India, an independent country

Colonial powers are often blamed for the plight of developing countries. One common complaint in Africa is that colonial powers drew state boundaries by straight lines and rivers, not giving a damn about ethnic boundaries. This is a source of wars.

Well, after India got independence in 1947, they solved this problem. In 1953, they redivided the states according to language. Andhra Pradesh where I go is the state of Telugu-speaking people. A completely new state, Kerala, was crafted for Malayalam speakers. This was an answer to a threat of India dissolving - after all, a minor zone called Pakistan got independent from India, and there were many princely states (including the princely state of Nizam in Hyderabad) which didn't join union before they were threatened with military force.

That's what independent countries do. The pass legislation which reflects the will of the people and solves internal problems, instead of blaming colonial overlords. The fact that India is a 3rd world country even after the problem of ethnic lines was solved - 55 years ago - is the fault of Indians and their rulers alone. Even if the Brits would know how to turn India into a rich 1st world country, for the last 60 years Indian military would haved chased them away at gunpont. Obviously, the British couldn't do the trick even if they had power, since surely they would have preferred the high tax revenues of a 1st world country to exploitative availability of raw materials.

Freedom comes with responsibility. Even for developing countries.

This post reflects Finnish debate and may be irrelevant for Indian readers.