I agree with the sentiment - however, even after independence, India has been ruled by the same Anglophone/phile elite with nearly the same set of laws/policies/ interests. Even the Indian constitution comes in large part from the 1935 GoI Act passed in the British Parliament.

(Anglo-)India is of the Anglophones, by the Anglophones and for the Anglophones for all practical purposes.

That's why laws etc. are mandated to be written in this foreign language that's incomprehensible to the majority, and why there's a strict near-apartheid like barrier preventing higher education (and with it, higher employment) to non-Anglophones.

The only reason I imagine we don't hear about this systematic discrimination that prevent downstream material development like industrialization (as opposed to the ethereal one like caste) is perhaps because Western institutions have vested geopolitical interest in having such a large vassal, intellectually if not politically.

Melodramatic much? It's a trade deal (if the parent is to be believed). Both sides are getting something out of it. Presumably, India needs access to the US market more than the other way round.

Well, NAM would only be successful with two power centers. One of the power centers disappeared which precipitated this state. It has nothing to do with the state as such.