> It is often now forgotten that much of what is referred to as 'The British Empire' was just private enterprise (veering into freebooting) flying a flag of convenience.
At the beginning sure, but the monarchy took over and controlled it to milk its worth (1). The Regulating Act in 1773 was step 1, followed by Pitt’s India Act in 1784 (2):
> the act provided for the appointment of a Board of Control, and provided for a joint government of British India by the Company and the Crown with the government holding the ultimate authority
Either way, given how monarchy and democracy progressed, I find it ridiculous how often this false “separation” of the East India Company and the British Empire is bought up.
Not even at the beginning. It’s laughable to intimate that a Crown monopoly and something exclusively owned by members of Parliament is anything but state-owned enterprise. The Company even struggled for the first half of the 17th century until Parliament pursued more heavy-handed mercantilism after the English Civil War.
The author writes: “one of the exemplars of administration that found success was the British East India Company. They ruled over an empire, created an empire in point of fact, and seemed to only be dislodged through the Queen’s velvet glove smacking them on the head, dissolving it in 1874 by government decree.”
This take is painfully revisionist. The Company was already suffering rot by the late 1700s culminating in the impeachment of Warren Hastings and later the revocation of its monopoly in 1813 (when Britain turned to more “liberal” economic policy). People like Adam Smith, Thomas Paine, and Edmund Burke throughly condemned a corrupt political system that kept this zombie entity alive.
For a more realistic overview, especially on the intimate links between government and the Company, I recommend Nick Robins’ The Corporation that Ruled the World and Priya Satia’s Empire of Guns.
At the beginning sure, but the monarchy took over and controlled it to milk its worth (1). The Regulating Act in 1773 was step 1, followed by Pitt’s India Act in 1784 (2):
> the act provided for the appointment of a Board of Control, and provided for a joint government of British India by the Company and the Crown with the government holding the ultimate authority
Either way, given how monarchy and democracy progressed, I find it ridiculous how often this false “separation” of the East India Company and the British Empire is bought up.
1 - https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/charter-granted-...
2 - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pitt%27s_India_Act