British Imperialism in India Essay

When the Mughal empire declined in the 1700’s, Britain turned its focus on India. The recent decline left India weak and ideal to colonize. Britain already had influence in India with the British East India Company, but now their outlook on India became political. The people of India were very diverse, spoke different languages, and had contrasting cultures. This was a disadvantage as Britain used their inability to unite against them. The British helped stimulate competition between the various Indian people and their princes. The Indians also had inferior weapons that couldn’t uphold against British firearms. In addition, Britain aimed to socially change India with an attempt to get rid of the caste system and important religious traditions like sati. By the 1850’s, the British selected Indians to provide service in fighting. Those employed were called Sepoys and were treated unfairly

In 1885, nationalist leaders organized the Indian National Congress who called for greater democracy which they felt would bring more power to themselves. Other Indian nationalists, took a more radical, anti-British stand. I believe this is positive because I feel that the first instance of British resistance was the first step towards independence. Negative effects of the imperialistic rule in India were that there was a rapid population growth , hence, there was a strain on the food supply, especially since farmland was turned into cash crops instead of food. They cleared new farmlands which led to massive deforestation and other environmental destruction. Also, in the late 1800s terrible famines swept India. The railroads could not carry food to the suffering areas, but overall, millions of Indian peasants sank deeply into poverty.

As India’s modernization developed, the entire civilization of India improved remarkably. The country’s improvement of civilization is exemplified through it’s establishment of schools and law. Western education was introduced by Britain and laws were well made with courts that enforce them. (Doc 3). One should take into account the speaker of this document because Romesh Dutt is an Indian like any other, yet he praises the British for what they have done to contribute to the development of India. In addition to these establishments is Britain bringing finer ideals of humanity to India. Infanticide, the killing of female babies, was brought to a halt as well as participation in the slave trade (Doc 5). Without the interference of Britain, these inhumane actions would be prevalent throughout India and the country would suffer from a bad reputation. These

Many positive things happened during, and as a result of, the British colonization of India. When the East India Company took control of India in 1612, they began modernizing, westernizing, and industrializing India. This westernization included giving women more rights, an attempt to eliminate the caste system and the loss of many of the more backward Hindu religious beliefs such as the domination of women by men and denying an entire class of people any rights. British occupation also did things long term for India. The modern technology and western customs allowed India to become a burgeoning regional superpower. The colonization of India was helpful for India because it went a long way to modernize India, westernized India in

British Imperialism had a negative impact on the politics of India because the British took away control of the country for their benefit and enforced laws that discriminated against Indians. Lavani claims the British “established the framework for India’s justice system, civil service, loyal army, and efficient police force.” However, this framework was not intended for the Indians, but for the British. For example, 94% of government positions were held by Englishman (Doc. #2). These people had “no permanent interest in their well-being” and returned to England after “forty-five or fifty-five years of age with large pensions (Doc. #2).” This shows the British government used India as a source of wealth and controlled the people without

Throughout the years many historians have compilated and examined why Indian people were so desperate to gain back their independence from the British Empire during their rule over India, from 1612 to 1947. The reasoning can most definitely be found as the British discriminated against Indian people as they believe that they were inferior; it is no surprise that Indian people fought so hard for their independence. Throughout the British Raj, they placed and put forward unbelievably racist acts and laws which discriminated against Indian people. Which of course led to Indians to rebel against the British rule and which the British reacted with causing massacres. Explaining the nationalistic many India’s felt during the British Raj.

After World War I, India established organizations known as the Indian National Congress and the Muslim League to lead their efforts toward independence. Wilson’s Fourteen Points and the Russian Revolution played a major role. Mahandes Gandhi, an Indian nationalist, led the movement toward independence for India. He was raised as a Hindu and studied law in England. He was opposed to the idea of the caste or class system especially the exclusion of the Untouchables. During his leadership, the British allowed the Indians to “self-rule”, but this lifestyle was rejected by the Muslims because the wanted complete independence. As a

