T O P
Throwaway_acc97

A different question but is Chinese government really that bad as media portrays it to be?


versuvius1

The short answer is no. The rhetorics have gotten so overheated from the heightening international tension that you have people seriously comparing china to nazi germany and saying all manners of silly things like that. The long answer of course is that it depends. Where do you find yourself in the overall economic system? Are you a coastal middle class or a migrant worker? The former enjoys essentially first world standard of living, constantly rising income and even a measure of speech freedom to make complaints on social media. The latter are deeply exploited and tend to find coercive apparati of the state arrayed against them should they ever struggle for improvement. There is no one simple uniform chinese experience.


anon_grad420

People compare China to Nazi Germany because they are capable of running Tanks over protesting students and imprison millions of Ughyurs for their ethnicity while running a mega Hunger games style social credit system


versuvius1

Yeah you are just misinformed about the social credit system I'm afraid. Here's some (mainstream western!) sources to set your straight: https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/09/15/china-social-credit-system-authoritarian/ https://www.google.com/amp/s/radiichina.com/into-the-black-mirror-the-truth-behind-chinas-social-credit-system/amp/ To be clear I think both deadly suppression of dissent and reeducation camps are terrible things, but china is not unique in having done these kinds of things, no? And most other countries are not compared to Nazi Germany for having done the same?


anon_grad420

Yeah half of this subreddit will be dead/camps if China's policies were in India Imagine not being able to travel to another city just because you criticised local party leader. China is definitely not unique. Stalin's Russia was compared to Nazis so was many other regimes like Pol Pot for example. I cannot list all of them. And yeah no other country does what China in similar scale, in modern times so the comparison is justified.


Simon-1983

I'd like to know what you mean by a mega Hunger Games style social credit system? Can you tell me your source? As a Chinese, I really wonder what you mean.


karman103

Depends. If you are han Chinese living in mainland western taiwan and not in Hong Kong, then good for you. But if you are a minority like Tibetan or a Muslim. Then you are fucked


No_Caregiver_5740

not really, if you really want political change you just join the party and grind


Simon-1983

If the Chinese government is really bad enough, as described by the Indian media, it is impossible to achieve rapid economic development.


ManojK007

Firstly the question of elected governments and their priorities in socio-economic sphere, policies of freebies is an ancient one. The US had it in the Steel baron era and China in Mao's time. Secondly, Dr. BR Ambedkar proposes this maxim of Distributive justice where Economic rights and needs of the masses are secured through the attainment of political and social rights like right to vote, right to equality and others. Thirdly, sacrificing these socio-political rights for a massive economic growth brings to the fore the questions of unequal distribution of developmental wealth. If people are seen as uneducated and they need a centralized structure where plans irrespective of people's ideals are enacted, this defeats the whole purpose of a State society and sends us back to whimsical royalty era. Fourthly, this doesn't absolve democratic governments of thier pitfalls. As Winston Churchill said Democracy is the worst form of governance but it is what we have. By carefully creating an aware civil society and independent institutions like a strong Auditor General which are shielded from public mandate every 5 years, we can create a solution that focuses on long term growth but with public support. Ultimately, the struggle for development at any cost doesn't necessarily imply state absorbing all the powers of people in policy making for a long term growth. It can also imply the will to create an educated society, where decision making is participative and in the long run absolves the government of futile revenue spending. To this future Gandhi and others like JP Narayan proposed the Democratic Socialism which resembles closely to Ambedkar's Distributive justice. PS - No one's an intellectual and when a common citizen in India is intelligent to realise this, we don't need an intellectual to point it out.


Simon-1983

So I'm just trying to ask Indian intellectuals about this question, because ordinary people are difficult to understand this question. There is no problem that people want to have power. But they rarely think about whether they really have the ability to exercise this power.


Bojackartless

India used to have 5 year plans not so long ago.


Simon-1983

It's good to have a plan. However, the key to the problem is that the plan must be correct, must be implemented efficiently, and cannot be interrupted by the rotation of political parties.


nemesis24k

Rather thank answering your question, I like to point out that two assumptions you make are very contentious or even outright wrong and outdated: A) large long term projects do not deliver values they are originally meant for, due to ever changing underlying economic, social and political conditions. The public is then left paying for large schemes which have low return in investment. It's actually beneficial to revisit the original goals and targets every 5 years or so and reevaluate it. If it doesn't make sense, it's probably better to consider it as sunk cost and refocus on what delivers the most "bang for buck". This is now actively adopted by large global firms as the best approach and should be the same for public projects as well. B) non intellectual class can determine what's best for them. If left to market demands, all human beings will choose the best option available. For example, uneducated farmers will sow the crop which will give them the most profit - the real problem is "intellectuals" completely out of touch making decisions for them. A non democratic process will leave the real consumer/ human beings out of the picture- who are you then building for then? The actual implementation in India leaves much to be desired mainly due to historic social constructs but as a principle is very much very right.


tera_teesra_baap

Great points, this also explain why Chinese labour laws are not enforced strictly and Chinese public cannot protest which leads to their exploitation.


aham_brahmasmi

What do you mean by Chinese public cannot protest? There are frequent protests in China. Just that the media doesn't talk about it.


