I wonder how many HNers recall life in Delhi even 20 years ago? Cutting electricity loss is one thing, but getting rid of "load shedding" (unplanned power cuts) is the really revolutionary part. It was not uncommon for the power to go out several times a day and you had to rush to unplug expensive appliances (TV, laptop), because when the power came back it was often accompanied by a surge. My office was wired with two sets of electrical sockets, one connected to grid mains and the other connected to the UPS (for important equipment only).
Actually load shedding is planned power cuts. I have seen a schedule published in a newspaper with different regions of the city (not Delhi) and times when no electricity will be available. This is for ppl to plan their day
The load shedding was a chronic problem. It lasted months if not years.
Example from year 2003 (city = Pune) [1]. Its hard to read
Excerpt:
The load shedding schedule is as follows:
Group A: Monday 8 am to 11 am, Tuesday 11 am to 2 pm,Wednesday 3 to 6 pm, Saturday 11 am to 2 pm: Navi Peth, Gultekdi I and II, Dhankawdi, Padmawati, Old Parvati I and II, SNDT, G Block, Parsi agiary, City Apollo, Sant Tukaram, Kharalwadi.
Group B: Monday 11 am to 2 pm, Tuesday 3 pm to 6 pm, Friday 8 am to 11 am
This continued even in 2013. Had to finally pay for an inverter because PCs do not have built in batteries like laptops do and work was being impacted.
Useless industries like RO water, gensets, inverters etc are so much larger in India because of governmental abdication of responsibility due to political compulsions. Once you have your own house, or live in a gated community/highrise with its own water/power infra, you get almost western levels of comfort without the messiness of the outside world.
I just don't understand why government didn't step in and raise the price of electricity 5x.
It is better to have electricity 24x7 but only 50 watts to run a fridge, phone charger and one lightbulb, than to have electricity 3 hours a day but be running 1000 watts of airconditioners.
I guess perhaps energy theft was too hard to police?
Load shedding = it was done on purpose, not that it was pre-planned. If a sudden problem occurs, some areas can be cut to prevent wider failure. I would expect this to be largely automatic.
There was some priority order to determine which circuits should be load-shed when there is a power shortage. For example while scouting datacenter sites across Delhi, Mumbai and Chennai, I learnt that 220KV lines were not part of load-shedding schedule whereas 66KV lines were. If you took power directly from the power generation company and had contracted power then also you were protected.
Every second house had a diesel generator back then. Ours had to be cranked started by hand(not for the heartless) before push button starters became a thing. The shutoff though was simple tug on the switch; I attached a twine that ran to my bedside for shutoff, which was a godsend at 2:00 AM when the power came back on to make those crazy summer days a bit easier to sleep through.
I remember the inverse of that in Chennai -- scheduled running water for an hour in the morning and an hour in the evenings when we had to stockpile water in every container possible.
Riots in India are uncontrollable. Muslims killed 59 Hindus returning from Ayodhya by burning a train full of innocent karsevaks which started the riots
IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt alleged that at a meeting on the night of February 27, 2002, Modi told senior police that Hindus should be allowed to "vent their anger." Another officer, R.B. Sreekumar, said he was denied a promotion for criticizing the government's inaction
Please don't throw around accusations like this; especially after creating a temporary account.
I was an adult in 2002. I remember the riots differently. (And, BTW: riots were almost an annual occurrence in some part or the other of the country, like clockwork. Moradabad, Aligarh, Bareilly, etc. etc.)
The SOP when riots happen is to call in the Army to do a "flag march", after a couple of days.
But guess what happened just a few months before the Gujarat riots? The attack on the Indian Parliament in 2001 [1]. As a result, the Army was deployed on the borders and could not be pulled to do flag marches. The Gijarat govt wrote to all neighboring states (MP, MH, RJ) to ask if some police could be spared to help stop the riots. All 3 state governments replied "no, we don't have any police to spare". What else could the government do?
From 2004 thtough 2014, several different teams investigated Gujarat government's actions, and in the end gave them a clean chit.
Sanjiv Bhatt's wife fought on Congress ticket. R. B. Sreekumar was implicated and charged for framing a highly decorated ISRO scientist Nambi Narayanan in a fake espionage case.
Both are dubious characters with conflict of interests and one of them even straight up went against an innocent scientist just to massage his fat ego.
This trope is going to get you guys nowhere. The Gujarat riots started with burning of a train filled with Hindu Karsevaks by Muslims. Once religious riots start in India no politician can control it. It requires military intervention. Gujarat riots was curbed the fastest if you compare it to any other riot in Independent India. It was ended in 3 days. By comparison, 1984 Sikh riots took 4 days to end.
The historical debate was revived globally when a British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) documentary highlighted a previously unreleased, classified 2002 British Foreign Office report. The internal UK government report concluded that the violence was pre-planned and that the rioting had all the hallmarks of "ethnic cleansing," alleging that Modi was "directly responsible" for the political climate that allowed it. The Indian government banned the documentary domestically, calling it a biased piece of colonial propaganda.
Supposed to be unbiased because "Internal UK government report"?. Both the train and the riots were crimes against humanity. Sorry if Indians don't believe shit coming from the UK.
Because it is propaganda. Explain to me how it is ethnic cleansing with figures. The same BBC did not recognize Kashmiri Pandits genocide, rape and exodus as ethnic cleansing but calls 2002 Gujarat Riots as ethnic cleansing? Do you guys even know what "ethnic cleansing" even means? Muslims are 10% of Gujarat's population. Roughly 6 million Muslims. In 2002 they were 4.6 million. Please tell me how TF is that ethnic cleansing? Compare it to Kashmiri Pandit Hindu genocide, rape and exodus of 1990s. In 1989, Kashmiri Hindus were roughly 150,000 in number. They were systematically targeted and wiped out from the Valley. Today there are only 3,000 Kashmiri Pandits.
Has BBC made any fucking documentary on this? No it has not.
Nor will losers like you question the blatant hypocrisy and propaganda.
> The internal UK government report concluded that the violence was pre-planned and that the rioting had all the hallmarks of "ethnic cleansing," alleging that Modi was "directly responsible" for the political climate that allowed it
"Internal UK government report" belongs in the dustbin.
> all the hallmarks of "ethnic cleansing,"
Please elucidate what those hallmarks are. I am extremely curious to know what the yardstick is for "ethnic cleansing" according to UK government.
I assume you are sincere in holding these beliefs and not just a bot inflaming politics.
In that case the general reason you are being dismissed now is you are doing a classic [whataboutism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism) - dismissing one wrong by pointing out another.
You should consider things in context, yes, but one wrong doesn’t make another wrong go away. If I kill your spouse, the fact that my spouse was killed (even by you) still makes it a murder. A country that doesn’t guard its sovereignty of violence famously stops being a country by definition - https://acoup.blog/2024/04/12/fireside-friday-april-12-2024/
As someone who moved to India for personal reasons from Europe, this whole defending of Modi and his party policies seems so bizarre - there _are_ examples of countries in the region that got worse in the last 30 years (Pakistan) in the region, but there are soo many examples of others that got much much better. If you look what’s happening to all the other countries in Asia - India seems to be falling behind so hard it’s not even funny. And all thanks to the great leader. It could have been worse - yes, but it could easily have been so so much better.
And I usually go back to the “why nations fail” book that outlined the reasons of countries success and failure - it’s not rocket science - build and strengthen institutions and your country prospers, waken institutions for personal gain to you and your allies - country goes to the dumpster eventually.
The US are going a similar road btw, and it would be a very interesting example to point to eventually for the next editions of that book.
Can we not call it the Sikh riots? Those were riots by Congress, the BJP and VHP and their supporters against the Sikhs. The Sikhs didn't rise up. You don't call the Gujarat riots the "Muslim riots" do you?
Perpetrators - Indian National Congress, Bharatiya Janata Party, Vishwa Hindu Parishad.
And if you want lessons on riot control, learn from Kerala. North Kerala is host to an uncountable number of Hindu-Muslim riot triggers but most of them are defused before they can take root, and if they do occur, the riots are curbed in a day or so.
This one is the most recent and deadliest riot in Kerala - defused in 2 days before it could escalate because of timely police action.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marad_massacre
> Throughout the violence, attacks were made in full view of police stations and police officers who did not intervene.[15] In many instances, police joined the mobs in perpetrating violence. At one Muslim locality, of the twenty-nine deaths, sixteen were caused by police firing into the locality.[18] Some rioters even had printouts of voter registration lists, allowing them to selectively target Muslim properties.[66][75][65] Selective targeting of properties was shown by the destruction of the offices of the Muslim Wakf board which was located within the confines of the high security zone and just 500 meters from the office of the chief minister.[61]
> The violence had been planned far in advance, and that similar to other instances of communal violence the Bajrang Dal, the VHP and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) all took part in the attacks.[64] Following the attack on the train the VHP called for a statewide bandh (strike), and the state took no action to prevent this.[61][62]
> The Concerned Citizens Tribunal (CCT) report includes testimony of the then Gujarat BJP minister Haren Pandya (since murdered), who testified about an evening meeting convened by Modi the evening of the train burning. At this meeting, officials were instructed not to obstruct the Hindu rage following the incident.[109][110] The report also highlighted a second meeting, held in Lunawada village of Panchmahal district, attended by state ministers Ashok Bhatt, and Prabhatsinh Chauhan, among other BJP and RSS leaders, where "detailed plans were made on the use of kerosene and petrol for arson and other methods of killing."[70][110] The Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind claimed in 2002 that some regional Congress workers collaborated with the perpetrators of the violence.[111]
> Dipankar Gupta believes that the state and police were clearly complicit in the violence, but that some officers were outstanding in the performance of their duties, such as Himanshu Bhatt and Rahul Sharma. Sharma was reported to have said "I don't think any other job would have allowed me to save so many lives."[112] Human Rights Watch has reported on acts of exceptional heroism by Hindus, Dalits and tribals who tried to protect Muslims from the violence.
Don't repeat BS talking points that the government couldn't do anything. If the government doesn't have a monopoly on violence, it has lost its legitimacy. That's literally one of the main jobs of the people in power.
Oh, and what did Gujarat do to Rahul Sharma, the IIT grad police officer who was one of the few officers to actually try to stop the riots? They transferred him.
> Those were riots by Congress, the BJP and VHP and their supporters against the Sikhs.
I was in Delhi in 1984 when the riots happened. It was only Congress workers going after Sikhs to seek revenge for the killing of Indira Gandhi. No BJP or VHP or RSS workers were involved. Our family gave shelter to Sikh families from the neighborhood. I remember the fear, as I couldn't understand why Sikhs were being targeted; and since I didn't see much difference between Sikhs and Hindus, I assumed we also could be the targets of these rioters.
The 1984 riots are a stain on the moral fabric of modern India. And the only party responsible for it is the Congress party; even though all Indians bear some collective responsibility for what happened.
As I grew older and learned more about what happened, I swore to myself: never again.
EDIT: funny how you edited your post and added BJP and VHP as part of Anti-Sikh riots. This is as fake as it can get. BJP and VHP actually saved many Sikhs from getting massacred. Why TF would BJP and VHP kill Sikhs? Indira Gandhi was not part of either BJP or VHP. She was part of Congress Party. This is how I know you are peddling propaganda.
> Can we not call it the Sikh riots? Those were riots by Congress and its supporters against the Sikhs. The Sikhs didn't rise up. You don't call the Gujarat riots the "Muslim riots" do you?
Why did the riots even begin in the first place? Because Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was shot by her two Sikh body guards. It was as revenge for Operation Bluestar which targeted Khalistani terrorists who had taken over the Golden Temple. Now I have no love for Congress or Gandhi family but you cannot exclude the history from it or cherry pick it according to your liking. Khalistani terrorism was at its peak during that period. Just look at the history of how many Hindus were killed during the militancy in Punjab.
> You don't call the Gujarat riots the "Muslim riots" do you?
It is not a name I have given. I did not decide to name 1984 riots as Sikh or Anti-Sikh riots. I did not decide to name 2002 riots as Gujarat riots. That is literally what it is called. There is no reason to get so butthurt about the name.
> And if you want lessons on riot control, learn from Kerala. North Kerala is host to an uncountable number of Hindu-Muslim riot triggers but most of them are defused before they can take root, and if they do occur, the riots are curbed in a day or so.
LMFAO this is the worst state when it comes to controlling riots. It tolerated Moplah Genocide of all things. Lasted several months.
> This one is the most recent and deadliest riot in Kerala - defused in 2 days before it could escalate because of timely police action. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marad_massacre
This is not a riot mate. This is a terror attack. Do you not know the difference between a riot and a terror attack?
> Don't repeat BS talking points that the government couldn't do anything. If the government doesn't have a monopoly on violence, it has lost its legitimacy. That's literally one of the main jobs of the people in power.
I never said Government couldn't do anything. Are you unable to comprehend what I wrote? I wrote politicians have no power to stop riots. It is only the military (which is also part of the Government) that has the power.
Your "Sikh riots" are literally called the "anti-Sikh riots". You don't get to brand the entire community just because the root cause was an assassination perpetrated by fringe elements of that community.
Second, very laughable of you to call out the Moplah rebellion, which happened in the 1910s lol. Are you still stuck in the British Raj, pre-WW1?
