The Myth of the New India 378
theodp writes "An NYT op-ed on The Myth of the New India reports that only 1.3M Indians are participating in the so-called new economy of BPO, leaving 400M have-nots without a piece of the pie. Despite recent gains, nearly 380M Indians still live on less $1 a day, setting the stage for rural and urban conflict." From the article: "No labor-intensive manufacturing boom of the kind that powered the economic growth of almost every developed and developing country in the world has yet occurred in India. Unlike China, India still imports more than it exports. This means that as 70 million more people enter the work force in the next five years, most of them without the skills required for the new economy, unemployment and inequality could provoke even more social instability than they have already."
Scaremongering (Score:2, Insightful)
Article misses the point. (Score:0, Insightful)
Does India's growth isolate a large portion of it's village dwelling population? Yes
Does it have internal stability issues? Yes.
But is it's growth, and the new wealth a step in the right direction? Absolutely Yes.
Cultural Problems (Score:5, Insightful)
Note: This isn't racist, or culturist, or any thing else -ist. And if you think it is, I no longer care.
Re:Scaremongering (Score:4, Insightful)
In the entire history of violent revolt, who, pray tell, do you think did the revolting? The wealthy elite? It has always been the poor. Usually rallied by educated youth.
First let me say (Score:5, Insightful)
1.3M may not be much, but it is more than before, and these people spend money and so that money reaches more people than just them.
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos
USA
Exports:
$927.5 billion f.o.b. (2005 est.)
Imports:
$1.727 trillion f.o.b. (2005 est.)
From:
Difference between India and China (Score:3, Insightful)
"Superpower" is over-rated... (Score:5, Insightful)
USSR was a "superpower" for decades. Life in it sucked big time. Living in Italy, the UK, France, or even India, would've been much better — if only for the possibility to leave, if you wanted.
It's True (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Does it look like Texas (Score:3, Insightful)
Ya gotta start somewhere (Score:5, Insightful)
Well yes. (Score:1, Insightful)
You think the different classes live different lives in America? In India or China the difference between classes might as well be entirely different nations.
Think about this (Score:4, Insightful)
Just my $.02.
Indian way vs American way (Score:5, Insightful)
If that is the way New India is going to emerge, it is not going to be. We have a saying, a cat should not brand itself to become a leoperd. India can not mindlessly follow the American success story and carry all the Indians along. We need a unique Indian way which is not capitalist, not communist, not socialist but Indian.
We have a rich tradition and had tall leaders leading us. We try to substitute everything with western values as in China. There is a better way. India can show to the world how to solve the problems of consumption driven economies of the west. We can evolve systems, practices to build a new type of economic development and social order. That would be the contribution of India to the world, not trying to be another China or USA.
Let's look at our own economy.. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Cultural Problems (Score:1, Insightful)
they figured that they weren't being stupid enough and thus decided to get stupider. I am still waiting for a law that would mandate death penalty for curruption. I hope it gets enacted someday. While it may leave countries like India without a gov. it would be better than what is going on now.
Re:So in other words (Score:5, Insightful)
The executives making the decisions are making
lots on inflated stock prices.
See? It is OK. And those executives will need
lots of servants around the house, and those cant
be outsourced.
Never mind in 10 or 20 years, the companies in the
countries being outsourced to will have all the
expertise they need, and the American partners will
be told to pound sand. And the weakened American
middle class will not have what it take to float
things along.
Re:Cultural Problems (Score:5, Insightful)
I mean, look at the language you use. "Backward caste" "Lower caste". I'm not saying that India hasn't made great strides; obviously it has. But just looking at your post gives one a sense of how deeply ingrained it is culturally.
Similar arguments can be made about race in the U.S. Many deny that racism exists, but from an outsider's point of view (as I am an outsider observing India), clearly there are major remnants of institutionalized racism in the US, despite the great strides that have been made.
India is changing in the face of thousands of years of culture. Clearly, the change is not going to happen overnight. As in the US, there are forces of resistance to such change, so those who want the culture to change must continue to work for it. The first step is to look within yourself and be aware of those old attitudes you might hold. (It's easier for me to advise you to do this than it is for me to do it myself. However, I think that to bring about the world we both want to live in, it's necessary for both of us to do this.)
