India will Surpass China in Population - Is This a Threat to Communist Rule?

India will become bigger than China in terms of growth. It's great China thought ahead and enacted it's one Child policy for the Han ethnic majority. Although single child children who marry eachoter may have two children in the Han ethnic majority. Other minorities all 55 of them are allowed to have as many children as they want.

India has not had any good planning. Not only will it make more difficulties for the Indian nation and require the government to become more cruel and harsh in maintaining it's own domestic problems it will become fiercer with neighbors as to show it is indeed dealing and winning over its problems.

Will this attitude and change in stance threaten the communist rule of neighboring China?


spelling error

[edit on 24-2-2005 by 00PS]

Yes, this is "great" news.

While these two countries are competing to see which one can pop out the most kids and use up the world's resources at an ever faster rate, the U.S. will no doubt continue to get the blame for all the world's problems.

article

[edit on 2/24/2005 by centurion1211]

Since the 1950s the concern about the growing population in India caught international attention, the country was encourage to use methods like anti conception like sterilization and family was encouraged but they fail in educating the population into other methods of birth control.

The sterilization Idea did not work very well, back then and in 1993 67% of the female population was on any type of birth control and only 9% of male were.

In 1994 the government started a wide spread of contraceptives plus education to help with the problem.

But by 1999 the population was in the 1 billion mark.

Now the population control is to favor males over females in the country.

The adverse ratio of 960 females to 1000 males is due to 'sex preference for sons and prevalent practices of female foeticide and infanticide.'

www.findarticles.com...

I read somewhere that because of the Chinese preference for boys and their practice of "baby girlicide", there is such a shortage of women now that men are illegally marrying cousins and even sisters, while some men have even given up on ever finding a wife.

I wonder how long it will be before China is a true matriarchal society with women calling all the shots?

Originally posted by centurion1211
I read somewhere that because of the Chinese preference for boys and their practice of "baby girlicide",

I am afraid that preference isn't limited to China alone, but also India and many other third world countries.

India has not had any good planning.

If memory serves me right, back in the day, India had the biggest mass sterilization project under the controversial martial law of 75-77. I don't know if that counts as good planning or not.

Aside from family planning, familes, upper, middle and lower have been adopting the idea of "small family, happy family." Today, in cities or villages, I doubt you can find a 10 year old child who has four or five sibilings.

Surf

Actually the sterilization did not work because it was to targeting the female population.

Now as anybody can see it has not stopped the birth rates at all.

Hell the chinese have had a chart that they claim is 99% accurate on prediting the sex of an unborn child and it's supposed to of be made over 700 years ago just to make sure they had a son.

A nurse gave me and my wife a copy of it when we found out she was pregnant. We did some checking around with families and its actually around 77% accurate.

Originally posted by marg6043
Actually the sterilization did not work because it was to targeting the female population.

Now as anybody can see it has not stopped the birth rates at all.

Targetting female population?

No, the one I am talking about was done during 75-77, where males got sterilized, not women.

It hasn't stopped the birth rates, but it sure have slowed them down. If it wasn't for that, India will now have more population than China.

Surf

Originally posted by surfup

No, the one I am talking about was done during 75-77, where males got sterilized, not women.

It hasn't stopped the birth rates, but it sure have slowed them down. If it wasn't for that, India will now have more population than China.

Surf

Well back when it started in the 1950s the women were the ones to be sterilized, the male sterilization came later.

Marrying cousins in China has been illegal for centuries. That doesn't mean it doesn't happen though. Most people think Communism in China is the Iron Hand keeping the people down. Fact is, there are too many people, many things happen without the government even knowning, even if they know they often can all but sit on their hands.

The current ruling party in india are the socialists, and india itself has 'poor' relations historically with the US because of its openness to communism. So power for india isn't necessarily a loss for china. Of course, india also has a very strong nationalist party within it.


