A Prescription for the BJP's Revival

If seeing the BJP as something to be revived, ever, one has not investigated carefully its right-wing or the sources of its ample funding prior to the recent general election. The outcome of the election did remind of the importance of everyday Indians, persons to struggle along who must be offered something better than instructions to hate or fear their neighbours. Those indicted in the Liberhans Report indicate the BJP's level of 'political development' as long as educated persons will Consider BJP candidates Indian democracy is rather threatened.
Pack them off to New Jersey or Chicago for more study of the rise of Hitler, those to bet Everything on a fascist leadup to the election, and LOSING, fairly and squarely.

DM...
"India shining" slogan was not absolutely wrong either...
During last 4 years, BJP/NDA did a lot in key areas like higher education, rural connectivity, infrastructure development, universal education....

This was message from Vajpayee....
http://www.expressindia.com/news/fullstory.php?newsid=22977
Mr. Joshi and Arun Shourie invested a lot on improvement of quality of higher education...

...and it was working fine...
GE,GM,Motorola,Nokia, IBM, HP, Google, Mocrosoft, Dell, Adobe, Yahoo, Intel, AMD,Fiat all set up their labs in Pune and Bangalore...

It was no mean achievement (within span of 5 years)

Recent news is not very encouraging....
http://en.kioskea.net/actualites/india-losing-sheen-as-offshore -r-and-d-hub-10127-actualite.php3

#673 GF: The simple point I am making is not getting through to you - it is not about personalities. it is about the system.

you think musharraf has a better personality than zardari - for the sake of argument lets say that is true. that is supremely irrelevant. What is relevant is - does one have a nation where the "ruler" (musharraf or zardari) knows that if he breaks the law (e.g. gets an opponent assassinated, takes illegal possession of property) he will be charged, tried and punished. or does one have a nation where the "ruler" knows that if he breaks the law he will simply have gotten what he wanted (gotten rid of an opponent, etc.).

Now that wasnt hard, was it? But there are hundreds of thousands of Pakistani babus, "loyal" retired military officers, petty minded individuals who cant see beyond their "ethnic" loyalties, and so forth - who will go through life never getting it.

Re: # 639

tahmed...we've talked on this subject before...and as you might remember, I'm personally all for democarcy...but unfortunately what here we are discussing is not democracy, but whether we should let this oligarchy to continue where say an ordinary, illiterate street thug, a wicked feudal lord with a number of wives and sundry mistresses, or an army general could rule over us...it basically boils down to comparing between whichever is the lesser evil...adding fuel to the confusion and malaise, unfortunately the political parties too hardly ever work on the democratic premise either, which are run like fiefdoms of reckless thugs that operate on the tenets of monarchies, where endlessly power keeps running from father to son and so on...so what democarcy are we speaking of?

Re: # 669
KHYBER...
Prividing Asylum is not illegal or uncalled for....
Pakistan provided asylum to large number of Kashmiri terrorists. Have India attacked (even before 1971) Pakistant any time?

Nehru and Indian administration was unprepared for the war and never believed that China can attack India....
That might not have changed the outcome very different...But sudden attack, specialy from China, overwhelmed entire administration....Nehru used to feel China and India are brother in arms and at least History ( apart from Opium war) taught him so....

Here Pakistani and Chinese approach is similar...
During 1965 war, Pakistan expected Kahsmiri people to help Pakistani forces; but that did not happened...

In 1962 too, local people ( Arunachal Pradesh) did not supported PLA....


Regarding democracy in India, it is compliant with Indian society and working well for last 15 years( starting with 1991)...If you have to prove something, you can try, but many countries support and gets inspired by Indian democracy....

Your question was, without education democracy may not be successful. Education does not mean going to school, alone. People gets educated through mass media like radio and tv and in their respective field; they know, what they expect from the govt. and whether the govt. is delivering it. A farmer in Punjab or UP knows ( without formal education), whether Govt. is providing right type of subsidy or loan and whether Govt. proving proper procurement price...They may not be botherred about Iraq war etc...But, that is the way Indian society is working for last 2000/3000 years...

With so much diversity, it is not easy to manage a country like India...I don't feel any other form of Governance may be able to hold the country together....Indians are not martial race ( Gandhi realised that very early), neither we put warlords in highest pedestrian. So, this military dictorship would have been a failure in India. Khsatriyas were treated lower than Brahmins...

Another good aspect of democracy/voting system is, getting feedback on, how the Govt. performing and taking corrective measures...Now a days, many of the popular State Govt.s in India, publish quarterly reports, about the % of promise, they have implemented....

CPI(M) is now feeling the heat of democracy....
So, you need to exclude India from your list of 3rd world countries, where Dictatorship should work as miracle....

Re: # 663

Rashid:

This four pillar approach needs development as Pakistani democracy, much as Iranians developed theirs with the fourth pillar. I am certain that in Pakistani army not all are dyed in wool pro-army wala like Riaz. I think people like Musharraff and several other intellectuals have something say and should be asked.

I think is distrust rather than inclusion among supporters of military rule and democrats in Pakistan. The beauty of democracy is that if democrats take the initiative to include democracy still wins. Once again just look at Iranian democracy. Likewise Pakistani democracy will be created, live in and improved by Pakistanis, not someone like me. I can ask right questions but may not have right answers.

You should write an essay and bring this discussion to the front page again.

