India Votes for Stability

Re: # 436

At least in Pakistan's case, I do know that economy grew at a much faster rate than under military rule. During Musharraf period, the gdp doubled in 7 years, about 2-3 million jobs were created each year, tens of millions lifted out of poverty, the middle class grew substatially, industrial sector contribution to GDP rose to 27%, a vibrant mass media developed that took on Musharraf's misguided actions in 2007-8 against judiciary.

You can look at a graph of economic growth over decades under military and civilian rule in Pak at:

http://www.riazhaq.com/2009/05/foreign-aid-trade-investments-and.html

Here's how Dalrymple described comparison between India and Pak in 2007:

"On the ground, of course, the reality is different and first-time visitors to Pakistan are almost always surprised by the country's visible prosperity. There is far less poverty on show in Pakistan than in India, fewer beggars, and much less desperation. In many ways the infrastructure of Pakistan is much more advanced: there are better roads and airports, and more reliable electricity. Middle-class Pakistani houses are often bigger and better appointed than their equivalents in India.
Moreover, the Pakistani economy is undergoing a construction and consumer boom similar to India's, with growth rates of 7%, and what is currently the fastest-rising stock market in Asia. You can see the effects everywhere: in new shopping centers and restaurant complexes, in the hoardings for the latest laptops and iPods, in the cranes and building sites, in the endless stores selling mobile phones: in 2003 the country had fewer than three million cellphone users; today there are almost 50 million."

Riaz Haq, PakAlumni Worldwide

Re: # 447

Don't forget that Hitler was elected, just like Modi.


Riaz Haq, PakAlumni Worldwide

Re: # 441: "It is for the Indians to decide if they are gettig good or bad governance."

Do you think they have much of choice? The choice Indian democracy offers is between really bad and worse.

"Indonesia is just surviving country and nothing to be emulated."

Is it? Have you looked at the various indicators of progress? Social? Economic? Human? Indonesia is well ahead of all of South Asia. Do some reseasch on it. In fact, India is at the bottom of the pile by most measures.




Riaz Haq, PakAlumni Worldwide

dost-mittar #: "You have to dig deeper into the past to know the background of hindutva.....Veer Damodar Savarkar, the father of the hindutva ideology."

...i have studied Savarkar quite a bit....much of the article i was writing was on Savarkar.....that is where i figured out that hindutva is the hindu version of tnt.....at least in its initial philosophy.....rss and bjp are the end results of this, not the philosophical base of it....

i, personally, think the hindutva philosophy, or some version of it will, eventually, dominate india....i don't think it will be the violent modi version.....it will, however, be the philosophical savarkar version......

.....it is taking a lot longer for it to happen in india, than in pakistan, because india has a very large muslim minority (and christian minority)......

....i think, evetually, india will have a hindu identity at a govt. level, and even congress will accept it.....minorities will live their relatively peacefully (like they do in pakistan), but they will not be allowed to impact this identity at the national level.....

.....i think the current govt. level secularism and/or multi-religious identity is more due to the personality of nehru and the fact that the creation of india had a concept that tnt is wrong.....if india accepts it, as well, then the concept of pakistan becomes legitimate......then what happens to indian muslims......

in the end, i think indian muslims, much like pakistani hindus on the muslim side, will accept the hindu identity of india, and will opt for a peaceful non-resistance life in such a majority, rather than a resistance based existence trying to deny this hindu identity.......

after which, south asia will slowly autonomise and federate into its historic base of multiple civilizations.....but that is a separate discussion.......

feroz:

I am fine. Thanks. Check your gmail message.

nkg#445:

Federal structure and strong executives are separate issues. The U.S has a federal system but the executive is free from legislature; Britain is not a federal state but it does not separate legislative and executive functions.

Riaz#442:

I am not so sure that minorities would have done any better under dictatorship. In my opinion, it is minorities which are better protected by democracy as it is best suited to protect against the tyranny of the majority, Hitler was a problem for jews and gypsies, not for white christians.

shoab#439:

Riaz is not alone in asking for a strong executive. Many prominent Indians, including the newly elected Shashi Tharoor, have suggested such an action. The NDA govt. had proposed a constitutional review to propose changes for a stable govt., but had to be dropped because "secular" forces suggested that it might be a ploy for bringing in uniform civil code, despite Vajpayee's categorical assurance that it was not so.

Almost all Indians agree that China is growing much faster than India because India is paying a price for democracy, a price which I believe that most Indians are willing to pay.

re: Dost-Mittar

Hello Sirji; hope all is well with you and hope my old friends on this site are well also. Best Wishes!

Ciao

Re: # 281 khyber:

"Spy...what do you think about this election victory by congress. SO WHAT DO YOU THINK CONGRESS WILL PICK Communists or BJB?".

By now you are aware of the Congress govt formation along with its allies of DMK(TamilNadu), TC(WestBengal) and some others like NC(Farooq, J&K) to be completed by Tuesday (26thMay). This time Congress has emerged the single largest party with 206 seats and less dependent on the regional parties.

