Their bad luck to encounter the technologically superior Brits at a time when the princes each felt the Brits could be of use to them.
The Brits are not just the sum of their commercial interests ~ although your typical Indian would like you to think so. They have a grand history of seeking to uplift the poor and extending charity to the oppressed. They even invented what has become modern European democratic forms of government and process.
The East India Tea Company was not a beneficent organization. The true test of an empire’s supposed benevolent motives is when they conflict with their commercial interests. I am not saying that the British Empire was totally bereft of such motives, but they were not what brought them to India, or the North American continent, or anywhere else. In some ways they helped India, such as in eradicating the Thugs and introducing modern medicine and education, but when push came to shove, they massacred Indians, whether Hindus, Sikhs or Moslems, and not so long ago, either. As for the conquest of the Ottomans, that had nothing whatever to do with liberating Arabs or establishing a homeland for Jews.
“The Brits are not just the sum of their commercial interests ~ although your typical Indian would like you to think so. They have a grand history of seeking to uplift the poor and extending charity to the oppressed. They even invented what has become modern European democratic forms of government and process.”
When I read the paragraph, I remember when the day after I came home from the hopsital this recent past summer, and I sat down to watch the opening ceremony to open the 2012 London summer olympics which talked about the contributions the British made both Europe and the world, until I heard Brian Coautus say and in a “jabbing” way to the country the British love to call the (USA) the “nation across the big lake” on the hot debate known as “Obamacare” and the infamous “NHS” when there was a dancing skit of doctors, nurses, and little kids. I was very much put off by that having just come home from the hospital after spending about a week there by it.
well, not completely correct. The Brits were not so technically superior in the 1800s. In comparison the Portuguese who came in the 1497 and were pre-eminent in the 1500s had a technological advantage
The Brits were initially cowed by the might of the Great Mughals. But when the Mughals fell, due to the outcome of the jihads by Aurangzeb, India became once more a chequerboard of states -- Marathas but also Rajputs and the various satraps like the Nizam, rulers of Oudh etc. looking for independence
The British played a smart game of carrot and stick. They didn't use the stick much, but gave the princes a fantastic carrot -- "we'll take care of your state for you, defence etc., and we'll give you a large stipend to sit around and do nothing".
Not true for the initial Company Raj in India when it was just about making money from the fabulously wealthy continent of India
Only in the 1800s, thanks to Methodists did that change. And it was after Company Raj ended in 1858 and the Empire started, that's when the entire myth of "we have come to better the world" started.
Yes, they did a lot of good, but also a lot of bad. On the whole the British Empire wasn't evil, but the outcomes of it's blundering (Pakistan, Palestine, Iraq, etc.) mean that it just gets a small plus point