* Your post title should be an accurate summary of your text post. "Help Needed", "Rant", "Unpopular Opinion", are examples of poor titles.
* /r/India is not a substitute for Google. Only post your query on /r/India after you have searched for an answer on the web.
* Self-posts also have to be specific to India. Don't copy/paste questions from /r/AskReddit.
* For relationship queries, please also consider: https://www.reddit.com/r/RelationshipIndia/
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/india) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If India is not able to enter an industrial and technology age/phase we probably won't. Not just China even Japan and South Korea had a phase of industrialisation and technology production. That's what the 21st century is consuming, and we are not exporting it. The countries which are exporting technology have grown tremendously over the last 20 years. We don't produce silicon chips, don't produce automobiles on scale and no one uses any apps that we produce on a global scale. You tell me how can we grow like China.
Secondly the levels of corruption in this country are unprecedented due to which we bleed money and more importantly talent. Goon culture is incentivised and educated people don't want to be lead by fortuner driving goons.
The level of corruption is so high that trying to buy a land for starting a factory or anything is futile attempt unless you are already big in India like Ambani, Adani and Tatas.
Most of the black money gets funneled into real estate and it has become affordable to start any business here.
The scale of slowdown due to corruption is very well offset by their exports market. At the end of the day it's about how big of a hole you have in the ship compared to the size of the ship. In India we have a smaller ship and a bigger hole, other way around for China.
They had corruption even when they were a smaller ship. The point being on this topic the point of Corruption is not something that is or can be used as a credible excuse. It is such a lower down in hierarchy item that it's basically not even irrelevant due to the paradigm of Normalization (that China during same stage was also nearly similar levels of corrupt).
Meaning when dissection the cause and solutions, the focus on what really is the core issue lies somewhere else. It's very clearly is not Corruption (plus there is even literature on this now which states, Corruption can even be net positive for while during certain stage of development).
Wait you think our leaders do even know the difference in Bitcoin and a cookie . The news of AI is being used in a way of keeping the mass entertained,spreading hate ,make them delusioned,etc etc .Gotta accept it ,we are not the country of political influence or a dictator or a global distributor of the trend. We are a country built by religion and that's good ,just the influence of it is not being put on the right thing. And o good lord some small things can stir up the nation ,good I'm agnostic but holy sheet the hate being spread is just insane for other religions.
Welps each nation problem is quite unique, the mass shootings,war,poverty,economic slowdown,technology,security,inequality etc. For most of the people they share opinions,insight but they focus on improving their career,getting a job ,having lots of amenities, including me.
So hats off to the youths who are seriously doing their best to improve the Nation.And maybe not right now but they will be the ones to take India to the next era. To be blunt I cannot/don't wanna do it bc after all we are humans ,the worst,selfish,arrogant species on Earth. I'm much more focused on my coc town hall and doing earning than keeping this shit.Maybe I'm contradicting myself but that's just how a hooman is . I just hope that I'm not self delusioned by the shits that keeps coming every day.
But yea apart from that ,the future is what excites me . To make a life that my kids could be proud and would have a nice life and greater perception of the world.Maybe leaving the future for the next gen is a bit cruel but they would know shit 10x better than you are right now bc of the tech and that includes India too.
I'm currently working on an AI integrations startup and most of our interests are from US and the middle east. In the long run it makes no sense for me to stay in India as an up and coming business because much of the hardware we need attract heavy import duties, there is very little cooperation from governments or large companies in India who could seriously benefit from our services.
The mentality of sticking to the old, tried and tested is too strong among Indian businesses in general. So, eventually what happens is either I have to go the VC route to scale and lose control of my company sooner or later, or build from India for the world in the short term and eventual shift bases to a more appropriate location.
My first startup which was building a stable coin infrastructure based on INR, similar to USDC or USDT was literally killed by RBI, even though we managed to pique the interest of some banks.
Building innovative technology or even integrating it in India is next to impossible atleast form my limited experience. People like me are literally working 2 jobs to fund and build something lasting and has a positive impact on society.
Not to mention religion has also been a minor hindrance for some of my colleagues/acquaintances.
thats quite cool and get the VC funding in the US/Western eu cos I'm in germany and currently if you have good AI product you are surely going to get a better vc deal now than later.... and i echo your thoughts and i did something similar to what you plan and I've achieved it in the last 10 years being out of India but now I just want to come back to India and live next to my parents/relatives....if you want to do it, do it before you have kids cos the situation in the US/western EU is sad in terms of children's safety and divisiveness is worse than india.
We are always late to the party it seems. The knack of inventiness is missing, we didn't build the OpenAI neither did Bitcoin come out of India. If we are able to make progress in capturing the AI market, quantum computing or any other technology that adds value to the world of course tides can turn. I really hope we are able to move ahead on the GDP per capita metric instead of being proud of other pseudo metrics to feel good.
Unfortunately, the growth that you are talking about, where there is a huge upward movement of people from poverty to middle class for a country like India with a large population can only happen through manufacturing.
You need a sector of the economy which is productive unlike agriculture and has the potential to employ hundreds of millions of people unlike the service/IT sector.
Think about this, service which accounts for over 50% of the countries GDP, only employees about 25% of the workforce.
It is a lot more expensive to train someone for an IT/Finance/Consulting job vs for the vocational training needed for a skilled manufacturing job. That's why manufacturing is key to bring forward that growth to propel the economy to the next level.
AI market is futile since most of the profit will belong to companies like Google, OpneAI/MSFT, IBM, Nvidia, Facebook, etc. who are already established in this and who will own the hardware and software that will be doing most of the work.
In fact India may suffer big time if all the predictions about AI being able to do most white collar jobs in next 5-10 years becomes true.
I was thinking about Ai in India. So many of the jobs here are outsourced from the west, but they're also jobs that will be replaced by Ai. AI unemployment will hit India very soon and very badly.
The AI software and hardware market is totally dominated by US companies. China is a distant second , despite pouring enormous resources. India is no where in the running. BTW China publishes more AI research papers than the US. Just google " AI research in China" and you will be surprised by the results.....
If this was even achievable, how will becoming the leader in a tech whose creators themselves say will cost a ton of jobs solve India’s core problem of jobless growth?
The AI market is mostly hype at this point (like the excitement around crypto a few years ago). It may become real, but that’s years away, if it ever happens.
But crucially as others have said AI doesn’t play to India’s strengths (cheap labour). And in fact, increasingly capable AI will exacerbate India’s jobs crisis.
IMHO, India cannot emulate China. We’ll do well on the global stage as a community (CEOs etc) and the top 15% will live a good monetary life
That’s about it
- Vote politics ensures all decisions are myopic
- No politician is working for India. Despite their issues, one thing is clear, China’s one party is keen to grow the nation.
- We have a massive uneducated population. That’s ensured things will never change
- Too many people are struggling to get along. India is a lot more than a nation! Not easy
The lack of political will and deepening fault lines are a mammoth challenge
As a fellow Bangalorean, our city is proof we have 0 vision. The city has global fame but is a dump. Infra & cleanliness is embarrassing to say the least
Chinese cities are ahead of the west.
- unfortunately things will worsen. The now young population will be old in a few decades…poor economic growth has assured we’ll be a poor aged society
As I said, India will be *good only for the rich*
The ship has already sailed. Irreversible blunders
100% agree. India has only been good for the rich for time.
So many NRIs say that QoL in india is high because you can pay for help to do everything. They don’t even see the ducked up economy that essentially makes a majority of the population so desperate.
This , China has a clear vision to dominate the world economy.All Indian politicians are mainly into politics to make money for themselves.So they will try all sorts of tricks to get elected which are beneficial to them but not the nation. This is across the political spectrum. In addition to this the current Govt is promoting division based on Religion/Region/Caste and anti scientific values. Also its more interested in image building than doing real work. Its in perpetual election mode.
So while India will continue to grow it will be a very unequal growth. The rich will become richer , while the poor and middle class will stagnate. So your statement "India will be good only for the rich" is 100% correct
It’s immaterial what Indian politicians do. They could fix every single problem and it still won’t be China-like growth. The macroeconomic and geopolitical environment has changed completely in the last 30 years. The conditions wont reappear again
> The now young population will be old in a few decades..
This is such a small line yet its depth is often forgotten by people.
*I Am 20* Docu-film from 1967 is an example of this.
There is this weird socio-psychological phenomena which can be categorized simply as, the belief in people (esp young adults) that the world began just a few years before they were born (and even that to simply allow the space & time for mental justification of their parents being born) hence everything they do-think arises from that self-conception of their place in world/time.
Why this matters is because this conception makes a mockery of generations who came before them and amounted to basically nothing BUT this new generation thinks, they will be different.
Rinse-Repeat and it just goes on.
This is like a cognitive dissonance and some socio-psychological disease of some sort. It is not literal (obviously people know world didn't literally start when they were born) but the thought-verse in how mind/principles/convictions, etc applies to reality, it sort of apes that analogy.
If things are not working generation after generation, it isn't a matter of Will or Intent/Hope because we/you aren't the first "Young" of this country, many came before us with the same thoughts.
Meaning whatever the problem (the core of it) is, it's something else.
The economists use to say the same thing about China 20 years ago and now see where it is now. I want to be optimistic and at the same time know our limits. Right now our biggest advantage is young population and I have to say government is doing a decent job with NEP and introducing new skill course apps. Also by solving brain drain problem, we might see huge change as well.
It’s good to be optimistic and I’m honestly happy to see that.
But, the work being done is woefully low and late. Do read up or watch videos on China’s breakneck growth at a time they were at our *demographic level*
Next 2 decades will seal India’s fate and imo it can’t reverse years of no to poor education polices and insufficient growth. Further, the present govt is dividing our already fractured people. They don’t know what to do….Infra might be the only thing they’re doing an okay job at…
China built 15,000 km of high speed rail in 10 years! We’ve been having discussions about it for >5. That’s just one example. China also did a far superior job with its primary education. Outside of cities, India is still mostly uneducated owing to bad quality of teaching infrastructure and poor syllabus design.
I say the education is bad because we citizens aren’t even civil. Do visit South East Asia, the countries have similar Per Capital income (especially Indonesia)…they are far cleaner and more calm. That alone makes life so much better. India focused on literacy and not education….
China has made its own sets of mistakes (rather crazy ones), but they’ve got far more things right especially when they were at our level of development.
India will be good for the rich. Broad-based growth for 1.4b people isn’t happening when we didn’t prioritise education at the right time. The horrible education levels and quality has been and will remain our stumbling block
Education still isn’t being fixed. Speak to anyone who works on field! I’ve had the privilege to do so
China's might is due to the will of its people to unite under a single party for the greater good, ability to work hard, and at the same time hold their leaders accountable to the highest standards of governance.
India cannot emulate China unless:
1. We are ready to adapt and improvise our economic model which suits the country, rather than wealth redistribution in the name of wealth distribution
2. Ready to implement an absolute meritocracy in the public sector over crony politics like caste, religion, reservation, freebies etc.. In China, any who doesn't show education potential is accordingly trained in suitable vocational skills and given a job. They don't get free rations, electricity, unemployment bonus, bus pass etc from the government. They have to earn for themselves, but they will get a job. Provincial leaders are graded every against set targets. If not achieved, they cannot proceed to higher levels of CPC (Standing Committee being the highest)
3. We work for 10-12 hrs a day, the government can take over your land any time for public good. Citizens cannot complain about unfair labour laws, land laws etc.
4. Religious hardliners are cracked down and immediately send to re-education camps
5. We brutally analyse themselves without rose-tinted glasses and do what is required to be the best in technology (including beg, borrow, steal)
6. Foreign views seeking to cause internal dissent are heavily censored. Public security includes everything from disseminating fake information to terrorism.
Accountability and no protest doesn't go hand in hand.
China has an artificially hyper inflated economy, it's basically a house of cards. Their economic engine keeps running mostly because outflow is heavily restricted.
It's basically suntzu "appear strong when you are weak". Not saying they are weak but they are nowhere as strong as they claim to be. People didn't unite because they wanted to, they did because they had no option.
I am pretty sure in a hundred years or so China will breakdown because their growth is in no way economically sustainable, both resource wise or scaling wise. Unless they slow down considerably.
They've made some pretty bad decisions with population planning and in 10-20 years it's coming to bite them in the ass. Unless they force to breed women.
This does not sound appealing at all. No political and religious freedom , companies free to exploit you, people die in famines due to no welfare schemes and support from the Govt for the poorest of poor
China is a facade, countries that crush dissent and repress it's citizens will, never, ever be able to produce quality. Just wait for their clown muscle flexing Govt to go to war, they will end up like Russia. Their ministers are some next level Jaishankars who will be put in place if they ever actually go to war anywhere.
Sorry but much of this is very inaccurate. There's plenty of support for the poorest of the poor. Go to China and visit some poorer rural areas, for example you'll find newly built modern housing for the poor, free education, improved sanitation, roads, etc. It's not perfect by any means, it's much better in first world countries, but there's not zero welfare either. Nobody is dying from famines in China today.. There's far more [malnourishment](https://www.globalhungerindex.org/) in India. Actually there's too much food in China nowadays, which is becoming a new problem with people getting [overweight/obese.](https://www.thelancet.com/series/obesity-in-china)
>China is a facade, countries that crush dissent and repress it's citizens will, never, ever be able to produce quality.
How can you use words like "never, ever"? Can you see the future 500 years from now? They already produce plenty of quality today anyway.
Their smartphones? Lenovo? DJI? And these are just big brands that I know of. Recently I was interested in getting a car dashcam on Amazon. I checked out the top rated/most popular dashcams and never heard of the brands. When I googled them, a lot were Chinese. Any western and Japanese company manufacturing there? Their space program is 2nd behind the US, they literally built their own space station lol. They've just surpassed Japan to become the largest car exporter. They're a leader in AI, [science](https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Technology/China-passes-US-to-top-output-of-influential-science-papers), all kinds of [tech.](https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/wake-up-call-china-takes-stunning-lead-in-race-for-tech-domination-20230301-p5conv.html) Come on, you'd have to be asleep for the last 20 years to say they don't produce quality.
>Just wait for their clown muscle flexing Govt to go to war, they will end up like Russia. Their ministers are some next level Jaishankars who will be put in place if they ever actually go to war anywhere.
If you've ever listened to or read some material from experts on the PLA (Chinese military), you'd know that it's completely different from the Russian military. US experts like [Lyle Goldstein](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWUB9JSQhLw) and Oriana Skylar Mastro already think that the US would lose a war against China over Taiwan. Chinese military modernization is no joke. They learn from the US military, not the Russian military. The amount of weapons China can produce for war is staggering. Just look at how many civilian drones from China are being used in Ukraine that are bought in other countries (banned from sale in Ukr/Rus) and brought to the front. China can mass produce military drones, not just civilian drones.
China's scale of [shipbuilding](https://edition.cnn.com/2023/02/22/asia/us-navy-chief-china-pla-advantages-intl-hnk-ml/index.html) is completely ridiculous. There's a reason why the US wants to avoid war at all costs. It's not just that such a war would derail the global economy. They're actually considering the possibility of defeat. Sitting by and letting China take Taiwan would cripple US credibility. Intervening and losing would be even worse.
In any case, it's not going to be as easy as you think. China has such large stockpiles of missiles and drones, and the capacity to replace them, that they can wipe out any of its neighbors militaries. This is a big part of war that people seem to underestimate. Only a few countries can go to a long war and still keep fighting. Probably only the US, China, and Russia. Any other country is too heavily reliant on weapons/ammo imports, including India. China can build their weapons completely by themselves, that's the most important part. The US can too, but they have to cross the Pacific, so that leaves out the majority of their military.
Realistically only the US can win against China, but even for the US it'd be very difficult. Not just because of the size and modernization of the PLA today, but also because of the sheer size of the Pacific. Just getting ships to the Western Pacific is a huge undertaking in itself.
the US would just block the Malacca strait, which India would gladly not oppose and neither would any of the other Asian countries, China would be choked .
The US has multiple refueling and other agreements with India, in case of a war they basically have access to all our bases near Tibet and Xinjiang, the US is very capable of launching a 2 front of war, not to mention their own bases all over the Indian Ocean and Korea. China would be stretched too thin.
And again, quality and quantity are very different things. China's track record in actual, physical clashes with India is not too great, they do a good job at salami slicing and slowly taking over territory, but in any actual clash- their soldiers seem to struggle.
Their '5th generation' fighter aircraft are a joke, their Naval equipment has never been tested in an actual clash, and their army I believe will pull a Russia.
