> Not to be flippant about it, but isn't the CPI(M)-led
> government in West Bengal pursuing the sorts of developmental state
> policies that you otherwise champion?
I wish they were, but I've seen no evidence of this. There's been some land reform, but neither the ruling CPIM nor the Congress Party opposition seem to have a coherent development strategy, aside from generating cash by selling real estate to speculators. This is a problem for much of South Asia -- the radical rhetoric isn't matched by actual policy.
The good news is, India does have many of the key elements of a developmental state: most of the banking system is state-owned, and the government regulates finance tightly. The country has a huge cadre of students, scientists, technicians and engineers, plus vast forex reserves.
> Moreover, isn't it still the case
> that there are more civil rights in Delhi than there are in Beijing or
> Singapore?
Well, many Beijingers have more economic security and state-guaranteed benefits (access to health care, education) than their comparable peers in New Delhi. On the other hand, certain formal rights of political organization and mainstream media expression are more developed in India, though China has been quietly democratizing from within -- e.g. there's a flourishing digital commons and plenty of spaces of dissent and discussion. And Singapore isn't some totalitarian dungeon, it's a First World service economy with reasonably free and fair elections.
-- DRR