The Importance of India

This looks interesting, but I could not find an RSS feed for the site. Could you please add one, I would definitely prefer that over subscribing to an email newsletter!

If you read the history books, people in the West have been predicting the death of India's democracy ever since Independence.

It hasn't happened, our democracy is as strong as it's ever been, with a much higher voter turnout than most western nations. We also have a myriad of political parties in power in different states, from communism in Kerala to right wing governance for years in Gujarat.

The US, in comparison, has very low voter turnout even for their presidential elections and extremely popular candidates like Bernie Sanders can't even fight the election, because apparently, a true democracy doesn't allow you to choose from more than 2 choices.

India has its flaws, but all countries do. Doomsayers will keep predicting death, while the people working towards betterment know the flaws and will try to fix stuff instead.

I'd have expected HN to have more of the second view, and I'm pretty disappointed to see that that's not the case.

It's almost funny how an apparent Chinese (sympathizer?) (check the activity) user below calls India a "semi Slavery society" with zero context about the country and even tries to hijack the present BLM in almost propaganda like move.

Now, facts. Upon independence, India's constitution was written by the constituent assembly presided over by an "untouchable". This constitution abolished discrimination on basis of caste, and as an affirmative action reserved seats in educational institutions and jobs in all state sponsored educational and public institutions.

This reservation system has rapidly been increasing over the years and now a staggering 60 - 70% of all positions are reserved today. What's more, the current Prime Minister of India and the President of India are from backward castes and scheduled caste respectively, and a majority of political parties and multiple Chief Ministers presently belong to traditionally backward castes. Even election constituencies are reserved, so that there is fixed amount of representation in the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha (lower and upper houses) no matter which government is in power.

The best any authoritarian regime can do right now is portray as propaganda that India is a "semi slavery society" which has no "liberal" shared values with the democracies in the West so everyone should shun it.

It's a standard divide and rule strategy.

> How you organize your society matters much more, Japan/SK has fraction of the global population, and somehow maintain their economic importance.

They maintain their importance by being creditor nations, i.e. they are productive and save.

> India has all the problems of a democracy without much of the benefit. It's more likely that India becomes a CCP style country than stays a democracy.

There is a fundamental distrust of power structures in India. This is due to multiple waves of colonization by foreign powers, first by the Mughals and second by the British East India Company.

India is likely to be a liberal democracy far longer than the United States. It’s current fascination with populism doesn’t necessarily lead to authoritarianism. Rather it is giving a voice to the most disenfranchised in a country, typically those who are now economically obsoleted by automation.

> If India was so great it's smaller immediate neighbor wouldn't be so hostile towards it, and friendly to CCP.

That is due to political history and infighting between secular and religious figures in India’s independence movement.

> India has all the problems of a democracy without much of the benefit. It's more likely that India becomes a CCP style country than stays a democracy.

What is the basis for this? People have been predicting fall of democracy in India for decades (especially in the West), but nothing of that sort has happened. The closest incident was the state of emergency under Indira Gandhi in 1975-1977. India successfully recovered back then when the populace was far less educated and far less exposed to the outside world. It's not likely that anything like that is going to happen again.

Great countries cant have any dispute with smaller neighbors, they just give away whatever the smaller ones ask for? You make no sense.

> where the state department can just overthrow the govt of a major country if it likes

That's an extraordinary exaggeration. The state dept does not have that power at all, not even close. Show me all the examples of this happening to a major country, much less a major democracy, in the last 50 years.

It's incredibly difficult - nearly impossible - for the state dept to overthrow the government of a major country. That's why Saddam Hussein, the dictator of a very weakened non-major nation, was so hard to remove.

Iran? Overwhelming proof of how hard it is to topple the government of even a mid-major nation. The state dept has wanted to change the government of Iran for four decades now and can't do it.

