Independence Day!

[blr_p]

A good effort, nonetheless. But if you pay enough attention, you'll see that countries like Indonesia, Taiwan, Singapore, Russia, China, South Korea, Vietnam, Cuba and even South Afrika aren't doing too bad. And corruption in highly developed democratic countries like Japan and USA isn't that low.

Lets see... from that chart (in terms of rank..higher means more corrupt)

Japan - 17/163
US - 20/163

thats decent

Taiwan - 34/163
Singapore - 5/163
South Korea - 42/163

smaller countries but doing well

Indonesia - 130/163
Vietnam - 111/163
Russia - 121/163
China - 70/163

so called countries that you claim are doing rather well.

Cuba - 66/163
South Afrika - 51/163

We might be able to match these..in the future.
India - 70/163..or no different that China in this aspect. 2 different systems same amt of ppl. I'm actually bit surprised with India's score, for some reason i thought it would be much higher.

Do you still think change is required ?

 

[Yamaraj]

Do you still think change is required ?

Corruption isn't the only criteria or deciding factor, is it? OTOH, if you're happy with our politicians and the socio-political condition of this country, I shouldn't be complaining.

 

[blr_p]

Ok, what are the most pressing needs of the country right now then ?

..what would it take to get ahead from where we are ?
But i wonder if radical change is required instead of just tweaks only.

Liberalising the economy 15yrs back brought about massive changes, that was a tweak IMO. You could easily argue that mostly the middle classes benefitted as a result instead of the poor. But then in any system that would be the case, initially. This implies less govt. involvement in certain areas resulted in efficiencies and for a lot of rich ppl there is nothing they would like better. But govt. is required otherwise we end up like the US with govt. mainly serving corporates only.

That Naidu could be thrown out by the common man was proof positive that the poor man's vote can put one in office and can very quickly do the opposite as well. So fringe politics comes into play, where if you can satisfy the voters that can tip you over, your job is done. So long as you dont annoy your main vote base you are golden.

 

[superczar]

D-uh, this thread is inane

Maybe you should live in Zimbawe or China to find out what you have till now.

you don't even have to do that...You can live in the US, or Western Europe and still find out what we have.....it's difficult to explain but I'll take a tangential shot....

Despite the creaking infrastructure, and the often callous attitude of people, life feels more like worth living and enjoying than it does in a US or Western Europe....

Folks who have lived outside India for extended periods of time would perhaps know what I am saying....
On top of that, the India we have today (at least in the cities ) is very different from what it was 10 years ago....and the thrill of living in a buoyant economy is amazing...Hell, NewYork in 1995 looked pretty much the same as it does today (minus the twin towers)

The Delhi of 2007 is virtually unrecognizable to someone who was there in 1995...Cheers to that!

 

[Yamaraj]

But i wonder if radical change is required instead of just tweaks only.

Liberalising the economy 15yrs back brought about massive changes, that was a tweak IMO.

A move that put us into the hands of capitalists, ignoring the safeguards of the socialism before wasn't a mere tweak.

And, people often misinterpret Naidu's demise, just as they do with that of the BJP's. If BJP-coalition was voted out because of Gujarat, why is Modi still holding a strong ground there?

As I've said before, democracy and Indians aren't made for each other.

 

[Yamaraj]

On top of that, the India we have today (at least in the cities ) is very different from what it was 10 years ago....and the thrill of living in a buoyant economy is amazing...Hell, NewYork in 1995 looked pretty much the same as it does today (minus the twin towers)
The Delhi of 2007 is virtually unrecognizable to someone who was there in 1995...Cheers to that!

Guess we subscribe to different meanings of the word development.

 

[blr_p]

How to remain successfully socialist, in an increasingly capitalist world ?

The ever socialist French, who have a multi-party system like us seem to be struggling.

..yes in some cases we are prolly less insulated in a global economy than before, but surely the rewards have been present as well. The ruppee is still not 100% convertible yet and for a good reason. No predatory hedge funds to worry about screwing up our exchange rate. FDI is still capped, yes we don't mind a bit but not as much till we have the forex to counter it. So expect more selling out as reserves grow, but then also accept the increased vested interest that comes along with it ie it increases our bargaining position.

Apart from export sector jobs that don't have any employment protection, hire and fire, i'm under the impression that the rest are safer.

So yes we are trading some protections for gains, so long as the RBI is cautious and i don't have a reason to doubt that as yet, for the most part, i think we will be fine.

 

[blr_p]

Talking about the so called american system, the current circus surrounding the 123 agreement shows amply the difference between their system & ours, when it comes to matters of national interest.

