Q6 (CAPF/2017) History & Culture › National Movement (1857–1947) › Colonial economic impact Answer Verified

Statement I : Dadabhai Naoroji argued that what was being drained out was ‘potential surplus’ that could generate more economic development in India if invested in India Statement I : Imperialists believed that India was brought into the large capitalist world market and that was in itself a progress towards modernization

Doth the statements arc individually true and Statement II is the correct explanation of Statement I

Both the statements are individually true but Statement II is NOT the correct explanation of Statement I

Statement I is true but Statement II is false

Statement I is false but Statement II is true

Result

Your answer: — · Correct: B

Explanation

Statement I is true as Dadabhai Naoroji’s 'Drain Theory' argued that a significant portion of India's national product was transferred to Britain without adequate return [2]. He specifically characterized this drain as a loss of 'potential investible capital' or social surplus that, if retained, could have been invested in India to generate economic development and increase productive capacity [4]. Statement II is also true; imperialist and colonial administrators justified British rule by arguing that integrating India into the global capitalist market was a progressive step toward modernization and civilization. While both statements are historically accurate, Statement II does not explain Statement I. Instead, they represent two diametrically opposed viewpoints: the nationalist critique of economic exploitation versus the imperialist justification of colonial 'modernization' through market integration [3].

Sources

[1] Rajiv Ahir. A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.). SPECTRUM. > Chapter 28: Economic Impact of British Rule in India > Economic Drain > p. 548
[2] History , class XII (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.) > Chapter 1: Rise of Nationalism in India > 1.6 Naoroji and his Drain Theory > p. 12
[4] https://mcrhrdi.gov.in/group1-2019/Reading%20Material/History/History%20part%203(m).pdf
[3] Indian Economy, Vivek Singh (7th ed. 2023-24) > Chapter 6: Indian Economy [1947 – 2014] > 6.1 Impact of British Rule on Indian Economy > p. 201

How others answered

Each bar shows the % of students who chose that option. Green bar = correct answer, blue outline = your choice.

Community Performance

Out of everyone who attempted this question.

50%

got it right

Question map

Explanation

SIMILAR QUESTIONS

Statement I : The economy of India in the 19th century came to a state of ruin under English East India Company. Statement II : English East India Company’s acquisition of Dtwani right led to the miseries of the peasants and those associated with the traditional handicrafts industry of India.

Statement I : India’s share of world manufacturing output steadily declined during the 19th and the 20th centuries. Statement I : There was no absolute decline in production in India during the colonial rule.

Statement I: In the 19th century, India was the largest British colony. Statement I : India became a big market for British manufactured goods and a field of investment for foreign capital in the 19th century.

Statement I : Agriculture in India still accounts for a substantial share in total employment. Statement I : There has been no decline in volatility of agricultural growth in India.