Sounds like we agree on everything except: "education does not guarantee the achievement of freedom" I truly believe it does. May take while, but it eventually does. "I will give you the example of India. Now, I know most of our impression of India is shaped by the observation of our immediate neighbors - Bihar, UP and the like - which are arguably the most under-developed places in India. However, if we are willing to look beyond these states, we see a vibrant country that has done well under democracy." Care to think why Andhra Pradesh is different from Bihar? I don't know about you, but I find my answer in education. "The democratic polity, and policies motivated by national pride, was able to produce a huge number of engineers and doctors, and many of them wasted their lives driving taxis etc. to make a living until the 1990s." I'm not going to argue on this (although I really could) because I don't think that's important. "In this scenario, the economic achievement of India was impinged not by the lack of an educated mass, but by the lack of freedom to associate with people from outside India." But now think if this (even though now you're talking "globalization"--as far as I know India got its freedom in the 40s) would have been possible if India didn't already have those engineers, doctors? You think that their preparedness didn't play an important role in attracting foreign money? If you ask me (and I know I'm not alone on this), I will say that the cheap and educated workforce of South India was the primary attraction to the foreign investors. The free market policy that was adopted was second. I know you think the other way around...and that's where we disagree. (Maybe we need an arbitrator :-)). But there are many democracies (just think in East Europe, Latin America, even Africa) that have economic policies even more open than that of India. Why didn't Microsoft build its R&D campuses in Argentina or Romania or South Africa? Or even more appropriate, why didn't it build its facilities in Bihar? Don't Bangalore and Patna share the same free/open market policy? Why is foreign investment in India so concentrated in the South? Again, I find my answers in the educated workforce. "The interpretation I present is again because of un-freedoms. Sure, we had freedom in paper. But the power-asymmetries remained, didn't it"? They did. And will remain that way until a fair majority of Nepalis are educated. So I guess now we'll have to define "freedom". But looks to me that your definition already assumes an educated mass [as implied by the need for a symmetrical balance of power], making this entire conversation pointless. :-) "A lot of things did work, and were working, were it not for the power hungry "educated" elite who took it upon themselves to override the status quo with their (distorted?) vision of what should be. That "educated" elite is the Maoist leadership, as well as the Narayanhiti-dwellers and to some extent some other politicos." Only an educated population can counter this phenomenon. Nothing else can. Educated leaders aren't enough. You need educated people, as well. Another long posting. Sorry. But why arent' more people taking part? Is it too trivial a topic we're discussing or what?