Re:Scaremongering (Score:5, Insightful)
Sorry, but it is not a matter of education or age that makes leaders. It is class and belief that make the difference. In almost all successful revolutions the leaders have been middle class or higher up the social scale, even up to the #2 guy in the country. They are people who have spare time and money.
Once you have those, leading a revolution requires two beliefs: 1) that you have the ability/skills to do the job better than the guy at the top, and 2) that you are likely to lose what you have if you do nothing.
The poor often are the victims of manipulation by both sides, and are usually tricked into doing something that is really not in their own long-term interests.
Educated youth usually just succeed in getting a bunch of people killed.
Re:Predictable Responses (Score:4, Insightful)
We saved you in World War II, so go to hell! If it weren't for us, you'd all be speaking German now!
But I *am* speaking german?!?
The author is right, and pessimistic. (Score:5, Insightful)
There is also no easy way out. Every $ or Rs. that is spent in India helps. Every cent of Investment or export by India helps. Much of it trickles down to the poorest in the cities and villages.
What's needed is an increase in literacy and increase in jobs. Neither of these are short-term, easily achievable goals.
Manufacturing must increase - providing opportunities to semi-skilled workers. Efficiency must increase, allowing for cheaper goods and trickling down to more profits for the millions of small businesses. Farm efficiencies must increase - through better processes or crops. Farmers must get a bigger share of the final price.
While all these are very important issues, the sheer size of India prevents easy action on any of them. We will get out of this mess, it will take time and money.
The author seems to know a lot of Indians who have settled abroad. I know a lot of Indians who've come back or are planning to do so very soon. They're bringing investment with them, they're bringing the contacts and business knowledge that will help them serve customers in the US or Europe. And they will each bring jobs for a few more people.
If the only way we can earn the money is through taking the high-tech jobs of Western countries we're not going to say no. If we can earn money by designing and launching satellites for small developing countries, we're going to do that too. If we can earn money by taking every service job in the US or Europe that's up for grabs, well, we're going to do that too.
India may become the back-office for the rest of the world, we'll still have people left to do other things. India may end up doing most of the unwanted service jobs for the rest of the world. India may do very high-technology services for other countries. That's fine too, because a billion people need a billion different things to do.
The West has drained an incredible amount of wealth from India/China/Africa/America and used it to kick-start their own economies. Two hundred years of plundering cannot be undone in a few dozen years. We're on our way back up, and we'll get there.
All of us have not fallen to the myth of Western superiority in economics due to any inherent advantages. We know what the Western economies owe the rest of world. We don't have the option of plundering other countries' natural resources or enslaving millions of Africans, Indians or Chinese people. We have to get out of this hole with only our own resources. And if it's going to take a century, then we're going to take a century. You can either help us, or hinder us.
Pakistani propoganda perhaps? (Score:1, Insightful)
1. India is the world's largest democracy and has been for some time. Successful elections for 60 years - not once has it had a militaristic regime or religious zealots threatening to take over the country. India has also never invaded another country.
2. Perhaps the most secular country in the world - It has a sikh (minority community) Prime Minister, Muslim President and Italian ruling party chieftan! Put in power by a 70% Hindu nation that is illetrate and poor. Which other Western nation has a similar track record? When will we see an african american President, voted to power by a rich, educated populous?
3. India has the second largest Islamic population in the world after Indonesia. All living harmoniously. The insurgency in Kashmir is primarily brought on by cross-border infiltration of mis-guided, Pakistani trained, mujahideen - same variety as Al Qaeda. And hey, India has had its people slaughtered since 1989 with the West continuing to ignore "state sponsopred terrorism". Why? Cause India chose to align with Russia, not in ideaology but for transfer of technology on MiGs and other hardware that the US was unwilling to do. Instead, America backed Pakistan and rebels in Afghanistan (read Al Qaeda) and we all know how that turned out... misguided beliefs of rich western nations against an impoverished India? Back in 1947, India had just been raped by the British for some 300 years and left to fend for itself.
4. A non polarized world - India pioneered the non-aligned movement to promote a healthy co-operation of nations, back when the cold war had pushed educated, rich, western nations to stock pile nukes and guarantee anhilation for the world. Who was thinking about the rest of the world - the billions living in impoverished nations? How effective is the UN? More than 2/3 of the global population is not even on the security council.