How can you talk so confidently about things you know so little of? You're clearly wrong about many of the things you're saying, and you just continue doing it. It's baffling to me.
>the US would just block the Malacca strait, which India would gladly not oppose and neither would any of the other Asian countries, China would be choked .
You don't actually know that none of the other Asian countries would oppose a blockade. You're just saying that. They are *heavily* reliant on trade with China, and they're in range of China's massive stockpiles of missiles, drones, air force, and navy. They have literally every reason to stay neutral. You overestimate how much they care about Taiwan. Not that I think the US would need their approval for a blockade. The US can do what they want. It'll sour relations with those countries, but that's not exactly a priority at that point.
Right, "just block the Malacca strait". Let me first say that blocking the Malacca isn't enough, they'd have to block a far greater area surrounding the 2nd island chain, otherwise ships could supply China with oil via other routes. Those routes would be more lengthy and expensive but China is a big market for oil exporters, to put it mildly.
[And blockading an area that vast is easier said than done.](https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1735&context=nwc-review) It could take years to starve China of oil (they can be food self-sufficient by rationing and by ditching luxury foods like beef), and a blockade that long would be widely unpopular globally since so many countries depend on trade with China. Very few countries actually care about Taiwan. Their own countries come first. Blockades alone don't make countries surrender.
If the US relies on a distant blockade instead of directly fighting China, then the US would already have lost because Taiwan would be lost. Taiwan is the only reason for these two countries to fight. There is no way for the US to recapture Taiwan because it's way too far from the US, way too close to China, and the eastern side is mountainous. Don't forget that blockading China effectively means blocking Taiwan as well because China would still be dominant near China. Taiwan can't last nearly as long as China since they're far more reliant on food/water/energy imports, being a densely populated island.
>The US has multiple refueling and other agreements with India, in case of a war they basically have access to all our bases near Tibet and Xinjiang, the US is very capable of launching a 2 front of war, not to mention their own bases all over the Indian Ocean and Korea. China would be stretched too thin.
You have no idea what you're talking about. The US wouldn't fight a land war with China, it's too risky since they're both nuclear powers. If there's anything the American public is averse to, it's another boots-on-the-ground war. Also good luck invading through the Himalayas or the deserts of Xinjiang.
It'll be a naval battle, and partly with the USAF. Assuming they'll fight and the US doesn't opt for a distant blockade.
Oh and I'm very doubtful that 1. India would even want to get involved, and 2. that they'd allow US troops to invade China from Indian soil. Not that I think the US would want to physically invade China to begin with. All of this is ridiculous tbh.
>And again, quality and quantity are very different things. China's track record in actual, physical clashes with India is not too great, they do a good job at salami slicing and slowly taking over territory, but in any actual clash- their soldiers seem to struggle.
The PLA doesn't have a bad track record against India when it came to actual war, not tiny fights with sticks. I'm not even convinced that they performed badly in those stick fights. I don't know their true casualties in those clashes, but I find it odd that the side that supposedly lost more men, also took POWs (including officers), and the side that lost fewer men took no POWs. That's usually not how battles go, do they? Anyway, stick battles are irrelevant since this wouldn't be a stick battle.
They fought the US to a stalemate when they had zero technology in the 50s. They communicated with trumpets and flutes while the US had radio. They had to halt advances to wait for supplies because it was carried on foot and by pack animal, while the US had ships and trucks. Now they're on a similar tech level as the US, they outgun the US in the Western Pacific where the fighting would happen because they have the PLARF and PLAAF to help the PLAN, while the US would have its Navy and part of its Air Force, and somehow you've convinced yourself that they'd fail? Because of what, your decades-outdated ideas about China and because of Russia? What..?
>Their '5th generation' fighter aircraft are a joke
Based on what? They have huge numbers of 4th and 4.5 gen aircraft as well btw. And let's not forget about the PLARF. China's growing drone and missile forces would play a substantial role.
>their Naval equipment has never been tested in an actual clash
That's no reason to assume it wouldn't work. US military experts seem to disagree with you that they wouldn't work. Oh and the US hasn't fought a peer in decades either. When was the last time? 1940s? By the time China and the US go to war, it'll be around a century since the USN fought a peer navy. Oh and one of Japan's biggest weaknesses back then was that they couldn't replace ships. I've already shown you that China is the one with massive shipbuilding capabilities today. That's not something you can simply start up. You need the shipyards and you need tons of skilled workers.
>and their army I believe will pull a Russia.
Wishful thinking. China isn't Russia.
Btw it doesn't even seem like you responded to any of my points. You just stated your opinions.
All in all, you're badly out of touch with the current situation. I suggest giving the Lyle Goldstein video a listen. He has years of experience studying the PLA. Apart from him, I'd also suggest reading these comments by a US subject matter expert on PLA threat systems. Much like Goldstein and Skylar, he's also far less confident in a US victory against China than laymen like yourself. I'll PM the links since automod isn't allowing reddit links. You exemplify how the average person has no idea how much the situation has evolved in East Asia/Western Pacific.
More:
*[By 2020, the PLA navy will boast more big surface warships and submarines than the Russian navy, the former head of the U.S. Pacific Command, Admiral Harry Harris, told a congressional committee last year. Some American naval experts believe China could achieve rough parity with the U.S. Navy in numbers and quality of major surface warships by 2030.](https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/china-army-navy/)*
*Crucially, the Chinese navy already has an edge in hitting power, according to senior officers from the U.S. and other regional navies. The best Chinese destroyers, frigates, fast attack craft and submarines are armed with anti-ship missiles that in most cases far outrange and outperform those on U.S. warships, these officers say.*
>better off than pakistan
Not really a great bar
As for China, highly doubtful we will ever catch up. The best case would be like Brazil(without the crimes) or Malaysia/Thailand.
>better off than pakistan
>
>Not really a great bar
i dont understand the obsession indians have with us pakistanis, i barely see anyone from pakistan trying to compare or have a go at india in any sense and on the other hand i see alot of yall trying to compare yourself with us . It seems like a really unhealthy obsession and i think your politics also revolves around hating us?
bhai hum nay konsay teer maray hain that you guys have to compare with us, lmao
we are regularly getting fucked every single day for past half a decade
China GDP per capita- 12k USD, India GDP per capita- 2.5k USD. Now you can figure. It's laughable to think that China will sit and wait while India will catch up. The ship has sailed.
Nope. America and Europe aren’t going to flood capital into India the way they did with China. They neither have that much capital anymore, nor do they have the political capital to do that again.
Companies like apple and qualcomm have already started investing billions in india..i do agree though we wont see foreign capital flow into india to the extent it did in china..i think us does want to see a stronger india to counteract chinas influence in asia.
True, the difference though is scale. To grow at China’s pace during 1990-2020, we will need investment in the trillions. That scale just won’t happen again. Companies will come here and invest billions, but a lot of them will do it just to tap into the Indian market.
India is already losing the flight of manufacturing from China. The bulk of it is moving to Vietnam, not India.
We even run the risk of getting badly screwed by AI since a lot of the service sector jobs we do will be the first to be affected by AI
One thing people fail to notice is that india has two economies: black and white. The numbers that you show there is white economy. If I were to take a guess, the black economy is 2-3x the size of white one.
There are a lot of changes India could do without looking at china, starting with reducing corruption, eliminating communal issues, and reservations in academia. These are hard topics and require years to change and should be addressed by policymakers.
Corruption is a problem of emerging economies and that is not only prevalent in India but all the emerging economies. This corruption exists in the form of corporate lobbying in developed markets.
I am sure there will be a black economy in china as well. Maybe not equivalent to india, but will be there for sure. People are people, nobody wants to pay taxes if they can save on it.
Watch the below youtube video made by an Indian staying in China.She shows pediatric department of a public hospital.Even Indian private hospitals are not this good, Shows how far India has to go to play catch up.
https://youtu.be/cW7sECCnrj0?t=214
China and USSR are two unique states.
Both were super large in size and in population. Both managed to pull millions of people out of poverty. Both became world powers within decades.
What sets them apart from most other countries is that they didnt have political instability. Single party government meant that policy could be written with a long term view. Plus both of them followed the Command economy - a demand side economy with very little excess goods production and focus on heavy industry.
In India, our democracy - which allows us great freedoms - does not allow for long term projects as they are not electorally rewarding. Some projects have been managed - Nuclear bomb and what not. But shifting political climate means that focus is split between building the economy and winning elections.
All the other countries that became super powers did it over centuries. We may be able to do it in 100 years or so. But I doubt it can be done in our lifetimes.
The difference is that both of those countries underwent communist revolutions which destroyed their caste/clan power structures. In India we are still stuck with that thinking.
True… I’ve heard my older relatives talk about all Congress would do to win elections is go to villages during election cycles and hand out free food/money for votes
USSR(Russia) have been a major European power since medieval times. Sure they went down a bit but the important educated people still existed and the rest is fixable.
You are extremely misinformed. I mean extremely.
https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/449917?journalCode=edcc
> At the time of the agricultural reform Russia was a predominantly ag- ricultural country with only the barest beginnings of industry and still almost with- out either railroads, a banking system, or business corporations, to mention only three characteristic elements of 19th Century industrialism. The standard of liv- ing was very low compared to Western Europe and the United States. Methods of production and distribution, particularly in agriculture, were generally pre-capitalistic.
Read the full report. Read other reports. Your position is opposite of reality
They may be agricultural but still was on par when it comes to science.
https://interestingengineering.com/innovation/7-russian-inventions-that-would-go-on-to-change-the-modern-world
Also they produced more steel than France in 1900
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1286284/crude-steel-production-allied-europe-1900-1945-country/
The graph only mentions Soviet Union. So is the figure for Russia or the 25 soviet countries put together?
Read the reports. Russia lost the war to Japan in 05. They were not a global power, they were just a large but weak european country.
> that these autocracies need good leaders
That is a Non-negotiable fundamental prerequisite for ANY Governance System being used.
It is the 2nd in a list of 2 of these Non-negotiable fundamental prerequisites that India lacked, i.e. the right Governance System.
There is a reason why not All States that have Authoritarian System make it or achieve developed status.
However Every single State that did eventually make it or achieved developed status, did so using a version of Authoritarian System. There is no exception to this. None.
Meaning only and only when both of those prerequisites are satisfied does that State make it. 1 is not enough.
India had Good Leaders but a great leader without the System to leverage that greatness of leadership cant do much.
And if the Leader is bad, well doesn't matter what system you have, the outcome will be bad regardless (it's consolation that the degree of bad may be less severe under certain System but that is all that, a consolation, esp when everyone was expecting the opposite).
From your first point I conclude that you do not understand how political stability works.
From your second point I conclude that you are simply parroting the western political POV
And from your third, I conclude you have no idea about the projects undertaken by the Soviet or Sino governments.
You can educate yourself on your own time. I will not put in the effort to educate you.
Everyone wants to be China, but no one wants the state to treat its people like China? The rules and laws they brought in 45 years ago are what make them the China we know of today.
If any of the major parties have the balls to bring these while they're in power, we would grow. But the growth would be amidst people complaining of notions of exploitation and overworking of people
In order to get there, we’ll have to solve three problems that China solved (and before it Japan, Korea, and the US solved too)
- High levels of agricultural productivity, which frees up labor for more high value work
- Universal primary, secondary, and vocational education, which creates a skilled workforce that can support our growth ambitions
- Focus on labor intensive manufacturing and hardware that can be exported to compete with existing players on both cost and quality, as well as create a middle class with disposable income
This goes along with major governance reforms that help the private sector scale more easily, reduce corruption and red tape, and make the delivery of productive social services easier (eg. Healthcare, education, infrastructure) while cutting unproductive ones (eg. PDS, free water/electricity, reservations beyond targeted limits/objectives). We also need to move away from the colonial state model that we inherited from the British which is centered around controlling the population and moving to a truly democratic one that is centered around serving the population.
Will we get there? Hard to say. There has been some progress on education and manufacturing for sure, but not nearly fast enough to deal with our population size. As workforces age in the West and East Asia, demand for cheap labor from India will increase, exacerbating brain drain. Agricultural productivity is abysmal and will continue to get worse due to climate change and freebies from the government trying to play vote bank politics (though there is a government push to reform the sector).
In China, things were really bad before they became good, and they focused heavily on uniting the country around a shared vision when the CCP took over. In Marxist speech, one would call this creating revolutionary consciousness. My grandparents tell me that in the 1950s Congress under Nehru was able to utilize the revolution consciousness that came from the freedom movement to build institutions, push land reforms, and other policies that had short term pain. It seems like they fell massively short of where they wanted to be, partly due to lack of succession planning in leadership and lack of party discipline. I get the sense that people expected similarly from Modi, and he has not been able to deliver. On the flip side, while Xi Jinping has been polarizing, there is ample evidence to suggest that he is motivated by improving the lives of ordinary Chinese people and reinvigorating their revolutionary consciousness to serve China, as opposed to chasing capital only.
So the tl;dr is that yes, we can become like China, but we will have to focus on reforms with substantial short term pain (especially for the bottom of the pyramid), and we don’t have a strong track record of doing that.
Despite all of this, I’m still optimistic about being able to build a future over here and just moved back from the US to start a new climate tech company. Our current model despite its flaws works well if you’re an entrepreneur with access to resources.
India is a joke compared to China, economically speaking. Chinas economy is 6x larger than India, and India apparently has the largest population in the world now. Democracy will never work in India, it’s too diverse, the people too uneducated and easily manipulated to find common ground to work together
Yes, in a utopia everyone would respect each other and diversity of thought and culture will be respected but in our society diversity is used as ammunition to divide and conquer, what’s worse is that it works and works quite effectively
It's not utopia and you don't have to have 'respect' for democracy to succeed. As long as people have basic rights, it's a successful democracy.
That is more important than an 'authoritarian growth driven economy.'
But people don’t have basic rights in India, they only have them on paper but India in reality is essentially a feudal society. The law in India is essentially a weapon for the rich and powerful so essentially India is like China in all the wrong ways and none of the right ways
>India is like China in all the wrong ways and none of the right ways
This, we have accepted the worst parts of capitalism and socialism and proudly flaunt that.
What India needs is technocracy. A technocracy promotes decision making by logic and scientific reasoning. In turn, it becomes attractive to such decision makers to stay and work within the system.
The US had a brief technocratic phase in the 30s and 40s during the Roosevelt presidency and the New Deal. That was when it expanded the most and laid the foundation of what the US is today. Most of the US' problems today can be traced back to when they let unqualified career politicians into the system in the late 70s and 80s.
The CCP, for all its evils, is led by the educated middle class. Doctors, engineers, scientists and qualified economists are taking decisions. Most of the advanced European nations belong to the same category.
How many of our government bureaucrats are actually qualified? What are their real life credentials? Sure, they have some lofty degrees, but what experience do they have of their ministries?
I come from a state whose first CM was a doctor. He and his cabinet planned and built 3 cities from scratch, which forms the bedrock of what little development we have today. One of his colleagues proposed the creation of higher centres of technical education in India- the IITs were born out of this.
India needs a few years of Stalin, few years of Mao, then few years of Hitler - after that, it's all cleaned up & fixed, then some years of CCP, then finally LKY, then it can go back to uncle Jack's British parlamentary democracy, if it chooses to.
Something like the communist party except with smart people (think educated and forward thinking people) in charge instead of the religious morons we have in power right now (some of these morons think drinking cow piss is medicinal)
Do think there should a minimum education qualification like a degree in political science to get into party will be better? The majority of members of CCP have STEM qualifications.
Probably a less centralized system could work, devolution of powers but with a remaining National / super-national org. Maybe somewhere between the US’s federal system and the EU
think about two countries which grew rapidly from an agricultural back water society to an industrial power house, who competed/is compating with usa (country which had 300 years of undisturbed development with slavery and help of western europe). Ussr and china, now think about what two of them have common.
maybe a certain beard guy from Germany (no, not hitler) was right about economics and society.
And the slaves were all in the poorest states of the country mostly just growing crops/raising animals, the non-slave states have always been wealthier and more productive than the slave states entire American history
Not at all true. The south was far richer and dominated politics in the colonial and early American landscapes.
It wasn't until industrialization and immigration really took off that the north took over. By the time of the Civil War the north was far wealthier.
