1. I just showed you that it was the Jains who supplied to the Muslims Mughals who had the real monopoly over opium trade.
It was the Jain Malwa sahukars, merchants-financiers who financed the cultivators, multiplied their advances to the producers of Opium.
In 1818, a chest of Malwa opium sold in Canton for (Spanish) $680 as against $840 for a chest of 'Patna' opium.
The peasants in Malwa were paid three times as much for their crop as the cultivators in Bihar.
Difference is British had over lordship of Bengal following the Battle of Buxar in 1764 and hence monopoly on trade.
Point being the Marwadis restricted themselves to FINANCING the operation, never did the actual trading.
2. When the dutch was barred from trading via mumbai surat, the parsis took over the trade in partnership with EIC.
It was this european money that helped the parsi houses to purchase opium by outbidding the marwadis. Marwadis restricted themselves to financing, never actual trading.
3. The British took over the Marwadi financing after 1857 giving monopoly to parsis. You can guss why.
It is this monopoly which you claim as "victory" over Hindus. Though the Marwadi sahucars were Jains.
I am not sure what you are trying to prove ?
That parsis were better collaboraters to the british ?
That parsis are superior to the "Hindoos" ?
or that Parsis are somehow not responsible for the drug trade ?
