> The liberalization was done with the support of BJP when Cong-I didn't even
have a
> majority. Now that Rao is depending on the leftists elements within his party (Arjun Singh, etc)
> for his survival, the liberal policy will die a slow death and it will be back to business
> as usual( corruption and nepotism for issuing licenses, etc).
If Congress needs a support from CPI-M then it will pull back on liberalization.At the moment there is no significant left wing within congress. IMO Arjun Singhis simply an opportunistic politician. He does not subscribe to any *ism.
None of the Congress politicians have any ideological affiliations.
> The IMF and the World Bank set realistic goals towards achieving market oriented reforms
> when they give out loans. They want to make sure that this money is put to good use by investing
> in projects that prove their worth. Not down the drain. Time and time again, these money have
> been used for mammoth projects in the public sectors that has had no return. This has led
> to these institutions putting more restrictions on India whenever a loan is
given.
>
>
> For 45 years, we have formulated a policy based on so called "self-interest". It doesn't
> seem to be working.
The policies during the first forty years were based on a view of the world
colored by our colonial experience. We were paranoid about economic
"colonialism". We were too zealous about our newly obtained freedom. Our
perception of self interest was different then.
I wouldn't lable the whole range of policies from 47to mid'80s as failures.
> Is it not in the self-interest of India to meet the goals that are set? After all, it is
> India that is going to benefit. Good luck in getting a loan where there are
no strings
> attached.
Looks like we are talking past each other. Why would you want to wish me luck
in getting a no strings attached loan? (if you know of such loans tell me
more about it :-)
> <<deleted>>
>> >
>> > Finally, which Indian party do you think is capable of making all this a
reality?. You guessed it right.
>> >
>> > IT'S BJP
>> Yeah, Right!!!!
>>
>> If BJP comes to power, it'll be a boost to the hindu extremists. They will
>> demand further concessions from the minorities. Since BJP will ride to
>> power on the back of the communal tiger, it will have to pay for the
>> Faustian deal. The result will be even more riots, anarchy and mayhem. How
>> will India attract foreign investment in the face of such massive instability?
>>
>
> We have had other communal parties (Akali Dal, Muslim League, etc) run govts before
> but it seem to be alright with the Hindus. Why do you think there could be a
problem
> only with a hindu party?
>Sure, there are strong communal elements within the BJP umbrella.
The strong communal elements within BJP *can not* be weeded out. The dramatic
rise in BJP's popularity over the last 8 years is due to the communal elements.
The country has become highly polarized over the Hindus vs. minorities issue.
Until 87-88 the moderates in BJP like Bajpayee, were in control of the party.
As the RJB issue grew and BJP aligned with VHP, moderates were sidelined
and Advani, with his Rath yatra (or Rakta Yatra as it was called by NS Raja
and others) gained power within the party. If BJP persists in its present
course, Advani will also be sidelined and a more radical group will take
control of the party. (We are already seeing signs that Advani or the present
leadership of BJP can not control the mass agitation. Apparently BJP did not
want the mosque to be demolished by the Kar sevaks on dec. 6th. The mob went
out of hand.)
> I am confidant that a BJP run govt would be moderate and not as you have envisioned it to be.
> Muslims might feel a little alienated in the short run but would eventually be brought into
> the fold by their economic prosperity under a BJP administration. Sure they wouldn't be
> appeased as before. Time and time again, they have only seen this "appeasing" as merely
> a ploy to "vote-getting" which have made them lose their self-respect for themselves.
> I am confidant that under a BJP admin, the minorities would be adequately protected and
> treated fairly.
I don't share your optimism about BJP.
BJP is fast changing its nature. It is not the cadre based disciplined party
anymore. Considering the nature of Indian politics, no popular party can be a
cadre based disciplined party. As BJP gains popular support, its ranks will
be swelled by undisciplined power mongers and one issue/agenda people (obviouslythe issue is minorities). They will outnumber the disciplined cadres and
dominate the party policies. In the least, the new entrants will be in charge
of the lesser day to day functions of the administration. They *will not*
be moderates. The minorities will definitely be affected adversly in almost
all the state functions. The economic prosperity will take a
few years coming. It will not be sufficient to counter the daily experiences
of the minorities.
