China and India are the two largest countries in the world, at least by population. I've (Bruce) spent a bit of time in each (most of June in China as readers of this blog know, and most of January, 2014 in India), and realize I have sometimes been comparing China to India while I was in Hong Kong and Guangzhou. My knowledge of each country is still very modest, but I'll share my thoughts and comparisons about them in this last blog entry.
Some background on my time in India: I was there helping Prof. Dana Gross (a psychology professor, friend, and long-time carpool mate) with her class on poverty, health, family, women and children in India. See the photo on the left, of our group in Chennai (Madras) at one of the colleges (Madras Christian College)which were hosting us; the two social work faculty working with us are on the left. We later spent time in Bangalore (also in southern India, and the high-tech center of India), and Delhi (the capital in the far north).
There are some important ways in which China and India are similar. One is simply that each is the current version of ancient cultures and civilizations, already millennia old when European cultures such as Greece and Rome were still in their infancy--and many people these two countries take pride in that heritage, regardless of the very real modern problems each country now faces. And there are ways in which the two have influenced each other: Barbara and I were visiting Buddhist temples in China, a religion which spread from its origins in India into Southeast Asia and China and beyond, for example.
Second, each country has a huge population. China has about 1.37 million people these days, but India is catching up and has 1.28 billion itself. Between the two, a little more than a third of the world's people live in these two places. Another demographic similarity is that each country has a significant "shortage" of women and girls; many of the females we would expect to see are "missing" from the population, as economic, political and cultural pressures have made males more valued and females more expendable (especially with modern medical technology that enables a family to know the sex of a pregnant woman's fetus, and to decide to abort a girl). Each culture has, traditionally, emphasized male children (girls would have married and moved away, while boys would stay with or near their parents in farm families, and inherited the land); in China, however, the "one-child" policy has added pressure to have that baby be a boy, and in India the cost of providing a dowry to a groom's family in order to marry off one's daughter has been an added factor when a dowry (though now illegal) can be ruinous for a poor family. The generation coming of age is one in which many men will be unable to find a woman to marry, in cultures in which family has been very important.
Third, each country became a modern nation-state in the late 1940's--China with its revolution, and India by gaining its independence from Britain's long colonial occupation. At some point I realized that I was born (1945) before these events happened (and when the world's population was only a third what it is today!). So these societies are both very old, and yet rather new at the same time.
Fourth, each country, but China in particular, has been rapidly changing from a largely rural, farming country to an urban one. In both countries, millions of people move from rural areas to the fast-growing mega-cities like Guangzhou each year, reflecting changes that took centuries in earlier times (the U.S. didn't become a predominantly urban society until around World War I and the 1920 Census). (Another more recent movement: each country is now a source of more immigration to the U.S. than is Mexico, for those who feel they have run up against the personal or economic or political limitations of the country from which they've come, at least for now.)
Fifth, rapid modernization, industrialization, and urbanization present serious problems for both China and India in the form of pollution of the air, water, and soil--particularly for China given how quickly its moved to provide economic growth (an important basis for its political legitimacy). Even though Western industrialization and economic growth are the primary historical source of the global warming and climate change we are now facing, China and India's dependence on coal as a source of energy have now also become major sources of atmospheric CO2. Simply breathing the air in cities like Delhi, Beijing, and Shanghai presents serious health risks (and some studies indicate that Delhi may have the worst air in the world). And each of these countries has historically depended in important ways on the great rivers flowing out of the Himalayas (fed by glacier melt) (such as the Ganges, the Yangtze,and the Mekong River in Southeast Asia), which will likely be seriously disrupted by global warming at a time when food must still be grown for their very large populations.