Third, Marad was a riot, except it was extinguished in a day (by a North Indian Hindu top cop by the way), because of timely action by the police in actually discovering the weapons. What could've been a terror attack was averted.
> I wrote politicians have no power to stop riots. It is only the military (which is also part of the Government) that has the power.
And fourthly, no riots in any democracy across the world are controlled by the military lol. The military serves a different purpose, and using them for tasks such as riot control is exactly how you end up with another Tiananmen Square massacre (in which case, the military were explicitly called because the civilian police of Beijing did not want to shoot and kill the protesters). Perhaps that's where your mind is, to make India another one-party Hindutva dictatorship.
My edits were taken from the Wikipedia article only.
EDIT: > Perhaps that's where your mind is, to make India another one-party Hindutva dictatorship
Thanks for confirming you are part of the propaganda. I have no further interest in continuing this discussion with a lunatic.
> My edits were taken from the Wikipedia article only.
Your edits even in the Wikipedia article call it "dubious". You still mentioned it anyway, without mentioning that the claim is dubious, because you are part of the propaganda machine.
> And fourthly, no riots in any democracy across the world are controlled by the military lol
It infact IS controlled by the military. In US, for example, it is called National Guard. Police is not equipped to control a riot in any democracy in the World. India is actually an exception where it has a CRPF for riots and because scale of riots in India exceeds even the CRPF's ability to handle it (due to our size and population), the Military is called.
> Second, very laughable of you to call out the Moplah rebellion, which happened in the 1910s lol.
Moplah Genocide was not part of the rebellion. Unless you want to call Muslims genociding Hindus and raping Hindu women as part of rebellion against the British Raj. Have some shame. And it happened in 1921 not 1910.
> My office was wired with two sets of electrical sockets, one connected to grid mains and the other connected to the UPS (for important equipment only).
This I think is a standard practice in any large office building in France (Europe? Global?) too, regardless of the frequency of the power cuts. I don't remember witnessing any power cuts in the office (not since long ago anyway), but in most of the places there are systematically white and red sockets, red ones being powered through a UPS. So, server machines go into red ones. Well, we don't have servers anymore, but the sockets are still there anyway. Hopefully UPS too, LOL.
I've never seen them in France. I've seen them in a chemistry lab section of a university in New Zealand and I believe they're also common in data centers, NOCs, etc. worldwide.
No, this isn't remotely "typical." You have no idea what you're talking about.
The building might be on a generator. The whole building is most assuredly not on UPS.
Even in hospitals only certain outlets are on UPS - the stuff that absolutely cannot be interrupted - though a lot of hospital equipment now has its own battery system, at least in part for convenience.
I don't know if it's still done but semiconductor plants used to use intertia-based grid smoothing/UPS systems to handle millisecond-level interrupts and voltage fluctuations.
Agreed. Nothing actually typical at all for regular "just offices".
I do remember working ~25 years ago at a place that did have those two kinds of outlets. Our computers and monitors would be on the UPS+generator ones, while desk lamps, office lamps etc. were not. But it was specifically because the offices were on-site w/ the two data center complexes the company had and the building I was in happened to also be wired into that whole setup. Not every other one was either, only that one and the 24/7 NOC.
I only knew this was a thing because my office mate's computer was in the wrong kind of socket. One day his lamp stayed on while the computer turned off and for me the other way around. Soon after we heard the diesels starting and had to close the window coz of the fumes.
At full capacity of the data center, the absolutely huge UPSs could run the data center for all of 10 minutes. So that's how long the diesels had to actually start and take over.
But all the nuclear power bros told me electricity in France is uber reliable and bountiful because it's all nuclear! We need nuclear power plants for a stable grid!
It's almost like grid inertia is a different problem from matching changes in demand, and nuclear really sucks at the latter...
Putting computer systems on UPSs isn't a Europe thing. Backup generators and UPS units are very common, or at least they were until everyone got infatuated with moving all their data "into the cloud" and stopped maintaining, or building, infrastructure in office space for it.
Now everyone has all their eggs in the Amazon/Microsoft/Google basket, and instead of the (ahem, regulated) telco or electric company going out...the cloud provider does, and unlike before where you could still work locally - now you can't do anything.
> It's almost like grid inertia is a different problem from matching changes in demand, and nuclear really sucks at the latter...
For the recent big outage in France, neither of those was the problem. Some big transformers overloaded and there wasn't enough redundancy.
> Now everyone has all their eggs in the Amazon/Microsoft/Google basket, and instead of the (ahem, regulated) telco or electric company going out...the cloud provider does, and unlike before where you could still work locally - now you can't do anything.
> But hey, it was cheaper, right?
> Oops...
I'm not sure what you mean by "oops". Those datacenters do have downtime but companies seem to be happy sticking with them anyway. It seems like it still saves money.
Sounds similar to life in Dhaka in the 1980s. I remember many sleepless nights where the power went out for no discernible reason and our air conditioner (a window unit in my parent’s bedroom) stopped working. My understanding is that this has gotten much better in Dhaka over the last decade, though the recent energy crisis set things back.
I once spent most of the summer in a WW2-era building with no AC in the southeastern US (Ft Benning). I imagine it is both hotter and more humid in much of India.
Short answer is that you get used to it. There was a surprisingly effective swamp cooler that worked about half the time (we got pretty good at troubleshooting it) and several ancient pedestal fans. You can sleep in very nearly any environment once you become sufficiently sleep-deprived.
I spent two weeks in Bangalore in 2014. Power cuts happened roughly every other day.
Thankfully, I stayed in a nice hotel with an automatic generator, so the power would cut out for a second or two before the generator came on, and then would cut back out for a second or two a few minutes later when the hotel went back on the mains.
Depends on the season. Until a few years ago Bengaluru had a different problem – when it thundered or rained, they would cut power to protect transformers from shorting out due to falling trees on power lines.
Unfortunately the water situation is still the same all over India even in 2026. There would be manaoon floods and yet in summer there would be widespread water cuts.
> I wonder how many HNers recall life in Delhi even 20 years ago?
I wonder how many HNers are, or ever have been there in the first place? It seems strange to me to ask who "recalls" what it was like there before. What would such a recollection be based on? There's only so much attention one can pay to what daily life is reportedly like around the world, and that required believing the reports.
At least a quarter of tech professionals in Silicon Valley are born in India. So I would guess a quarter to a third or more of the posters here are Indian origin.
India accounts for a big portion of the english speaking internet, so I wouldn’t be surprised if half the posters here are Indian origin.
We've traded power cuts for pollution. The current government seems energetic enough in trying to fix the problem, but frankly it's something every single developed country in existence went through at some point, so there's probably no escaping it. Hopefully the pollution era will be shorter than it was in other places!
We are 1.48 billion people (and growing) in a nation that is 1/3rd the size of the US. Expected to reach 1.7+ billion in another 20-30 years - which will increase desperation considerably.
The birth rate falling is a VERY good thing. India cannot really support more than 300-400 million people with a high quality of life with its geographic size and exhausted resources. Life becomes cheaper than disposable toilet paper otherwise.
India has roughly ~18% of humanity but only about 4% of global freshwater resources, and agriculture consumes roughly 80–90% of India's water. The World Bank estimates that around 600 million Indians already face water stress. (The number is actually higher in many estimates)
There is also substantial pressure on land. Government data report about 97.85 million hectares, or ~30% of India's geographical area, as affected by land degradation/desertification.
If you want long-term, sustainable agriculture, we need to heavily move to organic farming. This yields ~30% less food produce. I forgot the popular paper on this - can dig it up.
(IMHO that is the real reason why we got independence - the Brits didn't want to keep holding to a distressed asset and immediately liquidated. Look at Bengal famine of 1943)
We are having heavy import dependency on minerals - a ridiculous 80%!!! dependency, which is causing significant problems in our trade/current-account deficit.
So, if we want maximum ecological comfort, and long-term, prosperous standard of living, we need a significantly reduced population. You can get the number by just halving our population simply taking into account high-availability to water and then reduce further for sustainable agriculture and sustainable mineral consumption.
> If you want long-term, sustainable agriculture, we need to heavily move to organic farming
This is deeply unsupported by the evidence I’ve seen. Organic farming tends to look far more resource intensive than modern methods. Often for little discernible gain in flavor and nutrition.
> You can get the number by just halving our population
I agree with your conclusion given the data, particularly around mineral exhaustion. (Though there is also the issue of severe mismatches. Lots of lithium, for example, yet no battery industry to speak of.)
> This is deeply unsupported by the evidence I’ve seen.
What ? This is well-supported unless you have been sadly influenced by the brainwashing of corrupt American Agricorpos - who btw do a terrific job of FUD & misinformation. I even learned about the benefits of organic farming in high-school biology class.
"organic farming generally had higher soil organic matter, lower nutrient losses per hectare, lower energy requirements and generally better biodiversity outcomes"
Actually, there are dozens of papers. The research is extremely supported for sustainable agriculture with the corresponding caveat of lower yields like I mentioned. No idea how you got "deeply unsupported".
> there isn't to reverse a culture where having 0 children is normal and encouraged
Not normal. Not encouraged. Not the trend line. You’re projecting a problem from other countries onto a demographic context within which it doesn’t exist. Unfortunately this is a topic where one has to actually look at the numbers.
If the user above got what he wished, it'd be 0.90. That's what I'm talking about.
This is a topic where one needs to know how to read, my nagging friend.
No, Mumbai is significantly more densely populated than Paris when looking at the entire urban scale and not just a few areas of Paris. This is easily fact-checked.
I mean Mumbai's population is 10x Paris population, so this should be obvious.
Wikipedia lists the core city of both as 50,000 per square mile, though it looks like the Mumbai numbers are somewhat old. More recent numbers say 73,000 per square mile for Mumbai. Which is similar to Manhattan’s residential population density.
You should check your intuition against the facts, which show that decreasing fertility rates in the United States are largely a consequence of reduction in teen pregnancies.
made 40 years... before they (India) started developing.
Western countries were at the forefront of this already in the 80s. India, starting to develop much later, had a big time buffer to learn from that and at least attempt to avoid it.
Every part of the world is affected by this. Even Niger, which still leads the world in birth rate is seeing falling birth rates. There is no known way to prevent that short of halting economic and social development.
Eh, I think the birth rate (and economic challenges re: wages, etc.) from western countries are much simpler to explain, and also much much harder to resist than this implies.
Effective and safe Birth control is something that has never before existing in human history (with the possible exception of a specific plant during the Roman Empire which was driven to extinction due to over harvesting), and which society doesn’t really have a decent answer to address in a stable fashion yet. As clearly demonstrated by the upcoming demographic collapse.
The short term incentives this provides to women (and men who benefit in the short term as well) is just too powerful to fully contain, despite all the attempts from the powerful religious groups in India.
The long term consequences of having everyone (men and women) competing for the same jobs, lack of sustainable long term population demographics, removing many consequences of promiscuous sexual behavior, etc. only show up once the western approach has played out for multiple generations. Until then, it’s a way to juice the numbers.
They held out much longer than western society did, and society still goes to extreme lengths to attempt to restrain it, but it still has had widespread effect regardless. They still haven’t experienced the long term effects, and I bet they would love to juice the numbers more as India is a very hard place to live now.
They are still living with the very real pain of ‘the old approach’.
The even more powerful religious groups in the Middle East, and social/tribal groups in Africa, being the only ones ‘still standing’ on this front, but it’s inevitable there too.
Conservatism may attempt to slow the spread, but eventually even the tribal groups of mountainous Afghanistan will have to deal with the same issues that the most left wing liberal folks currently are grappling with - what is the point/long term future this is leading too?
The current Hedonic nihilism of a lot of folks in the west tends to not be long term self sustaining. Very addictive in the short term though!
It isn’t clear what is going to emerge as the alternative.
What would ‘children of men’ be like if the same thing was happening - but it was because of a voluntary pill or implant every woman was taking instead of some big mystery illness?
You mean the government actively scapegoating Muslims/minorities for all their problems? The Hindu nationalist party that has street militias (RSS, Bajrang Dal), anti-minority lynchings and press / university crackdowns? Sounds like a "breath of fresh air" for those on the right side of things
I'm an Indian 1.5 gen immigrant living in the west, and I'm by no means ashamed of my Indian culture or heritage. I would never move to India and I feel sorry for many of my Indian friends or cousins living there. They are too often emotionally stunted people, and held down by India's oppressive work culture.
The one benefit of living in India is cheap household labour...only possible because of a massive underclass of people!
Both of these comments have an inaccurate view of India in either direction, too romanticized or too doomerized. In reality it's just another country with people trying to do what's best for themselves and their families.
People are people, they live their lives, and there is no mastermind behind them. That is a given. But there is a common culture and country wide patterns that can still be observed.
It's clearly a massive exaggeration to talk about population collapse, but India has dropped below replacement, and will start seeing a decline in population in the next few decades, so they're heading in the same direction as everywhere else.
But of course that also makes blaming Modi pretty silly - every country sees this happening as their economic and social conditions improves. We don't know of any way of stopping it short of maybe throwing people into poverty.
(the only remaining places that has not yet dropped below replacement is sub-Saharan Africa and parts of the Middle East, but they too are seeing birth rates drop).
I think we do know how to stop it: Welfare Queens, but really. If you can actually "live large" by doing nothing else than raising a bunch of kids (either with some controls that ensure you raise them well, and/or significant structured investment into rearing kids by the state), people will do that.
