A new Center Right Think Tank – Parts 3 & 4

Continuing the debate on the proposal from Rajesh Jain and Amit Malviya of Friends of BJP for a new Center Right Think Tank called the new India Policy Foundation. (Parts 1 & 2).

The Objectives and Activities

The two main objectives of the Foundation are:

• Research and propose new policy alternatives to address pressing national issues.
• Disseminate the work of the Foundation widely, especially with a view to directly impacting the course and content of national policy.

The Foundation will take up a number of activities:

• Undertake research studies on existing policies of the government, both at the central and state level, with a view to examining the impact of such policies, and suggest alternative approaches where such policies are not delivering in the desired manner.
• Initiate studies to propose new policies over and above what governments might have so far considered. This is expected to address the problem of short term thinking that is often prevalent in governments, at the cost of long term strategic planning.
• Hold consultations, seminars, closed door sessions with policy makers, conferences on important national issues to stimulate debate and guide the policy process. Engage with formal (TV shows / appearances etc) and informal media for large scale dissemination and outreach.
• Engage with and convene meetings with key policy makers (MPs / MLAs & beauracracy) and opinion leaders to shape national policy.

The Foundation expects to demonstrate tangible results within the first few years of its operation. The Foundation will try and forge links with like-minded individuals and institutions globally.

The Differentiation

The Foundation will be different from existing think tanks in at least two different ways: (a) It will focus on developing policy ideas for practical real-life issues, rather than engage in mere theoretical pursuits, and (b) Engaging with policy makers and opinion leaders will be an integral part of its mandate, and it will be judged by the direct impact it will make in shaping the policy discourse in the country.

This Foundation will institutionalise the process of public policy research and intervention outside of the Government machinery. It will do so by employing and engaging the best minds under one umbrella, aggregating valuable information and ideas relevant for India, initiating debates in the intelligentsia and civil society and influencing the collective conscious of legislators and bureaucrats. It will be intellectually best in class and a constructive source of inputs on all important areas of legislation and policy making. It will aim to become the fountain head of all policy research and decision making in this country.

It will distinguish itself from other Think Tanks by its “result-oriented” (outcome focused) approach to policy intervention. The effectiveness of its output will be measured in a scientific manner and employee benefits will be linked to it. It will only have a guiding philosophy, and will have no pre-defined political affiliation. It will be accountable to its trustees and the country.

Filed under: Guest Posts, Offstumped Community, Offstumped Community Posts, Uncategorized

A new Center Right Think Tank – Parts 1 & 2

Reproducing a proposal for a Center Right think tank by Rajesh Jain and Amit Malviya from Friends of BJP on what they call the “new India Policy Foundation” – Parts 1 & 2.

Inviting the Offstumped Community to further the debate on this proposal here and on the Friends of BJP blog.

One of the ideas that a group of us have been thinking is the creation of a centre-right policy foundation / think thank. Amit Malviya and I, with help from a few others, have put a concept note on the idea. We would be keen to get your feedback on this.

The Problem

India since Independence has seen politics of convenience, one that is driven by individual preferences and often catering to compulsions of electoral politics. In the process, public policy-making and delivery are severely compromised. It is ironical that the Congress party has at its convenience oscillated from opposing Socialism to being a strong proponent of it and then embracing free markets when driven by compulsion. The Party has straddled these positions all in a matter of a few decades. Likewise, the BJP when in power, neither emerged as Right of Centre nor did it espouse the cause of Swadeshi. Popular perception is that the two major national parties have little to distinguish their economic policies and are often accused of being opportunistic and short sighted when it comes to policy related matters.

As a result, it is no secret that India as a nation has not realised its potential even after six decades of Independence. Our agriculture is in dismal state, internal security is compromised with alarming impunity, manufacturing sector is not robust enough to employ the vast semi skilled work force, education is highly regulated, health services are woefully insufficient and infrastructure is grossly inadequate. A nation of over a billion people is ruled by absolute adhocism. We are invariably held hostage to one of the pressure groups operating to services the narrow interest of its subjects.

In essence, India suffers from a lack of critical thinking on several key issues of national importance.  The thinking that goes on happens within the confines of government – the civil service and the cabinet.  There is almost a complete absence of groups outside the formal establishment who develop new policy ideas and actively engage with policy makers to see the ideas through.

It is this state of affairs that has prompted the idea of creating a Foundation which will work towards creating a better future for India.

The Solution

There is a cross section of society who believes that there is space for new thinking beyond being wedded to socialist ideals. The Group believes that there is scope for new ideas with a right-of-centre thrust, on a range of economic and social issues in the country. This group is coming together to create a new think tank – the New India Policy Foundation — that will provide cutting edge research on a range of economic and social issues.

The Foundation will propose, educate and engage with policy makers (elected representatives and members of bureaucracy) with the objective of guiding public policy, legislation and delivery, and influencing public opinion. Its support in matters of policy and governance will be driven by India’s long-term requirement and not short-term opportunism. The Foundation will be guided by the principles of liberal democracy, free enterprise (keeping in mind the interests of wider sections of society), social inclusion, robust defence policy and nationalism and will deliver India-oriented research.

The Foundation will analyse ongoing programmes and make suggestions for new policies that can be taken up by policy makers across party lines. Even as the Foundation expects that it is likely to have a right-of-centre thrust in its work, the Foundation will take a well researched and reasoned position on issues affecting India, rather than being driven purely by any economic or social ideology. The Foundation will be supported by a wide range of actors such as grant making foundations, the corporate sector, and individuals.

Similar parallels can be found with Heritage Foundation and Centre for American Progress, which support the Republican and Democratic Parties in the US, respectively.

Filed under: Offstumped Community, Offstumped Community Posts, Uncategorized

Arun Shourie on BJP – Final Part

Arun Shourie brings to closure his multi-part analysis of the rot within the BJP in an Op-ed series in the Indian Express (previous posts on Parts 1 , 2, 3)

The final part is titled “Ring out the Old, ring in the new“.

AMBITION TO GREED TO JEALOUSY TO UNSCRUPULOUSNESSAs the circle narrows, animosities within it become sharper. Rivalries become more intense: for now, all that each has to do is to do two or three in, and he has the top job. Lust is rationalised: “But you have to have fire in the belly. Otherwise you shouldn’t be in this game.”

Insatiable ambition triggers unquenchable greed.

That greed incites unremitting jealousy.

And that compels ruthless maneuvers.

As others play by the rules, the one who has shed all scruple triumphs. A vital resource turns out to be the rivals’ respective reach into cabals beyond the party. The one who can garner more money from prospectors; the ventriloquist who can malign through surrogates and thereby frighten others in the circle — as he has a mass-base among half a dozen journalists; this kind of reach proves decisive.

Two consequences follow. Cunning, jealousy, unscrupulousness at the top permeate to every pore of the organisation. The party becomes, to pluck Toynbee’s words, “a moral slum”. True, some young idealists still join it. But by the time they rise to any position of authority, their edges have been rounded off, they have been fully domesticated — look not just at our political parties, look at the civil services. And this is the character of the whole that the people see. The party is thus delegitimised.

The process is hastened if by chance the party is swept into office. For such a bunch cannot but be venal and corrupt in office. But there is a twofold difference. When some individual is picking pockets at a railway platform, little happens even if he is caught: he is an individual; the infamy is confined to him. But when, as member of a party and government, he is caught, the entire party and government are tarnished. Second, we are all judged by the ideals we proclaim. As this party and government have come out of a crusade, as they have come to office proclaiming that they will clean up the mess, the stain is that much deeper.

All this is brought to the attention of the leader. In fact, there is little need to bring it to his attention — the facts burst out day after day, even the cloistered leader cannot miss them. But as these concern his appointees, he is the indulgent father: “You may be right about him,” he says, “but many say that if one becomes a minister and does not do these things, then where was the point of becoming a minister?”

The example spreads. The exemplars become bold. The bold become brazen.

Seeing the party out of office — with its knifing and defaming of each other; seeing the party in office — venal and corrupt even if less than its rivals, the people conclude, “They are all the same. This party is no different.”

Its USP gone, the party continues to lose ground. The cries to stem the rot become shriller. They demand that responsibility be fixed. But the decision to fix responsibility is in the hands of the very ones who have brought the organisation to that pass.  

 

THE FOOLS, AND THE REAL FOOLS

The leader steps forth. Told by his henchmen that, once the process starts, the clamour will reach up to him, he insists that no individual is responsible, that the tradition of the party has always been “collective responsibility” — but was the “collective” at all involved in decisions? the laity demand. The leader raises the ante: if any one person is responsible, I alone am responsible. That silences calls for accountability — for who can say that, as, on his own telling, he is responsible, he make way for others?

He and his circle have little difficulty. Each post at every level in the party has been packed with weak men or henchmen. When the voices for change become shrill, all that the leader has to do is to signal the office holders to “give their views”. Who can say that their opinion is worth less than of the deviants? After all, they are the ones who are general secretaries and secretaries, presidents and vice presidents of state units.

Nor is that “strength” confined to the immediate present. The leader and his coterie control the loaves for tomorrow too: who will get tickets for elections in the future, who will get inducted into posts within the party— All these are the prerogative of the leader and his circle. They proffer these, and thus buy prospective silence.

That he is in total control of the organisation dooms the leader and the organisation with him all the more certainly: precisely because Rajiv Gandhi so completely controlled the situation within Parliament, he did not see that the situation outside had slipped completely out of his hands.

The lay-members run from one mansabdaar in the inner circle to another. The latter are bitter rivals of each other, no doubt — and it is in this that the lay members rest their hopes. But those in the inner circle are one against the outsiders. Moreover, there is a certain naivety in that running: the followers are appealing to these worthies in the name of values and ideals which those in the circle have long abandoned. They listen politely. They insinuate that the other member is responsible. As the followers leave, they exhale, “The fools….”

In turn, the followers — steeped by now in the same deviousness and hypocrisy — also learn to just listen politely. And go on doing exactly what they were doing. Solely to advance their personal fortunes.

The real fools — the ones who still adhere to the original ideals — try once more to salvage the party. To no more effect than they would were they “to try and dam a river with their bare hands.”

The hangers-on in the inner circle have no difficulty in undermining the counsel and warnings of these fools: they smear them with motives. The challenge that has been mounted is to the culture of intrigue, of personal aggrandisement, of contracts and nepotism, of cabalism. But the henchmen drown it in smears: “He is saying all this only because he is frustrated…. Only because he has not been given the post that he thought is his by right….” Actually, the hangers-on have even less than no difficulty for the leader is only too eager to believe that the warnings are impelled by base motive. 

 

MEN OF LITTLE FAITH

The defeats and setbacks about which these would-be reformers are wailing become tests of faith. Instead of instituting remedies, the leader proffers homilies: “Ups and downs are a part of life,” he intones. “We have gone down earlier also. But we have always risen again. Put what has happened behind you. Brace yourselves for the next battle.” That would be fine if, and only if, in the meanwhile the factors, the personnel and culture which had brought about the defeat have been changed. The fact, of course, is that these declamations are hurled at the members for the opposite purpose: to smother the demands for change, to kill every proposal for reform. For reform, the time is never right. When the party wins, there is obviously no need to change — after all, the leader, his team, the ideology have brought victory. When the party loses, casting blame is destructive, it is defeatist. One must unite, look ahead.

The declamations become sharper, they now aim not at the proposals but at the ones advancing the proposals. “We have seen days that were so much worse. But never did we lose heart. Never did we hear such voices of defeatism. Now we can see who has faith in the party and who does not.”

Nor is it just a question of faith in some abstraction, the so-called party. The point at issue is faith in the leader. This is tested not when the leader is triumphant and right — after all, everyone will hail the leader when he is triumphant and right. The real test is when the party has fallen into a ditch, when the leader has made a blunder. Only the one who stands by him at such times has faith in him!

That is the new thesis.