The political opportunism that the BJP or the Congress display when in Opposition has to do with the flawed model of Democracy we have been burdened with where the Executive is subordinated to the Legislature to a degree where unless you control the Legislature you have no stakes in Governance for the next 5 years till the next elections and are pretty much irrelevant watching on the sidelines.

To better appreciate this let us examine why is it that despite having a strong Non-Proliferation agenda the Democrats in the U.S. Congreess are able to work with a Republican President on the Nuclear Deal. The American Model of Democracy that separates the Executive from the Legislature while requiring Legislative Oversight of the Executive at the same time allowing for wide latitude in Executive Privilege is largely responsible for this. The separation of Executive and Legislature means the two principal parties can control separate functions of the Government thus both can be invested in and have a stake in National Affairs at the same time. Also the wide latitude the party system in Congress allows for bi-partisan sponsorship of legislation with Legislators cutting across Party Lines to come together on issues which also creates a stake for the opposition in the affairs of the Government.

By creating the opportunity for the opposition to stay engaged in National Affairs and by making it a stakeholder it is possible to evolve a coherent view of National Interest and to ensure consistency whether inside or outside the Government.

Source

So..as i said earlier, no dictatorship, benevolent or otherwise is needed...just some tweaks

 

[x86]

Peoples who are championing Communism or a Communist type system over Democracy needs some reality check. Any kind of 'ism' (look for the etimology of the same) is bad to govern a country, China might have been succesful by its Communism but there lies many inherent points of chinese communism (like nationalism being one), and lets leave the han ethnic issue aside.

A autocratic type government would have served good in Indias initial stages (atleast would not have done the nehrus blunders) but democracy is the ultimate way to go. Asking for a autocracy today will never solve the issues that India faces today.

Problem with Indian democracy is the 'chalta hai' attitude, We as people on enmasse are not educated, nor we take part in civilised form of nation building through politics thus giving politicians in most cases a one handed run. Some reforms can do wonders only if public were a bit concious about issues in better way. Indeed there are many negatives of democracy in a underdeveloped country there are many plus points as well.

Its useless discussion these issues democracy or no democracy because today it is not possible to change, nor this is the right place to discuss things in deeper level heck the word freedom in Indias context can bring a lot of points which might lead to deeper introspection, I wish India Godspeed in its developement it still has lots of things to do including defining the Indian way internationally ,and at many level as its strategic power increases, I only hope our politicians will gain some proper momentum for governing the nation.

 

[x86]

A move that put us into the hands of capitalists, ignoring the safeguards of the socialism before wasn't a mere tweak.

And, people often misinterpret Naidu's demise, just as they do with that of the BJP's. If BJP-coalition was voted out because of Gujarat, why is Modi still holding a strong ground there?

As I've said before, democracy and Indians aren't made for each other.

IMO this is incorrect analogy, Modi's holding out because he has done good for Gujrat in later by bringing in massive reforms maybe because of peer pressure to stay in power (Gujrats agri income has doubled this year from last 5 years).

BJP lost out because there were lots of factors, they committed quite lots of blunders in many areas.

What you can say is there needs to be a system of checks and balances in a democracy that political parties dont merely use a band party to influence a group of people and come in power, adherence to that basic nationalistic or emminent goals of a country should remain unchanged irrespespective of the political party that comes in power, and that set of goals of national importance needs to be ratified or holded by a set of policymakers and lawmakers. I personally kind of like the American type system.

I do find this a odd when people who are not literate goes to vote and decides whom to choose based on very loose sets of promises to them yes this is a problem for Indian democracy, can you change it overnight? no, only literacy can slowly change it. Like say the present opposition to the nuke deal by BJP is at plain odds because it was them who started and initiated the process. As one previously pointed out there needs to be a medium of a group of people through which opoposition and the ruling parties can come together on common ground on issues based on national interest.

 

[Yamaraj]

While I certainly don't support a communist dictatorship as in China, our democratic structure is no better than their's. Words like freedom, democracy and human rights mean little when people aren't educated or enlightened enough to regard them with value and respect. Our people are largely simpletons - too immersed in their own little lives, and lacking intelligence, knowledge or the will to think and change. When there's a common awareness beyond stupid cricket and silly tele shows, we can hope for a better India.

Endorsing democracy in its original form is like wearing a trenchcoat all day long, for it works for Londoners and Matrixers. We've never had citizens participating actively for our independence, as the US did. Democracy works in America because of its people, and it fails here for quite the same reason. Ours is only a bastardized version of kleptocracy at best, anyway.

