Entitlement vs Empowerment, Dynasty vs Development !

Discussion in 'Politics & Society' started by parijataka, Apr 8, 2013.

  1. parijataka

    parijataka Senior Member Senior Member

    Oct 15, 2011
    Likes Received:
    Very nice article by Shri Minhaz Merchant.

    Left, Right and Centre: Redrawing India’s Ideological Map

    Will the battle for 2014 be won or lost on a single ideological argument: entitlement vs. empowerment? Rahul Gandhi at CII last Thursday used entitlement as a metaphor for his vision of an inclusive, harmonious India – a hard-working, diverse beehive where the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

    Narendra Modi at FICCI on Monday emphasized empowerment of women and good governance which deliver not only gender equality but power, water, infrastructure, housing, healthcare and education.

    So will 2014 end up as a proxy contest between dynasty and development? The former stresses continuity, paternalism and benevolent feudalism. The latter stands for merit and no-nonsense delivery of efficient public services.

    Many also see the contest as a black-and-white one between centre-left liberalism and centre-right market economics. This of course is a misconception. To understand why, we need to redraw India’s ideological map, circa 2013.

    * * *

    “No respectable young man,” my tutor in England thundered, “can be a capitalist.” He was right. We were all proudly left-wing. The more radical among us 18-year-olds were Marxists.

    And we practised what we preached. Back from Britain, I declined to run my industrialist-father’s chemical factories and joined The Times of India instead – at a princely salary of Rs. 550 per month. Then, in quick order, came India Today and, at 25, my own media firm.

    It was now the 1980s and our old ideas of socialism were changing. Indira Gandhi’s own left-wing economic policies had become more centrist. By the late-1980s, Rajiv Gandhi, embracing technology, had steered Indian economics firmly towards the right and free markets.

    The liberalization of the economy in 1991 by Prime Minister PV Narasimha Rao and Finance Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh tethered India’s economic policy to the centre-right, a process that continued through the Deve Gowda, I.K. Gujral and A.B. Vajpayee governments up to 2004.

    India thus had 13 years of steadily rising GDP growth. Poverty reduced. Manufacturing and exports soared. In 2004, India ran a current account surplus. Inflation was below 4%.

    The UPA-1 government, held together by the stentorian Left, slowly began to reverse policy during its first term. Populism was the new watchword. UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi and her National Advisory Council (NAC) changed the thrust of policy from empowerment to entitlement.

    It was to prove a fatal mistake. Nine years later, the chickens are coming home to roost. The current account surplus of 2004 has turned into a record current account deficit (CAD) – 6.7% of GDP in the third quarter of 2012-13. For the full fiscal year ending March 31, 2013, for which numbers will be published in June, the government hopes to keep CAD below 5.5% of GDP. That’s still nearly Rs. 6 lakh crore. To get a fix on the number, CAD would then be 60% of India’s total annual revenue.

    Food inflation remains over 10% — more than double the level in 2004. The fiscal deficit, at 5.2% of GDP, is damagingly high. External debt has ballooned to $376 billion – 1.30 times foreign exchange reserves of $292 billion which have remained range-bound for nearly five years.

    * * *

    Through the 1980s and 1990s, I backed the Congress and its reasonably sensible economic policies in print – both in my media firm’s own publications as well as my columns in newspapers like The Times of India and others. These criticised – fairly sharply – the BJP for its divisive post-Babri politics. All of these are on the record.

    So what changed after 2004? Manmohan Singh as Prime Minister has been a disappointment. He was straitjacketed by the Left’s Common Minimum Programme (CMP) in UPA-1 but retained his liberalizer halo. The scams had not yet surfaced. The NAC’s welfare populism was meanwhile – subterraneanly – allowing corruption to flourish in a dole-based economy.

    In UPA-2, the Prime Minister has been pinned down by “coalition dharma”. Roughly translated, that means “stay in power at any cost, including the nation’s.”

    Is this “centre-left” politics and economics? No, it’s corrupt politics and zombie economics. It is unworthy of this Prime Minister. He has allowed himself to be held hostage to the Congress party’s obsession with staying in power by entitling, not empowering, the poor.

    It is a dishonourable policy that creates dependencies and does not build competencies or productive physical assets. It does not help the poor or the minorities. It only helps the UPA-2 government to cling to power.

