Fw: Why Indians have succeeded in countries ruled by whites but failed in their own?

[Arkay Enpee]

----- Forwarded Message ----
From: jay thakrar <jahe...@hotmail.co.uk>
Sent: Fri, 9 September, 2011 5:54:33 AM
Subject: FW: Why Indians have succeeded in countries ruled by whites but failed in their own?

 

---

 

INTERESTING ARTICLE TO READ.         > Subject: Interesting analysis: Why Indians have succeeded in > countries ruled by whites but failed in their own? > > In this last Swami-nomics of the millennium, I would like to sum up > our performance in the 20th century in one sentence: Indians have > succeeded in countries ruled by whites, but failed in their own. > > This outcome would have astonished leaders of our independence > movement. They declared, Indians were kept down by white rule and > could flourish only under self-rule. This seemed self-evident. The > harsh reality today is that Indians are succeeding brilliantly in > countries ruled by whites, but failing in India. They are flourishing > in the USA and Britain. > > But those that stay in India are pulled down by an outrageous system > that fails to reward merit or talent, fails to allow people and > businesses to grow, and keeps real power with netas, babus, and > assorted manipulators. Once Indians go to white-ruled countries, they > soar and conquer summits once occupied only by whites. > > Rono Dutta has become head of United Airlines, the biggest airline > in the world. Had he stayed in India, he would have no chance in > Indian Airlines. Even if the top job there was given to him by some > godfather, a myriad netas, babus and trade unionists would have > ensured that he could never run it like United Airlines. > > Rana Talwar has become head of Standard Chartered Bank Plc, one of > the biggest multinational banks in Britain, while still in his 40s. > Had he been in India, he would perhaps be a local manager in the State > Bank, taking orders from babus to give loans to politically favored > clients. > > Rajat Gupta is head of Mckinsey, the biggest management consultancy > firm in the world. He now advises the biggest multinationals on how to > run their business. Had he remained in India he would probably be > taking orders from some sethji with no qualification save that of > being born in a rich family. > > Lakhsmi Mittal has become the biggest steel baron in the world, with > steel plants in the US, Kazakhstan, Germany, Mexico, Trinidad and > Indonesia. India's socialist policies reserved the domestic steel > industry for the public sector. So Lakhsmi Mittal went to Indonesia > to run his family's first steel plant t here. Once freed from the > shackles of India, he conquered the world. > > Subhash Chandra of Zee TV has become a global media king, one of the > few to beat Rupert Murdoch. He could never have risen had he been > limited to India, which decreed a TV monopoly for Doordarshan. But > technology came to his aid: satellite TV made it possible for him to > target India from Hong Kong. Once he escaped Indian rules and soil, > he soared. > > You may not have heard of 48-year old Gururaj Deshpande. His > communications company, Sycamore, is currently valued by the US stock > market at over $30 billion, making him perhaps one of the richest > Indians in the world. Had he remained in India, he would probably be > a babu in the Department of Telecommunications. > > Arun Netravali has become president of Bell Labs, one of the biggest > research and development centers in the world with 30,000 inventions > and several Nobel Prizes to its credit. Had he been in India, he > would probably be struggling in the middle cadre of Indian Telephone > Industries. Silicon Valley alone contains over one lac Indian > millionaires. > > Sabeer Bhatia invented Hotmail and sold it to Microsoft for $400 > million. Victor Menezes is number two in Citibank, Shailesh Mehta is > CEO of Providian, a top US financial services company. Also at or > near the top are Rakesh Gangwal of US Air, Jamshed Wadia of Arthur > Andersen, and Aman Mehta of Hong Kong & amp; Shanghai Banking Corp. > > In Washington DC, the Indian CEO High Tech Council has no less than > 200 members, all high tech-chiefs. While Indians have soared, India > has stagnated. At independence India was the most advanced of all > colonies, with the best prospects. > > Today with a GNP per head of $370, it occupies a lowly 177th > position among 209 countries of the world. But poverty is by no means > the only or main problem. India ranks near the bottom in the UNDP's > Human Development Index, but high up in Transparency International's > Corruption Index. > > The neta-babu raj brought in by socialist policies is only one > reason for India's failure. The more sordid reason is the rule-based > society we inherited from the British Raj is today in tatters. > Instead money, muscle and influence matter most. > > At independence we were justly proud of our politicians. Today we > regard them as scoundrels and criminals. They have created a jungle > of laws in the holy name of socialism, and used these to line their > pockets and create patronage networks. No influential crook suffers. > They flourish unhindered because they have political links. > > The sons of police officers believe they have a license to rape and > kill (ask the Mattoo family). Talent cannot take you far amidst such > rank misgovernance. We are reverting to our ancient feudal system > where no rules applied to the powerful. The British Raj brought in > abstract concepts of justice for all, equality before the law. These > were maintained in the early years of independence. But fifty years > later, citizens wail that India is a lawless land where no rules are > obeyed. > > I have heard of an IAS probationer at the Mussorie training academy > pointing out that in India before the British came, making money and > distributing favors to relatives was not considered a perversion of > power, it was the very rationale of power. > > A feudal official had a duty to enrich his family and caste. Then > the British came and imposed a new ethical code on officials. But, he > asked, why should we continue to choose British customs over desi ones > now that we were independent? > > The lack of transparent rules, properly enforced, is a major reason > why talented Indians cannot rise in India. A second reason is the > neta-babu raj, which remains intact despite supposed liberalization. > But once talented Indians go to rule-based societies in the west, they > take off. In those societies all people play by the same rules, all > have freedom to innovate without being strangled by regulations. > > This, then, is why Indians succeed in countries ruled by whites, and > fail in their own. It is the saddest story of the century. > > Ravi Shankar Jayaram > Research associate > Council on Hemispheric Affairs > The Hague > > PS: THIS, BELIEVE YOU ME, IS JUST 1/10TH OF the INDIANS SUCCESS. > > > > > > Harry.