India wants Autocracy led by Modi: Pew Survey

[Dungeness]

What is the fundamental difference between India and China?

Culture.

 

[lonelyman]

Narendra Modi govt gets approval of 85% Indians; 55% support autocracy, shows new Pew Research survey


Washington: More than four-fifths of Indian citizens trust the government, but, interestingly, the majority also support military rule and autocracy, a new survey by the Pew Research Center said on Monday.


File image of Prime Minister Narendra Modi. PTI

"In India, where the economy has grown on average by 6.9 percent since 2012, 85 percent (of people) trust their national government", Pew Research said in a report based on its survey on governance and trust among key countries.

According to the survey, 55 percent of Indians support autocracy in one way or the other. In fact, more than one-fourth (27 percent) want a "strong leader".

Nearly half of the Russians (48 percent) back governance by a strong leader, but the prospect is generally unpopular, the report said.

A global median of 26 percent say a system in which a strong leader can make decisions without "interference from parliament or the courts" would be a "good way of governing". Roughly seven in 10 (71 percent) say it would be a bad type of governance.

India is one of the three countries in the Asia Pacific where people support technocracy (a government comprising an elite of technical experts). "Asian-Pacific public's generally back rule by experts, particularly people in Vietnam (67 percent), India (65 percent) and the Philippines (62 percent)", it said.

Only Australians are notably wary, as 57 percent say it would be a bad way to govern.

According to the survey, roughly half of both Indians (53 percent) and South Africans (52 percent) say military rule would be a good thing for their countries. But in these societies, older people (those aged 50 and above) are least supportive of the idea, and they are the ones who either experienced the struggle to establish democratic rule or are the immediate descendants of those democratic pioneers, Pew said.

http://www.firstpost.com/world/nare...ood-thing-reveals-pew-survey-4150203.html/amp

Weird and funny , don't Indians love their "democracy" and bash China for autocracy?

 

[ashok321]

India is already akin to North Korea.
Not filing the GST can land an Indian A** in jail for 5 years.
Same for income tax.
Draconian laws implemented.

 

[Soumitra]

Weird and funny , don't Indians love their "democracy" and bash China for autocracy?

What India wants is a strong leader who can take decisive actions not necessarily autocracy as China

 

[paritosh]

Culture.

You chose the most ambiguous and poorly understood jargon to describe the difference.
Cultures are cultivated over time, has your culture remained the same since the civil war days?

Not stupid people. Just simply sectarian, care only for themselves. And not sincere. Here corrupt is regarded as clever, rest fools.

Classic clan mentality in a majorly unambitious, illiterate, superstitious, orthodox populace is how I'd describe our lot. We don't build anything, our national character is far removed from one that seeks perfection. We mostly love living with problems and compromise a lot. Jugaad and quick fixes is the best that we do.
Corruption is a symptom of a rotten thought process arising out of the above mentioned traits.

You sound like Zaid Hamid .

oh bhai...ye kya bol diya!

I partly agree with you that democracy for India has been really bad and a more autocratic approach may have been better for growth. However, Indian democracy after all these years is now evolved such that its in a stage where going back is not an option, and in fact, in just few more years will it can be much better. I can see the light. Also, other options don't necessarily mean success.

Dekhen I agree that over time, with the gradual spread of education and ideas that come along, we will have a better average representative national character. However, it's going to take a long time given the social forces that resist change in India.
Pluralism is a big problem to deal with before it becomes a force multiplier eventually. I believe that our leaders wanted to score quick brownie points with their gora friends and hence chose democracy over a more logical socio-political set-up. A stupid population ended-up choosing castes and religious reasons over development and common good to pick their leaders arising out of our clan mentality.
Wish we had years of potty-training before we were given the beautiful gift of democracy

 

[Dungeness]

You chose the most ambiguous and poorly understood jargon to describe the difference.
Cultures are cultivated over time, has your culture remained the same since the civil war days?

Just trying not to be offensive, that's all. I think you may have your answer already. If you are still not sure, just google a 20 year-old LA Times article titled "How China Beat India in Race for Success". Some smart folks knew the difference between China and India back then in 1997, and they predicted what we are seeing today.

Quoted from the article:

"The force of China's market economy rests on the solid foundations of social changes that occurred earlier," said economist Sen. "India cannot simply jump onto that bandwagon without paying attention to the enabling social changes--in education, health care and land reforms--that made the market function in the way it has in China."

 

[paritosh]

Just trying not to be offensive, that's all. I think you may have your answer already. If you are still not sure, just google a 20 year-old LA Times article titled "How China Beat India in Race for Success". Some smart folks knew the difference between China and India back then in 1997, and they predicted what we are seeing today.

Quoted from the article:

"The force of China's market economy rests on the solid foundations of social changes that occurred earlier," said economist Sen. "India cannot simply jump onto that bandwagon without paying attention to the enabling social changes--in education, health care and land reforms--that made the market function in the way it has in China."

I am more critical of the Indian growth story than most people here on this forum mate so let's drop the euphemisms.
Culture-wise our countries started of as old, superstitious, resistant to change, pestered with foreign influences and xenophobic to foreign ideas.
While China never had to worry about consensus to drive their populace into the realities of the 21st century, we had to struggle to find common ground for any project to move forward.
If you disagree then I will spend time and write a longer post elaborating on the similarities between the Indian and the Chinese society till the 60s before executive action propelled China into a higher quadrant.

 

[Dungeness]

I am more critical of the Indian growth story than most people here on this forum mate so let's drop the euphemisms.
Culture-wise our countries started of as old, superstitious, resistant to change, pestered with foreign influences and xenophobic to foreign ideas.
While China never had to worry about consensus to drive their populace into the realities of the 21st century, we had to struggle to find common ground for any project to move forward.
If you disagree then I will spend time and write a longer post elaborating on the similarities between the Indian and the Chinese society till the 60s before executive action propelled China into a higher quadrant.

China started out on a similar footing in late 40's, in fact India had a head-start back then, thanks to British Raj's heritage. China went through painful social and cultural revolutions and eliminated all social ills by 60's, which still plague India today. By 1960's, though China was still a dirt poor country much like India was, China was already at the threshold of a modern society, a very significant depart from India.

Many Indians fail to realize the difference of China and India today, is more of the result of China's earlier social reforms than the later market reforms.

The title of this thread has suggested/implied that the democracy has failed in India.

 

[paritosh]

Many Indians fail to realize the difference of China and India today, is more of the result of China's earlier social reforms than the later market reforms.

Couldn't agree more, a larger impact was made through social reforms followed by the economic reforms which were received better in a relatively less-corruptible society.
This requires a long term vision that sadly the Indian leaders have lacked.

 

[Farooq]

lol! baniya gandus are confused !

they want autocracy and democracy ? lol