Why are there no forward looking, tough and aesthetic fascists in pajeetland?
There is a certain type of leader and ideology that is completely missing here. Obsession with efficiency, industry, innovation, embodying the will to power. Every successful country today was ruled by at least one such man, but here we have none. Like bismarck, napoleon, garibaldi, sun yat sen, cromwell, so on and so forth.
They smashed the old world so that the new world could be born. But jeets on the other hand are obsessed with antiquity. They believe when old = good, but in reality the great leaders believed that old = inefficient, and so created many reforms and revolutionised society.
Fascist larpers of even the jeet internet arent really fascists. Fascism was obsessed with futurism and industry, meanwhile jeets are obsessed with age old traditions... this is why jeetland is so far behind, we had no revolutionaries, we had no leaders to destroy the old decrepit systems and institutions. All our leaders are just old unkils and babus. They dont inspire, they dont innovate, they dont optimize, they are just leeches sucking the nation dry...
Take the bhosadpill, its the trvth...
>>30462
>All our leaders are just old unkils and babus
They are the biggest leaches, they don't share any resources and use their connections so that their family can get jaabs
Nepotism is core to corruption
>>30471
>You think timmyland had genius peasants in the 1700s?
yeah but I am not talking about edge cases, geniuses exist in india too, the general population is the deciding factor not the edge cases.
Literally all countries in west and east had a homogenous population with uniform culture - Japan, US, Germany, UK etc.
They all had massive civil wars and revolutions, almost all of them were under some form of authoritarian government or policies that are socially snd hence politically eugenic.
Lundia had none of that, infact British Raj system was superior to what we have now.
Americans for example literally took over an entire continent (bigger in size than all indian subcon), nothing like that ever happened in india, so we missed all sorts of political, economic and social supernovas.
In Europe just go and see just Brvtal was history post Roman Collapse, India has no equivalent to their wars of Religion, India Japan sengoku period and later Meiji Restoration comes to mind.
lundian history has no equivalents, the only people in lundian history who have fought are Rajputs, so if Indian consisted of Rajputs then we might have turned out like Japan or Germany.
It will sound too simplistic but after reading a lot I have come to a conclusion that two most important factors are
1. Homogenous society and culture
2. Warring (and Victorious) people
All first world states fought massive wars inside and outside and wete victorious most of the time.
>>30479
>>30492
Your analysis is flawed.
>Literally all countries in west and east had a homogenous population with uniform culture - Japan, US, Germany, UK etc.
This is lack of understanding on your part. Do you have any objective metric to measure homogenity or are you going by 'feels', kinda how to timmies all brownoids turd worlders appear the same. Uk for example is comprised of english, scots, welsh. In germany, a north german can't understand bavarian language spoken in souther alpine germany.
>They all had massive civil wars and revolutions.
Again whats your metric for comparison?
>the only people in lundian history who have fought are Rajputs.
What about sikhs, marathas, ahoms. Also it wasnt just rajputs who fought. They were cavaliers and commanders. Common foot soldiers, mahouts, etc. were always of ordinary castes like recruited peasants etc.