There are also some important differences between the two countries, in my experience. Though sometimes at great human cost, and enabled by top-down decision-making, China has developed economically faster than has India. Today the income per person (taking purchasing power into account) is around $51,000 dollars in the U.S., $11,500 in China (U.S. collars), but only $5,200 in India. China has made much more progress in eliminating widespread and deep poverty. Economic inequality has grown in both countries, as has the emergence of a middle class and a super-rich elite, but the "floor" under the resources for everyday life is higher in China than in India, overall. When I was in India, visiting schools for the poor, teachers spoke of how much weight their small students lost over longer school breaks when they weren't getting their daily dal and chapati lunches; anemia among pregnant women in India is a serious problem for many. Our group in India was far more likely to encounter people begging for money in India than I was in China (I only saw two people asking for money in China, who were physically disabled and sitting outside the gate to a temple).
Some of the economic differences between the two countries is reflected in the urban architecture and buildings we saw in China. In the photo to the right, Barbara is on the roof of one of the more recent, and very fancy, urban shopping malls in Guangzhou (in which almost every store featured a particular luxury good, such as Gucci, or Prada--and likely the "real thing" rather than a knock-off). To be sure, there are some nice malls and fancy stores in India, but those we saw reflected a more middle-class clientele, similar to better U.S. shopping malls.
One evening, after enjoying supper with a local Chinese family (whose daughter was translating for Barbara's class), we went walking along the Pearl River (with many young Chinese folks getting out into the cooling air, or just hanging out). We were reminded of the very innovative architecture in parts of Shanghai when we were there with students in 2004. And we were impressed by the quality of the many museums we visited, as well as the subway systems (more impressive than the admittedly older systems we've experienced in U.S. cities).
Another difference (one which is intertwined with economic inequalities) is in health and illness, especially as it affects women and children in poor areas in rural areas and cities alike in India. Poorer pregnant women in India are more likely to be anemic and underweight; a significant portion of poor children in India show stunted growth. This may reflect access to nutritious food, but also to vulnerability to disease; in India, about half the population does not use toilets or latrines, but becomes vulnerable to illness or parasites when relieving themselves outside. And girls still have less access to education than boys, though India's young middle-class women are going to university in large numbers, as we saw in 2014 (see photo below).
China is also becoming an "older" society much faster than India. With greater success in ending mass poverty, people in China are living longer; at the same time, both the now-ending one-child policy and the more rapidly urbanizing population have lowered the birth rates in China faster than seen in India (where birth rates have also been falling, but more slowly). This is compounded by the shortage of women in the population noted above, further reinforced by greater equality in education and employment for women in China both of which tend to lead women to choose to have fewer and later children. Articles in local newspapers in China, when we were there, talked about the problems soon to confront China as an "aging" society (as Japan is also experiencing), with too few young people to support an elder population (and several sets of grandparents sharing a single grandchild).
I'll mention one other difference (though this post is getting longer than planned!), the significant differences in the politics of China and India. India is often termed the "world's largest democracy," and elections there have in fact resulted in the replacement of one ruling party by another (one "bottom-line" test?). Yet it's also a complicated country to govern, with dozens of different regional languages and ethnic groups, and the current ruling party reflects a rise in "Hindu nationalism" in a place with a large Muslim minority (the second-largest Muslim population in the world after Indonesia).
China, with its one-party, top-down political system, has been more effective in creating economic and urban development, lifting many out of poverty, yet doing so at what we're learning has been great cost to the environment as well as real participation in decision making by ordinary people. In both countries, ironically, we see the rise of a small, super-rich layer at the very top, with disproportionate wealth and influence.
China's political dilemma (whether providing a rising standard of living can continue to offset the lack of real democratic participation in the way that Westerners would usually understand it)
was evident in a particular way in Hong Kong. The British returned Hong Kong to China in 1997, but the details of what Hong Kong will be remain uncertain. Hong Kong is particularly affluent (and still has its own currency), and is a key link to the world economy for China; on the other hand, many of its people expect greater democratic representation than Beijing has usually allowed.
