Krishnamurthy Subramanian’s India @ 100: Envisioning Tomorrow’s Economic Powerhouse presents a bold vision for India to become a $55 trillion economy by 2047, potentially surpassing the United States and China to become the world’s largest economy. The book’s claims rest on achieving 8% annual real GDP growth, leveraging India’s demographic dividend, and implementing zealous reforms. This article critically reviews these claims, assesses when India might become the world’s largest economy, and examines why it has lagged in scientific research and development (R&D). It also investigates the controversial actions of fringe elements within the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), Bajrang Dal, and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leaders, who have been linked to supporting convicted criminals, and evaluates how such actions may deepen religious extremism among youth and hinder economic goals.
Table of Contents
Review of Claims in India @ 100
Subramanian’s core claims revolve around four pillars to achieve a $55 trillion economy by 2047:
- Macroeconomic Emphasis on Growth: Prioritizing economic growth over inequality reduction, formalizing the informal sector, and boosting manufacturing to drive productivity. Subramanian argues that India’s current GDP per capita mirrors China’s in 2007, when China sustained 8% growth for two decades, suggesting India can follow suit.
- Microeconomic Focus on Inclusion: Ensuring social and economic inclusion through education reforms, job creation, and social pacts to distribute growth benefits equitably.
- Ethical Wealth Creation: Promoting private sector investment and entrepreneurship while reforming bureaucracy and judicial systems to foster trust and innovation.
- Virtuous Cycle via Investment: Triggering a self-reinforcing cycle of private investment, job creation, and productivity, supported by policies like the Atmanirbhar Bharat Rozgar Yojana (ABRY) and tax incentives for labor-intensive innovation.
Critical Evaluation of Claims
- 8% Real GDP Growth: Subramanian’s projection requires a nominal GDP CAGR of 12.5% (8% real growth + 4% inflation + 0.45% rupee depreciation). India’s historical growth averaged 6.7% from 2000–2023 (IMF), with peaks of 8–9% during 2003–2007. Sustaining 8% for 24 years is ambitious, as global slowdowns, domestic policy missteps, or external shocks (e.g., COVID-19) could disrupt this trajectory. The World Bank projects 7.8% growth as necessary for high-income status by 2047, but recent IMF forecasts (2024) suggest 6.5–7% through 2030, indicating a gap.
- Demographic Dividend: India’s median age of 28 and peaking working-age population by 2040 provide a strong foundation, unlike aging economies like China (median age 38). However, low labor force participation (55%, with female participation at 37%, ILO) and skill mismatches limit this potential. Subramanian’s education reform proposals align with the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020, but implementation lags, with public education spending at 4.6% of GDP (below the 6% target).
- Formalizing the Informal Sector: The informal sector (90% of employment, 40% of GDP, Economic Survey 2023–24) is a productivity drag. Initiatives like GST and UPI have formalized parts of the economy, but restrictive labor laws and uneven state-level implementation hinder progress. Subramanian’s focus on labor-intensive manufacturing is critical, as manufacturing’s GDP share (13%) trails China (28%) and Vietnam (20%).
- Investment and Productivity: Subramanian’s virtuous cycle depends on private investment, but gross fixed capital formation (29% of GDP) is below China’s 40% during its high-growth phase (World Bank). Bureaucratic red tape and judicial delays (50 million pending cases, National Judicial Data Grid, 2024) deter investors. While Make in India and PLI schemes show promise (e.g., Apple’s $14 billion iPhone production in 2023), scaling these requires consistent governance.
- Ethical Wealth Creation: The emphasis on ethical practices is laudable but vague. Subramanian does not deeply address how to curb cronyism or ensure equitable wealth distribution, critical given India’s high income inequality (Gini coefficient 0.35, World Bank 2020).
The claims are grounded in data and precedent (China’s growth), but their feasibility hinges on flawless execution, global stability, and addressing socio-political risks, which the book underplays.
When Will India Become the World’s Largest Economy?
Subramanian posits that a $55 trillion economy by 2047 could make India the world’s largest, surpassing the US (projected at $40 trillion by 2047, assuming 2% real growth) and China (potentially stagnating due to demographic decline and debt). Alternative projections vary:
- Goldman Sachs: Predicts a $50 trillion economy by 2075, suggesting 2047 is optimistic.
- EY Report: Estimates a $26 trillion economy by 2047, implying India may overtake the US but not China by then.
