What's ahead of South Asia?

[I*R*A]

deep-rooted issues like corruption, weak infrastructure, political instability, and poverty.

A populace that values cow life more than a human or people who want to lynch a person because random Arabic text was written on their attire .. want to be, like to be, and will always be subdued by morally corrupt and incompetent individuals and hence live like in conditions as that of sewer rats and behave like animal herd. Their tragedy is they want to protect their "Gods" .. exposure, openness, acceptance and free thinking is an alien concept in these societies and every free thinker will always end up being killed or exiled.

They do not teach and school their children for sake of learning, they spend and worry about securing a good job .. that is the biggest aim of all in these societies. Slave insecure mentality and tunnel vision cannot bring progress.

Do you think these structural hurdles and regional rivalries will permanently stunt South Asia's growth, or can these nations actually transition into fully modern societies ever?

They do not need to be modern in Western ways but they surely do need to get out of their insecure slave mentality first. May be a catastrophic war is the only option left to break this cycle.

 

[Aghor Warrior]

Religion may be relevant to understanding some social and cultural differences, but I'm not convinced it is a major factor in explaining why countries succeed or fail in development.

I don't see many convincing examples where a country succeeded or failed in development primarily because of its religion becaue i beleive governance, institutions, education, economic policy, and political stability seem far more important.

I’m not arguing that religion alone determines whether a country succeeds or fails economically. Governance, institutions, education, economic policy and political stability are obviously major factors. My point is that religion is still an important variable, especially when comparing India and Pakistan.

Religion can influence social norms, cultural practices, political institutions, laws, demographics and even the way societies perceive national identity. You cannot simply remove that variable from the analysis and assume India and Pakistan are otherwise identical.

The argument is not “religion causes development or underdevelopment.” It is that religious composition can shape the social and political environment in which development takes place. That is why it needs to be considered alongside governance, institutions, education and economic policy rather than dismissed as irrelevant.

 

[Raj-Hindustani]

Yeah, I like to live in heaven too, lol. The fact is many Indians are looking for employment opportunities in China and want to live there. That's why there is a huge jump in the number of Indians applying to go to China now, and many of them end up working in black markets. Chinese don't like that. You people's actions obviously don't match your claims here. AS I said before, since you people despise China, Indians just don't come to China whether working, doing business, studying or travelling. Make good on your words. Stay in your wonderland India or go to countries such as US and Japan where you are welcome.

You're mixing up two different things. Indians going to China for work, business, study, or travel doesn't mean China is their dream country to live in. People naturally pursue the best opportunities available to them, especially when access to traditional destinations becomes harder. Going to a country because it offers an opportunity is not the same as wanting to make it your ideal home.

That's why all this talk about whether China is "better" than India misses the point. People don't usually dream about moving to a country that's just a little better than their own. They dream about the best available option, the kind of place they genuinely aspire to live in. For many, that would be countries offering a much higher quality of life, such as Switzerland or other parts of Europe, rather than China, India or similrar countries..

 

[Raj-Hindustani]

I’m not arguing that religion alone determines whether a country succeeds or fails economically. Governance, institutions, education, economic policy and political stability are obviously major factors. My point is that religion is still an important variable, especially when comparing India and Pakistan.

Religion can influence social norms, cultural practices, political institutions, laws, demographics and even the way societies perceive national identity. You cannot simply remove that variable from the analysis and assume India and Pakistan are otherwise identical.

The argument is not “religion causes development or underdevelopment.” It is that religious composition can shape the social and political environment in which development takes place. That is why it needs to be considered alongside governance, institutions, education and economic policy rather than dismissed as irrelevant.

Sorry bro, I don't agree. I have a completely different view on this. I don't see any convincing example where religion itself led to better governance, stronger institutions, better education, sound economic policies, or greater political stability, which then made a country economically successful. Those factors can certainly be influenced by many things, but I'm not convinced that religion is the underlying reason for them.

