First, let me express my hope that I would spend time with an adult suitable for a meaningful debate. Otherwise Id better leave you to your own euphoria.
...
Most democratic countries are doing very well in Asia.
...
Let me readily deny that. This is a list of democratic countries in Asia. By western norm, a democratic country is a country where the leader is popularly elected.
Tell me your "most" outperform non-democratic China:
Japan *
Israel
Singapore *
Korea, Rep. of
Malaysia
Thailand
Kazakhstan
Philippines
Turkey
Sri Lanka
Iran, Islamic Rep. of
Azerbaijan
Turkmenistan
Indonesia
Kyrgyzstan
Uzbekistan
Mongolia
Tajikistan
India
Cambodia
Pakistan
Bangladesh
* are the countries that barely fit Western norm of democracy. For instance, Japan's LDP has rule the country for nearly half a century without change
http://www.tabunka.org/newsletter/true_democracy.html ; whereas Singapore's PAP has ruled the country with an iron grip since 1959, and its election can be compared with communist Laos.
http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=33047
...
Indian democracy has underperformed so far, not because of any inherent flaws in democracy, but because of inefficient implementation of it.
Why the best system (India) underperforms (according to you, why it can't be implemented) the bad system (China)? Have you done some serious study from a neutral, unemotional standpoint?
If you haven't, my afore-posted statement may help shed some light on it.
China's system is inherently flawed for a number of reasons. It discourages independent thought among the masses. It has no accountability...etc. I can go on.
You statement is mostly based on some hearsay or conjecture.
I don't think you have done any meaningful study on Chinese system, have you? If you have indeed done some, could you please excuse me and let me know what works have you studied, and answer me why majority Chinese chose to side with CCP not KMT?
If you haven't, let me help some with you. Within CCP, Mao Zedong and bunch of elites advocated "democratic centralization". In earlier stage (pre 1949), Mao's many instructions were stopped, or modified based on this system. However, Mao's personal charisma subverted the system in his later life stage. As the strong man is out of stage, "democratic centralization" is probably more or less restored.
If there were no independent thinking, how could China reform itself? If there were no independent thinking, how could ordinary Chinese conduct their business so successfully? If there were no independent thinking, how could Chinese patent requests rank number 3 in the world?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6939767.stm
If there were no accountability how could high rank CCP officials be executed or sacked?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6699441.stm
Having said that, let me repeat that Chinese system needs improvement badly in many aspects, because I am grateful to my awareness of the Chinese wisdom that: to make one strong, one has to find his weakness, not to deny it, and find a suitable way to fix it.
The strength of the Chinese system lies in its ability to get things done quickly. However, inspite of its shining infrastructure, the average Chinese will remain no more than an ant in a vast anthill. His individuality crushed by the collective goal.
According to what you imply, India individualism must be well respected. Then why average Indians are less happy than ant-like Chinese. Are you actually telling me that Indians are worse than ant life? If you want details, please see the happiness index in
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/lif_hap_net-lifestyle-happiness-net
I am no expert on the '62 war, but i do know that the war was managed very badly. Indian soldiers were badly equipped, and suffered tremendous logistical problems.
China however, under a dictatorship, attacked with a much better prepared army.
If you havent studied the war at least at least some degree, please dont talk too much. Keep quiet is a merit, not inability. Otherwise it will only demonstrate your immaturity, or Brij Mohan Kaul type of mentality. That wont do you, nor your country, any good.
-----
In conclusion, let me state that: no system in the world is perfect. The wisdom of politicians and its people lies in the fact they open-mindedly choose/initiate/develop the one that fit their country the best, as reflected by a set of measurable statistics or data, not just to "follow the flow".
Also let me further stress that I never said India system is bad, in fact it may be the best for it.
BTW, if you indeed have another thread for the topic, please kindly let me know. Im more than willing to be there. Meanwhile, I hope you can backup your statements with statistics from trustworthy international organizations, not by mere hearsays.
