On Jan 10, 2008 3:33 AM, Valsa Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > *Two Nations, Two Choices Vir Sanghvi > <http://www.hindustantimes.com/Search/Search.aspx?q=Vir+Sanghvi&nodate=1>* > > But it is the second point that I regard as more significant. In the 1950s > and in the 1960s, when India was ruled by a Nehruvian consensus, there were > many critics — usually on the political right — who thought we had got it > badly wrong. How did it benefit India, they asked, to follow some crackpot > policy of non-alignment which involved a surreptitious tilt to the Soviet > Bloc when we could so easily be friends with the US, the world's most > powerful democracy? > > *There were only two major Asian countries that rejected the US > prescription for development and foreign policy: India and China. And look > where they are today. *
Let me get this right, the author is saying India's past socio economic policies were right based on an economy that has boomed for under a decade? What about all the years when many Indians were convinced that our policies were wrong? I contend that the stars have lined up in just the right alignment for India's current boom. If there is any lesson one could learn from our past economic planning, it is that the decisions we make today (continuing to use English as a link language and a language of government) have unintended consequences decades from now (the call center market). And for those of us who argue that the Hindutva Right is more pro-US, let me remind you that it was the coalition Janata government - in which Vajpayee and Advani were cabinet ministers - that kicked Coke out of the country leaving us with such excellent choices as Thumps Up and Campa 77 (ugh!). My personal bias is that we did make the correct socio-economic decisions then. But we cannot claim success for those policies based on unintended consequences of those policies. Thaths -- Bart: We were just planning the father-son river rafting trip. Homer: Hehe. You don't have a son. Sudhakar Chandra Slacker Without Borders
