Consider the following statements: Statement-I: Dadabhai Naoroji arg

Consider the following statements:

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-II: Imperialists believed that India was brought into the large capitalist world market and that was in itself a progress towards modernization

Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements and the code?

Both the statements are 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

Answer is Right!

Answer is Wrong!

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CAPF – 2017

Download PDF Attempt Online

Statement I is true; Dadabhai Naoroji, through his ‘Drain Theory’, argued that British rule resulted in the systematic drain of wealth from India, representing a ‘potential surplus’ or investible capital that, if retained and invested in India, could have fueled its industrial and economic development. Statement II is true; Imperialists and colonial apologists frequently argued that British rule brought India into contact with the global capitalist system, promoting trade, infrastructure, and a degree of institutional modernization, which they presented as inherently progressive. Both statements are individually true, reflecting distinct viewpoints (nationalist critique vs. imperialist justification). However, Statement II does not explain why Dadabhai Naoroji developed his argument in Statement I. They represent contrasting analyses of the impact of British rule.

Dadabhai Naoroji critiqued the economic drain, while imperialists claimed modernization through integration into the world market; these are contrasting views, not cause and effect.

Naoroji’s Drain Theory was a cornerstone of early Indian nationalist economic critique, highlighting the exploitative nature of colonial rule. Imperial narratives, conversely, often focused on the ‘benefits’ of British rule, such as railways, telegraphs, and entry into global commerce, portraying them as signs of progress towards modernization.

Join Our Telegram Channel

More similar MCQ questions for Exam preparation:-