"In two respects, however, India has a big advantage over China in coping with an economic slowdown. It has all-too extensive experience in it; and it has a political system that can cope with disgruntlement without suffering existential doubts. India pays an economic price for its democracy. Decision-making is cumbersome. And as in China, unrest and even insurgency are widespread. But the political system has a resilience and flexibility that China’s own leaders, it seems, believe they lack. They are worrying about how to cope with protests. India’s have their eyes on a looming election."
This excerpt is from The Economist, December 13th, 2008 issue.
I am confused in the word "existential". I looked up in the dictionary, it says
adjective [only before noun] 1 (formal) connected with human existence 2 (philosophy) connected with the theory of existentialism
But I couldn't get the meaning in above context. Does the writer mean to say "existing doubts"? But then why did he use "existential"?
Please help me with it!
Top answer
Hi, Broadly speaking, the idea is that the Indian govt. does not waste its time thinking about questions like 'Are we the right form of govt. ' 'Are our policies the best for India?
— Clive
Free · every Monday
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
I could be wrong, but I'd say this is an example of the figure of speech affectionately called "personification." The political system itself is given human attributes. Not the disgruntlement - that we would attribute to the populace, suffering the pangs of economic depression. The political system can handle popular discontent without suffering self-doubt - without feeling