The reaction to that idea shows you how undervalued baby production still is. Morons insist that $20k or similar is enough incentive. It's laughable.
Whatever happens with AI "taking all the jobs", this will drive real societal change, because it has to. The options are obscene authoritarianism and removal of bodily autonomy from women so we can just force them to reproduce like society is used to, or actually adapting to what it will cost to encourage women to go through literal trauma and 20 years of really hard work because the rest of society will benefit. Seeing as de-facto enslaving all women is horrific, I hope people see that we should do everything to avoid the first option.
It has to become very attractive to be an average person, with average social standing, with average resources. The uber rich might have to give up some of their share of the pie.
I really don't think we do know how to stop it. Even massively increasing welfare payments has totally failed to produce lasting change where attempted.
It is possible going significantly higher could, but if so we have not yet figured out how high, and it's clear the threshold is much higher than people have tended to think it would be. E.g. look at financial incentives in Hungary, or the welfare system in places like Norway that makes parental leave in many developed countries look like third world conditions.
Rich people do seem to have a somewhat higher fertility rate, so it is possible that you could fund it enough, but the rise happens at high enough income levels I don't think our economy could handle it.
I agree with the rest of your comment, though - I just don't think we know if purely financial motivation would be sufficient at a level that is actually possible (and I do fear authoritarian approaches will end up being tried instead). It might take a lot more effort than that in terms of lightening the burden and/or making it more attractive in other ways.
> Replace the 100 million value with 300, 400, 500, and my point isnt going to change
Your ratios are all wrong. There are about 500mm Indians aged 6 to 26 today who will be over 80 (and under 100) by 2100. Even if nobody dies, India isn’t hitting 1.2bn 80-year olds. As for under-18s in that timeline, it ranges from 100 to 500 million depending on fertility.
Put another way, there is no deterministic population collapse in India the way there almost must be in Korea and Germany.
I'm honestly very glad to hear it won't be too bad but I reaaaaallly do not really care about numbers, my point is much broader.
I'd prefer if it didn't have to go through this at all. Knowing you are headed for bad times isn't something to live with, it's something to fix. And it's not like the birth rates in each state are staying the same, they are actively dropping. The issue isn't just there, it's also getting worse.
What makes you confident that declining population is gonna be worse than the alternative?
Smooth population decline means much less contention on ressources, energy and living space, which is highly relevant when all of those are already somewhat at the limit.
Significant positive growth is clearly completely unsustainable even over centuries, and I don't see why a somewhat smaller total human population could not be just as successful/satisfied over the next decades.
Then don't raise them! Also, don't raise problems that are easily disproven with real numbers! Demographics is a terrible domain to vibe your way through.
> Knowing you are headed for bad times isn't something to live with, it's something to fix
I literally just showed you that demographic projections for India give realistic scenarios for the number of under-18 year olds being equal to the number of over-80 year olds by 2100. The worst case is a 5:1 ratio.
I agree! But I just like using them to drive points across. Practical examples drive points across much better than some generalizations that take 10x as many words to be expressed.
exactly. so in 2150, or 2200, or someday, it will be a problem. So yes, it is a problem even today. It's kind of why you don't stand on train tracks even if there are still 15 minutes.
Future problems need to be fixed, else you end up as the countries you listed, Korea and Germany. It's not that hard
> so in 2150, or 2200, or someday, it will be a problem
No. Never of the magnitude you suggested. The population pyramid simply doesn’t have the shape required for a population bomb the likes of which we’re seeing in e.g. Korea.
Given current and projected fertility, it never blows out the way you suggest. It gently curves. If Indians, tomorrow, suddenly stop having kids that would be the problem you suggest. But they aren’t. And it isn’t.
Incorrect. It is 1.48 billion and expected to hit 1.7+ billion in next three decades in a nation that is <1/3rd size of the USA. Birth rate collapse cannot come soon enough.
They don't work nearly as well as the marketing says they do. They might save your equipment from a lightning strike a medium distance away, by absorbing the remnants of the surge that get to you - only once or twice before the protector is dead! - they will not save your equipment from anything that lasts longer than that.
> I wonder how many HNers recall life in Delhi even 20 years ago?
The only thing I know about India is from a Big Bang Theory episode where Raj's father said to Leonard when asked how's the weather, "It's hot, it's always hot in India!".
Played by Brian George, who I don't think has ever lived in India (his parents did, and he is part Indian, but he was born in Israel and grew up in London and Canada).
Re Estonia - it is integrated into EU wide power grid, 99% households have smart meters, reliability is 99.99% etc, all of its grid is inspected by drones. The only thing Estonian grid hasn't done is achieved sentience.
The effort to reduce electricity theft has had an interesting side effect. One of the ways to prevent theft is to insulate the power lines going into neighborhoods. This also makes them safe for monkeys to use as 'roads' with the result that roving gangs of monkeys move from neighborhood to neighborhood with ease and also have access to the upper floor of apartment buildings because of the proximity of the power lines. I saw this in person a few years ago.
Well the planet is theirs as well, so one may argue that putting up live wires that can electrocute them is quite cruel in the first place, especially given the lack of any preservation of their natural habitats in most places.
Actually they could have touched the wires as long as they touched only one and nothing which was earthed, but that might be pretty complicated to learn by trial and error, especially if error often means death.
Agreed. And nothing is stopping folks from running underground cables except crying about it being more expensive (i.e the true cost vs side effects to other populations so long as it doesn’t affect the consumers).
It’s as though all wealth and progress hinge on taking from others.
Infrastructure projects, whether big or small should always factor in local ecosystem. For example, highways built with with overpasses and underpasses are a great help to animals.
> One of the ways to prevent theft is to insulate the power lines going into neighborhoods.
This is going to be less effective going forward due to insulation piercing connectors, which simply clamp around an insulated conductor and pierce the insulation to connect to the conductor underneath.
A suitably insane person could also just strip the insulation from a small segment of the conductor, one phase at a time, and hand wrap a splice conductor around the live one and tape it up.
Great news for the monkeys though! I would not want to witness a monkey making contact with two uninsulated conductors on different phases, yeesh.
India has one thing going for it, sunlight all the time.
India can adopt plug-in standards, solar and batteries. I guess most people use some form of battery (UPS/Inverter) anyways, so the idea is familiar.
Rooftop is known and it can continue to grow. Next, add vertical solar. This will add ~4 hours of solar production.
Required gated communities to be self sufficient or net producers. Cover the surfaces of all high rises with vertical panels. Require these communities to have BESS and EV charging for all car parking. This adds two layers of storage. BESS instead of diesel generators. Add outlet for induction stove. No need of piped gas. I've seen villa communities where most homes are net producers, these ideas are happening, need to be standardized as regulation. Easiest thing is to create standards for the gated communities, which can be enforced.
Don't build rural transmission infrastructure. They can be offgrid, using solar and batteries. It is not worth the cost to build and maintain transmission and distribution infrastructure to millions of small villages.
Work towards regulating uber/rapido to require EV cars. These drive the most miles in cities and would do wonders.
Rooftop solar use had and continues to explode in most tier 2 cites where its seen as a great way to save on electricity bills by feeding that power back to the grid. Its one of the few bright spots in a country with relentless expenses and price pressures.
Would argue it is even coming to Tier 3 cities (personal experience from Rourkela, Odisha where I feel like rooftop solar has exploded in the last 5 years)
We installed a 5 kWp plant last month. Grid-tied, of course. Our daily usage is in the 12-25 kWh range depending on the season and the plant produces ~12 kWh on the worst days (~35 on the best, so far).
We have been doing our cooking almost exclusively on induction for the last 6-7 years, and I have been trying to get others to switch as well. However, it is difficult to convince people of the benefits. Some Indian cooking requires exposing the food directly to the flames, so piped/bottled gas cannot be completely eliminated.
How did you get that number? Is this just a quip about batteries?
Most of India has a solar capacity factor >0.2 and low seasonality. That means even 5kW peak rooftop panels and a 10 kWh battery will get you over 95% almost always. And panels+labor is so cheap in India, there's really no reason not to just tile the roof in panels.
Things get more difficult in dense cities, if you have multi story apartment blocks going 90+% locally is impossible. But then just transmit power from lower density rooftops, or actual solar farms.
And this already assumes widespread AC (really no way to increase electrification this much and not add AC in that climate).
Ember Energy: Battery storage is now cheap enough to unleash India’s full solar potential - https://ember-energy.org/latest-insights/battery-storage-is-... - April 7th, 2026 ("Ember’s analysis shows how solar and battery storage can meet as much as 90% of India’s electricity demand at lower LCOE than the average power purchase costs in most states.")
- Solar and batteries could supply 90% of India’s electricity demand at a competitive LCOE of around INR 5.06/kWh ($56/MWh).
- 4.9 GW of solar and 13.5 GWh of battery capacity for every 1 GW average demand load is enough to meet 83-92% of annual electricity demand in the ten largest states.
- 7 of India’s largest states by electricity demand can meet 90-92% of their demand with solar and batteries at an LCOE between INR 4.96–5.09/kWh ($55–56/MWh).
- 27% of India’s electricity was generated from clean sources in 2025. It was the 3rd largest country by electricity demand.
- As of March 2026, India was one of only ten countries planning to triple non-fossil generation capacity from 2022 levels by 2030. By December 2025, the country had achieved 258 GW of installed renewables capacity, making progress towards its 2030 goal of 500 GW. Ember analysis suggests that, under current plans, renewables would reach 42% of generation by 2030.
Low at $12k per capita PPP adjusted. But it seems like most panels are imported or assembled. I don’t see how you can have electricity that cheap in this case.
> At the turn of the millennium, solar panels cost $5-$6 per watt of generation capacity. Today, they sell for around 12 cents per watt, a level described as “offensively cheap” by Dave Jones, co-founder of think-tank Ember.
As someone who has no understanding of how the grid works, this was surprisingly a great first read that sent me down a ton of rabbit holes which have somehow together given me a much better overall idea of how this all works. Love seeing stuff like this on HN!
> The losses in Delhi weren’t caused solely by technical problems. Theft of electricity was rampant, by both the powerful and the powerless (in both senses of the word). Businesses, residential customers, and utility employees with vested interests would siphon electricity from the grid. It was easy to illegally hook into a streetlight or a distribution line running close to one’s house or factory. Utilities didn’t have the resources to identify theft or penalize offenders.
In general, once "everyone" is breaking a rule, more people break the rule too. Or to put it more bluntly; if everyone is breaking a rule, you should too.
"The ones who pay will pay" is always true (from people using public transport without a ticket to "normal" tax payers having to shoulder the losses caused by loopholes and "incentives" for the upper 0.1%), but resigning to it so explicitly is rare.
Yeah. My impression is, small players exploit the loopholes like there's no tomorrow, big players hire external consultants to give them least-effort playbook and take over liability, as anything more clever is exponentially more expensive.
One of the funniest ideas I heard was that we in South Asia do corruption properly, because unlike the West, even the poorest person gets to be corrupt while in the West you have to have money and know people. Democracy!
It's just not true at all though, and I don't get where the meme comes from other than the politicians pointing their fingers at the rich so we don't look at them. If there wasn't incentive to be homeless, we wouldn't have so many.
How is creating your own ETFs to avoid paying taxes low effort?
I mean, it's very low effort to have somebody else do all the work. But you'll never see a self-employed electrician creating an account in the Cayman Islands to avoid taxes.
You'll see a load of people on benefits being tax-negative, though. If paying taxes is your measure, then an honest assessment of who pays taxes wouldn't land you at the ultra-rich.
In places where the grid is reliable, approximately no one disconnects voluntarily from it, and solar panels are just a nice extra.
It is the places where the grid is failing where solar panels indeed liberate you, but not from the utility overlords, but from incompetent and corrupt governance.
I mean this is the case universally, even if the losses aren't in a specific line item the cost of generating that power has to be covered overall
There's usually an incentive to solve this though because this shrinkage, in retail terms, would be handled at the cost of power generated (without any profit margin) whereas if it was sold to a paying customer it'd have a margin built in. If the Greek utilities are allowed to make a profit on that losses line item, that is insane
it depends on how the regulations are written. not every single cost gets to go into the guaranteed return on equity. Probably plenty of examples where it is, but also there are definitely a lot of examples where that's not true. Given how militant most utilities are at preventing theft, either parent comment OP is just being cynical or there is something very off about the situation there vs. most places
Much has been made of Estonia having a high tech virtual government I’d. So many high tech start ups have come from Estonia, I’m a bit stunned that they have big electricity distribution problems.
> Albania, Argentina, Bangladesh, Brazil, Estonia, India, Kenya, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Uganda, and Venezuela
Even if Estonia does have stated electricity distribution loss, it still looks so way out of place in this group of countries by so many criteria. I wonder why not pick Egypt or Libya given that they have the same distribution loss.
Edit: this could be the reason - when you click on "Map" above the graph, for some reason Estonia is one of the blue countries shown on the map. Argentina, Brazil, and Kenya are there too (but not others).
Interestingly, this page seems to contain data only until year 2014, but the graph next to Estonia in the grandparent link does show an increase on the right side. Maybe Estonia did indeed experience some changes in overall distribution loss in recent years?
Elering reports only their part, the very high voltage transmission losses. Then there are the distribution losses on the local level are they're about 4%.
