“What was intended is plain. It was intended to appease them. Why was this particular moment selected for their appeasement? I will tell your Lordships why. It was because a grave threat had been made subversive of civil government in India. … I have had occasion in the last six years to make such study of Indian history as my abilities have qualified me to undertake, and I have drawn one deep lesson. The way to discharge our fiduciary obligations to India is never to yield to threats—never, never! The moment in which to make gestures of appeasement is not when you are threatened by men of influence and authority with a general campaign of civil disturbance. And what a method to select! You address the politically-minded classes of India. They are the only ones with which you are dealing, for you do not suppose that the 290,000,000 of peasants who cannot read are being appeased; they do not need appeasement and we were long since told of their pathetic contentment. What was the object of making this statement at this moment?”

Speech http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/lords/1929/nov/05/india-the-viceroys-statement in the House of Lords (5 November 1929)

Adopted from Wikiquote. Last update June 3, 2021. History

Help us to complete the source, original and additional information

Do you have more details about the quote "What was intended is plain. It was intended to appease them. Why was this particular moment selected for their appeasem…" by F. E. Smith, 1st Earl of Birkenhead?
F. E. Smith, 1st Earl of Birkenhead photo
F. E. Smith, 1st Earl of Birkenhead 27
British politician 1872–1930

Related quotes

Mohamed Nasheed photo

“Mohamed Nasheed: No, I am not disappointed, because we take the long view. I feel that India will in time understand what is best for India, the Maldives and the Indian Ocean. At present I am not convinced that it has understood this. But to assume that appeasement towards dictators would help bring stability -- it’s a tested hypothesis [that it does not]. How far do you appease? What do you achieve out of that? We would expect all countries in the region to be decent and supportive of democratic processes, and India too.”

Mohamed Nasheed (1967) Maldivian politician, 4th president of the Maldives

Irrespective of India’s policies, we would still argue for an India-first policy. This is not to do with India, it is to do with the Maldives, with us. I am under pressure from within my own party by those who tell me that we keep articulating the same thing, while President Yameen says he is going to be let off the hook by India and Pakistan. Our view is this – whatever India does, our views and principles are not based on our fortunes. We would want to have good relations with India and always argue for an India-first foreign policy.
Interview with the Hindu http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/interview/interview-with-nasheed-mohamed/article8310022.ece (March 4, 2016)

Maithripala Sirisena photo

“India has been a friend of Sri Lanka for a long time. That is why I selected India for the first state visit after my election as the President”

Maithripala Sirisena (1951) Sri Lankan politician, 7th President of Sri Lanka

Quoted on Eursasia Review (February 7, 2016), "India To Give Fullest Support To Sri Lanka’s Policies, Says Indian Foreign Minister" http://www.eurasiareview.com/07022016-india-to-give-fullest-support-to-sri-lankas-policies-says-indian-foreign-minister/

Thomas Hardy photo
Harold Wilson photo

“The government have only a small majority in the House of Commons. I want to make it quite clear that this will not affect our ability to govern. Having been charged with the duties of Government we intend to carry out those duties.”

Harold Wilson (1916–1995) Former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom

Television broadcast (October 1964), after winning the general election, quoted in David Butler, Coalitions in British Politics (Macmillan, London, 1978), p. 99.
Prime Minister

Aristide Maillol photo
Richard Rodríguez photo

“On the other hand I tell my true intimates that what I write is not intended for them. In fact I'd prefer they never read it. When I write, I'm talking to somebody I intend to never meet.”

Richard Rodríguez (1944) American journalist and essayist

Violating the Boundaries: An Interview with Richard Rodriguez (1999)

Richard Rodríguez photo
Tommy Robinson photo

“Since last night I've had countless threats to cut my head off. I have [contacted] police over 200 death threats. No arrests.”

Tommy Robinson (1982) English right-wing activist

Tweet quoted in "Woolwich Beheading: EDL Leader Tommy Robinson Tweets Own Death Threats", Internation Business Times (23 May 2013) http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/tommy-robinson-edl-death-threats-woolwich-terrorism-470472
2013

Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel photo

“What experience and history teach is this — that nations and governments have never learned anything from history, or acted upon any lessons they might have drawn from it.”

Introduction, as translated by H. B. Nisbet (1975)
Variant translation: What experience and history teach is this — that people and governments never have learned anything from history, or acted on principles deduced from it.
Pragmatical (didactic) reflections, though in their nature decidedly abstract, are truly and indefeasibly of the Present, and quicken the annals of the dead Past with the life of to-day. Whether, indeed, such reflections are truly interesting and enlivening, depends on the writer's own spirit. Moral reflections must here be specially noticed, the moral teaching expected from history; which latter has not unfrequently been treated with a direct view to the former. It may be allowed that examples of virtue elevate the soul, and are applicable in the moral instruction of children for impressing excellence upon their minds. But the destinies of peoples and states, their interests, relations, and the complicated tissue of their affairs, present quite another field. Rulers, Statesmen, Nations, are wont to be emphatically commended to the teaching which experience offers in history. But what experience and history teach is this, that peoples and governments never have learned anything from history, or acted on principles deduced from it. Each period is involved in such peculiar circumstances, exhibits a condition of things so strictly idiosyncratic, that its conduct must be regulated by considerations connected with itself, and itself alone. Amid the pressure of great events, a general principle gives no help. It is useless to revert to similar circumstances in the Past. The pallid shades of memory struggle in vain with the life and freedom of the Present.
Lectures on the History of History Vol 1 p. 6 John Sibree translation (1857), 1914
Lectures on the Philosophy of History (1832), Volume 1

Mark Tully photo

Related topics