How the British Empire plundered India for $45 trillion

Ringo

Gold Member
Jun 14, 2021
11,114
4,512
208
Over there
In Great Britain, it is often said that the colonization of India, no matter how terrible it was, did not bring great economic benefits to the British Empire itself. In any case, the administration of India itself was a payment to Britain. Thus, the fact that the empire lasted so long, as the story goes, was a gesture of British goodwill.
A new study by the well-known economist Utsa Patnaik, recently published by Columbia University Press, deals a crushing blow to this narrative. Based on almost two centuries of detailed data on taxes and trade, Patnaik estimated that the UK withdrew a total of about $ 45 trillion from India between 1765 and 1938.
The modern capitalist world would not exist without colonialism and the plunder

 
In Great Britain, it is often said that the colonization of India, no matter how terrible it was, did not bring great economic benefits to the British Empire itself. In any case, the administration of India itself was a payment to Britain. Thus, the fact that the empire lasted so long, as the story goes, was a gesture of British goodwill.
A new study by the well-known economist Utsa Patnaik, recently published by Columbia University Press, deals a crushing blow to this narrative. Based on almost two centuries of detailed data on taxes and trade, Patnaik estimated that the UK withdrew a total of about $ 45 trillion from India between 1765 and 1938.
The modern capitalist world would not exist without colonialism and the plunder


All about the cotton.
 
There was no 'India' until the British unified it; it was just a collection of scumbag feudal lords doing more 'exploitation' than any western 'empire' could ever manage.
 
There was no 'India' until the British unified it; it was just a collection of scumbag feudal lords doing more 'exploitation' than any western 'empire' could ever manage.
Yeah. And Britain's wars with China for the right to sell opium to China are a noble desire of civilized europeans to provide the chinese people with a democratic right to choose whether to smoke or not to smoke opium... Hypocritical filth.
 
Yeah. And Britain's wars with China for the right to sell opium to China are a noble desire of civilized europeans to provide the chinese people with a democratic right to choose whether to smoke or not to smoke opium... Hypocritical filth.

So you realize your own cite is full of crap and the Brits actually lost money on India, but you hope nobody notices. Okay.
 
There was no 'India' until the British unified it; it was just a collection of scumbag feudal lords doing more 'exploitation' than any western 'empire' could ever manage.
That is a lie. As result of the British, India divided into Pakistan and Bangladesh.

You racists always have an excuse.
 
Who didn't invade India would be a better question. Britain just did it better lol. Hate da game not da playa.
 
In Great Britain, it is often said that the colonization of India, no matter how terrible it was, did not bring great economic benefits to the British Empire itself. In any case, the administration of India itself was a payment to Britain. Thus, the fact that the empire lasted so long, as the story goes, was a gesture of British goodwill.
A new study by the well-known economist Utsa Patnaik, recently published by Columbia University Press, deals a crushing blow to this narrative. Based on almost two centuries of detailed data on taxes and trade, Patnaik estimated that the UK withdrew a total of about $ 45 trillion from India between 1765 and 1938.
The modern capitalist world would not exist without colonialism and the plunder

Was it really plunder? India lacked the logistical, and technological know how to efficiently extract resources and get them onto the global marketplace. Britain provided that. Was it perfect? No. Of course it wasn't.
 
Ringo India ''colonized'''' also........just like the Aztecs, Native Americans, Incas, etc etc = they CONQUERED/warred on/STOLE/etc --Britain, Spain, etc only did it on a larger scale because they were superior ........
 
There was no 'India' until the British unified it; it was just a collection of scumbag feudal lords doing more 'exploitation' than any western 'empire' could ever manage.
No no! White man bad. Disregard that they were fighting amongst themselves for thousands of years within a feudal caste system with little or no progress.
White man bad.
 
Was it really plunder? India lacked the logistical, and technological know how to efficiently extract resources and get them onto the global marketplace. Britain provided that. Was it perfect? No. Of course it wasn't.
exactly!!
 
At some point, one must recognize the fact that primitive cultures produce nothing of lasting value, and their people can only be brought into the contemporary world by "imperialists" from more developed countries. The fact is that the indigenous peoples of the America's, Australia, India, Africa, and much of the Middle East were surviving in virtual Stone Age conditions - hunter-gatherers, if you will - until the English and others arrived. Had there been no "Colonialism," they would still be living hand-to-mouth, with average life expectancies in the 30's and 40's, disease-ridden, starving, and poor.

The geographical region we now know as India would be the classic "shit-hole country," in worse shape than most of the others due to its explosive population growth, without the British influence. The benefits and costs of British colonialism in India were mutual; India is far better off than it would have been without the British influence.
 
That is a lie. As result of the British, India divided into Pakistan and Bangladesh.

You racists always have an excuse.

You morons are always wrong. The fact is Muslims Don't Play Well With Others, and moved out rather than share power with dhimmi. You tards always make excuses for your racist agendas.
 
No no! White man bad. Disregard that they were fighting amongst themselves for thousands of years within a feudal caste system with little or no progress.
White man bad.

Of course! if only Whitey had never existed, Afric would be full of rocket scientists and nuclear physicists n stuff, and they would be climate change advocates.
 
At some point, one must recognize the fact that primitive cultures produce nothing of lasting value, and their people can only be brought into the contemporary world by "imperialists" from more developed countries. The fact is that the indigenous peoples of the America's, Australia, India, Africa, and much of the Middle East were surviving in virtual Stone Age conditions - hunter-gatherers, if you will - until the English and others arrived. Had there been no "Colonialism," they would still be living hand-to-mouth, with average life expectancies in the 30's and 40's, disease-ridden, starving, and poor.

The geographical region we now know as India would be the classic "shit-hole country," in worse shape than most of the others due to its explosive population growth, without the British influence. The benefits and costs of British colonialism in India were mutual; India is far better off than it would have been without the British influence.
well said
 
well said
Sadly, once truly progressive nations like Britain, the USA, and Germany have now allowed themselves to be ruled by the same peoples they introduced the first world to. However, they naively think that these people will continue to grow their civilizations. Idiots.
 
In Great Britain, it is often said that the colonization of India, no matter how terrible it was, did not bring great economic benefits to the British Empire itself. In any case, the administration of India itself was a payment to Britain. Thus, the fact that the empire lasted so long, as the story goes, was a gesture of British goodwill.
A new study by the well-known economist Utsa Patnaik, recently published by Columbia University Press, deals a crushing blow to this narrative. Based on almost two centuries of detailed data on taxes and trade, Patnaik estimated that the UK withdrew a total of about $ 45 trillion from India between 1765 and 1938.
The modern capitalist world would not exist without colonialism and the plunder

 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top