainfall along the west coast and in the Eastern Himalayan foothills. The west, though, is drier. Because of some of the deserts of India, all of India gets rain for four months of the year. That time is called the monsoon. That is because the deserts attract water-filled winds from the Indian Ocean, which give rain when they come into India. When the monsoon rains come late or not so heavily, droughts (when the land dries out because there is less rain) are possible.

Defence[change | change source]

Main article: Indian Armed Forces

The Indian Armed Forces is the military of India. It is made up of an Army, Navy and Air Force. There are other parts like Paramilitary and Strategic Nuclear Command.

The President of India is its Commander-in-Chief. However, it is managed by the Ministry of Defence. In 2010, the Indian Armed Forces had 1.32 million active personnel. This makes it one of the largest militaries in the world.[41]

Currently, the Indian Army is becoming more modern by buying and making new weapons. It is also building defences against missiles of other countries.[42] In 2011, India imported more weapons than any other nation in the world.[43]

From its independence in 1947, India fought four wars with Pakistan and one war with China.

Indian states[change | change source]

For administration purposes, India has been divided into smaller pieces. Most of these pieces are called states, some are called union territories. States and union territories are different in the way they are represented. Most union territories are ruled by administrators sent by the central government. All the states, and the territories of Delhi, and Puducherry elect their local government themselves. In total, there are twenty-nine states, and seven union territories.[44]

States:

Union territories:

Union territoryCapital
Andaman and Nicobar IslandsPort Blair
ChandigarhChandigarh
Dadra and Nagar HaveliSilvassa
Daman and DiuDaman
DelhiDelhi
LakshadweepKavaratti
PuducherryPuducherry

Trouble with the borders[change | change source]

There are disputes about certain parts of the Indian borders. Countries do not agree on where the borders are.[45]Pakistan and China do not recognise the disputed territory of Jammu and Kashmir.[46] The Indian government claims it as an Indian state.[46] Similarly, the Republic of India does not recognise the Pakistani and Chinese parts of Kashmir.[46]

In 1914, British India and Tibet agreed on the McMahon Line, as part of the Simla Accord.[47] In July 1914, China withdrew from the agreement.[47] Indians and Tibetans see this line as the official border. China does not agree, and both mainland China and Taiwan do not recognize that Arunachal Pradesh belongs to India. According to them, it is a part of South Tibet, which belongs to China.[48][49]

Economy[change | change source]

Main article: Economy of India

The economy of the country is among the world's fastest growing. It is the 7th largest in the world with a nominal GDP of $2,250 billion (USD), and in terms of PPP, the economy is 3rd largest (worth $8,720 trillion USD).[50] The growth rate is 8.25% for fiscal 2010. However, that is still $3678 (considering PPP) per person per year. India's economy is based mainly on:

India's economy is diverse. Major industries include automobiles, cement, chemicals, consumer electronics, food processing, machinery, mining, petroleum, pharmaceuticals, steel, transportation equipment, and textiles.[51]

However, despite economic growth, India continues to suffer from poverty. 27.5% of the population was living in poverty in 2004–2005.[52] In addition, 80.4% of the population live on less than USD $2 a day,[53] which was lowered to 68% by 2009.[54]

People[change | change source]

There are 1.12 billion people living in India.[55] India is the second largest country by the number of people living in it, with China being the first. Experts think that by the year 2030, India will be the first.[56] About 70% of Indians live in rural areas, or land set aside for farming.[57] The largest cities in India are Mumbai, Kolkata, Delhi, Chennai, Bangalore, Hyderabad, and Ahmedabad.[44] India has 23 official languages.[58] Altogether, 1,625 languages are spoken in India.[39]

Languages[change | change source]

There are many different languages and cultures in India. The only geographical place with more different languages and cultures is the African continent.[44] There are two main language families in India, the Indo-Aryan and the Dravidian languages. About 69% of Indians speak an Indo-Arayan language, about 26% speak a Dravidian language. Other languages spoken in India come from the Austro-Asiatic group. Around 5% of the people speak a Tibeto-Burman language.

Hindi is the official language in India with the largest number of speakers.[59] It is the official language of the union.[60] Native speakers of Hindi represent about 41% of the Indian population (2001 Indian census). English is also used, mostly for business and in the administration. It has the status of a 'subsidiary official language'.[61] The constitution also recognises 21 other languages. Either many people speak those languages, or they have been recognised to be very important for Indian culture. The number of dialects in India is as high as 1,652.[39]

In the south of India, many people speak Kannada, Telugu, Tamil and Malayalam. In the north, many people speak Chhattisgarhi, Punjabi, Bengali, Gujarati, and Marathi, Oriya, and Bihari.[62][63]

India has 23 official languages. Its constitution lists the name of the country in each of the languages.[64]Hindi and English (listed in boldface) are the "official languages of the union" (Union meaning the Federal Government in Delhi);[65]Tamil,Sanskrit, Telugu, Kannada, Malayalam, and Odia are officially the "classical languages of India."

