I didn't say wealth wouldn't have been higher if colonization didn't occur, though I'm definitely unconvinced of that. I merely said that growth did occur everywhere.
Logically we know that a fair market creates more wealth for all who participate. Given that this was a perversion of these ideals...
We don't know this. The relevant counterfactual is not a perfect free market, but whatever the assorted kings of India would have imposed. I don't know enough about the history to comment on their likely economic policies.
Sorry, I have information which would be useful I'm aware that there were merchant communities in the kingdoms that would became India who did and we're looking into looms and technologies.
Since Britain was also monarchical, so the equation is - relatively- balanced.
Logically we know that a fair market creates more wealth for all who participate. Given that this was a perversion of these ideals...
We don't know this. The relevant counterfactual is not a perfect free market, but whatever the assorted kings of India would have imposed. I don't know enough about the history to comment on their likely economic policies.