Earlier quoted context omitted.
When you are weak, you take what you can get. It was much better to have been colonized by the British, who actually had an interest in nation-building and respect for law and human rights (to the extent they deemed their subjects capable of handling them), than, say, to have become the personal fiefdom of Leopold II of Belgium.
That's a false dichotomy if there ever was one. The alternative to being colonized by the British was not to be colonized by Belgium but not to be colonized at all.
It is arguable that India benefitted from being under British rule compared to be in under the rule of mad Moghal emperors though. I'd say gp was not a false dichotomy. Of the options available, British rule was not the worst possible outcome in hindsight.
To my Indian friends, please be wary of ultranationalism and the far right. It never does anyone any good. Just look at us and learn from US' shortcomings.