Hafizzz
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2010
- Messages
- 5,041
- Reaction score
- 0
India Journal: Can Egypt Happen in India?
India Journal: Can Egypt Happen in India? - India Real Time - WSJ
Which country do you think this is? And does it look like a basket case to you?
A growth rate of 7% for three consecutive years prior to the global financial crisis.
A 6% growth rate projected for the next fiscal year.
Unemployment below 10%.
A Gini coefficient (a measure of inequality of income distribution varying between 0 for perfect equality and 1 for perfect inequality) around 0.3, lower than the United States at 0.45.
The answer may surprise you: Egypt.
Other than the growth rate, which is slightly lower than India and China, the rest of the macroeconomic statistics are as good or better and pretty impressive. This should debunk the myth that the revolution in the making in Egypt was caused by economic stagnation. Nor does it confirm another myth, that revolutions only overtake repressive regimes. There are non-democratic regimes that enjoy political stability, including many in Africa, and there are democracies which succumb to popular social and political upheaval and military coups the history of Latin America being replete with examples.
The story coming out of Egypt seems to be a combination of highly unequal development in the context of a repressive regime which falls into an uncomfortable middle ground between the very rapid growth in India and China on the one hand and utter stagnation in places like North Korea and Zimbabwe.
When the common folk see a few well-connected rich people enriching themselves further with no prospect of an improvement in their lives, it fuels resentment and anger. Anthony Shadid in the New York Times puts it trenchantly: In a contest of image, perception and power, the rebellion pits those disenfranchised by Mr. Mubaraks government against a still formidable array built around the military and security apparatus and a fabulously wealthy clique enriched by connections with the governing party.
Closer to home, India and China, have been phenomenally successful economically but in diametrically opposed political systems. Both feature a pattern of development that is uneven and has created large inequalities of wealth and income. Indeed, the Gini coefficient in India is approximately 0.3-0.35 and Chinas is 0.4, higher than Egypts, implying that both countries are more unequal than Egypt. On the other hand, theyre both growing more rapidly, India around 8% to 9% and China around 9% to 10%.
Judging purely by the inequality statistics, in fact, India and China look alarmingly similar to Egypt, and, in both countries, some of the well-connected do indeed enrich themselves merely because of those connections rather than because theyre brighter or more productive. The recent scams in India should have convinced any doubters.
Given that the grievances of the common man are similar throughout the developing world, jobs, wages and the cost of living, some have mused whether Tahrir Square may inspire Tiananmen Square Round Two. Could massive public protests sweep India? Are India and China ripe for their own revolutions?
I dont think so.
A superficially similar macroeconomic picture may mask fundamental structural differences. There is a glue that binds the people of India and China to their respective political economies that was evidently absent in Egypt. What explains this?
Unlike Egypt, in India and China, its true that the rich are getting richer, but so too are many of the poor and middle class. Both countries have pulled hundreds of millions of people out of poverty and onto the first rung of the ladder of development. This is perhaps one reason why, in both countries, one does not typically see a widespread resentment of the rich and super-rich. Rather, the existence of wealth and the possibility of some opportunity for advancement fuel hope and aspiration instead, which remain intact, it seems, despite roadblocks to opportunity such as cronyism and poor provision of public goods such as health and education.
Its the combination of some opportunity, aspiration, and the possibility of upward mobility that is the glue binding the poor in India and China into their respective national projects. That is why democracy is, in my judgment, a red herring in debates about political stability in China versus India. Both systems have figured out how to share the wealth and pull enough people along as their economies grow to maintain their political legitimacy. As long as this remains true, were not going to see Egypt-style protests on the streets of India or China.
The crux is that hope and aspiration are based on economic growth that is sufficiently inclusive, whether in a democracy like India or an authoritarian state like China. As Shashi Tharoor recently argued, reflecting on events in Egypt, as long as authoritarianism can deliver economic benefits, most people in most developing countries will put aside their natural desire for democratic self-expression and concentrate on making a good life for themselves and their families instead. It is when an authoritarian state fails to deliver on these basic necessities that the people finally pour into the streets. While Mr. Tharoor, a Member of Parliament, would find it impolitic to say so explicitly, his observation implies the follow-up question: Do we over-emphasize the importance of democracy in India as a guarantor of social cohesion and political stability?
It will happen in Kashmir....then spread to Khalistan and Northeast India.
funny thread
