Suchergebnisse

US contact with southern Asia was very limited prior to WWII, & since that time has been unusually dominated by military considerations. In the wake of European decolonization, the US became a major diplomatic & pol'al force throughout the region, & the products & style of its material culture have a wide-spread appeal. Cultural, intellectual, & esthetic influence has been less marked, largely because of the residual colonial cultural bias, the appeals of the new nat'lism, fear of US psychol'al 'neoimperialism,' & awe of the strength & wealth of the US. In the region, many US efforts to communicate cultural universals have failed because of the strident cold-war atmosphere on China's frontiers. Cultural exchange programs have been somewhat more successful, but the unique location & wealth of the US do not always speak to Asia's needs. In an environment characterized by suspicion & envy, higher levels of contact & COMM between the US & southern Asia may, in fact, further estrange the US & the states of South & Southeast Asia. HA.

India's political development was unique, both in formal preparation and in the qualities of the modernizing elite which was fundamentally alien to Indian society. The sepa ration of alien elite and Indian masses is a historic condition, approaching the quality of a "praetorian society" and setting the context for efforts to create a national development effort. The political system was parliamentary democracy, and by 1957 was representing the effective centers of power in Indian so ciety. Nehru's leadership, the Congress party's policy con sensus, and the dominant role of the bureaucracy throughout the first decade of independence characterized the system. In legislation, response, and recruitment the political system proved flexible, sensitive, and viable, Indian planning con tinued to have a technical bias because of the relative isolation of the bureaucracy, both by social origin and governmental po sition. The administrative machinery of the state is relatively weak in comparison to the problems of stimulating development or using high levels of coercion in change, but strong enough to continue to dominate the decision-making process in the central government. The democratic system of social change has been more effective in India than the bureaucratic system of economic planning. The links between the two portions of the political community have been weak and sometimes hostile, limiting development.

India's pol'al development was unique, both in formal preparation & in the qualities of the modernizing elite which was fundamentally alien to Indian society. The separation of alien elite & Indian masses is a historic condition, approaching the quality of a `praetorian society' & setting the context for efforts to create a nat'l development effort. The pol'al system was parliamentary democracy, & by 1957 was representing the effective centers of power in Indian society. Nehru's leadership, the Congress party's policty consensus, & the dominant role of the bur'cy throughout the 1st decade of independence characterized the system. In legislation, response, & recruitment the pol'al system proved flexible, sensitive, & viable. Indian planning continued to have a technical bias because of the relative isolation of the bur'cy both by soc origin & gov'al position. The admin'- ive machinery of the state is relatively weak in comparison to the problems of stimulating development or using high levels of coercion in change, but strong enough to continue to dominate the decision-making process in the central gov. The democratic system of soc change has been more effective in India than the bur'tic system of econ planning. The links between the 2 portions of the pol'al community have been weak & sometimes hostile, limiting development. AA.