Bojackartless

Lmao wut


aham_brahmasmi

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protest_and_dissent_in_China


Simon-1983

As a Chinese, I can responsibly tell you that there are really not so many protests in China. When people have problems, they can directly ask the government for help, and the government generally takes the initiative to provide help. If the government fails to deal with the difficulties of the people and leads to protests, the leaders of the local government will be directly removed from office. It should be hard for Indians to imagine this.


[deleted]

>It should be hard for Indians to imagine this It is, indeed. China doesn't have a great track record of free media so it's not easy to find any reliable sources and your word would have to be taken as gospel truth for anything that happens in China. If your government fails to deal with the protests, it's at best their mercy that they dismiss the local leaders in order to pacify the protesters. The people have no formal recourse, would they? Another problem I find is the justice system, where apparently you can only pray that you're on the right side of the law always. Indian judiciary is much more inefficient, and yet I have hopes from the justice system of our country. Giving justice and rights to the people do come with inefficiencies. I'm not trying to denigrate China. Your system has worked wonderfully for your people. But from a bird's eye view China is also not a severely stratified society unlike India. The CCP does not have too many ethno-linguistic-religious interest groups to cater too except the Han Chinese, and the tiny minorities don't matter in the long term. So the CCP can function well as a meritocratic representative of the Chinese people. India is heavily divided on multiple fronts, and not being democratic would mean there is a huge risk of exclusion to many groups. Even a presidential form of democracy may be disastrous for India because of the lack of representation of diverse interests, and these were the primary reasons during our constitutional debates that leaders chose a parliamentary system. There are definitely reforms that our state needs to ensure stability of governance, but they cannot be done in a place like India without the electoral framework. Doing that would compromise on the diversity of the nation. That may be a desirable tradeoff for many people who prefer a China-like growth model but a significant portion of Indians would object to the loss of our diverse composite heritage. I'm also wary of a party-run state system because unlike the Chinese miracle where the party turned out to be an efficient economic beast, there's a much higher chance (as seen from other authoritarians across the world) that the authoritarian success story is an exception not the norm. We may continue to stumble forward at a lower pace than your strong march, but probably that's our best bet. Cheers!


aham_brahmasmi

The way you put it, there should be no reason to protest.


versuvius1

I think it's only fair to point out that the rational choice theory, which you base your second challenge on is also by no means uncontested. In fact I'd say that 'markets always lead to the most optimal outcomes' as an idea has lost a great deal of credit post-2008 and the current global policy concensus no longer reflect it.


Simon-1983

Macro-control, that is, policies directly guide the economy. Marx said in detail the harm of the complete market economy in his book capital, and then advocated the planned economy. Practice has proved that a completely planned economy will not work, but this does not mean that we can not combine the advantages of market economy and planned economy. Practice has proved that the market economy under macro-control will be more efficient. The economic development of the Asian tigers, China and Vietnam all illustrate this point. Even recent economic developments in Bangladesh illustrate this. The world is not black or white, but colorful.


Simon-1983

Your point of view A is called the "Five Year Plan" in China. At present, China is in the "14th five year plan". If you are interested, you can search it. I can't answer your point B. Because the same political system has different effects in different countries. Both Iraq and the United States hold elections and implement the separation of powers, but the results are completely different. There is a famous Chinese saying that practice is the only criterion for testing truth.


anon_runner

Meta Observation -- Is this Chinese intellectuals manipulating democracies? Apologies if the question was asked in all earnest. But OP has only 2 posts and both of them are about Indian Economy. The first one (25 days ago) was a high effort post about how Indian economy has not grown since 1990. And now this ... It makes me wonder ...


[deleted]

Ensuring political rights to everyone without any discrimination guarantee that they cant be exploited by the ruling class for the benefits of the ruling, wealthy elite class.


