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

[livingdead]

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.

India has same class system as british only more codified in 'caste' system form. Even here the same upper class rules year after year since hunderes of years.
I dont see that a good thing. Upper class people get better because they get the environment, food, less worries hence they take more risk and more reward. If they fail, always parents and contacts to bail them out.

They always sneer at lower class for being lazy, but they themselves get jobs due to contact. I am not saying one should be against them, but one should give fair chance to everybody.

So if in pakistan if lower class people ruling you, I would congratulate you. They are not brain deficient. lolz.

 

[NP-complete]

^^^
mentally inferior people are more likely to be morally corrupt.

 

[Fattyacids]

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

The reality of the world today shows otherwise. The vast majority of the democracies are the 3rd world countries, their govt had clearly failed to deliver to its people. US and Europe are not appropriate examples as you have pointed in the earlier post.

Check and balance would only work if the institutions are strong and free from corruption. Democracy doesn't wipe out corruption. In fact, democracy can be easily hijacked by corruption.

Election after election is just a figure of speech. I mentioned Egypt to illustrate how a democracy can go wrong. Wasn't Morsi govt democratically elected? Yet, the elected govt got thrown out of office. Transitional period or not, how successful is democracy in the middle east in general? The cultural and social characteristics are not suitable for democracy. Exactly what I meant by variables.

Power transition in Singapore, Malaysia, Japan when it was one party and China were effortless too.
Until it happens, it's premature to say if Saudi can't do it.

I had made my case in my earlier post. Nothing more to add.

 

[applesauce]

Democracy as a principle, is a point of superiority over China. Dont make a mistake on that.

That does not however mean that the way India's democracy functions is efficient. There are other democracies who work much faster and better than us. That should be emulated. This however will only improve with more and more education and/or better leaders.

The difference here is - do the ends justify the means.


India is spending a lot on infrastructure. Our infrastructure today is 10 times better than it was in the 90's.
However there are other flaws as well - the bureaucracy is a major hurdle along with populism of politicians. That will only end when people are able to call the lies of the politicians when they say it. That will only happen when the population becomes educated.

on paper, sure, its a point of "superiority" as you call it., in practice as you have noted yourself, it doesnt work so well when all the pieces arnt in place yet. and i have already said, on paper, more rights are given but in practice, many of those rights are being violated(and frankly the rights situation for the average folk is poorer than in china). But what good is "on paper" when in real life, the authoritarian country next door lives better than you(on average) in nearly every way. and i wish to note, i am not against democracy, just against how its implemented in india and other poor countries that rush(willingly or not) into it before they are ready.

and i have already pointed out that in nearly all countries there went from poor to rich, ie: japan, korea, Singapore, taiwan etc. during their period of development they were run by a single party, a dictatorship, a government that is authoritarian in nature, or the votes are severely limited to the chosen few. this last model includes the US and Britain where only the rich and educated was able to vote.

and yes india is spending more on infrastructure, that is noted and applaud, but its really not enough, one trillion over 5 years for a country so direly in need of it is still low considering the amount of work that needs to be done, i dont claim you need to spend like china, but definitely more than whats being spent now.

in addition i see you do note the importance of education. its not just one of the requirements, but really the back bone of democracy, it can only work when the voters know what their voting on and who their voting into office.

 

[Manvantaratruti]

on paper, sure, its a point of "superiority" as you call it., in practice as you have noted yourself, it doesnt work so well when all the pieces arnt in place yet. and i have already said, on paper, more rights are given but in practice, many of those rights are being violated(and frankly the rights situation for the average folk is poorer than in china). But what good is "on paper" when in real life, the authoritarian country next door lives better than you(on average) in nearly every way. and i wish to note, i am not against democracy, just against how its implemented in india and other poor countries that rush(willingly or not) into it before they are ready.

The stability and situation in China is not yet proven. It is too early to comment if the model is successful. It is yet to face any major internal struggle and its ability to emerge from such turmoil is still uknown. No one in the world will bet against such odds.