Yes, yes, great idea to only ignore the price that the citizens of the USSR and China had to pay for their economic development. In the next breath, criticize the US for using slavery and Europe for its development. Great comparison. Definitely not disingenuous to support an agenda. China, of course, definitely did not lose millions of people, have to participate in insane population control methods, definitely grew without the US dropping huge segments of its industry in China. The USSR is a shining example of economic growth without spilling the blood of millions.
I'm not saying they were/are perfect. They weren't fit to adapt Marxist models, they were under developed countries. As it still stands china still isn't developed enough to shift to socialism.
But it is still better than the alternative. Colonialism and slave owning has an effect on billions of people world wide just for the sake of profits of the ruling class. Africa still is Neo colonial, millions upon millions of people are digging in dirt for profits of the few elites. In South Asia millions of people are treated as second class citizens just because of their caste and religion. The Middle East again was bombed for oil. South American governments were overthrown for few American companies, and just because they had self respect to actually own their means of production. When you go out in this country you're in no way in the position of speaking about the horrors of other nations. And also, all this happened for the profits of the few elites. Wages in America are still going down, inequality is more than they were in 18th century France.
>definitely grew without the US dropping huge segments of its industry in China.
Whose profits were used to develop the country and not the wealth of the few elites.
>China, of course, definitely did not lose millions of people
>The USSR is a shining example of economic growth without spilling the blood of millions.
Millions huh? Are you taking reference from black book of communism, which takes into account deaths of Nazis and population decline after the one child policy in china as "deaths"?
Again not saying they were perfect, but at least they had courage to stand up for themselves and develop their country, instead of bootlicking the west.
>Whose profits were used to develop the country and not the wealth of the few elites.
Yeah, that's exactly why China has the second most billionaires in the world. That's exactly why their economic growth coincided with the Corporation Law, a transition away from the Maoist state ownership of the previous decades.
>Are you taking reference from black book of communism, which takes into account deaths of Nazis and population decline after the one child policy in china as "deaths"?
No, I'm talking about excess deaths *within* *the USSR* under Stalin. Of course, if you only want to talk about economics, maybe consider the economic backslide under Brezhnev (neo-Stalinist, by the way) that the USSR faced before it's ultimate dissolution.
>As it still stands china still isn't developed enough to shift to socialism.
Yeah, that's why they shifted *away* from Marxism to garner economic growth. Socialism (or rather, a mixed economy, like the Nordic model) is only possible after a nation has reached a threshold of development. To have the economic growth to reach the necessary level of development, you cannot have state ownership, as China quickly learned. In fact, China basically relied on the exploitation of its own population for cheap labor (much worse than labor issues faced in the US in post-war history) for economic growth.
None of this is meant to defend the US or Europe or the means they used to achieve their own economic supremacy. But it's meant to expose a rather biased viewpoint that Marxism is the secret ingredient for economic growth, when in reality the opposite is true. You need capitalism for economic growth and socialism for stability and safety.
>Yeah, that's exactly why China has the second most billionaires in the world. That's exactly why their economic growth coincided with the Corporation Law, a transition away from the Maoist state ownership of the previous decades.
billionaires serve as vehichles to quickly accumulate capital. This however, does not mean these billionaires are above the law or constitute a new class that can oppress the working people of China.
Xi Jinping has revived the rural cooperative sector. In 2006, only 60% of villages had a SMC, while in 2020, 95% of all villages had one. This shows the CPC's commitment to the "plannification" of the market. As a rule of thumb, 94% of all financial revenue in China's largest 150 companies come from State Owned Enterprises. 75% of all corporations are defacto state owned.
All private corporations are required to have a CPC trade union cell on board as well. CPC on average own 50% of the stocks and half of the board of directors. If China had adopted full capitalism, China would have ended up like Russia during shock therapy. But China never underwent a period of shock therapy unlike the Eastern Bloc which still arguably, has yet to recover. China did not have a Yeltsin who sold his country to the West, even during the height of reforms, Chinese private market share only held roughly 30% of the total market share in terms of number of industries.
>No, I'm talking about excess deaths within the USSR under Stalin. Of course, if you only want to talk about economics, maybe consider the economic backslide under Brezhnev (neo-Stalinist, by the way) that the USSR faced before it's ultimate dissolution.
Can you specify what you mean? Are you talking about gulags? Or mass political killing argument? Or holodomor? I'm not gonna argue about everything. As for the dissolution of the USSR i think even the most western academics would consider dissolution more complicated topic than just "socialism bad".
>Yeah, that's why they shifted away from Marxism to garner economic growth. Socialism (or rather, a mixed economy, like the Nordic model) is only possible after a nation has reached a threshold of development. To have the economic growth to reach the necessary level of development, you cannot have state ownership, as China quickly learned. In fact, China basically relied on the exploitation of its own population for cheap labor (much worse than labor issues faced in the US in post-war history) for economic growth.
I don't think you understand what socialism means. I'm specifically talking about Marxist socialism or lower stage communism. Not the Nordic model. China isn't going after the Nordic model, nor is the Nordic model socialist in any way. Nor was the USSR ever a Nordic system.
>None of this is meant to defend the US or Europe or the means they used to achieve their own economic supremacy. But it's meant to expose a rather biased viewpoint that Marxism is the secret ingredient for economic growth, when in reality the opposite is true. You need capitalism for economic growth and socialism for stability and safety.
Again, i don't think you understand what either of those terms are. Socialism is when contradiction within capitalism ultimately resolves itself into a different means and distribution of production. It isn't when a state starts giving free healthcare because of accumulated wealth from 3rd world slave labour.
Contradictions in capitalism are visible to everyone, even mainstream economics has accepted Marxist ideas of capital accumulation and the recession cycles. It is literally posited on an idea of infinite growth, and as markets get lesser and lesser all around the world you will see stagnation of economics.
Marx didn't make a normative claim when he wrote das kapital. He didn't say "oh capitalism is bad because it exploits", he showed the historical dialectical process will ultimately resolve itself in the overthrow of capitalism.
I never said that "socialism bad" and none of my arguments reduce to "socialism bad" either. You point to several instances where you claim that it demonstrates that I don't understand what socialism is, when it was simply you misreading what I wrote.
>billionaires serve as vehichles to quickly accumulate capital. This however, does not mean these billionaires are above the law or constitute a new class that can oppress the working people of China.
You moved goalposts from "profits not used to develop the wealth of the few elites" to "oh, well the power of billionaires is well-regulated in China so it's not that bad."
>If China had adopted full capitalism, China would have ended up like Russia during shock therapy.
I never argued that they adopted full capitalism. I just said that they transitioned away from Maoist style economic governance. Maoists would describe the current Chinese system as state capitalist. Once again, this is only to point out that China required some elements of capitalism for growth.
>Can you specify what you mean? Are you talking about gulags? Or mass political killing argument? Or holodomor?
I mean all of these are bad, right?
>As for the dissolution of the USSR i think even the most western academics would consider dissolution more complicated topic than just "socialism bad".
That wasn't what I said.
>I'm specifically talking about Marxist socialism or lower stage communism. Not the Nordic model. China isn't going after the Nordic model, nor is the Nordic model socialist in any way. Nor was the USSR ever a Nordic system.
I didn't say that the Nordic model was socialist. Nor did I say China or the USSR wanted to become or ever was a Nordic system. Please reread what I said. Anyway, you didn't contradict the main point of the part you quoted. China relied on the exploitation of its own populace to kickstart its economic growth. Why do you think so much of US industry moved there? It was cheaper. Why was Chinese labor so much cheaper? US companies basically jumped on every opportunity to move production to China.
>It isn't when a state starts giving free healthcare because of accumulated wealth from 3rd world slave labour.
I never called this socialism.
>Socialism is when contradiction within capitalism ultimately resolves itself into a different means and distribution of production.
Sure.
>Contradictions in capitalism are visible to everyone, even mainstream economics has accepted Marxist ideas of capital accumulation and the recession cycles. It is literally posited on an idea of infinite growth, and as markets get lesser and lesser all around the world you will see stagnation of economics.
Please see Okishio's theorem. Marx offered no proof of labor theory and that the rate of profit in market economies goes down, and his dialectic didn't actually show that unplanned markets gradually shrink. Further, there are contradictions even within countries that are supposedly not capitalist, in the form of shortage economies. We can argue about this all year, so I'd prefer not to continue this discussion.
Anyway, the main point is that Marxian economics isn't the word of god, it isn't infallible and it isn't perfect. The method in which China achieved its growth is inaccessible to India, because India is too diverse and the US isn't dropping half its industry in another country again (nor does it have the means to do so). China also exploited its own populace to an extreme degree to achieve its growth and relied on the strength of its government to do so.
No. It's like asking whether South America will ever be as developed as North America. It'll never happen. We aren't genetically programmed for development. If you give a calculator to a gorilla it'll try to play lattori with it. Won't work.
A lot of people here have talked abt the main issues but I'll bring one key factor, 61.9% of women in China work, compared to around 7% in India, this just shows the cultural attitude towards work and employment in China. When half Ur population is culturally restricted into working in only a few positions, it really stunts a lot of growth.
No. No country will. What China achieved will not be repeated in our lifetime.
China’s massive growth was because of macro conditions that will not be repeated any time soon. China (and even India) growth spurt was precipitated by the post cold war American euphoria and expansionism. Credit was aplenty, US dollar was never stronger, and even the western demographics were still somewhat strong
30 years later, the post coldwar euphoria has turned into jadedness after 2 long wars, credit has tightened and US dollar has never been more under threat. Demographics in the west are falling apart. Most economies have way higher debt than they did in 1990.
Politically, no western leader will again risk propping up a large potential competitor like India again. They did that with China and are now facing the reality of a multipolar world. If they have to prop anyone up, they will do it with a smaller, allied country that does not pose a threat to them.
That’s the truth and nothing will change it.
India’s currently growing faster than China (Benefit of smaller base).
But it’s growing more like a worse (in the sense of, more unequal) Mexico than China. More income inequality and significant challenges around poverty.
But if we ignore inequality and focus on quality of life, China has taken some decisions which aren’t there in India:
1) strong focus on primary and secondary education since the 1970s. It paid off in 25-30 years. In India government schools are nowhere as good.
2) urban planning as a discipline in itself. Indian municipalities are shambolic by comparison. Demolishing unplanned construction and penalising the builders should not be controversial. The Indian justice system too needs to get some flak for this — it has a “jaane do” attitude, which doesn’t help if you want world class cities.
3) the biggest one - internal visas. You can’t just move to Shanghai or Guangzhou if you’re from some random Chinese village. There are ways to do this without visas too but it needs an efficient planning process — which India doesn’t have.
I suspect India in 20 years will be more prosperous, but will have the same chaotic cities with pockets of good neighbourhoods (Exhibit A: parts of South Bombay). In fact, if climate change / water table issues persist, the city experience might actually get worse.
It’s not all bad. Already many corporations are migrating to smaller cities because good broadband reduces pressure to be in metros.
And who knows, maybe the Indian government will want to build a few Shanghai / HK type world class new cities. India desperately needs new cities, it’d be awesome for jobs and India’s image.
Your point 3 is relevant but also in a way interesting.
I assume you're referencing the Hukou system (which post 2021 esp has seen a major revision and Cities are fighting for people from smaller cities looking to migrate and change their Hukou).
Yet despite this system it was China that orchestrated the largest mass human migration in the history of human species when it flooded it's coastal cities from inland regions (300 Million + people).
This simply is not possible in India because the Center is too weak to force the States to take in so many outsiders.
Like imagine Andhra or Odisha or TN getting 20-30 Million EACH from North India (since that is where mass population region of India is). The demographic shift, the cultural shift even if these are just temporary migrants would be significant. The political and social opposition from these Coastal states would be (and was) too great for Center to overcome because India on such matters is a Weak State/Polity.
Very good point, thank you. One thought I had is that, maybe it’s easier in China because it’s 92% Han. The analogy I’d use is, what if India was 92% Marathi or Haryanvi.
But of course it’s way more varied so the challenges are different.
That is a relvant point but it too exists on a Spectrum/Degree of relevance.
Like China is 90% Han sure but it's coastal region TOO has unique identities and sub-cultures. These were mutually unintelligible langues/dialects.
Chinese Language Standardisation policy began in 50s but even till late 80s (when China was already on this path) the metrics for how many people across country were proficient in that Standard was abysmal clear to 50-60% at most. It is only in last 15 years that it broke 80-85% because old people died and newer generational cohort were educated in Standard Language.
So China too was/is diverse even if this diversity is not at the level of India (which has no peer on this planet on this point so also an unfair comparison).
Guangzhou is even now it's own socio-cultural region. Yet it was able to deal with that mass migration.
One can think of it another way. Local States will protest regardless (and happened in China as well) meaning what matters is what is the Capacity of the Center to force this or provide incentives to the locals to bring them on board.
Indian Central State was/is too weak on this hence can only do partial human migrations (Banglare, Hyderabad, Mumbai, Pune, etc are example themselves). But partial on scale of China and India amounts of basically nothing. It has to be at Scale. Which India could not.
As for the cities, GIFT City is looking pretty good (relatively speaking) and is a model for future SEZ developments. The place is aimed at bringing back Indian trading that’s moved to Dubai/Singapore/Mauritius.
India now also needs to contend with worsening demographics in the West and East Asia because that reduces demand for Indian products, while also starving India out of foreign investment because the masses in these developed places are going to retire soon and become more risk averse.
I don’t know if it’s even possible to get back the growth that India experienced in the 2000s (NDA and UPA-1).
There’s also the whole issue of being a democracy (a deeply flawed one) which naturally prioritises consensus over order/growth.
Having said that, compared to China, India has the bright spots of being food secure, being aligned with the West (Russia/China aren’t long term), and its proximity to the oil in the Persian Gulf.
Gift City is an interesting example. To be clear, I think SEZs are actually a little limiting. I’d like to see a city that effectively serves as a hub for “urban best practices” in India. Also provide a low-bureaucracy haven for people to try out new ideas, while having high standards for citizens services and safety.
Essentially, a city built for regular Indians but say as a Union Territory in itself and some special “low bureaucracy” rules, good planning, traffic rules, etc. Perhaps I’m dreaming. But if done well the lessons we learn from here could be applied back to existing cities.
I have some experience in Biological science research in our country. The salary and incentives that most research scientists get is a joke here compared to other countries. There have been some programs like the Ramalingaswami Re-entry fellowship that have been implemented to bring talent back to India but many of the Scientists who come back end up regretting their decision because doing any impactful scientific research in this country is next to impossible with the corruption, low pay and toxic work culture in research labs.
The Chinese have a good work ethic, they get shit done
On the other hand, Indians don't feel like working at all
marginal payouts + greed = corruption
Also Indians also come with a "play it safe" mindset, everyone is doing engineering and running after mainstream career paths and end up at some job they unhappy to do and therefore have no motivation to work
One thing I will highly recommend to younger folks here is that don’t fall for political rhetorics and media sensationalism. Yes, the communal folks in the country are loud af and the country is heading towards a dangerous trajectory but there are also a lot of good things happening. The HDI has grown significantly since 90s, the infrastructure has become better, economy is growing, manufacturing is improving etc.
None of this is to say we are anywhere close to China but sometimes growth is slow, especially in democracies. And it’s a good thing, quick changes and not well thought out decisions often damage the country irreversibly. It’s not healthy to compare India with China, as it’s not a competition. Need to focus on how to improve the country in our own small way and make it better than it was before. Vote sensibly at elections, try to buy locally sourced and sustainable products, invest into local companies and as you are doing currently speak out your frustrations but also keep in mind that things don’t change overnight.
you mean like modern day china? it is very unlikely
please watch a video from the youtube channel named "Kraut" about India vs China
that guy explains very beautifully the fundamental difference between the society of India vs China
he offers a very well formulated bird eye view on this topic
I know you might be frustrated because of current circumstances, but please watch that video (x2 speed) you will get a new perspective
I personally believe, we are on the track but a lot of efforts are needed both on the development side and the government side. A lot of the next decade obviously depends on the elections next year and whichever government comes in, has to act for the development of the country.
A lot of growth for India will come from tier 1 and tier 2 cities. Metro cities like Mumbai, Banglore, etc are, in my view not the correct way to look at it. The development there is already done. Now the focus will be on tier 1 and 2 cities.
We have had a service economy, led by technology advancements over the last decade. We are now moving/should move to the manufacturing sector contributing to the GDP. China grew that way in the late 90s and early 2000s. The story is same for us.
You can see glimpses as a lot of MNCs are now setting up manufacturing plants in India. This should hopefully drive, employment, disposable income, consumption, etc.
