The British in India

It seems to me that although many decry the British rule of India as oppressive and exploitative, there would be no India at all if Britain hadn't conquered it. Wasn't it the case that the Indian subcontinent was nothing more than a plurality of warring principalities before Britain conquered (and unified) it? I know for a fact that English is the single consistently spoken language and throughout the subcontinent (probably a good thing for India and Pakistan on the world stage) and that the second most prominently spoken is Hindi, which is not nearly as prevalent. India, it seems to me, would still be a highly balkanized and unimportant region of the world (if infact it could have retained its sovereignty in a disunited state for so long) if it weren't for the British occupation and unification of the country.

Plus when it started a good efficient and incorrptible civil service and a founding in democracy

How is it that India is knows as one of the biggest democracies around ?

What were these divisions and how should they have been addressed ?

Originally posted by Peteratwar How is it that India is knows as one of the biggest democracies around ?

India, it seems to me, would still be a highly balkanized and unimportant region of the world (if infact it could have retained its sovereignty in a disunited state for so long) if it weren't for the British occupation and unification of the country.

I think that's the wrong way around. If Britian hadn't conqured india, britian would have remained an unimportant region of the world.

Every empire in history that can control a reasonable portion of the subcontinent becomes rich and powerful. Those that can control all of it become unequalled in their age. Its not for nothing that the word Mogul means a rich and powerful person.

Most of Britains revenue was linked to India, and more than half her colonies, like Egypt, Aden, Singapore, and later Iraq were made to secure India.

India had lots of labor power for the British. also it wwas rich in natural resources

Actually, GLCE2003, British rule in India can be divided into three statges, i) company raj, which was brutal, extermely brutal even by the standards of the age as attested by contemporys, ii) crown rule from circa 1860-1914, which was chracterised by a "pretend we are not here"approach, the British let the locals do whatever, if they got too big for their boots lauch a punative expedition/measures depending on area, iii) 1914 to 1947, characterised by repression like the Defense of India Act and the Rowlett Act, though incidentally it was only here that the Brits wanted India to take a role of its own, as evidenced by the creation of a national flag, and Indian embassys/ missions in most countrys. So ironically, the time when Britain wanted India more independant was when the rule was even more repressive.

  Mughal just looking at your base text "ALL YOUR BASE ARE BELONG TO US ", am i mistaken if i think that it is taken from that Gensis shooter game which was famous for murdering the English language.