- Morgan Stanley: Forecasts India’s GDP doubling by 2031, but does not specify overtaking others.
Assuming Subramanian’s 8% real growth, India’s GDP could reach $55 trillion by 2047, potentially overtaking the US by 2040–2045 (if US growth slows) and China by 2047 (if China’s growth decelerates to 3–4% due to aging and debt, IMF 2024). However, this assumes no major disruptions. Realistically, 6.5–7% growth (IMF) pushes the timeline to 2050–2060 for India to become the largest economy, contingent on reforms and global conditions.
Why Has India’s Progress Been Hampered?
- Historical Legacy: Colonial exploitation (1700–1947) reduced India’s global GDP share from 24.4% to 4.2% (Maddison Project, 2013). Post-independence socialist policies and the License Raj stifled growth until 1991 liberalization (Panagariya, 2008).
- Policy Inefficiencies: Restrictive labor laws and bureaucratic delays deter investment. India ranks 63rd in Ease of Doing Business (World Bank 2020), and states like Bihar lag in governance.
- Social Challenges: Religious tensions, caste disparities, and low human capital (HCI 0.44 vs. China’s 0.65, World Bank 2020) hinder inclusive growth. Communal violence (1,974 cases in 2022, NCRB) disrupts stability.
- Global Factors: Trade barriers, geopolitical tensions, and climate risks (e.g., 2023 heatwaves costing 1.5% of GDP, Swiss Re) pose challenges.
Why Has India Lagged in Scientific Research and Development?
India’s lag in R&D stems from structural, historical, and policy-related factors:
- Low Investment: India spends 0.7% of GDP on R&D, compared to China (2.4%), the US (3.4%), and South Korea (4.8%) (UNESCO, 2023). Public funding dominates (60%), but private sector contribution is low due to risk-averse corporate strategies and regulatory hurdles.
- Historical Neglect: Colonial policies prioritized resource extraction over education and innovation, leaving a weak scientific base (12% literacy in 1947). Post-independence focus on heavy industry sidelined R&D until recent decades.
- Brain Drain: Over 1 million Indian STEM professionals work abroad (MEA, 2022), driven by better opportunities and funding. India produces 2.5 million STEM graduates annually, but only 12% are R&D-ready (PMKVY data).
- Institutional Weaknesses: Indian universities rank low globally (IITs excluded), with outdated curricula and limited industry-academia collaboration. Only 4% of R&D spending goes to universities, vs. 20% in China (World Bank).
- Bureaucratic Constraints: Complex funding processes and slow patent approvals (India ranks 40th in IP protection, WIPO 2023) discourage innovation. The Chandrayaan-3 success highlights potential, but such achievements are exceptions.
Subramanian’s call for R&D tax incentives is apt, but scaling innovation requires tripling R&D spending, reforming education, and retaining talent.
Fringe Elements and Support for Convicted Criminals
The RSS, VHP, Bajrang Dal, and some BJP leaders have been linked to controversial actions, including welcoming convicted criminals, which raises concerns about religious extremism and governance.
Notable Cases
- Babu Bajrangi: Convicted for the 2002 Naroda Patiya massacre (97 deaths) during the Gujarat riots, Bajrangi was granted bail multiple times post-2012 and celebrated by VHP and Bajrang Dal supporters, who viewed him as a Hindu hero (The Wire, 2019). His release fueled perceptions of impunity.
- Subhodh Singh and Pehlu Khan Killers: Subhodh Singh, a police inspector, was killed in 2018 by a mob in Bulandshahr over cow slaughter allegations, with Bajrang Dal members implicated. Pehlu Khan, a dairy farmer, was lynched in 2017 by cow vigilantes in Rajasthan; the accused were acquitted in 2019 amid public celebrations by VHP supporters (Human Rights Watch, 2022). Such outcomes embolden vigilante groups.
- Jayant Sinha’s Garlanding: In 2018, BJP MP Jayant Sinha garlanded eight men convicted of lynching Alimuddin Ansari over cow smuggling allegations in Jharkhand. The convicts were later released on bail, prompting criticism for glorifying violence (The Hindu, 2018). Sinha defended his actions, claiming the men deserved a fair trial, but the optics deepened communal divides.