 

[ety]

You're mixing up two different things. Indians going to China for work, business, study, or travel doesn't mean China is their dream country to live in. People naturally pursue the best opportunities available to them, especially when access to traditional destinations becomes harder. Going to a country because it offers an opportunity is not the same as wanting to make it your ideal home.

That's why all this talk about whether China is "better" than India misses the point. People don't usually dream about moving to a country that's just a little better than their own. They dream about the best available option, the kind of place they genuinely aspire to live in. For many, that would be countries offering a much higher quality of life, such as Switzerland or other parts of Europe, rather than China, India or similrar countries..

So, in your opinion, China is just a little bit better than India or the two countries are nearly the same in quality of life ? Then, good luck, don't come to China, China dorsn't need Indians. And then your foreign minister should not has complained to Chinese gov about drastically decreasing the approval rate of Indian applications for Chinese visas lately. Better to keep each other's fences.

 

[Indos]

India and Pakistan are not necessarily as culturally or socially similar as people often assume, just as Israel and Palestine cannot simply be treated as identical despite their shared geography and history. India has a Hindu majority, while Pakistan has a Muslim majority. Although India has a large Muslim population, this difference in religious majorities has contributed to significant differences in culture, food habits, language and social behaviour.

Whatever commonalities India and Pakistan shared in 1947 have also evolved considerably over time. This ground reality needs to be acknowledged if we want to develop any meaningful understanding of the relationship between the two countries. Religion cannot simply be ignored when discussing India and Pakistan.

Pretty much maybe yes. It is still now still between Abrahamaic Civilization(Judaism, Christian, Islam) and Chinese civilization

Previously it is Christian who advance under Roman Christian, then Islam take the leadership, now Christian again, maybe next Islam again among the Abrahamaic religion

 

[Raj-Hindustani]

So, in your opinion, China is just a little bit better than India or the two countries are nearly the same in quality of life ? Then, good luck, don't come to China, China dorsn't need Indians. And then your foreign minister should not has complained to Chinese gov about drastically decreasing the approval rate of Indian applications for Chinese visas lately. Better to keep each other's fences.

China is the best living country – be happy. Enjoy!

 

[ety]

China is the best living country – be happy. Enjoy!

The point is you haven't being truthful, lol.

 

[Aghor Warrior]

Sorry bro, I don't agree. I have a completely different view on this. I don't see any convincing example where religion itself led to better governance, stronger institutions, better education, sound economic policies, or greater political stability, which then made a country economically successful. Those factors can certainly be influenced by many things, but I'm not convinced that religion is the underlying reason for them.

That’s not actually contrary to my argument. I’m not claiming that religion itself automatically produces better governance, stronger institutions or economic success. My point is that religion can influence the social, cultural and political environment in which those institutions develop.

You are treating religion as if it has to be the primary cause of development for it to be relevant. I’m saying it is one of the variables that can shape outcomes. India and Pakistan have different religious majorities, and that difference has contributed to different national identities, social structures, political dynamics and cultural norms.

So I agree that governance, institutions, education, economic policy and political stability are critical. But I don't agree that we can completely separate those factors from the religious and cultural environment in which they operate. Religion doesn't have to be the sole cause of an outcome to be an important factor in explaining it.

 

[Aghor Warrior]

Pretty much maybe yes. It is still now still between Abrahamaic Civilization(Judaism, Christian, Islam) and Chinese civilization

Previously it is Christian who advance under Roman Christian, then Islam take the leadership, now Christian again, maybe next Islam again among the Abrahamaic religion

I think you're looking at this too broadly in terms of Abrahamic vs. Chinese civilization. My point is more specific: what fundamentally differentiates India from Pakistan is Hinduism and the civilizational framework that developed around it.

 

[Raj-Hindustani]

That’s not actually contrary to my argument. I’m not claiming that religion itself automatically produces better governance, stronger institutions or economic success. My point is that religion can influence the social, cultural and political environment in which those institutions develop.

