3 ms·

India's share of world GDP fell from ~24% in 1700 to ~4% in 1950. There was an explicit de-industrialization of India - colonial Britain destroyed the textile i

India's share of world GDP fell from ~24% in 1700 to ~4% in 1950. There was an explicit de-industrialization of India - colonial Britain destroyed the textile industry deliberately. Keep them poor and stupid was an explicit state policy. India was heavily exploited by the British compared to China. Extraordinary raw transfer of minerals to the British - most geographical areas were fully exploited of gold, diamonds, coal, manganese, mica, etc. Mines were left utterly bereft - colonial Britain was world-leader in resource extraction. Enforced cash-crops agriculture -instead of local crops that could feed people, farmers were forced to plant indigo, cotton, opium, tea, etc. This resulted in several mass famines. Independent India was left dead poor - extraordinarily more poor than China with no mineral wealth left to support industrialization. China was only semi-colonized and retained nearly all its mineral wealth.

StopDisinfo910 1y ago
There was no explicit deindustrialization of India, the term is non sensical and subject to debate even amongst the postcolonial academics who tried to impose it. There was no to little industrialisation of India. That’s very different. It didn’t escape you that the main reason India share of global GDP fell is the industrial revolution in the West leading to drastic production increase and not India producing less. The textile industry died because it failed to mechanise (and yes Britain had no interest in doing it). The situation was similar in Singapore - a country with no natural resources- and China. Yet they somehow managed to become economic power in the 20th century. I don’t doubt India is going to manage to succeed at some point. It currently is but systematically looking for excuses doesn’t help.
- lenkite 1y ago
  Colonial Britain carried out a well-documented and deliberate de-industrialization of India through trade policy, laws and overwhelming harsh taxes. This is very well-known history - you can reference sources online in Wikipedia and other books to educate yourself. Nobody is looking for excuses. I merely state basic facts - China and India had very different starting points. It is also well-known that China has far better mineral wealth than India due to both natural abundance and no colonial over-exploitation. If you wish sources and references, I can provide them, but I believe you can do this research yourself - this is arguing basic historical facts which are easily found. https://hdl.loc.gov/loc.gdc/gdcebookspublic.2005616343 https://hdl.loc.gov/loc.gdc/gdcebookspublic.2005616343 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De-industrialisation_of_India https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De-industrialisation_of_India

StopDisinfo910 1y ago

There was no explicit deindustrialization of India, the term is non sensical and subject to debate even amongst the postcolonial academics who tried to impose it. There was no to little industrialisation of India. That’s very different. It didn’t escape you that the main reason India share of global GDP fell is the industrial revolution in the West leading to drastic production increase and not India producing less. The textile industry died because it failed to mechanise (and yes Britain had no interest in doing it). The situation was similar in Singapore - a country with no natural resources- and China. Yet they somehow managed to become economic power in the 20th century. I don’t doubt India is going to manage to succeed at some point. It currently is but systematically looking for excuses doesn’t help.

lenkite 1y ago
Colonial Britain carried out a well-documented and deliberate de-industrialization of India through trade policy, laws and overwhelming harsh taxes. This is very well-known history - you can reference sources online in Wikipedia and other books to educate yourself. Nobody is looking for excuses. I merely state basic facts - China and India had very different starting points. It is also well-known that China has far better mineral wealth than India due to both natural abundance and no colonial over-exploitation. If you wish sources and references, I can provide them, but I believe you can do this research yourself - this is arguing basic historical facts which are easily found. https://hdl.loc.gov/loc.gdc/gdcebookspublic.2005616343 https://hdl.loc.gov/loc.gdc/gdcebookspublic.2005616343 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De-industrialisation_of_India https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De-industrialisation_of_India