Why Such Actions Occur
- Hindutva Ideology: The RSS, VHP, and Bajrang Dal, part of the Sangh Parivar, promote Hindutva, equating Indian identity with Hinduism. This ideology portrays Muslims and minorities as threats, justifying vigilantism (e.g., cow protection) as cultural defense. The BJP, while electorally pragmatic, relies on these groups for grassroots mobilization, creating a tacit tolerance for their actions.
- Political Strategy: Celebrating convicted individuals consolidates Hindu votes by polarizing communities, a tactic evident in elections (e.g., BJP’s 2019 victory post-Pulwama, New Left Review, 2022). Leaders like Sinha leverage such acts to signal loyalty to the base.
- Judicial and Police Inaction: Weak prosecution and bail grants (e.g., Bajrangi’s 90+ bail approvals) reflect systemic issues. Section 197 of the CrPC shields police from accountability, enabling impunity (Human Rights Watch, 2022). BJP-ruled states often fail to curb vigilante violence, as seen in 63 cow-related attacks since 2010, 97% post-2014.
Impact on Youth and Religious Extremism
These actions risk radicalizing youth and deepening religious extremism:
- Polarization: Glorifying vigilantes normalizes violence, with WhatsApp and social media amplifying hate (e.g., 2020 Delhi riots planned via “Kattar Hindu” groups, Newslaundry). Youth, facing unemployment (12.4% for ages 15–29, CMIE 2023), are vulnerable to extremist narratives promising identity and purpose.
- Erosion of Trust: Minority communities (200 million Muslims, 14% of population) feel targeted, as seen in 50,291 crimes against Dalits (2020, NCRB) and church attacks by VHP/Bajrang Dal (Uttarakhand, 2021). This undermines social cohesion, critical for economic growth.
- Distraction from Development: Religious polarization diverts focus from education and skilling, key to Subramanian’s vision. Karnataka’s business climate suffered due to communal tensions (New Left Review, 2022), deterring investment.
Can the Government’s Approach Achieve Economic Goals?
The BJP-led government’s approach, balancing economic reforms with Hindutva-driven politics, poses challenges to Subramanian’s vision:
- Economic Reforms: Policies like GST, UPI, and PLI schemes align with Subramanian’s pillars, driving formalization and investment. India’s digital infrastructure (50% of global payment volumes via UPI) and geopolitical positioning (e.g., US-China decoupling) are strengths. However, inconsistent implementation and federal tensions (e.g., GST revenue disputes) slow progress.
- Communal Polarization: The government’s tacit support for fringe elements risks instability. Violence and distrust deter FDI and disrupt labor markets, as seen in Karnataka’s tech hub (New Left Review, 2022). Subramanian’s call for inclusion is undermined by policies like anti-conversion laws, used to target minorities (Human Rights Watch, 2022).
- Youth and Human Capital: Unemployment and poor education (only 12% of workforce skilled, PMKVY) push youth toward extremist groups, as seen in ABVP-led campus violence (Justice For All, 2021). Without addressing this, the demographic dividend becomes a liability.
- Global Perception: Communal incidents and press freedom concerns (India ranks 161st, RSF 2024) harm India’s image, critical for global partnerships Subramanian emphasizes. Investors prioritize stability, which polarization jeopardizes.
Conclusion
Subramanian’s India @ 100 offers a compelling, data-driven roadmap for a $55 trillion economy by 2047, potentially making India the world’s largest economy by 2045–2050 if 8% growth is sustained. However, historical legacies, low R&D investment, and socio-political challenges temper this optimism. India’s scientific lag stems from underfunding, brain drain, and institutional weaknesses, requiring urgent reform. The actions of RSS, VHP, Bajrang Dal, and BJP leaders in supporting convicted criminals deepen communal divides, radicalize youth, and erode trust, directly countering Subramanian’s vision of inclusive, ethical growth. The government’s dual approach—economic reform alongside polarizing politics—risks derailing the $55 trillion goal. Achieving it demands prioritizing social cohesion, education, and governance over short-term electoral gains, ensuring India’s demographic dividend fuels progress rather than division.
References
- Subramanian, K. (2024). India @ 100: Envisioning Tomorrow’s Economic Powerhouse. Rupa Publications.
- Maddison Project (2013). Historical GDP Estimates.
- Panagariya, A. (2008). India: An Emerging Giant. Oxford University Press.
- World Bank, IMF, UNESCO, ILO, Economic Survey 2023–24, NCRB, National Judicial Data Grid, Human Rights Watch, The Hindu, New Left Review, Justice For All, The Wire.
–
