It is a conundrum, because the same NRIs oppose bills that would solve India's problems.
The ban on crop burning (main cause of Delhi's pollution) was central to the farm bill. But protesting farmers (widely supported in the west) opposed it, and the bill died despite having democratic approval (both national opinion and sufficient votes)
> dared to vote a great scientist to president
We do not vote for Presidents in India. The president was selected by the ruling party (The same BJP as Modi) to be the ceremonial president. The same one that has now elected a tribal woman to President, to signify secular allegiances.
> believe in equal rights
If we are to use leaders as a yardstick to measure equality opportunities and rights, then the incompetent ~6th generation heir of the Nehru/Gandhi family leading the opposition is hardly a good look.
> disappointed by the country I called home for most of my life
As a fellow NRI, this is counter to what I hear from my fellow Indians. There is a ton of optimism around jobs, infrastructure growth and economic policies that are finally opening up the nation, as India embraces the US after decades spent close to the Russia.
> potentially great, secular country
Even as a big supporter of liberal (as in valuing liberty, low authoritarianism) democracies, the evidence for free-democracies industrializing is exactly zero. Every big nation that has successfully escaped poverty has done so through suffocatingly authoritarian means (SK, Japan, Taiwan, Chile, China, Thailand, Malaysia). Every single one of them only transitioned to a proper liberal democracy (if at all) AFTER industrialization had been achieved.
I corrected the means by which the president is chosen (it’s a vote by the electoral college so it wasn’t completely incorrect to say vote though). Thanks for mentioning that.
I don’t think I agree with your other points. But I do hope your optimism pans out because right now things feel bleak.
I'm sorry, I don't understand why the other commenter thinks they are write and you are wrong? We live in a representative democracy. The Prime Minister is elected by proving a majority in the Lok Sabha, and the President is elected by electoral college, that doesn't mean that the President isn't elected? You are absolutely right to say that the President is elected.
The reality on ground is different from what you read in the press or even online. We see the work being done. When work wasn't being done (recent example of Karnataka), people voted BJP out. The alternative (Congress) came to power promising loads of freebies. Now voters on the ground are pissed off (plenty of videos where people are not willing to pay electricity bills or public transport fares because Congress said it'll make all of that free but never did so till date). So this hyperbole on BJP being "evil" is largely overblown and it is quite persistent in the Hacker News circles. Ultimately the voter decides based on whether the Party in power delivers or not. BJP has been doing great work on the infrastructure/development front as well as attracting investment. That is visible on the ground. What BJP is lacking severely is in State level leadership/politics which needs to be fixed. Congress on the other hand has given up its National ambitions and pursuing weaknesses it sees in BJP's state level politics. This is vibrancy of democracy. Nothing to feel "bleak" about unless you are drowning yourself in anti-India Western media reports and thinking that is the truth. Maybe you need to ask yourself if you are also part of a misinformation bubble yourself without even realizing it?
I absolutely hate the way fellow Indians will just try and deflect negative stories about India as western propaganda.
You do a disservice to your country by following that tired playbook.
Did you ever stop to consider that I am actually well informed and genuinely disappointed with my country.
Criticism of the country and party doesn’t mean I’m simply misinformed. I was critical of things when I lived there, I consume my news directly from Indian news sites.
Maybe you need to ask yourself why you feel the need to assume it’s western propaganda?
Sadly this is the line that the BJP and their followers have taken. Any criticism from outside India is "western propaganda". Any criticism from within India is "anti-nationalism", "pakistani" or "tukde-tukde gang".
Because we see the same actors coming out of the woodworks every time an issue breaks out. I mean, is the Opposition so bereft of people that it has to project the same faces every time? Some of these actors play multiple roles. Sometimes they don the hat of psephologists, sometimes lawyers, sometimes politicians, sometimes journalists and sometimes even give lectures on religion and philosophy. Such multi-talented actors cannot be so easily switched out every time right? Which is why Opposition has such a tough time winning General Elections in India. We see through this BS.
I won't name names but I am pretty sure you have already guessed who I am talking about. Even in these wrestlers protests we clearly see who is the puppet master who is controlling the marionette. The same puppet master active during farmer protests. The same puppet master active during CAA protests. That face is pretty much constant.
