Musings on India, Could India be the closest thing to a Superpower in SR? Options Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic Download this topic Subscribe to this forum Display Modes Outline Switch to: Standard Switch to: Linear+

[LivingOxymoron]

India gets very little coverage in the SR world. The only real mention I've seen in 4th Ed, where the AA Corp KITT is mentioned as, basically, the customer-level tech support for consumer goods, outsourced by even AAA megas.

This got me thinking.

With the breakup of China, India is the largest nation in the Shadowrun world by population. According to the stats given at the Sixth World Wiki (which I think are derived from 3rd Ed Shadows of Asia), it is home to nearly 1 billion people. Not only that, though, but the demographic stats are interesting. While nearly half the nation has less than a high school-level education (and the poverty rate is 25%), India boasts more Advanced Degrees than even Japan (18% vs 14%). In fact, the total number of undergrad AND advanced degree holders given are 44% compared to Japan's 43% and Seattle's 34%! Basically, India has nearly 440 MILLION people with some kind of higher-level education.

What is also interesting is where Japan boasts a 97% Corporate Affiliation rate, India is only 22% This means that even if the AAA's and AA's were to employ only college educated folks, half the population would still be highly educated and not corporate affiliated.

So what do we think? What do you suppose the status of the largest nation on Earth is? Especially one who's educated populace exceeds many other nations' (or corporations) total number of citizens? One which appears to have very little corporate involvement and is unified by a national faith only made stronger and more "real" by the Awakening?

[pbangarth]

The fact that India can't even convince it's neighbor to give up Kashmir (even with the threat of nuclear weapons) kinda precludes superpower status.

The US has not failed at doing these things. It is just taking a lot of time.

The same argument could be applied to Method's statement, to which I had replied.

[Method]

The same argument could be applied to Method's statement, to which I had replied.

If the US shared boarders with Iraq, Iran or Afghanistan your argument might hold water. As it turns out, those places are halfway around the globe and the US can still deploy massive military forces to both of them simultaneously (or anywhere else in the world) in a matter of 48-72 hours. Granted, places with endemic political and social problems (like Iraq) or stone-aged infrastructure (like large tribal areas of Afghanistan) aren't magically fixed because we deploy thousands of dudes with rifles to them. That takes time, will and billions of US taxpayer dollars...

[pbangarth]

That takes time, will and billions of US taxpayer dollars...

... and lots of lives. Ditto for Canada, The Netherlands, Britain, and to a much lesser extent other nations.

I think a serious argument could be made that the US could not have handled both Iraq and Afghanistan at the same time, by itself. Now, one could counter-argue that part of being a superpower is the ability to draw other nations into conflicts such as these. Which is the case right now.

Maybe it's just me, but it seems to me that it is getting harder to maintain the state of being a superpower these days. Which plays into the worldview of Shadowrun.

[hobgoblin]

I think a serious argument could be made that the US could not have handled both Iraq and Afghanistan at the same time, by itself.

Not at least without going conscription. And since vietnam, thats political suicide...

[Warlordtheft]

Not at least without going conscription. And since vietnam, thats political suicide...

And given the technical prowess of the US armed forces, most US generals would state that conscription/drafts are a bad idea in the current military.

[pbangarth]

And given the technical prowess of the US armed forces, most US generals would state that conscription/drafts are a bad idea in the current military.

This is an interesting idea. I wonder if anyone has actually done a study on the relative technical abilities of a conscript army versus a volunteer army. Would a random selection of the US population be less able to handle the complexities of a 21st century technology than volunteers? Volunteers may be more dedicated, but are they smarter than the average?

[Semerkhet]

This is an interesting idea. I wonder if anyone has actually done a study on the relative technical abilities of a conscript army versus a volunteer army. Would a random selection of the US population be less able to handle the complexities of a 21st century technology than volunteers? Volunteers may be more dedicated, but are they smarter than the average?

There's plenty of literature out there about the negative effects of conscription, but I don't think a less intelligent force is one of the problems. If anything, I'd expect a slight uptick in mean intelligence. OTOH, higher intelligence doesn't necessarily make a better soldier, especially if that soldier is mightily pissed off that they aren't working in the engineering firm that gave them a sweet offer right before they got drafted.

[Warlordtheft]

There's plenty of literature out there about the negative effects of conscription, but I don't think a less intelligent force is one of the problems. If anything, I'd expect a slight uptick in mean intelligence. OTOH, higher intelligence doesn't necessarily make a better soldier, especially if that soldier is mightily pissed off that they aren't working in the engineering firm that gave them a sweet offer right before they got drafted.

Actually it is (although this is US specific). With the all volunteeer force, you have a much higher skillset than in a conscript force. They are better motivated and led, and generally in much better mental and physical shape than the rest of the populace. The major downside is that the armed forces now compete with the rest of the job market (so when the ecnomy is doing well, it is harder to find volunteer, though not impossible, and when the econmy tanks they are easier to fill). Of note--China and Russia are in the process of changing to an all volunteer force. They have sen the lopsided success of the US army against the Iraqi army (twice), the Taliban (I'm talking firefight wise not politically), and other places.

Another issue is motivation, conscripted forces tend to be less motivated. Exceptions do exist-Isreal for example.