Why was India Colonized
video description
Date: 2026-09-04
Related videos
Comments and reviews: 20
hnsingh6888
India alredy colonized by central asian inavders in Northern India rule by delhi sultanate or mughal
In the eastern India bengal sultanate
Or Deccan sultanates were also inavders
Only in Southern India ruled by vijayanagar empire, northern eastern side ahom empire, western side rajput kingdoms, Deccan maratha empire, gajpati empire these empire are natives empire
50% india land rule by inavders rulers before British and rest of 50% rule by Natives rulers
In British rule still 50% india land rule by indian Kingdoms rajput rulers, nizam, or other 565 princely sates rest of 50% india area rule by British
reply
India alredy colonized by central asian inavders in Northern India rule by delhi sultanate or mughal
In the eastern India bengal sultanate
Or Deccan sultanates were also inavders
Only in Southern India ruled by vijayanagar empire, northern eastern side ahom empire, western side rajput kingdoms, Deccan maratha empire, gajpati empire these empire are natives empire
50% india land rule by inavders rulers before British and rest of 50% rule by Natives rulers
In British rule still 50% india land rule by indian Kingdoms rajput rulers, nizam, or other 565 princely sates rest of 50% india area rule by British
reply
DavidCrabtree-j7q
Lord Baron R0thch! ld said the king was his puppet, he said he controlled the empire. He owned the East India Co. In the 1820's, and 1840's when China didn't want their (east India co, Sassoon )opium, they sent the British navy. Much of the empire building was done by the banksters and their mercs. The treaty of Utrect proves London was just another mafia territory to the Khazarian bankers. Cromwell was their boy too, he made an example out of the last English king to resist usury. They went on to get the arch duke, Franz Ferdinand, Czar Nicholas II, Lincoln, and JFK.
reply
Lord Baron R0thch! ld said the king was his puppet, he said he controlled the empire. He owned the East India Co. In the 1820's, and 1840's when China didn't want their (east India co, Sassoon )opium, they sent the British navy. Much of the empire building was done by the banksters and their mercs. The treaty of Utrect proves London was just another mafia territory to the Khazarian bankers. Cromwell was their boy too, he made an example out of the last English king to resist usury. They went on to get the arch duke, Franz Ferdinand, Czar Nicholas II, Lincoln, and JFK.
reply
tony5ify249
I think that the term colonization should not be used to describe European expansion in Africa and Asia during the 19th and 20th centuries, as it can imply a process of settlement rather than conquest and domination. In many cases, European powers conquered and occupied territories with established societies and political structures, imposing their own systems of government and economic exploitation. Therefore, terms such as imperialism, domination, or explotation may be more accurate depending on the context.
reply
I think that the term colonization should not be used to describe European expansion in Africa and Asia during the 19th and 20th centuries, as it can imply a process of settlement rather than conquest and domination. In many cases, European powers conquered and occupied territories with established societies and political structures, imposing their own systems of government and economic exploitation. Therefore, terms such as imperialism, domination, or explotation may be more accurate depending on the context.
reply
AntitankDude
Because India is a colonial modern creation rather than a real historic entity. There were different kingdoms feuding against each other, which also contributed to the fact india fell. Not only that, but many prefered to rather team with some strange folk far away from other seas to gain an upper hand over the guy near them.
reply
Because India is a colonial modern creation rather than a real historic entity. There were different kingdoms feuding against each other, which also contributed to the fact india fell. Not only that, but many prefered to rather team with some strange folk far away from other seas to gain an upper hand over the guy near them.
reply
Stoic-q1y
Disunity and treachery was the main reason. Indian empires didn't even put a united front individually forget uniting with each other. For example Sikh army was better than EIC but their generals were traitors and sided with Britishers, same with Bengal in battle of Plassey.
reply
Disunity and treachery was the main reason. Indian empires didn't even put a united front individually forget uniting with each other. For example Sikh army was better than EIC but their generals were traitors and sided with Britishers, same with Bengal in battle of Plassey.
reply
dranzergigs8333
i think now i understand why not just india but every colonized country of the global south adopted a close market socialist economic policy.
They not only had to guard themselves against imperial powers but Powerful MNCs who could turn imperial as well.
reply
i think now i understand why not just india but every colonized country of the global south adopted a close market socialist economic policy.