You asked this question to me, but others have already expressed many views on this. I would repeat/summarize that the Indian style of democracy despite its weakness/short-comings is best suited for the available complexity, diversity across regions, languages, religions, caste, rich/poor etc. As a leading Indian journalist / author M.J. Akbar pointed out that Firstly - "India is not a secular nation because Indian Muslims want it to be secular. India is a secular nation because Indian Hindus want it to be secular". Secondly a model profile for a politician has emerged. The voter wants three qualities in his leader: honesty, competence and modesty"

These qualities were lacking in the left parties as well as the Mayawati/Lalu/Mulayam/Paswan and they lost. Yes the last 4 have been doing nothing but caste politics for last 20 years. While everyone pounces on the BJP as a Hindu party, but these 4 persons/parties have been getting away doing caste based politics and it was good that they have been defeated.

Regarding Congress they have given a large number of seats to the youth and Rahul Gandhi has decided not to accept any ministry. In the next 5 years it is hoped that he would get enough experience of the politics and the country, the people, their needs, issues etc. to be a good PM.

Re: # 438
dm...
India, with huge diverisity and population, should maintain the federal structure. The current trend is healthy for India...powerful state Govts. can make India better than a strong central govt. and weak state govt.s...

DM,

BTW, Riaz bhai should note that there are two Muslim Indians (I presume that they would prefer to be called Muslim Indians rather than Indian Muslims] on this thread and both of them like the Indian model of democracy despite Riaz bhai's contention that it doesn't work for minorities.

If Riaz mian’s contention is that the Indian System doesn't work as well for minorities then I would have to agree. I seriously don't think that there can be any argument about it just as there’s little doubt about that fact that Pakistan conducted a genocide in East Pakistan in 1971 on the majority of its “citizens� for which, till now, not too many have been punished or even censured.

Unfortunately, most of what Riaz mian says seems to be mere brash propganda rather than an honest discussion on the short comings of the Indian system, of which there are many.

Re: # 425 Riaz:

- "India is a living example of the miserable failure to deliver good governance to its teeming millions". It is for the Indians to decide if they are gettig good or bad governance. In the recent elections they have already demostrated this when they voted for Nitish (Bihar), Naveen (Orissa), Modi (Yes in Gujrat) etc. while rejecting the Left (in West Bengal and Kerela), Mayawati (UP) etc. Dont make such strong statements without really knowing about the Indian governance and its success/failure criteria.

- "What countries like India and Pakistan need are benevolent strongmen to lead them out of the swamp they are in to make them capable of good democratic governance". I am surprised at your suggestion, coing after having faced umpteen militry coups / dictatorships, and having seen that they are the root cause of all the problems in today's Pak. You are free to try it once again in Pak, but Thanks (no thanks) for giving that suggestion for India.

- "The experience of ASEAN founder nations of Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore is a good example how this scenario would work". Indonesia is just surviving country and nothing to be emulated. Malaysia and Singapore do not have the diversity as much as India. India needs more decentralization to accomodate multiple, regional views, as they say "unity in diversity".

Re: # 437 Muqaddam, BIMARU...There are other states such as West Bengal, Orrisa, Jharkhand, Chattisgadh that need to be included in this list. Rajasthan despite low literacy and water availability is doing much better with limited available resources. More than 50% IIT students overall India level are from Kota Rajsthan.

DM,

May be a directly elected president or prime minister whose job does not depend on the support of the shifting alliances of legislators would work better, especially if it allows him/her to go over the heads of the legislators directly to the people to get broad support on crucial policy decisions

I find this whole “go over the heads of the legislators directly to the people� really dichotomous after Riaz Main ripped apart Indians and their stupidity (and by extension Pakistan and Bangladesh with those two nations have a lower literacy rate than India’s). On the one hand he says that he doesn’t “know of any non-industrialized nation with widespread illiteracy and poverty that has made democracy work successfully� and then he want those same Indians to be approached “directly� and wants them to offer support on “crucial policy decisions�. Wah!

Anyways, let me ignore that, for the time being.

Coming to the point, so he wants an executive not dependant on the legislature, is that right? That’s the silver bullet—a strong executive?

Might I remind him that Mrs. G did “not depend on the support of the shifting alliances of legislators�. She was by the strongest executive that India ever saw, in some ways much stronger than even the US prez is vis-a-vis his legislature. There was no check on her power largely because she had bypassed all institutions, be it of party or of the legislature, to appeal “directly to the people� who gave her “broad support on crucial policy decisions�. Of course, during her time India most prolly saw its worst time economically.

On the other hand, under executives that did have to depend on “shifting alliances of legislators� since 1991, Indian has had its best time ever, economically. How does he explain that?

I’m afraid, Riaz mian’s advice will only lead to more disaster after which he will derive vicarious pleasure from all the exposed Indians arses its railroad tracks. For God’s sake, we need more decentralisation of power not less in a country India’s size. Having a prez form of Gov’t and “direct ballot’ in India (yeah, right) is nothing but building castles in the air.

majumdar#436:

It is one thing to say that Riaz bhai's prescription doesn't work and another to say that he did not give any prescription.

BTW, Riaz bhai should note that there are two Muslim Indians (I presume that they would prefer to be called Muslim Indians rather than Indian Muslims] on this thread and both of them like the Indian model of democracy despite Riaz bhai's contention that it doesn't work for minorities.