Right now let us just accept this basic fact that there is no one, in the Opposition at least, who is a serious contender to Modi at the National Level. Or even Yogi or any of the other BJP leaders. This is sad truth for Opposition parties that it has to accept first before it can work on finding the right candidate for the job. But doing that is easier said than done. When the Opposition is fragmented and bickering amongst itself, there is no way it can put on a United front. It tried it multiple times and failed miserably every single time. And being just anti-Modi/anti-BJP won't win votes. You need to present a viable alternative that is actually capable of taking on not just Modi but also be able to represent India on an International level. I don't find anyone in the Opposition fit enough for that position. Sorry.
The sheer amount of hubris in your post is astounding.
So any opinion other than your own is propaganda fed by the west, but the only true reality is the one you agree with that paints India in a flattering light.
Using “the world happiness index” as some kind of gotcha propaganda is hilarious, when we’re discussing actual issues like arresting protestors. Just ridiculous.
I won’t be replying again to you because I don’t think you are capable of accepting that other people disagree with your world view. It’s unhealthy and I really think you need to leave your own bubble.
Yeah the same Western media that fed the world the news that Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruction, Libya needs to be attacked to install democracy, justified sanctions on most energy producers who were not much in favor of the USD such as Iran, Venezuela, Libya, Russia.
Some day you will realize the Western media is a propaganda tool wielded by the powerful arms and other lobbies to paint their targets and give the Western governments pretext to begin interfering in the matters of a non-pliable foreign government.
Not OP (and not a fan of his whataboutism plus you don't deserve to be downvoted) but I think the issue is that India is so large and diverse that commentators can be right and wrong at the exact same time when painting a brush with the term "India".
When social and political norms can vary within individual states, let alone the entire country, it causes people to feel reporting about very negative or very positive news is propaganda one way or the other.
A lot of this is then further inflamed by IT Cells from parties across the board, especially because most NRIs are getting news about India via the internet plus social media.
Add to that the fact that most Western media isn't biased (I've worked with them), but might write articles using a broad brush that pisses other NRIs off and then we all devolve into regionalist or casteist bickering.
Eg. When the Unnao tragedy happened (which was horrible), it was reported in some western media that it was in India and broad brushed as an Indian issue. A number of Tamil and Malayali friends too offense to that and began saying "oh, it's actually Uttar Pradesh. Bhaiyyas are always like that" and regionalist shit like that, which obviously pissed off the UP+Bihari wale in my office.
On the side, you can see propagandists like Agnihotri inflaming Hindu-Muslim tensions by bringing up the Kerala Story as if every single Malayali Muslim is a future Jihadi and inflaming Hindi-Southern tensions by making a number of idiots assume Malayalis are a 5th column, which is an extremely horrible broad brushed assertation
And finally, a lot of people say that BJP voters are illiterate and illiteracy is pushing back India. As someone with family from small town India who has known illiterate people, they are smart as you and I. Just because they didn't get the opportunity to learn to read+write doesn't mean they can't think rationally and logically. So for NRIs from lower middle and working class (as a lot of NRIs increasingly are now), it feels very classist and insulting.
Basically, what I'm getting at is that we use our prior experiences and background to understand a country, but when you are dealing with a country as large and diverse as India it automatically falls apart.
> Add to that the fact that most Western media isn't biased (I've worked with them)
Have you forgotten the New York Times job ad for South Asia Business Correspondent for India?
Since you say Western media isn't biased and that you have worked with them, I would like to see at least one huff piece published by Western media on Modi/BJP. Surely there has to be at least one article to counter all the anti-Modi/anti-BJP articles we keep seeing propping up in the Western media. If you can't find even one piece that can counter-balance the mainstream narrative about India and its ruling political party then it isn't actually "unbiased". The tilt towards one side of the political spectrum is pretty obvious to all those who have been seeing Western media play its game.
> so large and diverse that commentators can be right and wrong at the exact same time when painting a brush with the term "India"
Yeah and since when has Western media ever understood this nuance? The bias is deep seated and pretty obvious to observers like me who fall on the other side of the political spectrum.
> Have you forgotten the New York Times job ad for South Asia Business Correspondent for India?
The NYT is not the primary source of truth for policymakers in the United States.
I agree there are a number of issues with the NYT's Delhi office, and a lot of that stems from bad pay.
The media ecosystem in the US works the same way as how the media works pin India. I haven't seen very nuanced discussions about American institutions in the Dainik Jagran, Hindustan Times, or WION either.
> Yeah and since when has Western media ever understood this nuance?