As a result, everyone who points to errors that need rectification has not just lost faith in the party, he is, by definition, personally disloyal to the leader. “What I have heard today, has pained me,” the leader tells the assembly — that is, the one who was making suggestions has inflicted pain on the exalted leader, the kul devta. 

 

TO BEGIN AGAIN

It is most certainly not the case that the organisation, in this case the political party must inevitably descend and disintegrate. Nor is it “fate”, or some external “law of nature” on account of which the political party goes down.  Of course, external factors may accelerate its decline: we noticed, for instance, that the decline is made more likely and is hastened when the political culture itself has become such that all other political parties are also proceeding along the same sequence. But such facilitation, so to say, by external factors apart, the reasons on account of which the political party declines are internal to it. In particular, they concern the deterioration of the political party as an organisation.

And the reason why it becomes almost impossible to stem the deterioration of the party is that its organisation is at all times in the hands of persons who would be most inconvenienced, who would almost certainly be dislocated were the changes which are necessary for its survival to actually come about. The key to turning it around, to arresting its descent, therefore, lies in the organisation somehow getting liberated from this handful.

This can happen, it can be brought about in several ways:

n For instance, a leader may acquire control of the organisation by accident, but, having acquired control, may feel himself to be so hemmed in by the continuance of persons who have dominated the organization till then, that he or she throws them out and reconstitutes the top leadership of the party. Recall, as an instance, the way Mrs. Indira Gandhi  threw out the “Syndicate” in 1969.

n It may happen by control falling into the hands of a new princeling who has yet not been domesticated by the organisation, who still retains some of the idealism of youth, some of the ideals and goals that originally inspired the party and the movement out of which the party was born:  recall, for instance, Rajiv Gandhi at the time that he gives his speech in Bombay against the sway that “power brokers” have acquired over the Congress. But in such an instance, as Rajiv Gandhi’s own example shows, the princeling must persevere. In Rajiv’s case, the establishment soon domesticated him and his initial impulses for reform were successfully neutralised.

n Or it may be that the world moves so swiftly and so completely away from the party and its ethos and it becomes so totally irrelevant that the irrelevance bursts even upon those who have been blinded by its hierarchies, its rituals, who have remained hitherto in the thrall of the leader and his henchmen. They rise, “We have nothing more to lose. Let us make one final effort.”

Only when the ordinary members or at least a significant minority among them are prepared to risk being cast in the wilderness once again — a risk that will become easier for them to grasp if some catastrophe befalls the organisation and it loses so completely that there is no option than to begin again — it is only in such an eventuality that reconstruction can begin. In such a circumstance, it is almost as if a new organisation is being started.

One way or another, the organisation has to be liberated from the vice of the leader and his henchmen, and the organisation has to be rebuilt anew. And for that to commence, the entire leadership at the top, as well as every nominee of it at every level has to be thrown out and a new lot put in place. That is the first step.

It is the necessary step, of course. But, as we have seen, it is not a sufficient step. The cycle can commence again, and very soon, unless some novel ways are instituted by which the leadership is perpetually renewed; unless those little circles that are certain to form are broken again and again; unless ways are instituted so that advancement comes to depend on work, on competence and integrity, on dedication to the original goals of the party than on the new virtues — intrigue, cunning, unscrupulousness.

Filed under: Guest Posts, Offstumped Community, Offstumped Community Posts, Uncategorized

Arun Shourie on withering BJP – Part 3

Arun Shourie continues with his multi-part analysis of the rot within the BJP in an Op-ed series in the Indian Express (previous posts on Parts 1 & 2).

The fundamental reasonThis is the crucial factor: the decision to reform or not has come to vest in the hands of the very persons who will be finished were the reform to take place — recall the two examples we encountered at the beginning: the civil service that stymies every commission’s recommendations, and the legislators who do not rectify the manifest lacuna in the law which allows those convicted of murder to continue as members. Hence the paradox: the stronger that the leader and his circle appear, the weaker the organisation.

Factions mushroom

As ‘power’ now flows solely from the Leader, factions sprout even within this circle — tiny though it is — around him. All the more so because the only glue now is lucre, pelf. The courtiers are now an ever-changing kaleidoscope of ‘tactical alliances’: three join, get the fourth; then two of the three join and get the first. To each, the nearest neighbour is the greatest enemy. At every turn, each of the sudden allies prides himself on being clever, he preens himself on being successful. In fact, even as they succeed against each other, they are undermining the esteem of the people and the workers of the party itself for the circle as well as the leader who presides over it.

The leader frowns, but inwardly foments the factions; at the least, he does not scotch them. As each subaltern jostles to be closer to him, he feels important, indeed he feels indispensable — “They are not yet mature enough to manage on their own.” He preens himself as arbiter, as the dispenser of favour and frown.

But the jostling, the ever-shifting alliances and ruptures among the courtiers break through the curtains of the court. Three consequences follow. The character of the leader is soon evident to all: that he is the one who is fomenting factions, that he is the one who is playing favourites. Second, the courtiers defame each other successively: soon enough, people know enough about each of them to believe the worst of all of them. Third, both because the leader has been seen for what he is and because each of the subalterns has shown himself to be but a schemer and plotter, the whole — the so-called party — loses the esteem of the people.

As factions fight, as subalterns spread stories about each other, the leader moans, “The party was never like this… When we began, we toiled without any expectation at all that we would ever be in power. We just toiled. Today, everyone expects rewards, office, perks. The simplicity of our leader of the time, his utter selflessness, his humility…And this business of factions, and backbiting — it was unheard of.”

Each time he invokes that distant leader, he reminds the listeners how far he has himself come from that sainted person. He reminds listeners how, under his direct stewardship, the party has been converted from being a crusade to becoming an instrument for his aggrandisement and that of his chosen handful.

The slide accelerates

Cleverness in the leader produces cunning and deviousness among his henchmen. Cleverness, cunning, deviousness at the top produce feigned loyalty among followers. The followers stick to the party only in the expectation that their chance to grab the goodies will also come one day. But as the party suffers successive defeats, that prospect recedes. Seeing that this is not the vehicle to lucre that they had imagined, the followers lose enthusiasm. Chunks break away. To other parties — where, of course, the same sequence is in progress.

That the same sequence is being enacted in other parties makes it that much more difficult to arrest it in this party. The rival party is fielding a criminal. Only a more audacious, a more resourceful criminal can defeat him. As winning the requisite numbers is all, those who urge that tickets be given only to persons of integrity and competence are easily shoved aside as unpractical ‘idealists’ — in the very party that had been founded and nurtured by idealists, the word becomes a pejorative.

Such adoption of what is common to others is triply harmful to a party that grew out of a movement, that has sworn fidelity to ideals. To start with, it loses its claim to being different from the others. Next, its culture, its very character changes. And third, if by chance and for reasons that have little to do with its new character, it wins, its members are not able to handle the complex tasks of governance — any more than those ‘boors in office’ were able to manage the states they founded after destroying Rome.

These accidental victories, however, have consequences for the party itself also. The victories come about from time to time, for reasons that are independent of the drift in the party — the strength in an area of the candidates as individuals, the particularly perfidious conduct of opponents. But the consequence is that the leader and his coterie feel vindicated in their ways. Those who had been warning of what will befall the party should it continue in the direction it has been proceeding are now even more easily put down as the perpetual whiners, the disgruntled, frustrated alarmists, the congenital pessimists.

Even as the party wins the odd contest, it continues to lose that vital intangible — esteem among the people. It is seen as being more and more like any other conglomeration. Every memory of the movement from which it had originated, every memory of its original leaders only reinforces this inference. The party no longer claims that it is different from the others. On the contrary, the other parties hurl that erstwhile claim at it — as a taunt.

The party which was a movement has become routine. Routinisation robs every abhiyaan it launches of meaning. It dwarfs everyone. How true the lesson that historians hold out:

“Early Roman history has been described as the history of ordinary people doing extraordinary things. In the later Empire it took an extraordinary man to do anything at all except carry on a routine; and, as the Empire had devoted itself for centuries to the breeding and training of ordinary men, the extraordinary men of its last ages — Stilicho, Aetius, and their like — were increasingly drawn from the Barbarian world.”*

But the other parties are enacting the same sequence. They don’t have any extraordinary men either that this party may swear in. Yet something has to be done to shore up its fortunes. The party knows its own too well. They have been around, and have not brought victory. Those in rival parties may not be extraordinary, but they have the attraction of being in other parties. The party, therefore, inducts persons who are like members and leaders of the parties it has hitherto denounced. Better still, it inducts persons who are still members and leaders of those parties. To little avail. The entrants are seen as turncoats. That the party’s claim to being different is fake is reinforced. Those who have served it loyally for decades are incensed.

The clever spinners

The leader, cocooned, does not notice the ground slipping away, in part because he is by now surrounded by clever courtiers. The moment a victory turns up, they are able to produce a dozen reasons to show that it is due to the leader, and, incidentally, themselves. The moment a defeat occurs, they are able to produce two dozen reasons to prove that it is due to others. And another score why the defeat is due to special, transient, exceptional, local circumstances, and, therefore, is no cause for worry.

The party’s electoral losses resume. They accelerate. Fewer and fewer new recruits join the organisation. Those who join, join for reasons other than the ideas and ideals for which that party or organisation once stood — they do so, for instance, in the belief that doing so will get them jobs, posts, contracts.

The leader and his circle could easily see the portent, if only they would. Are only the already-converted coming to our meetings? Are they coming spontaneously, or do wehave to bus them? How many uncommitted, new listeners are coming to our meetings? Indeed, the leader and his circle do not have to go even that far. They just have to look only at their own diaries: how many persons outside our circle have we met in the last week? But they don’t see. The organisation is busy talking to itself. Those within the circle are busy knifing each other. And the leader? He is enveloped in an impenetrable fog of self-satisfaction: the day’s photo-opportunity, the day’s conclave, the day’s meeting of the ‘core group’, the day’s meeting of ‘office-bearers’, the day’s meeting of ‘allies’ — what a fulfilling day…

The party stops hearing those outside the party. The leader stops hearing those outside his circle — of weak men and henchmen.

Many factors continue to obscure the fact that the ground is shifting from underneath the party. For a while, to cite one factor, the ‘core constituency’ continues to support it: out of habit; out of loyalty to the old ideals; out of an obstinate consistency. But the leader and his circle reassure themselves, “Our core constituency is intact.”

They draw an operational inference: in the belief that doing so will solidify the support of this core constituency, they reinforce earlier slogans so as to demonstrate that they remain committed to their original ideology. But each time they proclaim the slogans, they remind listeners — all the more so, this core constituency as it remains truly committed to what those slogans had promised — that, when they had the opportunity, they did nothing for those promises to materialise. Regurgitating the slogans thus does little to mobilise the core constituency. On the other hand, it consolidates the opponents. And another thing has happened in the meantime: a host of new elements have entered the arena — for instance, the young. Each time the leader and his coterie proclaim those old slogans — ‘socialism’ of the Congress; ‘Hindutva’ of the BJP; ‘Marxism-Leninism’ of the assorted Communists — they remind these new entrants that they and their party are an obsolete bunch. And then, suddenly, one day, a day like any other, that ‘core constituency’ also walks away.

Kafirs and apostates

At each turn, well-wishers counsel reform, they counsel that the party change course. But by now the leader is the party, most certainly in his eyes. Therefore, he takes every suggestion to be a rebuke, an assault on him personally for conducting the affairs of the party as he has been conducting them. When the suggestion-which-is-censure comes from an outsider, the leader rejects it as the ranting of a kafir, of one who has never believed, who has never committed himself to the cause. When it comes from one who undeniably has been part of the crusade, the leader dismisses it as being the rant of a murtad, an apostate — as the rant of one ‘who has crossed the barricade’. His reflex is to insulate himself even more into an even tighter circle.

