3 ms·

I see a lot of parallels here with the Japanese system. Similarly, the system seems to encourage conformism and rote learning over disruptive ideas and innovati

I see a lot of parallels here with the Japanese system. Similarly, the system seems to encourage conformism and rote learning over disruptive ideas and innovation. Similarly, their top universities have phenomenally competitive admissions, even though they are not ranked particularly high internationally. Similarly, many of their systems are characterized by endless paperwork and bureaucracy. Of course, there are certainly innumerable ways in which the two countries diverge. Japan has been economically far more successful in the last few centuries, and has a very respectable number of Nobel laureates, most of whom have remained in Japan. But I do think a lot of the criticism of India leveled here is applicable there. (Source: I lived there for a few years and am reasonably culturally/linguistically fluent)

bane 13y ago
As an outsider, it looks like India is trying very hard to figure out a path to success. But, probably for historical reasons, it's looking for a path to a Western U.S./Britain model of success rather than East Asian Japan/South Korea/Singapore/Hong Kong model. I don't know which makes more sense for India to look towards, but I wonder if a New Delhi that looks more like Seoul than London makes more sense and if modeling a future path on established paths to success and growth is a better idea. There may be more cultural similarities (for example, the social difficulties of coming out of deeply entrenched caste system, a deep respect for education, etc.) and adapting the same patterns for India's local conditions might work better For example, building an export driven economy like Japan and Korea did, has resulted in unbelievable economic growth, advanced technology, and global respect. By and large those countries are also able to retain talent, build sufficient educational institutions to train that talent, have enough local economic opportunities for that talent to make money, and have a vibrant enough economy to allow them to spend that money locally. It seems to me that many of the basic pieces are there for India to follow those models, and with a massive and cheap labor pool (one of the main requirements for this to work), make it happen.
vagarwa 13y ago
My view - The biggest difference is the underlying system (law, bureaucracy and even infrastructure)still being used in India is the one built to extract and export resources out as efficiently as possible. That's the legacy of 150 years of colonialism and Indians simply have never been able to do the challenging work (various reasons) of changing these but for a few word changes here and there. This is most stark in nation's civil and police services.
- shortsightedsid 13y ago
  Don't quite agree; it's time we stop putting the colonial legacy as a reason. The reason? It's been 65 years since colonialism ended and that's enough time to fix things. A lot of things have been fixed too but the real problem is a huge population. It's trivial to fix things for 1 million people compared to the 1.2 billion people and that's the real problem; not colonial legacy.

bane 13y ago

As an outsider, it looks like India is trying very hard to figure out a path to success. But, probably for historical reasons, it's looking for a path to a Western U.S./Britain model of success rather than East Asian Japan/South Korea/Singapore/Hong Kong model. I don't know which makes more sense for India to look towards, but I wonder if a New Delhi that looks more like Seoul than London makes more sense and if modeling a future path on established paths to success and growth is a better idea. There may be more cultural similarities (for example, the social difficulties of coming out of deeply entrenched caste system, a deep respect for education, etc.) and adapting the same patterns for India's local conditions might work better For example, building an export driven economy like Japan and Korea did, has resulted in unbelievable economic growth, advanced technology, and global respect. By and large those countries are also able to retain talent, build sufficient educational institutions to train that talent, have enough local economic opportunities for that talent to make money, and have a vibrant enough economy to allow them to spend that money locally. It seems to me that many of the basic pieces are there for India to follow those models, and with a massive and cheap labor pool (one of the main requirements for this to work), make it happen.

vagarwa 13y ago

My view - The biggest difference is the underlying system (law, bureaucracy and even infrastructure)still being used in India is the one built to extract and export resources out as efficiently as possible. That's the legacy of 150 years of colonialism and Indians simply have never been able to do the challenging work (various reasons) of changing these but for a few word changes here and there. This is most stark in nation's civil and police services.

shortsightedsid 13y ago
Don't quite agree; it's time we stop putting the colonial legacy as a reason. The reason? It's been 65 years since colonialism ended and that's enough time to fix things. A lot of things have been fixed too but the real problem is a huge population. It's trivial to fix things for 1 million people compared to the 1.2 billion people and that's the real problem; not colonial legacy.