India is doing what China did 30 years ago ?

[Leishangthem]

The Indians are very ungrateful that the British gave them an entire country, good infrastructure, and decent English skills. Had it not been for Great Britain, India would not be nearly so big.


Honestly as much as I hate to admit it India needs to get rid of its democracy. Its government is the reason why it cannot succeed ... when you think about the successes of democracy in the world, you think about the US and Europe, never India. India needs very centralized rule with a strong authority figure who uses their power to harshly implement reforms. Even Modi, however powerful he is within the BJP, cannot manage to push many initiatives through because of the bureaucracy. India itself embodies the failure of democracy.

Sure there were dark spots like the Bengal famine and harsh rule but India's existence today as it is is due to the British Raj. Your borders reflect that as does your IT industry lol

Democracy just doesn't work well in a divisified society like India.

Actually for a really diverse country like India Democracy in its truest form is necessary,right now it's democracy in periphery only.There's no freedom of speech,and every one's slave of the centre where they control masses by using colonial era laws like Section 124A, 153A 505 and 504 and more that obliterates any real critical judgement of the political elites.
A majoritarian government isn't democracy in it's real form.

India need to learn from Singapore.Wherein there's status quo to prevent a majoritarian- totalitarian governing system.
In India some political leader devises some new legislation based on a state like Bihar and then implements it on the rest,that sort of political manoeuvres results in huge internal conflict and loss of trust in the administration as the minority is rendered voiceless against the majority. What India needs is real democracy,with true freedom of speech,with proper status quo,where a majoritarian sect don't plough through the minority's aspirations.
For some reason India never look at Singapore ,which is the only country that shares the exact same history of national foundation under British empire.
India could literally use the SINGAPOREAN blueprint for national development and harmony among its diverse ethnicities and culture .
But,as apparent,it's way beyond Indian policy maker's mind to do so and instead they want to copy CHINA which is totally different culturally, genetically , historically;purely out of jealousy and since China has 1b people like India.

 

[ARMalik]

Its like hundreds and thousands of Fraudsters on top of each other thinking they are important.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

Costless or not, China's repeated blocking does prove the fact a permanent seat in UNSC does mean something to a country.

I don't base my understanding about a country studying a small group of people. If I had to form my idea of how the Chinese are just relying on the Chinese I have been in contact with, my judgement would be partially correct and partially wrong. You are a country of 1.5 billion people with diversified culture. India is even more diversified. So its entirely upto to you, how you choose to see us.

I must admit that it is difficult to govern India due to its diversity. The divide between North and South India is wide. The regional divide within them, even more. The refusal of 40% the population to speak Hindi and instead speak English - basically destroying the possibility of a unified IT market - is maddening. The British deindustrialized India thoroughly from 19th century even up to 1947. All in all, India was dealt a poor hand.

It was dealt a bad hand but then played that hand like it had pocket aces. If you played poker, you know what I mean. I can't pretend that I have the answers. But there are solutions that others have found.

 

[+4vsgorillas-Apebane]

Costless or not, China's repeated blocking does prove the fact a permanent seat in UNSC does mean something to a country.

I don't base my understanding about a country studying a small group of people. If I had to form my idea of how the Chinese are just relying on the Chinese I have been in contact with, my judgement would be partially correct and partially wrong. You are a country of 1.5 billion people with diversified culture. India is even more diversified. So its entirely upto to you, how you choose to see us.

Instead of attacking China, India should focus on France and ask why the fcuk they are one of the P5.

France surrendered in 6 weeks to the Nazis, if India can dislodge France for the position then it makes sense. The P5 cant be increased so for one to come in one must leave.

What India should do is what China did 70 years ago, Land Reform and Social Revolution. Or Indian will forever be a 2nd rated country.

India needs a Qin Shi Huang to create a united Indian identity and put an end to regionalism and petty religious ideologies. Should have been done 2000 years ago.

 

[Dungeness]

I must admit that it is difficult to govern India due to its diversity. The divide between North and South India is wide. The regional divide within them, even more. The refusal of 40% the population to speak Hindi and instead speak English - basically destroying the possibility of a unified IT market - is maddening. The British deindustrialized India thoroughly from 19th century even up to 1947. All in all, India was dealt a poor hand.

It was dealt a bad hand but then played that hand like it had pocket aces. If you played poker, you know what I mean. However, there are a few things that India should do to improve its status in the world. I can't pretend that I have the answers. But there are solutions that others have found.

