What do you think?
Rate this book
South vs North: India’s Great Divide
Compare two children – one born in north India, the other in the south. The child from south India is far less likely to die in the first year of her life or lose her mother during childbirth. She will also receive better nutrition, go to school and stay in school longer; she is more likely to attend college and secure employment that pays her more. This child will also go on to have fewer children, who in turn will be healthier and more educated than her. In a nutshell, the average child born in south India will live a healthier, wealthier, more secure life than one born in north India. Why is south India doing so much better than the north? And what does that mean? In this superbly argued book, data scientist Nilakantan RS shows us how and why the southern states are outperforming the rest of the country and its consequences in an increasingly centralized India. He reveals how south India deals with a particularly tough set of issues – its triumphs in areas of health, education and economic growth are met with a policy regime that penalizes it; its success in population control will be met with a possible loss of political representation. How will the region manage such an assault? Hard-hitting, troubling and full of fascinating data points, South vs North is an essential book about one of the biggest challenges that India faces today.
280 pages, Hardcover
Published May 17, 2023
59 people are currently reading
881 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 48 reviews
October 1, 2022
“If Gujarat is a model, then the real toppers, like Kerala and Tamil Nadu, must be super-models”, wrote Economist Jean Dreze in his book ‘Sense & Solidarity’. In addressing the question of why the South performs better than the North, Jean Dreze’s work explained that the divergence in socio-economic outcomes is due to South India’s (particularly Kerala & Tamil Nadu) social policies that are inclusive, universal, rational, and welfare-oriented. Whereas, the states that lag in development follow the policy of exclusion, targeting, and unscientific approach. Earlier, Prof. Amartya Sen had also enquired similar hypothesis on why Southern states perform better than the North in his seminal work ‘An Uncertain Glory’, in which he reasoned that enhanced public expenditure on education, healthcare, and food security as key pillars for improved human development in South. Similarly, Nobel Laureate Abhijit Banerjee reasoned that “good politics create good policies” in his “Poor Economics”.
The chest-thumping nationalists percieve any comparisons between the socio-economic performance of states as an act of balkanization. However, Nilakantan’s data-centric portrayal of key indices relating to health, education, and the economy merely reflects the goodness of priorities and policies of different states post-independence. Policies like the mid-day meal scheme, no cost school uniforms, bicycle and bus pass for students, often rejected by the elite minority within the ruling class as populist and so-called “freebies” have impacted the educational enrolments in states like Kerala and Tamil Nadu for the past seven decades. Critics tend to dismiss such developments with their usual snobby and aristocratic elitism that ‘quality of public service is substandard’. Even if it is the case, the South can now focus on output metrics while northern states need to get their children into school first and keep them there for longer periods cutting down dropout rates.
The one unique reason that makes this book required reading for every Indian is that, as far as I knew, for the first time in the developmental economics literature, someone had finally come up with the rationale for decentralizing and liberalizing our democracy as a remedy for these divergences. The author argues,
“The degree of divergence of India’s states demands policymaking and fiscal sovereignty at the state level for effective governance. After all, one entity cannot make a single policy decision that can apply equally effectively to both Afghanistan and the United States in health, for example.”
The above paragraph is the keystone element of this book, where Nilakantan points out the fallacy behind tailoring ‘One Nation, One Policy’ to be followed by all states. That brings us to a valid question, why does a State that has fulfilled its basic amenities with effective structures need to follow a policy targeted at a State that is structurally deficient in resources, lacking basic amenities, and struggling to get its act together? This phenomenon is well reflected in the New Educational Policy’s aspiration to enhance the national Gross Enrolment Ratio to 50% by 2035 when Tamil Nadu’s GER is already 50% in 2022.
Another crucial point from this book is how the rapidly increasing North Indian population is punishing the stabilized population of South India, with Southern states imposing higher taxes to meet the revenue shortfall. The fifteenth finance commission considered the population data from the 2011 census for the allocation of revenue between the States and the Union. In this regard, the States that had performed splendidly between 1971 and 2011 in stabilizing their population have lost their share of revenue around 7 percent. Moreover, this is a perverse incentive to the northern states that had neglected to stabilize their population. In addition, tactical trickery to decrease the share of the divisible pool in gross tax collection by collecting cesses and surcharges by the Union (not shared with the States) had further skewed the horizontal devolution of taxes.
Not only the above-mentioned divergence in the population is impacting the South’s purse, but the upcoming delimitation of parliamentary seats based on the decennial census will also dilute the democratic power of Southern states (whose population before the ‘freeze’ in 1971 was 25% which subsequently reduced to 20% in 2011 and will further reduce in 2022). In simpler words, if the delimitation exercise is carried out, the Gangetic belt (which has higher fertility rates) alone would send 275 of 548 members of parliament (MPs) to the Lok Sabha. Uttar Pradesh, at present, with 80 seats will still have the highest number of MPs with 143 seats. The author writes, “…the southern states have to give up power as a punishment for having effectively implemented the family planning policy.”
So, what can be a solution? To do away with the current Westminster model that we inherited from the British, the author advocates for a more representative form of democracy with an amalgamation of the Athenian model where people will directly have the power to formulate policies as per their requirements along with the proportional representation model as followed in Belgium (Ostbelgien-Model) with three-tier checks and balances in form of expert committees, voters and the elected members. The author calls this a gamified direct democracy. This might be just a distant dream since it involves people who enjoy being in power giving up a lot of power. But, as the author concludes, “An India that is less about the Union and more about its constituents and constituencies might be an India more capable of managing its diversity, its divergences, and contradictions. In such a Union, people everywhere would feel more equal."
The chest-thumping nationalists percieve any comparisons between the socio-economic performance of states as an act of balkanization. However, Nilakantan’s data-centric portrayal of key indices relating to health, education, and the economy merely reflects the goodness of priorities and policies of different states post-independence. Policies like the mid-day meal scheme, no cost school uniforms, bicycle and bus pass for students, often rejected by the elite minority within the ruling class as populist and so-called “freebies” have impacted the educational enrolments in states like Kerala and Tamil Nadu for the past seven decades. Critics tend to dismiss such developments with their usual snobby and aristocratic elitism that ‘quality of public service is substandard’. Even if it is the case, the South can now focus on output metrics while northern states need to get their children into school first and keep them there for longer periods cutting down dropout rates.
The one unique reason that makes this book required reading for every Indian is that, as far as I knew, for the first time in the developmental economics literature, someone had finally come up with the rationale for decentralizing and liberalizing our democracy as a remedy for these divergences. The author argues,
“The degree of divergence of India’s states demands policymaking and fiscal sovereignty at the state level for effective governance. After all, one entity cannot make a single policy decision that can apply equally effectively to both Afghanistan and the United States in health, for example.”
The above paragraph is the keystone element of this book, where Nilakantan points out the fallacy behind tailoring ‘One Nation, One Policy’ to be followed by all states. That brings us to a valid question, why does a State that has fulfilled its basic amenities with effective structures need to follow a policy targeted at a State that is structurally deficient in resources, lacking basic amenities, and struggling to get its act together? This phenomenon is well reflected in the New Educational Policy’s aspiration to enhance the national Gross Enrolment Ratio to 50% by 2035 when Tamil Nadu’s GER is already 50% in 2022.
Another crucial point from this book is how the rapidly increasing North Indian population is punishing the stabilized population of South India, with Southern states imposing higher taxes to meet the revenue shortfall. The fifteenth finance commission considered the population data from the 2011 census for the allocation of revenue between the States and the Union. In this regard, the States that had performed splendidly between 1971 and 2011 in stabilizing their population have lost their share of revenue around 7 percent. Moreover, this is a perverse incentive to the northern states that had neglected to stabilize their population. In addition, tactical trickery to decrease the share of the divisible pool in gross tax collection by collecting cesses and surcharges by the Union (not shared with the States) had further skewed the horizontal devolution of taxes.
Not only the above-mentioned divergence in the population is impacting the South’s purse, but the upcoming delimitation of parliamentary seats based on the decennial census will also dilute the democratic power of Southern states (whose population before the ‘freeze’ in 1971 was 25% which subsequently reduced to 20% in 2011 and will further reduce in 2022). In simpler words, if the delimitation exercise is carried out, the Gangetic belt (which has higher fertility rates) alone would send 275 of 548 members of parliament (MPs) to the Lok Sabha. Uttar Pradesh, at present, with 80 seats will still have the highest number of MPs with 143 seats. The author writes, “…the southern states have to give up power as a punishment for having effectively implemented the family planning policy.”
So, what can be a solution? To do away with the current Westminster model that we inherited from the British, the author advocates for a more representative form of democracy with an amalgamation of the Athenian model where people will directly have the power to formulate policies as per their requirements along with the proportional representation model as followed in Belgium (Ostbelgien-Model) with three-tier checks and balances in form of expert committees, voters and the elected members. The author calls this a gamified direct democracy. This might be just a distant dream since it involves people who enjoy being in power giving up a lot of power. But, as the author concludes, “An India that is less about the Union and more about its constituents and constituencies might be an India more capable of managing its diversity, its divergences, and contradictions. In such a Union, people everywhere would feel more equal."
