![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
someone please figure in the deliberate division of korea, japan, and china by western countries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 8979789C7978 ( talk • contribs) 01:49, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
"The Govt of India-Act -1935", was perfectly, "pre-designed" and passed and imposed by the British-parliament on the Indian-people, to have "the divide and rule policy" of the British-Imperial-Rulers, to dis-integrate people of the Nation-India, principally based on the sharing of the executive-power/legislative-power on the % quota basis of the strength of the population of the religions or castes or sub-castes or races or its various-social-groups or the so-called general catagory of the people or the untouchables etc, by making provisions of the separate list of electorates to elect the members of the legislatures , principally based on the birth-marks of the groups, and never to unite on the basis of the humanity.This political theory resulted in the partition of the Nation-India. The Secular-Republican-Democratic-Constitution of the Nation-India -1950, is perfectly pre-designed to have the universal-unity and integrity of the Nation-India, by the selecting the universal-Constitutional-natural-basic-unit of the Indian-people i.e individual-human-person i.e any-citizen i.e any-person and Constitutionally-guaranteed to it the universal-non-discrimination-status available to him from his birth to death. Unfortunately the temporary-special-provisions relating to the certain classes of the citizens of the Nation-India, based on the birth-marks of the caste or religion or race or sex or descent or its various-social-groups or the minority-group of various-religions or the so-called other backward castes or the scheduled castes or tribes etc, is extended 10-yrs to 70 yrs i.e generations to generations (one generation is the period of 30 years ) ,to share the executive-power or legislative-power or the judiciary-power of the Nation-India, based % quota basis i.e on communal-award lines, declared by the British-Imperial-Rulers in the year -1932, and the universal-unity and integrity of the Nation-India, is dis-integrated, and the Nation-India became the federal state of the communal-award; and presently the state of the Nation-India,became un-governable by the anybody or any-power-force only on the account of the divide and rule policy. The Govt.Deptts of the Nation-India, are dis-integrated and became un-governable by the anybody or any-power-force i.e by the self-rule. The white-collered caste-ism and corruption became the day to day business of the Govt-servants and officials.
Why is it not "divide and conquer"? Rfwh ( talk) 03:46, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Divide and rule. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:56, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
Given the current political landscape across the world, one could argue there are some examples of divide and conquer being used today. (i.e Boomer vs Millenial).
Would this be an appropriate section? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.219.211.154 ( talk) 02:36, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
I've removed a section labeled "The Presidency Of Donald Trump" which included nothing more than a link to the article by that name; as it seemed like a cheap shot of vandalism. If it's a valuable inclusion, I believe it important to arrive to a consensus before simply dropping it in the article. -- 2605:6000:1806:4153:ED68:EB54:E48:776D ( talk) 05:13, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
Good choice. The edit was most likely put there by a partisan editor who wanted to voice their displeasure. SuperWikiLover223 ( talk) 22:11, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
After seeing a section on D. Trump in the German version of this page, but missing it in the English version, I translated it into English and added a US-American source. I have cited both left-leaning and right-leaning sources, in effort to create a politically balanced chapter. Of course, as mentioned below, more current day examples would be very beneficial for understanding the prevalence of this political strategy in contemporary politics. 37.4.228.9 ( talk) 22:52, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Julius Caesar never wrote it, at least I've not found any sources, even if he used the principle. I put a request of citation in the entry.-- Vilnius ( talk) 14:12, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
someone please figure in the deliberate division of korea, japan, and china by western countries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 8979789C7978 ( talk • contribs) 01:49, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
"The Govt of India-Act -1935", was perfectly, "pre-designed" and passed and imposed by the British-parliament on the Indian-people, to have "the divide and rule policy" of the British-Imperial-Rulers, to dis-integrate people of the Nation-India, principally based on the sharing of the executive-power/legislative-power on the % quota basis of the strength of the population of the religions or castes or sub-castes or races or its various-social-groups or the so-called general catagory of the people or the untouchables etc, by making provisions of the separate list of electorates to elect the members of the legislatures , principally based on the birth-marks of the groups, and never to unite on the basis of the humanity.This political theory resulted in the partition of the Nation-India. The Secular-Republican-Democratic-Constitution of the Nation-India -1950, is perfectly pre-designed to have the universal-unity and integrity of the Nation-India, by the selecting the universal-Constitutional-natural-basic-unit of the Indian-people i.e individual-human-person i.e any-citizen i.e any-person and Constitutionally-guaranteed to it the universal-non-discrimination-status available to him from his birth to death. Unfortunately the temporary-special-provisions relating to the certain classes of the citizens of the Nation-India, based on the birth-marks of the caste or religion or race or sex or descent or its various-social-groups or the minority-group of various-religions or the so-called other backward castes or the scheduled castes or tribes etc, is extended 10-yrs to 70 yrs i.e generations to generations (one generation is the period of 30 years ) ,to share the executive-power or legislative-power or the judiciary-power of the Nation-India, based % quota basis i.e on communal-award lines, declared by the British-Imperial-Rulers in the year -1932, and the universal-unity and integrity of the Nation-India, is dis-integrated, and the Nation-India became the federal state of the communal-award; and presently the state of the Nation-India,became un-governable by the anybody or any-power-force only on the account of the divide and rule policy. The Govt.Deptts of the Nation-India, are dis-integrated and became un-governable by the anybody or any-power-force i.e by the self-rule. The white-collered caste-ism and corruption became the day to day business of the Govt-servants and officials.
Why is it not "divide and conquer"? Rfwh ( talk) 03:46, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Divide and rule. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:56, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
Given the current political landscape across the world, one could argue there are some examples of divide and conquer being used today. (i.e Boomer vs Millenial).
Would this be an appropriate section? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.219.211.154 ( talk) 02:36, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
I've removed a section labeled "The Presidency Of Donald Trump" which included nothing more than a link to the article by that name; as it seemed like a cheap shot of vandalism. If it's a valuable inclusion, I believe it important to arrive to a consensus before simply dropping it in the article. -- 2605:6000:1806:4153:ED68:EB54:E48:776D ( talk) 05:13, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
Good choice. The edit was most likely put there by a partisan editor who wanted to voice their displeasure. SuperWikiLover223 ( talk) 22:11, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
After seeing a section on D. Trump in the German version of this page, but missing it in the English version, I translated it into English and added a US-American source. I have cited both left-leaning and right-leaning sources, in effort to create a politically balanced chapter. Of course, as mentioned below, more current day examples would be very beneficial for understanding the prevalence of this political strategy in contemporary politics. 37.4.228.9 ( talk) 22:52, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Julius Caesar never wrote it, at least I've not found any sources, even if he used the principle. I put a request of citation in the entry.-- Vilnius ( talk) 14:12, 15 November 2021 (UTC)