Weather people are ready for democracy or not is a choice they have to make. It is not open for academic debate nor can anyone decide for them. There is a price for freedom and every living creature is willing to pay it.

and i have already pointed out that in nearly all countries there went from poor to rich, ie: japan, korea, Singapore, taiwan etc. during their period of development they were run by a single party, a dictatorship, a government that is authoritarian in nature, or the votes are severely limited to the chosen few. this last model includes the US and Britain where only the rich and educated was able to vote.

Japan, korea, singapore and taiwan aer all countries that survived and prospered on the largess of the US as it strategy to contain Russia and China. China today too has built up its limited success based only on US support, in order to contain Russia and India.

and yes india is spending more on infrastructure, that is noted and applaud, but its really not enough, one trillion over 5 years for a country so direly in need of it is still low considering the amount of work that needs to be done, i dont claim you need to spend like china, but definitely more than whats being spent now.

The people will decide the spend. If they are not happy, they change their decision every 5 years.

in addition i see you do note the importance of education. its not just one of the requirements, but really the back bone of democracy, it can only work when the voters know what their voting on and who their voting into office.

Education is not relevant for awareness. TV news and Radio is enough along with local gossip to make the citizens aware. You have no idea the depth of the Political awareness a local villager in India has. This is your ignorance speaking. It would be better if you tried to determine the political awareness of Indians before making such a sweeping comment.

 

[applesauce]

The stability and situation in China is not yet proven. It is too early to comment if the model is successful. It is yet to face any major internal struggle and its ability to emerge from such turmoil is still uknown. No one in the world will bet against such odds.

i never said the situation in china proven or that its has reached a stable state. china is in the mist of development and since the GLF and cultural revolution the CCP has done a decent job(in fact unprecedented in human history) in terms of national development. go ahead check any of the development indexes, whether its life expectancy or GDP numbers, the CCP has certainly done better in those regards than the government in india and india didnt even go though events like the GLF or the cultural revolution.

Weather people are ready for democracy or not is a choice they have to make. It is not open for academic debate nor can anyone decide for them. There is a price for freedom and every living creature is willing to pay it.

why is it not open to academic debate? and price for freedom? your telling me that every poor family in india or africa will take the right to vote over the right to food, shelters and life?

Japan, korea, singapore and taiwan aer all countries that survived and prospered on the largess of the US as it strategy to contain Russia and China. China today too has built up its limited success based only on US support, in order to contain Russia and India.

you option is that those countries' and china's success is solely due to the support of the US?
i laugh at your assertion. sure the US had a hand into but it was hardly the sole reason for their success. and contain russia and india? even more laughable, you think the US wants to prop up china to contain india? lol this is a classic thought process that prevents development ie: "its not our fault we are behind, and those other guys who succeeded had help and we didnt *sad face"

furthermore i have already stated that the U.S and GB themselves developed with what we would call "limited democracy" today, tell me, who was proping the US or GB up during their development and who were they trying to contain?

The people will decide the spend. If they are not happy, they change their decision every 5 years.

i have already stated the problem with this, ie: uninformed/uneducated voters

Education is not relevant for awareness. TV news and Radio is enough along with local gossip to make the citizens aware. You have no idea the depth of the Political awareness a local villager in India has. This is your ignorance speaking. It would be better if you tried to determine the political awareness of Indians before making such a sweeping comment.

not relevant? again these thoughts that prevent progress. and you think tv news and radio and of all things, GOSSIP is good enough? education isnt just able being able to read, its able being able to understand. understand macroeconomic and what effect a prospective leaders's policies can have, understand diplomatic policy and its effects on all sectors, undertsand why certain painful things have to happen for the greater good. if all indians think like you then i rest my case as to why india is under preforming.

 

[anjaneyashruti]

i never said the situation in china proven or that its has reached a stable state. china is in the mist of development and since the GLF and cultural revolution the CCP has done a decent job(in fact unprecedented in human history) in terms of national development. go ahead check any of the development indexes, whether its life expectancy or GDP numbers, the CCP has certainly done better in those regards than the government in india and india didnt even go though events like the GLF or the cultural revolution.