February 26, 2023
Hooter: A statistics based approach to the positives of the federalism approach of the Indian Union
"One tshirt size truly doesn't fit all" is the summary the author takes to by setting the baseline using 1/3 of the book to read the statistics across various indicators of education, health and economy to showcase how wide a chasm that exists across the different states of India which haven't converged after 75 years of Independence. With Tamil Nadu getting a special mention in each graph, its neighbour Kerala not too far behind , the author has them representative of South India. He then highlights how the standardisation across the nation actually hurts those who are ahead on the curve as it incentivises them to be complacent so that the laggards can catch up.
This goes back to the debate of equity v/s equality in terms of approaches that we usually hear in DEI conversations, but applied at a state level. Not sure if its me but a lot of the book has this heavy tinge of why we Tamilians are paying the price of the rest of the country being unable to catch up hypothesis.
So whilst the statistics make for an interesting reading and baseline framework towards developmental politics, I was hoping for a more forward looking constructive set of examples on how to push the boundaries for everyone to move forward on this developmental front rather than stop at showcasing whose ahead and who isn't and engaging in thought experiments.
"One tshirt size truly doesn't fit all" is the summary the author takes to by setting the baseline using 1/3 of the book to read the statistics across various indicators of education, health and economy to showcase how wide a chasm that exists across the different states of India which haven't converged after 75 years of Independence. With Tamil Nadu getting a special mention in each graph, its neighbour Kerala not too far behind , the author has them representative of South India. He then highlights how the standardisation across the nation actually hurts those who are ahead on the curve as it incentivises them to be complacent so that the laggards can catch up.
This goes back to the debate of equity v/s equality in terms of approaches that we usually hear in DEI conversations, but applied at a state level. Not sure if its me but a lot of the book has this heavy tinge of why we Tamilians are paying the price of the rest of the country being unable to catch up hypothesis.
So whilst the statistics make for an interesting reading and baseline framework towards developmental politics, I was hoping for a more forward looking constructive set of examples on how to push the boundaries for everyone to move forward on this developmental front rather than stop at showcasing whose ahead and who isn't and engaging in thought experiments.
July 8, 2023
(BOOK)
South vs North: India's Great Divide - Nilakantan RS (2022)
Genre: polity, propagation
Admin: Hiko
Nilakantan RS picks up a very important and relevant issue in our current polity, but fails to preact the idea to all of India as a whole.
The book is plagued with Marxist historian talking points, such as the Aryan invasion (meaning Sanskrit, a viable national language, is a foreign language, a lie, and as per Committee on Sanskrit 1950 most Sanskrit speakers in 1950 were in the south, while the Brahmin UC had switched to English for better opportunities. Central Asians can't say "p", say "b" instead, while we can say both), does not factor how colonization esp Islamic colonization affected the North more than the south (and how under the British, Muslim elite North Indian money developed most of the south), fails to mention that TN and KLA have the highest debt to the union govt than any other state, or how Kerala has more per capita r*pe and communal violence than UP (and how Bihar has more intercaste marriage than TN or Kerala) because education alone is not an indicator of stability, but education specifically on sexual awareness, communal history, etc are what actually have an impact on these factors, not education alone. Even movements like Aikya Malayali or Self Respect movement (on some level a necessity) are justified purely BECAUSE they demonize Brahmins. But when North India (Uttarakuhu) does the same against Muslims under hindutva, it is considered wrong. He even mentions how our federal structure affects 20% of the country, 75% of that 20% is in Uttarakuhu, only 25% is roughly in Dravida.
Still, there is a fair point on how a new and more decentralised federal structure can be beneficial to Bharat. Gautam Desiraju has a great book on the exact same subject released around the exact same time down to the month!
This creates some excitement, as it means that both sides of the political spectrum are looking at changing the federal structure.
In fact, Gautam Desiraju's 75 states model could work really well with the Gamified Direct Democracy voting system that Nilakantan RS talks about.
I would love to see the two in a debate too!
3/10
For more reviews, follow @hikoreviews on Instagram!
South vs North: India's Great Divide - Nilakantan RS (2022)
Genre: polity, propagation
Admin: Hiko
Nilakantan RS picks up a very important and relevant issue in our current polity, but fails to preact the idea to all of India as a whole.
The book is plagued with Marxist historian talking points, such as the Aryan invasion (meaning Sanskrit, a viable national language, is a foreign language, a lie, and as per Committee on Sanskrit 1950 most Sanskrit speakers in 1950 were in the south, while the Brahmin UC had switched to English for better opportunities. Central Asians can't say "p", say "b" instead, while we can say both), does not factor how colonization esp Islamic colonization affected the North more than the south (and how under the British, Muslim elite North Indian money developed most of the south), fails to mention that TN and KLA have the highest debt to the union govt than any other state, or how Kerala has more per capita r*pe and communal violence than UP (and how Bihar has more intercaste marriage than TN or Kerala) because education alone is not an indicator of stability, but education specifically on sexual awareness, communal history, etc are what actually have an impact on these factors, not education alone. Even movements like Aikya Malayali or Self Respect movement (on some level a necessity) are justified purely BECAUSE they demonize Brahmins. But when North India (Uttarakuhu) does the same against Muslims under hindutva, it is considered wrong. He even mentions how our federal structure affects 20% of the country, 75% of that 20% is in Uttarakuhu, only 25% is roughly in Dravida.
Still, there is a fair point on how a new and more decentralised federal structure can be beneficial to Bharat. Gautam Desiraju has a great book on the exact same subject released around the exact same time down to the month!
This creates some excitement, as it means that both sides of the political spectrum are looking at changing the federal structure.
In fact, Gautam Desiraju's 75 states model could work really well with the Gamified Direct Democracy voting system that Nilakantan RS talks about.
I would love to see the two in a debate too!
3/10
For more reviews, follow @hikoreviews on Instagram!
October 10, 2023
This guy has cherrypicked data. Compares Up life expectancy with kerala. Why can’t he compare life expectancy of Bihar and andhra pradesh/karnataka. What is the use of huge life expectancy when you have replacement value below 1.8.As he compare imr of mp to war torn countries like syria, afghanistan. If the amount of doctors required is only filled half, what do you suggest the govt. should do? Have any guy become doctor and start to treat those people?Or you really want doctor to be the sub par qualified?
May 12, 2023
Painful read. Could have been an essay…
May 29, 2023
As it is too data filled, the initial enthusiasm missed in midway
October 11, 2022
Excellent book showing the difference in progress between North and South of India. Deeply researched , highly data backed and very logical.
Must read for readers looking for rational data backed look at Indian states and their progress.
Must read for readers looking for rational data backed look at Indian states and their progress.
August 8, 2023
I've bookmarked many of Puram's tweets to use it for arguments about south vs north. And here is the complete guide. Must read. (not really vouching for the solution provided)
June 14, 2023
One of those rare books that made me immensely proud, stoked my Madrasi ego but also simultaneously sad and angry and while I was trying to grapple with all of these emotions, ended on a somewhat optimistic note.
Each page of this book punches you with arguments stating the wide-ranging diversity of the country and why centralized policies do not benefit any individual state. These arguments were almost always accompanied by strong data and numbers that reminded me of Whole Numbers and Half Truths by Rukmini - another stellar book that weaves compelling arguments about India's economic and political stands, backed by tables and figures.
As a native of Chennai myself, like the author, some lines really spoke of the author's admiration of the Dravidian politics and the historical self-respect movements by Periyar that fueled it all. Even though Kerala and Tamilnadu (accompanied on some occasions by Andhra, Telangana and Karnataka) were the table toppers in most progress indicators, I could almost sense the author smiling whilst describing how Tamilnadu stands apart with its pace of growth only accelerating. And, as a Chennaiite, I smiled with him.
One of the other really commendable qualities of the book is how it doesn't just pose the problems but also actively suggests various solutions to them. Although, personally, I agree with the author's final disclaimer on how his proposed solution (gamified democracy) is not going to sit well with any politician aiming for gradual career jumps in his party's hierarchical ladder and wouldn't even dream of taking the first step to even acknowledge the benefits of the proposed solution - I did not feel despair during the last couple of pages as I usually do after reading a book describing India's current political scenario. I felt content that there is in fact a solution, as much as the solution is entirely a magical dream for now.
So, yes, this book brings you up to speed on how 'South India' is vastly different from 'North India' in various sectors that cover health, education, economy, administrative policies, state ideologies, and general progress while also trying actively not to sound like flowering praise on South India, but instead underlining the differences that different states had accrued even before independence from the British.
Highly highly recommend and a must-read.
Each page of this book punches you with arguments stating the wide-ranging diversity of the country and why centralized policies do not benefit any individual state. These arguments were almost always accompanied by strong data and numbers that reminded me of Whole Numbers and Half Truths by Rukmini - another stellar book that weaves compelling arguments about India's economic and political stands, backed by tables and figures.
As a native of Chennai myself, like the author, some lines really spoke of the author's admiration of the Dravidian politics and the historical self-respect movements by Periyar that fueled it all. Even though Kerala and Tamilnadu (accompanied on some occasions by Andhra, Telangana and Karnataka) were the table toppers in most progress indicators, I could almost sense the author smiling whilst describing how Tamilnadu stands apart with its pace of growth only accelerating. And, as a Chennaiite, I smiled with him.
One of the other really commendable qualities of the book is how it doesn't just pose the problems but also actively suggests various solutions to them. Although, personally, I agree with the author's final disclaimer on how his proposed solution (gamified democracy) is not going to sit well with any politician aiming for gradual career jumps in his party's hierarchical ladder and wouldn't even dream of taking the first step to even acknowledge the benefits of the proposed solution - I did not feel despair during the last couple of pages as I usually do after reading a book describing India's current political scenario. I felt content that there is in fact a solution, as much as the solution is entirely a magical dream for now.
