What's new

Less democracy better for India, says Mahathir

MINK

FULL MEMBER
Joined
Jan 22, 2011
Messages
556
Reaction score
0
Country
India
Location
India
Less democracy better for India, says Mahathir

Former Malaysian Prime Minister, Tun Dr Mahathir bin Mohamad, who was the keynote speaker at HT Leadership Summit 2011 on Friday, said India could be China in terms of development if it was “less democratic”. Mohamad, who transformed Malaysia from being a small rubber exporter to one of Asia’s “tiger economies”, said India needed a much stronger central government and a powerful federal structure, but less powerful provincial governments to be able to make rapid economic progress.

The comments cut at the core of India’s current logjam and resistance to allow foreign direct investment in multi-brand retailing.

“Democracy does not always ensure stability and prosperity. He said that though democracy is the best form of government, it is not the easiest because people do not understand the limitations of democracy,” Mohamad.

Mohamad, who towered over his country’s politics for over two decades, is remembered for his colourful personality, frequent barbs at the West, and the authoritarian manner in which he implemented his pro-market reforms that saw Malaysia’s rise as an economic power.

“It is important for the world to understand the limitations of democracy,” he said. “Too much democracy, without understanding the responsibilities, can obstruct decision-making,” he said, later during an exclusive multimedia interview for hindustantimes.com.


A keen observer of Asian politics, Mohamad cited the example of Singapore, which had done very well economically because of limited democracy.

“Sometimes democracy can paralyse decision-making,” he said to a round of applause since it resonated with the audience, especially in view of the current deadlock in Parliament over allowing FDI in multi-brand retail.

Asked if he had any suggestion to make to the Indian prime minister Manmohan Singh, Mahathir said he ought firmly sell his policies he believed in.

‘Govt must convince people on FDI’

Known for pushing tough economic policies, Mahathir said the UPA government should hardsell its plan to allow FDI in multi-brand retail.

“If the Indian government thinks it (FDI) is good for the country, then it should publicise it well and launch an outreach plan to tell that it is good,” the former Malaysian PM said.

“The government should explain that FDI in multi-brand retail is good for the people, not the government,” he said, adding that decision-making is often a casualty in coalition governments.

Less democracy better for India, says Mahathir - Hindustan Times

Video:-

 
Last edited by a moderator:
democracy gives rise to mob rule where each party takes turns ruining the country while constantly lowering the standards.

american founding fathers made america into a republic, not a democracy.
 
china has the best system, the rulers can rule as long as the country is doing well and people's lives are getting better.

democracy causes each party to mess up, get out of power, then let the other party screw up, come back into power, and the vicious circle continues.

vote buying by powerful interest groups undermine the country at the expense of a few elites.
 
china has the best system, the rulers can rule as long as the country is doing well and people's lives are getting better.

democracy causes each party to mess up, get out of power, then let the other party screw up, come back into power, and the vicious circle continues.

vote buying by powerful interest groups undermine the country at the expense of a few elites.

How much did you get from CPC for saying that ?
 
it also gives the ability for other parties to correct mistakes that were made by the previous government, instead of them just going on in the one direction, such as what would happen in communist regimes. sometimes government will push things on the people, the majority of the people dont want it, but the government forces it, we can at least then get some sort of choice as to which policy is not as bad as the other, or the next government changes the policies made by the previous government, such as the IR laws that were introduced, and then abolished by the next government. in china, none of you even get a choice, and if you dont like it you cant say anything, and if you do, you get jailed.
 
But i think a few years of dictator rule will be ok for india. Atleast till all these reforms process in completed.
This congress government is totally paralyzed.
OR any single party should get complete majority in parliament to take hard decisions without worrying about the coalition partners.
 
mere changing of faces every 4 or 5 years is a recipe of disaster and only works for countries as long as they are able to fool the world with massive currency printing..eventually you end up like USa and europe. Stability and good governance are key to sucess..malaysia would not be what it is today without Mahatir constant rule for 20+ years
 
mere changing of faces every 4 or 5 years is a recipe of disaster and only works for countries as long as they are able to fool the world with massive currency printing..eventually you end up like USa and europe. Stability and good governance are key to sucess..malaysia would not be what it is today without Mahatir constant rule for 20+ years


I so much want India to end up like the USA :D
 
mere changing of faces every 4 or 5 years is a recipe of disaster and only works for countries as long as they are able to fool the world with massive currency printing..eventually you end up like USa and europe. Stability and good governance are key to sucess..malaysia would not be what it is today without Mahatir constant rule for 20+ years

we have seen non-democracies in the region from Pakistan to Bangladesh to (at times) Nepal, and if they did any better there would be a case study, the problem in India is not democracy, the problem in India are Center-Left policies.

Big Government, government trying to influence everything and anything. India is one country where the red-tape in terms of regulation and other non-sense should be removed. Government employee strength cut by half and let Private sector do its thing for a decade, and then fine tune it.

As Dr.Jaya Prakash of Lok Satta said.. "a pervasive government is unfocused and hence ineffective".
 
we have seen non-democracies in the region from Pakistan to Bangladesh to (at times) Nepal, and if they did any better there would be a case study, the problem in India is not democracy, the problem in India are Center-Left policies.

Big Government, government trying to influence everything and anything. India is one country where the red-tape in terms of regulation and other non-sense should be removed. Government employee strength cut by half and let Private sector do its thing for a decade, and then fine tune it.

As Dr.Jaya Prakash of Lok Satta said.. "a pervasive government is unfocused and hence ineffective".

Selective learning or white man bottom kissing...

Indias most powerfully ally, the Soviet Union was not democratic..during its entire hey day period..

China, you missed that..instead bought outback countries like Nepal and Bangladesh..the later especially is an epic story of democracy failure...

The hey days of Indian, before the British came with their democracy to loot the riches were not democratic either..The British took the wealth away and left behind democracy or jesus to play with wherever they set their foot!
 
it doesnt matter if a country is democratic,communist,etc
the important thing is that it should be able to apply its policies effectively which is not hapenning in india due to bureaucratic approach
communism failed in russia but was good for china and usa is a democratic country it made huge achievements so blaming the democracy,communism is not a good indicator
but in case of india the politicians are more interested in petty issues,the should rise above it to make a difference
 
Selective learning or white man bottom kissing...

Indias most powerfully ally, the Soviet Union was not democratic..during its entire hey day period..

China, you missed that..instead bought outback countries like Nepal and Bangladesh..the later especially is an epic story of democracy failure...

The hey days of Indian, before the British came with their democracy to loot the riches were not democratic either..The British took the wealth away and left behind democracy or jesus to play with wherever they set their foot!

What are you talking? Yeah, look at Egypt, Syria, Burma... having a stooge with a stick does not ensure a squat.

A diverse country like India cannot hold itself under autocratic rule, it is the easiest way to dismember India.
 

Back
Top Bottom