You are treating religion as if it has to be the primary cause of development for it to be relevant. I’m saying it is one of the variables that can shape outcomes. India and Pakistan have different religious majorities, and that difference has contributed to different national identities, social structures, political dynamics and cultural norms.

So I agree that governance, institutions, education, economic policy and political stability are critical. But I don't agree that we can completely separate those factors from the religious and cultural environment in which they operate. Religion doesn't have to be the sole cause of an outcome to be an important factor in explaining it.

I agree, but I would break it down further. I would say community and regional culture can matter more than religion itself.

For example, Punjab on both the Indian and Pakistani sides has its own strong social and economic culture, despite being in two different countries. Similarly, the Marwari community in India has done very well in business and trade, even though they are part of the same Hindu society as many other communities.

We can also compare South India with North India. Both are predominantly Hindu, but there are clear differences in education, economy, social structure and political culture. So I don't think religion alone can explain these differences. Community, culture, history and social environment also matter a lot.

India and Pakistan both have a mix of cultures and regional differences within their own countries. They share some common challenges, while also having their own unique ones. More or less, the key issues today come down to governance, stronger institutions, better education, sound economic policies, and greater political stability.

 

[Indos]

I agree, but I would break it down further. I would say community and regional culture can matter more than religion itself.

For example, Punjab on both the Indian and Pakistani sides has its own strong social and economic culture, despite being in two different countries. Similarly, the Marwari community in India has done very well in business and trade, even though they are part of the same Hindu society as many other communities.

We can also compare South India with North India. Both are predominantly Hindu, but there are clear differences in education, economy, social structure and political culture. So I don't think religion alone can explain these differences. Community, culture, history and social environment also matter a lot.

India and Pakistan both have a mix of cultures and regional differences within their own countries. They share some common challenges, while also having their own unique ones. More or less, the key issues today come down to governance, stronger institutions, better education, sound economic policies, and greater political stability.

Religion is pretty important though, it is the ideal foundation of moral and rules that the population have accepted, but the implementation once again depend on the people fully implementation of that ideal concept and also the people ability to interpret the religious concept inside the religion that they adopt at its best form.

For Chinese, I see their "religion" is Confusius

 

[Raj-Hindustani]

Religion is pretty important though, it is the ideal foundation of moral and rules that the population have accepted, but the implementation once again depend on the people fully implementation of that ideal concept and also the people ability to interpret the religious concept inside the religion that they adopt at its best form.

For Chinese, I see their "religion" is Confusius

I agree that religion can influence people's moral values and social norms, but I would still separate religion from culture and community. In China's case, I wouldn't simply call Confucianism a religion. It is more of a philosophical and social tradition that influenced Chinese culture, education, family values and ideas about social order.

 

[ety]

Religion is pretty important though, it is the ideal foundation of moral and rules that the population have accepted, but the implementation once again depend on the people fully implementation of that ideal concept and also the people ability to interpret the religious concept inside the religion that they adopt at its best form.

For Chinese, I see their "religion" is Confusius

Confucianism is a foundational ethical and social system focused on humanism, duty, and order rather than a traditional spiritual afterlife.

Other two popular religions in China:

Taoism (Daoism): China's indigenous philosophical and religious tradition focused on living in harmony with the universe.

Buddhism: The religion in China, with a large following practicing traditions rooted in Chinese history.

Also, some Chinese practice Islam and Christianity.

 

[Indos]

Religion is pretty important though, it is the ideal foundation of moral and rules that the population have accepted, but the implementation once again depend on the people fully implementation of that ideal concept and also the people ability to interpret the religious concept inside the religion that they adopt at its best form.

For Chinese, I see their "religion" is Confusius

Here for example, compare this with nation using Islamic at their nation name, despite prophet Muhammad and the first 4 Caliph never put Islamic on their Madinah state