In the Media that is actually consumed and read and used by policymakers like when I was on the Hill, as well as in the educational programs that bring future Americans into the Foreign Service.
> The NYT is not the primary source of truth for policymakers in the United States.
I don't have any issue with most current policymakers in US (for the past decade at the very least). Surprisingly most US lawmakers have their own individual views on India (unaffected/not influenced by Western media) and have a good working relationship with the GoI (including Modi and more specifically Jaishankar). This includes policymakers from both sides of the political spectrum (Republicans as well as the Democrats). Thank God for that. Else if they actually believed half the articles that came out of papers like NYT or Washington Post, they would have a totally warped understanding of India. And a really negative one at that. Policymakers pre-Bush era got most things about India wrong (and paid a price for it too with WTC bombings, 9/11 and finding Osama Bin Laden hiding close to their Ally's military complex). US Policymakers have changed their outlook and very few actually hold on to the anti-India stance that they once had. That's welcome.
My issue is with the common citizens getting a warped view of India. That's all.
> In the Media that is actually consumed and read and used by policymakers like when I was on the Hill, as well as in the educational programs that bring future Americans into the Foreign Service.
That's good to know. But Western Media still has a lot to catch up vis-a-vis being unbiased. They still heavily tilt towards parties that are non-BJP. That is fine if that is their intended outlook. But at least let it not pretend to be unbiased then.
> The media ecosystem in the US works the same way as how the media works pin India. I haven't seen very nuanced discussions about American institutions in the Dainik Jagran, Hindustan Times, or WION either.
Yes I agree with you that Indian media is biased too. Most of the media outlets are pro-Modi/pro-BJP. And in a way it should also be seen as a counter to Western media outlets and continuous disinformation/propaganda that kept coming from there. Let us not forget that people who work in Media organizations also have their own individual biases and they typically hire people who subscribe to their biases. It is not always necessarily a money thing (where the ruling party pays a media organization to speak in its favour). Many a times it is purely for ideological reasons.
Much the same as NYT or WP. The only problem is when NYT/WP is that it proclaims itself to be unbiased. That's when I go "Come on man I know you aren't. Quit the pretence".
Also Indian media typically is reactionary. We don't particularly have nuanced discussions about the West because first and foremost we don't have our own statistics bureau that can create all sorts of indexes that the West creates out of thin air. Some of the Western Indexes are based on factual research but most of them aren't. And we just typically counter them in a reactionary manner. We do not invest efforts into actually coming up with actual statistics or at least indulge in counter-propaganda. That appetite simply does not exist. Many of these Western statistics, stories and news articles go unrebutted.
Like I gave an example of World Happiness Index. Let us take World Press Freedom Index. India ranks below Afghanistan in World Press Freedom Index. 11 spots behind Afghanistan. This is a total joke. Is the West actually trying to say that Taliban, which is ruling Afghanistan now, has more Press Freedom than India? You see how these nonsensical statistics go unchallenged? Because what would you even counter these with? It is that ridiculous! Surely if everything was so bad in India we wouldn't be a thriving and one of the fastest growing economies in the World today. We would all be on the streets rioting (like what happened in Sri Lanka) and storming Modi's residence. Most of it is hyperbole.
> The sheer amount of hubris in your post is astounding.
Good to know you consider the World Happiness Index 2023 as hubris. We can finally agree on something.
> I won’t be replying again to you because I don’t think you are capable of accepting that other people disagree with your world view
Funny how you believe "I don’t think you are capable of accepting that other people disagree with your world view" and in the text rejected my valid argument which you had absolutely zero counter for.
Either accept that the World Happiness Index is a fabrication of the West or rebut with facts as to why India ranks below Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Myanmar. You got stumped with just this easiest piece of fact that you couldn't even counter. Tells me everything I need to know.
> when we’re discussing actual issues like arresting protestors
Cry me a river. The West is so pristine it doesn't arrest protesters at all. Nor do Government agencies kill people randomly. Nor does it indulge in assassinations both within its own soil or in countries that it has no jurisdiction over. Nor does the West bomb other nations to bits. Nor does it arrest farmers and confiscate their properties and bank accounts. The West is epitome of truth, fairness and justice. While puny Indians back home, which you incidentally rejected because of the deep seated hatred, are the horrible ones who do not have capacity to discern truth from fiction and do not understand how a Democracy functions.