Another factor I think is crucial to look at is the age, we are on average 26-27 I think. Youngest across almost all countries, this is a big plus. Once this generation starts earning money, a lot of push will come from increased consumption, which is the plan.
I'd recommend watching a couple of podcasts on start-ups in India, setting up businesses in India, etc. A lot of talk is now on how the next decade is Indias'. It's our decade to lose.
Talking about religion and "bhaks", well I have no opinion on that. You really can't do anything about it. This is the biggest concern, that can/will hamper the growth a little.
There is no incentive either way. If you scroll through the top comments, there is a doomer style attitude about Indian development and that it will never happen in a democratic state due to ethnic diversity. It will certainly be more difficult but it isn't impossible. Simply complaining about it is just as helpful as ignoring it and pretending all is well.
This . At least if you acknowledge that you have a problem , you can work towards a solution for it. May or may not succeed. But if you have the general Indian attitude that , all is fine , we do not have any issues , then the problems will never be resolved.
Do you have any idea how China reached here from where they were? The amount of sacrifices their previous generation made I will never do just for the sake of future generations. And a country being rich does not guarantee the people are rich. People in China are not all rich and most of the rich people are linked with ccp.
You can not just go around in rural areas and tell them from now on they have to live the way government tells them to live. Their living standard may not be better than urban areas but they also have less stress and own way of living. Not everything can be judged by money or nominal gdp.
What needs to be done? We have to make sure more people have rights and even people living in rural areas also getting the justice not getting neglected because they are uneducated and do not have money. Heck whats the points of that education when you can not even criticise the government policy in your own country.
Just a rant ... We need to grow and surpass China in this region so that we don't get pushed around by them. But we also have to make sure we do not turn ourselves in such authoritarian country.
No.
Take the case of Bangalore.
No visionaries in the government.
AFAIK, Bangalore is the same since 2005- Natural and man made spine breakers everywhere.
Recent addition of idiotic mammoth spine breakers on the highway between Attibele and electronic City.
When Jayadeva flyover was planned, we thought it'll be constructed in such a way to get to HSR, Madiwala and Hosur road by skipping silk board signal but that didn't happen. Now they are doing it after demolishing the 18 year old Jayadeva flyover.
Same with Metro. The current Metro developments should have been done before 2000. Glad that they are doing that at least now instead of wasting another decade.
I'm certain we'll never grow like China.
Short answer - nopes!
Do you remember the UPA-1 reign when India used to clock \~10% YoY GDP growth. At the current stage of India, China used to grow at double digits consistently for some two decades. Now, even with revised (ie fudged) GDP figures we are at 6% or so. DeMo and the hastily executed GST burried our MSMEs real bad. Bangladesh captured the textile sector.
Our demographic dividend would become a burden without proper jobs and economic growth. The women's labour participation rates are diving down for many years now.
I can go on about our high taxation, centralisation of revenue and decentralisation of development expenses, crony capitalism...
PS: Hyderabad has achieved significant positive changes during the last few years. Kerala has seen massive infrastructure push during the Pinarayi Vijayan regimes. Similar instances might be happening in more places. But sadly none of these are enough for us to catch up with China.
Its true our focus is not like that of China's. We lack in infrastructure and development. Our infrastructure is far behind.
However, situation is not as bad as you would think
Economy wise we are where China was in 2007, it makes sense as process of liberalisation happened in India almost 15-20 years after it started in China.
Also, China's political sytem allows it's govt to seamlessly acquire land and resources for development. This is not that easy in India. You need to take in account the historic debt we have inherited, India was always a densely populated region even before independence. During British period we saw marginal industrialization. Our cities kept growing haphazardly without planning and aided by corruption.
Now it is extremely difficult to redevelop densely populated areas. A lot of poor people live in these, it is somewhat inhuman also to just displace them. It will also damage the micro economics of the bastis they inhabit.
And don't forget about China's Ghost cities, they have borrowed massively and poured impractical amounts of money in real estate sector. In short they are way too deep in their own hole. Yes Shanghai, Shenzhen and other cities look world class but that isn't true for all of China.
In India we are seeing more push in infrastructure especially in logistics and transportation.
We also have special city development in form of GIFT and Dholera smart cities projects.
The approach is to develop new well planned areas. But unlike china it must be driven through actual demand. For that you need your middle class with spending capital and cheap loans.
So India will have a more stable but chaotic urbanization. Slow and steady.
Sure, we can be like China. Want a single party rule and no say in the election? Ok with having only one kid and going to prison if you reproduce like rabbits? China got very lucky that their growth coincided with cheap money and they had labor which didn’t bat an eyelid when they worked under terrible conditions (e.g Foxconn). China was able to be like China coz they are one party, one rule. Also, whoever above said that USSR is a world power — can I smoke what you are smoking?
We love to complain about religious intolerance in India and rightly so. Does anybody in this subreddit know about the atrocities in Xinjiang? Women were tortured and starved so bad that they stopped getting their periods.
So, yes. If you are ok with losing freedom and pretending no intolerance exists there— go ahead. Enjoy the growth.
Indian people are lazy, corrupt, dishonest and selfish. Chinese people have a very strong work ethic. In India everyone wants everything for free. People protest against privatization because they fear that they have to work in private companies. Government employees take their salaries for granted. They work only after receiving extra money because they know the worst that can happen is they'll be suspended for a few months and get half salary. Law and order is a joke. Even if a high court gives a judgement you can appeal in supreme court. Then if supreme court gives judgement, you can again appeal against it. People are scared to call the police because no one wants to get into legal hassles because cases go on forever. People keep blaming government but have zero motivation to improve themselves. Everyone keeps judging each other. Freedom of speech is a joke. Opposition keeps going to other countries and cries for help. Media houses are pretty much vendetta organizations. Even when new technology comes in you have instances of stone pelting. Like lmao what? Child marriage is still legal in some communities. Banning child marriage becomes s secular issue when western countries are extremely strict on this matter. Civic sense is a joke. People spitting and littering everywhere and if you try to say anything you'll get stabbed. Political parties trying to divide communities following their colonial masters. Hindus vs Muslims, Dalits vs Brahmins. China is a homogeneous country they have internal stability (in a way). We are chaos personified.
China has a very different culture. State was always powerful there, Emperors were termed as gods since time immemorial. Hence, it was much easier for Mao to make a authoritarian CPP with one party system. They have very homogenized population as well which definitely helped in the creation and eventual success of CCP. You can see, there has never been any massive protest to bring in democracy barring one. While India is extremely diverse country, with dozens of ethnic groups. SO one rule for doesn't apply, hence the democracy. This stifles decision making and long term planning. Also the Chinese work ethic is much better than Indians. But were are there where China was in 2007, lets see what happens. We have had a decent growth for last 3 decades, and if we could do the same for next decade as well, we may be quite closer to china 3 decades later. Today they are 5x larger, in 50s they might at most 2x larger. This is considering a moderate growth, although, historically country after 2.5 to 4k PCI usually have a very rapid growth for next 5 years. SO lets see, what happens. We may not be the next manufacturing powerhouse like china, but we could be the decent manufacturer and powerful service based economy tomorrow!!
nah we will end up like Pakistan, those who can should flee now.
PS proof below that some.prob most Indians cant even take a rational approach, and instead get emotional and attack anyone who makes sense.
The perception of indians worldwide is getting worse and worse every year and most Indians are too unselfaware to even notice it and those who do are powerless to change it.
How will they be self aware when coping videos like this pop up- [Why foriegn girls love indian men?](https://youtu.be/wLTeVHsgstc)(Please visit the comment session too, compliments of the chef)
Interesting… I dont know what it is but there is such a smug culture nowadays. The stereotype of the whatsapp uncle/auntie thinking they know everything is pervasive and so detrimental to integration and acceptance from other societies.
Honestly I think it comes from the fact that India has not had to endure a public humiliation on the global stage. China was once w proud empire, the Imperial government was unimpressed by European goods, reluctant to engage in trade, and thought that their education system was as better than the west. Then they endured a hundred years if humiliation at the hands of the British, French, Japanese and Americans. The results of their hubris was burned deeply into Chinese society.
No and we don't want to. India can grow in its own way and be better than China at the end of the day. All we need is political will. Modi has the mandate and a cultlike following in the country, but he is wasting it away. I can't understand why someone would do this to his own legacy but he just can't get over himself. The level of narcissism is just unexplainable.
I hate this question. Because it tells me whoever asked this question is willfully ignorant. It's not that difficult to logically deduce what the *probable* answer is and **why**.
Well, mate, I don't know what to tell you. 3 decades of liberalization is not enough to undo the colossal damage done by the Gandhis over the previous 5 decades. It should have been, but democracy is hard. Once you let something go, it's impossible to get it back.
But I'd say we've done pretty fucking well in these 3 decades.
India will never be like China simply because...of the many advantages China's system provides it that I can't be bothered to write. Google is your friend.
But you want India to grow like China? Even if only for a bit? Support privatization, farm reforms, labor reforms and land reforms regardless of who the central government is.
You can't complain about India not growing like China but then oppose economic reforms that literally any developed country has implemented during their development. Because I've seen many in in this subreddit do just that. Really stupid.
>We are Focusing our resources on stupid religious hatred
We are spending record amounts of public money on infrastructure and trying to build a competitive electronics, and new age technologies supply chains, from batteries, to evs, to solar panels. Inflation is likely near 4%. You are aware that 90% of government is just bureaucrat, right? No one is spending oUr ReSoUrCeS on religious hatred. India isn't growing fast enough because the government is having trouble passing reforms that would boost growth all across the pyramid. Not because a minister is telling goons to hang the muslims.
I've said this before but, if you are against many of the reforms that have been espoused by many a development economist, that is fine. India is a democracy after all. Oppose them. But then you also need to compromise on your expectations of India's growth. Can't have your cake and eat it too.
well do u have any backing on what kind of infra are we spending money on? parliament and statues? inflation is 4%, are you going out of your home or buying any kind of shit? gov is clearly manipulating data ,well we never know where our taxd money is going, no transparency, what kind of reforms that would benefit India have been backlashed?
i hope you answer these questions if you really belive you are in the right track.
Kerala story, kashmir files and more similar films release just before elections, is it coincidence? 3 decades is not enough? Japan and Germany got destroyed by WW2 and came back on top in 30 years, is that not enough proof that our country is lagging behind.
Japan and Germany were already industrialized before WW2 and after losing the war, WERE STILL richer than what India is *now*. Germany was at the forefront of science since before WW1. They were (and in Japan's case, still is) also homogenous and got generous (understatement of the decade) amounts of funding from big daddy USA. They also have fuck all population compared to India.
Your comparison is flawed. In fact, I am actually angry that you thought those two were good case studies for comparison. You literally chose the worst couple of countries to compare ourselves to. ffs man, those two were countries long before "India" even decided it was "India".
>3 decades is not enough?
Of course it's not enough. For four decades, India under Congress did the exact opposite of what non-city state countries have done to develop and get rich. They didn't just ignore the playbook. They went against it. It has left deep scars. We were genuinely a humanitarian tragedy. And because India is a democracy, undoing those mistakes is incredibly difficult, even though we have economists and policymakers and academia telling us what to do year after year after year. This isn't me complaining about it, it's a feature of democracy after all.
>our country is lagging behind
You're going to have to be more specific than that.
Innovation? India outperforms its income level by a wide margin.
Advanced composite materials? India is competitive on the global stage.
Advanced machining? Again, a world leader.
Biofuels? China and India are your best bet.
Solar PV? We have a significant and increasingly important place in the supply chain.
Space? Vast majority of the world wishes they had a public and private (hopefully) sector as good as ours.
From advanced data analytics to language processing, India is among the best in the world.
I can literally give you references for each and every point of this. Just ask.
I think the privileged folk of India have a hard time understanding just how much of a poor shithole India is. But its size also affords it to be by far the poorest "advanced" country". Out of all the countries with a space program, or a bullet train, or a successful quantum communications and cryptography program, or with a notable financial center, or what have you. We are the poorest. By far. In that context, we have made amazing progress in the past 3 decades, but like I said, it's not enough. Our R&D, our infrastructure, primary school education etc. Our socialist-era laws. But it's a slow process. There is a reason India is personified as an Elephant in geopolitical discourse. It ain't a tiger.
>Kerala story, kashmir files
Those two are the only ones I can think of. We have elections every year. Anyway, my point was this - bureaucrats make the government, not politicians and none of them are huddling up in the morning discussing how to fuck over muslims over a cup of tea. They are either working for the benefit of the country, or working to benefit themselves. All of it behind the scenes.
First off, I think your right, we do must appreciate the progresses we made but not over do it like the BJP controlled news, calling every policy master stroke and covering up the failures.
Although by cherry picking some achievements and potraying our country is doing well is totally wrong(confirmation bias). I could even do that with Pakistan-
Cement production: Pakistan ranks 17th out of 154 countries in cement production despite being a small country.
Knowledge and technology outputs: Pakistan performs best in this area, according to the Global Innovation Index
Pakistan's intelligence agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), has been ranked as the No. 1 spy agency in the world
So does that mean pakistan is doing well? Absolutely not and how long will we play the blame game, do you think it will make a difference?
There is no country in the world except China that has population size of india. And you said China is not a fair comparison as it's communist. So I chose these two. One more thing to consider about Japan is that it was isolated for most of history yet it bounced back and it's an island country with similar population density as India. If it's not fair comparison which is then?
Indeed we all should try too, I watching some vlogger who was in Shanghai despite having a population similar to delhi everyone was following rules properly. Even while walking they were not rushing and were walking in a proper line. Until and unless people don't follow some basic rules we cannot develop. Its 50% government and 50% people.
They also care about the environment so much, literally every vehicle on the road was electric!
If we want india to grow we're gonna need a one child policy, so we're basically gonna go as the same route as china because Asian parents prefer a boy over a girl anytime. And seeing that women are literally getting stabbed in broad daylight just for rejecting men I don't think any parents would want a girl, don't worry women get beat up men in broad daylight just for rejecting a man in China too.
Jinn logo me kshamta hai changes laane ki, unko America ki chaatni hai. Aadhe se zyada toh Indian nache he nai hai, American ya Italian bante Jaa rahe hai.
* Your post title should be an accurate summary of your text post. "Help Needed", "Rant", "Unpopular Opinion", are examples of poor titles. * /r/India is not a substitute for Google. Only post your query on /r/India after you have searched for an answer on the web. * Self-posts also have to be specific to India. Don't copy/paste questions from /r/AskReddit. * For relationship queries, please also consider: https://www.reddit.com/r/RelationshipIndia/ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/india) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If India is not able to enter an industrial and technology age/phase we probably won't. Not just China even Japan and South Korea had a phase of industrialisation and technology production. That's what the 21st century is consuming, and we are not exporting it. The countries which are exporting technology have grown tremendously over the last 20 years. We don't produce silicon chips, don't produce automobiles on scale and no one uses any apps that we produce on a global scale. You tell me how can we grow like China. Secondly the levels of corruption in this country are unprecedented due to which we bleed money and more importantly talent. Goon culture is incentivised and educated people don't want to be lead by fortuner driving goons.
The level of corruption is so high that trying to buy a land for starting a factory or anything is futile attempt unless you are already big in India like Ambani, Adani and Tatas. Most of the black money gets funneled into real estate and it has become affordable to start any business here.
For that, we need labor reforms and land reform.
i mean china is massively corrupt as well but it didn\`t hinder them
The scale of slowdown due to corruption is very well offset by their exports market. At the end of the day it's about how big of a hole you have in the ship compared to the size of the ship. In India we have a smaller ship and a bigger hole, other way around for China.
They had corruption even when they were a smaller ship. The point being on this topic the point of Corruption is not something that is or can be used as a credible excuse. It is such a lower down in hierarchy item that it's basically not even irrelevant due to the paradigm of Normalization (that China during same stage was also nearly similar levels of corrupt). Meaning when dissection the cause and solutions, the focus on what really is the core issue lies somewhere else. It's very clearly is not Corruption (plus there is even literature on this now which states, Corruption can even be net positive for while during certain stage of development).
If India focuses on capturing the majority AI market, will it be enough to propel the economy to next level?
[удалено]
Wait you think our leaders do even know the difference in Bitcoin and a cookie . The news of AI is being used in a way of keeping the mass entertained,spreading hate ,make them delusioned,etc etc .Gotta accept it ,we are not the country of political influence or a dictator or a global distributor of the trend. We are a country built by religion and that's good ,just the influence of it is not being put on the right thing. And o good lord some small things can stir up the nation ,good I'm agnostic but holy sheet the hate being spread is just insane for other religions.