KHYBER#669:

I agree with you but not in the way you suggest. I think that Nehru provoked the war with China by issuing orders to the Indian army, while he was in Colombo, to throw out the Chinese intruders. He had totally neglected India's defense and was not aware that Chinese were much better prepared than India. But giving asylum to China was the right ethical decision. And Tibet became China's internal matter also because of Nehru's wrong policies. The British had maintained Tibet as a buffer state between India and China; it was Nehru who, in his eagerness to be friendly towards communist China, agreed to the Chinese suzerainty (not sovereignty) over Tibet. In 1950, the Indian army was much better armed and professional than the rag-tag PLA of China.

I think 1962 sino-indian war could have been avoided if India had not intefered in the internal matters of china by providing aslyum to dalai lama. Chinese don't like any open conflicts so they will not initiate any attacks but another nation should be really crazy to attack China .

http://pukhtunkhwatimes.blogspot.com/

http://thepathans.blogspot.com/

KHYBER#667:

My approach to politics is based on realpolitik. India by itself cannot resolve tensions with its neighbours, including China, unless it is willing to accept their positions. This is especially true in case of China which claims one of India's states in its entirety. India and China have long been engaged in negotiations to resolve these disputes. India has virtually abandoned its claim on the territory it lost to the Chinese during the 1962 border war.

India is in no position to fight a war with China and should do everything possible to not provoke China into one at this time. At the same time, India is at a stage of economic development where it does not have to choose between guns and butter and can go for both, just as China did not sacrifice butter for guns or guns for butter during its development.

India needs fast economic development, better distribution of income, deal with several internal fissures and secure friendly borders, all at the same time. A truly tall order, but not impossible to achieve, with the kind of intelligent leadership it is fortunate to have at the helm right now.

Re: # 664
DM
Thanks for correcting me. I will look into the details.

Re: # 665DOST...Thanks for your comment,I was just wondering what you guys think about this situation,I think India should pay more attention to its poverty and other problems instead of getting involved in tensions with neighboring countries,we all know war is no good and if there is war between india and china,I think that will be more worst for India's survival.
Anyway nice article,'' A Prescription for the BJP's Revival ''

http://pukhtunkhwatimes.blogspot.com/

http://thepathans.blogspot.com/

KHYBER#662:

People's Daily is of course an official news source for China and has its own biases. But Indians should, of course, be careful. They are in a huge dilemma. I am sure that they know that they will most likely be routed again by China if there is another confrontation. At the same time, they cannot be seen as rolling over and play dead while China assumes an aggressive posture and concentrates forces on the border of its Arunachal Pradesh of of which is claimed by China. Frankly, I do not know what Indian govt. should or should not do. Indeed, the situation is worse diplomatically for India than in 1962; at that time, China had few friends and had border troubles with all its neighbors including Russia and Burma. Now, unlike India, China has friendly relations with all its neighbours as well as major world powers. The only saving grace for India, I think, is that Chinese do not want to be seen as irresponsible now and upset the world order.

Re: # 659

Maliksaab:

"I intended to point at some flaws that we accomodate due to political pressure but they inherently negate the basis of a modern state by incorporating a medieval bias."

This is why I said that you do not know about the hindu code. The so called "Hindu" Code Bill, which applies to all but Muslims and Christians in India, was enacted precisely to remove the "medieval biases" in the laws prevailing at that time. Before this code, Hindu could have as many wives as he could afford and want and the widow had no right to remarriage, among many other backward customs. The Hindu Code was used to modernise such laws in 1955. The only sad part is that the leadership of the time chose not to remove similar medieval biases in Muslim code and they continue to be governed by the sharia laws.

Re: # 661
Anil
I would like to know more about this idea. Please do not forget this army has the reputation of owning the state.

Peopledaily.com

India's unwise military moves
In the last few days, India has dispatched roughly 60,000 troops to its border with China, the scene of enduring territorial disputes between the two countries.

J.J. Singh, the Indian governor of the controversial area, said the move was intended to "meet future security challenges" from China. Meanwhile, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh claimed, despite cooperative India-China relations, his government would make no concessions to China on territorial disputes.

The tough posture Singh's new government has taken may win some applause among India's domestic nationalists. But it is dangerous if it is based on a false anticipation that China will cave in.

India has long held contradictory views on China. Another big Asian country, India is frustrated that China's rise has captured much of the world's attention. Proud of its "advanced political system," India feels superior to China. However, it faces a disappointing domestic situation which is unstable compared with China's.

India likes to brag about its sustainable development, but worries that it is being left behind by China. China is seen in India as both a potential threat and a competitor to surpass.

But India can't actually compete with China in a number of areas, like international influence, overall national power and economic scale. India apparently has not yet realized this.

Indian politicians these days seem to think their country would be doing China a huge favor simply by not joining the "ring around China" established by the US and Japan.
India's growing power would have a significant impact on the balance of this quation, which has led India to think that fear and gratitude for its restraint will cause China to defer to it on territorial disputes.

But this is wishful thinking, as China won't make any compromises in its border disputes with India. And while China wishes to coexist peacefully with India, this desire isn't born out of fear.

India's current course can only lead to a rivalry between the two countries. India needs

to consider whether or not it can afford the consequences of a potential confrontation with China. It should also be asking itself why it hasn't forged the stable and friendly relationship with China that China enjoys with many of India's neighbors, like Pakistan, Nepal and Sri Lanka.

Any aggressive moves will certainly not aid the development of good relations with China. India should examine its attitude and preconceptions; it will need to adjust if it hopes to cooperate with China and achieve a mutually beneficial outcome.

http://pukhtunkhwatimes.blogspot.com/

http://thepathans.blogspot.com/

Re: # 660

Rashid:

If it is just one of the pillars how can it make the others subservient? I think it can be dealt in the constitution.