They not only had to guard themselves against imperial powers but Powerful MNCs who could turn imperial as well.
reply
romandacil3984
India was never a country but a geographical location with several Large Kingdoms all vying for dominance and many smaller Princely States with shifting alliances. The Europeans especially the British were able to exploit.
reply
India was never a country but a geographical location with several Large Kingdoms all vying for dominance and many smaller Princely States with shifting alliances. The Europeans especially the British were able to exploit.
reply
CARL_093
India was colonized primarily because European powersled by the British East India Companysought vast economic profits, and they were able to exploit the political fragmentation that followed the decline of the Mughal Empire.
reply
India was colonized primarily because European powersled by the British East India Companysought vast economic profits, and they were able to exploit the political fragmentation that followed the decline of the Mughal Empire.
reply
amitjambhale1593
Indian powers like Marathas, Mysore and Sikhs had European styled armies trained by archrival of British that is french. But still they were defeated because british were well disciplined and well organised.
reply
Indian powers like Marathas, Mysore and Sikhs had European styled armies trained by archrival of British that is french. But still they were defeated because british were well disciplined and well organised.
reply
TorontoMiniClub
England wouldn’t have been the powerhouse it was in India without the Portuguese Princess Catherine of Braganza’s dowry which included Bombay which later Charles II leased to the East India Company.
reply
England wouldn’t have been the powerhouse it was in India without the Portuguese Princess Catherine of Braganza’s dowry which included Bombay which later Charles II leased to the East India Company.
reply
JoinOggronTOR
The British organized the country and stopped the sacrifice of widows as well as the ritual mvrders of travellers in the name of one of their goddesses. To this day the old railways are still used there.
reply
The British organized the country and stopped the sacrifice of widows as well as the ritual mvrders of travellers in the name of one of their goddesses. To this day the old railways are still used there.
reply
Wonder-y4f
India was far backward compared with contemporary europe in technology, scientific knowledge, infrastructure, social structure, defense. Etc.
Even after 70 years of independence india is still backward
reply
India was far backward compared with contemporary europe in technology, scientific knowledge, infrastructure, social structure, defense. Etc.
Even after 70 years of independence india is still backward
reply
Gau.
felt good knowing you didn't neglected our northeast indian empire, due to terrains a proper unity or kingdom was rare most of the times but u decided to include those makes me feel satisfied enough.
reply
felt good knowing you didn't neglected our northeast indian empire, due to terrains a proper unity or kingdom was rare most of the times but u decided to include those makes me feel satisfied enough.
reply
RSJSunbury
India was disunited and individual states and rulers within the sub- continent hated each other more than outsiders. So to a degree the ultimate colonisation by Europeans was self inflicted.
reply
India was disunited and individual states and rulers within the sub- continent hated each other more than outsiders. So to a degree the ultimate colonisation by Europeans was self inflicted.
reply
SexyUndisputed2All
Can partially blame china. Without china there wouldn't have been the compass, paper and especially gun powder to massacre and wipe our millions of non-pale people if not billions
reply
Can partially blame china. Without china there wouldn't have been the compass, paper and especially gun powder to massacre and wipe our millions of non-pale people if not billions
reply
CRY_997
I hope he makes a video on why china was not colonised while India was despite them being close to each other and both having large population and weak dynasty compared to previous ones
reply
I hope he makes a video on why china was not colonised while India was despite them being close to each other and both having large population and weak dynasty compared to previous ones
reply
ronaldendo833
In the fifteenth century the Pope Eugene IV declared Christianity above all other religions in the WORLD! Saying that any CHRISTIAN NATION could overcome any nation not CHRISTIAN!
reply
In the fifteenth century the Pope Eugene IV declared Christianity above all other religions in the WORLD! Saying that any CHRISTIAN NATION could overcome any nation not CHRISTIAN!
reply
54032Zepol
Just sign the dotted line and we will manage your lands for you, provide the necessary security, a weekly pension, a percentage in stocks and your wealth will be boundless!
reply
Just sign the dotted line and we will manage your lands for you, provide the necessary security, a weekly pension, a percentage in stocks and your wealth will be boundless!
reply
moozillamoo2109
Because in the modern era, if a country's leadership position is still based on bloodline, it would make no difference to the little people who is ruling over them.
reply
Because in the modern era, if a country's leadership position is still based on bloodline, it would make no difference to the little people who is ruling over them.
reply
Asfandyar_
Because unlike popular myth, India was a region, not a country. Formed of many warring states it was easier to take over via divide (already divided) and rule tactics.
reply
Because unlike popular myth, India was a region, not a country. Formed of many warring states it was easier to take over via divide (already divided) and rule tactics.
reply
Add a review, comment
Other channel videos
