On what parameters? Both have hundreds of languages, ethnic groups and religions. Both are huge and somewhat federated.
OP was saying that democracy doesn't stand a chance in highly populated countries. According to the Democracy Index [1], it's working better in India than in 15 European countries.
I wasn't saying anything really, just trying to get my head around the huge difference between numbers in population. Living in the Western world I feel all that matters is the US, and UK, and how much the US dominates and polices global politics.
Yet China and India's population are so astoundingly out of proportion with the rest of the world, I am surprised it isn't them that we hear more of. I haven't even place India into my 'understanding the world' mental picture yet.
My main point is about moving a highly populated country TO a democracy. I look at the American civil war and how many lives were lost during that, and then wonder about the implications of allowing opposing ideas to rise. My initial reaction to the 'communist' regime in China is that it's wrong. But I then look at how large the population is and how well the government is working, and wonder if it's any worse or better than America's capitalist version of democracy.
What happens when China or India decide that they need to police the world in what is an appropriate way to run a country?