| India is not really open; sure it's a "democracy", but it's really a de-facto feudal state, often with very little private property rights, and a bureaucracy that would put the Vogons to shame. It's not clear if contemporary India is better than contemporary China in any social/economic aspect (other than possibly allowing a free-movement of its people). Indeed considering that India's literacy rate is bettered by regimes like Myanmar and DPRK, one wonders why India is being played up, when in reality the only real comparison at this point is with other lower-middle income nations in Africa. This is not to say there is prosperity in cities which are essentially brought up to serve English-speaking nations, but to replicate this across the country[1] will likely lead to a further fall in education levels (this obsession[2] gets back to my "feudal" point). Unlike manufacturing in China, India can't ever extend the service economy (other than e-retail) to its own market. While some may romanticize Modi's plebeian origins [3], it must be inferred from his policies that he remains yet a handmaiden of the feudal powers that put him into power. I have been to (native?) universities in India, and level of ignorance/acceptance of the current situation baffles me to no end. It should be noted that, considering the stiflement of economics in India, a job in the state apparatus is seen often as the entire point of life outside the IT realm. Don't fall for all the propaganda being spewed from India for self-flattery, and from America for its "Asian pivot". The reality is much more nuanced and murkier. [1] http://www.business-standard.com/article/economy-policy/indi... [2] http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2014/11/06/the-problem-... [3] http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/22/opinion/sunday/how-english... |