Crowning the dragon: Chinese GDP PPP will exceed America's by year's end.

[Valmy]

Lots of countries did not industrialize successfully during the 19th century, even though they could see the Brits doing it. There were lots of reasons for that. Certainly British policies played a part, but that only goes so far - consider that places like China and Thailand also did not successfully industrialize, even though they were not part of the British Empire (while Japan did successfully industrialize, likewise while not being a European colony).

I suspect that the problem was that to industrialize wasn't simply a question of building a couple of factories, but of creating - in effect, changing - traditional society more or less completely, which most societies were very reluctant to do (Japan being a notable exception).

On top of that, trying to industrialize was a pretty dangerous game. The Egyptian leadership borrowed heavily in an attempt to do so and were driven into bankruptcy.

[Razgovory]

One wonders why India didn't build it's own factories or buy from other countries like the US or Germany.

I wonder if it had anything to do with the policies of the colonial administration?

Nah.  It's not like it was captive market or anything.

[Valmy]

One wonders why India didn't build it's own factories or buy from other countries like the US or Germany.

I just presumed the British did not allow it, or otherwise surely it could have been a good idea for the British companies to open factories right by the cotton fields and slash their costs.  But I could be wrong about that.

[alfred russel]

One wonders why India didn't build it's own factories or buy from other countries like the US or Germany.

I wonder if it had anything to do with the policies of the colonial administration?

One could also wonder why ~65 years on from colonialism their infrastructure is still in a deplorable state and some of the key elements of what they do have are left over from British times.

[grumbler]

I suspect that the problem was that to industrialize wasn't simply a question of building a couple of factories, but of creating - in effect, changing - traditional society more or less completely, which most societies were very reluctant to do (Japan being a notable exception).

Not only that, but a society's elites had to be willing to give up a big share of their power to the nouveau riche arising from the industrialization process.  Russia resisted industrialization and the American South fought a war to ward of industrialization because the elites didn't want to share power.

[Razgovory]

Lots of countries did not industrialize successfully during the 19th century, even though they could see the Brits doing it. There were lots of reasons for that. Certainly British policies played a part, but that only goes so far - consider that places like China and Thailand also did not successfully industrialize, even though they were not part of the British Empire (while Japan did successfully industrialize, likewise while not being a European colony).

I suspect that the problem was that to industrialize wasn't simply a question of building a couple of factories, but of creating - in effect, changing - traditional society more or less completely, which most societies were very reluctant to do (Japan being a notable exception).

How many non-white British colonial holdings industrialized in the 19th century?

[Valmy]

How many non-white British colonial holdings industrialized in the 19th century?

Who would have been a good prospect for that?  19th century is a little early for most African colonies.  The Caribbean maybe?  Maybe Malaysia or Hong Kong?  I guess one would have to decide what it would have meant for them to industrialize.  I mean obviously just being coaling stations they had something going on in a lot of those places.

[Malthus]

Lots of countries did not industrialize successfully during the 19th century, even though they could see the Brits doing it. There were lots of reasons for that. Certainly British policies played a part, but that only goes so far - consider that places like China and Thailand also did not successfully industrialize, even though they were not part of the British Empire (while Japan did successfully industrialize, likewise while not being a European colony).

I suspect that the problem was that to industrialize wasn't simply a question of building a couple of factories, but of creating - in effect, changing - traditional society more or less completely, which most societies were very reluctant to do (Japan being a notable exception).

How many non-white British colonial holdings industrialized in the 19th century?

Why restrict it to non-White? Industialization rates in the so-called "White Dominions" of Canada, Australia and New Zealand were also low in the 19th century. They acted mostly as producers of raw materials (and to an extent, still do). 

[Razgovory]

How many non-white British colonial holdings industrialized in the 19th century?

Who would have been a good prospect for that?  19th century is a little early for most African colonies.  The Caribbean maybe?  Maybe Malaysia or Hong Kong?  I guess one would have to decide what it would have meant for them to industrialize.  I mean obviously just being coaling stations they had something going on in a lot of those places.

India?

[Razgovory]

One wonders why India didn't build it's own factories or buy from other countries like the US or Germany.

I wonder if it had anything to do with the policies of the colonial administration?

One could also wonder why ~65 years on from colonialism their infrastructure is still in a deplorable state and some of the key elements of what they do have are left over from British times.

That seems to be common amongst former colonies.  It's almost like there is some sort of connection...

[alfred russel]

That seems to be common amongst former colonies.  It's almost like there is some sort of connection...

India had dramatically more territory and population than merry old England, but somehow managed to be conquered by people that had to take a boat trip half way around the world to get there. Who would guess that a country that dysfunctional going into colonialism would be messed up on the other end, and the mess wouldn't be resolved to this day?

Parts of Africa were either not colonized, or only lightly colonized for a short time. The evidence doesn't seem to show that colonialism is what caused the harm.

Eg: going north to south, we have Ethiopia, Kenya, and Tanzania. Among the three, Kenya was the most intensely colonized, and is the best off. Ethiopia was hardly colonized, and is the worst off. Tanzania is in the middle.

[Valmy]

That seems to be common amongst former colonies.  It's almost like there is some sort of connection...

Is it?  Many former colonies are doing very well.  I mean it has been 50+ years for most of them, there are fewer and fewer commonalities by this point.  Or is there something about roads and power plants and the like specifically you are talking about here.

I don't think AF is right here anyway, but I am no Indian infrastructure expert.

Just a quick Wiki it appears there has been quite a bit of installation of power infrastructure...still woefully inadequate for the population of course but you cannot have India without stuff like that.

[The Brain]

India has nukes and nukes is enough.

[Razgovory]

That seems to be common amongst former colonies.  It's almost like there is some sort of connection...

India had dramatically more territory and population than merry old England, but somehow managed to be conquered by people that had to take a boat trip half way around the world to get there. Who would guess that a country that dysfunctional going into colonialism would be messed up on the other end, and the mess wouldn't be resolved to this day?

Parts of Africa were either not colonized, or only lightly colonized for a short time. The evidence doesn't seem to show that colonialism is what caused the harm.

Eg: going north to south, we have Ethiopia, Kenya, and Tanzania. Among the three, Kenya was the most intensely colonized, and is the best off. Ethiopia was hardly colonized, and is the worst off. Tanzania is in the middle.

India wasn't actually a country when the British showed up it was a collection of states.

[The Brain]

The India.