The leader whose example used to be the goad; whose mere presence induced attention; whose glance, whose whispered suggestion used to ensure compliance, he now stands on office, on rank, on the years he has spent ‘in the service of the party’. He demands respect — a sure sign that he no longer commands it. Another sign, a sure one that what, in the infinitely vaster context of civilisations, Arnold Toynbee had called ‘the creative minority’ — the small group that brought the civilisation into being, and presided over its flourishing — has become ‘the dominant minority’ — the small group that chokes, and presides over the ultimate disintegration of the civilisation.

The circle becomes tighter and more and more homogenous, more and more subservient and sycophantic.

As the leader and his cohorts move within this ever-narrower circle, they see less and less of what is going on without the circle, they hear less and less. This blindness and loss of hearing are brought about all the more swiftly the more hierarchical is the organisation — for the greater the respect for hierarchy, the more the leader and his circle are not just looked up to, they are venerated, they are treated as oracles, as paragons of virtue and dedication; and the more disciplined the organisation is — for the more disciplined it is, the less do subordinates speak the whole truth to their seniors, the less they think for themselves: “Sir, hamare yahaan to soochnaa aayi, sochnaa band,” a stalwart once explained to me.

Filed under: Guest Posts, Offstumped Community, Offstumped Community Posts, Uncategorized

Arun Shourie on rot within BJP – Part 2

For the first part of this series by Arun Shourie on the BJP click here.

Reproducing the rest from the Indian Express today titled “The end of Ideology“.

After the others on whom blame may be pinned are exhausted, the leader and his circle turn on the ideals on which, on the ‘ideology’ for the realisation of which the movement had commenced and the party had been founded. So, one day they lunge for a ‘hard’ formulation — to win back the ‘core constituency’, they reason. The next, they lunge for a ‘soft’ formulation; one day they are stressing ‘our religion’, the next ‘our culture’; one day it is ‘return to basics’, the next ‘changing with the times’; one day they are declaring their faith in our history castigating persecutors of the past and their current heirs and apparitions, the next they are swearing by inclusiveness and geography¿ One day it is ‘reforms’, the next ‘Reforms with a human face’… One day it is ‘peasants’, the next ‘workers’, the third the inclusive ‘toiling masses’. And they are never short of quotations from the original leaders to justify each twist.

What the leader and his speechwriters convince themselves are sparkling new formulations, are, in fact, just clichés. “The party stands for a strong and prosperous India” — but which party doesn’t? “The party will make the 21st century, India’s century” — but which party says it won’t? Can one not go on adding to that declaration, and it would be just as acceptable? “The party stands for a strong and prosperous India, an India at peace with itself and the world”? “The party stands for a strong and prosperous India, an India at peace with itself and the world, an India in which no one goes to bed hungry”? “The party stands for a strong and prosperous India, an India at peace with itself and the world, an India in which no one goes to bed hungry, one in which the benefits of growth are shared by all”?

The leader and his circle convince themselves that they are making their party current, that, by the new formulation, they are going to attract new chunks. In fact, they convince the people at large that they believe in nothing; that their proclamations have all along been just opportunism dressed up; that they have no core — there is nothing that they will desist from doing if they see some advantage to themselves in doing it, that there are several things that just must be done but which they will not do lest some slight, momentary disadvantage befall them.

The people put no store by the words of these persons. They want to know, “Can this lot bring these goals to fruition any better than the other lot? Is the leader, are members of his circle living these ideals?” The ideas and ideology of this lot, rather the ideas on which, the ideals for the attainment of which this lot was founded no longer permeate or radiate into those who are outside the party or organisation. Even when they accept those ideas and ideals, those outside strain to hide their original source. Recall the net effect of the innumerable gurus and organisations that have been speaking for Hinduism in the last fifty years, or Marxism-Leninism and social justice for that matter: how well the words of Toynbee fit those who, almost furtively, live Hinduism today or do their bit for a more just society — “Under these sinister auspices, such selective mimesis [imitation, adoption] as occurs takes place on the barbarians’ own initiative [in our context, on that of those outside the party or organisation]. They show their initiative in imitating those elements which they accept in a manner which will disguise the disgraceful source of what has been imitated.”*

Character changes, relations are transformed

By such twists and turns, the leader and his circle, far from inducting new adherents, discredit ideology itself; they turn people off even the talk of ideals. Another factor smothers ideals and ideology. The movement became a party. That party has since become a mere electoral machine. But as general standards deteriorate, the party has to ‘adjust’; it has to effect ‘compromises’. The sole object is to attain office. And the sole criterion for that is numbers. Hence, winnability is all. Whoever can win a seat, be he a criminal or blackguard who has just deserted from the rival camp, is the one whom the party fields. Three consequences follow at once and inevitably. First, the proclamations of the party — ideals, ideology — reek more and more of hypocrisy. Second, the people at large see that this party is no different from any other. Third, and this is what has the deepest consequences for the future, the character of the party changes forever. Everyone above and below comes to rely on the clever strategist, on the deceitful, for he leads them to victories. Either that clever person or someone even more deceitful rises to the top. Gandhiji’s warning comes true — “An organisation that relies on rogues to do its work shall soon have rogues at its helm.”

But the transformation doesn’t stop there. Indeed, it has just begun. For the character of the one who has wrested the top stamps itself on the entire organisation, on every level of the entire organisation. His very ‘success’ legitimises ambition, greed, intrigue, double-dealing. “If he doesn’t have what it takes to capture even a party,” the thesis runs, “if he doesn’t have enough fire in his belly to capture even a party, how in hell is he going to lead the party to capture the country?” Ambition, greed, intrigue legitimised, every one becomes every one’s rival. Every one comes to suspect every one. That irreplaceable adhesive — Ibn Khaldun’s ‘group spirit’ — is rent asunder.

Both relationships — the one of the leader with his circle, as well as that of members of the circle with each other — are transformed. Every relationship is now pure and simple barter. The leader seeks out not colleagues but clients, not partners but dependents, not associates but instruments. He uses the henchmen, of course. But they also use him. They are nobodies without him. But with him, even with the rumour that they are close to him, they can strut around, and rake in the perks. They strain to be useful to the leader: helping one relative of his out of a difficulty, helping another relative set up a business… The leader demurs, “Is this really right?” They say what he wants to hear: “But why should he suffer just because he is your son?” The leader allows himself to be persuaded, after making sure that everyone has seen him hesitate. They now have him entangled into those “interlocking webs of mutual complicity.” He is as dependent on them, as they on him. Recall the cow-and-calf symbol of the Congress[I], and what the then chief minister of Haryana, Bansi Lal said during the Emergency, after he had helped ram through Sanjay’s Maruti plant, “Jab bachchda mere haath mein hai, gayiyaa kahaan jaayegi?”

But, of course, henchmen don’t just work to ingratiate themselves with the leader. They use their proximity to him to seize spoils for themselves. Indeed, in the organisation — and the more ‘disciplined’ and hierarchical the organisation, the more certain this is — they are the ones who are liable to make a grab for the riches because, even if evidence were to erupt in the public domain, the leader is least likely to act against them. They are the ones he is certain to shield.

What had begun as a relationship of devotees who had gravitated to an idol, of persons who had gravitated to the leader because he was devoted to a mission, because he personified ideals, becomes a purely transactional relationship. The first to erode is reverence for the leader. Next, the fear of him. That has but to happen and anarchy breaks out in the organisation, a free-for-all. The leader lectures, he admonishes, he threatens ‘disciplinary action’. Members listen. They even make a show of cowering. And resume their skirmishes. The leader wrings his hands, “The party was never like this…Nobody listens… Indiscipline…” Even as he does so, he is externalising the state of affairs — as if he himself has nothing to do with what has come about.

The Zulu proverb

As relatives and henchmen acquire properties on the sly, as they run businesses benami, the party loses its ability to fight the rulers. The leader knows, the henchmen know that the rulers know. So, they take up ‘issues’, but never push them to the point where the rulers will be really inconvenienced. As the Zulu proverb has it, “A dog with a bone in its mouth, can’t bark”.

Indeed, they go farther. They cultivate links sub rosa with opponents, in particular with rulers. They say this is so as to give the country ‘a constructive alternative’. In fact, it is for getting a few crumbs from the rulers’ table, at the least to keep out of trouble. Rulers readily flatter them by making a show of paying attention, they readily steer a few contracts their way — and thereby gain control over the very party that was to watch over them. The sequence weakens the leader vis a vis the rulers. It weakens him as much within the party: no leader who is crooked can straighten others.

The henchmen

These henchmen become the leader’s eyes and ears. Indeed, his ‘reference group’, they function as the pliable conscience he now wants. They feast off him when he is in office. They dissuade him from quitting when he clearly should. Truth be told, that takes less doing than one might imagine: at such turns, the leader is only waiting to be ‘persuaded’. They pander to his vanity exactly as Ibn Khaldun describes: by heightening the pretences of authority around him, even as they rake up the fruits for themselves.

But the henchmen don’t try just to be useful to the leader. Their power, their indispensability depends on making the leader feel insecure. So, they are always conjuring up news of conspiracies. They are forever isolating the leader — sowing doubts in the leader’s mind about one and all, in particular about his former comrades.

It is not that the leader never sees the cost these henchmen are bringing upon him. From time to time, evidence bursts forth that makes the continuance of some one of the henchmen completely untenable. The clamour against him becomes so insistent that the leader is brought to the brink of sending him away. Quite apart from the danger that exiling one who knows so much may entail, the leader is easily persuaded to hold his hand: “But they are not after me. Their real target is you. The moment you show that you can be pressurised, they will come after you” — recall the time it took for Indira Gandhi to act against Antulay; recall how Rajiv hung on to Ottavio Quattrochi.

The ordinary members watch with dismay as the sway of these henchmen envelops the leader, and, just as much, as their pillage begins to discredit the party. But at this stage they shiver at doing anything: they do not speak out; they do not collect evidence. They wait for something to turn up. They wait for someone else to expose and nail the henchmen: Ibn Insha was right, Haq achcha, iske liye Koi aur mare, to aur achcha

They wait for the leader to do something — “At least in his own interest.” Of course, the leader does nothing. He is immersed in his interests of the moment, and, the henchmen are useful agents.

Precisely because his failure to act against the henchman who is causing him so much avoidable trouble makes him seem weak, the leader just has to act against others: to show that he is strong, that he will not tolerate “indiscipline”, that he can and will quell “insubordination”. He lashes out — naturally at persons outside his circle. What were mere suggestions from them are projected as criticism; what was criticism merely to arrest the decline is projected as disloyalty. Everyone sees through the vehemence: everyone sees that the leader has an elastic ruler — a long one for his cabal, his instruments, a much shorter one for others.

The transformation cannot be hidden from the people any more than a grating cough. The group begins to lose legitimacy. Constitution? What Constitution? One norm after another, one rule after another is set aside. The so-called constitution of the party provides that posts — every post at every level — be filled by elections. In fact, at each level, each gathering hails the leader, and ‘unanimously resolves’ to leave the choice of office-bearers to him.

The party hierarchy comes to consist entirely of nominees — of the leader, and of those who, for the moment, have managed to insinuate themselves into the good books of the leader. Tickets have to be distributed for the forthcoming elections? The ‘state leaders’ — nominees all — ‘recommend’ some names. Neither the leader nor his nominees in the central organs have any system of independent verification. Lobbying, insinuation, come to count more than analysis; collateral ‘persuasion’ more than evidence; bargaining more than deliberation. The nominees don’t do well? There was dhaandali in the selection of candidates, someone shouts. He is smeared with motives, drowned with innuendo.

Meetings follow meetings. In each, ritual replaces substance. But the rituals, the routine are not for nothing. The ritual — the same “state-wise” reporting — is a device: a device to dodge the issues that are on everyone’s mind. Abhiyaans follow abhiyaans. They too become just routine.