If the US could topple countries so easily, Putin wouldn't be ruling Russia as a dictator. Chavez wouldn't have continued ruling Venezuela as a dictator (and Maduro wouldn't be in there now). Fidel wouldn't have ruled Cuba as a dictator for so long. China wouldn't be operated the way it is now, ruled by a dictator. North Korea wouldn't be run by the Kim dictatorship. Bashar al-Assad wouldn't still be ruling Syria as a dictator. Although it is interesting what all of these countries have in common.

> If India was so great it's smaller immediate neighbor wouldn't be so hostile towards it, and friendly to CCP.

I'm assuming by small country you meant Pakistan. If so, this couldn't be further from truth. Pakistan isn't hostile toward India because India isn't great; the reason is in the reason of its creation and a relentless need to justify that reason. Pakistan came into existence based on an idea that Muslims couldn't survive in a democratic nation with majority Hindu population as Hindus would be a de-facto rulers. (Although this argument has turned out to be a completely false as in India the population of Muslims have grown from 8% to 14%+ after independence. On the other hand, minority population - Hindus/etc. - have declined considerably in Pakistan.) Be it culture, history or language, Pakistan has most things common with India. If there's piece between both, people would soon start questioning reason to stay separate - together both can be a great powerful nation on the world. Many outside interests (read super-powers) wouldn't like this to happen so they keep fueling aggressive elements. Similarly, rulers of Pakistan can't allow this to happen for obvious reason. Till date, you can hear their leaders justifying separation from India in their speeches by highlighting some stray incident happened with some Muslim in India.

China has made big short-term gains because of an authoritarian rule. But, for a sustained growth, like that of USA, you need an open, democratic society which allows people to express their newly find voice. As people gain wealth, exposure and education, they gain new intellectual capabilities. This capability can be used for innovation but that requires people don't have undue pressure - they feel free to express their ideas and thoughts. If you're in constant battle with your own people/government, lot of energy is wasted that could otherwise be used to do more important things that can take you and yoru nation further.

Protecting India's water supply is why India took over Kashmir, and why the Chinese presence in Ladakh and bordering Arunachal Pradesh is so dangerous for India, as those two areas are the source for half of India's water supply.

India must shed Nehru's outdated non-aligned stance (as if China's 1962 treachery hadn't discredited it already) and ally with the US and Japan on equal terms to contain China. India should also invest massively in solar-powered desalination technology to lessen its dependance on river systems that will be disrupted by climate change even without Chinese mischief.

Most of the "knowledge driven economy" is bullshit imo. They're busywork that allows societies that already have a lot of wealth to distribute it to their middle and upper class. People like HFTs don't create nearly the same amount value as their income justifies.

Who were the "essential workers" during the lock down, other than medical professionals ? Did people horde Wikipedia articles or toilet paper ?

Knowledge driven economy is a possibility in the future. Automation is definitely driving down jobs, but not to the extent we are imagining. Most production of the world is being done in China and other ASEAN countries by its billion+ population.

Wasn’t Modi democratically elected — twice?

Don't conflate encouraging cult-like following and at times divisive politics with authoritarianism. There are free and fair elections in India. In fact, Modi (and BJP) have lost several recent state elections and handed power over to the opposition. There are a ton of political parties, especially regional, that give BJP a run for their money a.k.a political pluralism.

The reason Modi is running away with national elections is because of the absolute incompetence of the main opposition, the Congress party. Their decades of mind boggling corruption has finally caught up to them and their reluctance to look beyond the Gandhi family for leadership is costing them dearly. That combined with BJP's election machinery (which Modi has built) means that opposition has to raise their game spectacularly, which they are not able to do.

Population growth over a 30 year period is quite predictable. The rate is very cultural, and cultures change slowly.

And it's quite clear that population is a component of world power. Definitely not the only component, and probably not the most important component, but if all else is equal, the larger country will be the more powerful.