> Sure, anti-national activities would be dealt with severely as they ought to
be regardless
> of the perpetuators of these activities.
Is supporting Pakistan in Cricket matches an anti-national activity? Is
boycotting republic day an anti-national activity? Is refusal to sing Vande
Mataram anti-national activity? These activities are perfectly within the
rights of Indian citizens. These activities are not a litmus test for
nationalism and they are not anti-national activities. Terrorism and
violence are anti-national. Flagrant violations of law and constitution
are anti-national. The BJP leaders who gave press statements that they
will go ahead with kar-seva regardless of the supreme court verdict are
anti-national.
> BTW, who is responsible for the Sikh riots in 1984? Is it BJP? Moreover, there have
> been more deaths in Cong-I ruled states than in BJP ruled states due to Ayodhya?
> How do you explain it? If your logic is right, I should have seen more deaths in BJP
> ruled states.
This is not the topic of discussion. See the arguments I gave earlier.
>> BJP is not the solution. It is the problem.
>>
Let me clarify my statement. BJP is a problem because it persisted in it
path knowing fully well the kind of violence it can unleash. BJP has never
been a mass based party. BJP leaders have not led mass agitations in the
past. They can not control it (you need a leader of the stature of Gandhiji
to lead mass agitations). When Advani started on his Rath yatra, did he really
believe that it will be peaceful? Later on, the top leaders of BJP lost any
control over the events. They were reacting to the events and trying very
hard to stay at the top of things. They were forced to become more and more
radical. The way I foresee the course, it will play out the same way it has
in the past few years.
If BJP wins, it will be an endorsement of the radical hindu sentiment.
VHP and the other assorted fanatical hindu organizations will gain in strength
and whip up more hysteria. In trying to stay at the top BJP will become more andmore radical. Evntually BJP will be driven by the fanatics and not by seasoned
politicians (Try to think about the BJP response if VHP follows the sant
sammelan, starts new demands on Krishna Janmabhoomi and KJB becomes the focal
issue). It is possible that in not so distant future, Indian prime minister
will be a saffron clad version of Bhindranwale. The only hope for BJP is to
cut away from VHP *RIGHT NOW*.
I know that I have painted a bleak scenario, but I am scared that it might
come true. The whole Indian populace has become extremely sensitized to the
Hindu vs minorities issue. They have lost the perspective. The country has
become sharply polarized over the issue. It has become an emotionally charged
focal issue. (This must be the understatement of the year!) In such an
atmosphere, the above scenario is very realistic.
If we believe that BJP will retain a rational perspective (on coming to
power) we are just fooling ourselves. By encouraging the VHP and others
BJP has brought India to the brink of disaster. Unless it distances itself
from VHP, BJP will definitely put India through mind boggling violence.
Again, BJP is the problem and not the solution.
> Almost 45 years of Cong-I rule has degraded India to where we are today. Cong-I has
> nothing new to offer except the same formula of appeasement of certain groups that
> would keep them in power. They have run out of ideas. It is time they are thrown
> out. To brand BJP as the problem, is questioning the wisdom of millions of voters
> that have been voting for them. They are no fools.
The millions who voted for BJP are not fools; but merely because millions
voted for BJP, that does not make their decision wise. Well, millions and
millions voted for Congress consistently for forty years. You wouldn't agree
if I called it "wisdom", would you? Anyway, a discussion about the wisdom
or foolishness of voters is a digression.
>Whether anybody likes it or not,
> BJP is going to be a force to reckon with. The sooner their adversaries realise that,
> it's going to be the better for them.
>> The riots over the RJBM issue are going to hurt us badly. Potential investors>> are being scared away by the instability. BJP has diverted popular attention
>> from the pressing economic issues, because on the economic front, BJP does
>> not have anything more to offer than Congress under PVNR and Manmohan Singh.
>>
> Look who you are talking about. Cong-I is responsible for the mess we are in
today.
> India needs a change from the past policies of amost 45 years. What makes you think
> that Cong-I is going to straighten everything out in the next few years after messing
> everything up for so long? A sudden "enlightenment", perhaps.
>> Prashant
We definitely need an alternative to congress. IMO BJP is not the alternative
