I enjoyed your essay, but I’d like to point out what I see as serious flaws in the systems you advocate.
The Scandinavian model isn’t really portable. Most countries don’t have the natural resources, and almost no countries are as monochromatic. 95% of the population are the same race, attend the same church, and speak the same language. Because of that broad commonality, they are far more likely to view the poor, the disabled, or even the simply unproductive as fellow travelers much like themselves. The government controls most natural resource wealth, and heavily taxes their few large successful business enterprises. Quite simply their system of socialism is possible because their people have an astounding level of commonality missing from most societies and cultures. Importing that monochromatic culture to the US or India would be impossible.
While the informal economy in India is capable of employing vast numbers and strongly contributes to growth, that system also guarantees that the state is starved of tax revenue necessary to fund needed infrastructure. For example hundreds of millions in India don’t even have access to a bathroom. Worse, at least that number don’t have access to free childhood education.
While your real estate example helps disprove the Oriental Despot theory, those processes are far from beneficial to society. Any individual not favored by the community due to caste or religion will see a lower “market”price for their property. The reality of competitive profit going to the state creates a seller disincentive that keeps huge numbers of properties off the market or marginally used, depriving the community of wealth, jobs, and tax revenue.
Even the model adopted by Crop Connect is seriously flawed because they only do business with people they know”, which translates to only doing business with their friends, those of the same caste or same religion.
Sadly the solutions you advocate perpetuate racism and dooms generations to a permanent underclass. India can do better.