For all these to happen, India needs an Indian version of Mao, and in democracy, there will be no possibility to have a leader like Mao.

 

[Leishangthem]

Perhaps. But it looks like the Communists did a pretty good job in China though ... one glimpse of their cities is all it takes to recognize the progress. Really hard to argue with the Chinese development under the Communist regime. On the contrary, maybe if China had democracy like India or Brazil, it would look much different than today (by which I mean much poorer and worse off). For very large countries like China and India and even Brazil I really think heavily centralized rule is the way to go.

The Indians are very ungrateful that the British gave them an entire country, good infrastructure, and decent English skills. Had it not been for Great Britain, India would not be nearly so big.


Honestly as much as I hate to admit it India needs to get rid of its democracy. Its government is the reason why it cannot succeed ... when you think about the successes of democracy in the world, you think about the US and Europe, never India. India needs very centralized rule with a strong authority figure who uses their power to harshly implement reforms. Even Modi, however powerful he is within the BJP, cannot manage to push many initiatives through because of the bureaucracy. India itself embodies the failure of democracy.

East asians will find a way to develop one way or another. It's about the gene and the inherent culture thereby of the East Asians, meanwhile South Asians like the Indians more ***** and *******. There's no comparison.

Please don't view Indians from South Asia in the same lens of East Asians.China just thrives under their socialistic governance with chinese characteristics, but china would've still developed with any form of government.
It's about the people not system in reality.


India's geographical representation is by itself a British product,all of Indian Cities are British planned and they invested heavily in creating a large supply and trade chain from these cities,pre & post-independence.
Even after Independence, India's growth was footed by British investment and foreign aids at the initial stage.
The south east asian region of Indo pacific would have been worse off than Congo if not for British intervention.

I must admit that it is difficult to govern India due to its diversity. The divide between North and South India is wide. The regional divide within them, even more. The refusal of 40% the population to speak Hindi and instead speak English - basically destroying the possibility of a unified IT market - is maddening. The British deindustrialized India thoroughly from 19th century even up to 1947. All in all, India was dealt a poor hand.

It was dealt a bad hand but then played that hand like it had pocket aces. If you played poker, you know what I mean. I can't pretend that I have the answers. But there are solutions that others have found.

You're just viewing that from Chinese perspective,China & India are nothing alike ,the impression that Hindi is akin to Hanzi is your skewed perspective and it's also India's failure to preserve it's status quo among its diverse ethnicities that such an impression was even made about India.
The superimposition of Hindi, which is total alien to the culture and history of any other part of India( other than mostly the north), is nothing but tyranny and cultural genocide,use of English which is the basis language for the foundation of India is one of the few merits of Indian democracy.
Just like Singapore,India must preserve the use of English to respect each and every community and so that there's no forceful imposition of one community's language upon another.
But since many use that to taunt delirious and sensitive indians ,now some right winged ultranationalist politicians want to impose the north Indian language upon the rest.

 

[hualushui]

wrong
India buys weapons from the United States, from Russia, from Europe, from Israel. I don't see self-reliance

 

[Figaro]

Of course they do because of difference in living standards just as many would choose to live in US than China. So as you proclaimed something for us, let me also assure you if both India and China had same economic profile, only you would choose China, rest will choose India. Unfortunately we couldn't be cruel to our people for want of shiny roads and buildings. It is unfortunate that people like you (even though I am pretty sure you are Chinese) fall for such vain display.

If India had the exact same development level and didn't have all the religious fervor then maybe India would be better than China. The only problem is this is not the case at all. Indian sanitation is horrible ... even the Ancient Romans, a civilization that existed 2000 years ago, had better sanitation than most of India. I am sorry if I offended you but this is simply the truth. Who cares about freedom when you are living in a beyond third world country? Have you wondered why there are so many expats in China even though there are no political freedoms? Because the country is extremely developed ... their cities make LA or even New York look old. Hell, their infrastructure is miles ahead (pun intended) than our infrastructure system, which basically consists of terrible subways/amtraks and the aging interstate system. In the US, we respect our competitors or even enemies and try to out-compete them. Maybe India have some humility and try to actually improve their country instead of always pointing out how China is inferior.

wrong
India buys weapons from the United States, from Russia, from Europe, from Israel. I don't see self-reliance

When you have to import extremely basic systems like howitzers and light machine guns and even parachutes you know something's wrong with your military industry complex

 

[Dungeness]

India needs a Qin Shi Huang to create a united Indian identity and put an end to regionalism and petty religious ideologies. Should have been done 2000 years ago.

