A Shameless Polemic Against the Nehru-Gandhi Dynasty

People of India of any generation will not see Ayodhya temple in their life time. Mark my words. No matter which party it is in power. Once in power they will drop temple issue like a hot potatoe.

Hossp:

``Rao followed him but he was not the person who could have inspired confidence in a nation. It is the third phase of the Indian history where Indian youth begun to question its leadership. ``

I agree with the bulk of your post. I have already put one post about the Moeen Qureshi reforms.

``During his three-month tenure as caretaker prime minister, Moeen Qureshi initiated a substantial number of strong reform measures. He devalued the currency and cut farm subsidies, while raising the prices of wheat, electricity, and gasoline--strategies to reduce Pakistan`s huge budget deficit-- 7.5 percent of the gross national product (GNP). Qureshi also cut public-sector expenditures by instituting austerity measures, including closing down ten embassies and abolishing fifteen ministries. Qureshi`s most daring innovation, however, was a temporary levy on agricultural output--a measure resisted by powerful zamindari interests. ``

The only thing I would disagree with is your perception of Rao. Rao gov`t did bring along a political stability that was badly needed. Rao had been preceded by the weak governments of VP Singh and Chandrashekhar. This was also the time when India faced hopelessness and a big psychological blow was the transfer of gold to stave of the balance of payments crisis during Rao`s time. Rao`s reforms, along with the political stability, actually gave a glimpse of possibilities to middle class India. His term however was followed again by political instability with PMs following each other in quick succession.

The BJP has been a gainer not in terms of exceptional governance (it has only follwed the course set by Rao) but also the ability to put its own agenda on the backburner and manage a coalition to run for 5 years. The days of one party gaining absolute majority are gone. India actually has devolved more power to the states in a political sense through regional parties rather than through formal power sharing in a legal sense. The ability to last a full term is seen an asset in itself. Rao`s government is therefore not percieved in as negative a sense as you might think.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#17, Nazarhayatkhan:
Nazar Sahab, your statements are, as usual, totally on the mark. As an Indian, I too have concerns regarding the overall benefit of BJP`s shenanigans. But Indian democratic system has stood the test of time. It is true, there are elements in BJP such as Joshi and even Advani to some extent, that need to be checked. But do not forget that BJP amounted to nothing till they made way for Atal Behari Vajpayee. He is the Nehru of 21st century. My concern is that he is seventy nine years old. Ultimately, his strength is from the sensible Hindus of which there are a plenty. If Mr. Vajapayee is not given the Prime Minister`s status the NDA which is propped up by the BJP would immediately disintegrate. And if that happens in absence of the reformed Congress or a similar other party it would plunge India in to a cauldron of uncertainty. That may very well lead to a disintigration of India itself. BUT I HAVE HOPE, largely, in the maturity of the fairness and liberalism of Hindus and Indians.

Inquirer

Read the article from start to finish. I am not talking about Jawarhalal Nehru. You are a prime example of these men who prostrate themselves like eunuchs before the name of the family and acts as if a God has been spat upon if you dare to question their legacy. Get a life.

Gujji-Half-Wit

Man you were rumbled royally as Shamshul that was really funny, stop being so obvious and do your undercover work properly.


hossp

I would concur with Amit`s posts on everything.

#41 by amit

I think the ``secular`` middle class also kind of liked the muscular hindutva of the atom bum and a long term vision presented by BJP of finally finding India`s position under the sun. (It took a page out of Iqbals khudi book) This facet of hindutva has little to do with religion, and e.g. G. Fernandes like seculars could easily identify with it. So, congress and Manmohan, although got the economic reform (under the IMF danda) going, congress never spelt out such a vision.

Hossp:

``Indian would not agree with me here but Pakistan had started on the path of consumer economy way before India did but Pakistan had no strong economic sector to build upon the consumer spending whereas India already had a strong capitalist class to take advantage of heavy consumer spending. ``

Any knowledgable Indian would agree with you in terms of open market for consumer goods. At the time India believed in ``consensual`` socialism and Pakistan was derided for importing and patriotic slogans like ``Be Indian Buy Indian`` were popular.

