Lack of development after independence was a socialist tragedy,not a capitalist one, says Matt KilcoyneOwen Joness setup of India in the 20th century as capitalist, or as opposed to China’s communist rulers,is a revision of history that cannot be ignored (Capitalism, like communism, or has its own terrible record,26 July). India was an actively socialist state. Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru made no secret he was an active supporter of socialism and was an admirer of communism. The Indian republic nationalised large swathes of industry throughout the final century, including all banks between 1969 and the 1980s. In 1976 the structure was amended to add that India was a sovereign socialist secular democratic republic.
Mr Jones is right in one regard: the lack of development in India after independence was a tragedy. It was a socialist tragedy.
Matt Kilcoyne
Adam Smith InstituteContinue reading...
Source: theguardian.com