The losses mount. Calls for honest examination. For accountability. The leader and his circle swing into action. They galvanise their nominees in the states. “No, no. We can’t afford any witch-hunts,” these nominees of nominees declaim. “Elections are coming up in our state. Inquiry-shinquiry will cause all sorts of mud to be hurled. The media will be full of it. Our chances will be destroyed.”

As further losses occur, an inquiry to fix responsibility is at last instituted. But who is to inquire? The leader and his circle — who, after all, are responsible for all the decisions that have led the organisation to this pass — are the ones who alone can decide. They pick from among themselves, or, if the façade of ‘independence’, of ‘objectivity’ has to be maintained, their weak men and henchmen.

The inquiry never sees the light of day. In any case, no reform that may have resulted from the inquiry is ever visible. Perhaps for good reason: in all probability, each inquiry has concluded that no individual was responsible. The shortcomings were ‘systemic’!

Filed under: Guest Posts, Offstumped Community, Offstumped Community Posts, Uncategorized

Arun Shourie’s damning analysis of BJP – Part 1

Reproducing from the Indian Express what is the most profound and candid analysis of what ails the BJP from a long time insider, the Party’s only Center Right public intellectual and middle class role model – Arun Shourie.

Inviting the Offstumped Community to discuss and debate Mr. Shourie’s analysis.

Four instances, two questions.•Indira Gandhi is able to block the implementation of the Allahabad High Court judgement by changing — with retrospective effect no less — the law under which it held her guilty of corrupt electoral practices;

•Rajiv Gandhi is able to use his control over three-quarters of the House to block all inquiry into Bofors.

Do these instances testify to the strength of Mrs. Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi? Or to the weakness of the political system?

•Scores and scores of committees and commissions have been set up to reform the civil services; the services have continued exactly as they have been.

•Subsection 3 of Section 8 of the Representation of the People Act lists a number of grave crimes, and provides that if a person is convicted for any of them, he shall be disqualified for six years, and, if he is imprisoned, for a further six years after his release. The next subsection reduces this provision to a nullity. It provides, “Notwithstanding anything [in the earlier subsections] a disqualification shall not, in the case of a person who on the date of conviction is a member of Parliament or the legislature of a state, take effect until three months have elapsed from that date or, if within that period an appeal or application for revision is brought in respect of the conviction or sentence, until that appeal or application is disposed by the court.” The result? In August 2008, four persons come straight from Tihar jail to participate in the confidence vote in the Lok Sabha —persons who are serving life sentences, as they have been held guilty of murder!

How does a gaping crater of this magnitude in the law continue? How are civil services and legislators able to ward off reform so successfully?

Birth to senility

A movement, an organisation is originally inspired by an ideal: to undo what is wrong, to establish what is right.

Whether it triumphs or fails in its initial objective, over the years it becomes a political party.

At its inception, the party too is impelled by ideals. The crusade from which it has taken birth is still vivid, the idealists who led the movement, who then founded it and toiled to raise it are a living presence. Propelled by these memories, the party seeks to change the order, it wants to recast the polity of course, but more: it wants to recast society into the ideals to attain which it has been formed.

Over time, it forsakes this idealism, and becomes a mere electoral machine.

Soon, it putrefies into a machine that fails to win even elections.

Members become increasingly anxious: after all, if the party continues its decline, they tell each other, it isn’t just that the ideals which are its very reason for existence will not be attained, that the transformation for which they have been striving will not come about; but also, their personal fortunes will evaporate. They run from leader to leader, urging reform, a return to ideals. Their efforts go nowhere. The party does not reform. It does not die. It just goes on falling to pieces.

Why does this degeneration take place? Why do efforts to arrest its decline come to naught? By what symptoms may we know that a particular organisation is on its way down?

In one of the greatest works of history, Ibn Khaldun chronicled the founding, rise, decline and eventual disintegration of dynasties. In the introduction to that work, The Muqaddimah, he set out the patterns he had deduced: the abandonment of the austerities of the desert for the luxury and ease of settled courts; the waning of the “group spirit”; the culture of cunning and intrigue within palaces that replaces the valour of open battle… We have but to tweak the conclusions a little and we have the reasons on account of which our political parties moulder and waste away. And that should not surprise us. After all, so many of them are collections around dynasties; so many of them are gangs around individuals; so many of them are — at all levels, from their central offices to their local branches —parties of four/five persons for the projection of four/five persons. Not just the conclusions of Ibn Khaldun, the very words ring true as we see the parties deteriorate and eventually crumble.*

Two suggestions about reading this updated version. Do not rush through it. I have kept examples to a minimum: after a paragraph, recall the examples you know from your own personal experience that fit the words. Second, you will miss the point entirely if you think, “Oh, this is about the BJP… Oh, this is about the Congress…” Instead of concluding that I am out to convey some “hidden meanings” and trying to figure these out, think of your own party or organisation, the party or organisation that you know best, from the inside — the Congress, the BJP, the Communist parties, the regional parties: Telugu Desam, the DMK, the BSP, the AGP. It is then that you will get the point of the updating, namely that the symptoms are true of all our political parties today.

Hence, our real problem: there is nowhere to turn for an alternative.

The orientation, and its consequences

Our system, indeed our society is heavily oriented towards the state. He who occupies offices of state at the moment, receives deference, he is surrounded by hangers-on, by pelf; he gets the opportunity, if he is so inclined, to rake in money: in a word, as they say in Punjab, “the usual pump and show.”

Hence, when the party acquires office, its leading figures acquire all this: deference, pelf, the opportunity to rake in money. As they commence to use these, five things happen:

•Even if they are personally honest, the principals in the government are implicated by association: they have the clear duty as well as the clear opportunity to put an end to the doings of their juniors; they do not do so — this is enough to put them in the position in which, when the evidence of wrong-doing erupts, they have only one option: to defend their colleague. And there is a ready rationalisation for doing so: “How can we desert our colleague when he is trouble?” Suddenly “loyalty” acquires a new meaning: it does not mean loyalty to those pristine ideals; it comes to mean sticking by the colleague — the very one who has departed from those ideals.

•That robs, first, the leaders; then the government; and therefore, the party of its claim that it is different, that is inspired by ideals, that it is in politics not for power and pelf but to recast governance and society in those ideals.

•Being in government is far more exciting than staying back in the organisation: for those still committed to the ideals that had originally enthused the movement and organisation, being in government affords an incomparable opportunity to translate those ideals into practice; for those who are impelled now by other goals — money, “power”, pelf — remaining in the backwaters of the organisation is anathema. Hence the “best and brightest” rush into government. Whether the government as a whole does well because of the few who are still dedicated to ideals or not, the party certainly languishes.

•A distance develops — first between adherents who are still inspired by those ideals and those who have forsaken the ideals; then between the leaders — who are in office and are visibly enjoying the perquisites of office — and the followers; the latter now ask, “These fellows came to office because of us; they have their bungalows, they have their cars with laal batties; what have we got?”

•And distance develops even sooner between the principal leaders themselves: portfolios, size of offices, the ear of the ultimate boss, money — everything becomes a trigger. Comrades become colleagues; colleagues become competitors, rivals. But, in a sense, these spoils can all be managed. That one principal gets more of one thing can be made up by the other being enabled to get more of another. But there is one thing which really is a zero-sum magnitude: prominence. As there is only one front page, if one of the principals is splashed across it, by definition the others are excluded. Distance becomes envy; envy becomes jealousy; jealousy becomes venom. You can see the transformation in the very faces of the principals.

Even by themselves, just these features are enough to cause the party to begin losing its vitality as even an electoral machine.

The leader and his circle

But the leader has done more to weaken the machine. The more power is vested in him, the less secure he feels. Hence, exactly as Ibn Khaldun wrote about the choice of wazirs and successors, in choosing his circle, the leader’s concern is to choose the ones who will least threaten him, who will best advance his dynasty, who will best secure and perpetuate his position — that is, he chooses weak men and henchmen, not ones who will best advance the ideals for which the organisation had been founded. The weaker the man, the more compromised he is, the more dependent he is on the leader. The more unscrupulous the henchman, the more ruthless he will be on the leader’s behalf. Weakness, vulnerability, unscrupulousness become qualifications.

The arrangement works when the going is good. No one now is strong enough to harm the leader. But no one is strong enough — in the sense vital in a democracy, that is of having legitimacy, of commanding esteem — to help him when a crisis erupts.

But there is an even more consequential change: ideals, the commitment to higher objectives, for the interests of the group as a whole, these are restraints, they are the banks that enable a river to flow. When these are replaced by the interests of an individual and his little circle, the only glue that binds – followers to the organisation as much as members of this circle to the leader — is the prospect of spoils. Pillage commences. Legitimacy begins to dwindle.

The leader and his henchmen are unable to stem the decline. Enervated by luxury, by pelf, capable now only of giving directions to others, they are no longer able to toil in the field. They give out calls: “All workers shall hold dharnas at district headquarters against price rise…” “The abhiyaan against the corruption of this government shall be taken to every village, to every hamlet¿” A few desultory meetings are organised. People are bussed in. The abhiyaan disappears as a rivulet in the desert. No one even notices that it has been abandoned. At best, the leader sets out to repeat the performance that had once secured attention — the “struggle”, the fast-unto-death-between-meals, the yatra. But you can’t make the soufflé rise twice: the very fact that nothing was done after the first performance, robs the repeat of all credibility. Some ‘emergency’ is invoked to give up the performance midway.

The leader convenes meetings of his ‘core group’, the ‘working committee’, the politburo. Members of these private coteries hold further meetings with their own private core groups.

Everyone but the ‘core group’

The factor most responsible for the rout has been the state to which the leader and his circle have reduced the party as an organisation, but that is the one factor which the leader and his cohorts will not admit into the discourse. Is the party seen as, is it in fact different from the others? Are its candidates any different? Is every unit of the party not riddled with factionalism? That these are the reasons for the setback is manifest to all. But the leader and his circle would have none of them — for that would immediately raise further questions. The party is no longer different from others? Who has allowed the party to sink to this level where it cannot be distinguished from the very parties it has been denouncing? The candidates are no better than those of the rivals? Who has selected the candidates? Factionalism has been allowed to continue? Each state faction has a line to some ringleader in the central cabal? Who has allowed the factionalism to fester and swell?

They blame others — the rival party; the third party that has stolen their vote; the accidental reason on account of which a section whose vote was to have split got consolidated; the youth; the middle class; the poor who voted on money, the rich who did not vote; the holidays on account of which so many went out of town; the disenchantment with the party’s ally in one state, the absence of an ally in the other; the anti-incumbency factor against us in this state, the advantage that the rival party had in the adjacent state of being in office and thereby being able to use the state machinery; the ‘shameless’ use of money and muscle by the rival… In a word, everyone and everything other than themselves.

Filed under: Offstumped Community, Offstumped Community Posts, Uncategorized

ABIDe Bengaluru – Reforming Local Governance

OFFSTUMPED is taking a break from its self imposed hiatus from the blogosphere to highlight a significant initiative for the Center Right movement to differentiate itself from the psuedo-progressive Left of Center agenda of the Congress.

The ABIDe initiative in Bangalore under the leadership of long time South Bangalore MP and former Minister Anantha Kumar and entrepreneur and fellow twitterer Rajeev Chandrashekhar must be supported, highlighted and enhanced by all those sympathetic to the Center Right cause.

The psuedo-progressive approach of the Congress Party to force down from Delhi one-size-fit all solutions from education to development offers the BJP its best opportunity to differentiate itself as a Center Right party.

The joint initiative by Anantha Kumar and Rajeev Chandrashekhar is daunting as this report from the first public consultation reveals, but it cannot be allowed to fail.

It is surprising that for a City that is home to perhaps the highest concentration of Technology savy residents, there has been barely any discussion on ABIDe’s agenda on its website.

Offstumped urges its readers, community members and twitter followers many of who are from Bangalore ,  to take this debate further on with greater engagement.