LanguageLong formEnglish PronunciationShort form
Assameseভাৰত গণৰাজ্যBhārôt Gôṇôrājÿôভাৰত Bharot
Bengaliভারত গণরাজ্যBʰārôt Gôṇôrājÿôভারত Bharot
Bodo
Dogri
English[51]Republic of IndiaIndia
Gujaratiભારતીય પ્રજાસત્તાકBhartiya Prajasattakભારત.
Hindiभारत गणराज्यBhārata Gaṇarājyaभारत Bhārat
Kannadaಭಾರತ ಗಣರಾಜ್ಯBhārata Gaṇarājyaಭಾರತ Bhārata
KashmiriہِندوستانHindustān
Konkaniभारोत गोणराजभारोत
Maithili
MalayalamഭാരതംBhāratamഭാരതം Bhāratam
Manipuri (also Meitei or Meithei)ভারত গণরাজ্যভারত
Marathiभारतीय प्रजासत्ताकBhartiya Prajasattakभारत Bhārat
Nepaliभारत गणराज्यBʰārat Gaṇarādzyaभारत Bʰārat
OriyaଭାରତBharataBharata
Punjabiਭਾਰਤ ਗਣਤੰਤਰBhārat Gantantarਭਾਰਤ Bhārat
Sanskritभारत गणराज्यम्Bhārata Gaṇarājyamभारत Bhārata
Santhali
Sindhiڀارت، هندستانڀارت،ڀارت،
Tamilஇந்தியக் குடியரசுIndiyak-Kudiyarasuஇந்தியா India/Bharadham
Teluguభారత గణరాజ్యముBʰārata Gaṇa Rājyamuభారత్ Bhārath
Urduجمہوریہ بھارتJumhūrīyat-e Bhāratبھارت Bhārat

Culture[change | change source]

Cave paintings from the Stone Age are found across India. They show dances and rituals and suggest there was a prehistoric religion. During the Epic and Puranic periods, the earliest versions of the epic poems Ramayana and Mahabharata were written from about 500–100 BCE,[67] although these were orallytransmitted for centuries before this period.[68] Other South Asian Stone Age sites apart from Pakistan are in modern India, such as the Bhimbetka rock shelters in central Madhya Pradesh and the Kupgal petroglyphs of eastern Karnataka, contain rock art showing religious rites and evidence of possible ritualised music.[69]

Several modern religions are linked to India,[70] namely modern Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism and Sikhism. All of these religions have different schools (ways of thinking) and traditions that are related. As a group they are called the Eastern religions. The Indian religions are similar to one another in many ways: The basic beliefs, the way worship is done and several religious practices are very similar. These similarities mainly come from the fact that these religions have a common history and common origins. They also influenced each other.

The religion of Hinduism is the main faith followed by 79.80% of people in the Republic of India; Islam – 14.23%; Christianity – 2.30%; Sikhism – 1.72%; Buddhism – 0.70% and Jainism – 0.37%.[71]

It's the first time ever since independence that Hindu population percentage fell below 80%.

Technology[change | change source]

India sent a spacecraft to Mars for the first time in 2014. That made it the fourth country and only Asian country to do so. India is the only country to be successful in its very first attempt to orbit Mars. It was called the Mars Orbiter Mission.

ISRO launched 104 satellites in a single mission to create world record. India became the first nation in the world to have launched over a hundred satellites in one mission. That was more than the 2014 Russian record of 37 satellites in a single launch.

Pop culture[change | change source]

India has the largest movie industry in the world.[source?][72] Based in Mumbai (formerly Bombay), the industry is also known as Bollywood . It makes 1,000 movies a year, about twice as many as Hollywood.[73]

Sports[change | change source]

Main article: Sports in India

There is no national game in India.[74] Indians have excelled in Hockey. They have also won eight gold, one silver and two bronze medals at the Olympic games. However, cricket is the most popular sport in India. The Indian cricket team won the 1983 and 2011 Cricket World Cup and the 2007 ICC World Twenty20. They shared the 2002 ICC Champions Trophy with Sri Lanka and won the 2013 ICC Champions Trophy.Cricket in India is controlled by the Board of Control for Cricket in India or BCCI. Domestic tournaments are the Ranji Trophy, the Duleep Trophy, the Deodhar Trophy, the Irani Trophy and the Challenger Series. There is also the Indian cricket league and Indian premier league Twenty20 competitions.

Tennis has become popular due to the victories of the India Davis Cup team. Association football is also a popular sport in northeast India, West Bengal, Goa and Kerala.[75] The Indian national football team has won the South Asian Football Federation Cup many times. Chess, which comes from India, is also becoming popular. This is with the increase in the number of Indian Grandmasters.[76] Traditional sports include kabaddi, kho kho, and gilli-danda, which are played throughout India.

Notes[change | change source]

  1. ↑"[...] Jana Gana Mana is the National Anthem of India, subject to such alterations in the words as the Government may authorise as occasion arises; and the song Vande Mataram
The Taj Mahal in Agra was built by Shah Jahan as a memorial to his wife Mumtaz Mahal. It is a UNESCO World Heritage Site. It is thought to be of "outstanding universal value".[30]
The Harmandir Sahib or The Golden Temple of the Sikhs.
A 2008 Indian Premier League Twenty20 cricket match being played between the Chennai Super Kings and Kolkata Knight Riders

0 Replies to “My Dream India Essay Wikipedia Deutsch”

Lascia un Commento

L'indirizzo email non verrà pubblicato. I campi obbligatori sono contrassegnati *