So, yes, this book brings you up to speed on how 'South India' is vastly different from 'North India' in various sectors that cover health, education, economy, administrative policies, state ideologies, and general progress while also trying actively not to sound like flowering praise on South India, but instead underlining the differences that different states had accrued even before independence from the British.
Highly highly recommend and a must-read.
September 30, 2022
Leaves with more questions than answers. I guess its meant to do that.
The book provides fodder to a questioning mind. Helps you understand the nuances of why we are, where we are? I meant the Union of India, and also in particular the Southern States in the Union.
July of 1982, MGR launches the noon meal scheme. I recall as a kid laughing (as a member of the privileged and elite class) at MGR noon meal scheme. I could see the “Corporation” school across from then empty playground behind my compound walled house. Kids rushing around to eat the lunch!! Smirking at the politics of it all. Took me a good 20+ years to see its impact. Tamil Nadu had beaten many odds and was just behind Kerala in several Social Development metrics.
This book covers this and many more facts, how states have done a great job and implementing policies for its people. Talks about how Union govt wants to know take over the definition and implementation of these and similar policies. Stealing away from the States, the rights they originally held.
And another critical factor discussed is, how change in demographics will have a direct bearing on States that have done a good job of controlling population, educating them, improving their lives and health. These states may pay a price for their good performance.
Is that right? What are the dangers ahead? How can we solve this?
The book provides fodder to a questioning mind. Helps you understand the nuances of why we are, where we are? I meant the Union of India, and also in particular the Southern States in the Union.
July of 1982, MGR launches the noon meal scheme. I recall as a kid laughing (as a member of the privileged and elite class) at MGR noon meal scheme. I could see the “Corporation” school across from then empty playground behind my compound walled house. Kids rushing around to eat the lunch!! Smirking at the politics of it all. Took me a good 20+ years to see its impact. Tamil Nadu had beaten many odds and was just behind Kerala in several Social Development metrics.
This book covers this and many more facts, how states have done a great job and implementing policies for its people. Talks about how Union govt wants to know take over the definition and implementation of these and similar policies. Stealing away from the States, the rights they originally held.
And another critical factor discussed is, how change in demographics will have a direct bearing on States that have done a good job of controlling population, educating them, improving their lives and health. These states may pay a price for their good performance.
Is that right? What are the dangers ahead? How can we solve this?
July 7, 2023
The disparities between Indian states in terms of the health, education, and other economic prospects of their people are discussed in this book. As you are all aware, the south states consistently tops the table in all reports and indexes published by government. The author of this book uses data and scientific research to explain why there is such a regional imbalance between the states as well as how the southern states were able to acquire this position.
The inclusive policies and welfare programs implemented by the governments of the southern states are the only reasons for the development those states have today.
Recent arguments on "Freebies" have centered on a number of contentious issues. The truth, however, is that freebies were the only thing that helped the south's population improve both socially and economically.
People are empowered by free education. Prioritizing the health of infants and pregnant mothers leads to the creation of healthy people. A healthy society starts with its citizens. A healthy society produces a healthy economy, which is how the state governments of the South operate more effectively.
The importance they place on education is a simple answer when asked why the south performs better. The state was able to achieve this progress because of this education and other political movements.
The mid-day meal scheme made it easier for kids to stay in school. Less kids were born because in the southern states. Particularly women, had higher literacy rates. With this knowledge, the mothers of those kids understand what the child need in terms of nutrition, care, etc. These healthy babies develop into healthy adults who in turn contribute to the creation of a healthy society.
If you look at fundamental health indicators like IMR, U5MR, MMR, and TFR, the majority of the southern states are at the top of the list and have scores that are higher than the national average. And more crucially, while the north states still struggle to retain their children in school, states like Kerala and Tamilnadu have already met their goals and are concentrating on producing better outputs.
The second section of the book discusses the issue with India's growing centralization, which deprives states of the freedom to choose what works best for them based on where they are and who they are. The author also discusses other issues, such as how the southern states are losing political influence in the centre due to their reduced parliamentary representation and share of tax revenues. The book's conclusion also discusses the present electoral system and how it frequently produces undesirable results.
Highly recommended book for those who want to understand the real growth of Indian states.
The inclusive policies and welfare programs implemented by the governments of the southern states are the only reasons for the development those states have today.
Recent arguments on "Freebies" have centered on a number of contentious issues. The truth, however, is that freebies were the only thing that helped the south's population improve both socially and economically.
People are empowered by free education. Prioritizing the health of infants and pregnant mothers leads to the creation of healthy people. A healthy society starts with its citizens. A healthy society produces a healthy economy, which is how the state governments of the South operate more effectively.
The importance they place on education is a simple answer when asked why the south performs better. The state was able to achieve this progress because of this education and other political movements.
The mid-day meal scheme made it easier for kids to stay in school. Less kids were born because in the southern states. Particularly women, had higher literacy rates. With this knowledge, the mothers of those kids understand what the child need in terms of nutrition, care, etc. These healthy babies develop into healthy adults who in turn contribute to the creation of a healthy society.
If you look at fundamental health indicators like IMR, U5MR, MMR, and TFR, the majority of the southern states are at the top of the list and have scores that are higher than the national average. And more crucially, while the north states still struggle to retain their children in school, states like Kerala and Tamilnadu have already met their goals and are concentrating on producing better outputs.
The second section of the book discusses the issue with India's growing centralization, which deprives states of the freedom to choose what works best for them based on where they are and who they are. The author also discusses other issues, such as how the southern states are losing political influence in the centre due to their reduced parliamentary representation and share of tax revenues. The book's conclusion also discusses the present electoral system and how it frequently produces undesirable results.
Highly recommended book for those who want to understand the real growth of Indian states.
January 14, 2025
I think the author would have loved to call this Kerala and Tamil Nadu vs the Rest of India - but that would have been too on the nose.
This is certainly a book written by an economist, including statements along of the lines of “a person who works to realize her economic potential is likely to live a more fulfilling life.” Nevertheless it’s an insightful and quite statistical read.
One thing this book did bring to my attention was the whole “centralization” grand scheme of the current government- to centralize education, health, and recently as I understand - elections (!!!). (I suspect the desire for a unified language and religion is the ethos of all this) For a government that operates on divisive politics- this is the opposite of what I thought was going on.
The fact that the South has a more aging population and needs to prioritize elder care is a relevant point that needs more public attention and discussion.
After seeing the systems in Denmark - it is wistful to think of India (or atleast Tamil Nadu) being as considerate of her people - but I can’t deny that Denmark is pretty much getting by because of its size. Scaling up the Danish system to cover even a city in India would crush the system flat.
I think about every South Indian I know complains about the poor quality of education, not to mention the excess of engineering colleges - but the fact remains that access to subpar education is still better than the lack of it. That we’re educated enough to realise the education systems need to be much better - is a feat in itself. (Let’s not go into the absurd amounts of money these colleges demand.)
Again - grateful to pick up a book like this once in a while than pour over newspapers and suffer loud debates on the TV. It’s a book that definitely made me recount the Tamizhan vs Indian stances in my mind - and it does bring a bit of sadness that the two can’t ever be completely reconciled (not atleast at this rate.) To read this book while journeying through Tamil Nadu and her majestic temples - a definite experience.
Let’s see what the future brings.
இதுவும் கடந்து போகும்
எதுவும் கடந்து போவோம்.
Travel Reads: Trichy, Thanjavur, Madurai.
This is certainly a book written by an economist, including statements along of the lines of “a person who works to realize her economic potential is likely to live a more fulfilling life.” Nevertheless it’s an insightful and quite statistical read.
One thing this book did bring to my attention was the whole “centralization” grand scheme of the current government- to centralize education, health, and recently as I understand - elections (!!!). (I suspect the desire for a unified language and religion is the ethos of all this) For a government that operates on divisive politics- this is the opposite of what I thought was going on.
The fact that the South has a more aging population and needs to prioritize elder care is a relevant point that needs more public attention and discussion.
After seeing the systems in Denmark - it is wistful to think of India (or atleast Tamil Nadu) being as considerate of her people - but I can’t deny that Denmark is pretty much getting by because of its size. Scaling up the Danish system to cover even a city in India would crush the system flat.
I think about every South Indian I know complains about the poor quality of education, not to mention the excess of engineering colleges - but the fact remains that access to subpar education is still better than the lack of it. That we’re educated enough to realise the education systems need to be much better - is a feat in itself. (Let’s not go into the absurd amounts of money these colleges demand.)
Again - grateful to pick up a book like this once in a while than pour over newspapers and suffer loud debates on the TV. It’s a book that definitely made me recount the Tamizhan vs Indian stances in my mind - and it does bring a bit of sadness that the two can’t ever be completely reconciled (not atleast at this rate.) To read this book while journeying through Tamil Nadu and her majestic temples - a definite experience.
Let’s see what the future brings.
இதுவும் கடந்து போகும்
எதுவும் கடந்து போவோம்.
Travel Reads: Trichy, Thanjavur, Madurai.
December 29, 2022
TLDR: This is a brave and thought-provoking message about the fragility of the Indian confederation. It's a must-read for every Indian and anyone interested in the evolution of development and democracy.
***
The book aims to achieve the following:
(1) Show that the Indian peninsula (South) does better than the Indo-Gangetic plains (North) on most metrics of human development.
