When was imperialism in india

They suffered poverty, malnutrition, disease, cultural upheaval, economic exploitation, political disadvantage, and systematic programmes aimed at creating a sense of social and racial inferiority. While some may argue that any suffering on the part of the British colonialists ought to be met with little sympathy, this is not a reason to obscure it from history.

It was the very notion that Indian civil service servicemen were usurpers, full of privilege, in a foreign land that led to the sapped sense of humanity that many wrestled with — both during and after their India careers. As my own forthcoming book details, some shut themselves off from the day-to-day lives of Indians, unless forced to engage for work purposes.

Others escaped through drowning themselves in alcohol, opium or other drugs. Several came to see their role as being a peacekeeper between various ethnic and religious groups, despite the irony of the British having encouraged and exploited the categorisation of colonial subjects on these grounds in the first place.

Underneath all of this sits a trauma that the coloniser had to either deal with — or resign their post and go home. One serviceman of the late Raj who I have focused on in my research is an example of the coping mechanisms that British officials deployed.

Andrew Clow entered the Indian Civil Service in at the age of 22 and would remain a civil servant until when he reached the mandatory retirement ceiling of 35 years. His most notable portfolios were as secretary of the Indian Labour Bureau in the late s, followed by minister for communications and then governor of Assam from to Clow, and his one thousand or so colleagues at any one time, effectively ruled India during the late Raj. In many cases, England was the imperial, or mother country. Since India was put under imperialism, a great deal of things changed, some for the good, mostly though for the bad.

Between and , India was ruled by two periods of imperialism, both of which affected India in a very profound and permanent manner.

The first period of European control was between and During this period the British East India Company controlled the Indian sub-continent under the guise of economic imperialism, when in fact the manipulation of Indian affairs was much more political than let on.

As well, the British government also gave the company the right to make was or peaceful arrangements with powers who were non-Christian. This control expanded with the founding of a port at Bombay in , and the founding of Calcutta in Then in , a young employee named Robert Clive, who had been named lieutenant-governor in , was sent to take back Calcutta from the Bengal nawab. He accomplished this in January of Then later that year, Clive lead a group of European and 2, Indian soldiers sepoys against a group of 50, Indians lead by a degenerate nawab at Plassey.

The victory of the English forces over the local resistance brought Bengal under the effective political control of the East India Company. This Revolution brought the rule of the East India Company to an end. The second period of English imperialism started in August of when the British monarchy assumed direct control of India from the East India Company. This established a full colonial government, where British officials run the countries affairs, in India.

This is known as colonial imperialism. This period was one of the major changes in Indian life and culture. For much of the s the average Indian peasant had no more say in the way he or she was ruled than did the average worker in the United Kingdom. The British view tended to portray British rule as a charitable exercise - they suffered India's environment eg climate, diseases in order to bring to India good government and economic development eg railways, irrigation, medicine.

Modern admirers of British rule also note these benefits. Other historians point out that ruling India brought huge benefits to Britain. India's huge population made it an attractive market for British industry. India also exported huge quantities of goods to Britain, especially tea, which was drunk or exported on from Britain to other countries.

Then there were the human resources. The Indian army was probably Britain's single greatest resource. It was the backbone of the power of the British empire. In , for example, the British viceroy governor of India, Lord Curzon, said 'As long as we rule India, we are the greatest power in the world.

If we lose it we shall straightway drop to a third rate power'. Did India gain or lose from British rule? Some recent research suggests that British rule did little for India in economic terms. Britain gained hugely from ruling India, but most of the wealth created was not invested back into the country. For example, from to about , economic growth in India was very slow - much slower than in Britain or America.

India actually started importing food under British rule, because Indians were growing 'cash crops' like cotton and tea to be sent to Britain. It is extremely important not to forget the terrible famines that devastated India. These were partly the result of weather, but partly caused by British policies. Food shortages came about because Indians were growing cash crops.

When famine struck in and the British system of government was completely overwhelmed and could not organise a big enough relief effort.

As well as these massive famines, there were many other smaller, more localised famines. This was much less than the French, Dutch and Germans took from their lands. They brought in an irrigation programme, which increased the amount of land available for farming by 8 times. They developed a coal industry, which had not existed before. Public health and life expectancy increased under British rule, mainly due to improved water supplies and the introduction of quinine treatment against malaria.

Big landowners, Indian princes, the Indian middle classes all gained in terms of job opportunities, business opportunities and careers in areas like the law.