- UK panel to visit Kerala’s smart city in Nov, to help develop handloom sector!!
അകത്തു കത്തിയും പുറത്തു പത്തിയും*=A wolf in a lamb's skin( history of British rule:- Cheap British factory-made yarn and cloth took away India's local market)
=======================================www.ggdc.net/maddison/articles/moghul_3.pdfChapter 3 of Class Structure and Economic Growth: India & Pakistan since the ... The main changes which the British made in Indian society were at the top. ... drive the local population to revolt, both of which were against the .... Westernizing policies and the attempt to extend British rule by taking over ...... In the 1870s the.www.lse.ac.uk/economicHistory/Research/GEHN/GEHNPDF/Conf7_Williamson.pdfIntroduction. The idea that India suffered deindustrialization during the 19th century ..... laid the blame squarely on colonial economic policy, which almost entirely eschewed ... Cheap British factory-made yarn and cloth took away India's local market .... during the mid-century, and that the decline of both hand spinning and.A wolf in a lamb's skingurcharandas.org/rich-nation-poorwww.theguardian.com › Opinion › ChinaJun 20, 2014 - Ian Jack: Large parts of India's economy were destroyed by British ... made in china labels on clothes ... halls, shops, courts, police stations, post offices and local newspapers are closed or ... Guaranteed railway shares absorbed up to a fifth of British portfolio investment in the 20 years to 1870 – the first line ...
Nationalists claimed thatLancashire’s new textile mills
crushed India’s handloom textile industry and threw millions of weavers out of work. India’s textile exports plunged from a leadership position before the start of the Britain’s Industrial Revolution to a fraction.Weaving on Handlooms, c. 1913The indigenous banking system, which financed these exports, was also destroyed. Since the colonial government did not erect tariff barriers, Indian consumers shifted to cheaper English mill-made cloth and millions of handloom workers where left in misery. British colonial rule “de-industrialised” India (a favorite nationalist phrase) and from an exporter of textiles, India became an exporter of rawBritain also changed the old land revenue system to the disadvantage of the farmer, who had to now pay revenue whether or not the monsoon failed. This led to famines. The worst one in 1896-97 affected 96 million lives and killed an estimated 5 million people. Although the railways helped in the trade of food crops, the enlarged national market sucked away the peasant’s surplus, which he had earlier stored for the bad years. Moreover, the British government transferred its surplus revenues back to England. Since India consistently exported more then she imported in the second half of the 19th century and early 20th century, Britain used India’s trade surplus to finance her own trade deficit with the rest of the world, to pay for her exports to India, and for capital repayments in London. This represented a massive drain of India’s