(2) Question the arbitrary increase in centralization of policymaking.
(3) Inform the reader of the shift in power with changing population dynamics.
(4) Warn us of the impending disaster that the above three points lead towards.
(5) Offer an alternative to implementing democracy.
The book delivers on this promise with varying levels of success.
(+) DOES successfully surface the stark differences between the South vs. North., by displaying publicly available data in simple tables and regression plots.
(+) DOES inform the reader of the inequalities in taxation, investment, democratic representation, and the shortcomings of over-centralization.
(+) DOES introduce the possible causal pathways that caused this divergence.
(-) Does NOT explore in-depth flawed policies of the Center or successful policies of the States.
(-) Does NOT explore in-depth the clever algorithm for elections the author suggests after a long philosophical build-up. Perhaps it's for another book or a revised version!
***
The book aims to achieve the following:
(1) Show that the Indian peninsula (South) does better than the Indo-Gangetic plains (North) on most metrics of human development.
(2) Question the arbitrary increase in centralization of policymaking.
(3) Inform the reader of the shift in power with changing population dynamics.
(4) Warn us of the impending disaster that the above three points lead towards.
(5) Offer an alternative to implementing democracy.
The book delivers on this promise with varying levels of success.
(+) DOES successfully surface the stark differences between the South vs. North., by displaying publicly available data in simple tables and regression plots.
(+) DOES inform the reader of the inequalities in taxation, investment, democratic representation, and the shortcomings of over-centralization.
(+) DOES introduce the possible causal pathways that caused this divergence.
(-) Does NOT explore in-depth flawed policies of the Center or successful policies of the States.
(-) Does NOT explore in-depth the clever algorithm for elections the author suggests after a long philosophical build-up. Perhaps it's for another book or a revised version!
June 9, 2025
tl;dr - Since it's a long review, I'll preface by saying the review is mainly a list of my criticisms of this book. If you are looking for a recommendation on whether to read it or not - hard pass. If you are interested in reading all my issues with the book, scroll on. :)
Firstly, this is a biased book. This doesn't really mean that book doesn't make valid points or its content is spurious.
However, it is clearly written to support an agenda - namely, more regional autonomy over finances and policy for the five Southern Indian states (Kerala, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana and Tamil Nadu).
This book makes several, interconnected assertions but I found most of them wanting
Southern states are expected to be "punished" for success in population control if delimitation takes place
For context - delimitation (the process of redrawing electoral districts based on changes in population) has been frozen since 1976 when Indira Gandhi implemented her "family planning" programme (mass coercive sterilization).
This was to avoid a situation where districts and states which achieved higher sterilization numbers would have been penalized with lower representation at the central government due to delimitation.
This freeze was due to expire in 2001 but was extended again to 2026. Currently, there is no indication that it will be extended again and it will almost certainly be a huge political issue when the time comes to choose delimitation or freeze again.
Meanwhile, in the intervening 50 years since 1976, Southern states have developed further than Northern states. Now, they have a relatively richer, healthier and more educated population compared to the Northern states and consequently, have had a lower birth rate and lower population growth.
Were the delimitation to actually take place for the next election cycle (which would happen in 2029), this would significantly erode the relative numbers of politicians from Southern states vis-a-vis to the Northern states since the population gap between Northern and Southern states has only grown since 1976.
For the author - it is self evident that this is wrong as Southern states are being punished for better governance. However, to me it is not so clear.
After all, one can easily argue that Southern states are overrepresented and the democratic principle of "One Person One Vote" is eroded with each election cycle.
To me, I find these kind of contentious issues fascinating as they cannot be answered empirically. Of course, each side advocates the standpoint that benefits them and solid, logical arguments can be made for both sides of the arguments.
How to resolve this? I don't know. For the author, the solution is greater decentralization where more and more powers are devolved to the state.
I'm assuming here the crucial part would be more and more tax revenues from the richer Southern states would be retained by the richer Southern states. (The author does not address this issue)
How exactly something like this would be acceptable to the Northern states and resolve the deadlock is not clear to me.
Southern states are healthier and more educated than other states
This is the least controversial of all the assertions the author makes. Frustratingly, it is what the author spends majority of the first half of the book on.
Indeed, it seems like the book was written just so that the author could compile 50 odd tables and run linear regressions on them (but he never shares the correlation factors of these regressions).
It is like preaching to the choir. Meanwhile, data and arguments for his more controversial assertions (the one above and the following ones) are missing or scarce with him assuming a self evident tone whenever making these assertions.
Southern states are healthier and more educated because of better governance rather than some extraneous factor
Here, the data is missing. No one is disputing that Southern states are better developed now. But where is the data to show that, over a reasonable enough time frame, say the last 25 or 50 years the Southern states were starting from the same base metrics as their peers?
The only 3 tables/charts I could find that reference this are reproduced below
Firstly, there is a table comparing the improvement in IMR from 1981 to 2018
We can see that the Southern states are already starting from lower bases in 1981 (all four have sub-100 IMR) while all the Northern states (Bihar, Rajasthan, MP, UP) have IMR in the 100+ range.
Even when you consider the improvement column data, it isn't really clear that the Southern states are doing better relatively.
Here, the Southern states have improvements of 84% (TN), 81% (Kerala), 67% (Karnataka) and 66% (AP) with Telangana missing as it did not exist then (but it can be clubbed with AP as it was split from AP).
Meanwhile the Northern states have improvements of 73% (Bihar), 71% (UP), 66% (MP & Rajasthan).
While TN and Kerala have performed the best - Karnataka, AP and Telangana have actually performed worse than Bihar and UP and comparable to MP & Rajasthan.
Secondly, the author asserts that comparing the difference in literary rates of the 80+ age cohort and 10-15+ age cohort should give an idea of the relative performance in education and shares the below chart
Once again, you can see the Northern states starting off at a much lower base.
Though here, you can see the Southern states consistently posting a higher differential.
However, sometimes when considering data you have to consider what was omitted :). The 80+ vs. 10-14+ differential should measure the progress over 70+ years.
It would have been nice to see it compared to other cohorts e.g. 60-80, 40-60 etc to see the differentials over smaller progress intervals (most of the progress could have been before the delimitation freeze).
Finally, the author shares a chart to show the differential between secondary and higher school enrollments, implying that some states are able to better keep their subjects in school.
Again, the results are mixed bag. There are no quantitative numbers here but eyeballing the charts shows TN (Southern) and UP (Northern) states excelling and Telangana, Karnataka (Southern) underperforming along with MP, Bihar (Northern) with Rajasthan missing.
Overall, I did not find any convincing data to show that the Southern states are better governed vis-a-vis the alternative explanatory factor that they started off from higher bases.
There is a link between lower TFR and development metrics
The author argues that higher the level of education woman have ("send girls to school"), the lower the TFR.
To support this, the author references data that associates higher female education with lower TFR. However, here he makes the cardinal mistake of assuming correlation is causation.
Even the data he shares is problematic. Reproducing a table where the TFR is compiled for different states and education cohorts of woman.
Here, at the graduate level TFR ranges from 0.2 (Jharkhand) to an 2.4 (Uttar Pradesh)!
Here, the cohort of woman with a college degree in Uttar Pradesh still have TFR above replacement level!
Meanwhile, somehow in neighbouring Jharkhand the same cohort of woman having a college degree has TFR at a critically low level!
And then you have every level in between!
I remember watching a talk by a researcher who said the most predictive factor on how many children women will have is survey responses to the question "How many children will you have?"
For me, I think the strongest causative factor in TFR is cultural. But I'll concede, I have absolutely no way of proving this :).
Nevertheless, I do not find the author's argument that female education is a causative factor (or at least a very strong causative) in relation to TFR.
---
As mentioned in the tl;dr, I recommend giving this book a miss. It is not rigorous in either its data or arguments. It feels like a class assignment where a student is given a side to debate and he fits the data and arguments accordingly.
I also skipped the last section which is about "salvaging the Indian Union" because I did not find the author's arguments for the premise of the book convincing.
Firstly, this is a biased book. This doesn't really mean that book doesn't make valid points or its content is spurious.
However, it is clearly written to support an agenda - namely, more regional autonomy over finances and policy for the five Southern Indian states (Kerala, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana and Tamil Nadu).
This book makes several, interconnected assertions but I found most of them wanting
Southern states are expected to be "punished" for success in population control if delimitation takes place
For context - delimitation (the process of redrawing electoral districts based on changes in population) has been frozen since 1976 when Indira Gandhi implemented her "family planning" programme (mass coercive sterilization).
This was to avoid a situation where districts and states which achieved higher sterilization numbers would have been penalized with lower representation at the central government due to delimitation.
This freeze was due to expire in 2001 but was extended again to 2026. Currently, there is no indication that it will be extended again and it will almost certainly be a huge political issue when the time comes to choose delimitation or freeze again.
Meanwhile, in the intervening 50 years since 1976, Southern states have developed further than Northern states. Now, they have a relatively richer, healthier and more educated population compared to the Northern states and consequently, have had a lower birth rate and lower population growth.
Were the delimitation to actually take place for the next election cycle (which would happen in 2029), this would significantly erode the relative numbers of politicians from Southern states vis-a-vis to the Northern states since the population gap between Northern and Southern states has only grown since 1976.
For the author - it is self evident that this is wrong as Southern states are being punished for better governance. However, to me it is not so clear.
