Begs the question - what did India do right after driving out the British that parliamentary democracy was able to take root in a deeply feudal and stratified society?

Alex Navalny, in a WaPo op-ed last year, said the answer lies in choosing a Parliamentary form of government instead of a Presidential form of government. I tend to agree with him.

Parliaments yield fragile governments and yet, parliamentary democracy is probably the most visible example of an anti-fragile system.

Presidential governments are seductive but more countries should shift to parliamentary governments led by a Prime Minister.

If this theory is right, we (Indians) owe a big debt to the freedom stuggle generation for rejecting Presidential polities.