>> The West is so pristine it doesn't arrest protesters at all. Nor do Government agencies kill people randomly. Nor does it indulge in assassinations...
Yeah and what is wrong with whataboutery? I have no issues with sprinkling some whataboutery to expose the West for the ridiculous expectations it has from a developing country like India while at the same time indulging in worse acts itself. I mean at least don't effing preach if you can't show yourself to be a good example/role model. That's the least you can do.
> rabid amount of hate will get you nowhere in life and will always keep you in a negative mood and disappointed
Wat.
Honestly, this attitude—equating moderate criticism with “rabid hate”— causes me to pause every time I get excited about India. There are democratic trade-offs in development. India has made them decently historically, and well recently. But the way you tank that balance is with blind jingoism.
> Honestly, this attitude—equating moderate criticism with “rabid hate”
I was responding to this comment: "I absolutely hate the way fellow Indians will just try and deflect negative stories about India as western propaganda."
Nice try trying to change the tone of his sentence (which was "I absolutely hate") to "moderate criticism". There is nothing "moderate" about "absolutely hating" something/someone. I was just responding to that "extreme" emotion he was projecting. Such extreme emotions might win you the mob but it won't change facts.
> causes me to pause every time I get excited about India
Okay. And? What difference would it make to India's growth trajectory if you lose your excitement? Is it going to make any dent?
> But the way you tank that balance is with blind jingoism.
Lol. As an Indian the only content I get to consume majority of the times, from Western media/press, is how shitty India is. And this has nothing to do with BJP/Modi but has to do with how India has always been projected in the Western media. Take literally any media clip of India showcased on Western news channels and you will have at least 1 clip of Mumbai slum (which is the smallest portion of Mumbai, a part of Maharashtra state in India) projected as India itself. It is like Indian channels showing Skid Row as USA. So if you feel some sort of "jingoism" coming from me it is purely a response to the nonsense I always see on Western media whenever India is talked about. As it almost always projects and enhances stereotypes already existing about India and Indians. And lets not forget the most common tropes: poverty, illiteracy, drinking water, sanitation, slums, education, electricity etc. No matter how much India improves and solves these issues (many of which are close to 100%) it still wouldn't satisfy West's craving for denigrating India just for kicks.
So if I feel defensive about it, don't construe it as jingoism for the sake of it. I actually feel the difference in standard of living after being born here and lived for 34 years. I presume I have more experience about how much India has changed compared to Westerners or even NRIs who abandoned India for greener pastures and sit in the West and pontificate. Sorry if I sound jingoistic but I don't really care. Especially when the West doesn't really care about how India is denigrated repeatedly in their Media.
And if anyone has even a mild amount of criticism of the West, they get banned/cancelled in the West or worse bombed out of existence (Iraq/Syria/Libya). So much for tolerance to free speech and human rights.
> nothing "moderate" about "absolutely hating" something/someone
Fair enough. “I hate” in American English is a complaining—not raging—tone, though I grant it’s ambiguous and concede it shouldn’t be used.
> What difference would it make to India's growth trajectory if you lose your excitement?
Not much. Generally speaking, “fuck you, I’m beautiful” cultures that turn insecurity into a national sport have a common path.
India’s elites are savvy enough to build trade and diplomatic relationships, learn from others’ successes and failures and show outward strength. But I’ve seen this dismissive attitude towards criticism of any kind in my own family, and it’s paused at least my investing in India. (The only other places I see this, ironically, is in the U.K., Russia and rural American south.)
> I presume I have more experience about how much India has changed compared to Westerners or even NRIs who abandoned India for greener pastures and sit in the West and pontificate
Right. This attitude. It’s limiting in its rejection of unexpected sources of information. Again, it’s not common. Particularly among the elite and worldly. But as in America, when this attitude spreads, it diminishes prospects.
And why is this so important? If you don't invest someone else will. The World is huge. There are plenty of players who are willing to invest in India's growth: both within borders of India as well as people from outside India. No dearth of those who believe in India's future.
> Generally speaking, “fuck you, I’m beautiful” cultures that turn insecurity into a national sport have a common path.