What is of more significance is Pakistan`s role in jumpstarting economic reforms in India. In the late 80s or early 90s, Pakistan has a caretaker PM ...I think his name was Moeen Qureshi but I could be wrong. Anyway, this gentleman completely rewrote rules on foreign investment for Pakistan and was a major motivational factor for the manadrins of South Block.

I came late to this thread.

But I have no hesitation in stating that the author is an immature ignorant who just rambles on without any rhyme or reason.

#5, Romair: who generally is off sense, has exactly stated the relevant truth. May be naturally a Pakistani can always have more sense than an erratic and ignorant Indian about India.

Ask them what india has achieved!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Under Jawahar Lal Nehru!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

# 14 His Excellency

+++++
There are a lot of ``third`` options as well such as Janata Dal, DMK, AIMDK, TDP, Samajwadi, BSP, etc. At one point, BJP too was a small party with very few seats in parliament. Who knows one of these parties may grow into national movements in another 10 years!!
+++++

Limitations inherent in the charter, membership and even in names of parties like DMK, AIDMK, TDP make them as unlikely to grow into national movements in India in another 10 years as, say, the MQM in Pakistan.

In fact, given the fact that South India is socially, educationally and economically more advanced than the rest of the subcontinent, its proportion of the nation`s population will be going down for the foreseeable future. So, I see a shrinking voter-base for parties like DMK, AIDMK, TDP. They will definitely not grow into another Congress or the BJP.

Re:nazarhayatkhan #17
The more secular elements in India are basically frustrated that they don`t have a good choice other than the BJP. In any mature democracy, we see that the system naturally gravitates towards a two party system with one party being slightly right of center and the other being slightly left of center, in terms of economic and social matters. Typical examples are the Republicans and Democrats in US, Conservatives and Labor in UK etc. India is also moving in that direction with the BJP being the right of center party. The Congress is a natural choice for the contrasting left of center party. However, it is severely handicapped with its obsession with political dynasty. The voters in India have developed a strong sense of self-respect and will not elect an Italian-Indian to head their government. It doesn`t matter how good or bad Sonia is. Yet the Congress party will not leg go of her and select a more electable person to head their party, simply because of their weird separation complex from the Nehru-Gandhi family.
In addition, due to poor leadership, Congress is simply unable to form viable coalition governments with other similar parties. Today, India`s complex demographics has ensured that only a coalition government can survive at the center. Any entity that can form viable coalitions will be able to rule India. In the nineties, we saw the game of musical chairs with Deve Gowda and I. K. Gujral. One of the core strengths of BJP is the presence of Vajpayee, whom the rest of the NDA alliance supports wholeheartedly. There is no such figure in the Congress and hence their coalitions are so weak and fragmented.
I don`t think that the middle class in India is completely against the Congress, because it was the Congress Party that started liberalizing and opening the economy. The Congress may have leftist inclinations, but it is not beyond the pale as far as the electorate is concerned. However, what matters is the state of leadership in the Congress Party that seems stuck on Sonia Gandhi. I guarantee that if an Arjun Singh or Manmohan Singh took over the Congress Party, it could bounce back and reclaim its position in the Indian political domain.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

There is/was a roumor at the time of sitaram kesaris presidentship of CWC that a lot of the funding of election campaigns happens with funds from various dead gandhi trusts. Sonia is the main trustee, and heirs shall be her kids. That is where the main power emanates. After all, all the loyal followers of Gandhi clan are for a reason. They are hard-core politicians not really famous for rajput style loyalty. In the old license raj, it was easy for a Birla to fill in the trusts coffers based exclusive deal on making ambassadors.

