1) Some Chinese say its the confucian ethos and cultural facets behind the rise of Asian countries to become developed countries.

My 2 cents — With all these thousands of years of confucian wisdom , all these very countries follow a religion of Buddhism that originated in India

2) The East asian confucian countries have become developed

My 2 cents — Developed in the sense of innovations, number of nobel prizes etc. Becoming rich by becoming totally dependant on WESTERN countries (Export led growth of East Asia) — India does not think this as becoming developed

If the debate remains on a friendly academic level, it is beneficial to everyone. But if it is based on the “I am better than you” mentality, it would only benefit those who are trying to foster ill will between the masses of the 2 great future powers.

India and China had never had any problems with each other in the past 5000 years other than a relatively small conflict almost 50 years ago. So why start fostering enormosity between our peoples today.

Our priorities should be on how to learn from each other’s experiences and benefit ourselves in the process, with a focus firmly on bringing more people out of poverty.

As Deng XiaoPing once said: “it doesn’t matter if it’s a black cat or a white cat, if it catches mice, it is a good cat”

May the friendship between India and China last forever!

Chinese for all practical purposes are Han Chinese one people one language one race who have effectively swamped the few areas this is not so such as Tibet,Xingiang etc(I am not judging anyone nor am i a human rights campaigner)

India on the other had is a hugely diversed country of literally thousands of different cultures,communities,languages etc with not a single group dominant over the other.

Therefore the only practical solution is a democracy for all its imperfections.

And let us not forget the enormous suffering the chinese have had to undergo under one party rule remember the ‘cultural revolution’,'great leap forward’,'thousand flowers movement’ etc calamities in which tens of millions chinese needlessly perished.India for all its bumbling has never encontered such problems.

It is only in the past 20 or so years out of 60 years of independence that China has outshone India economically,in the long run which system proves more enduring and successful only time will tell.

The social inequities will then likely to be a source of great instability.
That is, though India will eventually become a developed country in the economic sense, in social terms, it will continue to be medieval what with untouchability, caste system and so on.

Interesting article.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2393/is_2_167/ai_n8691667/pg_1

Cheers,
~V

It is not advantageous for Chinese leader to adopt democracy at the expense of speed of growth. Besides, many Africian ,Muslim and Latin American leaders like to see the superiority of the western ideals and establishment challenged and they like to watch the show China has put out so far. For the same reason, China will not let Hong Kong have democracy otherwise people in China will want to be like Hong Kong. Independence of Taiwan is also out of the question or else it will embolden expansionism of the Japanese-US imperial army. China should eventually allow some form of civilian participation in politics without compromise of the efficient one-party system.
It will be a taboo for Chinese leader to learn to be like India and end up creating just the largest inefficiency. The voter turnout rate is only 50% in
America, so people should not impose their view on China for something that only half of their people engage in.

Centralization is good for China and actually India because the nature of capitalism gives rise to a lot of redundancy and wastfulness. This can be detrimental to the environment. Furthermore, most jobs in the rest of the world will be wiped out if everything is too efficient and too good in these 2 countries. The whole world is at stake and we must think beyond capitalism to become sustainable species.

From the way I see things are heading, the best you will end up seeing in China is for it to evolve politically into a form of “Lobbyable Dictatorship”. Citizens are allowed to form lobbying groups but not parties. Chinese dictatorship is always the driver taking the wheel and controlling the car. You the passengers can lobby the driver to take you to where you want to go but you must say it nicely. After all, how often do you change driver just because you want to change direction.

Someone argue that creativity doesnt thrive under dictatorship, I beg to differ after all China invented paper, gunpowder, compass. These were inventions motivated by the need to win war and maintain survival.
The same is true for things like Internet, GPS navigation and teflon (used in parts of atomic bomb)
China is big on space technology and nano for similar mentality. You dont need a lot of PHD to make scientific breakthrough. It only took one Einstein to figure out E=MC2 and one Newton to figure out F=MA.
PHD is merely there for process engineering and reverse engineering just like the Japanese did to transistor radio and cars in the 70′s and 90′s. One genius such as Newton makes something Possible. Then PHD turns this possibility into something Practical. Entrepreneur takes what is Practical then add Performance and Perfection to it. This is the 4P’s of product development. China only needs PHD and entrepreneur to keep the economic engine running. I do however admit some products from China suffers from “planned obsolescence on steroid”

As for freedom, some people need to define freedom more specifically. China will probably have more freedom in the future when it comes to material condition. How many countries can you count that have just about every conceivable form of machineries? China can make things from pins to plane, bolts to biotech, nuts to nanotech, chopsticks to chopper. These are material things directly involved in improving material condition and standard of living. Many countries including USA have to import them but China owns the machines that make them. Marxists only think in term of “materiality” not spiritually. Material things make things happen. When you have material things that make things happen, it is defined as freedom in material term.

In today’s scenario unemployment is not an issue as practically unemployment percentage is very less in India. Thanks to the booming IT industry and the manufacturing sector, there is now excess demand for labour. Demand for both skilled and unskilled labour has gone up and so have the wages. On paper we might show that unemployment is 10% or higher but actually the rate is far less as many firms hire labour without actually showing them, this is done to avoid paying any pension fund and other allowances.

Again the percapita income is very high because much of the trading is done in the parallel economy in order to avoid taxes. It is estimated that the size of the parallel economy would be atleast 7 times the actual economy. Unlike India, Chinese parallel economy is not over 30% of its actual economy because of heavy punishment imposed by the government on the tax evaders.

The reason why India is miles behind China is because of democracy ie giving power to the people. Any reforms imposed by the government, even if they are good for the country are subjected to protests and as a result are either taken back or postponed.

Another reason is favouritism of minorities. We would find the most ignorant and illitrate person who by no means can contribute to the development of the country sitting in the parliament or being a chief minister just because he belongs to a lower caste or a minority class.

Too many political parties, a hell lot of corruption and choosing the worst to be the leader would definately hamper development and if this goes on we might take another 200 to 300 years to become developed.

China is definately going to take the lead in the long run since it has got good infrastructure, increasing investment and promise of the future.