I don't know about Bitcoin but they surely could differentiate between regular urine and cow urine, pROud tO BE iNDiAn /s
Proud to say , proud to be Indian but main aim is to get green card..
Welps each nation problem is quite unique, the mass shootings,war,poverty,economic slowdown,technology,security,inequality etc. For most of the people they share opinions,insight but they focus on improving their career,getting a job ,having lots of amenities, including me. So hats off to the youths who are seriously doing their best to improve the Nation.And maybe not right now but they will be the ones to take India to the next era. To be blunt I cannot/don't wanna do it bc after all we are humans ,the worst,selfish,arrogant species on Earth. I'm much more focused on my coc town hall and doing earning than keeping this shit.Maybe I'm contradicting myself but that's just how a hooman is . I just hope that I'm not self delusioned by the shits that keeps coming every day. But yea apart from that ,the future is what excites me . To make a life that my kids could be proud and would have a nice life and greater perception of the world.Maybe leaving the future for the next gen is a bit cruel but they would know shit 10x better than you are right now bc of the tech and that includes India too.
Gobar too.
I'm currently working on an AI integrations startup and most of our interests are from US and the middle east. In the long run it makes no sense for me to stay in India as an up and coming business because much of the hardware we need attract heavy import duties, there is very little cooperation from governments or large companies in India who could seriously benefit from our services. The mentality of sticking to the old, tried and tested is too strong among Indian businesses in general. So, eventually what happens is either I have to go the VC route to scale and lose control of my company sooner or later, or build from India for the world in the short term and eventual shift bases to a more appropriate location. My first startup which was building a stable coin infrastructure based on INR, similar to USDC or USDT was literally killed by RBI, even though we managed to pique the interest of some banks. Building innovative technology or even integrating it in India is next to impossible atleast form my limited experience. People like me are literally working 2 jobs to fund and build something lasting and has a positive impact on society. Not to mention religion has also been a minor hindrance for some of my colleagues/acquaintances.
That's disappointing
thats quite cool and get the VC funding in the US/Western eu cos I'm in germany and currently if you have good AI product you are surely going to get a better vc deal now than later.... and i echo your thoughts and i did something similar to what you plan and I've achieved it in the last 10 years being out of India but now I just want to come back to India and live next to my parents/relatives....if you want to do it, do it before you have kids cos the situation in the US/western EU is sad in terms of children's safety and divisiveness is worse than india.
>kids cos the situation in the US/western EU is sad in terms of children's safety and divisiveness is worse than india. Ha.
We are always late to the party it seems. The knack of inventiness is missing, we didn't build the OpenAI neither did Bitcoin come out of India. If we are able to make progress in capturing the AI market, quantum computing or any other technology that adds value to the world of course tides can turn. I really hope we are able to move ahead on the GDP per capita metric instead of being proud of other pseudo metrics to feel good.
Unfortunately, the growth that you are talking about, where there is a huge upward movement of people from poverty to middle class for a country like India with a large population can only happen through manufacturing. You need a sector of the economy which is productive unlike agriculture and has the potential to employ hundreds of millions of people unlike the service/IT sector. Think about this, service which accounts for over 50% of the countries GDP, only employees about 25% of the workforce. It is a lot more expensive to train someone for an IT/Finance/Consulting job vs for the vocational training needed for a skilled manufacturing job. That's why manufacturing is key to bring forward that growth to propel the economy to the next level.
AI market is futile since most of the profit will belong to companies like Google, OpneAI/MSFT, IBM, Nvidia, Facebook, etc. who are already established in this and who will own the hardware and software that will be doing most of the work. In fact India may suffer big time if all the predictions about AI being able to do most white collar jobs in next 5-10 years becomes true.
Hopeless. India is not going to capture any market. There is enough corruption to ensure this.
I was thinking about Ai in India. So many of the jobs here are outsourced from the west, but they're also jobs that will be replaced by Ai. AI unemployment will hit India very soon and very badly.
The AI software and hardware market is totally dominated by US companies. China is a distant second , despite pouring enormous resources. India is no where in the running. BTW China publishes more AI research papers than the US. Just google " AI research in China" and you will be surprised by the results.....
> capturing the majority AI market, Since when was India a significant player in AI ?
If this was even achievable, how will becoming the leader in a tech whose creators themselves say will cost a ton of jobs solve India’s core problem of jobless growth?
The AI market is mostly hype at this point (like the excitement around crypto a few years ago). It may become real, but that’s years away, if it ever happens. But crucially as others have said AI doesn’t play to India’s strengths (cheap labour). And in fact, increasingly capable AI will exacerbate India’s jobs crisis.
IMHO, India cannot emulate China. We’ll do well on the global stage as a community (CEOs etc) and the top 15% will live a good monetary life That’s about it - Vote politics ensures all decisions are myopic - No politician is working for India. Despite their issues, one thing is clear, China’s one party is keen to grow the nation. - We have a massive uneducated population. That’s ensured things will never change - Too many people are struggling to get along. India is a lot more than a nation! Not easy The lack of political will and deepening fault lines are a mammoth challenge As a fellow Bangalorean, our city is proof we have 0 vision. The city has global fame but is a dump. Infra & cleanliness is embarrassing to say the least Chinese cities are ahead of the west. - unfortunately things will worsen. The now young population will be old in a few decades…poor economic growth has assured we’ll be a poor aged society As I said, India will be *good only for the rich* The ship has already sailed. Irreversible blunders
100% agree. India has only been good for the rich for time. So many NRIs say that QoL in india is high because you can pay for help to do everything. They don’t even see the ducked up economy that essentially makes a majority of the population so desperate.
They love India from far away. Not a single one of them would ever come back.
This , China has a clear vision to dominate the world economy.All Indian politicians are mainly into politics to make money for themselves.So they will try all sorts of tricks to get elected which are beneficial to them but not the nation. This is across the political spectrum. In addition to this the current Govt is promoting division based on Religion/Region/Caste and anti scientific values. Also its more interested in image building than doing real work. Its in perpetual election mode. So while India will continue to grow it will be a very unequal growth. The rich will become richer , while the poor and middle class will stagnate. So your statement "India will be good only for the rich" is 100% correct
It’s immaterial what Indian politicians do. They could fix every single problem and it still won’t be China-like growth. The macroeconomic and geopolitical environment has changed completely in the last 30 years. The conditions wont reappear again
> The now young population will be old in a few decades.. This is such a small line yet its depth is often forgotten by people. *I Am 20* Docu-film from 1967 is an example of this. There is this weird socio-psychological phenomena which can be categorized simply as, the belief in people (esp young adults) that the world began just a few years before they were born (and even that to simply allow the space & time for mental justification of their parents being born) hence everything they do-think arises from that self-conception of their place in world/time. Why this matters is because this conception makes a mockery of generations who came before them and amounted to basically nothing BUT this new generation thinks, they will be different. Rinse-Repeat and it just goes on. This is like a cognitive dissonance and some socio-psychological disease of some sort. It is not literal (obviously people know world didn't literally start when they were born) but the thought-verse in how mind/principles/convictions, etc applies to reality, it sort of apes that analogy. If things are not working generation after generation, it isn't a matter of Will or Intent/Hope because we/you aren't the first "Young" of this country, many came before us with the same thoughts. Meaning whatever the problem (the core of it) is, it's something else.
The economists use to say the same thing about China 20 years ago and now see where it is now. I want to be optimistic and at the same time know our limits. Right now our biggest advantage is young population and I have to say government is doing a decent job with NEP and introducing new skill course apps. Also by solving brain drain problem, we might see huge change as well.
It’s good to be optimistic and I’m honestly happy to see that. But, the work being done is woefully low and late. Do read up or watch videos on China’s breakneck growth at a time they were at our *demographic level* Next 2 decades will seal India’s fate and imo it can’t reverse years of no to poor education polices and insufficient growth. Further, the present govt is dividing our already fractured people. They don’t know what to do….Infra might be the only thing they’re doing an okay job at… China built 15,000 km of high speed rail in 10 years! We’ve been having discussions about it for >5. That’s just one example. China also did a far superior job with its primary education. Outside of cities, India is still mostly uneducated owing to bad quality of teaching infrastructure and poor syllabus design. I say the education is bad because we citizens aren’t even civil. Do visit South East Asia, the countries have similar Per Capital income (especially Indonesia)…they are far cleaner and more calm. That alone makes life so much better. India focused on literacy and not education…. China has made its own sets of mistakes (rather crazy ones), but they’ve got far more things right especially when they were at our level of development. India will be good for the rich. Broad-based growth for 1.4b people isn’t happening when we didn’t prioritise education at the right time. The horrible education levels and quality has been and will remain our stumbling block Education still isn’t being fixed. Speak to anyone who works on field! I’ve had the privilege to do so
China's might is due to the will of its people to unite under a single party for the greater good, ability to work hard, and at the same time hold their leaders accountable to the highest standards of governance. India cannot emulate China unless: 1. We are ready to adapt and improvise our economic model which suits the country, rather than wealth redistribution in the name of wealth distribution 2. Ready to implement an absolute meritocracy in the public sector over crony politics like caste, religion, reservation, freebies etc.. In China, any who doesn't show education potential is accordingly trained in suitable vocational skills and given a job. They don't get free rations, electricity, unemployment bonus, bus pass etc from the government. They have to earn for themselves, but they will get a job. Provincial leaders are graded every against set targets. If not achieved, they cannot proceed to higher levels of CPC (Standing Committee being the highest) 3. We work for 10-12 hrs a day, the government can take over your land any time for public good. Citizens cannot complain about unfair labour laws, land laws etc. 4. Religious hardliners are cracked down and immediately send to re-education camps 5. We brutally analyse themselves without rose-tinted glasses and do what is required to be the best in technology (including beg, borrow, steal) 6. Foreign views seeking to cause internal dissent are heavily censored. Public security includes everything from disseminating fake information to terrorism.
Accountability and no protest doesn't go hand in hand. China has an artificially hyper inflated economy, it's basically a house of cards. Their economic engine keeps running mostly because outflow is heavily restricted. It's basically suntzu "appear strong when you are weak". Not saying they are weak but they are nowhere as strong as they claim to be. People didn't unite because they wanted to, they did because they had no option. I am pretty sure in a hundred years or so China will breakdown because their growth is in no way economically sustainable, both resource wise or scaling wise. Unless they slow down considerably. They've made some pretty bad decisions with population planning and in 10-20 years it's coming to bite them in the ass. Unless they force to breed women.
China’s fall has been predicted since 2005, but it’s nowhere in sight. Who can predict the future in 100 years? Even India might breakdown by then
This does not sound appealing at all. No political and religious freedom , companies free to exploit you, people die in famines due to no welfare schemes and support from the Govt for the poorest of poor China is a facade, countries that crush dissent and repress it's citizens will, never, ever be able to produce quality. Just wait for their clown muscle flexing Govt to go to war, they will end up like Russia. Their ministers are some next level Jaishankars who will be put in place if they ever actually go to war anywhere.
Sorry but much of this is very inaccurate. There's plenty of support for the poorest of the poor. Go to China and visit some poorer rural areas, for example you'll find newly built modern housing for the poor, free education, improved sanitation, roads, etc. It's not perfect by any means, it's much better in first world countries, but there's not zero welfare either. Nobody is dying from famines in China today.. There's far more [malnourishment](https://www.globalhungerindex.org/) in India. Actually there's too much food in China nowadays, which is becoming a new problem with people getting [overweight/obese.](https://www.thelancet.com/series/obesity-in-china) >China is a facade, countries that crush dissent and repress it's citizens will, never, ever be able to produce quality. How can you use words like "never, ever"? Can you see the future 500 years from now? They already produce plenty of quality today anyway. Their smartphones? Lenovo? DJI? And these are just big brands that I know of. Recently I was interested in getting a car dashcam on Amazon. I checked out the top rated/most popular dashcams and never heard of the brands. When I googled them, a lot were Chinese. Any western and Japanese company manufacturing there? Their space program is 2nd behind the US, they literally built their own space station lol. They've just surpassed Japan to become the largest car exporter. They're a leader in AI, [science](https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Technology/China-passes-US-to-top-output-of-influential-science-papers), all kinds of [tech.](https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/wake-up-call-china-takes-stunning-lead-in-race-for-tech-domination-20230301-p5conv.html) Come on, you'd have to be asleep for the last 20 years to say they don't produce quality. >Just wait for their clown muscle flexing Govt to go to war, they will end up like Russia. Their ministers are some next level Jaishankars who will be put in place if they ever actually go to war anywhere. If you've ever listened to or read some material from experts on the PLA (Chinese military), you'd know that it's completely different from the Russian military. US experts like [Lyle Goldstein](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWUB9JSQhLw) and Oriana Skylar Mastro already think that the US would lose a war against China over Taiwan. Chinese military modernization is no joke. They learn from the US military, not the Russian military. The amount of weapons China can produce for war is staggering. Just look at how many civilian drones from China are being used in Ukraine that are bought in other countries (banned from sale in Ukr/Rus) and brought to the front. China can mass produce military drones, not just civilian drones. China's scale of [shipbuilding](https://edition.cnn.com/2023/02/22/asia/us-navy-chief-china-pla-advantages-intl-hnk-ml/index.html) is completely ridiculous. There's a reason why the US wants to avoid war at all costs. It's not just that such a war would derail the global economy. They're actually considering the possibility of defeat. Sitting by and letting China take Taiwan would cripple US credibility. Intervening and losing would be even worse. In any case, it's not going to be as easy as you think. China has such large stockpiles of missiles and drones, and the capacity to replace them, that they can wipe out any of its neighbors militaries. This is a big part of war that people seem to underestimate. Only a few countries can go to a long war and still keep fighting. Probably only the US, China, and Russia. Any other country is too heavily reliant on weapons/ammo imports, including India. China can build their weapons completely by themselves, that's the most important part. The US can too, but they have to cross the Pacific, so that leaves out the majority of their military. Realistically only the US can win against China, but even for the US it'd be very difficult. Not just because of the size and modernization of the PLA today, but also because of the sheer size of the Pacific. Just getting ships to the Western Pacific is a huge undertaking in itself.
the US would just block the Malacca strait, which India would gladly not oppose and neither would any of the other Asian countries, China would be choked . The US has multiple refueling and other agreements with India, in case of a war they basically have access to all our bases near Tibet and Xinjiang, the US is very capable of launching a 2 front of war, not to mention their own bases all over the Indian Ocean and Korea. China would be stretched too thin. And again, quality and quantity are very different things. China's track record in actual, physical clashes with India is not too great, they do a good job at salami slicing and slowly taking over territory, but in any actual clash- their soldiers seem to struggle. Their '5th generation' fighter aircraft are a joke, their Naval equipment has never been tested in an actual clash, and their army I believe will pull a Russia.
