China's Third Plenum and India's 'Dictator Envy'

[Chinese-Dragon]

the material well being is already added by virtue of the fact that we are considering only economic prosperity and ignoring freedom as you asked.
The only thing I want to add is the probability of things getting bad, as democracy has this huge practical advantage (forgetting freedom, equality etc which are dear to me too) of being very good at smooth transition of power.
where as autocracy gives you a false sense of stability equivalent to living on a dormant volcano.

I have no issue comparing India with china, but then that will be exactly that, a comparison of India and china. Not a comparison of democracy vs autocracy.

So why does European Sonia have more power in India than any single individual in China has over China?

Even our highest leaders like Xi Jinping and Hu Jintao, they have little power by themselves. They need a consensus from the rest of the politburo members before they can do anything.

When Sonia says something, everyone around her jumps in an eagerness to be the first to complete what she asks.

That's not even counting the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty that has ruled India for most of its lifetime. Just Sonia herself.

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

So why does European Sonia have more power in India than any single individual in China has over China?

Even our highest leaders like Xi Jinping and Hu Jintao, they have little power by themselves. They need a consensus from the rest of the politburo members before they can do anything.

When Sonia says something, everyone around her jumps in an eagerness to be the first to complete what she asks.

That's not even counting the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty that has ruled India for most of its lifetime. Just Sonia herself.

Why bring the ethnic origins of person over citizen ship?

So if children or grandchildren of Chinese comfort women from WW2 become successful Chinese leaders tomorrow. Should their origins matter or the fact that individual is Chinese citizen?

 

[Fattyacids]

LOL. You are the one who said Economist and academic journals compare India and China. Not me. I just gave you the probably reason.

However since neither are you not qualified to speak on behalf of economist or academic journals, your Fact is only an assumption. Is this chinese high IQ ?

I'm merely stating the position of the Economist and academic journals , I never attempted to speak on their behalf or use lame excuse that I cannot speak on their behalf. Fact is a fact. Go back and read my post. My IQ is good.

You are not qualified to speak on behalf of India either
Indian constitution borrows from the US and UK constitution and our democratic set up borrows from the US, UK model too. Eg. Bicameralism, President as India's head etc.. Our Judicial system borrows from the UK too. However US judicial matters continuous to be pertinent to us.
Culturally Hollywood and Bollywood immediately come to mind. So does our common language english and the books we read. Fact 2
Your ignorance about the cultural similarity is also evident. This is also a FACT.

Common knowledge doesn't require any qualification. All one needs is a good intellect.

Examples of good intellect?

1) Knowing the fact that once a law is made, there is little room for change. As such, there is only so many times one can compare judicial system.

2) Knowing the fact that judicial system cannot be routinely compared a consistent basis like economic data which is compiled on a quarterly basis globally.

Examples of poor intellect?
Making illogical statement such as:
"Culturally Hollywood and Bollywood immediately come to mind"

World Bank is a "Bank" They are nobody to set parameters for measurement except for determining how much Loan to give and how to recover that loan.

You assumption that they set any kind of social indicator is just a myth. Fact 3

No nation in Africa ever had stable democracy. Those that had, has done well. Fact 4.

Another example of poor intellect. Failure to know the proper definition before making a statement. Data | The World Bank

The data speaks for itself. facts are facts

Whatever works for you too boy. Whatever.

Parroting other's line is also an indication of poor intellect.

 

[livingdead]

So why does European Sonia have more power in India than any single individual in China has over China?

Even our highest leaders like Xi Jinping and Hu Jintao, they have little power by themselves. They need a consensus from the rest of the politburo members before they can do anything.

When Sonia says something, everyone around her jumps in an eagerness to be the first to complete what she asks.

That's not even counting the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty that has ruled India for most of its lifetime. Just Sonia herself.

sorry is that your general point against democracy as such or democracy as in use in India currently?
I find it completely random, so wont respond to it, waiting for @Fattyacids to reply in a logical way as he has done earlier.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

sorry is that your general point against democracy as such or democracy as in use in India currently?
I find it completely random, so wont respond to it, waiting for @Fattyacids to reply in a logical way as he has done earlier.