On the other hand, india in a sense is bigger than china. India proper has a billion citizens. Pakistan and bangaladesh are also 'ethnic indians' (generally). So the super india state fell apart, and the core is catching up with china, while china is really a conglomeration of different states, like inner mongolia and tibet. So 'appearances' are somewhat deceiving.

Anyway, the chinese government seems to be the biggest threat to ideological communism in china anyway. It looks like they are very intersted in a more open market, while merely retaining one party rule and unitary goverment, rather than radical communism.

Originally posted by Nygdan
Anyway, the chinese government seems to be the biggest threat to ideological communism in china anyway. It looks like they are very intersted in a more open market, while merely retaining one party rule and unitary goverment, rather than radical communism.

What you fail to realize is that there was never a true communist state that lived up to every belief of Karl Marx.

I also don't understand how India having a larger population would threaten communist rule in China - especially since the Communist Party is trying to stabilize the population. Wouldn't not holding the reputation of having the largest population constitute a victory and milestone for the Communist Party?

A large population is actually a hindrance.

You need to find food and jobs for all those people remember, hence the reason for the 1 child policy.

It may be raised to 2 children in the near future though due to gender imbalance and believe it or not... labour shortage

Originally posted by Lucretius
A large population is actually a hindrance.

You need to find food and jobs for all those people remember, hence the reason for the 1 child policy.

It may be raised to 2 children in the near future though due to gender imbalance and believe it or not... labour shortage

If a marriage is composed of a man and a woman who are each from a 'one child' policy family, they may have 2 children. This is a policy exception for the Han nationality. Also today, if someone wants to have two children from the Han nationality they may but they will have to pay a fine. The fine is proportional to a family's income. Also if your child is handicapped, mentaly retarded and such, a family may adopt another child but I'm not sure if they can bear a second one. For all ethnic minorities there is no one child policy.

India's population growth rate is .8% right now, and going down steadily. However, India does have almost one and a half times more arable land than China, and of that land, over 2/3 of food produced actually rots in silos without being delivered to the market.

The Indian government's priority now is firstly to maximize effeciancies in food production and distribution while the population growth rate, already low, goes down further; hence the major, major investments in infrastructure, GM crops, agriculture techniques and technologies, etc.

Secondly, to increase overall economic development in rural areas. The poorest rural areas of India are the places seeing the biggest population growth, as impoverished families look at children as economic assets that will bring in more money to the family to survive.

There is also the problem that certain demographic groups have the highest population growth rates. Sikhs and Hindus have relatively low (1-2 child) rates, whereas the Muslim population has up to 6 children on average per family, according to studies... But then again, Muslims are the most economically deprived community in India as well, so it can be an economic rather than cultural factor.

[edit on 27-2-2005 by rajkhalsa2004]

Tell me if my logic's right. An out of balance male-to-female ratio is a form of population control in itself, since you can only produce as many babies as there are women to have them. A hypothetical country with 100,000 males and 500 females would be back down to a population of a few thousand after a couple of generations once all the childless males die off. Therefore, the inbalance will plateau. Also, if no female babies were allowed to live, the country would effectively "gender-select" itself out of existence.

Originally posted by Lucretius
A large population is actually a hindrance.

You need to find food and jobs for all those people remember, hence the reason for the 1 child policy.

This is not a concern for the CCP. The only reason they bother giving anything to the poor masses is to contain a possible revolution by starving millions. They spend billions a year on the military and billions more on putting some Chinese dude into space for reasons of pride, while hundreds, yes, hundreds of millions of Chinese are living in poverty in unseen, rural China.

Ahhh, the oxymorons of China. Terms like "Socialist Market Economy", the "People's Bank of China". Even the currency in Chinese is called "The People's Currency" - pfffft! Funny how the ones who have most of the "people's currency" are the members of the Chinese Communist Party, their children, their buddies and their buddies' children.

Originally posted by wecomeinpeaceThey spend billions a year on the military and billions more on putting some Chinese dude into space for reasons of pride, while hundreds, yes, hundreds of millions of Chinese are living in poverty in unseen, rural China.