I know this because although britain claimed to gift India and her people with an absence of killing, and mutual respect, the British people have proven otherwise with the Amritsar massacre, and violent threats. To elaborate, Dr. Lalvani claims that there was a “noticeable absence of killings”, but this contrasts to the fact that in 1919, General R. E. H. ordered 50 Indian soldiers to open fire upon 20,000, killing 400 and injuring 1,200. This is important because it directly contrasts Dr. Lalvani’s previous claim that India had a noticeable absence in killings, with 400 being the dead. Finally, Dr. Lalvani claimed that there was mutual respect between Indians and britons. But, on the contrary, “Britain’s own cloth manufacturers conspired to cut off the fingers of bengali weavers and break their looms” (Document 3). This is very important because threats of violence and destruction of property against Indians is absolutely not

You may think Imperialism is not a big deal in india. But in a matter of a fact it was a very very very big deal. British imperialism in India is the most suitable example how one nation can make use of another nation through total control for very big amounts of profit. Imperialism had a lot of effects on india and I mean a lot some and most of them were positive but there was also a little bit that happened to be negative as well.

Another huge downfall of the British’s imperialistic reign in India was the Sepoy uprising. The Sepoy soldiers were originally people of India who supported the British imperialism and rulers. They rebelled after a rising spread of Indian nationalism spread throughout the country and after the spread of rumors that the grease for their guns was animal fat. The Sepoy’s rebellion is sometimes referred to as the first war of independence for India. The British call it a mutiny against pre-existing conditions. This revolt of 1857 led to a re-organization of the Indian army. The results of the Sepoy 1857 revolt may be subdivided as constitutional changes, changes in the army, religious, judicial and diplomatic effects, and social effects. There was a major transfer of power from the British East India trading company to a sovereign power of Britain. The military was originally split into two sections: the king’s forces and company’s troops. Because of this revolt, the two forces were then united and called king’s forces and one-third of it would consist of Europeans. The animosity between the Europeans and Indians rose and the hatred between the two also rose (Rana). The effects on India after the British imperialistic period were great, but there were other major effects left on China after the British imperialistic rule on them through

The so-called leaders of the people were much too preoccupied with the pastime of supplanting each other to be able to appreciate the value of unity. And that is what gave Britain the chance to slyly sneak in after the Indians had finally gotten rid of Moghul rule. The British seized this golden opportunity and implemented the scheme termed divide and conquer to take over India.

However India did get some things out of its own conquest. The British were fairly gentlemanly in their actions in India. The terrible act of Siraj-ud-Dowla, imprisoning 146 Britons in the Black Hole of Calcutta, showed in some ways the psyche of some of the rulers of India and the British civilising influence must have had some effect on most Indians quality of life, for the better. I do not feel however, that the British went to India in order to civilise the culture, I do not believe that their motives were that selfless, the civilising influence seems to have simply been a by-product of the fact that the Britains came.

The main cause of the rebellion is considered to be the East India Company’s exploitative and oppressive policies towards the Indian native soldiers – Sepoy. However, there were also many other causes that in sum resulted in the Rebellion of 1857. During the period between 1820 and 1856 East India Company acting on the behalf of the British government had been actively maintaining a number of reforms and policies in India. In addition, different fractions of people wanted to improve India in different ways. Evangelicals, for example, saw the improvement in India through Christianity and conversion of the Indian people to it. Liberal reformist thought that only Western education would bring the “barbarous” nation to the modern level. Utilitarian saw the improvement in India through the maintaining good policies. However, the Indian people had a negative attitude towards the active interference of the British people in their lives and saw the British actions as an assault on ancient traditions and customs. In addition, there were also two important Governor Generals of India whose policies accelerated the growing nationalism among the Indian people and resulted in the Great Uprising. The periods of government of Lord Bentinck and Lord Dalhousie had also contributed to the mutiny as their reforms were aimed to change the social, economic and political lives of the Indian people. This essay will analyse all these causes in a more detailed way (From lectures

The reform activities united people and the attack on institutions like caste which hampered social unity created a sense of oneness in the people. But most of these reform movements had certain limitations. The questions to which they gave primacy concerned only small sections of Indian society. Some of them failed to emphasize or even recognize that colonial rule was inimical to the interests of the Indian people. Most of them worked within the framework of their respective communities in a way tended to promote identities based on religion or caste. Many of these limitations were sought to be overcome during the course of the national movement with which many social and religious reformers were closely associated. Indian nationalism