The current form this different understanding of political participation takes is whether Hong Kong people can choose those who will govern the area, or will be limited in their choice to a slate chosen by the central government. When Barbara was in Hong Kong last September, tens of thousands of people protested Beijing's plans, shutting down parts of the city, and the issue came to a head once again just before we left. In a messy election, the Hong Kong "city council" voted down Beijing's proposal, leaving the matter to be resolved in the future, but just before the vote I visited the "tent camp" where some protestors had been living since the fall (see the photo above and to the left, which shows the library of books donated by local residents, as well as a yellow umbrella, symbolic of what has come to be called the "yellow umbrella" movement). A number of people there were preparing for protests just before the vote, and I got some sense for how passionately some local people feel about somehow creating a democratic enclave in a larger Chinese system that has a very different understanding about what representation would mean.
I've only had limited experience in China and India, and here I've shared some concluding impressions. I'm not sure what the future will bring to the people there, but I feel a fondness for those whom we've met, who've welcomed us with more hospitality than perhaps expected, and shared their lives with us. They have hopes and dreams, as well as challenges and frustrations, and Barbara and I would like to return someday to learn more about their lives and stories. And to share more food! (In the photo below, we see some of Barbara's students and co-workers on the last day of class in Hong Kong around a large round table--holding all 16 of us, with continually-arriving dishes for us to share!) Bruce
Second, each country has a huge population. China has about 1.37 million people these days, but India is catching up and has 1.28 billion itself. Between the two, a little more than a third of the world's people live in these two places. Another demographic similarity is that each country has a significant "shortage" of women and girls; many of the females we would expect to see are "missing" from the population, as economic, political and cultural pressures have made males more valued and females more expendable (especially with modern medical technology that enables a family to know the sex of a pregnant woman's fetus, and to decide to abort a girl). Each culture has, traditionally, emphasized male children (girls would have married and moved away, while boys would stay with or near their parents in farm families, and inherited the land); in China, however, the "one-child" policy has added pressure to have that baby be a boy, and in India the cost of providing a dowry to a groom's family in order to marry off one's daughter has been an added factor when a dowry (though now illegal) can be ruinous for a poor family. The generation coming of age is one in which many men will be unable to find a woman to marry, in cultures in which family has been very important.
Third, each country became a modern nation-state in the late 1940's--China with its revolution, and India by gaining its independence from Britain's long colonial occupation. At some point I realized that I was born (1945) before these events happened (and when the world's population was only a third what it is today!). So these societies are both very old, and yet rather new at the same time.
Fourth, each country, but China in particular, has been rapidly changing from a largely rural, farming country to an urban one. In both countries, millions of people move from rural areas to the fast-growing mega-cities like Guangzhou each year, reflecting changes that took centuries in earlier times (the U.S. didn't become a predominantly urban society until around World War I and the 1920 Census). (Another more recent movement: each country is now a source of more immigration to the U.S. than is Mexico, for those who feel they have run up against the personal or economic or political limitations of the country from which they've come, at least for now.)
Fifth, rapid modernization, industrialization, and urbanization present serious problems for both China and India in the form of pollution of the air, water, and soil--particularly for China given how quickly its moved to provide economic growth (an important basis for its political legitimacy). Even though Western industrialization and economic growth are the primary historical source of the global warming and climate change we are now facing, China and India's dependence on coal as a source of energy have now also become major sources of atmospheric CO2. Simply breathing the air in cities like Delhi, Beijing, and Shanghai presents serious health risks (and some studies indicate that Delhi may have the worst air in the world). And each of these countries has historically depended in important ways on the great rivers flowing out of the Himalayas (fed by glacier melt) (such as the Ganges, the Yangtze,and the Mekong River in Southeast Asia), which will likely be seriously disrupted by global warming at a time when food must still be grown for their very large populations.
