I firmly disagree. Those statistics are skewed and flawed in more than a few ways, because you see they reference themselves most of the times. Whenever, I analyze anything I can't go about referencing my own system's output as proof that my system works. I need to set up independent checks and balances to make sure that the output matches the tolerances I want. Beyond, the Indian census they don't have an independent data source to collaborate their claims, which is a logical fallacy I can't buy.

Let us analyze literacy;

The literacy statistics once you go into the document are counted by the number of graduates from this system, but in the system itself, more specifically, in the rural areas degrees can be bought and large scale cheating takes place. This isn't recycled third hand estimates, but the reality that even those who design the schemes know. Further, independent checks and analysis has not been undertaken to find out the validity of the statistics.

One of the most glaring examples of this are the educational institutions they have cited. Most of these institutions in rural areas exist only on paper and their funds are often mis-allocated by corrupt individuals. Obviously, there are no verifiable statistics available for this, but based upon ground reports from individuals and officers it's shockingly common.

If you actually see the data then you see a stagnation that has set in since the survey you cited (1998) and the 2001 Census. One of the interesting leaps was made between 1951 and 1997; the literacy rate increased from 18.3% in 1951 to 62% in 1997. This implies that an average increase of .95% in literacy was experienced by the population. Yet the 2001 census showed slowing down of the trend and over 3 years the literacy rate increased only by 2.84%.

It might seem like nothing but when aggregated over the large indian population then the numbers add up. However, it could be argued that this was just a minute deviation in the norm based upon outside factors beyond their control. The only way we can conclude this is when the results of 2010 Census comes out, but I would like to cite the report itself since it basically makes the same point;

>>> In 1942, the British Government instituted the Sargent Committee to propose a plan for eradicating illiteracy in India. The committee proposed a plan that would make India 100 % literate in 40 years. Indian nationalists scoffed at the plan stating that India does not have that kind of patience, and wanted quicker results. However, 58 years after that and 53 years after independence, our literacy rate is only 62 %. <<<

>>>The National Policy on Education (NPE), framed in 1986 and amended in 1992, accords priority to universalisation of elementary education, universal retention of children up to 14 years of age, non-formal education in the educationally backward states and thrust to the National Literacy Mission.

It states that " the investment on education be gradually increased to reach a level of 6% of the National Income as early as possible". In fact, several Government documents dating back to 1969 state this goal. The actual level of investment has remained far short of this target.

The Programme of Action of the NPE 1986 and as revised in 1992 states "Time is of essence, and unless we act now, we stand in the danger of once again missing the opportunity of education reform, so critical not only for the development of our nation, but for our very survival". It also mentions that "it is people’s achievement in the education reconstruction which will make the real difference"

We have not yet succeeded in any meaningful reform and also having society’s involvement in the process.<<<

The summary is quite interesting;

>>>To sum up, India’s education system is highly skewed. India has excellent examples of institutions at all levels of education to demonstrate its capability. Some higher education institutions like IITs and IIMs have earned international acclaim.

But below this elite crust there is not much to speak of and the road ahead is challenging.<<<

----

The point I am trying to make is that if you define state disintegration as failure of the machinery of the government, then India isn't exactly in a healthy state no matter how you cut it. This isn't something about picking problems. It's about analyzing them and figuring out ways to solve it. However, before you can solve any problem you need to analyze it and this is precisely what I am doing.

>>>Your statements are too sweeping and repeat broad generalization without having any first hand experience.<<<

Whoa! Hold your horses I thought this was HN!

Yes, it's true that I am offending your nationalistic sensibilities and I apologize for that, but I need you to understand don't give a damn about patriotism. No offense, I don't get choked up about national anthems, flags and parades. As George Carlin would say they are symbols and I leave symbols to the simple minded. I care more about people instead. Maybe, I am not worthy enough to be a citizen of this state in your eyes, but that is something for neither of us to decide.

Take care. :)