I hope it is simply the latter. Of course, there is no doubt that British imperialism had a strong element of "absence of mind." In its waning phase, the Suez incident was a notable illustration of such idiocy. In the French case, their Indochina policy plainly displayed an "absence of mind."
British imperial policy was also brutally consistent. Their aim was to maintain domination over India and control of the seas, of course. They wished to maintain the drain of surplus from India, a fact which many conservative historians no longer dare dispute -- although the conservative historians now claim that this drain had no effect on Indian economic development.
A commentator on the marxmail list once mentioned that perhaps Krugman had read Lenin. The more I read his NYT columns, I tend to agree that Krugman has read Lenin. But he should have read more carefully. Then he should read Hobsbawm and proceed to Rodrik.
ep
-- http://epoliticus9.blogspot.com/