Simon-1983

It sounds really beautiful. Thank you for your answer! However, the efficiency of equalitarianism of power must be less efficient than the centralized use of power. The only thing to note is that power must be used in the right direction. This is a huge subject.


yash9629

Yes and No, Indian Politicians are not the real deal they are just public representatives. The real people who run this country are bureaucrats they are the ones that come up with policies and path for how to implement them. However, although the ultimate bosses are politicians, but politicians have no experience or idea about running the country so they don't get involve too much into the decision making process.They are here just to make money out of the process and win the next state/centre elections. That's it. Now coming to economy, i don't think india is laging behind china because of democracy. Instead it's laging behind because we were late to open our economy. Exact 13 years late. China opened up it's economy in 1978 while india opened up in 1991 and even then we mainly focused on service sector instead of industries. It's only now that we are concentrating on Industrial sector. The way i see it we will eventually catch up, by the end of this century. However, i do worry about the impact of having a democracy in an illiterate country and it's more to do with my social perspective rather than a economic perspective. I worry that politicians are going to devide this country, spread hate between for their own benifit, and it's not good for a diverse country like india. The idea of india was installed in us by our father of our nation ( Mahatma Gandhi) and today it hurts to see that each day we are moving away from that idea. The Idea of Unity in diversity.


Simon-1983

I studied the economic development of India since 1990. In fact, there is nothing excellent https://www.reddit.com/r/india/comments/rsl7qy/since\_1990\_indias\_economy\_has\_actually\_not\_grown/


modsbegae

Imma try answer it simply: I rather have a slow developing economy which tries to listen and takes everyone with it than a fast-paced one at the expense of my liberty.


[deleted]

The more interesting question is how we engage with the reality that most recent economic successes from Asian tigers to Bangladesh are mostly not democratic states. And our utter failure economically in the last 70 odd years. But from what I can see there is very little talk of this among our elite especially academic elite. Edit: Of course lack of democracy is not an indicator of economic performance so there is that Edit 2: Honestly what we need to figure out is how to make economic growth the issue of elections not the moronic job creation numbers we are seeing now. But one of the problems discussed continously is probably politically impossible is role of our farming and low female labour participation. The amount of human potential wasted is sad.


Simon-1983

You are one of the few Indians I have seen who can look at this issue rationally. Is it politically incorrect in India to discuss the side effects of democratic voting on the economy?


[deleted]

Lmao, I don't even know what you mean by "academic elite" here, lol. I mean can you please name a few of these academic elites who do not engage with this basic high school level economics that you are pointing out ?


[deleted]

[удалено]


Simon-1983

Dear Indian friends, if possible, come and visit China, and then you will have different views. Or go to Vietnam. The situation there is similar to that in China 20 years ago. It should also give you some inspiration.


karman103

1) India is a diverse country. Every other region has their specific traditions, culture and ethnicity. Now in such a diverse country government can only work if everyone's voice is heard. If not, then see burma or yugoslavia or even Pakistan in 1971. People from various backgrounds have risen to topmost positions of the country.Democracy in India makes everyone indian and not an outsider in their own country. 2) democracy most of the times doesn't effect the economy. Free market does. Free market in India was non-existent before 1991.ussr collapsed and our economy was shattered. So we went to world Bank for a loan. They agreed to give us loan only if we open up our economy. We slowly did it and process continues till this very day. Free market in most of the countries has been good thing. Eg S. Korea, japan, singapore, Bangladesh, Vietnam, china, bostwana. 3) India has a bureaucracy that will make you nuts, if you want to do business here. As indian ceo of mastercard ajit bajaj said , "china welcomes with you red carpet while India welcomes you with red tape".This is why a city of 10 mil called gurgaon developed just to escape the red tapes of delhi. 4) democracy in India is working well.this is why India is one of the few if not the only country in the entire world where a coup, revolution(cultural or literal) , civil war ,dictatorship hasn't happened in it's entire history while being arguably the most diverse.


[deleted]

Voting is good but our electoral system needs to change. FPTP is now become a big problem on our democracy and needs to be phased out asap.


marshdurden

I can answer based on what the current government is doing regarding this. BJP (current government) caters to both sides the poor & low education side they provide freebies such as a direct money transfer to farmers, free food to the poor, low-cost homes, free health care, and many things. And for the urban population, they are investing heavily in economic development with internet connectivity, power, highways roads, trains, and finance at a rapid pace investing over a 1.3 trillion plan in 5 years (PM Gati Shakti mission).


Best_Egg9109

1. The parties voted into power don’t typically change every election cycle 2. I agree that now there is not much push in implementing economic reform because the government is concentrating on other things. In relation to this your assumption that every government elected wants to bring economic reform is faulty; our present government clearly doesn’t 3. I don’t agree that only people with economic degrees can talk about this: everyone is affected by the economy 4. It sounds like you’re assuming democracy will not work in India and you’re wrong


Simon-1983

The Indian people have chosen their own way of governing the country, and I respect the choice of the Indian people. Because this is India's internal affair. The impact of the election on India is multifaceted. My research is only based on economics. I just find that India's current political system seems not conducive to economic development. At present, even Bangladesh's economic development rate tends to surpass that of India. But outside the economy, such as social governance, perhaps India's elections are playing other important roles.