Is Adam Smith, so called Father of Economics responsible for the plight of India?

When in 1776 Adam Smith, a Philosopher authored the book "The Wealth of Nations," Nobody in the vicinity would have then known the far-reaching repercussions that his theory would provide. Our world was generally agricultural based economy then.The Industrial revolution was nowhere in the scene. People where heavily dependent on the cropping patterns which was the main source of their income. And at that time India was generally under the patronage of the Mughals. So a question to you where does Adam Smith comes in the picture and is he the main protagonist?
Of the time which we are talking about India as we call now, was mostly under the Mughal empire. And most of our country apart from the shores had an agrarian economy, i.e. most of the people had their living from the cropping patterns which was followed in the country and most of the crops were dependent on the monsoon. Apart from the agriculture what other things mattered in the economy were overseas trading in the things in which India holded its comparative advantage such as silk, spices, jewels, cotton, handicrafts etc. Then people were not that much profit oriented and had a slow paced life. Also for the local kingship most of the revenue came from the imposition of the taxes on the agricultural goods. Then most of the expenditure was made on maintaining the extravagant court and the army of the rulers. India during  that time generally had the presence of few kingdoms, As the mughals were present in most of the northern and central India. There were few deccan empires to stand in the way for the mughals as the real contenders to the throne. Where were britishers in the picture then? They were happy maintaining the small cantonments in the major port cities of India! and they were not alone, French and Portuguese also had their presence in the empire! They were a bunch of goons with a small army to defend their fort and work! They were mainly exporters of the indigenous goods! There were few wars between the foreign powers! esp the carnatic wars which was a fight for dominance between the powers of Britain and france in the southern india. But these events dont have Adam Smith in the scene!
Britain at that time was an agricultural country. The advancement in the field of education was giving way to more revolutionary ideas to come up and pave the way for the future. The royal society was sending expeditions to the nook and corners of the world but till that moment Britain was no capitalist economy. It was a socialist. When in 1776 Adam Smith gave away his treatise on the working of country. This work of his gave birth to a major disciple from the philosophy i.e. " Economics". He defined Economics as "the science of money," and propagated the idea that the only thing any nation needs for its welfare is Money. This idea was radical in itself though this looked good in sheet but when put to action this idea was no less than revolutionary. Now the monarchs and the house of commons gave away his principle a serious try and  looked for every opportunity to capitalize the economy. This marked with the excessive uses of resources for profit generation! the rates of taxes were raised in large part of Europe, people rights were given away. The whole economy crumbled. Nobles were paying less to its tenants, this led to a series of events, the prices of the goods raised and the disparity between rich and poor increased. the population was finding it difficult to sustain in such type of  place. This was also the time of the american independence and hefty sums were drained by the European forces to finance the war, the French kingdom was supporting the american liberlisation.so this lead to a series of wars between the two European super powers of the time which subsequently drained the wealth of the two nations.  countries were finding it difficult to maintain its own expenses as the state of the economy was not good thus taxes could not be increased further. as for the agricultural goods the harvest from few years were scarce due the varying climatic conditions of the nation. So with all these how india was affected?, when the french family found it difficult to maintain their own expenses  they had to call for the estate general meeting which ultimately led to the ruin of the french monarch and established the new form of life in the european countries. but as for the Britain they followed the principles given by Adam Smith.

So what was earlier a bit of socialist economy diverted its way to form the capitalist economy. Till the early 1800 they won many decisive battles in the indian peninsula and had an autonomy over the estate. With the battle of 1857 added to the new role of the British Empire. The motto of the East India Company which was only explorational in the beginning turned into a profit making machine and not only Britain  was driven by the thought of the adam smith,i.e. accumulation of wealth  can make a country prosperous. This  changed the course of the human civilization. Then came the industrial revolution which in the late 1750's  was functional and available to the mass. This gave birth to the large chunks of the manufactures who needed raw materials. And india being a tropical country was a heaven for it. Prior to it, India which had a large control over the handicraft market with its handmade clothes now saw a serious danger in the form of machines. Indian peasants were asked to cultivate the raw materials for the British empire only and this gave  the monopoly of the  handloom to the British Empire. They were now taking raw materials from India at a cheaper price and selling it back in India at a higher price. The British subjugation also made India only a raw materials producing unit, and the economy of India was shattered into pieces. Also, tons and tons of precious metals were deported to Britain. These events affected the economy of India so badly that still now it finds it difficult to cope up with.

Its true that some ideas are revolutionary enough that it can change the course of the human events but some when interpreted in a wrong manner can prove disastrous for some countries. Adam Smith's principle was simple that accumulation of wealth can make a country prosperous but he failed to imply that subjugation on other units making them slaves of one's needs is not what he meant. Though his thought was a just logic but  for the British Empire it served as a proof that they can be more rich if they followed the principle. It's very domineering that some people don't think what their thoughts can lead too. Adam Smith was considered as the Father of Economics but he somehow too is the culprit for the plight of India!