I did query ChatGPT and it seemingly wrong headedly suggested that Estonia had closed lots of Oil Shale power which it did have, I am not too up on this.
I did push back hard saying that that's not the same as what the article talked about at all.
The thing is if the World Bank is making statistics people are basing decisions on this is an issue.
The article also says Brazil's "problems look like Delhi’s 25 years ago", which is very incorrect from what they're describing. Almost none of what is described in the article happened in Brazil 20 years ago, let alone today. Energy theft, for instance, happens here but at a minuscule scale compared to what's on the article.
I also doubt Estonia has any of these issues whatsoever, like energy theft.
It really seems like a vibecoded article with numbers informing incorrect conclusions. Perhaps with a dash of nationalistic pride. Unfortunate from IEEE.
As far as I can tell, that number comes from the World Bank and it defines electricity loss as a percentage of domestic production. But Estonia imports a lot of its electricity, and that imported electricity is not included on the generation side of the equation.
It may be that they over-generate currently to account for the excess losses, which would be very costly given current fuel prices unless most of it is from environmental sources.
It doesn't need to be that amount, just a significant amount, to be worth mentioning. Though even if that much were true, you would have unusually high electricity bills at home¹.
----
[1] much like we do in the UK, but that is because our national grid is a privatised mess effectively run by external concerns (EDF have their fingers in the pie, for one example) charging us much more than they can get away with in their home markets.
They split from the Russian grid and it is causing growing pains. Generation is limited to oil and comprised of aging soviet era plants. They are upgrading but it takes time.
I grew up in Delhi during the 90s. We used to have daily power cuts but starting around year 2000 (can't pin exact year), we started having less outages. Since around 2006, we had almost no outages throughout the year. Now, I haven't experienced a power outage in a long time in Delhi
It seems to be an investment in underground distribution structures and advanced monitoring including predictive failure analysis.
However there's kind of a funny part to it that I read on the last page of New Scientist some years ago. According to that story, Singapore has by far the lowest rate of accidental line cuts - it's a step change to almost zero from the next best country. Apparently there's a worldwide organization that meets to discuss these things. At one meeting the Singaporean engineers presentation was eagerly anticipated but as he was going through his points the engineers from other countries were impatient - they know and do all this! Until he got to his final point: accidental line cuts in Singapore result in 10-year prison sentence. Hence the difference.
> accidental line cuts in Singapore result in 10-year prison sentence
I assumed it was something like that when I saw the graph for Singapore. They achieve the veneer of a perfectly clean and orderly society by punitive intolerance of anything else.
You can cause a lot of harm by breaking infrastructure. 10 years in prison is a bit extreme for an accident but it obviously has the desired effect. The current penalty in my part of town seems to be $0 and no time behind bars. My fiber optic internet is cut about once every 2-3 months.
I wonder if something in the middle could work. I feel like if you are legally responsible for a construction job and dig into the forbidden spaghetti that a little bit of mandatory community service isn't exactly an extreme response.
Singapore is also a 730 km^2 island city-state with a population of about 6.2 million people. I have honestly no idea why people and articles keep comparing it to literally the largest countries on the planet both in terms of land area and population. Ask any other wealthy cosmopolitan world city of about the same area and population what their electricity reliability figures are, and the answers will probably be quite similar.
Inb4 (in this case in-after) trope answers (see below) like 'veneer of perfectly clean and orderly society', 'punitive'. It is small; that is why it can get stuff done.
I 100% agree with this. I have great respect for Singapore and all the achievements of that country. But I also tell people to be mindful of the fact that it's a city state and an island.
I grew up in a part of India where power outages were a thing, but not as common. In 2003, I visited Delhi for the first time and went to the movie theater with a friend. Out of nowhere, the power went out in the middle of the movie. I found is really bizarre that we had to sit at the movie theater and wait for the power to come back. Not sure why I'm sharing this, but reading hm this article reminded me of that experience.
Good to see the improvements they've made over the years.
In Hyderabad, India the govt loses around 2 million kWh per day(roughly 50-60 million USD per year) in theft and unpaid electricity bills every year particularly the old city area where residents refuse to pay the bills.
Bill collectors are openly threatened by local elected leaders even in the presence of police.
The state chief minister(similar to a governor) acknowledged the problem and is planning to handover bill collection to a private firm specifically for that part of the city. The opposition is against the move as the area represents a major voting bloc.
Sometimes, policy based solutions work but political will is also necessary to enforce those policies.
Surprised to see my former university director/lecturer appear on HN. She (the author) was very controversial and general not liked towards the end of her tenure by most of my peers. Nonetheless, she was quite good in her field.
We in Tambaram City in TN, India pay an average of Rs.6000/- per month for water tanker even now in 2026. 24x7 piped water supply is still a dream in our area. Desalination plants are under construction for several years now. Pollution is a major problem and it is high time the municipal corporation provides us with N95 masks. For power outages you should check with people residing in Chennai.
I was curious if the price per unit of electricity has also changed over this time period, looks like that's been pretty much flat: https://ibb.co/8DLPn25D
(I assume consumption per customer has probably gone up)
Very difficult to raise electricity prices in retail areas in INdia. Political protests follow quickly. Also IIRC 30-40% waste in some places is almost always politically sanctioned theft. This is in addition to a lot more money lost as some entities that are politically controlled (e.g. Sugar factories in my state) purposely do not pay or delay. It is a miracle that the DISCOMs do not end up like neighboring Pakistan. It is like an invisible bargain with a lot of voting population and especially farmers (where no distinction is made between large land holding 1% vs others) who are routinely given free electricity. Cross subsidy is in the DNA of India.
The next 25 years will see another revolution, the solar residential (and hopefully commercial one) https://pmsuryaghar.gov.in/#/
The government is actively encouraging solar residential and net metering is on...
Since the topic is linked to Delhi..
In dino, garche dakkan mein hain kadre sukhan bahut,
Kaun jaye Zauq, par dilli ki galiya chodd ke
The poet acknowledges that the Deccan region (South India) currently offers better patronage and respect for poets than the declining Delhi. However, he rhetorically asks who could possibly bear to leave Delhi....
The power companies will just say that if they let everyone do that, it will kill line technicians and boom, no one gets solar. Happening in the USA today
The most important point to note here is that only after privatisation of power sector in Delhi things changed on the ground. Tata Power and Reliance Power completely changed the equation of Delhi power sector.
The fact that policy changes were made should be noted. Among those policy decisions, did India make its own transformers, conductors, and SCADA, (i.e. Indian companies) or did they buy from outside? Seems like it would be better for them to source their own transformers and conductors if they can. I wonder if they'd be better off developing their own software though? Quick Google search suggests that they source from international suppliers like Schneider and Siemens.
Well written. It describes the problem at a fairly high level for engineers to understand and for lay people to see how public policy works when it does.
> In areas where theft was particularly rampant and losses were as high as 83 percent, according to Tata, the companies took a different strategy. These pockets of Delhi were predominantly occupied by low-income families. Tata Power, and later BSES, worked to improve the water supply for these residents and provide educational opportunities, such as instruction in reading and writing in Hindi as well as financial literacy. These efforts focused on the women, who were at home more, and paid them to collect electricity payments from their neighbors. Bill payment rates from these areas are now on par with those of other parts of Delhi
I bet much of the savings is from reducing theft. 50 percent is too much for transmission losses.
In the industry, transmission and distribution losses are called T&D losses. Pretty much all unaccounted losses will be written off as T&D losses. Often the right expansion for T&D losses is Theft and Decoity losses :-)
One key factor not directly mentioned in the article is the simple alignment of financial incentives when electricity distribution was privatized. Before privatization, the agencies responsible for collecting electricity bills had little incentive to actually perform the collection. When coupled with rampant corruption, you get a situation where a lot of bills are either getting unpaid or not even being generated and just being written off as transmission and distribution losses. Switching to private distribution immediately aligns the incentives of the distributor to actually bill their customers for the electricity they are using. None of this is meant to take away from the value of the technical and policy work that led to improvements, and I'm sure all of the factors called out in the article also contributed to this change.
That’s quite the achievement. Though a side note of comparison I can’t believe France and Belgium suffer power losses in the 5 to 6% range. Unless I’m misunderstanding what that means, it seems excessive for a modern economy.
30 years ago my local electric co-op was bragging they got transmission losses down to 4%, when the rest of US was 8% (I'm not sure if that is average or some other statistical term).
But yes, transmission losses exist and are surprisingly large
every step in the chain loses power. You lose power just in the power lines. Every trip through a transformer adds some more loss
Reducing the number of transformers, raising the high side of system voltage, and increasing conductor sizes are all ways to reduce the transmission losses. of course each of those requires investments so that's why it can be variable and also something to brag about
Correct. As I recall the did a customer survey and customers didn't like (among other things) the number of power outages. The main goal was fixing that, and several side effects of that resulting in less line loss.
It's mostly about the distance, isn't it? Iirc even with the most modern ultra high voltage lines, it's about 3% per 1000km. Which honestly doesn't sound too bad, even for really long distances (like solar power from some desert to where people actually live).
Distance is a factor. I do not know what they were measuring (the main power plant was about 1000km away, but I don't know if they counted that or if that was ignored because someone else owned those lines). They were a fairly rural utility with most of the area belonging to farmers (but they do have a couple suburbs and a few small towns).
I don't know the real details, but my educated guess is they raised the voltage, and also they used 3x as many wires (running 3 phase past every house even though almost everybody only used 1 phase). That is I can visually see their insulators on the power posts are larger than neighboring utilities which allows for higher voltage (but may or may not mean higher voltages were used). Likewise I can see the 3 lines on each power pole while neighboring utilities only used one. It is hard to tell from the ground but I suspect they used thicker wires as well.
It’s where you’ll find most countries with a good handle on their electric network, advanced economies or not. You can do better but it requires either very small service distances (so you don’t have transmission losses in the first place) or an extreme dedication to hunting them down.
Czechia is at 5-6 per cent as well, even though our grid companies are quite good. This is the price for having rural areas. Within a single compact city, like Singapore, you can get under 1 per cent easily. One the distances grow to hundreds of kilometers, some non-negligible loss is inevitable.
In the 39 years I live here, the only power loss was due to lightning or planned power cuts because of work in the building where I live in the last 9 years ( rare - twice).
There is however incentive for our high chemistry industry to cut the power and they get re-imbursed. This is when we have too much electricity production ( solar power) vs. consumption. Otherwise the providers have to pay "fines" to lose the overproduction of electricity to neigboring countries ( who probably all have overproduction of electricity).
5-6 percent of electricity loss just mean that 5-6 percent of the electricity produced by all power plants in your country never reach the customer. Not that you have blackouts 5-6 percent of the time.
As of now, we cannot do lossless transmission. If some Ultragrok comes with room-pressure and room-temperature superconductors, then maybe.
It's embarrassing that it took so long. India has been crippled by decades of socialist government overreach. Unfortunately, even the purportedly right wing BJP is unable to keep the government out of places where it doesn't belong.
I am aware. The initial privatization push was initiated by Congress in 1991! My lament is that privatization has remained anemic, even under the so-called right wing BJP.
But you should also acknowledge that national electrical reform was done by BJP. The real problem for Indian politics was the re-entry of the Gandhi nepo-baby dynasty. We would be a lot better off if they hadn't gotten their claws back into the INC.
It's not surprising. For one, stated vs actual goals always differ and someone needs pockets to reach into. For the other, plenty of countries that listened to orgs like the World Bank saying "privatise everything immediately and reap the benefits!" just ended up handing the assets to cronies. Examples like Russia are of course well-known, but it's obviously happening under BJP in India as well.
It's once again lamentable, but somewhat predictable that even on a post about how privatization fixed, in five years, a problem that persisted for 50, you insist on spreading boogeyman tales about privatization. The Indian government is what American libertarians are afraid of, and in their defense, they should be afraid.
Boogeyman? Is the outcome of the World Bank's insistence on "structural adjustments" somehow in debate now?
I was in Delhi when this started and they began laying out the tamper-proof cable back in the early 2000s. At that time, railway food had been privatised, perhaps you recall. It wasn't better. The problem was not the privatisation or lack thereof, it was the complete lack of accountability.
I'm not referring to the World Bank, but rather the idea that BJP's privatization push is somehow benefiting cronies. This is a widely reported accusation by the INC, but like most of their accusations, it seems to be a matter of slinging mud at the wall and seeing what sticks.
Part of accountability is the possibility for failure and the associated consequences. PSUs have no fear of failure, since they're fundamentally parasitic, living as they are on the tax receipts of the beleaguered middle class. Private industry either increases efficiency to the point of profit, or goes under, simple as. Show me the incentive, and I'll show you the results!
Of course, if there is complete government capture by industry, then there is no more risk of failure, and you have privatized PSUs. But let's say this, from 1947-1991, India traded the British for the IAS. Hardly much of an improvement. The only way to reduce their power is to transfer it to the private sector, outside of areas where the utility of the activity is all externality (e.g. defense, scientific research). We have to move in this direction or risk returning to the License Raj era. Perhaps this will create more problems, but at least our children won't curse us for leaving them with our parents' problems.