Clearly not a point against democracy in general, which I consider to be a good system.

But why has it led to family dynasty rule in India? (Only otherwise seen in countries like North Korea, where rule passes from parent to child).

Where did India go wrong?

 

[livingdead]

Clearly not a point against democracy in general, which I consider to be a good system.

But why has it led to family dynasty rule in India? (Only otherwise seen in countries like North Korea, where rule passes from parent to child).

Where did India go wrong?

thanks for asking me such important question am pretty sure this is a genuine curiosity to understand.
So I will answer although its not exactly to the topic.

At the heart of it, is south asian family system. For us, family is everything. We decide collectively in family even personal things like marriage.
More often than not, you are identified by your parent or grandparent. Even when I travel to my village, people say 'look who has come, xyz's son'. And I am old enough to have my own identity.

Because you are known by your parent/grandparent, people instictively like or dislike you if they did to your parents. In a democracy voter has all sorts of bias but in south asia this is another bias.

If my dad was a leader and people liked him, they will like me by default, unless I am an as*.

This is the reason of dynastic politics in India (and pakistan too, our cultures are a bit similar I think, risking ire of pakistani posters). Sonia is not the only one, there are at least two dozen family big and small who benefit from goodwill towards their parents and grandparents.

BTW sonia did not become defacto leader on day 1. When her husband died (quite popular leader) she was not in politics and congress got another leader to lead the country.
Unfortunately for them, they panicked after electoral reverses, and repeated tried and tested dynasty formula and hit won.
I am not saying they won because of sonia, but for congress, there is a clear before and after state. Before sonia, BJP winning, sonia came and reversed the trend.

Personally I like her, but then I have travelled which makes me more open and less wary of foreigners. Not sure about rest of Indians, some hate her some like her.
She still needs to be voted to power, if congress loses power she will be in opposition. (a distinct possibility in 2014)

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

So, in this case, why hasn't democracy led to the correct checks and balances, instead leading to most political power resting in the hands of one person?

And how can it be fixed?

Family is also a very important thing in China, and nepotism is one of the most serious issues.

 

[Fattyacids]

the material well being is already added by virtue of the fact that we are considering only economic prosperity and ignoring freedom as you asked.
The only thing I want to add is the probability of things getting bad, as democracy has this huge practical advantage (forgetting freedom, equality etc which are dear to me too) of being very good at smooth transition of power.
where as autocracy gives you a false sense of stability equivalent to living on a dormant volcano.

I have no issue comparing India with china, but then that will be exactly that, a comparison of India and china. Not a comparison of democracy vs autocracy.

Granted on the material well being part. But the pain of hunger, the rights to basic amenities surely doesn't come under economic prosperity.

Almost all successful autocratic country is equally good when comes to power transition.
The only practical advantage of democracy is to prevent the concentration of power. But if corruption is rampant, sharing the spoils among many politicians is no better than one man keeping it all to himself.

As long as autocracy delivers results, stability comes naturally. Problem arise when it doesn't. Equally, if a democracy fails to deliver time after time, election after election, you too can have a volcano eruption. Egypt.

China and India are apt for comparison because of their size and population. And both countries started developing at a roughly the same time with similar economy size. But in terms of cultural and social characteristics, both are quite different.

 

[livingdead]

Granted on the material well being part. But the pain of hunger, the rights to basic amenities surely doesn't come under economic prosperity.

Almost all successful autocratic country is equally good when comes to power transition.
The only practical advantage of democracy is to prevent the concentration of power. But if corruption is rampant, sharing the spoils among many politicians is no better than one man keeping it all to himself.

As long as autocracy delivers results, stability comes naturally. Problem arise when it doesn't. Equally, if a democracy fails to deliver time after time, election after election, you too can have a volcano eruption. Egypt.

China and India are apt for comparison because of their size and population. And both countries started developing at a roughly the same time with similar economy size. But in terms of cultural and social characteristics, both are quite different.

