Machismo rankling over rankings

Economic machismo was visible in 2025, as it has over the past several years. Each regime invariably takes credit for achievements. But when the debates sink, and numbers become meaningless, the story turns into a sarcastic and rhetoric drama with extreme theatrics. Consider the case of the size of the Indian economy. A few supporters of the ruling regime earlier claimed that India had become the fourth largest economy in the world, after overtaking Japan by a whisker, India’s annual GDP of $4.197 trillion versus $4.196 trillion for Japan. It was a difference of a mere billion dollars. Which was fine as the GDP can be looked at from different angles.

However, the claim was contested. A former civil servant wrote a piece, six months later, which was irrelevant, that the regime loyalist had “confused IMF GDP projections for 2025 (2025-26 for India) with the actual size of India and Japan’s economies.” The figures mentioned above are related to the forecast in April 2025. When the IMF updated the figures in October 2025, India’s projected GDP was lower than Japan’s; $4.125 trillion versus $4.28, or a difference of $1.55 billion, which is nothing. Since the updated figure was “unlikely to reverse much in the remaining few months of 2025, Japan… will remain the fourth-largest economy,” stated the article.

If this back-and-forth was not enough, the Government refused to relent, and did not give up on its assertion. It was national machismo at its peak, as if it mattered if the average Indian was a millimetre taller than an average Japanese. Almost a month later, an official press release confidently quoted the April 2025 figure, and categorically stated that “India with a GDP of $4.18 trillion had surpassed Japan… and is poised to displace Germany from the third rank in the next 2.5-3 years with a projected GDP of $7.3 trillion by 2030.” It was a year-end roundup that talked about growth, inflation, trade, and other issues. But the media highlighted the ranking part.

Of course, the media headlines were influenced by the one in the official release, which considered 2025 as a “defining moment.” A prominent newspaper added a caveat that the “final confirmation (of the ranking) will depend on the data released by the IMF in the first half of 2026 when the final figures for 2025 will be released.” The newspaper added that the “IMF forecasts for 2026 value India’s economy at $4.51 trillion, slightly above Japan’s projected $4.46 trillion.” This added another mischievous twist. This was because the original article, which claimed that India was not the fourth largest, concluded that “India may not cross Japan’s GDP in 2026-27 as well, and would need to wait for 2027-28 to overtake Japan’s GDP.”

The rankling over rankings, or rather numbers, did not die down with this. When the Government released the GDP growth data for the second quarter (July-September 2025) of this fiscal year, there was more confusion. The figure of more than eight per cent confounded both loyalists and critics. Obviously, the policy-makers thumped their chests in celebration since most forecasts were in the 6-7 per cent range. The critics quickly went to work, and raked up the IMF’s observations that the country’s statistics for national accounts (GDP) were of C grade, or one notch above the lowest D-Grade. An economist said that the data was “unreliable,” and India’s real growth may be 2.5-3 per cent, and not 8 per cent.

More experts joined the discussion. As quoted in a newspaper, two economists from Nomura added, “Consequently, there seems to be divergence between the GDP statistics, and the evidence from high-frequency activity indicators, making it difficult to gauge whether the GDP data are indeed reliably reflecting the state of the economy.” There was a fall in the monthly industrial growth figures for October 2025, which was described as “industry wilts under (the US) tariff pressure (Nomura).” “not looking good (Barclays),” and “exhibiting weakness across sectors (Union Bank).” Yet, in November 2025, the index of industrial production “surged to a 25-month high of 6.7 per cent” compared to “just 0.4 per cent in October 2025.”

Now, a new narrative shaped up. A newspaper stated that the October numbers were low because the economy was “disrupted by Diwali, and other holiday-related pauses in factory activity (although the growth in October 2024 was 3.5 per cent). In comparison, industrial output had expanded five per cent in November 2024 (Diwali was on October 31 in 2024). November’s (2025) numbers reflect a return to normal production levels, and a pickup in consumption after the festive period. The recovery was led by manufacturing, which grew eight per cent…. Key contributors included the manufacture of basic metals and fabricated metal products, pharmaceuticals, and motor vehicles. Together, these segments provided the biggest boost to overall industrial growth.”

Economic machismo cropped up again in a reverse direction, when it came to the free fall of the rupee. Once the currency breached INR90 against the dollar, the regime’s loyalists immediately defended the fall. One of the economic advisors proudly said that the depreciation of the rupee reflected the booming economy. Most nations, like Japan and China in the past, witnessed weakened currencies when their economies boomed, and took off. He forgot to add that both Japan and China were, and are export-led economies, where a depreciated currency boosts exports. India is the opposite, as exports contribute a smaller proportion. Another supporter claimed that a weaker rupee was good for labour-intensive sectors and, thus, generated jobs. “The macho rupee syndrome should be discarded immediately. Let us try and change this public narrative, which is detrimental to the country,” he added. Economic machismo was not good.

Clearly, the debates about economics, and economy seem to be at their lowest levels. When a figure is distorted, and highlighted as a milestone, the same is twisted by critics, and hailed as a disaster. When data shows momentum, critics are quick to put roadblocks and obstacles. When it does not, the loyalists gear up to justify. In the end, the discussions lose context, and perspective. There is a democratic right to be biased. No one tries to make sense of the figures, or understand the reasons for the divergence, and contradictions. The public, even the literate sections, are confused. There is an immediate need to swing the debates into meaningful discussions that can improve, and enhance understanding.