larissa said:
I do not think any amount of economic theorizing is going to help India. India needs nothing short of a revolution, not in a communist sense but in the sense of what re-volution really means, a revolvere or going back to origins. India never had its revolution, after the British left, the institutions never changed. In short, Hindus (by which I mean all those others belonging to native religions as well) have not really been in control for the last 800 years, and the sham secular government does not count as representing Indian culture. From being a manageable country of about 350 million at the time of independence, India has become an utter hell hole in the last sixty years. I do not see much coming out of India’s much vaunted democracy in the last sixty years except more misery and a fourfould increase in population which could have been kept at the rate at the time of independence if the government really wanted to. This increase alne will permanently cripple India and nothing is even being done to address this issue–its not the number of people that counts, but the quality of people.
As for democracy who, ever heard of the same family being party leaders? In the U.S. Kennedy’s daughter had a hard time even running for Governor.
What can India boast of since independence? Bpllywood and cricket? What does it create that others seek to emulate, which is the mark of a creative, vibrant society? What has it done to improve the life of its people? Where are its top notch universities competing with that of other countries? Not a single Indian universtiy ranks among the top in the world. What technology do India’s factories produce that are the envy of others? Nothing. Somehow I think India has retrogressed not progressed, and retrogressed almost to the point of no return with an unmanageable population that gets only larger. I remember my mother going to Benares after forty years to the university where she studied. She was shocked at the increase in the amount of people, almost ready to run you over…
There has to be someone strong to get hold of power–someone who can establish discipline, honor and dignity again–this requires a leader of steel –I do not see this happening amidst a passive population. Moreover, fake democracy has so corrupted Indians, that there is no sense of command and order, so that even if a great capable leader is somehow in politics, he will find it impossible to lead people who are guided only by self-interest. Not only is a good leader required, but also people who are capable of being lead, because without the support of such people a good leader is also useless. And for a peoples to be lead also requires discipline on part of the people. This is lacking.
The problem of India is deep, it is rotting institutionally, and the rot is very deep. Economics is going to change things only at a cosmetic level, India needs a fundamental overhaul, nothing short of a revolution. But India being the way it is, the chances of this happening is slim.
Perhaps the bad state of affairs will get to a breaking point that people are forced to wake up, just as the inept government was forced to initiate some reforms when India went almost bankrupt. India seems to only get active only in response to crisis anyway, as currently it just exists, without national strategy or vision, it is just limping along.
Few malls are opened in middle class areas, and people get to shop in them, some more middle class get jobs in the tech industry and in business, and it is thought India is progressing!
I would say a fundamental change in leadership is needed.
I do not think any amount of economic theorizing is going to help India. India needs nothing short of a revolution, not in a communist sense but in the sense of what re-volution really means, a revolvere or going back to origins. India never had its revolution, after the British left, the institutions never changed. In short, Hindus (by which I mean all those others belonging to native religions as well) have not really been in control for the last 800 years, and the sham secular government does not count as representing Indian culture. From being a manageable country of about 350 million at the time of independence, India has become an utter hell hole in the last sixty years. I do not see much coming out of India’s much vaunted democracy in the last sixty years except more misery and a fourfould increase in population which could have been kept at the rate at the time of independence if the government really wanted to. This increase alne will permanently cripple India and nothing is even being done to address this issue–its not the number of people that counts, but the quality of people.
As for democracy who, ever heard of the same family being party leaders? In the U.S. Kennedy’s daughter had a hard time even running for Governor.
What can India boast of since independence? Bpllywood and cricket? What does it create that others seek to emulate, which is the mark of a creative, vibrant society? What has it done to improve the life of its people? Where are its top notch universities competing with that of other countries? Not a single Indian universtiy ranks among the top in the world. What technology do India’s factories produce that are the envy of others? Nothing. Somehow I think India has retrogressed not progressed, and retrogressed almost to the point of no return with an unmanageable population that gets only larger. I remember my mother going to Benares after forty years to the university where she studied. She was shocked at the increase in the amount of people, almost ready to run you over…
There has to be someone strong to get hold of power–someone who can establish discipline, honor and dignity again–this requires a leader of steel –I do not see this happening amidst a passive population. Moreover, fake democracy has so corrupted Indians, that there is no sense of command and order, so that even if a great capable leader is somehow in politics, he will find it impossible to lead people who are guided only by self-interest. Not only is a good leader required, but also people who are capable of being lead, because without the support of such people a good leader is also useless. And for a peoples to be lead also requires discipline on part of the people. This is lacking.
The problem of India is deep, it is rotting institutionally, and the rot is very deep. Economics is going to change things only at a cosmetic level, India needs a fundamental overhaul, nothing short of a revolution. But India being the way it is, the chances of this happening is slim.
Perhaps the bad state of affairs will get to a breaking point that people are forced to wake up, just as the inept government was forced to initiate some reforms when India went almost bankrupt. India seems to only get active only in response to crisis anyway, as currently it just exists, without national strategy or vision, it is just limping along.
Few malls are opened in middle class areas, and people get to shop in them, some more middle class get jobs in the tech industry and in business, and it is thought India is progressing!
I would say a fundamental change in leadership is needed.
No comments:
Post a Comment