You know who excels at this the most? The West. Its penchant for "installing democracy" in various countries, by force, and then leaving it completely destabilized and destroyed is something we have seen happen time and time again. Which is why you see trends of de-dollarization and non-alignment picking up rapidly. If India doesn't toe the Western line of thought we are targeted, either with sanctions (like in the 90s after reciprocal nuclear tests) or pompous pontifications on democracy/human rights in 2020s (because the West no longer can simultaneously sanction as well as invest in India's growth can it?). You see we Indians know how to survive and thrive even in the worst of conditions. The 90s are a good reminder for all of us as to how reliable the West is. If we go further back into the 70s we had to face off a Western Alliance which sent ships to nuke us out of existence because we chose to side with Democracy against an evil Dictatorship which the West was mollycoddling with. If you don't know what I am talking about read up on the USS Enterprise and the 7th fleet (Task Force 74). [1]
So yeah it applies more to the West compared to ancient cultures rooted in tradition like India.
> (The only other places I see this, ironically, is in the U.K., Russia and rural American south.)
So you are saying you don't see the West indulging in this but only U.K., Russia and rural American south? No wonder why the West is failing the past decade. Do you not even see the strong anti-West sentiment in the air as well as the de-dollarization that is gathering rapid speed/progress? If I were in your position I wouldn't be bothered about investing in India being an issue but be more worried about protecting my investments in the West considering the crazy geopolitical decisions the West has been taking lately. It has eroded a lot of confidence/trust other countries had towards the West. To the point where we are building alternate infrastructure to settle trade (which is currently dominated by the West with its SWIFT infrastructure). Not a good outlook for the West at the very least. Western hegemony will end. It is no longer a question of "if" but "when".
> India’s elites are savvy enough to build trade and diplomatic relationships, learn from others’ successes and failures and show outward strength
We don't need to learn from others' successes and failures. We have plenty of our own successes and failures if we just bother to look back into our rich Ancient history (which many Westernized Indians lack basic knowledge in). And most Indian elites/diplomats/businessmen have given examples from India's Ancient history as their source of strength. Have linked an example of the same from India's best EAM that we have ever had until now [2].
> limiting in its rejection of unexpected sources of information
Please. Do not try to simplify this issue as an issue of rejecting "unexpected sources of information". The Western media has been playing this playbook for decades now. Most articles you see about India or the Indian Government (irrespective of who is in power) is mostly anti-India. Even positive news (like a successful rocket launch by ISRO) is sprinkled with at least some amount of negativity. The usual trope being poverty. There is no two ways about it. None of this is "unexpected". Rather Indians would find it "unexpected" if the West does not use any of the usual stereotypes associated with Indians and broadcasts news as is. We are so used to the denigration that many have become immune to it over time. We just expect to see at least one b-roll of Mumbai slum, of a heavily crowded marketplace, people hanging from trains and if not for these then definitely one of monkeys hopping buildings stealing food. Pick any news story about India from any Western publication, watch the story and tell me you don't see at least one of these typical racial stereotypes.
>> Take the World Happiness Index 2023 which ranked India lower than Pakistan ...
May be World Happiness Index 2023 data is bit flawed. But I don't think that means whole world is sharing propaganda against India.
>> Heck we get 100Mbps-1Gbps unlimited internet connectivity anywhere in India at the lowest rates possible in the entire World.
How is it an achievement of Government while this was done by private companies like Reliance at the cost of public owned BSNL? Government actually let the loss of public tax payers money by giving favourable treatment to private companies.
Modi and his fans always talk about low prices of internet in India, while its a failure of government to control Reliance where Reliance is using money raised from state bank to give dirt cheap internet connection to public and killing the competition. They have already started raising the prices now that several competitors are gone. [1]
Reliance raises money from public banks, Reliance uses that money to get tower network of public owned BSNL, Reliance gets priority over BSNL to launch 4G, Reliance is in profit while BSNL is in loss, Government employee phone connections are transferred from BSNL to private entity Reliance. [2] [3] [4]
>> I don't need some stupid organization in the West to tell me I am more unhappy than these countries.
Why care about other stupid organizations while you have "Whatsapp university" to keep us informed. [5]
> May be World Happiness Index 2023 data is bit flawed. But I don't think that means whole world is sharing propaganda against India.
Okay then lets take the World Press Freedom Index 2023. India is behind Afghanistan by 9 points in Press Freedom. Explain how Taliban ruled Afghanistan grants more Press Freedom than Democratic India.
> How is it an achievement of Government while this was done by private companies like Reliance at the cost of public owned BSNL? Government actually let the loss of public tax payers money by giving favourable treatment to private companies.