• ABIDE Task Force Agenda
• Plan Bengaluru 2020
• Secure Bengalauru
• Govern Bengaluru
• Urban Poor
• Roads, Traffic Management, Transportation
• Namma Bengaluru Action Plan
• ABIDE Heritage Plan

The new Big Tent will not be a reality till the vision of Shveta Chhatra in heralding Freedom to Local Communities in governance is pursued with a missionary zeal.

By differentiating itself on Urban Local Governance the BJP could script its come back with the cosmopolitan Urban  voter who has been disenchanted with it over the last two elections.  Bangalore rightly reposed its faith in the BJP  and the BJP would do well to follow through with this initiative till it transforms everyday urban life in Bangalore to become a showcase for Delhi, Mumbai and other major cities, towns.

Offstumped wishes Mr. Anantha Kumar and Mr. Rajeev Chandrashekhar all the very best on what will likely be a herculean task.

NOTE: Twitter compilations and guest posts from Offstumped Community will continue to appear as Offstumped continues with its break from active blogging.

More from Offstumped archives on Local Governance.

Nithari

Burra Bazaar

The Bangalore Mysore Infrastructure Corridor Project

Delhi BRT mess

Vadodara CDP

Mumbai BMC

Filed under: ABIDE Bangalore, DesiPundit, Local Governance, Offstumped, Shveta Chhatra, Uncategorized

Shveta Chhatra Debate – June 21st to July 4th

Compilation of 344 short comments via twitter on Indian Politics, Shveta Chhatra, BJP’s travails, IPC 377 and much more…