Agreed, we are ignoring only human emotions related to freedom and equality and we will include the human emotions related to basic necessities and other material well being.
Its like the story of dog and wolf in which wolf says I am free, but dog says so what, I get food to eat but dont mind being chained, coz I dont want to die of hunger.

Lets say we both are on dogs side. Am pretty sure even with that, majority of democracies will win, because autocrats have screwed up their own country in a way no democracy can. Simply because nobody to check them.

egypt is competely wrong example here, it was hardly a democracy, the autocrats made a farcial election and waited for opportune moment to take back power. Its not like people waited for few elections and got annoyed.
There was no election after election. Just one election. All the rest that happened before had more than 90 % majority for same guy or party. We know how it worked.

The comparison I made was with a dormant volcano. As long as the guy ruling has hold on power, things seems to work. What if the guy gets ill? What if there are more than 1 contender to the throne when the guy about to die.
There is a period of uncertainty when such transition happens.

Power transition is effortless in democracy, there is no widespeard panic if one party hands over power to other. But who will be the next king of saudi arabia. That uncertainty can plunge the whole region into darkness unless managed properly.

Summing up all this rambling here are the points where I think democracy wins.
1. smooth transition of power
2. less ability to go wrong as everybody is kept in check

negatives:
1. corruption of many opposed to corruption of few (is that bad?)
2. slow rate of improvement in material wealth

 

[NP-complete]

India will keep progressing steadily because it is run by people who are supposed to run it. i.e their traditional upper classes.
anyone can come and study indian(pakistani+indian+bengali) people and realize that the traditional lower classes here are brain deficient (which is not surprising offcourse). in pakistan due to multiple reasons this inferior gene (in terms of mental work) has taken over the country. it has already resulted in its reduction (from third biggest country in asia to "some country"). and these "lower" administrators of this country are currently leading it to its doom.
india is the opposite. they have regard for noble blood which is doing them good. their sulgishness is maily due to the fact that it's thought is not "europeanised" like china. they dont follow the modren idea of (as we call in urdu) "parvaz" (flight). but anyhow india is bound to be 5th best nation in the world in 50 years time after usa,china, EU and russia.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Agreed, we are ignoring only human emotions related to freedom and equality and we will include the human emotions related to basic necessities and other material well being.
Its like the story of dog and wolf in which wolf says I am free, but dog says so what, I get food to eat but dont mind being chained, coz I dont want to die of hunger.

Lets say we both are on dogs side. Am pretty sure even with that, majority of democracies will win, because autocrats have screwed up their own country in a way no democracy can. Simply because nobody to check them.

egypt is competely wrong example here, it was hardly a democracy, the autocrats made a farcial election and waited for opportune moment to take back power. Its not like people waited for few elections and got annoyed.
There was no election after election. Just one election. All the rest that happened before had more than 90 % majority for same guy or party. We know how it worked.

The comparison I made was with a dormant volcano. As long as the guy ruling has hold on power, things seems to work. What if the guy gets ill? What if there are more than 1 contender to the throne when the guy about to die.
There is a period of uncertainty when such transition happens.

Power transition is effortless in democracy, there is no widespeard panic if one party hands over power to other. But who will be the next king of saudi arabia. That uncertainty can plunge the whole region into darkness unless managed by bigger power.

The thing about autocratic systems like China, is that 99% of people are "free" to all extents and purposes.

If you find a random person in China and a random person in India, neither of them will be under "chains" in any real way, even if we find one rural Chinese and one Dalit Indian. If they are just regular people living regular lives, they won't notice anything at all.

For the average person in China, the only real time they will run into problems with the government is if they live in an urban area and want to have more than one child (though the one-child policy has been gotten rid of already).

Sure, if you are the less than 1% who get into trouble because you are causing too much trouble (whether that is writing/liking posts about communal things on facebook in India, or trying to start a movement to overthrow the government in China) then it will suck for you. But for the vast majority of people, it's the development that counts. That's my opinion anyway.

