During the British rule in India, an interesting lesson ‘The blessing of the English Government’, was taught in schools. It compared the past with the present, pointing out that prior to the British rule there was political chaos, disorder and no rule of law. People had no security of life or property and armies of warlords were busy looting and plundering.

It was a reminder to the people of India that the English government restored law and order and established peace in the country. Therefore, people in turn should be grateful to the government for its laudable achievements. But how was it that the English managed to occupy such a vast country so easily? Was it their military power or the policy of fraud and deception; or the inevitable result of weak Indian rulers? History shows that without collaboration, it is impossible for a foreign power to occupy and sustain its rule in any country. So who were the collaborators who supported the English and helped them establish their rule? The rulers of the minor states of southern India sought military help of the English and the French to resolve their internal disputes. This was an opportunity for the European powers to interfere in the internal affairs of the Indian states.

In exchange they would demand cash or land. Surpassing the French in this conflict, the British soon emerged as a military power in the region. Unhappy with the Company's interference in the internal affairs of his province, Siraj-ud-Daulah, the Nawab of Bengal organised his army and defeated the British in Kolkata. The British sent reinforcements under Colonel Robert Clive from Chennai (Madras) to Bengal and recaptured Kolkata. Tensions and suspicions between Siraj-ud-Daulah and the British culminated in the Battle of Plassey, which lingered for seven years. When Clive arrived in Bengal, he realised that it would be difficult for him to win the battle purely on the basis of military strength. He decided to conspire with Umi Chand, Mir Qasim and the bankers of Bhagat Seth who had business interests with the East India Company. Mir Qasim collaborated because he wanted to become the ruler of Bengal at all cost.

So basically there were collaborators, the power hungry people who were ready to consort with the Company without realising the cost of their support. Then there were businessmen acting as agents between the Company as well as the artisans who manufactured textile for it.

In the south, Tipu Sultan being an enlightened and progressive ruler realised the danger of foreign rule. He was liked neither by the Nizam of Deccan nor the Maratha chiefs. He was defeated by the combined powers of the Nizam, the Marathas and the Company. The rulers who did not tolerate Tipu and his policies failed to understand that the growing power of the Company was more dangerous than Tipu, and conspired with the British. The Marathas were annihilated by the English while the Nizam survived on humiliating terms of the Company.

The Indian states were in a dismal condition, the rulers incapable and the masses had no right to live a dignified life. However, people who served the Company in various capacities received regular salaries and pensions after retirement. This was not a common practice in the Indian states so working for the Company was much preferred as it provided security. Once the Company established its rule, religious scholars and professionals also offered their services and were proud to be its servants.

In his autobiography, Lutfullah, who served the Company in its early period, expressed his pride and gratitude to British officials. It was published in 1854 and reprinted several times. Taking full advantage of the situation, the Company extended its hegemony all over India. Soon they had the intellectuals arguing on their behalf that the English rule was a blessing to India which had begun to progress as a modern country.

According to their point of view, the British introduced new ideas and thoughts to change traditional society. Sir Syed Ahmad Khan also believed that the British rule would rescue India from its decadent culture. Here rises the question whether we should depend on foreign powers to come and solve our problems for us or is it better to rely on our own ideas to change our society?