Which will be a world superpower first? China, or India?

The answer to this question is very straightforward and simple - China. The socialist state of India will never ever become a superpower due to many endemic problems within its system of government, and overbearingly socialist economy.

However, there are many who furiously attack me when I say this, mostly due to a very biased outlook against China, and a very erroneous belief of China still being a totalitarian communist state, combined with a complete lack of knowledge of what China really is like these days. I suspect these folks have never been to China, have no idea what China is like these days, and are being tutored by Fox News or the like on "communism" and other irrelevant nonsense, while also choosing to ignore China's stupendous development.

Anyway, my question is this, which will be a world superpower first? China, or India? Please advise your opinion, along with plausible reasons.

My answer is: China. China is already up to first world standards by some benchmarks, and in another 30-40 years will definitely be the next superpower. India? Never, and I'll outline why below.

1. The Indian system of chaotic democracy, and socialist thinking only leads to corruption, going around in vicious circles, and very little development in the long run. In contrast, the Chinese one party system is far better, and is really what is required in India for progress. The Chinese one party system is the main reason why the country has progressed so fast, since the country is nowhere near as chaotic and lawless as India is. That, and ...

2. OVERPOPULATION! This is another major reason why India will never improve to the standard it should, while China jumps ahead by leaps and bounds. The Indian inability to get their population under control is pathetic to say the least.

3. The deplorable practices of socialism in India. The Indian economy is still a socialist economy, while the Chinese gave it up in the 70's.

4. The general socialist attitudes in India and age old thinking, which never changes no matter what is going on in the world.

The only things India does have going for it right now are more English speakers than China, and better IT people, BUT ...

1. English in India isn't necessarily English that others can understand. Only a very small %age of the population speaks standard English, and the rest speak their own "regional versions "of English, often laden with heavy, unintellgible accents and incomprehensible dialects. So, this is not an overall advantage in the long term, especially as the Chinese are learning US (or Aussie, UK, Canadain, South African) English to the exclusion of all others.

2. IT - Again the same problem - many IT folks, but the quality is not that good, and the wages are crap. Pure crap. China, on the other hand, while it may not have that many IT people now, is rapidly catching up in this aspect too.

I look forward to the Forum's response on this one. I would appreciate honest reasons and answers, and those without bias.

I don't have the knowledge to offer my own ideas but I did read this today:

India's merry-go-round gets a push from the top - Business - Business

The author is a very well respected writer on economics here. More at the link.

__________________
"There were no D-Day Heroes in 1973" - Cold Chisel Khe Sanh

The link doesn't address the question I asked, but thanks anyway, Diuretic.

It does bring up an interesting point though ...

This is quite correct, and in part the curse of socialism that Nehru imposed upon India. The socialist practices adopted by Nehru when India became independent are the main reason for the deplorable state India is in today.



Unfortunately, the country doesn't want to get past all this, instead choosing to remain in the Dark Ages, figuratively speaking that is.

China already is a superpower. India will become more important in the future. They got a lot potential as well, but they probably got even more problems to face than China. But this superpower stuff is probably a concept of the past anyway. The word is getting more and more complex and multi-polar in all aspects of politics and the world economy.

Just curious, why do you think so?

China is clearly a regional power but not quite yet a superpower. Whether it becomes one will depend on how the Chinese government handles some of the more pressing domestic social issues. Corruption, healthcare and environment.

__________________

The universe grows smaller every day and the threat of aggression by any group anywhere can no longer be tolerated. There must be security for all or no one is secure... - Klaatu

Sorry, but in terms of power and international influence, China most certainly IS a superpower.

All superpowers in the past, the US, USSR, United Kingdom, France, Spain, had the ability to project power to far flung corners of the globe. China, doesn't have a blue water navy, and other then in the Sudan, china has exerted little influence outside of its region.

India at least has the military, by token of its friendlier international relations, to allow it to begin aligning itself in the world affairs, so while it is not a superpower, it can be a minor player more globally until it moves up in the world (which of course it likely won't do until relations with Pakistan warm up).

Like I said. The "superpowers" concept that we knew is a concept of the past. More and more countries have or will sooner or later have nukes. The world economy is changing dramatically. Today, an interest rate hike in Tokyo can cause a stock market crash in Europe. All big players totally depend on each other economically. In the long run, there are no superpowers any more. Of course certain coutries will be more influential than others. But it's a multipolar world. And the ability to "project power" is an illusion anyway. Iraq and Afghanistan unfortunately are the best examples.

The ability for bank crashes has existed for as long as modern banking. The Kredit-Anstalt crashed most of Europe's banks and helped contribute to the collapse in the United States, yet it didn't prevent the USSR and USA from becoming superpowers.

The impacts of interconnection are often vastly overstated.

what he said.......its a done deal china is the superpower waiting in the wings to assert its dominance

Rak, we seem to agree on MORE things than one ...

This is the most ludicrious comment I've heard by far.

Dude, India's military is nothing compared to what the Chinese have. Hell, they had a FAR superior military even back in the 60's - that situation hasnt changed despite India upgrading it's army ... they have done the same thing.

While India may not have the shear size of a military that China has, they have better access to Russian and NATO equipment. For example Russia and England have both sold India functional carriers for its navy[1], which is a good deal different then the carrier that Russia sold to china as scrap[2] or the one which is going to become a theme park[3]. Russia has also sold India Akula's[4], and offered India its brand new Mig-33 MKI[5]. And while the US is offering F-16s and F/A-18s[6] China's own deal with Pakistan has been derailed pushing Pakistan back into the arms of the United States[7], because of Russia's closer ties to India[8]

So where does that leave China? It is a nation with less support from the world, with no blue water capable navy, contrasted to India which is having the world clamor over it, which has a blue water navy, and the best submarines Russia ever built.

[1] Indian Navy
[2] Aircraft Carrier Project - People's Liberation Army Navy
[3] ibid
[4] Akula Class / Bars-class / Project 971
[5] India, Russia in Negotiations re: Next-Generation Fighter (defense acquisition, defence purchasing, military procurement)
[6] India's Fighter Contract Still Up in the Air (defense acquisition, defence purchasing, military procurement)
[7] $5.1B Proposed in Sales, Upgrades, Weapons for Pakistan's F-16s (defense acquisition, defence purchasing, military procurement)
[8] Stuck in Sichuan: Pakistani JF-17 Program Grounded (defense acquisition, defence purchasing, military procurement)

Sorry, but globalsecurity.org and defenseindustry daily are hardly the most unbiased sources out there.

You also seem to have ignored the fact that the Chinese won the only war ever fought between India and China. Further, China has plenty of advanced military equipment, no matter what biased source you bring up.

As for your claim of "the world clamoring over India", this is another load of unbacked up BS.