 

[anjaneyashruti]

I'm merely stating the position of the Economist and academic journals , I never attempted to speak on their behalf or use lame excuse that I cannot speak on their behalf. Fact is a fact. Go back and read my post. My IQ is good.

You are claiming the position of Economist and academic journals. You are in no position to claim anything so uni dimensional.

Common knowledge doesn't require any qualification. All one needs is a good intellect.

Examples of good intellect?

1) Knowing the fact that once a law is made, there is little room for change. As such, there is only so many times one can compare judicial system.

What do you think law makers in US congress and Indian parliament do ?

2) Knowing the fact that judicial system cannot be routinely compared a consistent basis like economic data which is compiled on a quarterly basis globally.

LOL. What has "routinely comparing data compiled on a quarterly basis" got to do with anything ? Who says comparison must be only done by those parameters ? Some intellect !!

Examples of poor intellect?
Making illogical statement such as:
"Culturally Hollywood and Bollywood immediately come to mind"

How is that illogical ? Music, Dance forms, story, play-write, drama etc. are fundamental expression of one's culture. Hollywood in the US and Bollywood in India does exactly that. And both draws inspiration from each other. Clearly you have no knowledge on either Hollywood or Bollywood.

Another example of poor intellect. Failure to know the proper definition before making a statement. Data | The World Bank

The data speaks for itself. facts are facts

I said 'world bank' is no authority to set standards for social and economic indicators. Failure to understand english is also example of poor intellect.

Parroting other's line is also an indication of poor intellect.

It is called mocking the others intellect. Look it up.

You are busy trying to prove you have 'good intellect'. I think you should leave that to the readers. Now if you have any other relevant points, make it. Or call it a day.

 

[Fattyacids]

You are claiming the position of Economist and academic journals. You are in no position to claim anything so uni dimensional.

I was stating the position of the Economist and academic journals.
Stating and claiming doesn't carry the same meaning. Go back and read my post. Use a dictionary.

What do you think law makers in US congress and Indian parliament do ?

Invalid. Try harder

LOL. What has "routinely comparing data compiled on a quarterly basis" got to do with anything ? Who says comparison must be only done by those parameters ? Some intellect !!

Repetitive failure to grasp a comment in its entirely could be a sign of retardation.

How is that illogical ? Music, Dance forms, story, play-write, drama etc. are fundamental expression of one's culture. Hollywood in the US and Bollywood in India does exactly that. And both draws inspiration from each other. Clearly you have no knowledge on either Hollywood or Bollywood.

You have just proven that me right. The sign is real.
Hollywood doesn't draw inspiration from you. Bollywood is the biggest plagiarism of Hollywood. Even with plagiarism, there exists no cultural similarity. Go take your medication.

I said 'world bank' is no authority to set standards for social and economic indicators. Failure to understand english is also example of poor intellect.

World Bank set the benchmark for loans and funding globally, if they are no authority to set a standard for measurement, nobody else does. One only needs to take a few courses in economics to find that out. Poor education often lead to poor intellect.

It is called mocking the others intellect. Look it up.
You are busy trying to prove you have 'good intellect'. I think you should leave that to the readers. Now if you have any other relevant points, make it. Or call it a day.

Copying is not mocking, use a dictionary if you have. Be sure, to find out what is a "parrot"

In two posts, I've illustrated what is bad intellect and also diagnosed mental incapacitation. It's good idea to let the readers decipher what is "Culturally Hollywood and Bollywood immediately come to mind."

 

[anjaneyashruti]

@Fattyacids your entire post is junk. There is nothing worth responding to. You are busy trying to prove you are not as dumb people take you to be. Quite frankly, no one cares.

if you have anything more to say on democracy, say it or stop wasting my time.

 

[Fattyacids]

@Fattyacids your entire post is junk. There is nothing worth responding to. You are busy trying to prove you are not as dumb people take you to be. Quite frankly, no one cares.

if you have anything more to say on democracy, say it or stop wasting my time.

Don't get personal, let the readers decipher and decide for themselves:

"Culturally Hollywood and Bollywood immediately come to mind."

"World bank' is no authority to set standards for social and economic indicators"