What does the West prefer: communism or democracy?
A topic that often goes unnoticed is that India holds regular elections and operates as a democracy. In contrast, China is a communist dictatorship, where the directives of the ruling body are followed to the letter. Whether the Chinese people approve or not, they comply. This distinction has drawn Western investment toward China. Doing business in China is relatively straightforward if you align with the government. In India, however, businesses must navigate complex laws, regulations, and political dynamics, making it more challenging.
China, while projecting itself as aligned with the U.S. business interests, was willing to betray Russia if it meant securing American support. Between 1990 and 2014, China enticed a trillion dollars in foreign direct investment (FDI - Brick & Mortar) by misleading the West, securing favorable exchange rates between the dollar and the yuan and got a tariff free market. The U.S. provided manufacturing technology and welcomed 200,000 Chinese students, many of whom acted as industrial spies. Most significantly, the West opened its markets to China, allowing duty-free imports of goods produced with artificially low manufacturing costs. This led to an export boom that was unprecedented in China's history. As a result, factories funded by FDI produced goods worth several trillion dollars for Western markets as well as for local consumption with no signs of slowing down.
Rather than betraying Russia, China instead convinced the West that India's economic landscape was chaotic. The West favored the simplicity of dealing with China—no bureaucracy, no laws and no red tape—over India's democratic complexities, which, much like the U.S., requires satisfying numerous rules, regulations, and political interests.
The Chinese system, with its order and control, appeals to the West. It’s efficient and predictable, even if it contrasts with the West’s own ideals of democracy, freedom, and rule of law. US Law Maker John Moolenaar said that in China, there is no justice, no rights, no free speech. Still when money is on the line, the West seems willing to overlook its principles in favor of China’s authoritarian stability.
India, on the other hand, has a vibrant democracy. Its legal system, a legacy of British rule, has evolved and improved over time. India offers freedoms comparable to any Western nation, but this also means that processes are often slow. The presence of opposition parties ensures checks and balances, and India’s federal system mirrors that of the United States, though it differs from the smaller, more centralized countries of Europe.
It’s no secret that Americans dislike communism, yet they appreciate the order it can bring. However, that order in China came at a tremendous cost—between 1949 and 1952, three million people died as the regime solidified its grip. This bloodshed instilled fear and established a system where obedience is absolute and dissent is met with severe punishment.
India’s path has been different. Like the United States, it adopted a constitution in 1949, drafted by British-educated lawyers along the American lines. The Indian people have the freedom to express their grievances, sometimes even violently. Elections are held regularly, and the occasional political turmoil is part of the democratic process. Power frequently shifts between federal and provincial levels, but that’s the nature of democracy.
So, my question is this: why does the West embrace Communist China for investment while singling out India for criticism? Why is India, the world's largest democracy, often overlooked for FDI? Democracies may be slower to operate, but they are stable, grounded in principles that the West itself champions. Shouldn’t that be more appealing?