We're going to go back to the original point you made that you don't understand why privatisation is going so slowly. And I will reiterate that there are good and bad reasons. The bad reasons are visible, like Adani winning every coal tender in every BJP state, or the contractors (privatised) who make shit roads so they can then get paid to repair them. The good reasons are the ones I stated and you've touched on - you don't just give away the family jewels, you make sure that the recipient is strongly incentivised to do a better job. Just "oh they need to make money so it will be better" is too nebulous to mean anything. What is the incentive for a railway caterer to do a better job if he won't get pulled up for substandard food?
Saw the same thing playing out in public transport in a few different countries, incidentally. London railways are a particularly hilarious example of what happens when you privatise without proper accountability.
Speaking of the IAS, my grandfather went smoothly from being an honest and principled ICS officer to being an IAS one. A contractor had his mother murdered because he wouldn't take a bribe for an illegal transport licence. That had nothing to do with socialism or capitalism, and neither ism will magically fix a society where that barely raises an eyebrow.
True it should never have gotten so bad, but when there is no incentive to invest, this is the result you can expect. This happened in Venezuela and South Africa too - though SA also suffers from massive corruption (officials pocketing moneys and diverting from investment in infra).
Being to the right of the current INC is not an achievement. The only people not in that position are Maoists.
Anyway, I think it's reasonable to be suspicious of the wealthy and powerful. For instance, I personally quite dislike our new AI ruling class. But unfortunately, in India there was an attitude since independence that it is impossible to generate wealth in a legitimate manner. Which is going way too far! And has predictably bad outcomes for the country.
Definitely not nearly as vile. It certainly wasn't perfect, particularly things like the awful penal colonies, but jump-starting a giant civilisation, say, 1000+ years into the future is not straightforward either. India is experiencing a rise in nationalism, but would do well to imagine the counterfactual of what India would be like had Europe never visited.
> jump-starting a giant civilisation, say, 1000+ years into the future is not straightforward either
The various East India companies went to India (and the other east Indies) because those places had things rich Europeans desired - spices yes, but also high-end, high-quality textiles and handcrafted items. They were already the height of civilization and had high economic productivity.
> would do well to imagine the counterfactual of what India would be like had Europe never visited
It would probably not be one country. Best case scenario: like a South Asian EU. Why do you think they wouldn't have copied European industrialization and developed themselves? Japan did it. Turkey did it.
Speaking of Japan, isn't it interesting that the first Asian country to industrialize is also one of the only Asian countries never colonized by Europeans? Why do people still believe colonization was good for economic development?
IIR, Japan was a pretty xenophobic, unified, and militarized place when the Europeans showed up. And without either reputed or obvious Tier 1 riches - such as Central & South America's precious metals - to motivate a hard-fought conquest. Especially when 'most everywhere else in South & East Asia was comparatively easy pickings.
> Why do people still believe ...
Because, if you use sufficiently Eurocentric metrics, it usually was. And picking those metrics feels pretty good, if you identify uncomfortably closely with that sort of capitalism.
> Japan was a pretty xenophobic, unified, and militarized place when the Europeans showed up.
Other than unified, that describes most places in the 15th or 16th century.
> Because, if you use sufficiently Eurocentric metrics, it usually was.
The one country in Asia* to not suffer colonialism (Japan) is way ahead of all the others that did have it, especially on "Eurocentric" metrics such as GDP and productivity and democracy and human rights. That alone should be a rebuke to colonialism's purported development powers.
* Arguably Thailand is another but it was forced to cede land to colonial powers. It too is considerably richer than its immediate neighbors.
The one country in Asia to not suffer colonialism (Japan) is way ahead of all the others that did have it, especially on "Eurocentric" metrics such as GDP and productivity and democracy and human rights. That alone should be a rebuke to colonialism's purported development powers.
I don't think this is a good example, given the actual modern history of Japan.
Contemporary Japanese democracy and respect for human rights aren't indigenous Japanese developments. They were literally forced on Japan by the victorious Americans after the homegrown Japanese militarist empire, which didn't GAF about either, catastrophically lost a major war.
Industrialization wasn't an "indigenous Japanese development" either. Other than Britain, every country had to import the industrial revolution.
Japan could only start that war because of its early industrialization. Colonies didn't start WW2.
In an alternate historical timeline where Japan industrializes but doesn't start the war? It would need to have had less militaristic and xenophobic leadership in the early 20th century than it did in our timeline. And IMO that would've led to more democracy* and human rights anyway over time.
*Important to note: Even pre-WW2 Japan went from absolute monarchy to a semi-constitutional monarchy, with suffrage for all adult males granted in 1925.
1000 years ago is not mud huts. Although in terms of civics and rights I would say India seems quite a lot further back than 1000 years, if you take the ancient Greeks as your yardstick.
> Although in terms of civics and rights I would say India seems quite a lot further back than 1000 years
How so?
> if you take the ancient Greeks as your yardstick
You mean the slave owners? Who only allowed free men to vote? And required property ownership to hold office?
I'm not aware of widespread slavery in India, nor a requirement to own property to hold public office. Women are allowed to vote there. They've even had a woman be Prime Minister and two women Presidents.
Goodness, there was a huge amount of slavery, back into prehistory, then lots African slaves from the 6th century, then when Islamic conquest hit almost 1000 years ago many Indians were enslaved. Just as slavery was everywhere, it was in India. The big event was in 1843 when Britain did the moral thinking and emphasis to abolish it throughout their empire and also just in general, with British ships going to war against slaver ships and the British Empire buying slaves' freedom. The two big things about India and abolition were 1) the East India Company was definitely not as morally clear as the people in England, and 2) there was a worry that ending slavery in India would be too disruptive to the local culture, it was so embedded. So it was only abolished 10 years after the rest of the Empire.
Today, with 70 years of independence and self-rule, India has the most modern slaves in the world[0].
> Women are allowed to vote there.
Yes, as of 1950 when democracy was copied and pasted from other civilisations - some, like ancient Greece, almost 2000 years prior - who did all the discovery and moral thinking for this. It's not hard to copy something, particularly when declaring it to be so is what's measured, and not how well it's implemented.
Quite a motte and bailey there. You said India is backward today compared to ancient Greece. Then when I pointed out all the ways in which ancient Greece was backward you began comparing to something else. To be clear: ancient Greece, the "fountain of democracy" had legal slavery. Modern India does not.
"Countries with large populations have large numbers of people doing <insert illegal act>" is hardly a revelation.
> Yes, as of 1950 when democracy was copied and pasted from other civilisations
So weird that those "moral" British didn't allow Indians to vote before that. I thought you said they were the good guys!
No extant country has adopted democracy from first principles. Everyone copy-pasted it. 1950 was the first time India had the choice and chance to do it, and they took it.
> You said India is backward today compared to ancient Greece
No, I didn't mean that. I said if Ancient Greece is your yardstick, India would be more than 1000 years behind today without external influence. Ancient Greece was 2000 years ago, not 1000.
Okay, but it's also a huge country the size of a continent, so of course it's got more than most of Western Europe. If Luxembourg had a million modern slaves there'd be nowhere to hide them. And it has much, much more sensitive systems for detecting this sort of thing than India does, so you can imagine that number is not lowballed.
> India would be more than 1000 years behind today
Behind what? And what are you basing this on, other than vibes and your biases?
> without external influence
Of course it would be externally influenced, even without being colonized. It isn't an island. It couldn't shut itself away like Japan did pre-19th century. Japan is more modern than India because it wasn't colonized. They just took ideas from abroad - industrialization, capitalism, mass literacy, adult male suffrage, (some) democracy (pre-WW2) - and adopted them.
> Okay, but it's also a huge country the size of a continent
> It baffles me that country still has strong anti-capitalist views.
I wouldn't call the "license raj" of India as anti-capitalist.
India arguably has the strongest of institutions of all the countries in South Asia.
However, even its institutions and regulations are pathetically weak.
You probably also saw a previous post right here on this orange website
when someone tried to repatriate their business money outside of India.
It was painful just to read that they had to get approvals
from iirc sixteen different government agencies
to get their own money that they brought in from outside of India back.
Not profits, not proceeds, a fraction of what they put in.
Neither of these two cases is due to "anti-capitalist" views of India.
If you look at what was India before Moghul rule and British rule,
you could argue India has never been socialist before.
I think workers everywhere should have "strong anti-capitalist views",
because unrestrained capitalism is just anarchy.
I think that's a bad read of Indian institutions. They are incredibly powerful - in fact, they are far too powerful. That's the problem. The license raj is the epitome of authoritarian, centralized political and economic power. I suppose it was justified on socialist grounds, but it would be fair to say that saying so doesn't make it so! Before 91, nothing, and I mean nothing, could happen without government say-so.
The problem with Indian institutions is that they are far too powerful, centralized and bureaucratic. Just read the article - the problem was created by a lazy, corrupt, powerful and centralized bureaucratic system. The solution was to dismantle it and decentralize power.
I apologize I am not very good at expressing myself.
Could India be better?
Of course!
Anyone can be better than what they are.
Like a fish that lives in water doesn't ever think about water,
an Indian living in India does not think about the absurdity
of how powerful a District Collector / District Magistrate (DM) / Deputy Commissioner (DC) is in contemporary India.
> I think that's a bad read of Indian institutions. They are incredibly powerful - in fact, they are far too powerful. That's the problem. The license raj is the epitome of authoritarian, centralized political and economic power. I suppose it was justified on socialist grounds, but it would be fair to say that saying so doesn't make it so! Before 91, nothing, and I mean nothing, could happen without government say-so.
> The problem with Indian institutions is that they are far too powerful, centralized and bureaucratic. Just read the article - the problem was created by a lazy, corrupt, powerful and centralized bureaucratic system. The solution was to dismantle it and decentralize power.
What you are saying is absolutely true.
the bureaucracy in India is absolutely lazy, corrupt, powerful, and centralized.
It is also arguably one of the biggest reasons why India has never had a (successful) military coup.
You could even argue the inefficiency and the sluggishness of the bureaucracy is a feature and not a defect.
I think this is a self-deprecating canard that's oft-repeated, but I think fails the credibility test and encourages a kind of fatalistic resigned attitude among Indians. Are we to take from this that efficient bureaucracies lead inevitably to coups? Is the pathetic state of most African countries a result of their stellar bureaucracies?
tldr; they passed the administration of power from the corrupt government officials to Tata power (part of the Tata conglomerate) and BSES (part of another conglomerate Reliance). They modernized the setup and closed loopholes and avenues of corruption and also made stealing of power by the corrupt sections of public difficult.
This is going to get a lot of press and it does not mention any ministers or government services. The guy who wrote it is getting transferred in a week.
They do mean loss. Literally losing electricity as heat because of resistance. You can never reduce this to zero, but various problems can compound to increase the loss to ridiculous levels.
using less electricity downstream is a nice compliment to less loss upstream and has the advantage for the enduser that its within their span of control. both strategies together are ideal
Actually load shedding is planned power cuts. I have seen a schedule published in a newspaper with different regions of the city (not Delhi) and times when no electricity will be available. This is for ppl to plan their day
Example from year 2003 (city = Pune) [1]. Its hard to read
Excerpt:
The load shedding schedule is as follows:
[1] https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/pune/mseb-announces...Useless industries like RO water, gensets, inverters etc are so much larger in India because of governmental abdication of responsibility due to political compulsions. Once you have your own house, or live in a gated community/highrise with its own water/power infra, you get almost western levels of comfort without the messiness of the outside world.
It is better to have electricity 24x7 but only 50 watts to run a fridge, phone charger and one lightbulb, than to have electricity 3 hours a day but be running 1000 watts of airconditioners.
I guess perhaps energy theft was too hard to police?
“And there was no penalty for not paying—there were no regulations allowing the utilities to cut off a customer’s power.”
Collecting more money in a corrupt organization doesn’t means they will automatically get a more effective distribution system.
People wont vote for them if they increased the price by 5x.
see also: squirrel wingsuit.
Nowadays, power cuts are announced via SMS in advanced. Before, this was not the case.
Isn't that a rolling blackout? Load shedding is the technical term and can happen for a variety of reasons that are not based on policy.
Moving from Mumbai to Pune in early 2000's was like going back to a village with 3 hour power cuts in Summer.
Would reconsider if INC appoint someone competent like Shashi Tharoor.
IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt alleged that at a meeting on the night of February 27, 2002, Modi told senior police that Hindus should be allowed to "vent their anger." Another officer, R.B. Sreekumar, said he was denied a promotion for criticizing the government's inaction
I was an adult in 2002. I remember the riots differently. (And, BTW: riots were almost an annual occurrence in some part or the other of the country, like clockwork. Moradabad, Aligarh, Bareilly, etc. etc.)
The SOP when riots happen is to call in the Army to do a "flag march", after a couple of days.
But guess what happened just a few months before the Gujarat riots? The attack on the Indian Parliament in 2001 [1]. As a result, the Army was deployed on the borders and could not be pulled to do flag marches. The Gijarat govt wrote to all neighboring states (MP, MH, RJ) to ask if some police could be spared to help stop the riots. All 3 state governments replied "no, we don't have any police to spare". What else could the government do?
From 2004 thtough 2014, several different teams investigated Gujarat government's actions, and in the end gave them a clean chit.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_Indian_Parliament_attack
Both are dubious characters with conflict of interests and one of them even straight up went against an innocent scientist just to massage his fat ego.
Has BBC made any fucking documentary on this? No it has not.