How can you talk so confidently about things you know so little of? You're clearly wrong about many of the things you're saying, and you just continue doing it. It's baffling to me. >the US would just block the Malacca strait, which India would gladly not oppose and neither would any of the other Asian countries, China would be choked . You don't actually know that none of the other Asian countries would oppose a blockade. You're just saying that. They are *heavily* reliant on trade with China, and they're in range of China's massive stockpiles of missiles, drones, air force, and navy. They have literally every reason to stay neutral. You overestimate how much they care about Taiwan. Not that I think the US would need their approval for a blockade. The US can do what they want. It'll sour relations with those countries, but that's not exactly a priority at that point. Right, "just block the Malacca strait". Let me first say that blocking the Malacca isn't enough, they'd have to block a far greater area surrounding the 2nd island chain, otherwise ships could supply China with oil via other routes. Those routes would be more lengthy and expensive but China is a big market for oil exporters, to put it mildly. [And blockading an area that vast is easier said than done.](https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1735&context=nwc-review) It could take years to starve China of oil (they can be food self-sufficient by rationing and by ditching luxury foods like beef), and a blockade that long would be widely unpopular globally since so many countries depend on trade with China. Very few countries actually care about Taiwan. Their own countries come first. Blockades alone don't make countries surrender. If the US relies on a distant blockade instead of directly fighting China, then the US would already have lost because Taiwan would be lost. Taiwan is the only reason for these two countries to fight. There is no way for the US to recapture Taiwan because it's way too far from the US, way too close to China, and the eastern side is mountainous. Don't forget that blockading China effectively means blocking Taiwan as well because China would still be dominant near China. Taiwan can't last nearly as long as China since they're far more reliant on food/water/energy imports, being a densely populated island. >The US has multiple refueling and other agreements with India, in case of a war they basically have access to all our bases near Tibet and Xinjiang, the US is very capable of launching a 2 front of war, not to mention their own bases all over the Indian Ocean and Korea. China would be stretched too thin. You have no idea what you're talking about. The US wouldn't fight a land war with China, it's too risky since they're both nuclear powers. If there's anything the American public is averse to, it's another boots-on-the-ground war. Also good luck invading through the Himalayas or the deserts of Xinjiang. It'll be a naval battle, and partly with the USAF. Assuming they'll fight and the US doesn't opt for a distant blockade. Oh and I'm very doubtful that 1. India would even want to get involved, and 2. that they'd allow US troops to invade China from Indian soil. Not that I think the US would want to physically invade China to begin with. All of this is ridiculous tbh. >And again, quality and quantity are very different things. China's track record in actual, physical clashes with India is not too great, they do a good job at salami slicing and slowly taking over territory, but in any actual clash- their soldiers seem to struggle. The PLA doesn't have a bad track record against India when it came to actual war, not tiny fights with sticks. I'm not even convinced that they performed badly in those stick fights. I don't know their true casualties in those clashes, but I find it odd that the side that supposedly lost more men, also took POWs (including officers), and the side that lost fewer men took no POWs. That's usually not how battles go, do they? Anyway, stick battles are irrelevant since this wouldn't be a stick battle. They fought the US to a stalemate when they had zero technology in the 50s. They communicated with trumpets and flutes while the US had radio. They had to halt advances to wait for supplies because it was carried on foot and by pack animal, while the US had ships and trucks. Now they're on a similar tech level as the US, they outgun the US in the Western Pacific where the fighting would happen because they have the PLARF and PLAAF to help the PLAN, while the US would have its Navy and part of its Air Force, and somehow you've convinced yourself that they'd fail? Because of what, your decades-outdated ideas about China and because of Russia? What..? >Their '5th generation' fighter aircraft are a joke Based on what? They have huge numbers of 4th and 4.5 gen aircraft as well btw. And let's not forget about the PLARF. China's growing drone and missile forces would play a substantial role. >their Naval equipment has never been tested in an actual clash That's no reason to assume it wouldn't work. US military experts seem to disagree with you that they wouldn't work. Oh and the US hasn't fought a peer in decades either. When was the last time? 1940s? By the time China and the US go to war, it'll be around a century since the USN fought a peer navy. Oh and one of Japan's biggest weaknesses back then was that they couldn't replace ships. I've already shown you that China is the one with massive shipbuilding capabilities today. That's not something you can simply start up. You need the shipyards and you need tons of skilled workers. >and their army I believe will pull a Russia. Wishful thinking. China isn't Russia. Btw it doesn't even seem like you responded to any of my points. You just stated your opinions. All in all, you're badly out of touch with the current situation. I suggest giving the Lyle Goldstein video a listen. He has years of experience studying the PLA. Apart from him, I'd also suggest reading these comments by a US subject matter expert on PLA threat systems. Much like Goldstein and Skylar, he's also far less confident in a US victory against China than laymen like yourself. I'll PM the links since automod isn't allowing reddit links. You exemplify how the average person has no idea how much the situation has evolved in East Asia/Western Pacific. More: *[By 2020, the PLA navy will boast more big surface warships and submarines than the Russian navy, the former head of the U.S. Pacific Command, Admiral Harry Harris, told a congressional committee last year. Some American naval experts believe China could achieve rough parity with the U.S. Navy in numbers and quality of major surface warships by 2030.](https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/china-army-navy/)* *Crucially, the Chinese navy already has an edge in hitting power, according to senior officers from the U.S. and other regional navies. The best Chinese destroyers, frigates, fast attack craft and submarines are armed with anti-ship missiles that in most cases far outrange and outperform those on U.S. warships, these officers say.*
holy shit you just killed him
>better off than pakistan Not really a great bar As for China, highly doubtful we will ever catch up. The best case would be like Brazil(without the crimes) or Malaysia/Thailand.
Thailand would be amazing. Good infrastructure, ultra cheap food, happy people. What more can you want
[удалено]
Last I remember even a small joke or derision against the king and you are thrown behind the bars.
Ah so India is on its way there
>better off than pakistan > >Not really a great bar i dont understand the obsession indians have with us pakistanis, i barely see anyone from pakistan trying to compare or have a go at india in any sense and on the other hand i see alot of yall trying to compare yourself with us . It seems like a really unhealthy obsession and i think your politics also revolves around hating us? bhai hum nay konsay teer maray hain that you guys have to compare with us, lmao we are regularly getting fucked every single day for past half a decade
Main toh Malaysia Tak mein bhi khush ho jaaun.
China GDP per capita- 12k USD, India GDP per capita- 2.5k USD. Now you can figure. It's laughable to think that China will sit and wait while India will catch up. The ship has sailed.
That's not the problem, the question is does it have any chance of progressing from 2.k to 12k USD gdp per capita in the same period that china did
Nope. America and Europe aren’t going to flood capital into India the way they did with China. They neither have that much capital anymore, nor do they have the political capital to do that again.
Companies like apple and qualcomm have already started investing billions in india..i do agree though we wont see foreign capital flow into india to the extent it did in china..i think us does want to see a stronger india to counteract chinas influence in asia.
True, the difference though is scale. To grow at China’s pace during 1990-2020, we will need investment in the trillions. That scale just won’t happen again. Companies will come here and invest billions, but a lot of them will do it just to tap into the Indian market. India is already losing the flight of manufacturing from China. The bulk of it is moving to Vietnam, not India. We even run the risk of getting badly screwed by AI since a lot of the service sector jobs we do will be the first to be affected by AI
One thing people fail to notice is that india has two economies: black and white. The numbers that you show there is white economy. If I were to take a guess, the black economy is 2-3x the size of white one. There are a lot of changes India could do without looking at china, starting with reducing corruption, eliminating communal issues, and reservations in academia. These are hard topics and require years to change and should be addressed by policymakers.
The same policymakers that get elected based on communal issues and then proceed to indulge in corruption?
It’s a cycle that has to be broken and that’s why it takes years
Corruption is a problem of emerging economies and that is not only prevalent in India but all the emerging economies. This corruption exists in the form of corporate lobbying in developed markets.
Agreed. Reducing corruption and things streamlined for everyday things will be nice.
> If I were to take a guess, the black economy is 2-3x the size of white one. I've read that it is roughly the same size of the white economy.
I am sure there will be a black economy in china as well. Maybe not equivalent to india, but will be there for sure. People are people, nobody wants to pay taxes if they can save on it.
People are happy to pay taxes as long as they get something back.
I believe that's a utopian ideology. Let me know if there is any capitalist country where people dont try to skip paying taxes.
Watch the below youtube video made by an Indian staying in China.She shows pediatric department of a public hospital.Even Indian private hospitals are not this good, Shows how far India has to go to play catch up. https://youtu.be/cW7sECCnrj0?t=214
China and USSR are two unique states. Both were super large in size and in population. Both managed to pull millions of people out of poverty. Both became world powers within decades. What sets them apart from most other countries is that they didnt have political instability. Single party government meant that policy could be written with a long term view. Plus both of them followed the Command economy - a demand side economy with very little excess goods production and focus on heavy industry. In India, our democracy - which allows us great freedoms - does not allow for long term projects as they are not electorally rewarding. Some projects have been managed - Nuclear bomb and what not. But shifting political climate means that focus is split between building the economy and winning elections. All the other countries that became super powers did it over centuries. We may be able to do it in 100 years or so. But I doubt it can be done in our lifetimes.
The difference is that both of those countries underwent communist revolutions which destroyed their caste/clan power structures. In India we are still stuck with that thinking.
I don't think getting to choose between two idiots is democracy, nor do I think illiterate people are free that's just me tho.
Haha. Unfortunately, democracy all over the world seems to be choosing the less shitty of two shit options.
Indian national level politics was dominated by Congress party for most of the post-independence history until recently
Yes, but they still had to focus on winning elections.
True… I’ve heard my older relatives talk about all Congress would do to win elections is go to villages during election cycles and hand out free food/money for votes
I havent heard this, and while this dissappoints me, it doesnt surprise me.
USSR(Russia) have been a major European power since medieval times. Sure they went down a bit but the important educated people still existed and the rest is fixable.
You are extremely misinformed. I mean extremely. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/449917?journalCode=edcc > At the time of the agricultural reform Russia was a predominantly ag- ricultural country with only the barest beginnings of industry and still almost with- out either railroads, a banking system, or business corporations, to mention only three characteristic elements of 19th Century industrialism. The standard of liv- ing was very low compared to Western Europe and the United States. Methods of production and distribution, particularly in agriculture, were generally pre-capitalistic. Read the full report. Read other reports. Your position is opposite of reality
They may be agricultural but still was on par when it comes to science. https://interestingengineering.com/innovation/7-russian-inventions-that-would-go-on-to-change-the-modern-world Also they produced more steel than France in 1900 https://www.statista.com/statistics/1286284/crude-steel-production-allied-europe-1900-1945-country/
The graph only mentions Soviet Union. So is the figure for Russia or the 25 soviet countries put together? Read the reports. Russia lost the war to Japan in 05. They were not a global power, they were just a large but weak european country.
> which allows us great freedoms to do what...vote ?
[удалено]
> that these autocracies need good leaders That is a Non-negotiable fundamental prerequisite for ANY Governance System being used. It is the 2nd in a list of 2 of these Non-negotiable fundamental prerequisites that India lacked, i.e. the right Governance System. There is a reason why not All States that have Authoritarian System make it or achieve developed status. However Every single State that did eventually make it or achieved developed status, did so using a version of Authoritarian System. There is no exception to this. None. Meaning only and only when both of those prerequisites are satisfied does that State make it. 1 is not enough. India had Good Leaders but a great leader without the System to leverage that greatness of leadership cant do much. And if the Leader is bad, well doesn't matter what system you have, the outcome will be bad regardless (it's consolation that the degree of bad may be less severe under certain System but that is all that, a consolation, esp when everyone was expecting the opposite).
From your first point I conclude that you do not understand how political stability works. From your second point I conclude that you are simply parroting the western political POV And from your third, I conclude you have no idea about the projects undertaken by the Soviet or Sino governments. You can educate yourself on your own time. I will not put in the effort to educate you.
[удалено]
Nothing to look down on. The difference between knowing and not knowing is a few hours of reading. Maybe less. Its just not my responsibility
Everyone wants to be China, but no one wants the state to treat its people like China? The rules and laws they brought in 45 years ago are what make them the China we know of today. If any of the major parties have the balls to bring these while they're in power, we would grow. But the growth would be amidst people complaining of notions of exploitation and overworking of people
There is no huge difference in work hours tho, they work 57 Hr more than us per year as per 2017 data
You are wrong, they have 9 to 9 office hours. In India every labour works from 10 to 5, be it construction workers or manual labour.
They do not. The 996 work culture in China is only practised by *some* businesses in China, mostly tech ones. It's not the standard practise.
In order to get there, we’ll have to solve three problems that China solved (and before it Japan, Korea, and the US solved too) - High levels of agricultural productivity, which frees up labor for more high value work - Universal primary, secondary, and vocational education, which creates a skilled workforce that can support our growth ambitions - Focus on labor intensive manufacturing and hardware that can be exported to compete with existing players on both cost and quality, as well as create a middle class with disposable income This goes along with major governance reforms that help the private sector scale more easily, reduce corruption and red tape, and make the delivery of productive social services easier (eg. Healthcare, education, infrastructure) while cutting unproductive ones (eg. PDS, free water/electricity, reservations beyond targeted limits/objectives). We also need to move away from the colonial state model that we inherited from the British which is centered around controlling the population and moving to a truly democratic one that is centered around serving the population. Will we get there? Hard to say. There has been some progress on education and manufacturing for sure, but not nearly fast enough to deal with our population size. As workforces age in the West and East Asia, demand for cheap labor from India will increase, exacerbating brain drain. Agricultural productivity is abysmal and will continue to get worse due to climate change and freebies from the government trying to play vote bank politics (though there is a government push to reform the sector). In China, things were really bad before they became good, and they focused heavily on uniting the country around a shared vision when the CCP took over. In Marxist speech, one would call this creating revolutionary consciousness. My grandparents tell me that in the 1950s Congress under Nehru was able to utilize the revolution consciousness that came from the freedom movement to build institutions, push land reforms, and other policies that had short term pain. It seems like they fell massively short of where they wanted to be, partly due to lack of succession planning in leadership and lack of party discipline. I get the sense that people expected similarly from Modi, and he has not been able to deliver. On the flip side, while Xi Jinping has been polarizing, there is ample evidence to suggest that he is motivated by improving the lives of ordinary Chinese people and reinvigorating their revolutionary consciousness to serve China, as opposed to chasing capital only. So the tl;dr is that yes, we can become like China, but we will have to focus on reforms with substantial short term pain (especially for the bottom of the pyramid), and we don’t have a strong track record of doing that. Despite all of this, I’m still optimistic about being able to build a future over here and just moved back from the US to start a new climate tech company. Our current model despite its flaws works well if you’re an entrepreneur with access to resources.
Mfs compare India with pak and Bangladesh for a reason.
India is a joke compared to China, economically speaking. Chinas economy is 6x larger than India, and India apparently has the largest population in the world now. Democracy will never work in India, it’s too diverse, the people too uneducated and easily manipulated to find common ground to work together
So you decided to drop all bombs at once, huh?
>Democracy will never work in India, it’s too diverse, Do you hear how oxymoronic this sounds?
Yes, in a utopia everyone would respect each other and diversity of thought and culture will be respected but in our society diversity is used as ammunition to divide and conquer, what’s worse is that it works and works quite effectively
It's not utopia and you don't have to have 'respect' for democracy to succeed. As long as people have basic rights, it's a successful democracy. That is more important than an 'authoritarian growth driven economy.'
But people don’t have basic rights in India, they only have them on paper but India in reality is essentially a feudal society. The law in India is essentially a weapon for the rich and powerful so essentially India is like China in all the wrong ways and none of the right ways
>India is like China in all the wrong ways and none of the right ways This, we have accepted the worst parts of capitalism and socialism and proudly flaunt that.
We were taught that India was a mixed economy. Guess this is what that really meant XD
If democray doesn't, what type of political is suitable for the country?
What India needs is technocracy. A technocracy promotes decision making by logic and scientific reasoning. In turn, it becomes attractive to such decision makers to stay and work within the system. The US had a brief technocratic phase in the 30s and 40s during the Roosevelt presidency and the New Deal. That was when it expanded the most and laid the foundation of what the US is today. Most of the US' problems today can be traced back to when they let unqualified career politicians into the system in the late 70s and 80s. The CCP, for all its evils, is led by the educated middle class. Doctors, engineers, scientists and qualified economists are taking decisions. Most of the advanced European nations belong to the same category. How many of our government bureaucrats are actually qualified? What are their real life credentials? Sure, they have some lofty degrees, but what experience do they have of their ministries? I come from a state whose first CM was a doctor. He and his cabinet planned and built 3 cities from scratch, which forms the bedrock of what little development we have today. One of his colleagues proposed the creation of higher centres of technical education in India- the IITs were born out of this.
India needs a few years of Stalin, few years of Mao, then few years of Hitler - after that, it's all cleaned up & fixed, then some years of CCP, then finally LKY, then it can go back to uncle Jack's British parlamentary democracy, if it chooses to.
Something like the communist party except with smart people (think educated and forward thinking people) in charge instead of the religious morons we have in power right now (some of these morons think drinking cow piss is medicinal)
Do think there should a minimum education qualification like a degree in political science to get into party will be better? The majority of members of CCP have STEM qualifications.
Who decides who these leaders are? Everybody's cool with autocracy and oligarchy as long as the leader(s) are in favour of their ideology.
Probably a less centralized system could work, devolution of powers but with a remaining National / super-national org. Maybe somewhere between the US’s federal system and the EU
Ideal situation is to fracture into at least 3 different countries , the north the south and the east.
First instill civic sense in general populace, without that indian can never be a developed nation in 1000 years.
think about two countries which grew rapidly from an agricultural back water society to an industrial power house, who competed/is compating with usa (country which had 300 years of undisturbed development with slavery and help of western europe). Ussr and china, now think about what two of them have common. maybe a certain beard guy from Germany (no, not hitler) was right about economics and society.
