360° Insight into Market Pulse
S. Gurumurthy's proclamation that globalization has collapsed and that economic nationalism represents "India's moment" is a bold one. But bold claims demand rigorous scrutiny. Let's peel back the layers and see if the numbers support this declaration.
"India's Moment": Fact or Just a Catchphrase?
Deconstructing "India's Moment"
"India's moment." It sounds impressive, doesn’t it? But what does it actually *mean* in quantifiable terms? Are we seeing a surge in Indian exports that outpaces global trade growth? Is foreign direct investment flooding into India while other emerging markets stagnate? Or is this simply a narrative being pushed without concrete backing? The statement, delivered on November 28, 2025, lacks specific context. Which makes it difficult to assess its validity.
Without a clear definition, we're left to speculate. Perhaps Gurumurthy is pointing to India's relatively strong GDP growth compared to other major economies (the IMF forecasts 6.8% for 2024). But that figure alone doesn't automatically equate to a wholesale collapse of globalization. Many factors contribute to GDP growth, and internal consumption could be a significant driver, masking weaknesses in export sectors. Where's the data on comparative advantage shifts? Are Indian companies genuinely outcompeting global rivals, or are they benefiting from protectionist policies?
It's also crucial to consider the base effect. Emerging economies often exhibit higher growth rates simply because they are starting from a lower economic base. A 6.8% increase on a smaller base may not represent the same level of economic transformation as, say, a 2% increase in a developed economy like the US. Are we comparing apples to oranges here?
Globalization: Recalibration or Catastrophe? Data Needed.
The Globalization Obituary: Premature?
The claim that globalization has "collapsed" is equally provocative. While it's true that global trade growth has slowed in recent years, and geopolitical tensions are rising, labeling it a complete collapse seems premature. Global supply chains, while perhaps being reconfigured, haven't vanished. Cross-border data flows continue to increase exponentially. International capital markets are still deeply interconnected.
Perhaps Gurumurthy is referring to a shift away from the hyper-globalization of the pre-2008 era (the period before the Great Financial Crisis). But a shift is not the same as a collapse. It could simply be an evolution, a recalibration of global economic relationships. Are we witnessing a transition to a more regionalized or localized form of globalization? Or a fragmentation into competing blocs? The data is still unfolding.
And this is the part of the analysis that I find genuinely puzzling: the lack of nuance. The world is rarely black and white. Is Gurumurthy painting a picture of complete disintegration to make a more compelling point about India's potential? Or is he genuinely convinced that the global economic order is crumbling? I've looked at hundreds of these pronouncements, and this level of certainty, without supporting data, is unusual.
So, What's the Real Story?
Gurumurthy's assertion is a catchy headline, but it requires far more than just rhetoric. We need hard numbers, detailed analysis, and a clear definition of terms to determine whether "India's moment" is a genuine paradigm shift or simply a data anomaly amplified by nationalist sentiment. Until we see that data, color me skeptical.