Ahhh, the oxymorons of China. Terms like "Socialist Market Economy", the "People's Bank of China". Even the currency in Chinese is called "The People's Currency" - pfffft! Funny how the ones who have most of the "people's currency" are the members of the Chinese Communist Party, their children, their buddies and their buddies' children.

Az eye am in China eye no all to well what ewe are speeking about
It's like over 70% of the people live in Rural environments. And everthing is the peoples this and the peoples that but the people have nothing...shame

Originally posted by Blackout
What you fail to realize is that there was never a true communist state that lived up to every belief of Karl Marx.

How has my post 'failed to realize' that? I think that thats a bit of a commonplace these days no? Regardless china used to be more 'communist' and has become less communist.

I also don't understand how India having a larger population would threaten communist rule in China

I think that the suggestion is that there is something like an 'economy of scale' here. China is a huge market, merely because its got a lot of people in it. The US has a huge economy, in large part because of its territory and population. India, since its catching up and probably exceeding china in terms of population, has a large base from which all sorts of potential successes can come from.

Originally posted by Nygdan

Originally posted by Blackout
What you fail to realize is that there was never a true communist state that lived up to every belief of Karl Marx.

How has my post 'failed to realize' that? I think that thats a bit of a commonplace these days no? Regardless china used to be more 'communist' and has become less communist.

I also don't understand how India having a larger population would threaten communist rule in China

I think that the suggestion is that there is something like an 'economy of scale' here. China is a huge market, merely because its got a lot of people in it. The US has a huge economy, in large part because of its territory and population. India, since its catching up and probably exceeding china in terms of population, has a large base from which all sorts of potential successes can come from.

Firstly China is on the road to International Free Trade and Capitalism.
Secondly India is already there
Thirdly if India has bigger consumer base this can be an economic challenge to China. If production and consumption of India suprases China then many foreign investors would chose India over China...Plus China has the English Language Barrier.


But this is purley Economics. I think there would also be some Military pressures because of this. Who would like to be the leader of the APEC militarily, sure China wants too, but a bigger in population and more powerful Indian rupee might make China have to cower in the corner..

Just a thought

Originally posted by 00PS

Originally posted by Nygdan

Originally posted by Blackout
What you fail to realize is that there was never a true communist state that lived up to every belief of Karl Marx.

How has my post 'failed to realize' that? I think that thats a bit of a commonplace these days no? Regardless china used to be more 'communist' and has become less communist.

I also don't understand how India having a larger population would threaten communist rule in China

I think that the suggestion is that there is something like an 'economy of scale' here. China is a huge market, merely because its got a lot of people in it. The US has a huge economy, in large part because of its territory and population. India, since its catching up and probably exceeding china in terms of population, has a large base from which all sorts of potential successes can come from.

Firstly China is on the road to International Free Trade and Capitalism.

I beleive this is what I said no? That they are abandoning communism, more or less.

Thirdly if India has bigger consumer base this can be an economic challenge to China.

I think this is what I said also no?

China...Plus China has the English Language Barrier.

Excellent point that I hadn't considered.


But this is purley Economics. I think there would also be some Military pressures because of this.

They'd have to go hand, at least if history is any indication. Also an indian super-market and regional great power would have the eternally hostile Pakistan next door to it, so militarization would be a necessity, which in itself makes something of an issue for china. Nepali instability and afghan anarchy would also be considerations for a superpower india to turn its eye to.

I do have to wonder tho, both Indian civilization and classical chinese civilization don't seem to be too much concerned with things going on far beyond their borders. Although china did conquer tibet and inner mongolia, not to mention that the very formation of china itself required a long period of warring states. And certainly modern china under the leadership of the communist party seems like it might be interested in expansion. Then again with the socialists in power in india perhaps there'd be a sense of 'brotherhood'.

Of course, if the nationalists come to power again in india that could be all over.