5. True India has many impoverished people. But look at the scale of the problem - 1 billion people! Not something you can change overnight. India has done well to maintain democracy, create robust internal industries and excel in the services sector. And so what if they claim Lakshmi Mittal as one of their own - he does still own an Indian passport. Things are changing and its in the right direction. More money is flowing in to the country, more jobs, more prosperity. India's liberalized economy is some 15 years old... given time who knows, its still a damn decent shot at success.
6. India's manufacturing sector is the next big thing - just check out their Automotive, Pharmaceuticals, Heavy Engineering & Aerospace industries. The government's focus like China is industrial growth. Recent announcements of Special Economic Zones is akin to what China did 15 years ago. Results will flow given time. And remember, the Chinese had a strong, communist government forcing change down people's throats... India needs to deal with democratic politics - the process of change is obviously slower.
I could go on, but the message is clear... The Indians are coming, not to fight or takeover the world, just to be respected as global citizens, at par with Americans, Europeans, Japanes, Chinese and the rest of the world.
Re:Scaremongering (Score:2, Insightful)
Right.
Except where revolts are happening.
In India.
Among the poor.
This is really happening... RTFA.
Re:Cultural Problems (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, because you're evincing pride in achievements you haven't made, by people you had no way of influencing. You've done nothing to deserve the pride you feel. It's this innate and undeserved feeling of superiority that makes you a casteist.
Of course they're being helped -- a lot (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm sorry, but that was a pretty stupid comment. Of course jobs help the Indians a lot. They help the people with the jobs and they help some more Indians that those people buy goods and services from. The gist of the article was just that there are lots MORE people to be helped than seem likely to be reached in the near future by merely the growth engines that are already going strong.
If you look at not just those 1.3 million workers and their families, but the top 100 or 200 million people in India, you have a relatively healthy country. The problem is the other billion or so who desperately need to be dragged along. Or so I understand; I've never actually been to India myself.
Re:English? (Score:4, Insightful)
Official National Language: Hindi Other National Languages: 25 Religions: Everything religion ever practised on Earth because even a minority here is in millions. Ofcourse Hinduism is the dominant religion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_national_lang uages_of_India [wikipedia.org]
English is a language used only in cities and in some parts of the government. To my European colleagues I explain it thus: Think of the EU as a single country with all your languages, cultures, religions(though they are all based on Christianity), etc. Now mulptiply that problem by 100 and the population by 9 or 10 and that is India.
And its almost funny when you say that a nation with over 5000 years of _written_ history would be eager as a puppy to 'absorb' a 300 year old country's culture and stored-up 'ideas'. Sure, the US media has managed to reach global audiences and create a homogeneous MTV generation. And some of that can be seen in Indian cities. But that is probably India has assimilated foreign influences over the millenia, not just by copying them, but by choosing what they like in them. That is the only way to survive as a people if you don't want revolution every few hundred years. But the western world may disagree...
Re:First let me say (Score:5, Insightful)
This is normal for a post-industrialised service economy. You import more than you export and your primary growth is in the services industry.
The important words here are "post-industrialiased". US was an agricultural economy all the way up to WW2. It became an industrial power as a result of WW2 and it is now moving towards a services driven economy. Most of Europe is quite similar.
India is trying to become post-industrialiased society before going through the industrialisation stage. That does not work. Every single attempt to jump-start a civilisation across an "age" in human history has finished with a failure. Either a social revolt or a regression back into the old state once the "jump the age" financial drip feed is withdrawn.
This is one thing Chinese got right. They are going for an industrialiased society first. Many other reasons aside, industrialiased society is also much better at equalising the overall living standard across a country. Service oriented society is going in the absolutely opposite direction by creating new living standards drifts and divides. Just compare the living standard differences across England at the height of industrialiasation and now. Now they are actually much higher.
And I agree with many posters. India is heading for social trouble full steam ahead. There will be no USSR to supply "assistance" this time, but things like this happen sooner or later without external assistance. And a social revolt in a nuclear power is not a scenario I would like to think of. Plenty of other depressive things around.
