DBWI: Reverse the economic state of India and China

As we all know, the Republic of India is the world's second largest economy with India projected to pass the United States of America as the world's largest economy in a matter of years and the Indian government having an ambitious initiative to increase India's economic power and facilitate the development of the Eurasian landmass while the Federal Republic of China is still largely poor but is catching up with the West (and India), so, what PODs might be needed for India and China to reverse economic states? Partition going through? The PRC adopting economic reforms with Deng Xiaoping winning out in the post-Mao power struggle instead of the PRC being overthrown in a popular uprising in 1988? Something else?
 
As we all know, the Republic of India is the world's second largest economy with India projected to pass the United States of America as the world's largest economy in a matter of years and the Indian government having an ambitious initiative to increase India's economic power and facilitate the development of the Eurasian landmass while the Federal Republic of China is still largely poor but is catching up with the West (and India), so, what PODs might be needed for India and China to reverse economic states? Partition going through? The PRC adopting economic reforms with Deng Xiaoping winning out in the post-Mao power struggle instead of the PRC being overthrown in a popular uprising in 1988? Something else?

India still has a rather large problem with rich families holding a lot of power today, maybe if one of those families [the Nehru, maybe?] managed to actually take control of the country early on they could have stunted its growth or something? I don't know, its kind of hard to imagine...

As for China, your suggestion of the PRC reforming its economy under Xiaoping sounds like it would work, but I'm not sure it would have gone through. Besides, I'm not sure I'd want to live in a world where the PRC is a superpower, that sounds like it would just be Cold War 2.0.
 
India still has a rather large problem with rich families holding a lot of power today, maybe if one of those families [the Nehru, maybe?] managed to actually take control of the country early on they could have stunted its growth or something? I don't know, its kind of hard to imagine...

As for China, your suggestion of the PRC reforming its economy under Xiaoping sounds like it would work, but I'm not sure it would have gone through. Besides, I'm not sure I'd want to live in a world where the PRC is a superpower, that sounds like it would just be Cold War 2.0.
What about partition of India going through as opposed to the federal arrangement which resulted in a united, federal India?
 
India has a number of advantages that China, even now under capitalism, does not.

It speaks English - which given between the British and the Americans, gives it a connection to 300 years of global economics, culture and dominance. No matter how rich China might get, I don't see Mandarin ever replacing English as the closest thing to a global language since Ancient Greek.

It's a democracy, a stable, pluralistic one at that. China meanwhile, languaged under a Communist dictatorship for two generations.

Another big one is that, since independence, India has always enjoyed a special relationship with the USA - we're both republics that won our liberty from Britian, and the cold war tensions between the USA/India and USSR/China only drove us closer together. We've been more than happy to invest in and work with India, and they've been more than happy to work with the USA for the past 70 years as a result.

Lastly, and this one is key, India pretty much has the run of the Indian Ocean rim, while China has to compete with the USA, Japan, South Korea and half of Asia for the Pacific trade. India has pretty much managed to corner the market in Indian Ocean trade, and formed its own little regional block, albiet one increasingly of equals like the East African Federation and Indonesia.
 
India has a number of advantages that China, even now under capitalism, does not.

It speaks English - which given between the British and the Americans, gives it a connection to 300 years of global economics, culture and dominance. No matter how rich China might get, I don't see Mandarin ever replacing English as the closest thing to a global language since Ancient Greek.

It's a democracy, a stable, pluralistic one at that. China meanwhile, languaged under a Communist dictatorship for two generations.

Another big one is that, since independence, India has always enjoyed a special relationship with the USA - we're both republics that won our liberty from Britian, and the cold war tensions between the USA/India and USSR/China only drove us closer together. We've been more than happy to invest in and work with India, and they've been more than happy to work with the USA for the past 70 years as a result.

Lastly, and this one is key, India pretty much has the run of the Indian Ocean rim, while China has to compete with the USA, Japan, South Korea and half of Asia for the Pacific trade. India has pretty much managed to corner the market in Indian Ocean trade, and formed its own little regional block, albiet one increasingly of equals like the East African Federation and Indonesia.
Calling India a democracy stretches the credibility of that word. It does have elections where opposition parties are permitted. It's just that the Congress Party and its satellites have won every election at the federal and state level since independence thanks to its ruthlessly efficient patronage machine that Nehru developed, and that journalists and too successful opposition parties get harassed by various legal pretexts.

Last thing about English: it's certainly India's preferred language for international trade and the civil service, but the primary reason why it was designated as such was to restrict the pool of potential competitors for the cliques who have dominated its establishment since independence. Only 4% of Indians know English at a professional level, which greatly expands their opportunities in the civil service, effectively imposing a ceiling on everyone else. Another 16% know English to varying levels, but not sufficient to reach advanced professions. The other 80% don't know English at all.

I think China has higher long-term potential thanks to the lack of sectarian/religious tensions, genuinely democratic politics (yes, there are frequent brawls in the National Congress), and the lack of language barrier inhibiting communication.
 
It's just that the Congress Party and its satellites have won every election at the federal and state level since independence thanks to its ruthlessly efficient patronage machine that Nehru developed, and that journalists and too successful opposition parties get harassed by various legal pretexts.
Well, the Congress Party "won" the 2005, 2009, and 2013 elections via coalition arrangements with regional parties and the opposition being divided between left-wingers who think that the INC is too moderate, Hindu nationalist groups, the liberal Indian Democratic Alliance, and the Muslim League.
 
Well, the Congress Party "won" the 2005, 2009, and 2013 elections via coalition arrangements with regional parties and the opposition being divided between left-wingers who think that the INC is too moderate, Hindu nationalist groups, the liberal Indian Democratic Alliance, and the Muslim League.
The Congress Party's regional coalition partners are so obviously their stooges, that some of these parties' constitutions stipulate they will work under the leadership of the Congress Party. They're exactly like the united front parties in the former communist bloc.

As for the opposition being divided between hard-left socialists (where else would there be three Communist Parties represented in state legislatures?), Hindu nationalists, the Muslim League, and bland liberals, that's exactly what Congress wants.
 
Top