all we hear on the financial news outlets is how fast china's economy is growing. yet we hear nothing about india.
they have similar populations so their human resources should be comparable.
they handle most of our tech support calls. they are an educated society for the most part.
why are they not enjoying equivalent success as the chinese?
is chinese manufacturing pulling them that far ahead?
are there other reasons, perhaps political?
The answer to you question is quite complex.
India has been subjugated under continuous waves of invasions by barbarians since the 8th century CE (712 CE to be exact); first by the marauding Muslim Arabs and then the thieving Christian British almost a thousand years later.
The Indian ethos, that is, Hindu culture, has been kept down and still is so due to the lib-left scumbags who are communist-Marxist who are in charge of the entire English-speaking media in India, the Muslim fanatics in and out of India (funded by Middle Eastern terrorists like Saudi Arabia), and Christian fanatics funded by western bible-thumping apes. The post-modernist outlook on culture that has been imposed on the Indian ethos posits a pseudo-secular narrative that keeps out any and all influence of Hindu/Dharmic philosophy from discourse in the public sphere. The travesty is that Indian culture is suffused with Hinduism and is Hinduism is practice. This culture has been worn out so much by invading influences and constant denigration, both physically and mentally, that current-day India in no way represents the greatness that it once was; Bharatvarsha - the spiritual epicenter of the world as well as the richest country on the planet till the 1800s. (Remember, that rapist-murderer Christopher Columbus was looking for India!)
In terms of "economic progress", the phrase is misleading to begin with. India, like China, is
regaining its position on the world stage economically speaking (source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_regions_by_past_GDP_(PPP)). Despite over 1300 years of plunder, rape, pillaging, and genocide by barbarians, India is now the 10th largest economy in the world and 4th largest by PPP (purchasing power parity). To come to such an economic state a mere 63 years after independence is quite astounding. It should also be noted that India's economic principles were drastically changed in the early 1990s by the then Prime Minister, PV Narasimha Rao (a Brahmin- surprise surprise
); one of the greatest PMs India has had despite being part of the Congress Party (anti-Hindu/anti-national/minority-appeasing bums).
Although the rate of economic growth has been lower than that of China's, India's growth is looked upon as more favorable due to its somewhat steady pace of well over 7% per annum. Now, the growth is touching 10% and seems to keep climbing yearly. That kind of growth, the growth that is slow and steady, is much more sustainable in the long run and is thus looked upon optimistically by economists worldwide. China's brute-force method has helped them catapult to the second largest economy in the world, however, whether that is sustainable in the long run is anybody's guess.
China's one party system with no election also helps their reforms, whether economic or otherwise, see reality much quicker than those in India due to the latter's democratic government. With a myriad political parties, separated on language, caste, and religious lines, India's democratic system is nothing short of a miracle. The largest democracy, that is, India, has the largest elections in the history of mankind; more than 430 million people voted in the 2009 elections and elected a minority candidate to the highest office of Prime Minister; Dr. Manmohan Singh, a Sikh. India's President is a woman and the Vice-President is a Muslim.
Minority "rights" did you say? Dumb shit-for-brains in the west who still won't vote for a woman as President have the gall to talk about "women's rights" in other countries.
Despite India's bungling in implementation and enforcement of laws and reforms to help various sections of society, more than 300 million people, the size of the entire US, is considered upwardly mobile and 'middle class' (with regard to purchasing power).
Interesting you brought up Indian economy today; India just got its first Ferrari dealership yesterday (source:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703453804576191712833758754.html). And, those cars are starting at 2.2 Crores (22 Million Rupees which translates to around ~$487,000) means that they are MUCH more expensive than the same cars in the US (due to excise tax etc.).
As others have already said, China's homogeneous culture and ethnicity (to a large extent) has helped them a lot. They are much more cohesive and it is very difficult to find an anti-China Chinese than an anti-India Indian. In fact, the latter group enjoys a strong following in and out of India; they are a special caste called BLCs; that is, BOOT-LICKING-COOLIES.
India, as a democracy will be one of the largest economies in the world. Compared to China, I'm not sure whether it'll be bigger or not, but India's society, which is free, democratic, and diverse, is place where anyone can come and settle down and feel at home. The same cannot be said of China.
Certain foreign investors, with their poor understanding of Indian culture, will perhaps prefer China in the near future due to the latter's homogeneity and seemingly safer government, however, in the long run, investment in India's future will pay a much higher dividend, monetarily and more.
And, India is officially known as a "democratic SOCIALIST republic" so it is because they are following, at the governmental level, western principles, the economy has been in doldrums. If they follow the age-old traditions of Sanatana Dharma (Hinduism), India will be what it was; the richest country on the planet, monetarily, culturally, and spiritually, without destroying others or dominating over others.
After all, it was Chinese philosopher Hu Shih who said,
"India conquered and dominated China culturally for two thousand years without ever having to send a single soldier across her border."
Facebook
Twitter