1.  
   1. Why pray is it responsibility of the State to provide land for burial, land which comes at a premium, is it too much to ask people to pay ?
   2. As innocuous as this sounds http://is.gd/1nfeg hard to miss the communal emphasis, state would be better off devolving this to local govt
   3. Story in Rediff on EVMs is good reason why we need audit trails & random audits but to allege a Conspiracy in elections is a stretch
   4. Indian Express thinks BJP will make a strong case for Privatisation in the Indian Railways http://is.gd/1mKcC MGMG is having an impact ?
   5. To a point it appeared Aditya Sinha was on to something significant on BJP http://is.gd/1mK8C but he comes up with the worst prescription
   6. @JaideepSK Absolutely agree with you, the media is going overboard on this as usual little realizing where mainstream India is on this issue
   7. Bottomline PBM’s piece & Pioneer’s lead ed the frame issue the way it ought to be “getting State out of private consensual adult relations”
   8. Far too often we get carried away by Courts doing Executive/Legislature’s job that we fail to ask should Courts have the luxury of a vision?
   9. Phrase in PBM’s piece that needs to be paid attention to wrt Court’s progressive agenda “the Court has a vision of equal inclusive society”
   10. PBM makes useful points on Sec 377 verdict http://is.gd/1mJsE something the media must pay attention to with the kind of stories running
   11. Yet another version of whodunit on 7/11 http://is.gd/1mHRo UPA guilty of not taking 7/11 investigations beyond India, shame on you Manmohan
   12. @Acorn @Pragmatic_d Wages of coercive diplomacy, let us celebate with a nostalgic Hallmark Card with best wishes from @ShashiTharoor
   13. @JaideepSK It needs to be created, it takes leadership, vision and mission, populism is a hallmark of lazy politics looking for shortcuts
   14. Is Narendra Modi the last man standing between a Progressive monopoly and a common sense approach to governance ?
   15. When Sushma Swaraj praises Mamata on special trains and subsidies and Arun Jaitley is vague in his response, it is troubling
   16. BJP needs to come up with response rooted in “Min Govt Max Governance” for it to be seen as a viable alternative to Congress’ progressivism
   17. What next, PIL in Delhi HC to declare “Social Commitment not Economic Viability” is Constitutional tenet guiding Public Sector Enterprises
   18. So now the Indian Railways shall subsidize Islamist Education as well, the commitment to “inclusiveness” is total and complete
   19. Progressive-Media nexus exposed, Mamata’s promise of subsidized Rail tickets for the media, any surprise why 90% of media sucks up to them
   20. With a Rail promised for every social group, a matter of time before the Indian Railways is derailed, god save us from them Progressives
   21. A train for Women, aYuva train for GenNext, she didnt perhaps have advanced notice of yesterdays verdict but perhaps a train for them too
   22. A day after Delhi HC upheld “inclusiveness” as a Constitutional tenet, Mamata has actually followed thru on “identity based targeting”
   23. Mamata Bannerjee’s pearls of wisdom – “Economic viability is not only index for performance, social commitment is”, she is out to sink UPA
   24. So who wud be fit candidates for a committee that advises on Economically unviable yet Socially desirable projects ?
   25. We need “Minimum Government Maximum Governance” so Ministers are stripped of power to abuse Public Enterprises as political vehicles
   26. new Progressive catchphrase – “Economically unviable yet Socially desirable” http://is.gd/1mkZl it shud perhaps read “politically desirable
   27. On a lighter note in closing from Offstumped archives – “A club for the exclusively inclusive” http://is.gd/1lJ9T enjoy…….
   28. One thing if political parties use “inclusiveness” as codeword for “identity based quotas & targetting” quite another for Courts to do same
   29. So will Courts now start putting every legislation to an “Inclusiveness” Constitutional litmus test ?
   30. While many in the broad Center Right space have hailed HC verdict, the underlying rationale rooted in “progressivism” is cause for concern
   31. Would have been better if Court had explicitly made “Right to Privacy” Consitutional tenet for its clarification on Unconstitutionality
   32. Court may have injected a Progressive agenda into Judicial decision making with reference to “inclusiveness” as a Constitutional tenet,
   33. Just read 100 odd pages of full text of HC verdict on IPC Sec 377, conclusion makes sense but for some value judgements on inclusiveness
   34. @ShashiTharoor Success will come by standing firm on convictions to appeal to silent majority rather than appease a vocal minority lobby
   35. @ShashiTharoor In the interest of transparency pls make avlbl online all such requests for Haj Quotas, let us know who is batting Haj quotas
   36. @NandanNilekani Id-ing every Citizen wud also mean recognizing their unique needs, hopefully less “aam admi one size fit all” solutions
   37. So is the Economic Survey the government’s way to talk of things it lacks the political will to follow thru on from taxes to disinvestment ?
   38. Academic performance of students in Sangh run schools in Orissa http://is.gd/1lr5H RT@PrasannaVishy @Sreejith_PA
   39. @Diptosh thx for clarification, will read full text, was reacting to popular characterization of verdict that it “legalized” something
   40. @Roops78 @Vijay_Vikram It seems to have gone beyond that in specifying whats legal and what is not legal till the Parliament ammends the law
   41. Delhi sealing to Art377 Courts’ actions are wakeup call to delinquent Executive/Legislature Courts will step in to do their job for them
   42. Delhi HC shud have merely held Article 377 as unconstitutional if it felt so it shud not have passed value judgement on how law ought to be
   43. As reprehensible as Article377 was this trend of legislating from the bench by lower courts till legislature acts is unhealthy bad precedent
   44. Delhi HC’s verdict on Article377 is puzzling, how can Courts legalize something, it can either decree something as Unconstitutional or not
   45. For all blatant Congress propaganda, CNN-IBN is a loss making channel http://is.gd/1l6Pc interesting to know if CNBCtv18 is subsiziding it
   46. So much for reforming Higher Education http://is.gd/1kSbg between Arjun and Sibal they seem to be committed to diluting Brand IIT
   47. @SVaradarajan There is more “Azaadi” in India than in “hypersensitive insecure” AJK, we dont need kowtowing, just be honest about your bias
   48. More on sycophancy and this Congress fetish for naming after the Living Dead from Offstumped archives http://is.gd/1kzjV
   49. We may not criminalize Sycophancy but we can atleast require Sycophants to legitimize their obsession by direct approval of local community
   50. That should have read “we are not afraid to talk down to Pakistan…” http://is.gd/1kxbd
   51. Conflicted http://is.gd/1kjE3 Shud we celebrate rout of evil Left or rue the win of Irrational Left
   52. @BabyChen It still misrepresents facts hence malafide
   53. For a lifelong bureaucrat Manmohan Singh’s imagination doesnt seem to extend beyond products of CPSC, Nandan Nilekani being sole exception
   54. When was the last time a bureaucrat, let alone 3 top ones, turned around a Business http://is.gd/1kduf Air India is doomed to drain our taxs
   55. More on Muslim woman topper from Kerala http://is.gd/1jCO9 on how she abandoned Arabic to pursue Sanskrit after her schooling
   56. @Democratically Not sure how much you know about my knowledge of Minorities, check out Offstumped archives between 2004 and 2009 for more
   57. @NR_Tatvamasi In matters of faith Local Community is all believers is untenable, those who care need to put their money where their faith is
   58. @Overlordtwits The quote was a mangled version of Ravi Shankar Prasad’s personal retort to Digvijay Singh, more at phalaka.com
   59. @Democratically Not sure what relevance your dark skin and political leanings have to Offstumped, but thanks for the information nevertheles
   60. @BabyChen Absolutely truth seems to be it was a personal retort to Diggy Raja’s comments and not a dare to the Congress as a party
   61. Prodyut Bora’s rebuke of Ashok Desai’s cheap shots http://is.gd/1kbOV Telegraph needs to have a Dont drink and write editorial policy
   62. @JaideepSK The message needs to be powerful so the medium and messenger become less relevant, hidden gems like Nitin Gadkari are highlighted
   63. @ZoomIndianMedia Dont know who created it but it makes a powerful impact, hopefully her Parliamentary performance matches her public persona
   64. Excellent compilation of Sushma Swaraj in public life by an avid fan it seems http://is.gd/1k7OR need to see her step out of shadows more
   65. The NehruGandhi’s may be fair and beautiful but they are no Leaders, Sonia Gandhi shud have objected to this cheap attempt at sycophancy
   66. @PrasannaVishy Nitin Gadkari’s credentials as an Infrastructure Visionary are impeccable, BJP needs to market him better in the ELM
   67. This blatant manufacturing of communal hatred by the Indian Express raises serious questions of its credibility and its motives
   68. Simple google news query reveals only Indian Express has manufactured this provocative headline http://is.gd/1jErb and no other media source
   69. A provocative headline of this nature with no attribution shud be considered as grounds for charging Indian Express with spreading hate
   70. Makes one wonder who is in charge at Indian Express, Shekhar Gupta has clearly lost his grip on the news paper
   71. Indian Express’ mischief mongering http://is.gd/1jE3A no source attributed to sensational headline, no quote attributed either
   72. Muslim girl tops Kerala University’s Sanskrit Vedanta graduation exam http://is.gd/1jAkp she chose Sanskrit as a symbol of national culture
   73. BJP must get bold & imaginative in its “structured response” with Truth & Reconciliation, more from Shveta Chhatra http://is.gd/1jcxS
   74. Merely reiterating its commitment to a Ram Temple in Ayodhya accomplishes nothing beyond reinforcing negative stereotypes of the past
   75. Only by doing so will it be able to shed baggage of the past & lay a coherent inclusive foundation that reconciles ideology with governance
   76. BJP must do so while being committed to upholding the Rule of Law and the process of Justice taking its course on Babri Masjid demolition
   77. That creativity must evolve from Constitutional principles of Freedom to Faith from Government, Freedom to Local Community in local disputes
   78. BJP must be creative in its response to Liberhans report and create an opportunity out of it rather than get defensive or belligerent
   79. @PrasannaVishy Hence the need to call their bluff and be creative in the response to Liberhand rather than get defensive or belligerent
   80. @PrasannaVishy Agree its time to not just move on from competitive victimhood but to also label Progressivism as being just that
   81. Either make the entire report public without delay or come clean on your reasons to not do so, responsibility for leaks will lie with PMO
   82. Let us make it very clear to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh no inspired leaks sponsored media mischief on Liberhans Report will be tolerated
   83. @Democratically I cannot speak to that question I am not a member of the BJP or the RSS but your point is valid
   84. If the Mumbai Police have specific expectations from Mumbaikars in response to terror alerts they shud spell them out, otherwise keep mum
   85. What purpose does it serve to go public with Terror alerts if there is no protocol on civilian responses http://is.gd/1jalD
   86. Its time to move on from agitational politics rooted in greivances to Aspirational Politics focused on opportunities and strategic interests
   87. @JaideepSK Have covered in great detail how Culture Conflicts of last century must be reconciled in Shveta Chhatra
   88. @JaideepSK Mr. Advani’s legacy is history sooner the BJP faces that reality the faster will be its recovery, past 5 years of drift are proof
   89. @Democratically I dont know what Mr. Advani is thinking about perhaps his legacy, I have to think about the next 25 years
   90. Any reinvention of Center Right movement will have to begin with a clean break from the past shedding its baggage, this is a moment of truth
   91. Putting Babri Masjid’s ghosts to rest was long overdue the Liberhans report is timely, one hopes Manmohan Singh shows spine makes it public
   92. Contrary to ip smacking glee with which some in media are looking its release, it will serve a larger purpose for both the nation and BJP
   93. UPA government shud make Liberhan Commission Report public without delay rather than play politics with it, let the truth prevail
   94. @ShashiTharoor You could have as well sent them a Hallmark Card, one of those where you can record a song perhaps http://is.gd/1iCxl
   95. Someone needs to tell Ashok Desai the election was over a month ago http://is.gd/1ivga
   96. @KanchanGupta Valid point, this approach of making a political statement is counterproductive also agree Child Abuse laws must be tightened
   97. The Pioneer’s editorial on Article 377 is good reason why the public debate on Article 377 needs to be framed around Privacy of all Indians
   98. @KKPTN Had tweeted on Iran over the weekend, check out the tweets over last 48 hours
   99. One hopes more 4th generation leaders from the Center Right movement emerge in the days to come
   100. That Prodyut Bora has decided to “Walk the Talk” shud put to rest petty myopic criticism of the BJP’s digital campaign and IT Vision
   101. Prodyut Bora’s decision to take to an all India trek by foot in a privata capacity is a sign of 4th gen BJP leadership coming of age
   102. Prodyut Bora’s blog has more details on his planned trek of India on foot http://is.gd/1ibXZ look forward to progress on his plans
   103. Someone needs to tell greybeards and skullcaps of Deoband India doesnt run on shariat law http://is.gd/1hXFv
   104. Till there is full accounting of all aspects by an Independent Blue Ribbon Commission on Mumbai 26/11 BBC’s story will fuel speculation
   105. What we have also not been told is whether all wireless equipment carried by the 26/11 terrorists had been accounted for in the intercepts ?
   106. What we have not been told by BRaman or any of the Mumbai Dossiers is how many hrs into 26/11 did surveillance begin ?
   107. BRaman doesnt put much credence on BBC’s 26/11 story but then BRaman is merely disputing the basis for BBC’s hypothesis
   108. Prodyut Bora is taking to a long walk all India walk from Kanyakumari to New Delhi http://is.gd/1hpkR wishing him all the best and energy
   109. Review of VIP security http://is.gd/1hpbB about time, 45,000 policemen nationwide are wasting time on VIP security rather than protect us
   110. White Umbrella shall stand for preserving dignity & respecting privacy of all Indians while leaving to Faith all issues of values & mores
   111. In new Big Tent there will be no role for Government to intrude on what goes on between law abiding Citizens within privacy of their homes
   112. Making repeal of Article 377 a Right to Privacy issue for all Indians will have far greater resonance than making it about a sexual minority
   113. In interest of dignity privacy of all Indians repeal of Article377 must be done thru omnibus reform of British era laws http://is.gd/1hntE
   114. Prodyut Bora revisits the BJP I.T.’s Vision in light of Nandan Nilekani’s appointment to UIADAI http://is.gd/1hnao
   115. Fali S. Nariman reminds us of the imposition of Emergency, why its the duty of every Citizen to protect the Constitution http://is.gd/1hn5p
   116. @KanchanGupta Good one
   117. It was PV Narasimha Rao’s 89th birth anniversary http://is.gd/1h8OP trust the Nehru-Gandhi’s to obliterate all traces of PV in public memory
   118. This is why need a Blue Ribbon Commission to fully account for every aspect of 26/11 and 13 terror attacks preceeding it
   119. If Teesta Setalvad cud eavesdrop on Mumbai police wireless chatter during 93 riots why cudnt a local LeT cell do same during 26/11 ?
   120. @Calamur so much for phony idealism exuded by the media, shameful that BBC bells the cat on Mumbai 26/11 and not the Indian media
   121. For all the drivel that passes for investigative journalism it is amazing the Indian Media has given a free pass to UPA on 26/11 and 7/11
   122. No clarity on who mysterious Baba was in 26/11 transcripts http://is.gd/1h2yq nor any explanations for many discrepancies http://is.gd/1h2BJ
   123. Local hand in Mumbai 26/11 returns to haunt UPA http://is.gd/1h2ja also read Offstumped archives on unanswered questions http://is.gd/1h2n9
   124. Dr. Kalam’s Billion heart beats http://is.gd/1gvbj is an inspiration for infectious optimisim Shveta Chhatra shall exude http://is.gd/1gvhA
   125. It must take immense wisdom and conviction for a Muslim to visit a Catholic School and invoke Dharma as a shared value http://is.gd/1gupU
   126. Abdul Kalam on Dharma http://is.gd/1gtXI Dr. Kalam makes interesting observation that righteousness must be an integral element of Knowledge
   127. Important to note this event which occured on May 27th more than week after Lok Sabha election results was hardly covered by national media
   128. When Narendra Modi http://is.gd/1goGz and Abdul Kalam shared a dias http://is.gd/1goIM to talk of Energy Independence & Capacity Building
   129. Sangh functionary Suresh Soni’s invocation of Abdul Kalam is interesting http://is.gd/1gojW will we hear more of Abdul Kalam in days to come
   130. BJP would do well to evolve a process by which the next President is truly “elected” rather than “selected” by backroom consensus
   131. Aditya Sinha over at NewIndExpress argues against Arun Jaitley being made BJP President http://is.gd/1gkwC sounds premature to discuss names
   132. Between the As and Rta duality, Deva and Asura duality and that famed Rig vedic lore of Indra slaying Vrtra must lie the answer
   133. For two cultures that shared so much in language between Avestan and Sanskrit the laterally inverted philosophies never cease to fascinate
   134. Speaking of Iran thoughts go back to how and why the Indo-Iranian Indo-Aryan split occured, was it philosophical or political ?
   135. @PrasannaVishy to think of it last weekend the Obama-mania media was running 24×7 coverage on Iran, what a difference a week can make
   136. In fact Offstumped had tweeted that as breaking news and subsequently retract due to fact that voting was still going on some places
   137. There is good reason to suspect external role in Iran events for TOI had carried news of 60% vote for Mossavi much before official counts
   138. Iran was a fiasco for Obama is clear from the fact that NYTimes has buried Iran stories much deeper after MJ, Pakistan and everything else
   139. @PrasannaVishy dont know about that but you are right the global activism is misplaced and counterproductive
   140. Could the Twitter activism over Iran be the first subversive use of the Internet to influence desired outcomes, an unanswered question ?
   141. To all the twittering global citizens, the bitter reality is they may have been played to spur events towards the desired outcomes
   142. Has the world gained or lost leverage in preempting or slowing down a Nuclear Iran, we must conclude it is the latter
   143. It must be asked who gains from these outcomes – Israel for it suits its interests or Russia which perhaps comes out with greater influence
   144. Whether by design or default the Supreme Leader appears vulnerable to the Ahmedenijad faction which clearly has come out stronger
   145. If we apply the outcomes test to events in Iran look who stand diminished – Khamanei, Obama Administration and of course the losing faction
   146. As the Iran protests unravel it must be asked if the sequence of events were scripted to preempt Obama moves on Iran ?
   147. Shahnawaz Hussan’s interview to Zee http://is.gd/1g7Lf mostly touts party line, no significant insights on either chintan or manthan in BJP
   148. This is the kind of considered response the BJP needs to make a habit of coming up with as an Opposition http://is.gd/1f3HY RT @PRSLegislati
   149. When was the last time India reposed faith in a master politician perceived in the Machiavellian or Kautilyan mould ?
   150. Cant resist saying this – Michael Jackson was many things but he was not “too big to fail”, no TARP, TALF federal bailout for his debt
   151. @Calamur I like the feminine metaphor this is why we need more gender diversity in public debate
   152. @Gudem That doesnt quite explain it for there are many Global Citizens safely ensconced in their homelands
   153. @JaideepSK He is right and wrong in parts, there will be other similar opinions, multiplicity will breed perception of incoherence
   154. Perils of not having a Shadow Cabinet http://is.gd/1eohD MMJoshi’s personal opinions on education must not be passed off as Party line
   155. @Calamur Neem twigs
   156. So what is Global Citizenry about – feeling good at the end of the day so you can go to sleep not feeling guilty over other’s victimhood
   157. “You cannot pick choose hang” but “You can pick choose reform disposal of mercy petittions ” http://is.gd/1ekkZ so why didnt You for 5 yrs ?
   158. White Umbrella shall stand for the assurance that “Minimum Government Maximum Governance” is not a mere slogan but an article of faith
   159. In new Big Tent there will be dramatic reduction in number of Federal Ministries and elimination of archaic laws to reduce wastage
   160. British comedies Yes Minister and Yes Prime Minister are a must read on how Govt creates waste to keep itself in business http://is.gd/1egUe
   161. That people is what is called “Maximum Government with no real Governance”, one doesnt even need RTI, PIB press releases are eye opening
   162. NCAEUS wants NAFUS to be setup under SIDBI so MSME can be funded while UPA-II procures from MSE to keep sector viable http://is.gd/1egGw
   163. One figurehead writes to other out of work politicians on whats essentially an Executive function http://is.gd/1efOS is this funny or what ?
   164. If distributing subsidies and reviving restructing sick Units is 100 days plan http://is.gd/1efHu what was this Ministry up to last 5 years
   165. What does Adventure have to do with Rajiv Gandhi and why do we need to consolidate and standardize advencture http://is.gd/1efDJ why ?
   166. @Wanderer08 – The quote is mine the observation was with reference to the headline today and many tweets in response to it
   167. Who knew Doctrine of Necessity was Machiavellian in its origins “Necessity leads you to do things reason does not recommend”
   168. Irony of our times – we celebrate the creative brilliance of the deeply flawed and disturbed anti-role-models
   169. Interesting conflict between Global progressivism and Machiavelli – “there is no court of appeal for States”
   170. Machiavelli – At the origin of every state there is virtu of one man who grasped destiny’s opportunity presented to him
   171. With Internet at hand book reading is so much more enriching for one can instantly cross reference & discover insights beyond printed text
