By its very nature, IP generation is a job for a small element of the population. Manufacturing, of whatever kind, needs to occupy a much larger segment of the population. And that’s a genuinely large segment.

After all, we are speaking of a country which is probably many orders of magnitude more complex than a company. And core competence is merely a management construct, with all that it implies.

Regards.

Vivek, interesting point about remembering. Something vividly imagined is as real as something actually seen. It is arguable that the Mahabharata is even more vivid in my imagination than things that I have seen on video (which may of course be doctored). Can you believe things that you see on video? Remember the film ‘Rising Sun’? There are those who claim that the entire moon landing was faked on Hollywood sound stages! Shruti and smrti — that which is heard and that which is remembered: intriguing philosophical arguments there, and therefore I stand by my phrasing. I in fact do remember what I saw in my imagination.

Srinilakshmi, great post. I agree with you that India was no slouch at light manufacturing, and the wootz story is of course well known. But then, what is it that India’s core competence is in? China’s is in innovation of a practical nature — magnetic compass, gunpowder. India’s is in abstract thought — Panini’s grammar, Patanjali’s yogasutras. But then India’s practical genius is seen in Karikala Chola’s Grand Anicut, the 1960-year-old irrigation system. My claim is that a) temperamentally Indians are suited to IPR generation; b) endowment-wise Indian land and water are better at agriculture than almost anybody else (57% of our land is arable compared to 14% of China+Tibet’s). India can be the world’s breadbasket — I doubt if monocrop America is going to be able to do this; and this will give India tremendous clout and seller power (compare to OPEC).

This doesn’t mean India cannot do light manufacture either (else how would we have accounted for 25% of the world’s GDP in 1750?). The question is where do you have sustainable competitive advantage, even unfair competitive advantage, and the answer is IPR and agriculture. In light manufacture, India is good, but not the only game in town. So let China do the manufacturing, especially the heavy, polluting kind, and we can sell them rice for their electronics. That’s putting it simplistically, of course.

imho, this somewhat ignores Indian manufactures which have been considerable and of high quality throughout history. If I may point to a few examples from the pre Muslim period which continued down to the Colonial period when some of these industries were destroyed: cloth, all manner of metalwork esp., iron and steel forgings (‘Saladin’s Sword’), gems etc.. Indian exports have always included value added goods in addition to cash crops like cardomom, pepper etc.

Take a ship’s bill of lading as an example: In early 1640, the ship of a certain Shaikh Malik Mohammed left the Andhra port of Masulipatnam for Bandar Abbas with the following goods: 200 large and 100 small packs of textiles, which probably came from Warangal, Glconda, as well as the Krishna and Godavari deltas, 500 maunds of Bengal sugar, brought to Masulipatnam on the coastal network (i.e., Pipli and Balasore), seventy packs of cinnamon, brought from Ceylon on the same network, sixty packs of benzoin (probably from Aceh), 100 khandi iron from interior Andhra, and 500 khandi rice, probably from Bengal and Orissa. (from Sanjay Subrahmanyam, Political Economy of Commerce, South India, 1500-1650, CUP, 2004).

Most of the Indian temples in Burma and South East Asia (except the huge grand ones) throughout history down to the 19th century were all donated and endowed by Indian trading guilds viz., nanadesi, manigramam, nagarathar etc. This is indeed the case with the still functioning Hindu temples of Singapore.

The pre Islamic personal name Mohannad (sword bearer) derives from the Arabic word for India, ‘al-Hind’. I think this would have refered to the much sought after wootz steel swords exported in large numbers from the Peninsula. This is a material import as opposed to the Arabic concept of the numeral (‘Hindsah’) also from ‘Al-Hind’, a clear case of borrowing of IP

I have no arguments about Indian core competence in IP generation. Just that it puts the other material achievements altogether in the shade. This is so only because the western thought has really lagged behind in IP generation until the Renaissance.

Hope this helps.

This is my understanding of the India-US Nuclear deal. Consider paying $45 billion “importing” oil wells (N-reactors) from Saudi Arabia (USA). Next, we keep paying Saudi Arabia (US) for crude oil imports (N-fuel) for running those oil wells (N-reactors) avoiding a (N-reactor) meltdown. Further, we sign an agreement to buy crude oil (Uranium) in perpetuity with no guaranteed supply from Saudi Arabia (USA). And we lobby the OPEC (45 member NSG), informally assuring them never to test N-Weapons. Finally, the King of Saudi Arabia (US President) can stop fuel supplies for waking up on the wrong side of the bed. This makes no sense at all. Shri. Manmohan Sigh is a brilliant gentleman. I hope he is taking care of our interests.

Minor crib about the phrasing: You can’t possibly “remember” any such thing.

It deals with the British coming to Bengal and Madras (the areas you mention), the trial for Hastings’ impeachment by Edmund Burke (who himself has money invested in the East India Company) and the vilification of India as a form of defense of Hastings. The author contends that the idea of “Civilizing” India was in order to distract attention from British corruption and savagery. It is a truly fascinating account. A lot of folks have written about British loot and British appropriation, and subsequent vilification of India’s culture (Willie Jones, Asiatic society blah blah) as separate subjects. This is the first I have read where the author has combined these two to explain how one justified the other.

I am only half-way through it – and the mind reels, the soul revolts at the sheer duplicity of the British. Men such as Robert Clive and Warren Hastings should be tried for crimes against humanity. I am also convinced that the British national character can only be described as being the ‘ire of an ugly woman that has been spurned’ a la. Surpnakha (Ravana’s sister). Such people can only say that others are bad, that others are vile and indulge in calumny and character assassination. This – please note is the only British specialty. Sadly, it gets them nowhere in the competitive global economics of today when others can see and judge for themselves – instead of relying on pretended British ‘expertise’ as distilled through the imperial experience.

Angus Maddison’s effort is magnificent. Interestingly a lot of Hindu revivalist author’s, including Sita Ram Goel and Ram Swarup contend that British Imperialism, though bad for Hindus, was not as bad as Islamic imperialism. I have come to see this point as debatable. The Islamists try to wipe away our culture by force and largely failed, while India continued to dominate economically. The Brits tried to wipe away our affluence by force and our culture by trickery – and largely succeeded in both (poverty and McCaulay’s children are everywhere in India). Your views on this would be interesting.

Apologies for the long comment – I am feeling like writing today