Nor will losers like you question the blatant hypocrisy and propaganda.
> The internal UK government report concluded that the violence was pre-planned and that the rioting had all the hallmarks of "ethnic cleansing," alleging that Modi was "directly responsible" for the political climate that allowed it
"Internal UK government report" belongs in the dustbin.
> all the hallmarks of "ethnic cleansing,"
Please elucidate what those hallmarks are. I am extremely curious to know what the yardstick is for "ethnic cleansing" according to UK government.
In that case the general reason you are being dismissed now is you are doing a classic [whataboutism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism) - dismissing one wrong by pointing out another.
You should consider things in context, yes, but one wrong doesn’t make another wrong go away. If I kill your spouse, the fact that my spouse was killed (even by you) still makes it a murder. A country that doesn’t guard its sovereignty of violence famously stops being a country by definition - https://acoup.blog/2024/04/12/fireside-friday-april-12-2024/
As someone who moved to India for personal reasons from Europe, this whole defending of Modi and his party policies seems so bizarre - there _are_ examples of countries in the region that got worse in the last 30 years (Pakistan) in the region, but there are soo many examples of others that got much much better. If you look what’s happening to all the other countries in Asia - India seems to be falling behind so hard it’s not even funny. And all thanks to the great leader. It could have been worse - yes, but it could easily have been so so much better.
And I usually go back to the “why nations fail” book that outlined the reasons of countries success and failure - it’s not rocket science - build and strengthen institutions and your country prospers, waken institutions for personal gain to you and your allies - country goes to the dumpster eventually.
The US are going a similar road btw, and it would be a very interesting example to point to eventually for the next editions of that book.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1984_anti-Sikh_riots
Perpetrators - Indian National Congress, Bharatiya Janata Party, Vishwa Hindu Parishad.
And if you want lessons on riot control, learn from Kerala. North Kerala is host to an uncountable number of Hindu-Muslim riot triggers but most of them are defused before they can take root, and if they do occur, the riots are curbed in a day or so.
This one is the most recent and deadliest riot in Kerala - defused in 2 days before it could escalate because of timely police action. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marad_massacre
And this is the entry for the Gujarat riots - Perpetrators: Government of Gujarat. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Gujarat_violence
To quote some extracts :
> Throughout the violence, attacks were made in full view of police stations and police officers who did not intervene.[15] In many instances, police joined the mobs in perpetrating violence. At one Muslim locality, of the twenty-nine deaths, sixteen were caused by police firing into the locality.[18] Some rioters even had printouts of voter registration lists, allowing them to selectively target Muslim properties.[66][75][65] Selective targeting of properties was shown by the destruction of the offices of the Muslim Wakf board which was located within the confines of the high security zone and just 500 meters from the office of the chief minister.[61]
> The violence had been planned far in advance, and that similar to other instances of communal violence the Bajrang Dal, the VHP and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) all took part in the attacks.[64] Following the attack on the train the VHP called for a statewide bandh (strike), and the state took no action to prevent this.[61][62]
> The Concerned Citizens Tribunal (CCT) report includes testimony of the then Gujarat BJP minister Haren Pandya (since murdered), who testified about an evening meeting convened by Modi the evening of the train burning. At this meeting, officials were instructed not to obstruct the Hindu rage following the incident.[109][110] The report also highlighted a second meeting, held in Lunawada village of Panchmahal district, attended by state ministers Ashok Bhatt, and Prabhatsinh Chauhan, among other BJP and RSS leaders, where "detailed plans were made on the use of kerosene and petrol for arson and other methods of killing."[70][110] The Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind claimed in 2002 that some regional Congress workers collaborated with the perpetrators of the violence.[111]
> Dipankar Gupta believes that the state and police were clearly complicit in the violence, but that some officers were outstanding in the performance of their duties, such as Himanshu Bhatt and Rahul Sharma. Sharma was reported to have said "I don't think any other job would have allowed me to save so many lives."[112] Human Rights Watch has reported on acts of exceptional heroism by Hindus, Dalits and tribals who tried to protect Muslims from the violence.
Don't repeat BS talking points that the government couldn't do anything. If the government doesn't have a monopoly on violence, it has lost its legitimacy. That's literally one of the main jobs of the people in power.
Oh, and what did Gujarat do to Rahul Sharma, the IIT grad police officer who was one of the few officers to actually try to stop the riots? They transferred him.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rahul_Sharma_(Gujarat_police)
I was in Delhi in 1984 when the riots happened. It was only Congress workers going after Sikhs to seek revenge for the killing of Indira Gandhi. No BJP or VHP or RSS workers were involved. Our family gave shelter to Sikh families from the neighborhood. I remember the fear, as I couldn't understand why Sikhs were being targeted; and since I didn't see much difference between Sikhs and Hindus, I assumed we also could be the targets of these rioters.
The 1984 riots are a stain on the moral fabric of modern India. And the only party responsible for it is the Congress party; even though all Indians bear some collective responsibility for what happened.
As I grew older and learned more about what happened, I swore to myself: never again.
> Can we not call it the Sikh riots? Those were riots by Congress and its supporters against the Sikhs. The Sikhs didn't rise up. You don't call the Gujarat riots the "Muslim riots" do you?
Why did the riots even begin in the first place? Because Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was shot by her two Sikh body guards. It was as revenge for Operation Bluestar which targeted Khalistani terrorists who had taken over the Golden Temple. Now I have no love for Congress or Gandhi family but you cannot exclude the history from it or cherry pick it according to your liking. Khalistani terrorism was at its peak during that period. Just look at the history of how many Hindus were killed during the militancy in Punjab.
> You don't call the Gujarat riots the "Muslim riots" do you?
It is not a name I have given. I did not decide to name 1984 riots as Sikh or Anti-Sikh riots. I did not decide to name 2002 riots as Gujarat riots. That is literally what it is called. There is no reason to get so butthurt about the name.
> And if you want lessons on riot control, learn from Kerala. North Kerala is host to an uncountable number of Hindu-Muslim riot triggers but most of them are defused before they can take root, and if they do occur, the riots are curbed in a day or so.
LMFAO this is the worst state when it comes to controlling riots. It tolerated Moplah Genocide of all things. Lasted several months.
> This one is the most recent and deadliest riot in Kerala - defused in 2 days before it could escalate because of timely police action. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marad_massacre
This is not a riot mate. This is a terror attack. Do you not know the difference between a riot and a terror attack?
> Don't repeat BS talking points that the government couldn't do anything. If the government doesn't have a monopoly on violence, it has lost its legitimacy. That's literally one of the main jobs of the people in power.
I never said Government couldn't do anything. Are you unable to comprehend what I wrote? I wrote politicians have no power to stop riots. It is only the military (which is also part of the Government) that has the power.
Second, very laughable of you to call out the Moplah rebellion, which happened in the 1910s lol. Are you still stuck in the British Raj, pre-WW1?
Third, Marad was a riot, except it was extinguished in a day (by a North Indian Hindu top cop by the way), because of timely action by the police in actually discovering the weapons. What could've been a terror attack was averted.
> I wrote politicians have no power to stop riots. It is only the military (which is also part of the Government) that has the power.
And fourthly, no riots in any democracy across the world are controlled by the military lol. The military serves a different purpose, and using them for tasks such as riot control is exactly how you end up with another Tiananmen Square massacre (in which case, the military were explicitly called because the civilian police of Beijing did not want to shoot and kill the protesters). Perhaps that's where your mind is, to make India another one-party Hindutva dictatorship.
My edits were taken from the Wikipedia article only.
Thanks for confirming you are part of the propaganda. I have no further interest in continuing this discussion with a lunatic.
> My edits were taken from the Wikipedia article only.
Your edits even in the Wikipedia article call it "dubious". You still mentioned it anyway, without mentioning that the claim is dubious, because you are part of the propaganda machine.
> And fourthly, no riots in any democracy across the world are controlled by the military lol
It infact IS controlled by the military. In US, for example, it is called National Guard. Police is not equipped to control a riot in any democracy in the World. India is actually an exception where it has a CRPF for riots and because scale of riots in India exceeds even the CRPF's ability to handle it (due to our size and population), the Military is called.
> Second, very laughable of you to call out the Moplah rebellion, which happened in the 1910s lol.
Moplah Genocide was not part of the rebellion. Unless you want to call Muslims genociding Hindus and raping Hindu women as part of rebellion against the British Raj. Have some shame. And it happened in 1921 not 1910.
This I think is a standard practice in any large office building in France (Europe? Global?) too, regardless of the frequency of the power cuts. I don't remember witnessing any power cuts in the office (not since long ago anyway), but in most of the places there are systematically white and red sockets, red ones being powered through a UPS. So, server machines go into red ones. Well, we don't have servers anymore, but the sockets are still there anyway. Hopefully UPS too, LOL.
The building might be on a generator. The whole building is most assuredly not on UPS.
Even in hospitals only certain outlets are on UPS - the stuff that absolutely cannot be interrupted - though a lot of hospital equipment now has its own battery system, at least in part for convenience.
I don't know if it's still done but semiconductor plants used to use intertia-based grid smoothing/UPS systems to handle millisecond-level interrupts and voltage fluctuations.
I do remember working ~25 years ago at a place that did have those two kinds of outlets. Our computers and monitors would be on the UPS+generator ones, while desk lamps, office lamps etc. were not. But it was specifically because the offices were on-site w/ the two data center complexes the company had and the building I was in happened to also be wired into that whole setup. Not every other one was either, only that one and the 24/7 NOC.
I only knew this was a thing because my office mate's computer was in the wrong kind of socket. One day his lamp stayed on while the computer turned off and for me the other way around. Soon after we heard the diesels starting and had to close the window coz of the fumes.
At full capacity of the data center, the absolutely huge UPSs could run the data center for all of 10 minutes. So that's how long the diesels had to actually start and take over.
It's almost like grid inertia is a different problem from matching changes in demand, and nuclear really sucks at the latter...
Putting computer systems on UPSs isn't a Europe thing. Backup generators and UPS units are very common, or at least they were until everyone got infatuated with moving all their data "into the cloud" and stopped maintaining, or building, infrastructure in office space for it.
Now everyone has all their eggs in the Amazon/Microsoft/Google basket, and instead of the (ahem, regulated) telco or electric company going out...the cloud provider does, and unlike before where you could still work locally - now you can't do anything.
But hey, it was cheaper, right?
Oops...
For the recent big outage in France, neither of those was the problem. Some big transformers overloaded and there wasn't enough redundancy.
> Now everyone has all their eggs in the Amazon/Microsoft/Google basket, and instead of the (ahem, regulated) telco or electric company going out...the cloud provider does, and unlike before where you could still work locally - now you can't do anything.
> But hey, it was cheaper, right?
> Oops...
I'm not sure what you mean by "oops". Those datacenters do have downtime but companies seem to be happy sticking with them anyway. It seems like it still saves money.
Genuine question - how did people sleep there pre-AC?
Short answer is that you get used to it. There was a surprisingly effective swamp cooler that worked about half the time (we got pretty good at troubleshooting it) and several ancient pedestal fans. You can sleep in very nearly any environment once you become sufficiently sleep-deprived.
Thankfully, I stayed in a nice hotel with an automatic generator, so the power would cut out for a second or two before the generator came on, and then would cut back out for a second or two a few minutes later when the hotel went back on the mains.
I wonder how many HNers are, or ever have been there in the first place? It seems strange to me to ask who "recalls" what it was like there before. What would such a recollection be based on? There's only so much attention one can pay to what daily life is reportedly like around the world, and that required believing the reports.
India accounts for a big portion of the english speaking internet, so I wouldn’t be surprised if half the posters here are Indian origin.
The birth rate falling is a VERY good thing. India cannot really support more than 300-400 million people with a high quality of life with its geographic size and exhausted resources. Life becomes cheaper than disposable toilet paper otherwise.
Source for this carrying capacity?
India has roughly ~18% of humanity but only about 4% of global freshwater resources, and agriculture consumes roughly 80–90% of India's water. The World Bank estimates that around 600 million Indians already face water stress. (The number is actually higher in many estimates)
https://www.worldbank.org/en/brief/2026/03/19/how-india-is-a...
There is also substantial pressure on land. Government data report about 97.85 million hectares, or ~30% of India's geographical area, as affected by land degradation/desertification.
https://www.pib.gov.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?lang=2®=...
If you want long-term, sustainable agriculture, we need to heavily move to organic farming. This yields ~30% less food produce. I forgot the popular paper on this - can dig it up.
India has also exhausted its mineral reserves. This is not fully our fault. We were fully strip mined and utterly bankrupted by the British in WW2. https://www.pib.gov.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?lang=2®=...
(IMHO that is the real reason why we got independence - the Brits didn't want to keep holding to a distressed asset and immediately liquidated. Look at Bengal famine of 1943)
We are having heavy import dependency on minerals - a ridiculous 80%!!! dependency, which is causing significant problems in our trade/current-account deficit.
So, if we want maximum ecological comfort, and long-term, prosperous standard of living, we need a significantly reduced population. You can get the number by just halving our population simply taking into account high-availability to water and then reduce further for sustainable agriculture and sustainable mineral consumption.
This is deeply unsupported by the evidence I’ve seen. Organic farming tends to look far more resource intensive than modern methods. Often for little discernible gain in flavor and nutrition.
