Democratic development will promote economic development.

Can democracy promote economic development?

Whenever I hear westerners say that because India is a democratic country, it is bound to develop its economy faster, I can't help laughing. They are all bearing the consequences. Democracy is a kind of social welfare, a luxury of national life and a spiritual pursuit after material satisfaction. I hope that democracy can promote economic development, just as I hope that luxury goods can provide people with food and clothing. Isn't it looking for fish in a tree?

Democracy cannot promote economic development. On the contrary, only economic development can promote the development of democracy (substantive democracy rather than formal democracy). Any country that reverses this process has become the poorest capitalist country in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and sub-Saharan Africa. The development experience of developed countries in Europe and America and the Four Little Dragons in Asia has unanimously proved that democracy comes after economic development. It is economic development that brings about democratic development, not the other way around. If democracy comes ahead of time, it will not only promote economic development, but also greatly hinder economic development before the people's food and clothing problems and material needs are solved. It takes more than ten years to build a highway in India, and it is a good example because a few farmers who touch the interests of land oppose it.

Democracy is mass consultation. Consensus is the fruit of democracy. Inconsistent consultations will hinder the development of the situation. In the west, due to respect for the opinions of the minority, the interests of the minority can override the interests of the majority and the collective. Democratic procedures have acknowledged this situation, and there is nothing anyone can do. In China, if the consultation is not consistent, it is to promote public welfare through centralized way, taking the interests of the majority and the collective as the standard, and sacrificing the interests of the minority. Democracy ran aground as soon as this happened. For example, the construction of the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge was stopped for several years because of the opposition of an old woman, knowing that it was done by the political group gymnastics behind it, but there was no way to recognize this situation through democratic procedures. This is a victory for democracy and a failure for economic construction.

Developing countries want democracy first, not economic development first, just like a poor man who doesn't even have enough to eat, but has to carry a Louis? So is Vuitton's bag. Or, this is a beggar sleeping in a five-star hotel. In China, the people who advocate democracy are basically the leisure class, not those who work hard for their livelihood. Democracy is a luxury. After thousands of years of human development, it took root in the human world in the 20th century. Democracy needs economic and social development as the foundation, and a beggar does not need democracy. Only with the development of economy and society and the development of people's spiritual needs can democracy become necessary.

Westerners say that democracy can promote economic development, but never delve into why. They will be surprised if they seriously think about the truth behind it. In fact, a few westerners are aware of this problem. For example, some western journalists say that the United States has two boards of directors, the European Union has 27 boards of directors and China has only one board of directors, which shows that China has been able to build world-class highways, airports and dams at a record speed in the past 30 years. This actually implies the role of democracy in economic development.

Look at China and India. It is said that Indian economic development potential is greater than that of China. Why? Because India is a democracy! But decades of economic development history has not proved this. It has been more than 60 years since India established a bicameral parliament in 1952. Why has India's democracy been delayed? ! Of course, people have plenty of rhetoric. Because India will definitely surpass China in the next few decades! In 2003, Indian officials said that five years later, the world would only talk about Mumbai and forget about Shanghai. This has become a joke. And Indian democracy is actually hindering India's economic and social development. Indian democracy is a high-level democracy and a low-level democracy. China gradually liberated democracy while developing its economy, making the development of democracy adapt to the development of economy and society, which is in sharp contrast with India. Moreover, China's development model of "economy first, then democracy" is consistent with the development process of developed countries in Europe and America and the four little dragons in Asia, and it has also been tested by historical practice. How much India can achieve in the development mode of democracy first and then economy depends on the historical judgment.