There are also some important differences between the two countries, in my experience. Though sometimes at great human cost, and enabled by top-down decision-making, China has developed economically faster than has India. Today the income per person (taking purchasing power into account) is around $51,000 dollars in the U.S., $11,500 in China (U.S. collars), but only $5,200 in India. China has made much more progress in eliminating widespread and deep poverty. Economic inequality has grown in both countries, as has the emergence of a middle class and a super-rich elite, but the "floor" under the resources for everyday life is higher in China than in India, overall. When I was in India, visiting schools for the poor, teachers spoke of how much weight their small students lost over longer school breaks when they weren't getting their daily dal and chapati lunches; anemia among pregnant women in India is a serious problem for many. Our group in India was far more likely to encounter people begging for money in India than I was in China (I only saw two people asking for money in China, who were physically disabled and sitting outside the gate to a temple).
Another difference (one which is intertwined with economic inequalities) is in health and illness, especially as it affects women and children in poor areas in rural areas and cities alike in India. Poorer pregnant women in India are more likely to be anemic and underweight; a significant portion of poor children in India show stunted growth. This may reflect access to nutritious food, but also to vulnerability to disease; in India, about half the population does not use toilets or latrines, but becomes vulnerable to illness or parasites when relieving themselves outside. And girls still have less access to education than boys, though India's young middle-class women are going to university in large numbers, as we saw in 2014 (see photo below).
China is also becoming an "older" society much faster than India. With greater success in ending mass poverty, people in China are living longer; at the same time, both the now-ending one-child policy and the more rapidly urbanizing population have lowered the birth rates in China faster than seen in India (where birth rates have also been falling, but more slowly). This is compounded by the shortage of women in the population noted above, further reinforced by greater equality in education and employment for women in China both of which tend to lead women to choose to have fewer and later children. Articles in local newspapers in China, when we were there, talked about the problems soon to confront China as an "aging" society (as Japan is also experiencing), with too few young people to support an elder population (and several sets of grandparents sharing a single grandchild).
I'll mention one other difference (though this post is getting longer than planned!), the significant differences in the politics of China and India. India is often termed the "world's largest democracy," and elections there have in fact resulted in the replacement of one ruling party by another (one "bottom-line" test?). Yet it's also a complicated country to govern, with dozens of different regional languages and ethnic groups, and the current ruling party reflects a rise in "Hindu nationalism" in a place with a large Muslim minority (the second-largest Muslim population in the world after Indonesia).
China's political dilemma (whether providing a rising standard of living can continue to offset the lack of real democratic participation in the way that Westerners would usually understand it)
was evident in a particular way in Hong Kong. The British returned Hong Kong to China in 1997, but the details of what Hong Kong will be remain uncertain. Hong Kong is particularly affluent (and still has its own currency), and is a key link to the world economy for China; on the other hand, many of its people expect greater democratic representation than Beijing has usually allowed.
The current form this different understanding of political participation takes is whether Hong Kong people can choose those who will govern the area, or will be limited in their choice to a slate chosen by the central government. When Barbara was in Hong Kong last September, tens of thousands of people protested Beijing's plans, shutting down parts of the city, and the issue came to a head once again just before we left. In a messy election, the Hong Kong "city council" voted down Beijing's proposal, leaving the matter to be resolved in the future, but just before the vote I visited the "tent camp" where some protestors had been living since the fall (see the photo above and to the left, which shows the library of books donated by local residents, as well as a yellow umbrella, symbolic of what has come to be called the "yellow umbrella" movement). A number of people there were preparing for protests just before the vote, and I got some sense for how passionately some local people feel about somehow creating a democratic enclave in a larger Chinese system that has a very different understanding about what representation would mean.
I've only had limited experience in China and India, and here I've shared some concluding impressions. I'm not sure what the future will bring to the people there, but I feel a fondness for those whom we've met, who've welcomed us with more hospitality than perhaps expected, and shared their lives with us. They have hopes and dreams, as well as challenges and frustrations, and Barbara and I would like to return someday to learn more about their lives and stories. And to share more food! (In the photo below, we see some of Barbara's students and co-workers on the last day of class in Hong Kong around a large round table--holding all 16 of us, with continually-arriving dishes for us to share!) Bruce
