Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-wq484 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-29T15:21:05.270Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Political Economy of Post-Independence India—A Review Article

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 March 2011

Get access

Extract

Economists and political scientists have become increasingly interested in the political economy of India during the past decade and particularly during the past three or four years. The titles under review will be valuable not only to India specialists but also to comparative scholars because of the intriguing mix of conditions found in India. More like a continent than a country in its diversity, India is in some ways very similar to densely populated, predominantly rural and agricultural China, differing most perhaps in the obstinacy and depth of its poverty. In the predominant role played by the state within an essentially capitalist economy, it is closer to the model of Western social democracies than it is to either prominently ideological capitalist or socialist nation-states; like other countries in the “third world,” the state in India plays a highly interventionist developmental role. Finally, since Independence it has pursued, more successfully than most nation-states in Latin America and Asia, policies of importsubstituting industrialization and relative autarchy. In terms of its political structures, India differs from most newly industrialized countries (NICs) in that it generally continues to function as a parliamentary democracy. The federal political system creates an intriguing balance of forces between central and the regional state governments, which are often ruled by opposition parties with agendas, ideologies, and organizational structures quite different from those of the central government.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © The Association for Asian Studies, Inc. 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

List of References

Appadurai, Arjun, and Breckenridge, Carol A.. 1988. “Why Public Culture?” Public Culture 1, no. 1:59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1985. “The Social Space and the Genesis of Groups.” Theory and Society 14, no. 6:723744.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guha, Ranajit, ed. 1982. Subaltern Studies 1: Writings on South Asian History and Society. Delhi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Guha, Ranajit. 1983. Subaltern Studies 2. Delhi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Guha, Ranajit. 1984. Subaltern Studies 3. Delhi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Guha, Ranajit. 1985. Subaltern Studies 4. Delhi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Guha, Ranajit. 1987. Subaltern Studies 5. Delhi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mies, Maria. 1982. The Lace Makers of Narsapur. London: Zed Press.Google Scholar
Moore, Barrington. 1966. Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
O'Hanlon, Rosalind. 1988. “Recovering the Subject: Subaltern Studies and Histories of Resistance in Colonial South Asia.” Modern Asian Studies 22, no. 1:189224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharma, Ursula. 1980. Women, Work, and Property in North-West India. London: Tavistock.Google Scholar
Spivak, Gayatri. 1988. In Other Worlds: Essays in Cultural Politics. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Swaminathan, Padmini. 1987. “State and Subordination of Women.” Economic and Political Weekly 22, no. 44 (Review of Women Studies):WS3439.Google Scholar