Society in India has been getting more progressive over the years. Compare any decade with previous decade and see the difference. It's a trait and gift of democracy, people with access to information adapt themselves to be compatible with modern ideas. There'll always be two sides like in any other countries, but balance is easily achievable.

Your doubt is typical Indian opposition viewpoint right now. They are so just for the sake of opposition.

I think it depends on what annoys you. I find myself annoyed by any kind of cultural tick. Phrases, mannerisms, cliches, tropes, all bother me to the extent that they are common and pervasive (in any culture).

But by far I see this the worste in youths. Highschoolers and undergrads are so painfully unoriginal. But, that's life. Better to focus your attention on people who you find unique and impressive than to worry about people who are still finding themselves.

It's good that you recognise your bias. Most, if not all people have biases. Few recognise them. Even fewer are willing to fix them. So kudos to you.

The best way to work on such feelings is with a professional such as a therapist. I'd like to remind you that there doesn't need to be anything wrong with a person to be able to benefit from seeing a therapist.

Seeing a (good) therapist can, and in almost all cases will make someone a better person because you get a (more or less) objective outside view that makes you question and explore your emotions, why you feel the way you feel, and help you figure out what you can do to change for the better.

That said, IMO, you could start here:

Firstly, you must realise (you very probably already know this, maybe you just haven't given it much thought) that there are all kinds of people from all countries, in all kinds of demographics.

Secondly, it's import to ask yourself what is it about most Indians that you find annoying? Is it their attitude? Is it their accent? Is it their culture?

Don't be ashamed if you find that your reasoning doesn't make sense or isn't completely rational. Feelings often aren't. That's okay.

Once you know what it is that you don't like about Indians, pay attention to it next time you feel annoyed by Indians. Are they really doing something that should annoy you? Or is it a false perception of yours? Recognising biases and catching yourself in the act goes a long way towards overcoming said biases.

You should also try to find like-minded individuals, or individuals that you look up to from the demographic in question and spend time with them. That'll help you realise that there are likable and admirable people within the group too, and help dismiss your biases against them.

This article has some good advice too: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/in-practice/201508/6...

I wish you the best of luck.

Realize their children will have shed most of the traits you find objectionable (assuming those are Indian immigrants to the West).

Also, Participation of women in the economy is super low. This needs to be improved.

> Having a huge population doesn't help much.

The article highlights this by saying "India currently punches below its weight on the world stage" and it's true if we go by the numbers. Also, if we go by the numbers the country is in the best state ever compared to its past. Modernization in manufacturing or agriculture will surely increase the country's output which I believe should be the target of governance.

India is a paradox https://archive.vn/bS2fL

Yeah, any comparison to China needs to acknowledge that China is largely ethnically homogenous and has an authoritarian government that has relatively consistent goals top-to-bottom. India is nothing like that and I don't see it becoming like that anytime soon.

May I know how many years your grandmother was kept as a slave and abused ? Indian experienced it for 200+ years.

People (Americans dare I say ?) have no problems accepting blacks are behind whites on most development indices EVEN TODAY because of slavery and oppression, but somehow can't extend the same logic to former colonial countries like India.

Recent economic hardships of a particular class has threatened democracy and made a joke of fabled American institutions, despite high levels of education and wealth. But a country which was oppressed for centuries and is still reeling in poverty, for benefit of the Western world, now is in a position to help them with a little bit of help and you still can't extend a helping hand in good faith.

Maybe your grandmother would have been a bicycle if she had wheels, but you despite having a brain are a simpleton.

REF: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7CW7S0zxv4

Can you please stop posting flamebait to HN so we don't have to restart the rotating ban-wagon game?

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Insofar as they’re not trending toward population extinction, yes.

Oh pls!! Trolling just for the sake of trolling, you can do it on Twitter. Those imprisonments if at all happened, have a validity and supreme courts are very good to handle any issues like that.

> India is like a thousand different things heading in a thousand different directions.

The Republic of India more than 70 years old. And India is not the only democracy with a multitude of cultures.