What nonsense. It is exact opposite of what you are saying. BSNL was always a loss making company that never innovated and was kept stagnant for decades. We all saw how shabby the 2G rollout was. And who subsidized BSNL? It was us, the tax payers. They never turned a profit even once. Even now they are "expected" to turn a profit in 2026-27.
What you are advocating for is maximum Government. That almost always ends in disaster. What you should be aiming for is minimum Government. We, the People, have granted Government powers through the Constitution. The reason we did that is because somethings are best managed by the Government than either free markets or people themselves: building infrastructure, security, law and order, healthcare, protecting borders. Anything beyond this is not mandate of the Government. Government has no business being in business. The more private players are encouraged the better for growth of an country/economy. The less Government intervention the better.
Reliance bought the licenses for 4G through an auction. And it was bought in 2010 (during Congress ruled UPA era). So your ridiculous accusation of "giving favourable treatment to private companies" applies to Congress more than anyone else. Either ways, I don't find anything wrong in it as it was a fair auction that did not go the ways of 2G scam. The auction happened during the Congress regime. Reliance won. But Congress failed to setup the infrastructure needed for Reliance to build the network. This is where the Government is needed to intervene and help out by building infrastructure. PPP partnerships are forged for this reason only. Government builds basic infrastructure (like connecting roads, electricity lines, plumbing etc), Private Companies build plants, machinery and in this case installing antennas and laying of fibre optic cables. It takes two to tango. Congress was missing in the picture as it was busy with corruption. It is only when BJP came to power that this project was fast tracked.
> where Reliance is using money raised from state bank to give dirt cheap internet connection to public and killing the competition
Lol you are talking as if Reliance had underdogs as competitors. Airtel, Vodafone, Idea etc are all billion dollar companies. They could have easily taken on Reliance. In fact they were quite content with their dominence in the sector and refused to innovate. It is not Reliance's fault if the competition was caught sleeping at the wheels.
> They have already started raising the prices now that several competitors are gone.
Welcome to Capitalism 101. This is how it works everywhere. Not just in India.
> How is it an achievement of Government while this was done by private companies like Reliance
Did I say it is achievement of the Government anywhere? I talked about positive changes that are happening in India and the infrastructure developmental projects that are shaping such outcomes. For Reliance to lay their antennas and fibre optic cables it requires Government to support through infrastructure development. By making connecting roads/highways and digging necessary lines for fibre optic cables to be laid. This is the work of the Government: infrastructure. The Government did not setup the network. I never said that anywhere.
> Reliance raises money from public banks, Reliance uses that money to get tower network of public owned BSNL, Reliance gets priority over BSNL to launch 4G, Reliance is in profit while BSNL is in loss, Government employee phone connections are transferred from BSNL to private entity Reliance.
Dude how different is it from the West? Even in the West you have Verizon, AT&T etc. Does the US have something equivalent to BSNL? Nope it doesn't. In fact I want Modi to shut down BSNL. It is a big drain on tax payer money. Just like US doesn't have any state owned telecom companies, India shouldn't have one either. Especially one which is stagnant and unable to innovate. We can use the tax payer money for other better causes.
> Why care about other stupid organizations while you have "Whatsapp university" to keep us informed. [5]
When you have no proper rebuttal this is the crap you come up with. This is why Opposition can never win the General Election in India. You guys suck at this. Most of your information is hollow at best. No proper study. Just a bunch of links from media stories. If you had known that Reliance won the 4G auction during UPA regime you wouldn't have even made this point.
I haven't even included UPI in this which has been an absolute game changer. Anyone with 2 brain cells to rub together would know how transformational UPI has been to India and growth of India in the past few years. But yeah we should neglect all that because the West said so. Sure there are problems in India just like there are problems in every other country in the World. But when it comes to India, the problems are amplified to an unwarranted degree in the West. Maybe because we don't toe the Western line when it comes to many things (like staying non-aligned or not signing the non-proliferation treaty) and the West just doesn't like it. Has been holding a grudge since the 90s when India conducted reciprocal nuclear tests (after China conducted its own nuclear tests). Bill Clinton saw it fit to sanction Democratic India but not Authoritarian CCP. It is not something new. And pre-90s was even worse with the West supporting Dictatorial Islamic Republic of Pakistan against Democratic India.
>> I haven't even included UPI in this which has been an absolute game changer.
Wasn't the work on UPI started in 2009 and the vision statement was prepared in 2012, 2 years before Modi/BJP came to power?