   172. @KanchanGupta Arent there enough of those to hold up in contrast to Madarsas, yet poor Muslims go to Madarsas in big cities – why ?
   173. @KanchanGupta We need to make the argument if they want Madarsas to give secular edn get certified and accredited like everyone else
   174. @KanchanGupta You miss the point we need to ask this question so they admit the truth – there is no secular edn in a Madarsa
   175. White Umbrella shall stand for assurance that there will be no discrimination in accreditation and performance of schools with same standard
   176. In new Big Tent poor Muslim students will have freedom to attend any school and will not have to settle for substandard secular education
   177. Look who is discriminating against poor Muslims, an unholy political nexus between Progressives and clergy who run Madarsas
   178. Arent poor Muslim Students entitled to hold their religious school to same standard for secular education delivered as any other student
   179. Kapil Sibal’s proposal for a separate Madarsa Board alongside CBSE and an independent accreditation agency makes no sense
   180. Why the double standard if any school can get certifed by independent accreditation agency why cant Madarsas do same for secular education ?
   181. As I have always Leadership is not about the electoral landscape as it exists but about remaking it as it ought to be, wll MGMG banner help
   182. @prasannavishy It may not exist today but thats the leadership challenge can you reconcile diveristy under a new Big Tent within MgMG banner
   183. @veryhuman Its more than a slogan its a philosophy of governance and a political agenda – 3 in one, you are right Progressives will oppose
   184. Beauty of “Minimum Government Maximum Governance” – it stakes a claim to the Center while drawing a sharp differentiation with Progressivism
   185. Will “Minimum Government Maximum Governance” give hope to Rural India, after all that was what Gandhi’s Rama Rajya was about ?
   186. Will “Minimum Government Maximum Governance” resonate with Urban Middle India, after all thats where its economic interests lie ?
   187. RT @Narendra_Modi Emerging Markets Forum study shows Gujarat a leader in “Minimum Govt Maximum Governance” Urban Management
   188. @Sreejith_PA It is great if it is happening at the groundlevel in Bangalore it needs to bubble up and acquire a national profile
   189. @PrasannaVishy There is a distinction between attracting talent and outsourcing leadership
   190. At heart of inability to attract new role models is the acceptability deficit BJP suffers in Urban Middle India, a space it once had lock on
   191. BJP needs to reflect why it no longer attracts professional achievers and middle class role models the way it did in the 1980s and 1990s
   192. The issue of identifying BPL to determine eligibility for entitlements is a political minefield, will put Nandan’s Corporate Skills to test
   193. To pitch National UID with social justice flavor to is clever politics, the BJP missed the argument on this one by harping on Natl Security
   194. Nandan Nilekani resigns from Infosys accepts National UID Chairmanship with mandate to identify BPL for social scheme targetting
   195. Dramatic proposal to scrap Class X boards obfuscates the issue focus ought to be on performance benchmarks with flexibility on career option
   196. Machiavelli’s influence on US Constitution is interesting with a minimalist secularism that merely requires State to be non-theocratic
   197. Machiavelli’s concept of Religion being subservient to State is interesting , did you know USA can reject a religion if detrimental to State
   198. BJP conducted a ballot election to choose new CM of Uttarakhand. http://is.gd/1cv6p . No back room consensus (RT @Sreejith_PA)
   199. On this count the proposed NCHER is no mere Regulator for it claims a Missionary role in remaking steering Higher Education “independently”
   200. There is a clear and unambiguous distinction between Enforcement Functions of a Regulator and Missionary Functions of the Executive
   201. Next think what comes to mind when you hear words – ensure transparency, quality, audit, feedback, performance
   202. What comes to mind when you hear words – strategize, steer, evolution, expansion, catalyst, conduit, spearhead, reform, renovate, innovate
   203. @KanchanGupta We dont need Statutory National Commission all we need is Independent Agency to rate Institutions against accepted benchmarks
   204. @KanchanGupta Hence the need for independent Professional Bodies for periodic Certification of Professionals and Rating of Institutions
   205. White Umbrella shall stand for an end to culture of centralizing Executive Power & of making it unaccountable thru Independent Commissions
   206. In new Big Tent Higher Education will be a State and Local subject with full freedom and professional bodies certifying practitioners
   207. Isnt it typical of Progressives that the solution to any problem is always a new Independent Statutory National Commision with noble goals
   208. With loaded phrases like “social audit processes”, this Commission is less about freeing Higher Education more about centralizing control
   209. NCHER will merely become vehicle for driving Progressive Agenda from Delhi accomodating retired bureaucrats with zero accountability
   210. Perusal of detailed report http://is.gd/1cnal reveals none of the 10 odd goals of NCHER require it to be an independent Statutory Commission
   211. If Professional bodies Certify practice of individual professions Universities have autonomy to manage affairs what role will NCHER play ?
   212. Yet another statutory commission at tax payers expense http://is.gd/1cmZX dont we have enuf already providing employment to retired Babus
   213. National Gas Grid & Gujarat – disabusing laggard states of a euphemism called equitable distribution and balanced growth http://is.gd/1cmz6
   214. Narendra Modi’s latest blog post has an interesting dynamic to it http://is.gd/1c87w
   215. To reduce debate on State control of Faith to casteism is disingenuous, more from the Shveta Chhatra http://is.gd/1c4qw & http://is.gd/1c4rJ
   216. @Mudittuli Have articulated how new Liberal National Big Tent can enable that with Freedom to Faith http://is.gd/1c4qw & http://is.gd/1c4rJ
   217. @Mudittuli Who has talked about giving Hindu Temples to Brahmins, Temples belong to everyone in Faith, need mechanisms to reflect that
   218. @BibekDebroy Kudos on your latest piece in the Indian Express on government interference in faith and AP Endowments Act of 1987
   219. Bibek Debroy must be applauded for belling the cat on this, hope others follow to put an end to AP Endowments Act of 1987 & other such laws
   220. Progressive Secular establishment stands guilty of a Conspiracy of Silence on illberal Constiutional acts that cemented State inteference
   221. Why pray should the Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanam be the private unaccountable slush fund at the disposal of IAS officers MLAs and MPs
   222. Liberal thinkers waking up to travesty of State interference in Faith http://is.gd/1c1lP Bibek Debroy asks the 50,000 crore question on TTD
   223. The White Umbrella shall stand for holding all acts of government which gave State a role in running Temples illiberal & unconstitutional
   224. Hence in new Liberal National Big Tent there will be complete freedom to faith, Govt will have no role in how Institutions of Faith are run
   225. Solution to Govt control of Temples is not more Govt control on how funds from Temples are used but the solution ought to be NO GOVT CONTROL
   226. Arvind Lavakare is right to the extent that the BJP failed to raise one legitimate Hindu issue it should have, Govt control of Temples
   227. It would not just cement grip of the State on every aspect of Life it would Institutionalize Identity based policy making for every group
   228. If one were to extrapolate Arvind Lavakare line of thought it would be taking Social Justice to its ultimate perversity based on identity
   229. Arvind Lavakares prescription for BJP on KanchanGuptas blog reduces Hindutva to Social Justice for Hindus issue with greater role for State
   230. @ZoomIndianMedia Arvind Lavakare’s comment on @KanchanGupta’s blog is right on diagnosis wrong on prescription, he wants more govt control
   231. Diptosh Majumdar (@Diptosh) has an interesting blog post on how the BJP failed Advani http://bit.ly/Kb6J4 makes familiar arguments
   232. This story from the Upanishads that Joseph Campbell alludes to in Power of the Myth also comes to mind on moral limits http://is.gd/1bwn9
   233. Was Ashwamedha ancient India’s solution to tame unbounded free will & its pursuit vainglory does this explain absence of Machiavellian virtu
   234. @Gudem Machiavelli’s virtu has deeper meaning, answer lies in literal translation of Ashwamedha & this Upanishadic story http://is.gd/1bwn9
   235. How to explain near total absence of Machiavellian virtu in ancient India while it became its victim thru Greek Hun Mughal British invasions
   236. One must not confuse virtu with either unbounded freedom or Liberty, for even the vagabond desires them, virtu is about unbounded vainglory
   237. Perhaps unethical Capitalism of 21st Century is a modern day manifestation of Machiavelli’s virtu, now globally diffused to non-State actors
   238. Kautilya & others drew geographical boundaries to advocate against Imperial expansion, Machiavelli’s virtu puts Imperialism into perspective
   239. In Machiavelli we find the fundamental distinction between the West and East, R.P. Kangle alludes to this in his Kautilya’s Arthashastra
   240. To appreciate why Machiavelli & Kautilya are poles apart we must recognize Machiavelli held a very cynical view – Man by nature is corrupt
   241. Where Machiavelli has no moral compass, Kautilya never loses sight of Dharma requiring State’s Ministers to ensure King never strays from it
   242. One would be thoroughly justified in taking offence and disabusing any suggestions describing Kautilya as Machiavellian, it is an outrage
   243. Five pages into Machiavelli on relationship between Individual & State it is clear there is no equivalence between Kautilya & Machiavelli
   244. Enough with BJP musings back to Machiavelli on conflicts between the Individual and the State
   245. Most meaningful advise for the BJP comes from the Mint http://is.gd/1b4GK echoes Offstumped on the need for a Liberal & National Big Tent
   246. Media’s BJP obsession continues Suhit Sen http://is.gd/1b4oN Neerja Choudary http://is.gd/1b4mn this curious one in ET http://is.gd/1b4tQ
   247. BJP failed since 2004 due to its eagerness to give Communists a race for populist opposition to UPA to cede the centrist space to Congress
   248. The only way the BJP can do this is by driving a sharp differentiation in its response to UPA’s policies by bracketing UPA with Communists
   249. Sheer real politik demands that BJP deprive Congress the luxury to occupy Centrist space by default, courtesy Left’s populist criticism
   250. BJP’s bane has been incoherence & confusion in responding to UPA since 2004 on issues where far Left positions make Congress look centrist
   251. There is a risk here though for the BJP, it is far easier for Left to occupy space of political opposition by making populist arguments
   252. Dinosaurs often confuse their ability to read and write with intellect to offer unsolicited advise on education http://is.gd/1aZUc
   253. The Hindu’s lead editorial talks of what it calls “low key Hindutva” http://is.gd/1aYy1 all the more reason for BJP to shift the debate
   254. Kanchan Gupta also rightly calls for a Blair Moment for the BJP, wholesome praise for Narendra Modi apart, the rejuvenation seems far away
   255. Kanchan Gupta rightly calls out the BJP for not having decoupled Article 370 and UCC from the popular labelling of them as Hindutva issues
   256. Kanchan Gupta’s contrarian take on BJP National Executive http://is.gd/1aX53 there is more to agree with him than disagree on this one
   257. @KanchanGupta reading it right now, I like the title “Waffle at the BJP National Executive”
   258. Ashok Malik’s analysis and prescription for BJP http://is.gd/1awjt echoes Offstumped on need for transparency and ballots
   259. @mallumusings @babychen http://is.gd/1atJ9
   260. @BDUTT Watch MI-5 or Spooks as they call it in the UK
   261. Comment in Swapan Das blog quoting this piece by Arun Shourie http://tinyurl.com/km6bwv Here is Offstumped critique on it http://is.gd/1acFp
   262. @ZoomIndianMedia Arun Shourie got it horribly wrong with all due respect to him here is my critique exposing the flaws http://is.gd/1acFp
   263. The Burqa issue is best left to Muslim women, let them discard it of their own free will, let no one force them to wear the veil
   264. National Legislation mandating what Citizens can & cannot wear is as illiberal as a theocracy, french better deal with public smoking first
   265. @Diptosh Migrate to France dont have wear anything at all on the sleeve, they have areas marked out on the beaches
   266. White Umbrella shall stand for open transparent decision making where Leaders earn their right to lead by putting themselves to ballot test
   267. In the new Big Tent there will be no backroom nor will there be a totem pole called the High Command
   268. This mutually beneficial consensus on backroom decision making will only result in petty sharing of what remains of spoils of power
   269. Once you “select” individuals to leadership to suit your convenience you lose the moral high ground to petty politics
   270. Culture of High Command doesnt make BJP a superior better alternative to Congress merely a clone without advantage of dynastic chromosomes
   271. Indira Gandhi institutionalized culture of changing CMs sitting in Delhi is undemocratic and anti-federal, a slap on the face of Uttarakhand
   272. There shud have been a transparent claim challenging Khanduri, people of Uttarakhand are entitled to know why their CM is being replaced
   273. Backroom consensus is forced consensus, till the BJP embraces a culture of transparency and a faith in the ballot recovery will be remote
   274. LK Advani and Rajnath Singh’s electoral fortunes cannot be the basis for Khanduri’s performance, this matter shud have been settled in state
   275. Culture of High Command will be the BJP’s undoing, BC Khanduri’s cannot and shud not be decided in New Delhi, this is Congressisation of BJP
   276. Reading Machiavelli by Guiseppe Prezzolini – politics is a human activity incompatible with Christian Morality
   277. The poorgeoise Bhadralok of Bengal lost the plot somewhere between Bohemian pursuits and Bolshevik politics
   278. Is Mamata Bannerjee the best Bengal can produce in response to over two decades of Communist rot, is there no spark to the Right left ?
   279. An interactive forum for RTI enthusiasts in Punjab and elsewhere www.rightto.info
   280. If Consitutional sanction to State Interference in matters of faith is a shame that BJP lead NDA did nothing to correct it is a bigger shame
   281. Extending NN Vohra’s warped logic perhaps Pravin Togadia should be appointed to the Haj Committee to ensure safe passage next
   282. So does Amarnath Yatra now need to be secular and politically correct to obtain safe passage http://is.gd/19EY5
   283. So what will be Super about these Regulators – will they wear their unmentionables on the outside and rent a cape ?
   284. It seems to be the season for super regulators http://is.gd/19ELC this one is for spectrum
   285. A super regulator by any other name would end up being just that http://is.gd/19AIZ retired bureaucrats cannot inspire fresh thinking
   286. Bibek Debroy rips 7th schedule and the Concurrent List http://is.gd/19Aw0 says we need concurrence on separate Center State & Local lists
   287. GVLNR comes out of hibernation http://is.gd/19AqE forget the fine print, tell us why you got it wrong
   288. What goes on in a University ought to be its business, the young and aspirational CM would do well to focus on governance http://is.gd/19Ab9
   289. They may as well take their cue from one Yedyyurappa who is doing the rounds of temples in Tamil Nadu http://is.gd/19A0c
   290. Karat-o-saur is not known particularly for its ability to think consistently and apply logic http://is.gd/19zWx often that results in rebuke
   291. @Sreejith_PA There is just no basis for his followers to claim protectionism redistribution are based on an Indian model of a Welfare State
   292. @Sreejith_PA But thats about it beyond that Integral Humanism is on very weak grounds on socio-economic world view
   293. @Sreejith_PA That Pt Deendayal was in favor of decentralization is clear and consistent with Gandhi Nanaji Deshmukh Govindacharya
   294. @Calamur They could have been creative in using the instruments of Constitution without undermining it to achieve same end
   295. @Calamur There is right way to eliminate Zamindari and wrong way to do it, whats the point in having a Constitution if you had no faith in i
   296. @PrasannaVishy Once the ideological influence wanes transactions are reduced to the petty and inane
   297. @Calamur We know with hindsight there are No Good Marxists so that settles that debate
   298. @Calamur Exactly he shudnt be deemed one we must not be blind to his strenghts and faults else no lessons wud be learnt
   299. @Calamur With the 9th schedule he opened the pandoras box for ammending Constitution to suit political expediency
   300. @Calamur Nehru fails on legacy of failed Institutions starting with the Constitution to which he provided an escape clause in 9th schedule
   301. @Calamur India was lucky in Nehru to the extent that post Independence insecurities had to be managed but leadership is also abt legacy
   302. @Swapan55 could have to do with the fact that “influence” has been on the wane given the deep fault line on economic issues
   303. @Prassannavishy That is a profound observation, if there is any state ripe for a Center Right spark its Bengal, tragedy the BJP is sleeping
   304. @Calamur @ZoomIndianMedia Fact that his daughter Institutionalized all the ills of Indian Democracy and Indian State stands testimony to it
   305. @Calamur @ZoomIndianMedia Right way to judge him wud be by quality of Institutions he left behind on that count he fails the history test
   306. @Calamur @ZoomIndianMedia Nehru was in some parts Kautilyan in his actions and in some he wasnt, how must we judge him ?
   307. @Ranjithp Dont know if Upadhyay wud have supported State control of education but his followers have by prescribing syllabi denying autonomy
   308. @Ranjithp Reference to Gandhi was limited to his description of utopia called “Rama Rajya” not so much so to education
   309. Next time we are forwarded obfuscations like Rama Rajya, inclusive Hindutva or Integral Humanism, remember to challenge their Indian origins
   310. Govindacharya is right this is psuedo-Hindutva but the bad news is even Integral Humanism is psuedo-Hindu by and large with more Greek in it
   311. It is ironical that those swear by a Hindu identity have learnt the least from the most Hindu of works on statecraft and political realism
   312. Answer may lie in his advocacy of non-violence for the ancient Indian State put a high premium on protecting National Interest by all means
   313. It must be asked why Gandhi talked of a utopia called Rama Rajya that had more in common with Aristotle than with Kautilya ?
   314. Where Aristotle echoes tight State control of education in the ancient Indian State education outside the control of the State in Gurukuls
   315. The most striking contrast between Aristotle’s State and Kautilya’s State is the role of State visa-vis education
   316. Dinosaurs share deep ethnic bonding and usually speak up for each other even the bad ones http://is.gd/199oU mystery how they became extinct
   317. Speaking to United Press Jun 1945 Gandhi describes it as dreamland that may never be realized that he is happy imagining http://is.gd/18RXK
   318. Reading Gandhi’s description of Rama Rajya as a dream state almost reminds one verbatim of Aristitotle’s definition from Book1 of Politica
   319. Follows hence that ancient Indian State did not prescribe moral behavior to Individuals limiting itself primarily to enforcing rule of law
   320. RP Kangle on Arthasastra draws an interesting distinction between Moral Codes prescribed for individuals from crimes punishable by State
   321. Amartya Sen revives the Social Justice debate http://is.gd/18GBX
   322. Interesting find in book on Vedic Metaphysics by Prem Sabhlok http://is.gd/18EgG echoes Offstumped on Dharma nature of ancient Indian State
   323. This raises an interesting question if what is passed off for “Rama Rajya” as a welfare State is of Indian or Greek origin ?
   324. Where Aristotle requires a welfare role for the State the ancient Indians it seems left that welfare role to autonomous local communities
   325. In contrast ancient Indian role for State seems minimalismostly focused on upholding rule of law and protecting against external threats
   326. Having read thru most of Politica it is clear modern “progressive” “welfare” State is largely an Aristotlean idea
   327. Education is strictly controlled by Aristotle’s State and is enforced to be uniform to all citizens
   328. Aristotle’s regulatory role for the State extends to regulating marriages, childbirth, abortion and conduct during Pregnancy
   329. Aristotle also asserts regulatory role for the State in land distribution and usage to provide for public welfare services like common meals
   330. Aristotle lists out 6 functions of the State and views the purpose of the State to be their fulfillment
   331. But recognizing the importance of exports/imports Aristotle recommends developing ports outside fortified cities, almost sounds like SEZs
   332. A rather familiar fear of foreign trade and influx of foreigners comes up as well
   333. Aristotle clearly comes in favor of controlling the size of the State thru a limit on population and controlling immigration
   334. @Chakreshm Direct from an English translation of Politica with of course a lot of modern american opinion polluting the original text
   335. @chakreshm I think its too broad a generalization for there are many diverse schools of thought
   336. One even sees an echo of NREGS in Aristotle’s description of Carthaginians who give work to poor in turns
   337. Subsidies and modern welfare find mention in Aristotle who wants surplus revenues of the State to be redistributed to the poor
   338. @Chakreshm That seems to be a very poor generalization, original reference please ?
   339. Where Aristotle is focused on internal affairs of the State Kautilya and others mostly focus on protecting the State from external threats
   340. An interesting contrast in Greek and Indian view on role and management of the State
   341. It begs the question of advocates of Integral Humanism where from did they derive their socio-economic world view – Greece or India ?
   342. Cannot recall any references to role of State in equalizing wealth or redistribution in either Arthashastra or Sukraniti
   343. Aristotle’s views on property limits equity it is clear there is more Greek in Integral Humanism than Dharma from Arthashastra
   344. Reading Aristotle’s Politics his definition of the State minus patriarchy and slavery sounds like Integral Humanism