Re:Cultural Problems (Score:3, Insightful)
That's only a small part of the problem. In India, the caste system has pretty much inverted itself because the upper castes are a minority of the population. Now the sad thing is that there is official discrimination against people based on caste, but done completely in the name of affirmative action. In order to gain favor with the masses, politicians have continually increased the "quota" of the "Backward Classes" so much to the point where the many impoverished of the "Forward Classes" have almost lost the ability to go to public college. Rather than try to find solutions to the difficult problems of poverity, politicians have found it easier to blame current suffering on the past subjugation of the lower castes. In reality, the wealth of all Indians was destroyed primarily by colonial oppression, the inability to control population growth, and foolish economic policies.
If you think about, very few 3rd world countries have ever made it out of the 3rd world. Almost all former European colonies still suffer from brutal dictatorships and miserable poverity. Pakistan is entirely Muslim and does not have the problem of caste. But still they are in no better economic state as India. The biggest problem of the caste system is that it distracts India from focusing on the real problems. Religious hatreds are doing that too.
Right now there are a billion people living in a country one third the size of the United States. India had an opportunity to control population growth early on, but totally blew it. Indira and Sanjay Gandhi conducted a forced vasectomy program that ever since has made it harder for the government to promote family planning. In China the solution was simple: forcibly prevent people from having more than 1 child. But India is a democracy where *everyone* votes. Unlike the United States where mostly only the wealthy, educated, or elderly bother voting. People don't like being told how many kids they can have. And the uneducated and poor don't have TV sets to get their propaganda from.
West chooses dictatorship over democracy (Score:5, Insightful)
In China the ruling Communist Party (CCP; with policies closer to a capitalist fasist party) does exactly what it wants in order for China to become the greatest power on earth under their rule. Sacrificing their people and even swallowing up neighbouring nations to reach that aim doesn't bother the CCP dictatorship one bit.
Case in point: The CCP recently finished the building of the massive Three Gorges Dam. Millions of locals had to be relocated with much if not most of the meager compensation stolen by opportunistic party officials. People attempting to report facts about it face arrest, suspicious muggings or worse.
In India far smaller dam projects face long delays or even cancellation because the locals have various means of defending their rights.
In China, business people with the right guanxi (political connections) can take over anyone's land and if the locals riot as their last recourse, the Party's paramilitary police will quickly take care of it.
If democracy and basic human rights meant anything to Western business people and Western politicians who are responsible for the "rules of engagement", the West would choose to invest in and trade with democratic developing nations (like India) instead of expansionist totalitarian regimes (like China).
As long as democracy and basic human rights are only paid superficial lip-service by the West, free countries will lag behind the dictatorships. Beside the West losing (selling out) its fundamental moral foundations, such policies will also encourage developing countries to adopt the more dictatorial forms of government since they are proving to be more beneficial in terms of foreign investment. In fact China is increasingly channeling its own foreign investments into Central Asia, Africa and South America, further undermining the West's half-assed efforts at encouraging democracy and human rights in those countries.
Democracy and human rights certainly incur some financial costs but are we surrendering it all up just to help global corporations rake in short-term profits? It wasn't the corporations who suffered when the Stalins, Hitlers, Maos and Hirohitos went on a rampage; no, it was people who took the bullets in the name of their continued freedom.
If today's people still value those ideals, then global trade could easily be harnessed as a force for good. If countries like India were to be given preferential trade treatment over expansionist dictatorships like China, it would force the Chinese people to rethink their system and policies instead of giving them an edge over free societies.
What a dollar buys in India (Score:3, Insightful)
Another way of looking at what a dollar can buy is by looking at what the corresponding monthly expenses would be like. Eating out is sort of a luxury/uncommon in many places in India (let alone, gasp, everyday!). People cook at home -- and that gets the costs down significantly. In fact, I remember reading somewhere on how one can have a healthy meal for dollar a day per person in the US (something about buying things that are in season, etc.)
A dollar a day is very low for one person even in India. The picture may appear more depressing if we look at that money from the perspective of western eating habits.
S
Re: Hey Genius (Score:2, Insightful)
India needs industrialization, because the fact is that most people can't become programmers or even call-center workers overnight. No country can skip the necessary step of creating a blue-collar working class.
Re:Cultural Problems (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Scaremongering (Score:2, Insightful)