DISCUSSION.

The article comments on the problems and performance of China and India. There are, of course, similarities between the two in terms of their enormous land and population masses and the historical burden of long foreign exploitation. Moreover, the problems of each are staggering. Perhaps my familiarity with the mind-boggling Indian scenario breeds some caution. The Chinese scene is equally complex with the additional handicap of lack of reliable information on China. Social development can be identified in terms of progress not only in education, health, social mobility, and so on but also in the attitudes, values, motivation, and behavior patters of the population. Furthermore, China's leaders have sought to create such a perfect state of social development by a massive and sustained employment of communist ideology and organization. It is argued that the Chinese system is more self-reliant because it has not relied to an equal degree as India on foreign private investment, foreign aid, imported technology, and so on. It is further argued that the Indian reliance on foreign private investment has led to economic dependence on foreigners. It is also arguable that the Indian strategy of utilizing aid and limited private investment to finance imports of technology in order to narrow the technology gap has produced far more substantial and variegated technological absorption in India than has been the case with China.