How would have history turned out to be if the British had not colonized India?

According to what i know, these might have been the possibilities

  • The country may have been richer
    • According to Dadabhai Naoroji's book, "Poverty And Un-British Rule In India", the amount of wealth drained by the British from Indian resources amounted to 4 million pounds every year.
    • Before British Raj India was called Golden bird and it would have remained so

  • The country's map wouldn't be what it is now.
    • Before British different rulers ruled the country, mostly muslim rulers, most probably monarchy would have been overthrown by late 90's
    • But this would not have resulted in the same map of the nation as it is now
    • I can't say how small or how many parts as there are too many possibilities.

  • World War II wouldn't have affected India
    • India had always been a peaceful nation and would have nothing to with the World War II had it not been under the rule of the British. More than two million sons of our soil were sent to fight the Axis powers in a war we had nothing to do with.
    • Being part of British Raj, we had to fight as a British Colony

  • Formation of a consolidated army
    • India has one of the strongest defense in the world. However, it would have been difficult for India to form such a strong army today had it not been trained for warfare under the British.
    • Indians were trained under British Raj which led a formation of a systematic , disciplined and strong army for India

  • Slow development of the railways
    • The British introduced the railways in 1871, but given their absence, the emergence of railways would probably come about much later in the 20th century and would not have covered every part of the country.
    • We wouldn't be having Metro right now in India, most probably.

  • A fragmented Nation
    • Most of the states might or might not have been combined to form a Country we call India
    • Most of the states will be known for different ruler and language

  • Progress would have been witnessed without Indians paying dearly for it
    • Technological advancements such as setting up telegraph posts, connecting railways, airways and progress in the fields of medicine and academics would have flourished even without the British.
    • After all we would have been rich nation.

  • The abolition of Sati
    • The most heinous Hindu practice where a widow would be burnt alive on the pyre of her deceased husband was finally abolished in 1829 in certain parts of India, starting from Bengal and rest of the Princely states followed suit. Apparently, Mughal king, Akbar, and Aurungzeb had tried to ban the custom but their implementations were not fruitful.
    • Although personalities like Sahajanand Swami and Raja Rammohan Roy had struggled hard to abolish the practice, it would have been a tough job had the British not backed the cause, especially with the widespread protest from the Hindu community against the ban.

Thanks for reading!

  1. BITTER TRUTH: If the British had not colonized India, then India would have become a Muslim country.
  2. Every Muslim invaders, who invaded the Indian sub continent, including the Mughals, had only one agenda and that was to convert all the Hindus ( Infidels) into Muslims. And, all the invaders were quite remarkably successful in their agenda. The result was Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh, which were all once Hindu countries, became completely Muslim countries. The Muslim invaders had already forcefully converted millions of Indians and, had not the British ruled India for those 200 years from the 18th century, the remaining Indians would have also been converted and India would also have become a complete Muslim country.
  3. British introduced modern weaponry to Indians. They taught the Indians how to use those modern weaponry and how to be disciplined and organised while fighting the enemy. This modern weaponry stopped the Muslim invasion of India and further conversions.
  4. Some Indians argue that Moghals had become weak and Hindu kingdoms like Maratha, Vijayanagara were rising and so, Hindus would have dominated. But, the Muslim history teaches us they would have repeatedly attacked India till they achieved their goals. Remember Mahmud of Ghazni , who invaded India 17 times. The treacherous defeat of Vijayanagara Empire by the united Sultanates, followed by destruction and looting brought an end to a dream.
  5. I agree that it is always difficult to accept bitter truth. Some Hindus may not be able to digest the bitter truth that we needed the British entry into India to prevent further Muslim invasion and forceful conversion. But the reality is Hindus are generally soft, mild, adjusting and peace loving people. But Muslim invaders were always ferocious and aggressive. So it was a mismatch. We therefore needed modern Weaponry from British to face further Muslim invasion. Today, we are very strong. Jai Hind.

Just Before the East India company gained it's momentum in the sub-continent , there where few regional superpowers who where gaining momentum .

  1. This was India's map in 1795 , a time before the East India company emerged as a power .

We would have been still or lessertime than current., using horses., since railways are a gift of britishers to India.

Bangladesh Pakistan Afghanistan Burma Myanmar etc those who were a part of Greater India ie AkhandBharat would be one big country thereby surpassing every possible GDP and developed country of the present globe.

We'd have been colonized by some other European power. At that time, European nations were the most technologically, politically & militarily advanced powers. All three are required to colonize a subcontinent. The Indian kingdoms of that era were strong enough to repulse foreign invaders even though they were divided. Besides, Foreign invaders tend to unite rulers as they don't want to compete with unknown kings. It was this fear of war, both within India & at the borders, that allowed the Brits to colonize us.

The British were one of the strongest naval powers in the world. Their primary rival was France. So, I'm guessing France would have colonized us. However, the French didn't play politics as well the British. They were more interested in establishing strong trade & military relations instead of establishing dominance. However, they probably would have stepped in whenever a local ruler was getting too powerful.

The trade with India & subsequently the rest of Europe would have allowed the French to amass huge riches(just like the Brits). This wealth would have allowed them to build a navy that would isolate the British & fund wars that would force the rest of Europe to bow to them. Of course, this process would be bloody but the French would most likely avoid the Revolution since an isolated Britain wouldn't have many colonies to break away & form constitutional republics. The US would still be inhabited & divided among its various native tribes.

So, democracy is unlikely to have taken root. French would be the international language of diplomacy & commerce. Slavery would still probably exist since the Spanish & Portuguese colonies in South America would depend on it. Spain, Portugal & France were all catholic nations & had a strong bond. Besides, the French colonies in the Caribbean would have large labor intensive sugar plantations. We would probably still see Indians moving to these regions for work.

  • Then Asian continent will have at least 70 countries instead of 48 countries.
  • America will be the world's largest Democracy.
  • The world wouldn't have known about Leaders like Mahatma Gandhi,subash Chandra Bose, Bhagat Singh, APJ Kalam and many more....
  • some parts of India will still be under the control of the French, Portuguese.
  • Several famines that occurred in the sub continent would have been prevented.
  • Practices like sati, untouchability, Caste discrimination would still exist.
  • Multiple border related issues would pose a serious threat for regional Peace.

Indian history would still be Mughals rule.

Let's talk Scandinavia.

The Northern European countries have a common ethnic and cultural heritage. They are collectively called Scandinavia.

Had there been no British rule, the south Asian region would have been known collectively as India or Indian Peninsula.

There would have been at least two dozens of countries by now.

China should have been sitting pretty Andaman and Nicobar Islands

Why do people travel as tourists?

It is because travels makes us happy and release their tress , feel relaxation and wants to explore about various new places, destination where they can gather handsome knowledge. As i am having my own travel agency in Kenya so this is my definition about why people loves to travel.

As a solo female traveler, which are some places I should never visit?

Any of the North Indian cities especially our capital and as mentioned below Ludhiana Punjab and Haryana. Strict NOMumbai is far better.south Indian states always a best option. Please mention your travel plans an s places for further insights.

Has any documentary ever changed your life?

Last week I happened to watch a documentary named *GASP* *one strange rock *IT IS A NAT GEO DOCUMENTARY .Name of documentary is gasp but before you could take a gasp it's going to take your breath away.Ever wondered why the level of oxygen