Here is the Sonia bio where all her trustee positions are indicated.
http://www.congresssandesh.com/aicc_directory/biodata/ls/soniagandhi.html

Anybody with knowledge of how campaigns are financed and party tickets issued?

Stuka, Jang, plats8 and others,

I wanna again make it clear I am not accusing Indians of anything I was merely asking for debate on some issues rather then just saying that Congress is bad and Gandhi family is bad as to me it makes no sense.

Here is how I look at Indian politics/Economy in an extremely sanitized and shortened version.

The first phase: Nehru and his socialism. After independence India needed stability first from some unnerving experiences after the partition. Nehru handled it well. He put India together and sowed the seeds of pride in India. He was an idealist and followed the ideology of that time-socialism. We may differ with that but Indians elected him and he followed his policies.

The Second Phase: Indra Gandhi-twice. She was born into power. She never struggled for her political ideals. She relied on Nehru name. She was status quo. She also helped develop pride in India. Since she was not a product of the people she lost sight of democracy at her first major challenge.

The Third Phase: Rajiv and Rao. Rajiv was inept and even lacked his mother’s charisma and stubbornness. Ran a confused and devoid of any ideas type of govt. Rao followed him but he was not the person who could have inspired confidence in a nation.
It is the third phase of the Indian history where Indian youth begun to question its leadership.

The Fourth phase: BJP/NDA coalition
Before we discuss the fourth phase lets look at what happened that brought about the fourth phase.

India opened up the country in Rajiv-Rao period and Manmohan Signh led that opening of market and economy.
The initial opening took place at the consumer side
Indian would not agree with me here but Pakistan had started on the path of consumer economy way before India did but Pakistan had no strong economic sector to build upon the consumer spending whereas India already had a strong capitalist class to take advantage of heavy consumer spending.

The Indian TV, from that stupid Govt owned media moved into private enterprises hands. The Hollywood developed program showed people what the good life is and Indians took to the shops to buy color TVs, fridges, Microwaves and what not. Indian entrepreneur invested heavily on consumer demand items. India already had a 250 million strong middle class and that middle class had no place to spend the money before. Now it could. The Hindustan car and the Ambassador car that changed models some 50 years ago were now quickly replaced by newly assembled Japanese car. The huge motor bikes were replaced by Honda made small and affordable bikes and families started to travel more within the city and spend more at recreation. The current economic revolution in India is based on the consumer economy. It is leading to low cost technology driven economy and soon it will translate into high tech industrial economy.

Next what part did the BJP/NDA play in this whole saga?

Before I post the second part, Stuka and Jang and plat, just assess and see where I am right and where I am wrong and we will continue from there.

Again this is a shortened version and I have not gone into details but I think this sets up the paltform for us to discuss the current situation.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

rsridhar #29,

``There is no need for Pakis to get too excited about all this. You guys
have hardly seen any democrazy in your country, so i am amazed you
should be giving a sermon on chowk.``

Drop it. We can be shown the mirror in a thousand different ways.

Congress cronyism probably hit rock-bottom during the Emergency, and it
has never recovered from that. Indira and her lumpen younger son were
almost exclusively responsible for promoting such a culture, mostly through
a carrot and stick policy (lot of stick, little carrot).

As several people here have suggested, Congress really needs to stop reacting
to the BJP and start promoting people like Manmohan Singh and Sheila Dikshit
as its public face. Sonia`s primary handicap is not her Italian origin - it is her
complete lack of political intelligence.

Sadna:

#34 is a very astute post and I agree completely.

Jang:

``So while you will see them grateful to Nehru for creating jobs for their parents via the public sector employment, they have no sympathy with any of the working masses.``

I am grateful to Nnehru for creating the idea of India. I am certainly not grateful to him for creating Public Sector jobs. If he had not created those jobs, the private sector would have filled the vaccum. India did have a thriving private sector right upto the late fifties. It was massive central planning, followed by Indira Gandhi`s nationailzation followed by ``Loan Melas`` that lead to crisis of confidence of 1991.