Someone asked this very enlightening question. Here's an attempt at answering it.
While it is extremely tempting to imagine a radically developed and rich India now, had our government attempted liberalization right from the early 1950s, that assumption most likely is futile.
I think so because -
While it is extremely tempting to imagine a radically developed and rich India now, had our government attempted liberalization right from the early 1950s, that assumption most likely is futile.
I think so because -
- The British had almost completely hollowed out India before leaving - we had practically no capital resources, no industrial base, and no roadmap for the future. We were a blank canvas.
- Economic liberalisation through a democratic political process would have most likely led to a huge centralisation of wealth and resources within a decade, and the almost total annihilation and usurpation of all things indigenous (and we had/have tonnes of them). China avoided that largely for a long time post-1979 as a one-party system could take on the most convoluted of problems head-on.
- India was still developing its concept of nationhood through the entire 1950s, 60s and 70s, and in that sense, we may have become a carbon copy of the American model, something unsuited to our ground realities.
- Our military and security apparatus were relatively nascent. We were not a nuclear power.