> China is 90%+ ethnic Han with one-language-multiple-dialects, one-party state with most population concentrated in a few provinces. Indian elections might have a hundred plus candidates running for one-seat for parliament. India is a multi-ethnic multi-religious democracy with hundreds of languages spread across diverse geographies. The entrenched nature of (in)decision making in a three-tiered democracy, a free press, coupled with woke activism and sclerotic judiciary makes progress slow especially compared to China.

That seems like a lot of excuses frankly.

> You can have the biggest bullet train network created from scratch in a decade in China but then you get the Four Pests campaign [2] which led to eating and trading in wildlife and perhaps sparked Covid, Cultural revolution, the great leap forward, the one-child policy, Vietnam invasion, Tiananmen, Xinjiang internment camps and President for life.

India also has its share of problems - terrorism, conflicts with pakistan/kashmir,sectarian/religious violence,extreme poverty,etc. But given all the problems of china, I'm willing to bet most people would prefer china over india. You act like it's just a bullet train. China lifted hundred of millions out of poverty. While hundreds of millions of indians live without electricity and indoor plumbing. Also, the problems you listed for china were mostly from decades ago.

> In India building a single nuclear plant requires wading through two decades worth of protests by foreign non-profits [1] and final adjudication by the Supreme court that construction could proceed. Foreign funded non-profits (NGO in India speak) were criticized by the former prime minister, Manmohan Singh, for intervening in matters of India's development.

If india wants to be free from foreign interference, perhaps they should leave the british commonwealth/empire once and for all and stop being a colony of britain? Why are you guys still part of the british empire? It's insane learning that india left the british empire and then rejoined it 2 years later.

Democracy is nice, but democracy is supposed to be a luxury you earn after you get wealthy. It was never meant for poor nations, especially poor multi-ethnic giants like india. Democracy was invented in athens by wealthy, educated, well-fed, slave owning greeks. Reason would tell you that democracy is an awful form of government for poor developing nations.

The problem with india is that it lacks the central authority that china has. Perhaps china is too centralized and too authoritarian but the lives of the average chinese certainly is better than the lives of the average indian. You need a strong central/federal power the larger, the poorer and more diverse you are. It's just common sense. Sure, you get brownie points and pat on the head from britain for being a democracy but much of your population is living in utter poverty. Certainly it's time to look in the mirror and say something hasn't worked out. Maybe even wonder whether britain isn't patting you on your head because indian democracy is good for india, but it's good for britain? It's not like britain ever gave much thought to the well being of india while it was ravaging india for 150 years. As a matter of fact, if there is any nation that wants india to be weak, it certainly has to be britain. No? Perhaps instead of doing things to win the approval of britain/etc, start doing things to develop the nation.