a Required reading for all Anglophiles in former British colonies, and needs to be a textbook in Britain. This involved the administration in maintaining the pretence that the famines exposed the Indians’ inability to govern for themselves, while itself failing to respond adequately to the food shortage or subsequently to acknowledge responsibility for the resulting mass starvation. After revisiting Ferguson’s defence of empire to dispel his (as it turned out) misplaced confidence in the 21st century as that of The statistic that India produced 25 per cent of world output in 1800 and 2-4 per cent of it in 1900 does not prove that India was once rich and became poor. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Nevertheless, British patronage seems to have had a cathartic effect on India’s future philanthropists, such as Pachaiyappa Mudaliar, Sir J. and Lady Jamsetji Jeejeebhoy, Jagannath Shankarshet and Kavasji Jehangir Readymoney, who ‘thus encouraged […] went about building some of the country’s most important institutions’.Tharoor was surprised that his Oxford Union speech, which he felt merely restated established arguments, had created such a stir and concluded that what he ‘considered basic was unfamiliar to many, perhaps most, educated Indians’ (p. xxii). As with David Cameron’s earlier refusal to apologise during a visit to Amritsar, it is tempting to speculate that the nostalgia of British voters for their ‘jewel in the crown’, expressed by the popularity of such recent dramas as Reviews in History is part of the School of Advanced Study. '- Nilanjana Roy, Financial Times'Brilliant a A searing indictment of the Raj and its impact on India. The reasons are manifold, and partly lie, as Tharoor’s Inglorious Empire shows, in the policies enacted by the colonial powers themselves before independence and in the economic and political conditions imposed by Western powers after. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.This website uses cookies to improve your experience. India’s share of world GDP fell from 27 per cent in 1700 to 3 per cent by the time the British left in 1947. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. And its subjugation resulted in the expropriation of Indian wealth to Britain, draining the society of the resources that would normally have propelled its natural growth and economic development’ (p. 222). The Union then posted the speech on the web. The increasingly agricultural Indian state paid for its own vassal status through outrageously high levels of taxation, which were syphoned off to pay for such developments (all in the British interest) as the enormous Indian army, the construction of railways (at an abnormally high five per cent return for British investors), and the building of public works in both India and Britain. "Empire" comes so close to working that you can see there from here. In chapter five he challenges the British notion of effective rule through ‘enlightened despotism’, by which the state takes on a parental role towards its subjects, making decisions in what it perceives to be their best interest. By subscribing to this mailing list you will be subject to the School of Advanced Study
However, as Keay points out, ‘Indians are not the only ones who need reminding that empire has a lot to answer for’. […] The drain theory of India’s poverty could not be tested, because the intrinsic value of the payments India made to Britain could not be measured. '- Salil Tripathi, Chair of the Writers in Prison Committee, PEN International, and author of The Colonel Who Would Not RepentNecessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly.
[I]t is entirely possible that an Indian ruler would have accomplished what the British did, and consolidated his rule over most of the subcontinent’ (p. 37). The education system imposed by the British displaced an existing and much older organisation, while the English language, rather than being a gift to the Indian people, was necessary to implement colonial policy. These cookies do not store any personal information.Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. By 1947, after two centuries of British rule, it had decreased six-fold.
[…] The research shows that the colonial links […] do not sufficiently explain British investment and British economic growth and that arguments for the empire rested on strategic needs more than material gains […]. Tharoor took the lectern at the Asia Society in Hong Kong on Dec. 2, not fully recovered from mobilizing relief in Kerala forr victims of Cyclone Ockhi. Its emergence as the language of international commerce is more a consequence of American globalisation than British imperialism. In his final chapter, Tharoor argues that, despite the British public’s woeful factual ignorance of their former empire, ‘colonialism […] remains a relevant factor in understanding the problems and the dangers of the world in which we live’ (p. 236). Asia Society Talk. Inglorious Empire What The British Did To India by Shashi Tharoor. Tharoor concedes that tea and cricket might be the exception to his thesis, acknowledging that ‘this time it is difficult to argue that one could have had extensive tea cultivation and a vast market for the product without colonization’ (p. 205). In addition, Roy maintains, Tharoor ‘misreads British history’, ‘is ill-informed on the record of Indian economic growth in colonial times’ and has a ‘naïve’ understanding of Indian political history.Tharoor’s occasional misinterpretation of Victorian politics is demonstrable in his treatment of Robert Lytton, viceroy from 1876 to 1880. Inglorious Empire What the British Did to India (Paperback) : Tharoor, Shashi : "In the eighteenth century, India's share of the world economy was as large as Europe's. Indians are not the only ones who need reminding that empire has a lot to answer for.' You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. Inglorious Empire What the British Did to India (Book) : Tharoor, Shashi : "In the eighteenth century, India's share of the world economy was as large as Europe's.