    What’s the alternative? The Left is discredited. Regional parties like the TMC, DMK, AIADMK, SP, BSP, SAD, NC, MIM and Shiv Sena are either casteist (BSP), communal (SP, MIM), maverick (TMC, SAD), sectarian (Shiv Sena, NC) or parochial (DMK, AIADMK).

    It is ironic that the UPA-2 government is supported by some of the most communal, casteist and parochial parties in India who justify such support on the grounds of “keeping communal forces at bay.”

    Who will keep them – the real communal forces – at bay?

    And the BJP? A genuine centre-right alternative to the mish-mash above is necessary. But the BJP has some outdated ideas on economic policy. A genuinely right-of-centre political party would support policies to build on the economic reforms of 1991-2004, not dilute them. Will the BJP reinvent itself as a modern, centre-right party, shorn of ideology, focusing on good governance and rapid economic development?

    That could provide it the key to unlock the gates of the 16th Lok Sabha.
  3. nrj

    nrj Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Nov 16, 2009
    Likes Received:
    Yeah, socialism ftw ! Everyone except socialists are degenerate mammals..

    People in this country are confused between capitalism & socialism because leading political parties are themselves whirling to any corner of economic policy according to their mood. In India, no clear concept of capitalism or socialism exists.
  4. anoop_mig25

    anoop_mig25 Senior Member Senior Member

    Aug 17, 2009
    Likes Received:
    why everybody thinks that when bjp plus alies would come to power at center they would be more left leaning then current congrees led upa gov.Just because what they are now publicly speaking are they going to implement it.

    if they come to power(2014) they would go ahead with reforms as such there would be pressure form (industrialist>>>modi>>>gov) and they would citie empty treasure on account congrees policies
  5. pmaitra

    pmaitra Moderator Moderator

    Mar 10, 2009
    Likes Received:
    EST, USA
    Interesting article.

    The fact of the matter is well summarized in, and I quote, "“stay in power at any cost, including the nation’s.”

    Just as @nrj rightly said, "In India, no clear concept of capitalism or socialism exists." India is socialist only on paper, i.e. a de jure Constituionally socialist country, while in reality, even the USA is more socialist than India, de facto; and the Social Security Programme and Labour Laws of the US are good examples thereof.

    The Left Parties, in their perpetual distrust, opposed the Undo-US Nuclear Deal, while the BJP tagged along in expressing their lack of confidence in the PM. Ditto, when it comes to FDI in retail. There is really no clear cut demarcation as to who is right and who is left. Congress must be given credit, as much as we despise them, for perfecting the art of staying in power. They are willing to tow the capitalist line, and quickly pendulate to a socialist line, if the need arises, and they are very flexible to go back and forth with this.

    If there is one example of "no-nonsense delivery of efficient public services," it has to be Narendra Modi, but then, that credit goes to him and him alone, not BJP.

    When India was a nascent Republic, born out of the ruins of partition, riots, and the economic destability brought about by the just concluded World War II, in which India was a participant, strict government control and a planned economy was a necessity. It would be wrong to say it has not benefited the country as a whole. However, times have changed, and it is time to empower the people to achieve their dreams.

    Things do not look very optimistic, because, India is still stuck in the bureaucratic overhang it has inherited from the British Empire. India does not need more complication, it needs simplification. This is one reason why, IMHO, it will not help to add more bureaucratic overhead, like the ombudsman, to watch over politicians. If there is honesty and sincerity, any type of government will yield good results. However, if politicians see politics as an avenue to wealth, riches, and Swiss Bank accounts, then no kind of government, no matter left-centre-right, will be able to help this country.

    Let there be empowerment, and let water find its own level.
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015

    HEILTAMIL Regular Member

    Mar 15, 2013
    Likes Received:
    decentralisation of power and budget, with near autonomous state power is probably the right way, to weed out corruption and to improve economy

    hatred of nehru dynasty should not result in the favour of modi brand,

    both of them are in a race to rape the nation
  7. nrupatunga

    nrupatunga Senior Member Senior Member

    Feb 10, 2013
    Likes Received:
    Correct. Each and every party is out there to loot the nation.

Share This Page