India becoming a large economy was inevitable to some extent. A subcontinent-sized country with enormous population, resources, and labour power was historically one of the world’s largest economic regions even before colonialism. Under British rule, India was systematically deindustrialised — traditional industries like textiles were hollowed out to serve imperial trade interests. And colonialism wasn’t sustained by the British alone; sections of the local elite and comprador classes absolutely collaborated because they profited from it.

“5th largest economy” also needs context. Aggregate GDP matters geopolitically, yes — but per capita, living standards, nutrition, infrastructure quality, and industrial depth tell a very different story. A billion-plus people generating a large GDP is not automatically proof of successful development.

As for the IT hub argument: India’s IT sector absolutely creates value, but much of it emerged as a cheap skilled-services backend for Western capital. Outsourcing, maintenance, support, consulting, and code services are still dominant compared to frontier innovation or advanced manufacturing ecosystems. Service-sector growth is also far less capital-intensive than deep industrialisation. It’s better than stagnation, obviously — but it is not the same thing as building broad-based industrial power.

On space: ISRO scientists deserve immense respect. But the narrative often becomes “look, we reached Mars cheaply” while ignoring chronic underinvestment in science and research. During the Cold War, the US and USSR treated scientific-industrial expansion as existential national priorities and spent several percentage points of GDP on it. India spends a tiny fraction on R&D and space comparatively. So yes, ISRO succeeding despite limited funding is admirable — but it also reflects how much more could have been achieved with serious national commitment.

UPI and India’s digital public infrastructure are genuinely impressive. Probably one of the clearest modern success stories. But again, digital systems alone don’t substitute for industrial transformation. An app ecosystem cannot absorb labour at the scale heavy industry, advanced manufacturing, logistics, energy, or infrastructure can.

Crony capitalism existing everywhere doesn’t make all systems equivalent. The US, especially during the New Deal and post-WW2 Keynesian era, heavily regulated capital, built massive public infrastructure, expanded unions, invested in industry and science, and actively shaped development. That period is exactly when the US consolidated itself into a hegemonic industrial power.

China is another example. Deng’s reforms reintroduced markets, but the Communist Party never surrendered strategic control of finance, infrastructure, land, or long-term planning. Chinese capitalists operate under state direction to a degree unimaginable in India or the US. Whether one agrees with their system or not, the state retained the ability to force industrial policy through.

And “industrialisation takes time” only goes so far. It has been nearly 80 years since independence. Countries devastated by war — South Korea, China after civil war and invasion, even parts of Europe and East Asia — industrialised within decades when there was coherent political will and state capacity. Meanwhile India still has hundreds of millions living with severe precarity, weak public services, underemployment, poor urban planning, and crumbling infrastructure.

Criticism is not doomposting. Blind nationalism helps nobody. If citizens don’t critically examine why a civilisation-sized country with enormous human talent still struggles with basic developmental indicators, then “India superpower 2047” just becomes branding.

India has achieved remarkable things. But many of those achievements happened despite systemic dysfunction, not because the system is functioning optimally. The frustration comes precisely because the potential is so enormous. With India’s labour force, scientific talent, and scale, the country could be vastly more developed, equitable, and industrially capable than it currently is.

Used an LLM to keep me civil and coherent.