After all, one can easily argue that Southern states are overrepresented and the democratic principle of "One Person One Vote" is eroded with each election cycle.
To me, I find these kind of contentious issues fascinating as they cannot be answered empirically. Of course, each side advocates the standpoint that benefits them and solid, logical arguments can be made for both sides of the arguments.
How to resolve this? I don't know. For the author, the solution is greater decentralization where more and more powers are devolved to the state.
I'm assuming here the crucial part would be more and more tax revenues from the richer Southern states would be retained by the richer Southern states. (The author does not address this issue)
How exactly something like this would be acceptable to the Northern states and resolve the deadlock is not clear to me.
Southern states are healthier and more educated than other states
This is the least controversial of all the assertions the author makes. Frustratingly, it is what the author spends majority of the first half of the book on.
Indeed, it seems like the book was written just so that the author could compile 50 odd tables and run linear regressions on them (but he never shares the correlation factors of these regressions).
It is like preaching to the choir. Meanwhile, data and arguments for his more controversial assertions (the one above and the following ones) are missing or scarce with him assuming a self evident tone whenever making these assertions.
Southern states are healthier and more educated because of better governance rather than some extraneous factor
Here, the data is missing. No one is disputing that Southern states are better developed now. But where is the data to show that, over a reasonable enough time frame, say the last 25 or 50 years the Southern states were starting from the same base metrics as their peers?
The only 3 tables/charts I could find that reference this are reproduced below
Firstly, there is a table comparing the improvement in IMR from 1981 to 2018
We can see that the Southern states are already starting from lower bases in 1981 (all four have sub-100 IMR) while all the Northern states (Bihar, Rajasthan, MP, UP) have IMR in the 100+ range.
Even when you consider the improvement column data, it isn't really clear that the Southern states are doing better relatively.
Here, the Southern states have improvements of 84% (TN), 81% (Kerala), 67% (Karnataka) and 66% (AP) with Telangana missing as it did not exist then (but it can be clubbed with AP as it was split from AP).
Meanwhile the Northern states have improvements of 73% (Bihar), 71% (UP), 66% (MP & Rajasthan).
While TN and Kerala have performed the best - Karnataka, AP and Telangana have actually performed worse than Bihar and UP and comparable to MP & Rajasthan.
Secondly, the author asserts that comparing the difference in literary rates of the 80+ age cohort and 10-15+ age cohort should give an idea of the relative performance in education and shares the below chart
Once again, you can see the Northern states starting off at a much lower base.
Though here, you can see the Southern states consistently posting a higher differential.
However, sometimes when considering data you have to consider what was omitted :). The 80+ vs. 10-14+ differential should measure the progress over 70+ years.
It would have been nice to see it compared to other cohorts e.g. 60-80, 40-60 etc to see the differentials over smaller progress intervals (most of the progress could have been before the delimitation freeze).
Finally, the author shares a chart to show the differential between secondary and higher school enrollments, implying that some states are able to better keep their subjects in school.
Again, the results are mixed bag. There are no quantitative numbers here but eyeballing the charts shows TN (Southern) and UP (Northern) states excelling and Telangana, Karnataka (Southern) underperforming along with MP, Bihar (Northern) with Rajasthan missing.
Overall, I did not find any convincing data to show that the Southern states are better governed vis-a-vis the alternative explanatory factor that they started off from higher bases.
There is a link between lower TFR and development metrics
The author argues that higher the level of education woman have ("send girls to school"), the lower the TFR.
To support this, the author references data that associates higher female education with lower TFR. However, here he makes the cardinal mistake of assuming correlation is causation.
Even the data he shares is problematic. Reproducing a table where the TFR is compiled for different states and education cohorts of woman.
Here, at the graduate level TFR ranges from 0.2 (Jharkhand) to an 2.4 (Uttar Pradesh)!
Here, the cohort of woman with a college degree in Uttar Pradesh still have TFR above replacement level!
Meanwhile, somehow in neighbouring Jharkhand the same cohort of woman having a college degree has TFR at a critically low level!
And then you have every level in between!
I remember watching a talk by a researcher who said the most predictive factor on how many children women will have is survey responses to the question "How many children will you have?"
For me, I think the strongest causative factor in TFR is cultural. But I'll concede, I have absolutely no way of proving this :).
Nevertheless, I do not find the author's argument that female education is a causative factor (or at least a very strong causative) in relation to TFR.
---
As mentioned in the tl;dr, I recommend giving this book a miss. It is not rigorous in either its data or arguments. It feels like a class assignment where a student is given a side to debate and he fits the data and arguments accordingly.
I also skipped the last section which is about "salvaging the Indian Union" because I did not find the author's arguments for the premise of the book convincing.
November 15, 2023
Excellent book to understand the disparities within India, what are the likely causes and possible solutions. Written in simple language understandable to everyone. Some sections did require a second reading. The provoking title of the book makes it look like the author may be trying to make a case for south India, but that isn't the case. The book explores education, health and financial metrics for several Indian states and provides a solid foundation to understand the underlying issues.
October 1, 2022
This book comprehensively explores the divergence between the southern states and the northern states of India - what was the starting point, how public policies over half a century changed the growth pathways of different states and what holds for the future for the prosperous southern states in the larger Indian union. It provides tons of data to substantiate every claim and is very well argued.
The concept of gamified direct democracy is new and very interesting to explore. A society seeking a more equitable representation of the will of the people should eventually look past the current form of electing representatives. This seems like a starting point to take that conversation forward.
This is one of those books you come out feeling all the different strands of your own thought have found order and structure. I wish I had read something like this right out of college. Where you come from is not the same for all Indians and what public policies shaped the place you come from is important to have as a young person. I think that's an unintended but really important outcome of the book for me.
The concept of gamified direct democracy is new and very interesting to explore. A society seeking a more equitable representation of the will of the people should eventually look past the current form of electing representatives. This seems like a starting point to take that conversation forward.
This is one of those books you come out feeling all the different strands of your own thought have found order and structure. I wish I had read something like this right out of college. Where you come from is not the same for all Indians and what public policies shaped the place you come from is important to have as a young person. I think that's an unintended but really important outcome of the book for me.
October 27, 2022
தமிழ்நாடு மட்டுமில்ல ஒட்டுமொத்தமா தென்னிந்திய மாநிலங்கள் எல்லாமே வட இந்திய மாநிலங்களை விட ஆரோக்கியம், கல்வி, பொருளாதாரம்னு பல துறைகளில் எப்படி முன்னேறி இருக்குன்னு அரசுத்தரப்பு புள்ளிவிவரங்களோடவும், ஆதாரப்பூர்வமான புள்ளி விவரங்களை எல்லாம் தொகுத்து வெளிவந்திருக்கு இந்தப் புத்தகம். புத்தகத்தோட ஆசிரியர் அடிப்படையில் ஒரு Data Scientist அவர், அதனால் இந்த புள்ளிவிவரங்களை தொகுக்குறதுலயும், அவற்றை விரிவாக்குறதுல சிறப்பாவும் செய்திருக்கார். வெறும் புள்ளி விவரங்களை மட்டும் வைத்து தென்னிந்திய மாநிலங்கள் தான் சிறப்பா இருக்குன்னு சொல்றதோட அவர் நிறுத்திக்கல. ஏன் தென்னிந்திய மாநிலங்கள் சிறப்பா இருக்குன்றதுக்கான ஆராய்ச்சியவும் அதற்கான விளக்கங்களையும். இந்த நேரத்தில் இந்தியாவுக்கான தேவை என்ன, அந்த பாதையில் போறதுக்கு என்ன செய்யனும்ன்ற ஆய்வுக்கட்டுரைகளும் புத்தகத்தோட பின்பகுதியில் இருக்கு.
ஆரோக்கியம், கல்வி, பொருளாதாரம், ஒட்டுமொத்த வளர்ச்சி என எல்லா துறைகளிலும் வட இந்திய மாநிலங்களை விட ஏன் தென்னிந்திய மாநிலங்கள் அதிக வளர்ச்சியை அடைந்திருக்கின்றன? புள்ளிவிவரங்கள் சொல்வது என்ன?
My Complete Review >> https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=129...
ஆரோக்கியம், கல்வி, பொருளாதாரம், ஒட்டுமொத்த வளர்ச்சி என எல்லா துறைகளிலும் வட இந்திய மாநிலங்களை விட ஏன் தென்னிந்திய மாநிலங்கள் அதிக வளர்ச்சியை அடைந்திருக்கின்றன? புள்ளிவிவரங்கள் சொல்வது என்ன?
My Complete Review >> https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=129...
May 10, 2023
It is a widely known fact that the Southern states have been consistently outperforming the rest of India in terms of multiple indices, most measures being comparable to the numbers of developed countries. But little do we hear about how most of the progress is dampened in the greater scheme of things. The South in reality is punished for its effective population control in terms of allocation of resources, citizens paying more taxes and underrepresentation in the Parliament (thanks to electoral delimitation). The central government's power of purse and taxation, not to mention some of the more unforgiving legislations that crop up everyday makes it an uphill battle. In one example, it says how the South has the lowest rural households that are agricultural, and how the path to economic development as seen universally is moving people out of agriculture and into the industrial and service sectors. Now imagine doing that when the PM Kisan program essentially pays farmers to continue farming....
Towards the end of the book I particularly enjoyed reading some of the solutions (hypothetical) proposed for adding layers of vetoes allowing for deliberation of a legislation before it being passed.
