Response to a Chinese

by Guest Fri Oct 05, 2012 4:38 pm

http://sulekha.forumotion.com/t67-response-to-a-chinese

by Vakavaka Pakapaka Fri Oct 05, 2012 4:50 pm

Your Aurangazeb argument doesn't take into account that India was not a single nation before him but was still prosperous. It actually deteriorated somewhat while under a single king (Asoka, Aurangazeb).

Why is India not prosperous now? Actually, during the last 10-20 years, India has seen significant growth.

China should wait for another 20 years before dismissing India. India chose a slower path (and it is a democracy). Who knows what happens in China in the next 20 years?

Which system is better - Saudi Arabia or Sweden?

by Idéfix Fri Oct 05, 2012 4:53 pm

Canada became independent in the 19th century, and as an independent nation under the British crown, it closely followed the path of America during the industrial revolution. Hong Kong and Singapore are tiny countries whose paths cannot be easily compared with that of a large country like India. They grew primarily because their huge neighbors (China and India) were closed to the rest of the world, and they took advantage of their position to become business-friendly hubs of trade.

by Guest Fri Oct 05, 2012 5:01 pm

panini press wrote:Canada became independent in the 19th century, and as an independent nation under the British crown, it closely followed the path of America during the industrial revolution. Hong Kong and Singapore are tiny countries whose paths cannot be easily compared with that of a large country like India. They grew primarily because their huge neighbors (China and India) were closed to the rest of the world, and they took advantage of their position to become business-friendly hubs of trade.

According to this chart, Canada gained independence from England in 1931:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_country_and_capital_changes

by Idéfix Fri Oct 05, 2012 5:13 pm

Canada had self-government as the Dominion of Canada in the 19th century. The British crown was the sovereign (as it still is), but the dominion had much more freedom than India did (thanks to the lessons learned by the British from the American independence experience).

India attained that dominion status on August 15, 1947. Indian National Congress used to demand dominion status for India prior to the Lahore Resolution of 1929, because dominion status was independence in internal affairs.

From Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada

In 1867, with the union of three British North American colonies through Confederation, Canada was formed as a federal dominion of four provinces. This began an accretion of provinces and territories and a process of increasing autonomy, culminating in the Canada Act 1982.

by Vakavaka Pakapaka Fri Oct 05, 2012 7:53 pm

Yes, they still have governor general and Lt. governor generals. The queen still signs the legislation to make official. So, it is not yet a republic. The constitution was repatriated to Canada during Trudeau's time. Many in Canada opposed him (and accused him of being a Frenchman). He actually showed the finger to them (literally) and told them to f... off (when asked in parliament to repeat what he said, he said "fuddle duddle"). For a boring country (in politics), he was a charismatic leader. However, as you said, for all practical purposes, Canada is an independent country for a long time.

by Idéfix Fri Oct 05, 2012 7:57 pm

Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:He actually showed the finger to them (literally) and told them to f... off (when asked in parliament to repeat what he said, he said "fuddle duddle").

The patriation of the constitution was an excellent move. It makes no sense for a country like Canada to ask the British parliament to amend their constitution. It took a Quebecois prime minister to get that done in a manner which would be acceptable to his province.

by Sponsored content

Response to a Chinese

Response to a Chinese

Re: Response to a Chinese

Re: Response to a Chinese

Re: Response to a Chinese

Re: Response to a Chinese

Re: Response to a Chinese

Re: Response to a Chinese

Re: Response to a Chinese