>> In April 2009, National Payment Corporation of India (NPCI) was formed to integrate all the payment mechanisms in India and make them uniform for all retail payments. RBI in 2012 released a vision statement for a period of four years that indicated commitment towards building a safe, efficient, accessible, inclusive, interoperable and authorized payment and settlement system in India. UPI was officially launched in 2016 for public use. [1]
There were plenty of projects that were announced before BJP came to power and was never implemented. Congress was elected twice to implement these very things. Instead they spent all their time indulging in communal nonsense and high ticket corruption. To just put it into perspective: The Finance Minister P Chidambaram (during UPA era) castigated Modi for launching Digital India when he said it makes no sense considering India is not connected with Internet to the last village [1]. And that it will be a failure. The entire Opposition made fun of it in 2017.
So no matter if you have great ideas, if you do not even believe in those ideas let alone execute on them it is as good as dead ideas.
We would have progressed rapidly had UPA not indulged in corruption and working tirelessly to convict Modi in the Gujarat riots cases and instead focused its efforts on doing some actual developmental work, many of those ideas rightfully was thought of in its time (which i'll give credit for). But they lacked big time on execution. Modi had a proven track record in Gujarat which helped him beat Congress in 2014 elections. He just has brought most of Congress's plans to fruition which Congress doesn't like for obvious reasons.
UPA losing power is its own doing more than BJP's coming to power. Heck even Modi keeps taunting Congress in the Parliament saying that most of the policies that Congress opposes today was all their own plans that they never brought to life. That's the reason the Opposition is unable to counter BJP. BJP is just doing exactly what the Opposition promised in its manifesto when it came to development but never delivered.
> Wasn't the work on UPI started in 2009 and the vision statement was prepared in 2012
Is this[1] or is this not P. Chidambaram, Indian Finance Minister during the Congress-led UPA regime, criticizing the government's digital payment plans? You think such a pessimistic guy or his government would have done anything to make UPI a success except in a half-hearted fashion?
There is a saying: success has many fathers while failure is an orphan. No wonder when UPI has turned out to be a resounding success, people either turn up to claim credit or to run down the success of the current government.
The fact that they are elected by electoral college does not make them non-democratic or non-elected. We live in a representative democracy.
> As a fellow NRI, this is counter to what I hear from my fellow Indians. There is a ton of optimism around jobs, infrastructure growth and economic policies that are finally opening up the nation
One wouldn't rely on anecdotal evidence to justify policy. For example my own experience is the opposite of yours. I hear complains about unemployment, lack of safety for women, cost of living crisis, lack of safety of Muslims.
> Every big nation that has successfully escaped poverty has done so through suffocatingly authoritarian means
Just because others failed doesn't mean we should too. Keep in Mind that the Republic of India has survived until now, and people at it's inception said it wouldn't.
Wow! Most of what you mentioned is plain wrong. Not sure if you are mistaken or lying knowingly.
>> The ban on crop burning (main cause of Delhi's pollution) was central to the farm bill.
Crop burning is already outlawed in India and enforced with fines. Why you need to make a new law for something which is already illegal? Below was the actual central idea of the farm bill:
"The laws would have deregulated a system of government-run wholesale markets, allowing farmers to sell directly to food processors, but farmers feared that this would result in the end of government-guaranteed price floors, thereby reducing the prices they would receive for their crops."[1]
>> We do not vote for Presidents in India.
Again, wrong. The 2022 Indian presidential election was held on 18 July 2022 to elect the president of India. The election was the 16th presidential election in India since the Partition. [2]
>> incompetent ~6th generation heir of the Nehru/Gandhi family
Source please?
>> There is a ton of optimism around jobs, infrastructure growth and economic policies
Source please? You must be living in an alternate world.
>> Every single one of them only transitioned to a proper liberal democracy
So, China is a "proper liberal democracy" as per you? Also can you please share a source to support your claims?
Stubble burning was long banned but it's still being practiced and contributes to Delhi's pollution. In fact, one of the demands of the farm protests was to release those who were arrested for stubble burning[1].
> Again, wrong. The 2022 Indian presidential election was held on 18 July 2022 to elect the president of India.
It's not a general election. Only MPs and MLAs get to vote for the president.
> Source please? You must be living in an alternate world.
There are indeed concerns on job growth but infrastructure growth and economic policies have caught pace in the last decade. There's a reason why Meta, Google and Aramco want to pour money into the country.