Towards the end of the book I particularly enjoyed reading some of the solutions (hypothetical) proposed for adding layers of vetoes allowing for deliberation of a legislation before it being passed.
April 23, 2023
India is a union of states and the union is failing the states. Specially the states that are performing better compared to the rest and the policies and politics being exported from the centre are dragging these better performing states to the mean.
The book asks more questions than it answers but I guess that was the purpose. Also it is very brave attempt to show the current picture backed by data.
The book asks more questions than it answers but I guess that was the purpose. Also it is very brave attempt to show the current picture backed by data.
August 21, 2023
Rating: 2.5/5
An informative book that provides a ton of data and insightful analysis on the performance of states in India, across metrics such as health, education and economic performance. The author uses the disparity in these metrics to argue against a centralised approach to policy making in the country. However, there are also signs of selective and simplistic interpretation of the data, along with ideological stances that the author incorrectly presents as obvious to make from the data.
The book makes three foundational points: i) States vary across their performance in the aforementioned metrics of progress, ii) On average, "Southern" states perform better than "Northern" states, and iii) a centralised approach to govern these states with disparate challenges will fail. While these seem to be reasonable and interesting points when expressed this way, it is the nature in which these arguments and their solutions are presented in the book that, in my opinion, is problematic.
For instance, the author seems hell-bent on making point number ii in the book. However a "North" vs "South" comparison is clearly unfair -- for one you are comparing four relatively small and lower population states with around 20 larger states, most of which are significantly more culturally and linguistically diverse within themselves. Moreover most statistics are easily skewed in such a North-South binary classification, the former by states like Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and Jharkand, the latter by Kerala and Tamil Nadu. In fact, if one removes these states altogether from the analysis, there is no such "Great Divide", as Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh/Telangana are comparable in several metrics to other "Northern" states such as Gujarat, Punjab or Maharastra (which sometimes the author conveniently includes as part of south-peninsular India.....). One also has to remember that states like Kerala (although not Tamil Nadu) have enjoyed much better human development indicator metrics historically since independence, and therefore started the race much more ahead than lagging states - an example is the Infant Mortality Rate; to purely attribute differences to policy effectiveness is simplistic in my view. More fundamentally, this stress on South vs North was completely unnecessary for the points in the book, and in my view serves no purpose other than a catchy title and/or as an expression of the author's own ideological stances. Rather, a focus on the differing performance across states without introducing North-South camps would have been a more convincing reading of the data while simultaneously making the point the author wanted to make.
The other issue with the book seems to be with point iii: the author implicitly invokes the argument that the "more decentralisation in government, the better", almost in axiomatic fashion. In my opinion, this is not an obviously correct point to make; there are merits and demerits to both the centralised and decentralised camps and in my view a balanced combination of the two works best. While the author is free to have this view, he must provide arguments for why complete decentralisation is a desirable approach to policymaking. The author does indeed make the argument that centralisation has significant demerits, especially in a country like India with differing levels of progress and enormous socio-ethnic diversity -- any sensible person would agree with these qualms. However, the author does not address the potential issues with an entirely decentralised system. For instance, how do you ensure cooperation between states in such a a system, how would you ensure that states do not reach their own respective divergent "steady states" due to the differing levels of present success exacerbated by predicted levels of future success due to poor performance in HDI metrics. For instance, is an extremely prosperous, healthy, educated Kerala and a simultaneously poorly performing Bihar a desirable outcome; if not, in a decentralised approach how does one prevent such a situation? It feels like in the fundamental philosophical battle of Union vs States, the author espouses an extremely strong support for the latter and is unwilling any concession on its part for the sake of the former. Again, I would have felt more comfortable for a more moderate position by the author, especially since he hasn't taken the effort to convince me otherwise.
All this being said, I really liked the latter part of the book where the author discusses some of the fundamental limitations of representative democracy and the Westminster forms of government, while also discussing some interesting (albeit impractical) alternatives to tackle its several shortcomings. There were certainly some thought-provoking points in there that strikes at the almost divine reverence for western-liberal democratic principles and political systems that we hold, and reminds us that there is always room for improvement in every system/philosophy that we as humans have developed. I was also impressed with the vast pool of data that the author has very kindly included within the book, which allows readers to make their own interpretations of the data and not take the authors assessment on face-value. I wish more books would follow this approach, which permits critical analysis.
In summary, an insightful read with a relevant data compilation and thought-provoking arguments; however, it could have benefitted from a more unbiased stance, less emphasis on ambiguous "North" and "South" categories, and a less provocative title :)
An informative book that provides a ton of data and insightful analysis on the performance of states in India, across metrics such as health, education and economic performance. The author uses the disparity in these metrics to argue against a centralised approach to policy making in the country. However, there are also signs of selective and simplistic interpretation of the data, along with ideological stances that the author incorrectly presents as obvious to make from the data.
The book makes three foundational points: i) States vary across their performance in the aforementioned metrics of progress, ii) On average, "Southern" states perform better than "Northern" states, and iii) a centralised approach to govern these states with disparate challenges will fail. While these seem to be reasonable and interesting points when expressed this way, it is the nature in which these arguments and their solutions are presented in the book that, in my opinion, is problematic.
For instance, the author seems hell-bent on making point number ii in the book. However a "North" vs "South" comparison is clearly unfair -- for one you are comparing four relatively small and lower population states with around 20 larger states, most of which are significantly more culturally and linguistically diverse within themselves. Moreover most statistics are easily skewed in such a North-South binary classification, the former by states like Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and Jharkand, the latter by Kerala and Tamil Nadu. In fact, if one removes these states altogether from the analysis, there is no such "Great Divide", as Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh/Telangana are comparable in several metrics to other "Northern" states such as Gujarat, Punjab or Maharastra (which sometimes the author conveniently includes as part of south-peninsular India.....). One also has to remember that states like Kerala (although not Tamil Nadu) have enjoyed much better human development indicator metrics historically since independence, and therefore started the race much more ahead than lagging states - an example is the Infant Mortality Rate; to purely attribute differences to policy effectiveness is simplistic in my view. More fundamentally, this stress on South vs North was completely unnecessary for the points in the book, and in my view serves no purpose other than a catchy title and/or as an expression of the author's own ideological stances. Rather, a focus on the differing performance across states without introducing North-South camps would have been a more convincing reading of the data while simultaneously making the point the author wanted to make.
The other issue with the book seems to be with point iii: the author implicitly invokes the argument that the "more decentralisation in government, the better", almost in axiomatic fashion. In my opinion, this is not an obviously correct point to make; there are merits and demerits to both the centralised and decentralised camps and in my view a balanced combination of the two works best. While the author is free to have this view, he must provide arguments for why complete decentralisation is a desirable approach to policymaking. The author does indeed make the argument that centralisation has significant demerits, especially in a country like India with differing levels of progress and enormous socio-ethnic diversity -- any sensible person would agree with these qualms. However, the author does not address the potential issues with an entirely decentralised system. For instance, how do you ensure cooperation between states in such a a system, how would you ensure that states do not reach their own respective divergent "steady states" due to the differing levels of present success exacerbated by predicted levels of future success due to poor performance in HDI metrics. For instance, is an extremely prosperous, healthy, educated Kerala and a simultaneously poorly performing Bihar a desirable outcome; if not, in a decentralised approach how does one prevent such a situation? It feels like in the fundamental philosophical battle of Union vs States, the author espouses an extremely strong support for the latter and is unwilling any concession on its part for the sake of the former. Again, I would have felt more comfortable for a more moderate position by the author, especially since he hasn't taken the effort to convince me otherwise.
All this being said, I really liked the latter part of the book where the author discusses some of the fundamental limitations of representative democracy and the Westminster forms of government, while also discussing some interesting (albeit impractical) alternatives to tackle its several shortcomings. There were certainly some thought-provoking points in there that strikes at the almost divine reverence for western-liberal democratic principles and political systems that we hold, and reminds us that there is always room for improvement in every system/philosophy that we as humans have developed. I was also impressed with the vast pool of data that the author has very kindly included within the book, which allows readers to make their own interpretations of the data and not take the authors assessment on face-value. I wish more books would follow this approach, which permits critical analysis.
In summary, an insightful read with a relevant data compilation and thought-provoking arguments; however, it could have benefitted from a more unbiased stance, less emphasis on ambiguous "North" and "South" categories, and a less provocative title :)
February 25, 2024
A book on North-South divide on India was long due.But this is certainly not that 'book'.The 'book' more or less seems a report to be understood by statisticians rather than a book to be sold to a layman.We all know about the quality of life in south India but we require solutions.The solutions phrased out here,just will not assimilate into the Indian system.e.g. Direct democracy.
Just for the sake of author's research and attempt to start a conversation on the omnipresent elephant in the room,I am awarding two stars.Otherwise,it is not worth it.
Just for the sake of author's research and attempt to start a conversation on the omnipresent elephant in the room,I am awarding two stars.Otherwise,it is not worth it.
Read
March 18, 2023South Vs North: India's Greatest Divide
Author: Nilakanthan RS
Published by Juggernaut Books
Non Fiction
Pages: 280
MRP: Rs. 599/-
Thank you juggernaut book for providing a media copy.
The book "South Vs North: India's Greatest Divide" by Nilakantan RS is a well-argued and thought-provoking analysis of the developmental divide that exists between the southern and northern states of India. The author effectively uses statistics to showcase the wide gap that exists across various indicators of education, health, and economy, with Tamil Nadu and Kerala as representative of the southern states.
