Lee Kuan Yew

[American spying]

Calling India a country is like calling Africa a country. India is union of many different states that are glued together by force. It's like Africa as a continent wanting to be a single country by uniting all African states. India will break up eventually as poor people get richer they will want independence. Just look at what a flawed concept the European Union is, same thing with India. The Khalistan movement was just the start, other states like Tamils and Muslims will want their independence. India has numerous separatist movements that the Indian government delicately manages. But one little trigger and chaos will break out leading to the collapse and break up of the Indian union. Happened to the Soviet Union where it was glued together by force people from different religions and ethnicities. USSR failed, EU is failing and India will fail too.
Unions of different ethnicities NEVER last long.

 

[harpoon]

Calling India a country is like calling Africa a country. India is union of many different states that are glued together by force. It's like Africa as a continent wanting to be a single country by uniting all African states. India will break up eventually as poor people get richer they will want independence. Just look at what a flawed concept the European Union is, same thing with India. The Khalistan movement was just the start, other states like Tamils and Muslims will want their independence. India has numerous separatist movements that the Indian government delicately manages. But one little trigger and chaos will break out leading to the collapse and break up of the Indian union. Happened to the Soviet Union where it was glued together by force people from different religions and ethnicities. USSR failed, EU is failing and India will fail too.
Unions of different ethnicities NEVER last long.

I see far greater chances of Tibet & Xinjiang breaking away from PRC .

 

[American spying]

I see far greater chances of Tibet & Xinjiang breaking away from PRC .

China is made up of 90% Han. You're only talking about 2 or 3 regions with relatively small populations. Indian union is made from the combination of many different states glued together. The religions are different, the cultures are different and the languages are different. The fact that India has lasted this long is one of the greatest achievements. But can it last for another 50 years? Highly doubt it. India has such a complex political system because it cannot operate without it as it has to serve for all the different people in order to keep the union intact. India's messy political system is a must to keep the union but that system makes India slow and highly inefficient. There is no such thing as an 'Indian' just like there is no such thing as a 'Soviet'. There is only Russian, Ukrainian, Belarusian, Latvian. Same will happen to India when India breaks up, there will be no such thing as an 'Indian'.

 

[harpoon]

China is made up of 90% Han. You're only talking about 2 or 3 regions with relatively small populations. Indian union is made from the combination of many different states glued together. The religions are different, the cultures are different and the languages are different. The fact that India has lasted this long is one of the greatest achievements. But can it last for another 50 years? Highly doubt it. India has such a complex political system because it cannot operate without it as it has to serve for all the different people in order to keep the union intact. India's messy political system is a must to keep the union but that system makes India slow and highly inefficient. There is no such thing as an 'Indian' just like there is no such thing as a 'Soviet'. There is only Russian, Ukrainian, Belarusian, Latvian. Same will happen to India when India breaks up, there will be no such thing as an 'Indian'.

Are you faithfulguy's student.

 

[shuntmaster]

China is made up of 90% Han. You're only talking about 2 or 3 regions with relatively small populations. Indian union is made from the combination of many different states glued together. The religions are different, the cultures are different and the languages are different. The fact that India has lasted this long is one of the greatest achievements. But can it last for another 50 years? Highly doubt it. India has such a complex political system because it cannot operate without it as it has to serve for all the different people in order to keep the union intact. India's messy political system is a must to keep the union but that system makes India slow and highly inefficient. There is no such thing as an 'Indian' just like there is no such thing as a 'Soviet'. There is only Russian, Ukrainian, Belarusian, Latvian. Same will happen to India when India breaks up, there will be no such thing as an 'Indian'.

Past Indian empires, which encompassed far larger regions than present day India have lasted for centuries... Indians have been called by various terms in past like Hindu, Hindustani, Bharatiya etc in the past. The ancient Chinese or Greeks or Arabs didn't know the existance of Punjabi or Bengali or Tamil or Marathi or Oriya. To them the people of subcontinent were Indians or Yindus or Hindustanis.
The thread that binds and unites India is the idea of India, which is quite unique and cannot be compared with the concept of nationhood of other countries.

 

[harpoon]

Past Indian empires, which encompassed far larger regions than present day India have lasted for centuries...
The thread that binds and unites India is the idea of India, which is quite unique and cannot be compared with the concept of nationhood of other countries.

You are replying to faithfulguy2......however hard you try these people will not be convinced bcs its no their job to be convinced (you know what I mean).

Anyways even if India is not a united country before does it really matter. A country called USA with barely 500 years history is the most powerful country in the world with world wide influence while some countries with 5000 year old history are languishing at the bottom.

 

[asad71]

As he puts it, provocatively: “When Nehru was in charge, I thought India showed promise of becoming a thriving society and a great power,” but it has not “because of its stifling bureaucracy” and its “rigid caste system.” Being deliberately provocative, Lee says: “India is not a real country. Instead it is thirty-two separate nations that happen to be arrayed along the British rail line.”

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/237920-lee-kuan-yew.html#ixzz2XlvCI3TK

Only Lee Kuan could have articulated so smoothly.

 

[shuntmaster]

As he puts it, provocatively: “When Nehru was in charge, I thought India showed promise of becoming a thriving society and a great power,” but it has not “because of its stifling bureaucracy” and its “rigid caste system.” Being deliberately provocative, Lee says: “India is not a real country. Instead it is thirty-two separate nations that happen to be arrayed along the British rail line.”

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/237920-lee-kuan-yew.html#ixzz2XlvCI3TK

Only Lee Kuan could have articulated so smoothly.

