Then who should rule? Well, it would be quite preposterous to say that I should rule. For, it is not that kind of atrocious discussion that is done here. Well, then who should rule here? It is my considered view that the geographical area currently known as Pakistan, India and Bangladesh should be ruled by the English Royal family, with statutory officials as viceroys. But not by someone from any feudal language nations. And definitely not by democratic processes. As to such rule leading to absolutism, well, safeguards can be kept in position. And there are inherent checks and balances in the English language. No man will have absolute powers. For, he or she cannot grow beyond the parameters of English words and usages. For, there are no relative heights and depths in English words. No man can exist beyond the limits of another citizen’s purview.

 I am sure that many ‘educated’ Indians would find this proposition quite preposterous. They, if they are rich or of the official class would attack it vehemently till they or their children get a visa to remove themselves to some English nation. I am totally against allowing such persons and their offspring into English nations. Once they are there, they would take up the new issue of racial discrimination. I would say that racial discrimination on them is too soft an attitude. For, they are the bearers of feudal language codes that can putrefy human dignity.

Yet, am I alone in my profound feelings that English rule is the best, not only for India, but also for many other places in the world including Pakistan, Bangladesh, many Asian and African nations, the US as well as many European nations? I do not think so.

See this about Cornelia Sorabji: She (15 November 1866 – 6 July 1954) was the first female barrister from India, a social reformer, and a writer. She was the first female graduate from Bombay University, and in 1889 became the first woman to read law at Oxford University. And also the first Indian national to study at any British university. Later she became the first woman to practise law in India and Britain. In 2012, her bust was unveiled at Lincoln's Inn, London.

See the following quotes about her from Wikipedia:

 As Cornelia put it bluntly in India Calling, "I am Parsee by nationality." With that declaration, Sorabji announced what she had long adhered to as the defining differences between her community and that of the Hindus. What's more, she established herself as the interpreter of peculiarly Hindu religious customs and social practices to an audience that was presumed to be non-Indian and probably British—an audience that would also, she appears to have presumed, read her sympathies as similar to their own. Her descriptions of her childhood in India Calling are full of h didactic examples of what differentiated her family from other Indians. Whereas the Sorabji children were "'brought up. English'—i.e., on English nursery tales with English discipline"—most Indian children were, in her view, spoilt and misbehaved. The treatment of women was for Cornelia the ultimate index of cultural difference: orthodox Hindu women "live[d] in subjection to their husbands"; "Moslem women remained in purdah"; "but our women have never been secluded." The independence and careerist goals of the Sorabji women were an explicit contrast to what Sorabji saw as the slavish lives of women in the Hindu community, from whom Parsis sought and maintained an "apartness" that their Persian "origin, temperament, and habits of life . . . made inevitable." Dress—a cultural marker that preoccupied Sorabji throughout her time in Britain—represented the most eloquent manifestation of Parsi distinctiveness. "Our women wear a sari certainly," she wrote, "but it is of silk, and draped differently from the Hindu sari (over the right ear, behind the left)."

 There is this writing also about her, with regard to her biography:  

 QUOTE: 'Although fully Indian, Cornelia supported the British Raj ..........................'. 

MY COMMENT: Apart for a very deep disregard for Gandhi and his likes, there is also a vehement emotion to stand apart from other ‘Indians’. Well, this is actually an emotion seen everywhere in India. In my own native state, the Nairs cannot bear to be identified as Sudras (which was an okay title for them till Travancore became part of India and the north India identification of the term Sudra became clear in Travancore. The Ezhavas want to bring the Thiyyas under their dominion, which at least a particular section of the Thiyyas cannot bear even to contemplate upon. The Christians of South Kerala do not want to discuss their history, in which it is seen that they are the converts from lower castes in Travancore. The north Indians did not want to be identified with the South Indians till recent times. However, when the national fraud and hoax of foreign currency exchange rates turned the tables, and the southern states have made the northern states go destitute, it might be difficult to maintain this dislike. 

The north-eastern state people do not want to be part of the other Indians. The Muslims bear a dislike to other communities, and the other communities bear an equal grudge against them. Well, this is and beyond is the reality. Yet, the real culprit in all this is the feudal content of the ‘Indian’ vernaculars. See this for more. 

Native-English racism is next to nothing compared to all this. Other white racism is just a repulsion to be identified with the others. They want to be with the native-English folks, at the same time heaping the native-English speakers with all verbal and mental abuses. Yet, to be identified with the Blacks and the Asians would be quite unbearable for them.

See these comparitive images: Cornelia with ordinary English children [Somerville College, class of 1891. Cornelia Sorabji is first on the left, second row] and Gandhi with the rich and  mighty of India. If people had any sense, they would opt for English connection, rather than connection to 'Indian' rich and mighty, including Gandhi, who would place them at the lower end of 'respect' versus perjorative codes. In fact, English racialism is much better than being hammered by 'Indian' pejorative codes. 

There are others also who have come forward supporting English rule for the world. See these comments on SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN on its RAMANUJAM page:

 32. Eugene Sittampalam     07:26 PM 12/27/12

I was born and raised in the Island of Serendipity, or Ceylon (now Sri Lanka) during the British reign there; and I am very proud indeed of the educational system they firmly established for us there. With excellent teachers and UK-style education, it was little wonder that we excelled in education in the whole of South-East Asia. (Even Mr. Lee Kuan Yew, who was to later become the first Prime Minister of Singapore, had his early education in Ceylon; see: The Singapore Story http://www.sthomascollege.com/Excerpt.htm)

 Even if the Sun has set on the British Empire, you can safely bet it'll never set on the British language. It grows instead, with even the EU be adopting it as its official language (in preference to contending German for the honour)!

 Long live Euro-English; and Happy New Year to you all!

 www.toe.tv