One of the strengths of the book is the author's focus on federalism and how standardization across the nation can actually hurt those who are ahead on the curve. This is a valuable perspective on the debate between equity and equality, applied at a state level.
The book covers various facts on how different states have implemented policies for their people and how the Union government wants to take over the definition and implementation of these policies, which originally belonged to the States. This theft of rights can hamper the progress and growth achieved by these states, and the book discusses this in detail.
However, the book falls short in providing forward-looking examples and solutions to address the developmental divide. The heavy tinge of the "why we Tamilians are paying the price of the rest of the country being unable to catch up" hypothesis may also be a drawback for some readers.While the author talks about the Kerala Model not given enough focus, and talks about the literacy rate and other things, but conveniently does not talk about how the state was affected during the second wave of the pandemic. While going on and on about IMR and other topics in the health section of the book.
Overall, "South Vs North" is a worthwhile read for anyone interested in understanding the developmental challenges faced by India and the potential consequences of a centralized policy regime. The book highlights the need for a more nuanced approach to developmental politics, and its data-driven analysis makes a compelling case for the value of federalism.
Author: Nilakanthan RS
Published by Juggernaut Books
Non Fiction
Pages: 280
MRP: Rs. 599/-
Thank you juggernaut book for providing a media copy.
The book "South Vs North: India's Greatest Divide" by Nilakantan RS is a well-argued and thought-provoking analysis of the developmental divide that exists between the southern and northern states of India. The author effectively uses statistics to showcase the wide gap that exists across various indicators of education, health, and economy, with Tamil Nadu and Kerala as representative of the southern states.
One of the strengths of the book is the author's focus on federalism and how standardization across the nation can actually hurt those who are ahead on the curve. This is a valuable perspective on the debate between equity and equality, applied at a state level.
The book covers various facts on how different states have implemented policies for their people and how the Union government wants to take over the definition and implementation of these policies, which originally belonged to the States. This theft of rights can hamper the progress and growth achieved by these states, and the book discusses this in detail.
However, the book falls short in providing forward-looking examples and solutions to address the developmental divide. The heavy tinge of the "why we Tamilians are paying the price of the rest of the country being unable to catch up" hypothesis may also be a drawback for some readers.While the author talks about the Kerala Model not given enough focus, and talks about the literacy rate and other things, but conveniently does not talk about how the state was affected during the second wave of the pandemic. While going on and on about IMR and other topics in the health section of the book.
Overall, "South Vs North" is a worthwhile read for anyone interested in understanding the developmental challenges faced by India and the potential consequences of a centralized policy regime. The book highlights the need for a more nuanced approach to developmental politics, and its data-driven analysis makes a compelling case for the value of federalism.
July 30, 2025
The author cherry-picks data to support a clearly biased regional agenda.
Disappointing and One-Sided – A Book That Fuels Division Instead of Insight
This book claims to be an analysis of India’s regional disparities and economic development—but it sadly ends up being a propaganda piece that fuels division rather than offering honest insight.
Yes, it’s refreshing that states like Karnataka are recognized for their success due to pro-capitalist, pro-individualism policies and a free market approach. But the author stops there and fails to examine the new, troubling trends in the same southern states—especially the rise of hostile regionalism and left-wing extremism, particularly in Tamil Nadu, that openly question national unity and stir secessionist tones. Why is this never addressed?
The book also conveniently ignores the fiscal time bomb ticking in Kerala, with its bloated debt-to-GDP ratio and excessive welfare expenditures dragging its economy toward a collapse. At the same time, northern states like Haryana and Uttar Pradesh have been revenue-surplus for three years, showing real fiscal discipline—but not a word about them. The author cherry-picks data to support a clearly biased regional agenda.
Even more disappointing is the complete absence of any discussion on the ballooning fiscal deficits caused by unsustainable freebie culture and populist welfare schemes strangling state budgets.
In short, rather than being informative, this book feels like a one-sided narrative wrapped in intellectual pretense. It ignores key economic facts and rising political dangers, all while promoting a divisive viewpoint that’s more ideological than analytical. Not recommended if you’re looking for balanced or honest analysis.
Disappointing and One-Sided – A Book That Fuels Division Instead of Insight
This book claims to be an analysis of India’s regional disparities and economic development—but it sadly ends up being a propaganda piece that fuels division rather than offering honest insight.
Yes, it’s refreshing that states like Karnataka are recognized for their success due to pro-capitalist, pro-individualism policies and a free market approach. But the author stops there and fails to examine the new, troubling trends in the same southern states—especially the rise of hostile regionalism and left-wing extremism, particularly in Tamil Nadu, that openly question national unity and stir secessionist tones. Why is this never addressed?
The book also conveniently ignores the fiscal time bomb ticking in Kerala, with its bloated debt-to-GDP ratio and excessive welfare expenditures dragging its economy toward a collapse. At the same time, northern states like Haryana and Uttar Pradesh have been revenue-surplus for three years, showing real fiscal discipline—but not a word about them. The author cherry-picks data to support a clearly biased regional agenda.
Even more disappointing is the complete absence of any discussion on the ballooning fiscal deficits caused by unsustainable freebie culture and populist welfare schemes strangling state budgets.
In short, rather than being informative, this book feels like a one-sided narrative wrapped in intellectual pretense. It ignores key economic facts and rising political dangers, all while promoting a divisive viewpoint that’s more ideological than analytical. Not recommended if you’re looking for balanced or honest analysis.
December 6, 2023
A must read for hyper nationalists
At a time when much is being made of the demographic dividend of India as a feature that makes the country uniquely a bright spot in the world, this book focuses on the demographic divergence within India, especially between the North and the South, and how it could impact the latter's development.
At stake for the relatively developed states, especially Tamil Nadu and Kerala, and also Maharashtra and Gujarat to a certain extent, is the devolution of funds and allocation of parliamentary seats based on population.
The author points out that the weightage given to population in funds devolution bestows more funds on states like UP and Bihar, whose total fertility rate (TFR) is higher than the national rate, while states like Tamil Nadu and Kerala get lesser share of funds despite having a TFR that is less than the national average.
Allocation of parliamentary seats in India is based on population as per the Constitution, which is subject to review after every decennial census. Going by the logic of 'one person one vote' states with more population will have more seats. To correct it, a delimitation exercise is required after updating the census.
However, in 1971 the Indira Gandhi government froze delimitation for twenty-five years. The freeze was extended by another twenty-five years during the Vajpayee government. That freeze is due for review in 2026.
Since the freezing of delimitation there has been notable divergence between populated States like UP and Bihar and southern states like Tamil Nadu. An MP in the former states represents far more people than in the latter. This means a vote in the southern states has more weight than in the populated states.
Between 2011 and 2026, "Uttar Pradesh will have added over 62 million adult citizens as voters. This would mean a single MP for 3.36 million people in the current scenario. In the same time period, Tamil Nadu would have added a corresponding 15 million, which would mean 2.2 million people per MP. That is, the value of each vote and the representative power of each citizen is diverging to a point where ‘one person, one vote’ will no longer be true for these two states if the status quo of frozen delimitation persists.
If, on the other hand, the author argues, delimitation is defreezed then states like Tamil Nadu and Kerala will lose some seats in Parliament, while states like UP and Bihar will gain by more than 50% seats. This amounts to punishing the states that have achieved population stability.
"Either the southern states have to give up power as a punishment for having effectively implemented a policy of the Union, or the people in the northern Indian states have to accept their status as lesser citizens in terms of political power."
"This skew of demographic and political might towards one part of India, and away from others, in some senses, is India's biggest problem", according to the author.
What most of the richer states pay into the federal system goes to Uttar Pradesh. States like Tamil Nadu, Gujarat, Karnataka and Kerala have state budgets that are much smaller than what their GSDPs would warrant. Uttar Pradesh is in the opposite situation: that is, its state budget is much, much larger than its GSDP warrants. This is not so much a problem for Uttar Pradesh as for the other states, which pay in.
Rich paying for the poor
Richer states paying for poorer states is not uncommon. In US as well as in Germany, for instance, states that have higher GDP take care of the poorer regions. But one crucial difference between these two countries and India is that they are more populous than their poorer counterparts, whereas in India it is the poorer states that are populous.
Also in India it is TFR that is the cause of population growth, whereas it is migration in western countries that is responsible for higher population.
In other words in India it the relatively prosperous states with lesser population that are bearing the burden of populous states with lower productivity and revenue. The richer peninsular states paying for the north-eastern states is understandable since the latter has limited productivity and revenue.
The solution
The skewed distribution of powers between the Union and the states should have been reformed, especially after India faced an autocratic phase during the Emergency when several amendments were passed by the Centre. But that didn't happen during the Narendra Modi's tenure. Instead, the nation witnessed more centralisation of power in measures such as demonetisation and the manner in which GST was passed.
What is the solution! "Change the division of powers between the Centre and the states by reducing the powers allocated to the Centre.That solution points to extreme decentralization and a more equitable federal structure and, perhaps, far more devolution of powers down to the panchayat, municipal and even individual levels."
In conclusion, the book argues given the "extreme divergences between its states and indeed, between regions within the states, India needs more local self-governance and locally formulated policies that address specific local needs."
At a time when much is being made of the demographic dividend of India as a feature that makes the country uniquely a bright spot in the world, this book focuses on the demographic divergence within India, especially between the North and the South, and how it could impact the latter's development.
