I’m not saying the USSR was responsible for the development of the Estonian economy,

Really? Because that rather sounds like what you’re saying with the comparison you make here

If the british had built comparable infrastructure in India as in the UK, if they had industrialized it,

But I don’t know why I expect consistency from red fash.

Please. Show me the data for that. Show me how exploited the Estonians were, how much lower their wages were than in the rest of the USSR. Spoiler alert: data contradicts your claims.

The second external strategy employed by the Soviet Union to rebuild its devastated economic infrastructure was the joint company. It became a ubiquitous institution in Eastern Europe. The joint company enabled the U.S.S.R. to extract resources and products from a region partially occupied militarily by the Soviet Army and completely reorganized by the Communist Party. So effective had the joint company and Soviet exploitation become that the economic world of Eastern Europe was turned upside down. Not only did the U.S.S.R. impose the goals of socialism and industrialism on essentially peasant societies, it altered the region’s traditional trade pattern that had focused on commerce with Central and Western Europe. By 1947, commerce flowed in the opposite direction as seventy-five percent of all Russian imports originated in Eastern Europe

But tell me more about how THIS form of market capture over vassalized states is TOTALLY different than the British Empire’s form of market capture over vassalized states /s

https://www.jstor.org/stable/24664533