While we admire the Americans for their "flawless" democratic system, they have become increasingly vocal against a two-party system in their country. And we all know how easy it is for politicians along with media-moguls to manipulate the common man's views. Believe it or not, there are going to be some changes in the American style of democracy ans administration within a few years.

Besides, the rule of majority troubles me to no ends. In stead of abiding by the will of the majority, shouldn't we stress on what's suitable for the whole population? Since the majority is illiterate, undereducated and unintellectual, what kind of a socio-political system can we expect from them?

I strongly believe that in stead of blindly endorsing an imported political system we should rely on something home-brewed and custom-tailored for our needs and nation.

 

[DanDroiD]

An outsiders perspective (me)

Living in a free, democratic society, has no bearing on politics or corruption, In the USA, look at the Enron case of a few years ago.

Poverty is related to industry and jobs, 60 years is hardly enough time to build an infrastructure of industry and economic stability. When a country is able to export enough goods, it helps build a sound economic environment. As a economy, India is still young, and it's rate of export is still growing, presently it is still reliant on larger amounts of imports than exports.

Living in a country like the USA does not exclude you from poverty, in some factors it is worse. Here is a country that spends billions on a war that nobody wanted, yet there are so many homeless and hungry people in parts of San Francisco, it's ridiculous. Education is paramount, and only the wealthy can afford a really good one. Yes, there are state funded schools here, but many who live in poverty never have the opportunity to take advantage of it. It is hard to get a college education at 17 when you are struggling to raise a family, and live in the middle of a gang war zone, or your parents are abusive alcoholics. A large majority of homeless people are alcoholics or drug addicts, and prostitution and crime in some of these area's is unprecedented. We have muggings, stabbings, shootings, gang fighting, crack being sold on the streets, homeless people begging for money and/or for food.

Now don't get me wrong, this isn't everywhere but a few pockets of the city, and those willing to work hard, can still make a good life for themselves. A large portion of the homeless are comprised of people that through upbring, or life's circumstances, have just given up. There are many people here that do not have any kind of Medical Insurance, and there are cases in the past where people have been turned away from Hospitals though lack of funds or Medical insurance (though I think that has legally been changed now)

A small one bedroom home in San Francisco Bay area starts at about $400K, so it seems that the rich are getting richer and the poor poorer, there is most definitely a class distinction developing in this country. The so called middle class is disappearing, and I personally do not see this ever changing unless we can change the political climate here.

So it seems to me that you guys have a lot to look forward to living in a country who's economic development has no where to go but up. Things may not be ideal, but as they say "The grass is always greener on the other side." It seems that many of you here at TE are well educated, or have the opportunity to be so, this is your advantage. India is a young healthy country, that has a great future.... Invest time energy and participation in your country and politics, and you will reap the rewards later and thereby provide a better future for your children, just like your own parents did.

 

[superczar]

I strongly believe that in stead of blindly endorsing an imported political system we should rely on something home-brewed and custom-tailored for our needs and nation.

Care to elaborate?

 

[blr_p]

So we have the current circus in our country.

The 2 party sytem in the US, with less taxes, works for the most part, is susceptible to bribery see oil, military, israel, RIAA lobbies etc.

The british one which we are closer related, twin party but with allowance for smaller ones cept they dont get upto much till they have the consituent numbers to back it up. Big ticket items like defence can certainly influence decisions.

The french system that's multi-party and has a never ending amount of coalitions, seems strangled for the most part and in some cases feels like deja-vu.

The more authoritarian system of China, where if you are not part of the majority, you are as good as dead.

So there are choices out there, what system would work for us then ?..none are immune to corruption, more transparency could help that.

Some say the current system in India is actually too good for us or the converse. Could that be because the ppl that made it were educated middle class ppl so maybe their view of the world at the time was preferred.

Does that mean it needs to be changed or that as time goes on, ppl will grow into it ?

At the moment we know how it is more or less, and so does business iow there is a certain degree of predictabilty, an important factor if we want to grow. The problem with changing the current system is the amount of unknowns it adds to the current climate.

How do you go about convincing anyone that proposed changes will/may be better ?

Kalam made some hints about this, is this the first time these ideas have been voiced ?..or that we look at China in envy and wonder what is wrong with us, maybe ignoring the stready progress that has been made since the last 15yrs, or even to a certain extent since independence. One columnist noted that life expectancy has doubled since then.

 

[Yamaraj]

Care to elaborate?

I thought I did already!