India has often been advised to follow the path of China in public investment in human capital. China has done well in the last decade, but it would be a disaster if India were to follow her example. China's approach can be called "two quick steps forward, one slow step back." India's approach, in contrast, is "one slow step forward." The end result of both approaches turns out to be quite similar. But in the short run, China appears to be ahead with her two quick steps.

Buddhist philosophy has two streams that typify these different approaches. Mahayana asks the seeker to work for the betterment of the world. The seeker is advised to dissolve his ego into the common good. Chinese governance is closer to this system. The Chinese follow their leader more or less unquestioningly. Policy correctness is secured by the leader, who corrects himself as mistakes become clear, since he is driven by a deep desire to better the people's lot.

The Hinayana, on the other hand, asks the seeker to withdraw from the world and seek individual salvation though meditation. Hindu philosophy advocates much the same thing. It adds, however, that the seeker should resist the tyrannical ruler. Correctness is secured by friction between the rulers and such seekers -- the Brahmins. Facing incessant debates by these Brahmins, leaders are unable to take quick decisions. Yet slowly there emerges a decision that is close to the correct path.