RAS question
The 'Drain of Wealth' theory argued that:
Correct answer: (C) Wealth was being drained from India to Britain without adequate return.
The Drain of Wealth theory argued that wealth was being transferred from India to Britain without an adequate return to India.
Explanation
Dadabhai Naoroji was the major proponent of the Drain of Wealth theory, which treated British rule as a system that removed India’s wealth and capital. The cited IGNOU unit says Naoroji linked this drain to poverty in India and developed the idea around unrequited transfers: India did not receive an equivalent return in merchandise or treasure. The theory also covered mechanisms such as tribute, Home Charges, salaries and pensions of British civil and military officials, and trade arrangements that left India poorer. Therefore, option C captures the central claim: wealth was not merely moving through normal exchange; it was being drained from India to Britain without adequate compensation.
Why the other options are wrong
- (A) The theory argued that British rule impoverished India by removing wealth and capital, not that India was becoming richer.
- (B) Naoroji’s argument presented British rule as economically exploitative, so it did not treat British investment as a net benefit to India.
- (D) The drain argument focused on unrequited exports and transfers from India to Britain, not on India gaining from a growing trade surplus.
Concept
This tests the economic critique of colonial rule in modern Indian history. It recurs in RAS because Naoroji’s drain theory is a standard link between early nationalism, colonial exploitation and the poverty debate.