Now you put their starting point 2000 years back!

India still has its chance, for gods sake, USA has only 200+ years history. For that, India will have to give up its greed of land grabbing. What's the point to bite on a land that it can never swallow, let alone digiste and waste all precious resource trying to hold on to it?

India can make peace with all its neighbours by giving up claims to land that it never owned, and puts its resource on education in its Cow Belt, and makes any caste based practices crime. From there, India can start copying what China did 70 years ago.

 

[Imran Khan]

Perhaps,

The issue is now not just the boundary dispute but "survival".
The Survival in a highly technology dominated world.

Either you choose and develop your own or, get bullied. Its Economy.. Economy all the way.

is it a deliberate "act" by India to cut off substantial ties with China and ACCEPT the SHORT TERM LOSS to GAIN a LONG TERM ADVANTAGE of SELF RELIANCE ?

@Joe Shearer

china will not loss india will loss in both cases . china exports to india only

 

[Adonis]

Lol just because I said something good about the British Empire you are now triggered? Your country would not exist without the British ... Indians always complain about the "atrocities" of the "evil" British Empire even though they provided India with the a huge jumpstart after independence. I'm sure if the British Empire continued ruling, India would be in a significantly better shape than it is today ... perhaps not a Hong Kong but definitely much better than whatever is current day India.

Mate...most of the countries (Aus, NZ, Canada and including yours (US) would not have existed without British.
You are commenting on another country with bias in your mind and are using words like "I am sure". Fine....

British did to India and other countries what China is now doing.....Expand in the name of trade, use their resources, flood their markets with British/Chinese goods to kill their industries, Loan/bribe them to get unfair advantages in tenders, contracts, tax benefits etc.....and in the end make them dependent. All infrastructure that British invested upon was for their benefits and not for locals....Did they good to red Indians there? or Aboriginals, Maoris in my country?.....or Indians or Pakistanis?...similarly so called BRI is China's game plan to get benefited at the cost of others....

 

[Cliftonite]

East asians will find a way to develop one way or another. It's about the gene and the inherent culture thereby of the East Asians, meanwhile South Asians like the Indians are actually like africans ,but more cunning and deceitful. There's no comparison.

Please don't view Indians from South Asia in the same lens of East Asians.China just thrives under their socialistic governance with chinese characteristics,but china would've still developed with any form of government.
It's about the people not system in reality.


India's geographical representation is by itself a British product,all of Indian Cities are British planned and they invested heavily in creating a large supply and trade chain from these cities,pre & post-independence.
Even after Independence, India's growth was footed by British investment and foreign aids at the initial stage.
The south east asian region of Indo pacific would have been worse off than Congo if not for British intervention.



You're just viewing that from Chinese perspective,China & India are nothing alike ,the impression that Hindi is akin to Hanzi is your skewed perspective and it's also India's failure to preserve it's status quo among its diverse ethnicities that such an impression was even made about India.
The superimposition of Hindi, which is total alien to the culture and history of any other part of India( other than mostly the north), is nothing but tyranny and cultural genocide,use of English which is the basis language for the foundation of India is one of the few merits of Indian democracy.
Just like Singapore,India must preserve the use of English to respect each and every community and so that there's no forceful imposition of one community's language upon another.
But since many use that to taunt delirious and sensitive indians ,now some right winged ultranationalist politicians want to impose the north Indian language upon the rest.

You know it's telling when even undeveloped Yangon and Phnom Penh are cleaner than Mumbai and Delhi. You're right. East Asians are culturally more civilized than South Asians and specifically Indians.

India can never dream of catching up to China. It has half of China's land. A highly regressive religion and culture. And way too many cultural dissimilarities between each state.

 

[Figaro]

Mate...most of the countries (Aus, NZ, Canada and including yours (US) would not have existed without British.
You are commenting on another country with bias in your mind and are using words like "I am sure". Fine....

British did to India and other countries what China is now doing.....Expand in the name of trade, use their resources, flood their markets with British/Chinese goods to kill their industries, Loan/bribe them to get unfair advantages in tenders, contracts, tax benefits etc.....and in the end make them dependent. All infrastructure that British invested upon was for their benefits and not for locals....Did they good to red Indians there? or Aboriginals, Maoris in my country?.....or Indians or Pakistanis?...similarly so called BRI is China's game plan to get benefited at the cost of others....