Complete nonsense to say India did not go thorough any revolutionary changes. This ignorance pretty much sums up your entire take on world history.

India has done well on developing its cultural, on developing democracy, on developing its social structures, on developing its food security and an independent foreign policy.

China has not done well on any of these parameters except food security.

why is it not open to academic debate? and price for freedom? your telling me that every poor family in india or africa will take the right to vote over the right to food, shelters and life?

Because any debate does not change the fundamental nature of granting people choice. It is a futile exercise. India has demonstrated that every poor family has chosen freedom over food shelter and life. This is staring at you in the face, yet you are unable to reconcile with this truth. This inability to handle truth is another of chinas failure.

you option is that those countries' and china's success is solely due to the support of the US?
i laugh at your assertion. sure the US had a hand into but it was hardly the sole reason for their success. and contain russia and india? even more laughable, you think the US wants to prop up china to contain india? lol this is a classic thought process that prevents development ie: "its not our fault we are behind, and those other guys who succeeded had help and we didnt *sad face"

Yes. China's rapid rise is only due to US support. You are free to laugh and revel inyour ignorance and retarded development. I just find it sad.

furthermore i have already stated that the U.S and GB themselves developed with what we would call "limited democracy" today, tell me, who was proping the US or GB up during their development and who were they trying to contain?

That is your assertion. Evolution of democracy in the US & GB was a natural process. The advent of the industrial revolution and global conquest was independent of democracy.

i have already stated the problem with this, ie: uninformed/uneducated voters

You have stated your ignorant opinion. It carries no credibility with anyone.

not relevant? again these thoughts that prevent progress. and you think tv news and radio and of all things, GOSSIP is good enough? education isnt just able being able to read, its able being able to understand. understand macroeconomic and what effect a prospective leaders's policies can have, understand diplomatic policy and its effects on all sectors, undertsand why certain painful things have to happen for the greater good. if all indians think like you then i rest my case as to why india is under preforming.

It is hilarious to think a villager needs to know international policy and macroeconomics to vote for is local leadership.

As I said, you understand of democracy is a joke. First learn the fundamentals of democracy before engaging with anyone who lives and breaths it everyday.

 

[applesauce]

Complete nonsense to say India did not go thorough any revolutionary changes. This ignorance pretty much sums up your entire take on world history.

you call me ignorant and yet you are the one that failed to read/understand my post. no where did i say india didnt go through changes(it most certainly did), however post-independence none of the said changes are on the scale or as disruptive as the GLF or the cultural revolution. furthermore the whole talk of GLF and revolutions are merely a side point. i will say no more about it.

India has done well on developing its cultural, on developing democracy, on developing its social structures, on developing its food security and an independent foreign policy.

China has not done well on any of these parameters except food security.

again you did not read/understand at all, i clearly said development index, the for front of which is the Human development index. but even going by what you said, go ahead and feel free to give us some graphs or charts, like i said, other than democracy, india is behind in nearly every index. the fact that you even dispute this clearly shows your here for arguments sake and not because you have a point.

Because any debate does not change the fundamental nature of granting people choice. It is a futile exercise. India has demonstrated that every poor family has chosen freedom over food shelter and life. This is staring at you in the face, yet you are unable to reconcile with this truth. This inability to handle truth is another of chinas failure.

since the debate about the universe wont change it in any way i guess the scientific community should just not talk about it anymore huh? since nothing said on this forum has any effect on real life policies of governments/military i guess we should all just should pack up and leave huh? yea lets stop talking, starting with you. furthermore with regards to the so call choice, there is no alternatives for those families. not one said to them, "you can stay here have a vote on things you dont understand or move to this other place, you dont get a vote but we guarantee you food, a chance at a nice job and shelter".

and furthermore. this is again a side point.

Yes. China's rapid rise is only due to US support. You are free to laugh and revel inyour ignorance and retarded development. I just find it sad.

so tell me, who prop the US up during its development?

futhermore lets be clear on this point

you believe the US prop china up to contain india?