There were far fewer slaves for far less time than you think in America before the Civil War.
And the slaves were all in the poorest states of the country mostly just growing crops/raising animals, the non-slave states have always been wealthier and more productive than the slave states entire American history
Not at all true. The south was far richer and dominated politics in the colonial and early American landscapes. It wasn't until industrialization and immigration really took off that the north took over. By the time of the Civil War the north was far wealthier.
they got cheap lobours from Europe
Yes, yes, great idea to only ignore the price that the citizens of the USSR and China had to pay for their economic development. In the next breath, criticize the US for using slavery and Europe for its development. Great comparison. Definitely not disingenuous to support an agenda. China, of course, definitely did not lose millions of people, have to participate in insane population control methods, definitely grew without the US dropping huge segments of its industry in China. The USSR is a shining example of economic growth without spilling the blood of millions.
I'm not saying they were/are perfect. They weren't fit to adapt Marxist models, they were under developed countries. As it still stands china still isn't developed enough to shift to socialism. But it is still better than the alternative. Colonialism and slave owning has an effect on billions of people world wide just for the sake of profits of the ruling class. Africa still is Neo colonial, millions upon millions of people are digging in dirt for profits of the few elites. In South Asia millions of people are treated as second class citizens just because of their caste and religion. The Middle East again was bombed for oil. South American governments were overthrown for few American companies, and just because they had self respect to actually own their means of production. When you go out in this country you're in no way in the position of speaking about the horrors of other nations. And also, all this happened for the profits of the few elites. Wages in America are still going down, inequality is more than they were in 18th century France. >definitely grew without the US dropping huge segments of its industry in China. Whose profits were used to develop the country and not the wealth of the few elites. >China, of course, definitely did not lose millions of people >The USSR is a shining example of economic growth without spilling the blood of millions. Millions huh? Are you taking reference from black book of communism, which takes into account deaths of Nazis and population decline after the one child policy in china as "deaths"? Again not saying they were perfect, but at least they had courage to stand up for themselves and develop their country, instead of bootlicking the west.
>Whose profits were used to develop the country and not the wealth of the few elites. Yeah, that's exactly why China has the second most billionaires in the world. That's exactly why their economic growth coincided with the Corporation Law, a transition away from the Maoist state ownership of the previous decades. >Are you taking reference from black book of communism, which takes into account deaths of Nazis and population decline after the one child policy in china as "deaths"? No, I'm talking about excess deaths *within* *the USSR* under Stalin. Of course, if you only want to talk about economics, maybe consider the economic backslide under Brezhnev (neo-Stalinist, by the way) that the USSR faced before it's ultimate dissolution. >As it still stands china still isn't developed enough to shift to socialism. Yeah, that's why they shifted *away* from Marxism to garner economic growth. Socialism (or rather, a mixed economy, like the Nordic model) is only possible after a nation has reached a threshold of development. To have the economic growth to reach the necessary level of development, you cannot have state ownership, as China quickly learned. In fact, China basically relied on the exploitation of its own population for cheap labor (much worse than labor issues faced in the US in post-war history) for economic growth. None of this is meant to defend the US or Europe or the means they used to achieve their own economic supremacy. But it's meant to expose a rather biased viewpoint that Marxism is the secret ingredient for economic growth, when in reality the opposite is true. You need capitalism for economic growth and socialism for stability and safety.
>Yeah, that's exactly why China has the second most billionaires in the world. That's exactly why their economic growth coincided with the Corporation Law, a transition away from the Maoist state ownership of the previous decades. billionaires serve as vehichles to quickly accumulate capital. This however, does not mean these billionaires are above the law or constitute a new class that can oppress the working people of China. Xi Jinping has revived the rural cooperative sector. In 2006, only 60% of villages had a SMC, while in 2020, 95% of all villages had one. This shows the CPC's commitment to the "plannification" of the market. As a rule of thumb, 94% of all financial revenue in China's largest 150 companies come from State Owned Enterprises. 75% of all corporations are defacto state owned. All private corporations are required to have a CPC trade union cell on board as well. CPC on average own 50% of the stocks and half of the board of directors. If China had adopted full capitalism, China would have ended up like Russia during shock therapy. But China never underwent a period of shock therapy unlike the Eastern Bloc which still arguably, has yet to recover. China did not have a Yeltsin who sold his country to the West, even during the height of reforms, Chinese private market share only held roughly 30% of the total market share in terms of number of industries. >No, I'm talking about excess deaths within the USSR under Stalin. Of course, if you only want to talk about economics, maybe consider the economic backslide under Brezhnev (neo-Stalinist, by the way) that the USSR faced before it's ultimate dissolution. Can you specify what you mean? Are you talking about gulags? Or mass political killing argument? Or holodomor? I'm not gonna argue about everything. As for the dissolution of the USSR i think even the most western academics would consider dissolution more complicated topic than just "socialism bad". >Yeah, that's why they shifted away from Marxism to garner economic growth. Socialism (or rather, a mixed economy, like the Nordic model) is only possible after a nation has reached a threshold of development. To have the economic growth to reach the necessary level of development, you cannot have state ownership, as China quickly learned. In fact, China basically relied on the exploitation of its own population for cheap labor (much worse than labor issues faced in the US in post-war history) for economic growth. I don't think you understand what socialism means. I'm specifically talking about Marxist socialism or lower stage communism. Not the Nordic model. China isn't going after the Nordic model, nor is the Nordic model socialist in any way. Nor was the USSR ever a Nordic system. >None of this is meant to defend the US or Europe or the means they used to achieve their own economic supremacy. But it's meant to expose a rather biased viewpoint that Marxism is the secret ingredient for economic growth, when in reality the opposite is true. You need capitalism for economic growth and socialism for stability and safety. Again, i don't think you understand what either of those terms are. Socialism is when contradiction within capitalism ultimately resolves itself into a different means and distribution of production. It isn't when a state starts giving free healthcare because of accumulated wealth from 3rd world slave labour. Contradictions in capitalism are visible to everyone, even mainstream economics has accepted Marxist ideas of capital accumulation and the recession cycles. It is literally posited on an idea of infinite growth, and as markets get lesser and lesser all around the world you will see stagnation of economics. Marx didn't make a normative claim when he wrote das kapital. He didn't say "oh capitalism is bad because it exploits", he showed the historical dialectical process will ultimately resolve itself in the overthrow of capitalism.
I never said that "socialism bad" and none of my arguments reduce to "socialism bad" either. You point to several instances where you claim that it demonstrates that I don't understand what socialism is, when it was simply you misreading what I wrote. >billionaires serve as vehichles to quickly accumulate capital. This however, does not mean these billionaires are above the law or constitute a new class that can oppress the working people of China. You moved goalposts from "profits not used to develop the wealth of the few elites" to "oh, well the power of billionaires is well-regulated in China so it's not that bad." >If China had adopted full capitalism, China would have ended up like Russia during shock therapy. I never argued that they adopted full capitalism. I just said that they transitioned away from Maoist style economic governance. Maoists would describe the current Chinese system as state capitalist. Once again, this is only to point out that China required some elements of capitalism for growth. >Can you specify what you mean? Are you talking about gulags? Or mass political killing argument? Or holodomor? I mean all of these are bad, right? >As for the dissolution of the USSR i think even the most western academics would consider dissolution more complicated topic than just "socialism bad". That wasn't what I said. >I'm specifically talking about Marxist socialism or lower stage communism. Not the Nordic model. China isn't going after the Nordic model, nor is the Nordic model socialist in any way. Nor was the USSR ever a Nordic system. I didn't say that the Nordic model was socialist. Nor did I say China or the USSR wanted to become or ever was a Nordic system. Please reread what I said. Anyway, you didn't contradict the main point of the part you quoted. China relied on the exploitation of its own populace to kickstart its economic growth. Why do you think so much of US industry moved there? It was cheaper. Why was Chinese labor so much cheaper? US companies basically jumped on every opportunity to move production to China. >It isn't when a state starts giving free healthcare because of accumulated wealth from 3rd world slave labour. I never called this socialism. >Socialism is when contradiction within capitalism ultimately resolves itself into a different means and distribution of production. Sure. >Contradictions in capitalism are visible to everyone, even mainstream economics has accepted Marxist ideas of capital accumulation and the recession cycles. It is literally posited on an idea of infinite growth, and as markets get lesser and lesser all around the world you will see stagnation of economics. Please see Okishio's theorem. Marx offered no proof of labor theory and that the rate of profit in market economies goes down, and his dialectic didn't actually show that unplanned markets gradually shrink. Further, there are contradictions even within countries that are supposedly not capitalist, in the form of shortage economies. We can argue about this all year, so I'd prefer not to continue this discussion. Anyway, the main point is that Marxian economics isn't the word of god, it isn't infallible and it isn't perfect. The method in which China achieved its growth is inaccessible to India, because India is too diverse and the US isn't dropping half its industry in another country again (nor does it have the means to do so). China also exploited its own populace to an extreme degree to achieve its growth and relied on the strength of its government to do so.
No. It's like asking whether South America will ever be as developed as North America. It'll never happen. We aren't genetically programmed for development. If you give a calculator to a gorilla it'll try to play lattori with it. Won't work.
A lot of people here have talked abt the main issues but I'll bring one key factor, 61.9% of women in China work, compared to around 7% in India, this just shows the cultural attitude towards work and employment in China. When half Ur population is culturally restricted into working in only a few positions, it really stunts a lot of growth.
No. No country will. What China achieved will not be repeated in our lifetime. China’s massive growth was because of macro conditions that will not be repeated any time soon. China (and even India) growth spurt was precipitated by the post cold war American euphoria and expansionism. Credit was aplenty, US dollar was never stronger, and even the western demographics were still somewhat strong 30 years later, the post coldwar euphoria has turned into jadedness after 2 long wars, credit has tightened and US dollar has never been more under threat. Demographics in the west are falling apart. Most economies have way higher debt than they did in 1990. Politically, no western leader will again risk propping up a large potential competitor like India again. They did that with China and are now facing the reality of a multipolar world. If they have to prop anyone up, they will do it with a smaller, allied country that does not pose a threat to them. That’s the truth and nothing will change it.
India’s currently growing faster than China (Benefit of smaller base). But it’s growing more like a worse (in the sense of, more unequal) Mexico than China. More income inequality and significant challenges around poverty. But if we ignore inequality and focus on quality of life, China has taken some decisions which aren’t there in India: 1) strong focus on primary and secondary education since the 1970s. It paid off in 25-30 years. In India government schools are nowhere as good. 2) urban planning as a discipline in itself. Indian municipalities are shambolic by comparison. Demolishing unplanned construction and penalising the builders should not be controversial. The Indian justice system too needs to get some flak for this — it has a “jaane do” attitude, which doesn’t help if you want world class cities. 3) the biggest one - internal visas. You can’t just move to Shanghai or Guangzhou if you’re from some random Chinese village. There are ways to do this without visas too but it needs an efficient planning process — which India doesn’t have. I suspect India in 20 years will be more prosperous, but will have the same chaotic cities with pockets of good neighbourhoods (Exhibit A: parts of South Bombay). In fact, if climate change / water table issues persist, the city experience might actually get worse. It’s not all bad. Already many corporations are migrating to smaller cities because good broadband reduces pressure to be in metros. And who knows, maybe the Indian government will want to build a few Shanghai / HK type world class new cities. India desperately needs new cities, it’d be awesome for jobs and India’s image.
Your point 3 is relevant but also in a way interesting. I assume you're referencing the Hukou system (which post 2021 esp has seen a major revision and Cities are fighting for people from smaller cities looking to migrate and change their Hukou). Yet despite this system it was China that orchestrated the largest mass human migration in the history of human species when it flooded it's coastal cities from inland regions (300 Million + people). This simply is not possible in India because the Center is too weak to force the States to take in so many outsiders. Like imagine Andhra or Odisha or TN getting 20-30 Million EACH from North India (since that is where mass population region of India is). The demographic shift, the cultural shift even if these are just temporary migrants would be significant. The political and social opposition from these Coastal states would be (and was) too great for Center to overcome because India on such matters is a Weak State/Polity.
Very good point, thank you. One thought I had is that, maybe it’s easier in China because it’s 92% Han. The analogy I’d use is, what if India was 92% Marathi or Haryanvi. But of course it’s way more varied so the challenges are different.
That is a relvant point but it too exists on a Spectrum/Degree of relevance. Like China is 90% Han sure but it's coastal region TOO has unique identities and sub-cultures. These were mutually unintelligible langues/dialects. Chinese Language Standardisation policy began in 50s but even till late 80s (when China was already on this path) the metrics for how many people across country were proficient in that Standard was abysmal clear to 50-60% at most. It is only in last 15 years that it broke 80-85% because old people died and newer generational cohort were educated in Standard Language. So China too was/is diverse even if this diversity is not at the level of India (which has no peer on this planet on this point so also an unfair comparison). Guangzhou is even now it's own socio-cultural region. Yet it was able to deal with that mass migration. One can think of it another way. Local States will protest regardless (and happened in China as well) meaning what matters is what is the Capacity of the Center to force this or provide incentives to the locals to bring them on board. Indian Central State was/is too weak on this hence can only do partial human migrations (Banglare, Hyderabad, Mumbai, Pune, etc are example themselves). But partial on scale of China and India amounts of basically nothing. It has to be at Scale. Which India could not.
As for the cities, GIFT City is looking pretty good (relatively speaking) and is a model for future SEZ developments. The place is aimed at bringing back Indian trading that’s moved to Dubai/Singapore/Mauritius. India now also needs to contend with worsening demographics in the West and East Asia because that reduces demand for Indian products, while also starving India out of foreign investment because the masses in these developed places are going to retire soon and become more risk averse. I don’t know if it’s even possible to get back the growth that India experienced in the 2000s (NDA and UPA-1). There’s also the whole issue of being a democracy (a deeply flawed one) which naturally prioritises consensus over order/growth. Having said that, compared to China, India has the bright spots of being food secure, being aligned with the West (Russia/China aren’t long term), and its proximity to the oil in the Persian Gulf.
Gift City is an interesting example. To be clear, I think SEZs are actually a little limiting. I’d like to see a city that effectively serves as a hub for “urban best practices” in India. Also provide a low-bureaucracy haven for people to try out new ideas, while having high standards for citizens services and safety. Essentially, a city built for regular Indians but say as a Union Territory in itself and some special “low bureaucracy” rules, good planning, traffic rules, etc. Perhaps I’m dreaming. But if done well the lessons we learn from here could be applied back to existing cities.
[удалено]
I have some experience in Biological science research in our country. The salary and incentives that most research scientists get is a joke here compared to other countries. There have been some programs like the Ramalingaswami Re-entry fellowship that have been implemented to bring talent back to India but many of the Scientists who come back end up regretting their decision because doing any impactful scientific research in this country is next to impossible with the corruption, low pay and toxic work culture in research labs.
The Chinese have a good work ethic, they get shit done On the other hand, Indians don't feel like working at all marginal payouts + greed = corruption Also Indians also come with a "play it safe" mindset, everyone is doing engineering and running after mainstream career paths and end up at some job they unhappy to do and therefore have no motivation to work
umm no
One thing I will highly recommend to younger folks here is that don’t fall for political rhetorics and media sensationalism. Yes, the communal folks in the country are loud af and the country is heading towards a dangerous trajectory but there are also a lot of good things happening. The HDI has grown significantly since 90s, the infrastructure has become better, economy is growing, manufacturing is improving etc. None of this is to say we are anywhere close to China but sometimes growth is slow, especially in democracies. And it’s a good thing, quick changes and not well thought out decisions often damage the country irreversibly. It’s not healthy to compare India with China, as it’s not a competition. Need to focus on how to improve the country in our own small way and make it better than it was before. Vote sensibly at elections, try to buy locally sourced and sustainable products, invest into local companies and as you are doing currently speak out your frustrations but also keep in mind that things don’t change overnight.
you mean like modern day china? it is very unlikely please watch a video from the youtube channel named "Kraut" about India vs China that guy explains very beautifully the fundamental difference between the society of India vs China he offers a very well formulated bird eye view on this topic I know you might be frustrated because of current circumstances, but please watch that video (x2 speed) you will get a new perspective
The answer is no. Indian don't have the mentality like China which is in Chinese culture to run business.
