Nirmala Deshpande - A Truly Great Soul

Re: # 213
He was reluctant but relented later (to dismiss Namboo govt). What abt ur langoti BJP govt? They too did as well.

Ans: There are some basic differences. Wherever Congress imposed artcle 356, Congress is routed out of power. In the case BJP, Laloo was kicked out after couple of years.
You can not compare Congress and BJP in this regard.
Farokh Abdullah of J&K, N T Ramarao of AP, R K Hegde of Karnataka Congress is numero uno villain in this pack. During BJP rule, Central Govt. had far better relationship with Congress and other Govt.s. S M Krishna, Digvijay Singh, Vilashrao deshmukh, Budhdhadeb Bhattacharya have got much favourable treatment than their NDA counterpart like Babulal Marandi or Navin Pattanaik...

VRV...
Noble peace prize is now a total political stuff....

gtg & huried posts. mistakes crept in.

As for being critical of the existing realities, what's wrong with it - be it Nehru or us?

Unless u r critical of urslf u cant make amends or reform our system. That's the philosophy of criticism. To say that Nehru wanted to destroy the country is downright mental.

Majumdar,

U sound like Zeemax when it comes to seing ghosts in the afairs of Nobel Committee. Tho I cant deny some distortions but the way they award prizes incl to Amartya Sen is fair. To say that Sen lobbied is lie.

As for Nehru being a democrat, yes he was and he ramained. AS for sacking of Kerala govt, he used the Constritutional provision, which is far more restrained than Indira's rash dismissals.

He was reluctant but relented later (to dismiss Namboo govt). What abt ur langoti BJP govt? They too did as well.

Nehru economic policies were influenced by the centralised Planning economy of the Soviet model. At the heart of his decision was the wellbeing of the country. Btw, US was not an economic superpower then.

In 2008 we can say so so was wrong but we have factor in the realities of 1950s to cooment on the policies of that era.

Re: # 210

oxymoronic

Majumdar,

Stalinists would have shown knowledgible Indians, who knew the religion they belonged to, the rapid strides Soviet Union had made. At that point of time, it did appear to be a grand success. The notion of everything owned by everyone would have appealed to the Indian bent of mine and that would not have needed distortion of facts...

Valid question from majumdar.

If Nehru is such a liberal democrat and not a Stalinist why did he dismiss a democratically elected communist government of Kerala ?.

(I know the above statement has a lot of weirdness associated with it..:-) )

Majumdar,

It is a fact that Vaishnavites and Shaivites could not tolerate each other. The patronizing kings were used as pawns by the proponents of the respective faiths to decimate the opponent.

I will refer you to some books soon. And please don't bring in the rightist hallucinations here...

(That is preposterous...LOL... )

Nope. That is Stalinism for you.

Regards

Nkg,

Man Booker is Man Booker, Nobel is Nobel.

Regards

Re: # 204

Majumdar Dada,

That is preposterous...LOL...

Re: # 199
Majumder...
VSN was awarded with Man Booker prize ( UK) as early as 1971. You can not bring islamic angle at that time ( UK, USA were big supporter of islamists in Kashmir and Pakistan)...

Vengy,

The Stalinists needed to discredit Hindooism so that Hindoos wud turn to Stalinism. That is why they had to show up Hindooism's faults - some true (casteism, misogyny) some false (sectarianism)

Regards

Nkg,

(Couple of drops of tears for Nirmala-didi.)

Yes.

(All Gandhians are not as bad/hyppocrete as Gandhi )

Yes, again.

Regards

Majumdar,

How would sectarian clash truths fecilitate Red-Hinduism?