> You can get the number by just halving our population
I agree with your conclusion given the data, particularly around mineral exhaustion. (Though there is also the issue of severe mismatches. Lots of lithium, for example, yet no battery industry to speak of.)
What ? This is well-supported unless you have been sadly influenced by the brainwashing of corrupt American Agricorpos - who btw do a terrific job of FUD & misinformation. I even learned about the benefits of organic farming in high-school biology class.
"organic farming generally had higher soil organic matter, lower nutrient losses per hectare, lower energy requirements and generally better biodiversity outcomes"
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22947228/
“Organic farming enhances soil microbial abundance and activity - A meta-analysis and meta-regression” (2017)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjourn...
Land‐use intensity and the effects of organic farming on biodiversity: a hierarchical meta‐analysis
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4299503/
Actually, there are dozens of papers. The research is extremely supported for sustainable agriculture with the corresponding caveat of lower yields like I mentioned. No idea how you got "deeply unsupported".
Not normal. Not encouraged. Not the trend line. You’re projecting a problem from other countries onto a demographic context within which it doesn’t exist. Unfortunately this is a topic where one has to actually look at the numbers.
I mean Mumbai's population is 10x Paris population, so this should be obvious.
I can fault India (and, in particular, Modi) for repeating the same mistake all other western developed countries made 40 years before, yes.
made 40 years... before they (India) started developing.
Western countries were at the forefront of this already in the 80s. India, starting to develop much later, had a big time buffer to learn from that and at least attempt to avoid it.
Effective and safe Birth control is something that has never before existing in human history (with the possible exception of a specific plant during the Roman Empire which was driven to extinction due to over harvesting), and which society doesn’t really have a decent answer to address in a stable fashion yet. As clearly demonstrated by the upcoming demographic collapse.
The short term incentives this provides to women (and men who benefit in the short term as well) is just too powerful to fully contain, despite all the attempts from the powerful religious groups in India.
The long term consequences of having everyone (men and women) competing for the same jobs, lack of sustainable long term population demographics, removing many consequences of promiscuous sexual behavior, etc. only show up once the western approach has played out for multiple generations. Until then, it’s a way to juice the numbers.
They held out much longer than western society did, and society still goes to extreme lengths to attempt to restrain it, but it still has had widespread effect regardless. They still haven’t experienced the long term effects, and I bet they would love to juice the numbers more as India is a very hard place to live now.
They are still living with the very real pain of ‘the old approach’.
The even more powerful religious groups in the Middle East, and social/tribal groups in Africa, being the only ones ‘still standing’ on this front, but it’s inevitable there too.
Conservatism may attempt to slow the spread, but eventually even the tribal groups of mountainous Afghanistan will have to deal with the same issues that the most left wing liberal folks currently are grappling with - what is the point/long term future this is leading too?
The current Hedonic nihilism of a lot of folks in the west tends to not be long term self sustaining. Very addictive in the short term though!
It isn’t clear what is going to emerge as the alternative.
What would ‘children of men’ be like if the same thing was happening - but it was because of a voluntary pill or implant every woman was taking instead of some big mystery illness?
The one benefit of living in India is cheap household labour...only possible because of a massive underclass of people!
There are 1.2 billion Indians.
But of course that also makes blaming Modi pretty silly - every country sees this happening as their economic and social conditions improves. We don't know of any way of stopping it short of maybe throwing people into poverty.
(the only remaining places that has not yet dropped below replacement is sub-Saharan Africa and parts of the Middle East, but they too are seeing birth rates drop).
The reaction to that idea shows you how undervalued baby production still is. Morons insist that $20k or similar is enough incentive. It's laughable.
Whatever happens with AI "taking all the jobs", this will drive real societal change, because it has to. The options are obscene authoritarianism and removal of bodily autonomy from women so we can just force them to reproduce like society is used to, or actually adapting to what it will cost to encourage women to go through literal trauma and 20 years of really hard work because the rest of society will benefit. Seeing as de-facto enslaving all women is horrific, I hope people see that we should do everything to avoid the first option.
It has to become very attractive to be an average person, with average social standing, with average resources. The uber rich might have to give up some of their share of the pie.
It is possible going significantly higher could, but if so we have not yet figured out how high, and it's clear the threshold is much higher than people have tended to think it would be. E.g. look at financial incentives in Hungary, or the welfare system in places like Norway that makes parental leave in many developed countries look like third world conditions.
Rich people do seem to have a somewhat higher fertility rate, so it is possible that you could fund it enough, but the rise happens at high enough income levels I don't think our economy could handle it.
I agree with the rest of your comment, though - I just don't think we know if purely financial motivation would be sufficient at a level that is actually possible (and I do fear authoritarian approaches will end up being tried instead). It might take a lot more effort than that in terms of lightening the burden and/or making it more attractive in other ways.
If child rearing is a full time job maybe we can treat it like one.
You see, I know it's hard to grasp for some, but everything is really relative.
Your ratios are all wrong. There are about 500mm Indians aged 6 to 26 today who will be over 80 (and under 100) by 2100. Even if nobody dies, India isn’t hitting 1.2bn 80-year olds. As for under-18s in that timeline, it ranges from 100 to 500 million depending on fertility.
Put another way, there is no deterministic population collapse in India the way there almost must be in Korea and Germany.
I'd prefer if it didn't have to go through this at all. Knowing you are headed for bad times isn't something to live with, it's something to fix. And it's not like the birth rates in each state are staying the same, they are actively dropping. The issue isn't just there, it's also getting worse.
Smooth population decline means much less contention on ressources, energy and living space, which is highly relevant when all of those are already somewhat at the limit.
Significant positive growth is clearly completely unsustainable even over centuries, and I don't see why a somewhat smaller total human population could not be just as successful/satisfied over the next decades.
Then don't raise them! Also, don't raise problems that are easily disproven with real numbers! Demographics is a terrible domain to vibe your way through.
> Knowing you are headed for bad times isn't something to live with, it's something to fix
I literally just showed you that demographic projections for India give realistic scenarios for the number of under-18 year olds being equal to the number of over-80 year olds by 2100. The worst case is a 5:1 ratio.
exactly. so in 2150, or 2200, or someday, it will be a problem. So yes, it is a problem even today. It's kind of why you don't stand on train tracks even if there are still 15 minutes.
Future problems need to be fixed, else you end up as the countries you listed, Korea and Germany. It's not that hard
No. Never of the magnitude you suggested. The population pyramid simply doesn’t have the shape required for a population bomb the likes of which we’re seeing in e.g. Korea.
Given current and projected fertility, it never blows out the way you suggest. It gently curves. If Indians, tomorrow, suddenly stop having kids that would be the problem you suggest. But they aren’t. And it isn’t.
Incorrect. It is 1.48 billion and expected to hit 1.7+ billion in next three decades in a nation that is <1/3rd size of the USA. Birth rate collapse cannot come soon enough.
The only thing I know about India is from a Big Bang Theory episode where Raj's father said to Leonard when asked how's the weather, "It's hot, it's always hot in India!".
I don't personally know that the statement is true, but if that's your issue you should be criticizing the writer, not the actor.
https://e-estonia.com/estonia-the-only-country-in-the-world-... https://windeurope.org/news/power-shift-how-the-baltic-synch...
It’s as though all wealth and progress hinge on taking from others.
Also it would also avoid such incidents.
Minister blames monkey for Sri Lanka nationwide power cut
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c8d92n28pqjo
Infrastructure projects, whether big or small should always factor in local ecosystem. For example, highways built with with overpasses and underpasses are a great help to animals.
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/samruddhi-fo...
This is going to be less effective going forward due to insulation piercing connectors, which simply clamp around an insulated conductor and pierce the insulation to connect to the conductor underneath.
A suitably insane person could also just strip the insulation from a small segment of the conductor, one phase at a time, and hand wrap a splice conductor around the live one and tape it up.
Great news for the monkeys though! I would not want to witness a monkey making contact with two uninsulated conductors on different phases, yeesh.
India can adopt plug-in standards, solar and batteries. I guess most people use some form of battery (UPS/Inverter) anyways, so the idea is familiar.
Rooftop is known and it can continue to grow. Next, add vertical solar. This will add ~4 hours of solar production.
Required gated communities to be self sufficient or net producers. Cover the surfaces of all high rises with vertical panels. Require these communities to have BESS and EV charging for all car parking. This adds two layers of storage. BESS instead of diesel generators. Add outlet for induction stove. No need of piped gas. I've seen villa communities where most homes are net producers, these ideas are happening, need to be standardized as regulation. Easiest thing is to create standards for the gated communities, which can be enforced.
Don't build rural transmission infrastructure. They can be offgrid, using solar and batteries. It is not worth the cost to build and maintain transmission and distribution infrastructure to millions of small villages.
Work towards regulating uber/rapido to require EV cars. These drive the most miles in cities and would do wonders.
Lots of scope for growth.
We installed a 5 kWp plant last month. Grid-tied, of course. Our daily usage is in the 12-25 kWh range depending on the season and the plant produces ~12 kWh on the worst days (~35 on the best, so far).
We have been doing our cooking almost exclusively on induction for the last 6-7 years, and I have been trying to get others to switch as well. However, it is difficult to convince people of the benefits. Some Indian cooking requires exposing the food directly to the flames, so piped/bottled gas cannot be completely eliminated.
Installed capacity is 5kW. Which is generally sufficient as we use very less power.
I have induction stoves, so gas fuel for kitchen is minimized.
Planning to put a solar based offgrid chiller unit for air conditioning next.
Most of India has a solar capacity factor >0.2 and low seasonality. That means even 5kW peak rooftop panels and a 10 kWh battery will get you over 95% almost always. And panels+labor is so cheap in India, there's really no reason not to just tile the roof in panels.
Things get more difficult in dense cities, if you have multi story apartment blocks going 90+% locally is impossible. But then just transmit power from lower density rooftops, or actual solar farms.
And this already assumes widespread AC (really no way to increase electrification this much and not add AC in that climate).
India’s Clean Energy Boom Halts Coal Power Growth - https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Indias-Cl... - September 18th, 2026
Ember Energy: India - https://ember-energy.org/countries-and-regions/india/ - Last Updated: June 4th, 2026
Ember Energy: Battery storage is now cheap enough to unleash India’s full solar potential - https://ember-energy.org/latest-insights/battery-storage-is-... - April 7th, 2026 ("Ember’s analysis shows how solar and battery storage can meet as much as 90% of India’s electricity demand at lower LCOE than the average power purchase costs in most states.")
- Solar and batteries could supply 90% of India’s electricity demand at a competitive LCOE of around INR 5.06/kWh ($56/MWh).
- 4.9 GW of solar and 13.5 GWh of battery capacity for every 1 GW average demand load is enough to meet 83-92% of annual electricity demand in the ten largest states.
- 7 of India’s largest states by electricity demand can meet 90-92% of their demand with solar and batteries at an LCOE between INR 4.96–5.09/kWh ($55–56/MWh).
Ember Energy: India’s electrotech fast-track: where China built on coal, India is building on sun - https://ember-energy.org/latest-insights/indias-electrotech-... - January 22nd, 2026
- 27% of India’s electricity was generated from clean sources in 2025. It was the 3rd largest country by electricity demand.
- As of March 2026, India was one of only ten countries planning to triple non-fossil generation capacity from 2022 levels by 2030. By December 2025, the country had achieved 258 GW of installed renewables capacity, making progress towards its 2030 goal of 500 GW. Ember analysis suggests that, under current plans, renewables would reach 42% of generation by 2030.
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2026/09/offensively-cheap-so...
> At the turn of the millennium, solar panels cost $5-$6 per watt of generation capacity. Today, they sell for around 12 cents per watt, a level described as “offensively cheap” by Dave Jones, co-founder of think-tank Ember.
In general, once "everyone" is breaking a rule, more people break the rule too. Or to put it more bluntly; if everyone is breaking a rule, you should too.
You can steal as much as you want. The ones who pay will pay.
You'd be amazed at how most of this sort of thing is not done by the same people you blame for everything.
/s? There isn’t an incentive to be a war refugee either.
I mean, it's very low effort to have somebody else do all the work. But you'll never see a self-employed electrician creating an account in the Cayman Islands to avoid taxes.
Until solar panels came to liberate us from the utility overlords.
A failed state will be fail-stating regardless of the technology.
It is the places where the grid is failing where solar panels indeed liberate you, but not from the utility overlords, but from incompetent and corrupt governance.
There's usually an incentive to solve this though because this shrinkage, in retail terms, would be handled at the cost of power generated (without any profit margin) whereas if it was sold to a paying customer it'd have a margin built in. If the Greek utilities are allowed to make a profit on that losses line item, that is insane
Much has been made of Estonia having a high tech virtual government I’d. So many high tech start ups have come from Estonia, I’m a bit stunned that they have big electricity distribution problems.
We do not have issues with electricity here or planned power cuts or whatever else.
I would like to see where this professor got his data for losses from. Maybe his data is flawed.
Even if Estonia does have stated electricity distribution loss, it still looks so way out of place in this group of countries by so many criteria. I wonder why not pick Egypt or Libya given that they have the same distribution loss.
Edit: this could be the reason - when you click on "Map" above the graph, for some reason Estonia is one of the blue countries shown on the map. Argentina, Brazil, and Kenya are there too (but not others).
'kaod' is losses, this table shows losses from bruto production.