That is your assertion. Evolution of democracy in the US & GB was a natural process. The advent of the industrial revolution and global conquest was independent of democracy.

that is not my assertion. it is an observation. every example of a rich democracy(recently rich or otherwise) has had, during its development, one of the traits i described. the counter example, india, is fares worse in nearly every index when compared to the authoritarian country next door.

You have stated your ignorant opinion. It carries no credibility with anyone.

i have indeed stated my opinions and observations, whether they are ignorance or have credibility is up to the readers, same with your opinions

It is hilarious to think a villager needs to know international policy and macroeconomics to vote for is local leadership.

its hilarious to think people dont need to be educated before deciding their leaders.

As I said, you understand of democracy is a joke.

a joke to you perhaps.

First learn the fundamentals of democracy before engaging with anyone who lives and breaths it everyday.

again, the readers can decide for themselves whether its you or i that dont know what we are talking about

 

[anjaneyashruti]

you call me ignorant and yet you are the one that failed to read/understand my post. no where did i say india didnt go through changes(it most certainly did), however post-independence none of the said changes are on the scale or as disruptive as the GLF or the cultural revolution. furthermore the whole talk of GLF and revolutions are merely a side point. i will say no more about it.

Again the nonsense about GLF as if no other country in the world has faced similar trend Human nature and political history the world over follow the same pattern. You are like a frog in a well who thinks the well is his whole world. You need to read and understand world history before commenting about it.

again you did not read/understand at all, i clearly said development index, the for front of which is the Human development index. but even going by what you said, go ahead and feel free to give us some graphs or charts, like i said, other than democracy, india is behind in nearly every index. the fact that you even dispute this clearly shows your here for arguments sake and not because you have a point.

Again like the frog in the well, you are insisting that only your definition of development index is the right one.

It is not. India follows its own development index. Learn to look beyond the well to see that the world and its practices is much larger that what you have been taught. There are many tangibles and intangibles that democracy delivers. All of which are open source and available for the anyone who chooses to understand it.

There can be no chart or graphs to show how much more Indian culture has grown post Independence or how much freedom the average India enjoys. That does not mean it is not true. It only means that such measurement are meaningless.. Only experience matters. There may be a chart somewhere but you will have to Google it out on your own if you really wants to know.

since the debate about the universe wont change it in any way i guess the scientific community should just not talk about it anymore huh? since nothing said on this forum has any effect on real life policies of governments/military i guess we should all just should pack up and leave huh? yea lets stop talking, starting with you. furthermore with regards to the so call choice, there is no alternatives for those families. not one said to them, "you can stay here have a vote on things you dont understand or move to this other place, you dont get a vote but we guarantee you food, a chance at a nice job and shelter".

All choices are know to people. They are smarter than you give them credit for. Such naive arrogant dismissal of peoples intelligence and instincts is what keeps you ignorant. People vote on their understanding that goes beyond cheap promises. There is a history and a present which they experience and which forms a core part of their instinct.

so tell me, who prop the US up during its development?

The British Empire and Slaves from Africa.

futhermore lets be clear on this point

you believe the US prop china up to contain india?

Yes. US propped up china to contain Russia and NAM, India etc.

that is not my assertion. it is an observation. every example of a rich democracy(recently rich or otherwise) has had, during its development, one of the traits i described. the counter example, india, is fares worse in nearly every index when compared to the authoritarian country next door.

The Index that your lives revolve around are not the Index we measure our life by. Again like the frog in the well, you think only your index is the right one. You are unable even to conceive a different index which governs 1.5 Billion people choices. You need to come out of that well and truly understand other nations before you begin to understand the truth about what I have said. Other wise it would be like explaining fire to a person who has never seen Fire before.

its hilarious to think people dont need to be educated before deciding their leaders.

Oh they are educated and knowledgeable, only in ways you are unable to conceive or imagine. Like a naive know it all, you think the education camps in CCP is the repository of all knowledge and education in the world.

again, the readers can decide for themselves whether its you or i that dont know what we are talking about

This being PDF, I wont give the readers of this forum too much credit