If LKY couldn't predict the rise of China when Mao was at the helms, how can he predict the future of India?
Also, how is caste system got to do anything with economic development of the country?
Running a city state is cakes walk compared with governing a large country like India or China. LKY should spend his remaining time thinking about future of Singapore than predicting the futures of other countries.

 

[Genesis]

I'll admit the caste system seems overblown, much like communism. I'm willing to take an Indian person at their word, since living in India would have a much better understanding of it than say someone like me, where the closest I been to India is Istanbul.

BUT Lee is a cool dude, he established a dynasty the Chinese leaders would be jealous of, as of this moment it is impossible for a top leader to pass the position to his children. He can certainly help them rise, but to get the number one chair, you need much more than family.


But one thing is funny, isn't Indians part of Singapore? I know at least one minister is of indian descent. So why the hate.....

 

[asad71]

If LKY couldn't predict the rise of China when Mao was at the helms, how can he predict the future of India?
Also, how is caste system got to do anything with economic development of the country?
Running a city state is cakes walk compared with governing a large country like India or China. LKY should spend his remaining time thinking about future of Singapore than predicting the futures of other countries.

The founders of international communist movement had initially selected British India to be the first country for their project. Comrade Muzaffar Ahmed, Moni Singh and others had worked hard towards this. But the project failed totally. In their study, the communist thinkers discovered that Indian society, being overwhelmingly Hindu, could not be analyzed in terms of dialectic materialism. The overwhelming force in Hindu society is not economic but the millennium old caste system.

 

[shuntmaster]

The founders of international communist movement had initially selected British India to be the first country for their project. Comrade Muzaffar Ahmed, Moni Singh and others had worked hard towards this. But the project failed totally. In their study, the communist thinkers discovered that Indian society, being overwhelmingly Hindu, could not be analyzed in terms of dialectic materialism. The overwhelming force in Hindu society is not economic but the millennium old caste system.

even with caste system, India was able to produce 25% of worlds GDP before European colonization.

 

[faithfulguy]

Past Indian empires, which encompassed far larger regions than present day India have lasted for centuries... Indians have been called by various terms in past like Hindu, Hindustani, Bharatiya etc in the past. The ancient Chinese or Greeks or Arabs didn't know the existance of Punjabi or Bengali or Tamil or Marathi or Oriya. To them the people of subcontinent were Indians or Yindus or Hindustanis.
The thread that binds and unites India is the idea of India, which is quite unique and cannot be compared with the concept of nationhood of other countries.

So today's India is base on fabricated history of one Indian nation that existed for centuries. That is fabricated as India was created by the British. The civilization that existed on the Indian subcontinent existed for a while but not the Indian nation.

You are replying to faithfulguy2......however hard you try these people will not be convinced bcs its no their job to be convinced (you know what I mean).

Anyways even if India is not a united country before does it really matter. A country called USA with barely 500 years history is the most powerful country in the world with world wide influence while some countries with 5000 year old history are languishing at the bottom.

So Indians should admit that India was created by the British, as this does not matter.

As he puts it, provocatively: “When Nehru was in charge, I thought India showed promise of becoming a thriving society and a great power,” but it has not “because of its stifling bureaucracy” and its “rigid caste system.” Being deliberately provocative, Lee says: “India is not a real country. Instead it is thirty-two separate nations that happen to be arrayed along the British rail line.”

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/237920-lee-kuan-yew.html#ixzz2XlvCI3TK

Only Lee Kuan could have articulated so smoothly.

He is one of my heroes.

 

[shuntmaster]

So today's India is base on fabricated history of one Indian nation that existed for centuries. That is fabricated as India was created by the British. The civilization that existed on the Indian subcontinent existed for a while but not the Indian nation.



So Indians should admit that India was created by the British, as this does not matter.
.

OK.. whatever floats your boat mate.. There was no India before the Europeans came. The subcontinent was under the ocean and the British pumped out the water and raised the seabed to create the British Raj, which later became India.
Happy now? So, stop trolling here and go troll elsewhere.
You are too funny for a Taiwanese guy in US claiming to be student of history, but so focused on trolling on threads related Indian history and current affairs.

 

[harpoon]

I'll admit the caste system seems overblown, much like communism. I'm willing to take an Indian person at their word, since living in India would have a much better understanding of it than say someone like me, where the closest I been to India is Istanbul.

BUT Lee is a cool dude, he established a dynasty the Chinese leaders would be jealous of, as of this moment it is impossible for a top leader to pass the position to his children. He can certainly help them rise, but to get the number one chair, you need much more than family.


But one thing is funny, isn't Indians part of Singapore? I know at least one minister is of indian descent. So why the hate.....

People of Indian descent and judging by the reactions of some of them, they seems to have a superiority complex over native Indians much like Hong Kongese have over Mainlanders and we don't hate Singapore, on the contrary happy for them and wishes them best of luck on their progress..... but its hard to digest criticism from a president of country of 5 million on how to run a country like India for the simple reason that Mumbai mayor administers 4 times the population of Singapore.

So Indians should admit that India was created by the British, as this does not matter.

Whats you benefit in this?

 

[faithfulguy]

OK.. whatever floats your boat mate.. There was no India before the Europeans came. The subcontinent was under the ocean and the British pumped out the water and raised the seabed to create the British Raj, which later became India.
Happy now? So, stop trolling here and go elsewhere to troll.

India was a geographical expression and a civilization prior to the arrival of British. It was not and never a political entity.