India mainly sells “low value” labor products and raw materials to America. That’s literally neocolonial extraction.

That’s changing and iirc this past year was the first one where the us wasn’t the number 1 importer or trader by volume or whatever, Indias electronics manufacturing is starting to take off (lol at Apple having to gb2 China over qc tho…) and the mohdi government is keeping their options open, but self reliance isn’t the measure of decolonization, it’s your relationship to the history of colonization and your mode of production and trade. I also think it’s really hard to call a place decolonized when it’s got a strong ethnofascist movement.

Just off the top of my head, serious interrogation of these will probably lead me to clarify but not abandon these positions:

“Independence” movement started by man who wanted to be treated like the British subject he was, not one subject to black codes.

Post “independence”, made no substantial, long lasting moves to integrate or protect muslim and buddhist minorities leading to a resurgent hindu nationalist movement.

Failed to undo the caste systems effects

Extensive system of secondary educational institutions function primarily to export skilled workers to other countries where they often work under indentured servitude (like in the us) rather than build national industry.

Failed to make peace with Pakistan over the British saying “now fight!” a long time ago.

I’m really interested in your argument that significant progress has been made towards decolonization tbh. Some lib wrote comparing the outcomes of India and China over the same time period and at the time it was published there was ink to be spilled letting the whole world know how good China had done but in the present day it’s hardly necessary.