At stake for the relatively developed states, especially Tamil Nadu and Kerala, and also Maharashtra and Gujarat to a certain extent, is the devolution of funds and allocation of parliamentary seats based on population.
The author points out that the weightage given to population in funds devolution bestows more funds on states like UP and Bihar, whose total fertility rate (TFR) is higher than the national rate, while states like Tamil Nadu and Kerala get lesser share of funds despite having a TFR that is less than the national average.
Allocation of parliamentary seats in India is based on population as per the Constitution, which is subject to review after every decennial census. Going by the logic of 'one person one vote' states with more population will have more seats. To correct it, a delimitation exercise is required after updating the census.
However, in 1971 the Indira Gandhi government froze delimitation for twenty-five years. The freeze was extended by another twenty-five years during the Vajpayee government. That freeze is due for review in 2026.
Since the freezing of delimitation there has been notable divergence between populated States like UP and Bihar and southern states like Tamil Nadu. An MP in the former states represents far more people than in the latter. This means a vote in the southern states has more weight than in the populated states.
Between 2011 and 2026, "Uttar Pradesh will have added over 62 million adult citizens as voters. This would mean a single MP for 3.36 million people in the current scenario. In the same time period, Tamil Nadu would have added a corresponding 15 million, which would mean 2.2 million people per MP. That is, the value of each vote and the representative power of each citizen is diverging to a point where ‘one person, one vote’ will no longer be true for these two states if the status quo of frozen delimitation persists.
If, on the other hand, the author argues, delimitation is defreezed then states like Tamil Nadu and Kerala will lose some seats in Parliament, while states like UP and Bihar will gain by more than 50% seats. This amounts to punishing the states that have achieved population stability.
"Either the southern states have to give up power as a punishment for having effectively implemented a policy of the Union, or the people in the northern Indian states have to accept their status as lesser citizens in terms of political power."
"This skew of demographic and political might towards one part of India, and away from others, in some senses, is India's biggest problem", according to the author.
What most of the richer states pay into the federal system goes to Uttar Pradesh. States like Tamil Nadu, Gujarat, Karnataka and Kerala have state budgets that are much smaller than what their GSDPs would warrant. Uttar Pradesh is in the opposite situation: that is, its state budget is much, much larger than its GSDP warrants. This is not so much a problem for Uttar Pradesh as for the other states, which pay in.
Rich paying for the poor
Richer states paying for poorer states is not uncommon. In US as well as in Germany, for instance, states that have higher GDP take care of the poorer regions. But one crucial difference between these two countries and India is that they are more populous than their poorer counterparts, whereas in India it is the poorer states that are populous.
Also in India it is TFR that is the cause of population growth, whereas it is migration in western countries that is responsible for higher population.
In other words in India it the relatively prosperous states with lesser population that are bearing the burden of populous states with lower productivity and revenue. The richer peninsular states paying for the north-eastern states is understandable since the latter has limited productivity and revenue.
The solution
The skewed distribution of powers between the Union and the states should have been reformed, especially after India faced an autocratic phase during the Emergency when several amendments were passed by the Centre. But that didn't happen during the Narendra Modi's tenure. Instead, the nation witnessed more centralisation of power in measures such as demonetisation and the manner in which GST was passed.
What is the solution! "Change the division of powers between the Centre and the states by reducing the powers allocated to the Centre.That solution points to extreme decentralization and a more equitable federal structure and, perhaps, far more devolution of powers down to the panchayat, municipal and even individual levels."
In conclusion, the book argues given the "extreme divergences between its states and indeed, between regions within the states, India needs more local self-governance and locally formulated policies that address specific local needs."
February 9, 2023
Picked up the book with great expectations and have been let down. Author spends reams of paper on how the difference across states in education / health / economy exists across states in India and as always Kerala / TN followed by Kar / AP / Telangana and Maha follow, with North states being laggard. He then moves to the agenda of Union vs state as to how centralization of policy impacts adversely due to states being at different levels / having different challenges to solve for. Finally concludes with what could be a better model of governance. This last part was most interesting as 'sortition' was explained - core idea being to have representative groups of people through randomization to decide on which legislation to be brought in, followed by sortition of experts on building this new legislation and finally parliament to vote on this.
The author also brings about a thought experiment of an alternative and its interesting to read.
Most importantly, the author does not explain in any manner how South got to where it did, if the improvement in states has been similar as comparing absolutes may not be the only way, does not consider 'services' at all, impact of immigration.
It seems that the author starts with the idea of 'South being better off and now being penalized for doing better than others' and thus how can South be saved. Not the best of hypothesis as the logic shared by him can be used for districts within a state as well.
The author also brings about a thought experiment of an alternative and its interesting to read.
Most importantly, the author does not explain in any manner how South got to where it did, if the improvement in states has been similar as comparing absolutes may not be the only way, does not consider 'services' at all, impact of immigration.
It seems that the author starts with the idea of 'South being better off and now being penalized for doing better than others' and thus how can South be saved. Not the best of hypothesis as the logic shared by him can be used for districts within a state as well.
October 31, 2022
As the name suggests, the author presents comparison between growth trajectories of north and south India and argues why southern states feel more and more disillusioned by the increasing centralisation of power and resources by central government, which ends up having policies more aligned with realities of north india than the south. At times, it seems that the author is justifying, if not advocating, the sub national and borderline secessionist elements in southern polity.
Nevertheless, the book provides and original critique of functioning of Indian polity and even suggests an alternative model of democratic decision making, which the author calls ‘gamified direct democracy’. The solution he proposes by itself is very impractical and unimplementable, so much so that he himself calls it ‘only a thought experiment’ but it is no less practical than Plato’s Philosopher King, a great contribution to political science.
Though I do not agree with much of his proposals, I found the book to be thought provoking and consider it as a must read for any student of political science, especially in an Indian context.
Nevertheless, the book provides and original critique of functioning of Indian polity and even suggests an alternative model of democratic decision making, which the author calls ‘gamified direct democracy’. The solution he proposes by itself is very impractical and unimplementable, so much so that he himself calls it ‘only a thought experiment’ but it is no less practical than Plato’s Philosopher King, a great contribution to political science.
Though I do not agree with much of his proposals, I found the book to be thought provoking and consider it as a must read for any student of political science, especially in an Indian context.
October 17, 2024
A fine read explaining few important concepts related to health education and progress of a state.
In Pakistan, we need to adopt India's delimitation plan (implemented since 1975) being the only way Provinces will seriously consider controlling population growth/ family planning). Better performing Divisions/ Districts will have more representation per number of individuals hence more resources and focus.
A society with low literacy rate and high dropout ratiom; failing students in lower standards (classes) is counter productive and needs to be reviewed.
As per worldometer 2024, Life expextancy of India is 72.24 and that of Pakistan is 67.80 (highest is of hong kong - 85.63); we need to invest in quality healthcare and modern education trends.
Most importantly, same rule can't be applied to all provinces once it comes to Health, Education and Economic policy (even different set of rules are required down till Divisional level).
In Pakistan, we need to adopt India's delimitation plan (implemented since 1975) being the only way Provinces will seriously consider controlling population growth/ family planning). Better performing Divisions/ Districts will have more representation per number of individuals hence more resources and focus.
A society with low literacy rate and high dropout ratiom; failing students in lower standards (classes) is counter productive and needs to be reviewed.
As per worldometer 2024, Life expextancy of India is 72.24 and that of Pakistan is 67.80 (highest is of hong kong - 85.63); we need to invest in quality healthcare and modern education trends.
Most importantly, same rule can't be applied to all provinces once it comes to Health, Education and Economic policy (even different set of rules are required down till Divisional level).
January 8, 2023
The book is about the growing divide between Southern/Peninsular states and the Middle&Northern states especially in Health, Education and Economy. There is a stark divide further since the states have achieved relatively better progress compared to other states they are being penalized in terms of revenue allocation by the center. It was interesting to learn how the revenue is being allocated by the center to various states, what is the difference between a tax and a cess, When to focus on input and output metrics etc, vertical vs horizontal imbalance. Last sections prescribe forms of democracy we could have which solves current problems. I have my apprehensions since the same forms proposed could create significant hindrances and challenges in implementation and growth. Interesting and quick read though.
February 27, 2023
Coming from the South, having lived in the North and the South equally - it’s always intrigued me why the South always felt more developed, advanced, prosperous, healthier, better educated and more liberal. Nilakantan provides some great insights and data powered reasoning on this existence of two Indias. Although it’s obvious to anyone with half a brain that a powerful Centralized system of governance will not achieve good results for India as a whole, finding an alternative is an intractable problem. The last chapter of the book explores a fantasy solution but that’s what it is at best - an unrealistic fantasy, and that’s where the 1 star from my rating goes missing.
February 9, 2025
It is a good read that helps understand how there is a divergence between the Northern and the Southern states in India in terms of health, economics, social fabric. To put it simply, "the median child born in South India will live a healthier, wealthier, more secure and more socially impactful (voting representation) life than a child born in north India."
The author details the background of why this happened, it consequences to the current fabric of federalism and offer solutions. Quite a good read.
Sharing the notes: https://share.note.sx/nmsbbdrs#kToVHm...
The author details the background of why this happened, it consequences to the current fabric of federalism and offer solutions. Quite a good read.
Sharing the notes: https://share.note.sx/nmsbbdrs#kToVHm...
Displaying 1 - 30 of 48 reviews