Either someone has been sending wrong data to the world bank or there is some issue with interpreting them before importing to world bank.
But at 2.9% according to Eesti's electricity supplier: https://www.elering.ee/en/electricity-consumption-and-genera...
"In 2024, losses accounted for 2.9% of the total amount of electricity supplied to the transmission system." What does it all mean, who knows.
https://www.ceer.eu/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/3rd-CEER-Repo...
I did push back hard saying that that's not the same as what the article talked about at all.
The thing is if the World Bank is making statistics people are basing decisions on this is an issue.
"Oh, you sweet summer child"
The existing ones are used only when electricity prices are veey high.
I also doubt Estonia has any of these issues whatsoever, like energy theft.
It really seems like a vibecoded article with numbers informing incorrect conclusions. Perhaps with a dash of nationalistic pride. Unfortunate from IEEE.
----
[1] much like we do in the UK, but that is because our national grid is a privatised mess effectively run by external concerns (EDF have their fingers in the pie, for one example) charging us much more than they can get away with in their home markets.
However there's kind of a funny part to it that I read on the last page of New Scientist some years ago. According to that story, Singapore has by far the lowest rate of accidental line cuts - it's a step change to almost zero from the next best country. Apparently there's a worldwide organization that meets to discuss these things. At one meeting the Singaporean engineers presentation was eagerly anticipated but as he was going through his points the engineers from other countries were impatient - they know and do all this! Until he got to his final point: accidental line cuts in Singapore result in 10-year prison sentence. Hence the difference.
I assumed it was something like that when I saw the graph for Singapore. They achieve the veneer of a perfectly clean and orderly society by punitive intolerance of anything else.
I wonder if something in the middle could work. I feel like if you are legally responsible for a construction job and dig into the forbidden spaghetti that a little bit of mandatory community service isn't exactly an extreme response.
Inb4 (in this case in-after) trope answers (see below) like 'veneer of perfectly clean and orderly society', 'punitive'. It is small; that is why it can get stuff done.
Good to see the improvements they've made over the years.
Amazing that places have 50% power loss.
Bill collectors are openly threatened by local elected leaders even in the presence of police.
The state chief minister(similar to a governor) acknowledged the problem and is planning to handover bill collection to a private firm specifically for that part of the city. The opposition is against the move as the area represents a major voting bloc.
Sometimes, policy based solutions work but political will is also necessary to enforce those policies.
(I assume consumption per customer has probably gone up)
The government is actively encouraging solar residential and net metering is on...
Since the topic is linked to Delhi..
In dino, garche dakkan mein hain kadre sukhan bahut,
Kaun jaye Zauq, par dilli ki galiya chodd ke
The poet acknowledges that the Deccan region (South India) currently offers better patronage and respect for poets than the declining Delhi. However, he rhetorically asks who could possibly bear to leave Delhi....
A few years back the electricity clean up reached the famous Ghalib Haveli as well
https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/historic-ghalib-ki-hav...
This is... interesting on multiple levels.
In the industry, transmission and distribution losses are called T&D losses. Pretty much all unaccounted losses will be written off as T&D losses. Often the right expansion for T&D losses is Theft and Decoity losses :-)
But yes, transmission losses exist and are surprisingly large
Reducing the number of transformers, raising the high side of system voltage, and increasing conductor sizes are all ways to reduce the transmission losses. of course each of those requires investments so that's why it can be variable and also something to brag about
I don't know the real details, but my educated guess is they raised the voltage, and also they used 3x as many wires (running 3 phase past every house even though almost everybody only used 1 phase). That is I can visually see their insulators on the power posts are larger than neighboring utilities which allows for higher voltage (but may or may not mean higher voltages were used). Likewise I can see the 3 lines on each power pole while neighboring utilities only used one. It is hard to tell from the ground but I suspect they used thicker wires as well.
Is the juice worth the squeeze?
For some problems, the closer you get to perfection, the harder the next step is.
In the 39 years I live here, the only power loss was due to lightning or planned power cuts because of work in the building where I live in the last 9 years ( rare - twice).
There is however incentive for our high chemistry industry to cut the power and they get re-imbursed. This is when we have too much electricity production ( solar power) vs. consumption. Otherwise the providers have to pay "fines" to lose the overproduction of electricity to neigboring countries ( who probably all have overproduction of electricity).
As of now, we cannot do lossless transmission. If some Ultragrok comes with room-pressure and room-temperature superconductors, then maybe.
But you should also acknowledge that national electrical reform was done by BJP. The real problem for Indian politics was the re-entry of the Gandhi nepo-baby dynasty. We would be a lot better off if they hadn't gotten their claws back into the INC.
I was in Delhi when this started and they began laying out the tamper-proof cable back in the early 2000s. At that time, railway food had been privatised, perhaps you recall. It wasn't better. The problem was not the privatisation or lack thereof, it was the complete lack of accountability.
Part of accountability is the possibility for failure and the associated consequences. PSUs have no fear of failure, since they're fundamentally parasitic, living as they are on the tax receipts of the beleaguered middle class. Private industry either increases efficiency to the point of profit, or goes under, simple as. Show me the incentive, and I'll show you the results!
Of course, if there is complete government capture by industry, then there is no more risk of failure, and you have privatized PSUs. But let's say this, from 1947-1991, India traded the British for the IAS. Hardly much of an improvement. The only way to reduce their power is to transfer it to the private sector, outside of areas where the utility of the activity is all externality (e.g. defense, scientific research). We have to move in this direction or risk returning to the License Raj era. Perhaps this will create more problems, but at least our children won't curse us for leaving them with our parents' problems.
Saw the same thing playing out in public transport in a few different countries, incidentally. London railways are a particularly hilarious example of what happens when you privatise without proper accountability.
Dude, you're the one coming across as a zealot here.
The License Raj prior to 1991 was pretty socialist, and it was a Congress policy.
It baffles me that country still has strong anti-capitalist views. I guess lack of education does that to people.
Also, BJP is slightly right of Congress (post 1991) when it comes to economics.
Anyway, I think it's reasonable to be suspicious of the wealthy and powerful. For instance, I personally quite dislike our new AI ruling class. But unfortunately, in India there was an attitude since independence that it is impossible to generate wealth in a legitimate manner. Which is going way too far! And has predictably bad outcomes for the country.
While the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_India_Company was, as a broad generality, not nearly so vile as (say) the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_colonization_of_the_Am..., it certainly didn't leave many Indians with a favorable impression of European-style capitalism.
The various East India companies went to India (and the other east Indies) because those places had things rich Europeans desired - spices yes, but also high-end, high-quality textiles and handcrafted items. They were already the height of civilization and had high economic productivity.
> would do well to imagine the counterfactual of what India would be like had Europe never visited
It would probably not be one country. Best case scenario: like a South Asian EU. Why do you think they wouldn't have copied European industrialization and developed themselves? Japan did it. Turkey did it.
Speaking of Japan, isn't it interesting that the first Asian country to industrialize is also one of the only Asian countries never colonized by Europeans? Why do people still believe colonization was good for economic development?
IIR, Japan was a pretty xenophobic, unified, and militarized place when the Europeans showed up. And without either reputed or obvious Tier 1 riches - such as Central & South America's precious metals - to motivate a hard-fought conquest. Especially when 'most everywhere else in South & East Asia was comparatively easy pickings.
> Why do people still believe ...
Because, if you use sufficiently Eurocentric metrics, it usually was. And picking those metrics feels pretty good, if you identify uncomfortably closely with that sort of capitalism.
Other than unified, that describes most places in the 15th or 16th century.
> Because, if you use sufficiently Eurocentric metrics, it usually was.
The one country in Asia* to not suffer colonialism (Japan) is way ahead of all the others that did have it, especially on "Eurocentric" metrics such as GDP and productivity and democracy and human rights. That alone should be a rebuke to colonialism's purported development powers.
* Arguably Thailand is another but it was forced to cede land to colonial powers. It too is considerably richer than its immediate neighbors.
I don't think this is a good example, given the actual modern history of Japan.
Contemporary Japanese democracy and respect for human rights aren't indigenous Japanese developments. They were literally forced on Japan by the victorious Americans after the homegrown Japanese militarist empire, which didn't GAF about either, catastrophically lost a major war.
Japan could only start that war because of its early industrialization. Colonies didn't start WW2.
In an alternate historical timeline where Japan industrializes but doesn't start the war? It would need to have had less militaristic and xenophobic leadership in the early 20th century than it did in our timeline. And IMO that would've led to more democracy* and human rights anyway over time.
*Important to note: Even pre-WW2 Japan went from absolute monarchy to a semi-constitutional monarchy, with suffrage for all adult males granted in 1925.
Not sure what you are suggesting here.
How so?
> if you take the ancient Greeks as your yardstick
You mean the slave owners? Who only allowed free men to vote? And required property ownership to hold office?
I'm not aware of widespread slavery in India, nor a requirement to own property to hold public office. Women are allowed to vote there. They've even had a woman be Prime Minister and two women Presidents.
Goodness, there was a huge amount of slavery, back into prehistory, then lots African slaves from the 6th century, then when Islamic conquest hit almost 1000 years ago many Indians were enslaved. Just as slavery was everywhere, it was in India. The big event was in 1843 when Britain did the moral thinking and emphasis to abolish it throughout their empire and also just in general, with British ships going to war against slaver ships and the British Empire buying slaves' freedom. The two big things about India and abolition were 1) the East India Company was definitely not as morally clear as the people in England, and 2) there was a worry that ending slavery in India would be too disruptive to the local culture, it was so embedded. So it was only abolished 10 years after the rest of the Empire.
Today, with 70 years of independence and self-rule, India has the most modern slaves in the world[0].
> Women are allowed to vote there.
Yes, as of 1950 when democracy was copied and pasted from other civilisations - some, like ancient Greece, almost 2000 years prior - who did all the discovery and moral thinking for this. It's not hard to copy something, particularly when declaring it to be so is what's measured, and not how well it's implemented.
[0] https://www.walkfree.org/global-slavery-index/country-studie...
The US has the most people in modern slavery in the Western hemisphere: https://www.walkfree.org/global-slavery-index/country-studie....
And that's even counting Mauritania: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_Mauritania
"Countries with large populations have large numbers of people doing <insert illegal act>" is hardly a revelation.
> Yes, as of 1950 when democracy was copied and pasted from other civilisations
So weird that those "moral" British didn't allow Indians to vote before that. I thought you said they were the good guys!
No extant country has adopted democracy from first principles. Everyone copy-pasted it. 1950 was the first time India had the choice and chance to do it, and they took it.
No, I didn't mean that. I said if Ancient Greece is your yardstick, India would be more than 1000 years behind today without external influence. Ancient Greece was 2000 years ago, not 1000.
> The US has the most people in modern slavery in the Western hemisphere: https://www.walkfree.org/global-slavery-index/country-studie....
Okay, but it's also a huge country the size of a continent, so of course it's got more than most of Western Europe. If Luxembourg had a million modern slaves there'd be nowhere to hide them. And it has much, much more sensitive systems for detecting this sort of thing than India does, so you can imagine that number is not lowballed.
Behind what? And what are you basing this on, other than vibes and your biases?
> without external influence
Of course it would be externally influenced, even without being colonized. It isn't an island. It couldn't shut itself away like Japan did pre-19th century. Japan is more modern than India because it wasn't colonized. They just took ideas from abroad - industrialization, capitalism, mass literacy, adult male suffrage, (some) democracy (pre-WW2) - and adopted them.
> Okay, but it's also a huge country the size of a continent
And India isn't?
I wouldn't call the "license raj" of India as anti-capitalist. India arguably has the strongest of institutions of all the countries in South Asia. However, even its institutions and regulations are pathetically weak.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhopal_disaster
You probably also saw a previous post right here on this orange website when someone tried to repatriate their business money outside of India. It was painful just to read that they had to get approvals from iirc sixteen different government agencies to get their own money that they brought in from outside of India back. Not profits, not proceeds, a fraction of what they put in.
Neither of these two cases is due to "anti-capitalist" views of India. If you look at what was India before Moghul rule and British rule, you could argue India has never been socialist before.
I think workers everywhere should have "strong anti-capitalist views", because unrestrained capitalism is just anarchy.
The problem with Indian institutions is that they are far too powerful, centralized and bureaucratic. Just read the article - the problem was created by a lazy, corrupt, powerful and centralized bureaucratic system. The solution was to dismantle it and decentralize power.
> I think that's a bad read of Indian institutions. They are incredibly powerful - in fact, they are far too powerful. That's the problem. The license raj is the epitome of authoritarian, centralized political and economic power. I suppose it was justified on socialist grounds, but it would be fair to say that saying so doesn't make it so! Before 91, nothing, and I mean nothing, could happen without government say-so. > The problem with Indian institutions is that they are far too powerful, centralized and bureaucratic. Just read the article - the problem was created by a lazy, corrupt, powerful and centralized bureaucratic system. The solution was to dismantle it and decentralize power.
What you are saying is absolutely true. the bureaucracy in India is absolutely lazy, corrupt, powerful, and centralized. It is also arguably one of the biggest reasons why India has never had a (successful) military coup. You could even argue the inefficiency and the sluggishness of the bureaucracy is a feature and not a defect.
Although they were some mistakes his government made all in all it’s been a huge success compared to the previous administrations in India.