Two problems in this tribute
1. Wrong to say Nehru's persona gave India a geopolitical stature it didn't deserve
India's share of Asian GDP higher in 1950 than in 2000
2. Nehru was no great Hindu lawgiver. Hindu society had reformist tendencies for atleast 100 yrs before Nehru
1. Wrong to say Nehru's persona gave India a geopolitical stature it didn't deserve
India's share of Asian GDP higher in 1950 than in 2000
2. Nehru was no great Hindu lawgiver. Hindu society had reformist tendencies for atleast 100 yrs before Nehru
As Rao himself notes, Nehru failed to reform Muslim society. He was no great Muslim lawgiver. In part because Muslim society was less willing to "reform" than Hindu society
To give credit to Nehru is to not acknowledge the currents with H-society which led to 1956 Act
To give credit to Nehru is to not acknowledge the currents with H-society which led to 1956 Act
Rao takes great pleasure in calling India piss-poor and other such abject terms
But as a banker he should know that geopolitical / economic heft is always assessed in "relative" terms not absolute
But as a banker he should know that geopolitical / economic heft is always assessed in "relative" terms not absolute
India had greater geopolitical / economic heft in 1600 when it accounted for 25-30% of World GDP even though the India of 1600 was "dirt poor" compared to India of today or even Indira Gandhi's India 50 years ago
Heft and influence is relative to what others are upto
Heft and influence is relative to what others are upto
Back in 1950, India's GDP was the same as China's, or probably a tad bigger
Countries like S.Korea, Malaysia, S'pore were not miles ahead of India as they are today
In relative terms, we are much behind today in the Asian rat race
(though we've recovered ground in past 20 yrs)
Countries like S.Korea, Malaysia, S'pore were not miles ahead of India as they are today
In relative terms, we are much behind today in the Asian rat race
(though we've recovered ground in past 20 yrs)