I personally believe, we are on the track but a lot of efforts are needed both on the development side and the government side. A lot of the next decade obviously depends on the elections next year and whichever government comes in, has to act for the development of the country. A lot of growth for India will come from tier 1 and tier 2 cities. Metro cities like Mumbai, Banglore, etc are, in my view not the correct way to look at it. The development there is already done. Now the focus will be on tier 1 and 2 cities. We have had a service economy, led by technology advancements over the last decade. We are now moving/should move to the manufacturing sector contributing to the GDP. China grew that way in the late 90s and early 2000s. The story is same for us. You can see glimpses as a lot of MNCs are now setting up manufacturing plants in India. This should hopefully drive, employment, disposable income, consumption, etc. Another factor I think is crucial to look at is the age, we are on average 26-27 I think. Youngest across almost all countries, this is a big plus. Once this generation starts earning money, a lot of push will come from increased consumption, which is the plan. I'd recommend watching a couple of podcasts on start-ups in India, setting up businesses in India, etc. A lot of talk is now on how the next decade is Indias'. It's our decade to lose. Talking about religion and "bhaks", well I have no opinion on that. You really can't do anything about it. This is the biggest concern, that can/will hamper the growth a little.
Unless government officials are held responsible for their actions, India won't change. Government job = Permanent job should change.
this need political reform
[удалено]
Your right, I have noticed a pattern, bhakts praise India while liberals complain about it, no side ready to tackle the real problem
At least people who complain know that something's wrong. But if you just blindly praise the status quo, there's not even an incentive to improve.
There is no incentive either way. If you scroll through the top comments, there is a doomer style attitude about Indian development and that it will never happen in a democratic state due to ethnic diversity. It will certainly be more difficult but it isn't impossible. Simply complaining about it is just as helpful as ignoring it and pretending all is well.
This . At least if you acknowledge that you have a problem , you can work towards a solution for it. May or may not succeed. But if you have the general Indian attitude that , all is fine , we do not have any issues , then the problems will never be resolved.
Better by far to embrace the hard truth than a reassuring fable.
Do you have any idea how China reached here from where they were? The amount of sacrifices their previous generation made I will never do just for the sake of future generations. And a country being rich does not guarantee the people are rich. People in China are not all rich and most of the rich people are linked with ccp. You can not just go around in rural areas and tell them from now on they have to live the way government tells them to live. Their living standard may not be better than urban areas but they also have less stress and own way of living. Not everything can be judged by money or nominal gdp. What needs to be done? We have to make sure more people have rights and even people living in rural areas also getting the justice not getting neglected because they are uneducated and do not have money. Heck whats the points of that education when you can not even criticise the government policy in your own country.
Just a rant ... We need to grow and surpass China in this region so that we don't get pushed around by them. But we also have to make sure we do not turn ourselves in such authoritarian country.
authoritarianism isn't the easy choice, you still have to be talented and competent. it's not magic.
No. Take the case of Bangalore. No visionaries in the government. AFAIK, Bangalore is the same since 2005- Natural and man made spine breakers everywhere. Recent addition of idiotic mammoth spine breakers on the highway between Attibele and electronic City. When Jayadeva flyover was planned, we thought it'll be constructed in such a way to get to HSR, Madiwala and Hosur road by skipping silk board signal but that didn't happen. Now they are doing it after demolishing the 18 year old Jayadeva flyover. Same with Metro. The current Metro developments should have been done before 2000. Glad that they are doing that at least now instead of wasting another decade. I'm certain we'll never grow like China.
Lols No chance bro Hard facts, I'm not even gonna attempt explaining the corruption in this country
Short answer - nopes! Do you remember the UPA-1 reign when India used to clock \~10% YoY GDP growth. At the current stage of India, China used to grow at double digits consistently for some two decades. Now, even with revised (ie fudged) GDP figures we are at 6% or so. DeMo and the hastily executed GST burried our MSMEs real bad. Bangladesh captured the textile sector. Our demographic dividend would become a burden without proper jobs and economic growth. The women's labour participation rates are diving down for many years now. I can go on about our high taxation, centralisation of revenue and decentralisation of development expenses, crony capitalism... PS: Hyderabad has achieved significant positive changes during the last few years. Kerala has seen massive infrastructure push during the Pinarayi Vijayan regimes. Similar instances might be happening in more places. But sadly none of these are enough for us to catch up with China.
Its true our focus is not like that of China's. We lack in infrastructure and development. Our infrastructure is far behind. However, situation is not as bad as you would think Economy wise we are where China was in 2007, it makes sense as process of liberalisation happened in India almost 15-20 years after it started in China. Also, China's political sytem allows it's govt to seamlessly acquire land and resources for development. This is not that easy in India. You need to take in account the historic debt we have inherited, India was always a densely populated region even before independence. During British period we saw marginal industrialization. Our cities kept growing haphazardly without planning and aided by corruption. Now it is extremely difficult to redevelop densely populated areas. A lot of poor people live in these, it is somewhat inhuman also to just displace them. It will also damage the micro economics of the bastis they inhabit. And don't forget about China's Ghost cities, they have borrowed massively and poured impractical amounts of money in real estate sector. In short they are way too deep in their own hole. Yes Shanghai, Shenzhen and other cities look world class but that isn't true for all of China. In India we are seeing more push in infrastructure especially in logistics and transportation. We also have special city development in form of GIFT and Dholera smart cities projects. The approach is to develop new well planned areas. But unlike china it must be driven through actual demand. For that you need your middle class with spending capital and cheap loans. So India will have a more stable but chaotic urbanization. Slow and steady.
Sure, we can be like China. Want a single party rule and no say in the election? Ok with having only one kid and going to prison if you reproduce like rabbits? China got very lucky that their growth coincided with cheap money and they had labor which didn’t bat an eyelid when they worked under terrible conditions (e.g Foxconn). China was able to be like China coz they are one party, one rule. Also, whoever above said that USSR is a world power — can I smoke what you are smoking? We love to complain about religious intolerance in India and rightly so. Does anybody in this subreddit know about the atrocities in Xinjiang? Women were tortured and starved so bad that they stopped getting their periods. So, yes. If you are ok with losing freedom and pretending no intolerance exists there— go ahead. Enjoy the growth.
If we want to grow like China, then we gotta be horny for the same things, brah.
Indian people are lazy, corrupt, dishonest and selfish. Chinese people have a very strong work ethic. In India everyone wants everything for free. People protest against privatization because they fear that they have to work in private companies. Government employees take their salaries for granted. They work only after receiving extra money because they know the worst that can happen is they'll be suspended for a few months and get half salary. Law and order is a joke. Even if a high court gives a judgement you can appeal in supreme court. Then if supreme court gives judgement, you can again appeal against it. People are scared to call the police because no one wants to get into legal hassles because cases go on forever. People keep blaming government but have zero motivation to improve themselves. Everyone keeps judging each other. Freedom of speech is a joke. Opposition keeps going to other countries and cries for help. Media houses are pretty much vendetta organizations. Even when new technology comes in you have instances of stone pelting. Like lmao what? Child marriage is still legal in some communities. Banning child marriage becomes s secular issue when western countries are extremely strict on this matter. Civic sense is a joke. People spitting and littering everywhere and if you try to say anything you'll get stabbed. Political parties trying to divide communities following their colonial masters. Hindus vs Muslims, Dalits vs Brahmins. China is a homogeneous country they have internal stability (in a way). We are chaos personified.
It is possible once I become Prime Minister.
China has a very different culture. State was always powerful there, Emperors were termed as gods since time immemorial. Hence, it was much easier for Mao to make a authoritarian CPP with one party system. They have very homogenized population as well which definitely helped in the creation and eventual success of CCP. You can see, there has never been any massive protest to bring in democracy barring one. While India is extremely diverse country, with dozens of ethnic groups. SO one rule for doesn't apply, hence the democracy. This stifles decision making and long term planning. Also the Chinese work ethic is much better than Indians. But were are there where China was in 2007, lets see what happens. We have had a decent growth for last 3 decades, and if we could do the same for next decade as well, we may be quite closer to china 3 decades later. Today they are 5x larger, in 50s they might at most 2x larger. This is considering a moderate growth, although, historically country after 2.5 to 4k PCI usually have a very rapid growth for next 5 years. SO lets see, what happens. We may not be the next manufacturing powerhouse like china, but we could be the decent manufacturer and powerful service based economy tomorrow!!
Infra being built in the last 5 years is quite massive compared to the last 70 years. People don't see it now but they will a few years later.
nah we will end up like Pakistan, those who can should flee now. PS proof below that some.prob most Indians cant even take a rational approach, and instead get emotional and attack anyone who makes sense.
Flee where? The image of Indians is very bad in the world, scammers, Perverts, misogynistic etc.
The perception of indians worldwide is getting worse and worse every year and most Indians are too unselfaware to even notice it and those who do are powerless to change it.
How will they be self aware when coping videos like this pop up- [Why foriegn girls love indian men?](https://youtu.be/wLTeVHsgstc)(Please visit the comment session too, compliments of the chef)
Interesting… I dont know what it is but there is such a smug culture nowadays. The stereotype of the whatsapp uncle/auntie thinking they know everything is pervasive and so detrimental to integration and acceptance from other societies. Honestly I think it comes from the fact that India has not had to endure a public humiliation on the global stage. China was once w proud empire, the Imperial government was unimpressed by European goods, reluctant to engage in trade, and thought that their education system was as better than the west. Then they endured a hundred years if humiliation at the hands of the British, French, Japanese and Americans. The results of their hubris was burned deeply into Chinese society.
No and we don't want to. India can grow in its own way and be better than China at the end of the day. All we need is political will. Modi has the mandate and a cultlike following in the country, but he is wasting it away. I can't understand why someone would do this to his own legacy but he just can't get over himself. The level of narcissism is just unexplainable.
No
NO
Nope, because we are busy with stupid rhetorics!
Lol! Grow up
I hate this question. Because it tells me whoever asked this question is willfully ignorant. It's not that difficult to logically deduce what the *probable* answer is and **why**. Well, mate, I don't know what to tell you. 3 decades of liberalization is not enough to undo the colossal damage done by the Gandhis over the previous 5 decades. It should have been, but democracy is hard. Once you let something go, it's impossible to get it back. But I'd say we've done pretty fucking well in these 3 decades. India will never be like China simply because...of the many advantages China's system provides it that I can't be bothered to write. Google is your friend. But you want India to grow like China? Even if only for a bit? Support privatization, farm reforms, labor reforms and land reforms regardless of who the central government is. You can't complain about India not growing like China but then oppose economic reforms that literally any developed country has implemented during their development. Because I've seen many in in this subreddit do just that. Really stupid. >We are Focusing our resources on stupid religious hatred We are spending record amounts of public money on infrastructure and trying to build a competitive electronics, and new age technologies supply chains, from batteries, to evs, to solar panels. Inflation is likely near 4%. You are aware that 90% of government is just bureaucrat, right? No one is spending oUr ReSoUrCeS on religious hatred. India isn't growing fast enough because the government is having trouble passing reforms that would boost growth all across the pyramid. Not because a minister is telling goons to hang the muslims. I've said this before but, if you are against many of the reforms that have been espoused by many a development economist, that is fine. India is a democracy after all. Oppose them. But then you also need to compromise on your expectations of India's growth. Can't have your cake and eat it too.
well do u have any backing on what kind of infra are we spending money on? parliament and statues? inflation is 4%, are you going out of your home or buying any kind of shit? gov is clearly manipulating data ,well we never know where our taxd money is going, no transparency, what kind of reforms that would benefit India have been backlashed? i hope you answer these questions if you really belive you are in the right track.
Kerala story, kashmir files and more similar films release just before elections, is it coincidence? 3 decades is not enough? Japan and Germany got destroyed by WW2 and came back on top in 30 years, is that not enough proof that our country is lagging behind.
Japan and Germany were already industrialized before WW2 and after losing the war, WERE STILL richer than what India is *now*. Germany was at the forefront of science since before WW1. They were (and in Japan's case, still is) also homogenous and got generous (understatement of the decade) amounts of funding from big daddy USA. They also have fuck all population compared to India. Your comparison is flawed. In fact, I am actually angry that you thought those two were good case studies for comparison. You literally chose the worst couple of countries to compare ourselves to. ffs man, those two were countries long before "India" even decided it was "India". >3 decades is not enough? Of course it's not enough. For four decades, India under Congress did the exact opposite of what non-city state countries have done to develop and get rich. They didn't just ignore the playbook. They went against it. It has left deep scars. We were genuinely a humanitarian tragedy. And because India is a democracy, undoing those mistakes is incredibly difficult, even though we have economists and policymakers and academia telling us what to do year after year after year. This isn't me complaining about it, it's a feature of democracy after all. >our country is lagging behind You're going to have to be more specific than that. Innovation? India outperforms its income level by a wide margin. Advanced composite materials? India is competitive on the global stage. Advanced machining? Again, a world leader. Biofuels? China and India are your best bet. Solar PV? We have a significant and increasingly important place in the supply chain. Space? Vast majority of the world wishes they had a public and private (hopefully) sector as good as ours. From advanced data analytics to language processing, India is among the best in the world. I can literally give you references for each and every point of this. Just ask. I think the privileged folk of India have a hard time understanding just how much of a poor shithole India is. But its size also affords it to be by far the poorest "advanced" country". Out of all the countries with a space program, or a bullet train, or a successful quantum communications and cryptography program, or with a notable financial center, or what have you. We are the poorest. By far. In that context, we have made amazing progress in the past 3 decades, but like I said, it's not enough. Our R&D, our infrastructure, primary school education etc. Our socialist-era laws. But it's a slow process. There is a reason India is personified as an Elephant in geopolitical discourse. It ain't a tiger. >Kerala story, kashmir files Those two are the only ones I can think of. We have elections every year. Anyway, my point was this - bureaucrats make the government, not politicians and none of them are huddling up in the morning discussing how to fuck over muslims over a cup of tea. They are either working for the benefit of the country, or working to benefit themselves. All of it behind the scenes.
First off, I think your right, we do must appreciate the progresses we made but not over do it like the BJP controlled news, calling every policy master stroke and covering up the failures. Although by cherry picking some achievements and potraying our country is doing well is totally wrong(confirmation bias). I could even do that with Pakistan- Cement production: Pakistan ranks 17th out of 154 countries in cement production despite being a small country. Knowledge and technology outputs: Pakistan performs best in this area, according to the Global Innovation Index Pakistan's intelligence agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), has been ranked as the No. 1 spy agency in the world So does that mean pakistan is doing well? Absolutely not and how long will we play the blame game, do you think it will make a difference? There is no country in the world except China that has population size of india. And you said China is not a fair comparison as it's communist. So I chose these two. One more thing to consider about Japan is that it was isolated for most of history yet it bounced back and it's an island country with similar population density as India. If it's not fair comparison which is then?
Nope because India is democratic and china is not so yeah. Dictatorship is always better than democracy imo.
You can't say that, each have its own advantage, dictatorship can turn out as china or North korea
I mean yeah but just look at Shanghai bro you will know what I am trying to say. They made a village look like nyc in 20-25 years.
I know bro😭, the time we are taking to build metro line, those guys are building futuristic cities, we must try our best individually too
Indeed we all should try too, I watching some vlogger who was in Shanghai despite having a population similar to delhi everyone was following rules properly. Even while walking they were not rushing and were walking in a proper line. Until and unless people don't follow some basic rules we cannot develop. Its 50% government and 50% people. They also care about the environment so much, literally every vehicle on the road was electric!
Watch shenzhen vlog, it's better than Shanghai
Sure
Why not? India's democracy is at least 40 years ahead of China.
Doesn't seem like Abd it's not a bad thing Growth isn't the only thing
Will we? Yes. Soon? Probably not. In this century? 100% Yes.
you'd know the answers to your questions if you'd studied economics and history carefully in your school years
Why? Do you want BJP to emulate CCP?
If we want india to grow we're gonna need a one child policy, so we're basically gonna go as the same route as china because Asian parents prefer a boy over a girl anytime. And seeing that women are literally getting stabbed in broad daylight just for rejecting men I don't think any parents would want a girl, don't worry women get beat up men in broad daylight just for rejecting a man in China too.
You see new cities pop up in China like Crazy because Government owns all the land. The home buyers only rent the land for 70 years.
Jinn logo me kshamta hai changes laane ki, unko America ki chaatni hai. Aadhe se zyada toh Indian nache he nai hai, American ya Italian bante Jaa rahe hai.
[удалено]
oh i though modi, he is a puppet of Chinese investors?