How different would India be, had only Britishers colonized us and Mughals never invaded?India would be superpower as it was before. India had a large modern technology, food , knowledge , fighting skills etc. All the technology has been gone out from India. Martial arts , technique of cooking , technique of mining , chemistry , astrology , biology , physics , engineering , building , medicines , medical transplants etc and many field science and technology have gone out from India. India was a major trade center which traded minerals , textiles , spices to Arabs and Europeans. At that time European didn't even had knowledge of wearing clothes. Long before British and Vasco da Gama had invaded India. He was a sea thief of portugal. He had the largest ship in the whole Europe in that time. He reached India with the help of a trader from Gujarat named kanha. Kanha had "12 times " bigger ship than that of Vasco da gama. He looted India. He took gold and platinum from the people looted them and took" seven " big ships of gold and silver to Europe. Then the mughals and Britishers looted us. Still we are a rich nation and we have enough potential to become superpower.
Before 1813 India was an 100% exports oriented country. From 1818 India became 100% import destination. That is the greatest loss India suffered. The only positive of British rule is India has got united as 1nation and socially reformed. Before Muslims invasion India was a forward nation where princess could chose her husband in a swayamvar. India was a 100% scientific research center which got destroyed during muslim invasion. For security reasons women were forced to be indoor deprived of any education
This would have been avoided had Muslims and British not ruled our country.
If the Mughals or other Islamic invaders never colonized then the British would never have had the opportunity to colonize India. Indian natives were entrenched in war with Islamic invaders, making both native and Islamic armies too weak to resist British invasion. If the Mughals never invaded, then the natives would not need to exhaust resources fighting Mughal rule and would be able to focus on resisting British rule, this like other Asian nations avoiding European colonization.
India won't have been the Country it is now.
India was all the Kingdoms combined by the British to administer, in a way Uniting a lot of small, medium and Large Kingdoms.
All the subjects of these Kingdoms found a Common Cause to fight towards and after eradicating the British Administration, they all created a goverment to Replace the British.
Most Kingdoms didn't choose to go back to the pre British Situation, because during the freedom struggle itself a generation had passed and the then current generation were used to living in the British India ( which consisted of provinces from various kingdoms )
I agree with some of the answers. If only the British had invaded, and the Mughals had not, then I think the outcome would have been a little different, where India, Pakistan and Bangladesh may have been one country. But that is not guaranteed either.
The question is would People from India have progressed more in terms of economics and technology without the Mughals, or would they have lagged behind? Would India be a purely homogenous society lacking diversity, as the current language and religious diversity can be attributed to Mughals.
Mughals did leave many influences in India. For example, their cultural impacts, culinary influence, and their laws and language. Some of the most historical landmarks in India were built by the Mughals, Taj Mahal being the best example.
So, it's really hard to say either way. Better question would be if neither British or Mughals would have invaded, where would India be now.