Is China 70 years ahead of India? A visit to Mao's home province city, Changsha

[letsrock]

My signature say it all. India was created by the British. The current India people and leadership has more loyalties to their caste and state vs the country of India.

Exactly. They are loyal to their caste because its only their caste that accepts them and loyal to state because states are based on language - and most people throughout world group themselves under language. There is some hope to build a nation out of their states but india itself looks pretty hopeless at this point.

 

[ST1976]

The research report indicated that the Indian economy is 16.5 years behind that of China on broad business and economic parameters. The report indicates that India is behind China by 21 years when it comes to patents. 20 years in FDI, 19 years in Forex Reserves, and 17 years in exports.

Economic growth is well on track

According to the recent release of data from the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (MOSPI), the economy grew at 7.8 percent during Q1 of FY24, a notch lower than the RBI estimate of 8...

timesofindia.indiatimes.com

.
=> https://www.business-standard.com/i...ion-breaking-news-updates-123090400116_1.html

 

[kankan326]

India is not China we have 2000 cultural minorities. There is no monotheism or 1 dominant religion/ideology possible here. Some southern states in India are communist ffs. India is a big mash of different cultural identities.
If India wanted quick growth, western investments it would've joined western camp directly post independence, we might've gotten a mini marshal plan but our government preffered to be independent and non aligned than being an secondary American ally.

To be honest, if India separates into dozens of small states, it would be better for the people living in the subcontinent. There are too many internal frictions in India. It's a typical 1+1<2. I said that not because I'm Chinese.

 

[Jamie Brooks]

Ahhh Changsha… the jewel of hunan. Will go visit again next month hopefully

 

[Sam6536]

To be honest, if India separates into dozens of small states, it would be better for the people living in the subcontinent. There are too many internal frictions in India. It's a typical 1+1<2. I said that not because I'm Chinese.

Not necessarily, Myanmar is a small country and its still going to shit. Apart from Kashmir almost all Indian states priorly princely states joined India by popular vote. Together India is strong divided it's weak Indians understand that, that's why nationalism is so strong here. Hindu, Muslims, Sikhs, Parsis, Christians and many other communities live here. The sentinelese tribe on Andaman and Nicobar islands has possibly got to be the last untouched human tribe, they are protected under Indian law, no outside contact is allowed.
India is an ancient civilisation like China, it has changed a lot of rulers and ideologies but the culture and traditions still remains. Even some of the Muslim rulers like akbar realised this and promoted religious harmony.
North India is a synthesis of hindu and Muslim culture be it architecture, food etc. Chicken Tikka, Chinese influences hakka food it's all there in India.
South has it's own unique culture due to the southern kingdoms being independent in most of their histories from foreign rule. In west you have the marathas and their culture. Dutch, French, English, Mughal, Hindu influences all can be found in India.

 

[_killuminati_]

Japan and South Korea never got economic help like the mini-Marshall plan from US, they pretty much developed their economy by themselves.

Japan and SK were also authoritarian during their most important development phases, and moved into democracy much later after developing. Whereas India adopted democracy while it was still largely undeveloped; 70 years later, it is still largely undeveloped but hey.. atleast it got democracy - that's gotta be worth something.

 

[8888888888888]

India was richer when it was in smaller states, when the British took over they allow some of the states to be independent from India. India never stayed united for long until 1948.

 

[Hellfire2006]

in real terms it is 16-18 years. economically and socially

My signature say it all. India was created by the British. The current India people and leadership has more loyalties to their caste and state vs the country of India.

with this kind of myopic attitude, china will only underestimate india and find out for itself, just like russia underestimated ukraine.

India was richer when it was in smaller states, when the British took over they allow some of the states to be independent from India. India never stayed united for long until 1948.

mauryan empire kept india united for 500 years, guptas 300 years and lastly the marathas in the 18th century

 

[Hellfire2006]

Japan and SK were also authoritarian during their most important development phases, and moved into democracy much later after developing. Whereas India adopted democracy while it was still largely undeveloped; 70 years later, it is still largely undeveloped but hey.. atleast it got democracy - that's gotta be worth something.

india is reversing that under modi.

 

[StraightEdge]

That's like comparing against Patna, Visakhapatnam (Vizag) in India.

 

[faithfulguy]

in real terms it is 16-18 years. economically and socially


with this kind of myopic attitude, china will only underestimate india and find out for itself, just like russia underestimated

My views are based on historical facts. Europe, Arabia peninsula and India subcontinent are geographical expression until modern time. There were empires in Europe such as Roman Empire but they don’t represent the whole Europe. Similarly, these ancient empires in Indian subcontinent do not regard itself as an Indian empire. But as an empire in the Indian subcontinent. Which make the term India a geopolitical expression.

I’m not from China and never lived there. I don’t believe most Chinese notice India.

 

[faithfulguy]

India was richer when it was in smaller states, when the British took over they allow some of the states to be independent from India. India never stayed united for long until 1948.

Actually, India never existed until British created them. The empires that existed in Indian subcontinent never regard itself as rulers of an existing country called India. As the India core never existed. It’s just a piece of territory in India subcontinent, ie, Bharat, to rule over.

This is why there were empires in the history of Indian subcontinent’s past. But never dynasties as there is no real continuity between one empire to another in political sense.

 

[Archie]

You guys should google Tofu Dreg Construction

That should open your eyes on the quality of Chinese construction

All that infrastructure that was built over last 20 yrs in china, has already started showing cracks and wont last the end of this decade

 

[beijingwalker]

You guys should google Tofu Dreg Construction

That should open your eyes on the quality of Chinese construction

All that infrastructure that was built over last 20 yrs in china, has already started showing cracks and wont last the end of this decade

Really, like subways and high speed railways? did you ever visit China or you just heard that crap from your media?

 

[etylo]

You guys should google Tofu Dreg Construction

That should open your eyes on the quality of Chinese construction

All that infrastructure that was built over last 20 yrs in china, has already started showing cracks and wont last the end of this decade

Yeah, better to build infra with cow dungs as in the la la land. Sour grape.