Looks like you are trying to respond to be without understanding the topic first and your above comment does not relate.
My reply was to this comment which said:
1. "The ban on crop burning (main cause of Delhi's pollution) was central to the farm bill"
2. "We do not vote for Presidents in India. The president was selected by the ruling party"
Can you please let me know how any of above 2 statements are correct?
Also, to your other comment:
>> There's a reason why Meta, Google and Aramco want to pour money into the country.
Companies like Meta, Google and Aramco invest and try to invest in all the counties for their own growth. This is also to target the huge population of India. These companies also invested in China, that does not make China any better. Can you please share a source for "infrastructure growth and economic policies have caught pace"?
> "We do not vote for Presidents in India. The president was selected by the ruling party"
The President of India is voted by electoral college. We live in a representative democracy. Just because the President is voted by electoral college doesn't mean they are not elected. Keep in mind that the Prime Minister of India is also not directly elected, they are chosen by the Lok Sabha.
Banning doesn't take care of the problem completely unless there is a mechanism to take stubble away from the farmers. If there is no mechanism, people will burn it to get rid.
That he is incompetent ? I mean, even the most ardent congress fan won't deny that Rahul Gandhi is incompetent at best and a BJP plant at worst. He oversaw the downfall of the freest of wins in world politics anywhere.
>> He oversaw the downfall of the freest of wins in world politics anywhere.
BJP under Modi-Shah lost 8 states, 218 by-elections in last two years [1]
Karnataka and Himachal Pradesh are the two states where the BJP has lost to Congress in the last six months. The BJP lost deposits in 38.4% of the seats it contested in Southern Karnataka. [2] [3]
Modi was the face of election campaign and spent whole centre government money and machinery to campaign. Modi speaks a script written by someone else by using a teleprompter and has never given an open & live unscripted press conference in last 8 years ([4] [5] [6]). By your logic, are you trying to say Modi is also incompetent?
>> The exact line you quoted, literally ends with an "if at all" in brackets right after.
Got it. So you are hoping some day China will transition to democracy AFTER industrialization had been achieved, and you think India might need to convert to an authoritarian state in order to successfully escaped poverty? Is my understanding correct?
Also, you haven's still answered my 2 questions:
1. How is "The ban on crop burning (main cause of Delhi's pollution) was central to the farm bill."?
2. What do you mean about this: "We do not vote for Presidents in India. The president was selected by the ruling party"?
> The ban on crop burning (main cause of Delhi's pollution) was central to the farm bill. But protesting farmers (widely supported in the west) opposed it, and the bill died despite having democratic approval (both national opinion and sufficient votes)
Funny you are being downvoted because you are speaking the truth. I have already said in another comment that people like the current party because they actually get shit done in various areas like infrastructure etc which was hugely neglected for decades. We all know that but some people wouldn't want to accept.
May be you are on same page with the parent poster. But I answered to the parent comment mentioning most of the claims are wrong.
Btw, selling government assets to private companies, or getting the new roads constructed and charging tolls on them does not exactly considered as a government achievement.
The ban on crop burning (main cause of Delhi's pollution) was central to the farm bill. But protesting farmers (widely supported in the west) opposed it, and the bill died despite having democratic approval (both national opinion and sufficient votes)
> dared to vote a great scientist to president
We do not vote for Presidents in India. The president was selected by the ruling party (The same BJP as Modi) to be the ceremonial president. The same one that has now elected a tribal woman to President, to signify secular allegiances.
> believe in equal rights
If we are to use leaders as a yardstick to measure equality opportunities and rights, then the incompetent ~6th generation heir of the Nehru/Gandhi family leading the opposition is hardly a good look.
> disappointed by the country I called home for most of my life
As a fellow NRI, this is counter to what I hear from my fellow Indians. There is a ton of optimism around jobs, infrastructure growth and economic policies that are finally opening up the nation, as India embraces the US after decades spent close to the Russia.
> potentially great, secular country
Even as a big supporter of liberal (as in valuing liberty, low authoritarianism) democracies, the evidence for free-democracies industrializing is exactly zero. Every big nation that has successfully escaped poverty has done so through suffocatingly authoritarian means (SK, Japan, Taiwan, Chile, China, Thailand, Malaysia). Every single one of them only transitioned to a proper liberal democracy (if at all) AFTER industrialization had been achieved.
It is depressing. But, the numbers don't lie.