What caused India to have a much less developed economy than other British Dominions in the early 20th century? Politically it seems to have shared a similar position, but it was on a much less effective footing when it gained independence than Canada and Australia, for example.
Obviously there are a lot of differences. “Indigenous” peoples forms a majority in India and were almost annihilated in Canada and Australia.
Especially given the experience of WWI, it would make tactical sense from a British perspective to broaden the “skilled labor” base that could go into a future war effort by bringing up the economy of the dominions. Why wasn’t this attempted (or it it was attempts outside my knowledge, why didn’t it succeed)?
I’m currently reading Churchill’s history of WWII and it seems like India wasn’t the profound source of power for the British that it seems like it should be, given its manpower, size, and resources.
Historians dont quite agree, but the 2 dominant sides are either: Britains protectionist Policies and High taxes on Local Indian Goods, hampered the Ability of India to sell Industrial goods which could be acquired Cheaper from Britain, aswell as the Fact that the new Cheaper Production thanks to the Industrial Revolution meant that India Economy needed to find new Jobs. Other Historians/Economist however say that the main Problem was that Britain didnt change alot of the Indian Institutions in the Raj, and instead let Local Rulers decide most of the Policies, which in my Opinion probably had a big Impact on its Future Development, especially with the Bigger Indian Substates where Rules just wanted their Pops to produce as much revenue as possible. Overall Id say its a mixture of both.