Compare And Contrast Mexico And India

Mexico and India were both suppliers of raw materials for industrialized nations in Europe, but differ in how they were run politically and economically. Mexico differed from India politically because of its independance from another nation; it had no controlling power it had to follow. On the other hand, India was controlled by Britain. Bother, however, focussed on exporting raw materials, but Mexico’s exports were for profit and driven by small powerful bourgeoisie class, and Britain’s exports were for Britain's benefit. India was a controlled principality that was forced to supply raw materials for its ruling country, but Mexico was an independant nation that exported raw materials for for profit. Mexico differs from India because it was an independant nation and India was controlled by Britain. Mexico had won its Independance from Spain, and had developed in a nation with its own government. The power, however, was held a small number of powerful individuals. As Document G mentions, the “land, timber, and water are monopolized in a few hands” (Document G). India was an independent empire that was taken over by the British. Britain accomplished this by gaining the support of …show more content…
Mexico was an independent nation driven by a few individuals who wanted profit, and India was controlled and exploited by Britain. Furthermore, both had a large class of workers who were exploited. The few landowners in Mexico gave their workers nearly none of the profit, and the British used military power to keep India controlled. The rulers in Mexico were focused on benefiting themselves and business accomplices in other countries, while Britain did it to support its factories which then sold finished products right back to India for profit. Despite the difference in economic drive and political system, both India and Mexico have one exploited group and one powerful group who benefits off the