Yes Britain did some bad stuff. That is why we became independent. However the contributions of the British Empire to these societies are significantly overlooked while the bad sides are overemphasized. Yes the British practiced mercantilist policies, yes they bribed, yes they did some unfair things. But what about the infrastructure they built? What about the education they gave? My original point was Britain made India to the country it is today. Its borders are those of the British raj; without Great Britain India would not have the land it has today or frankly be the country it is today (it would be split up into multiple smaller countries as a couple posters stated). Moreover, the British handed India a pretty extensive infrastructure network, especially in railroads, something that was far superior to the rest of Asia at the time. Also let's not forget about the literacy in English the British gave, which created the Indian IT industry. Can Chinese or frankly any other Asian country speak English as well as the Indians on average?

Actually for a really diverse country like India Democracy in its truest form is necessary,right now it's democracy in periphery only.There's no freedom of speech,and every one's slave of the centre where they control masses by using colonial real laws like Section 124A, 153A 505 and 504 and more that obliterates any real critical judgement of the political elites.
A majoritarian government isn't democracy in it's real form.

India need to learn from Singapore.Wherein there's status quo to prevent a majoritarian- totalitarian governing system.
In India some political leader devises some new legislation based on a state like Bihar and then implements it on the rest,that sort of political manoeuvres results in huge internal conflict and loss of trust in the administration as the minority is rendered voiceless against the majority. What India needs is real democracy,with true freedom of speech,with proper status quo,where a majoritarian sect don't plough through the minority's aspirations.
For some reason India never look at Singapore ,which is the only country that shares the exact same history of national foundation under British empire.
India could literally use the SINGAPOREAN blueprint for national development and harmony among its diverse ethnicities and culture .
But,as apparent,it's way beyond Indian policy maker's mind to do so and instead they want to copy CHINA which is totally different culturally, genetically , historically;purely out of jealousy and since China has 1b people like India.

Singapore is an excellent example. Even the Chinese under Deng Xiaoping looked at Singapore as a model example. I think many Chinese officials were even sent to Singapore to study their development. But the fact of the matter is India desperately needs a much stronger central/national government and far weaker regional governments. That would be a very good start.

 

[Leishangthem]

Singapore is an excellent example. Even the Chinese under Deng Xiaoping looked at Singapore as a model example. I think many Chinese officials were even sent to Singapore to study their development. But the fact of the matter is India desperately needs a much stronger central/national government and far weaker regional governments. That would be a very good start.

Do you think the Central gov wield any less power? That's not the problem at all,the administration can seem fascist to many foreigners if one spend time in India.The fact that there's lack of real freedom of speech is the most telling https://indianexpress.com/article/i...-is-not-hell-remark-manohar-parrikar-2991772/
https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/modi-caricature-lands-cartoonist-in-jail/article2494467.ece

The regional gov are puppet of the central gov,there can't be any more stronger central gov than regional ones.
People has huge misconception about indian democracy,indian freedom of speech .

The whole political class is incompetent,that's a great problem with India.It's not in the characteristics of Indians to think in a higher order of rectitude, equality ,and serving with the sense of doing right for all.
They are all self-serving toward themselves and mentally incapable to think and operate at the scale the East Asians does,that's why it's pointless to even compare.These are very primitive people that operate on dark impulses based on their short-sighted view and limited temperament.
It's about the gene and the culture,the people not just system.
Indians will always mess stuff up.It's about sorting a way to best minimize the mess.

It's now about how one can salvage as much as they can in this dystopia of a region. One shouldn't expect the miracle that we see from East Asia.

China isn't India,Chinese are almost similar culturally,genetically ,historically that's why socialism with chinese characteristics work,that can't be applied to India.
India need to better its form of democracy like singapore.

 

[Joe Shearer]

What India should do is what China did 70 years ago, Land Reform and Social Revolution. Or Indian will forever be a 2nd rated country.

You are thinking about Pakistan. In case nobody informed you, land reforms took place in India in the 50s (in different states at different times, so no one fixed date, but all in the space of a few quarters).

Social Revolution is not happening in a democracy; the changes will be slow, but we will have no horror movies like the Cultural Revolution or the Great Leap Forward. We will not have to hide millions dead in internal upheavals.

You are, of course, aware that such land reforms have not taken place in Pakistan, and individuals still own hundreds of acres; some say thousands of acres. Not that it is to be equated, but the information might help in formulating prescriptions for neighbours.