Lee Kuan Yew

[Srinivas]

He made a straight forward analysis of India. Just because your disagreement with the ground reality doesn't mean that fail with his logic. US has immigrants from different country. But the parent country of US is Britain, same as India. So English is the language that unite Americans, same as English is the language that unite India. So Britain created US, Britain also created India. Prior to British, America consisted of various Indians tribes. India was consist of various Indian kingdoms.

The one difference between America and India is that most of Americans come from some where in the last 200+ years. Most of Indians have ancestors lived in the same state before the British came. So the relationships between the Indian states if more similar to European countries than American states.

Europe is not a single entity where as India is, British called it India before coming, India existed as a single entity for a long time starting from 300 B.C.

Hindi is the major language spoken in India not english.

 

[TakeNoBS]

Yes but right now we are discussing about the article and diagnosing it, On the other hand he agrees USA is a power house (lot of similarities with India, multiethnic and diverse culture and it will remain so with immigrations continuing and will so in future).
But fails to apply the same logic to India.

American diversity stem from people coming from different countries but live among Americans. Indian diversity is from difference between states. In America, there are concentration of Cubans in FL, Mexican in South West, Asians in the west, Northern Europeans in the upper Midwestern state. But most people would move to wherever they want to go. People are not tie to an area. India, on other hand, consist of people whose ancestor have been associated with their state or town for hundreds if not thousands of years. And the difference is between states. So its a different kind of diversity. America is a melting pot. India just have 32 different countries tie together by Britain.

 

[KS]

@faithfulguy is back.

@WebMaster

 

[indushek]

Just google the key words and find it mate, "chinese man run over by bulldozer".

And there are lot of examples which I don't want to post here.

» Man Crushed by Steamroller On Orders of Chinese Officials Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!

There is no point in bashing unless it directly impinges on our national interests.

 

[TakeNoBS]

That is because India is not the U.S. The U.S. was not really a multi ethnic culture when it became as developed as it did. We are very different & therefore the outsider is justified in raising doubts. Take the last 5 years of the UPA as an example. Money was squandered left right & center (not talking about the scandals) by simply throwing away money for some silly programs which could have given us a much better RoI if it had been used wisely. This is done under political as well as regional pressure, therefore little use in blaming foreigners when they see as being incapable. Where Lee Kuan Yew is probably wrong is that India will grow inspite of the government, not necessarily because of it. That is something that neither he nor the Chinese who are obsessed with control can understand.

India will continue to grow in spite of the gov. But that is the fact every where. Indian gov just do more to hinder its growth than China or even American gov. So India would not grow as fast.

 

[Srinivas]

That is because India is not the U.S. The U.S. was not really a multi ethnic culture when it became as developed as it did. We are very different & therefore the outsider is justified in raising doubts. Take the last 5 years of the UPA as an example. Money was squandered left right & center (not talking about the scandals) by simply throwing away money for some silly programs which could have given us a much better RoI if it had been used wisely. This is done under political as well as regional pressure, therefore little use in blaming foreigners when they see as being incapable. Where Lee Kuan Yew is probably wrong is that India will grow inspite of the government, not necessarily because of it. That is something that neither he nor the Chinese who are obsessed with control can understand.

I am with you on the highlighted part.

The common notion in the out side world is that British created India, which is completely wrong. India existed as a single entity During Mauryan rule which is close to 400 years. After that I call it as a civil war since there is a no central authority.

Economic development has nothing to do with multi ethnic or culture.

 

[TakeNoBS]

Europe is not a single entity where as India is, British called it India before coming, India existed as a single entity for a long time starting from 300 B.C.

Hindi is the major language spoken in India not english.

A long time is 50 years in this case. India was a geographical expression, as stated by Winston Churchill.

 

[Srinivas]

There is no point in bashing unless it directly impinges on our national interests.

No problem mate, even CCP is counting its days in China .

Modern Chinese want democracy and freedom of speech, I am bashing only CCP policies not Chinese or their nature.

 

[Shardul.....the lion]

Beaurocracy is a big hurdle for India. And it will remain for long time to come...

 

[Srinivas]

A long time is 50 years in this case. India was a geographical expression, as stated by Winston Churchill.

I laugh at this guy who lost his elections right after winning the greatest war in human history, he hates India and Indians.

If I posses power to give life to one person in this world I will surely bring back this person from his death and show today's India.

 

[Bang Galore]

I laugh at this guy who lost his elections right after winning the greatest war in human history, he hates India and Indians.

Np point in laughing at historical figures. All men have their faults, whether you focus on the faults or on the positive depends on where you are sitting.

 

[shuttler]

Will India rival or even surpass China’s rise? The U.S. government recently asked its $50 billion intelligence community this question. Their recently released report, Global Trends 2030, forecasts that “the most rapid growth of the middle class will occur in Asia, with India somewhat ahead of China in the long term.” Lee Kuan Yew disagrees strongly. 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.”

Lee has a lot of experience eye-witnessing and managing the behaviour and culture of indians in his own country. He is spot on describing the dire situation of india today and in the future. He is also insinuating india will be broken up into small portions which will be represented by many states independently by virtue of the many rebellions in the country.

 

[Rig Vedic]

India is a civilization state, which can be hard to understand for outsiders who don't understand the Indic civilization.

Can India compete with China? With the present government, the answer is no. With purposeful leadership (like Narendra Modi), there is a chance.

 

[Bang Galore]

He is also insinuating india will be broken up into small portions which will be represented by many states independently by virtue of the many rebellions in the country.

Regardless of your interpretation of his comments, there is not much substance to that. India's greatest threat of disintegration was decades ago. These days the nation is much stronger, both in terms of hard power as well as in the wide acceptance of the concept of the Indian nation itself.

 

[KS]

Well Lee Kuan Yew cant be faulted for having that view.

For someone from a Chinese heritage which is essentially an ethnically homogenous civilization, India must seem incomprehensible. He is not alone. Another fat fellow called Winston Churchill too suffered from that same confusion.