Filed under: Offstumped on Twitter, Shveta Chhatra, Uncategorized

India Elections 2009 Phase 3 & Phase 4 Analysis

The month long election has reached an interesting juncture with the first four phases of voting done with barely over a week to go before the votes are counted.

The turnout figures for phase 4 seem quite encouraging in stark contrast to the less than impressive turnout in phase 3.

West Bengal, where polling was held in 17 constituencies, the voter turnout was “large” (about 75%). In Jammu and Kashmir where the Srinagar constituency went to the polls, there was a low turnout (around 24%), he said.

In J and K the polling this time was better. In 2004 it was 18.57 per cent and in the 1999 Lok Sabha poll it was 11.93 per cent. Separatists had given a poll boycott call in the State.

This phase covered Haryana – for 10 seats, Rajasthan 25, Punjab 4, West Bengal 17, Bihar 3, Jammu and Kashmir 1, Uttar Pradesh 18 and NCT of Delhi 7.

Bihar recorded a turnout of 37 per cent. It was 63 in Haryana, 65 in Punjab, and 50 each in Rajasthan and UP.

With this phase, polling has been completed in 457 of the 543 Lok Sabha constituencies and an average of about 55.5 voters had cast their votes

Continuing with Offstumped analysis of bellwhether seats there are about 4 seats that are of interest across phases 3 and 4. (click here for analysis of bellwhether seats in Phase 1 and Phase 2)

#1 Banaskantha in Gujarat

#2 Anand in Gujarat

#3 Bulsar in Gujarat

#4 Sikar in Rajashthan

Of these the 3 seats in Gujarat can be considered the most reliable indicators of the BJP’s prospects of forming a government at the Center. The 3 seats in Gujarat voted 5 out of 6 times for the party that either formed the government in Delhi or for a party that supported it. More importantly every single time these seats voted for the BJP a Non-Congress government was formed at the center. If this report is anything to go by the Congress is clearly not fancying its chances in Banaskantha. However the Satta market seems to punt for the Congress in Anand.

Sikar in Rajasthan too got it right 5 out of 6 times and has not voted against the BJP in the last 3 elections. It can be considered a reliable indicator of the anti-Congress sentiment except for 2004.  The big unknown this year in Sikar is the emergence of the CPI-M making it a triangular fight. No data yet on the turnout figures in Sikar, it will be interesting to see if a high turnout is an indicator of red and saffron mobilization.

Two other seats in Delhi which have reliably voted for the party that forms the Government were Delhi Outer and Delhi Sadar both of which have been transformed in the post-delimitation era making seats in Delhi less reliable an indicator of which way the wind is blowing.

Phase 5 has some interesting bellwhether seats in Tamil Nadu, Himachal Pradesh and an odd seat in West Bengal.

In retrospect it must be said that we need to come to terms with the reality that Lok Sabha elections are no longer a referendum on national issues but are really about control of the national power structure. End of the day the choice that has to be made by each voter is about which coalition has earned their trust to be vested with that control.

When viewed through the prism of power structures, the post results game of bluff becomes as important as the prepoll agenda. It is clear that no matter what the outcome is on May 16th BJP’s best chances lie in the rather outcome of the game of bluff that will be played between the Congress and the Communists after May 16th.

More on that game of bluff in the next post.

To post comments click here

Filed under: Chattisgarh Polls 2008, Chhattisgarh Polls 2008, Delhi Polls 2008, DesiPundit, Dharmayudh-2009, Gujarat Polls 2007, India Elections 2009, Karnataka Polls 2008, Lok Sabha Polls 2008-2009, Madhya Pradesh Polls 2008, Rajasthan Polls 2008, betrayal of aam admi, jeetega-bharat

Dissecting Congress Party’s Anti-Terror approach

Jairam Ramesh the Congress Party’s Coordinator for Election Related Affairs for the Lok Sabha 2009 polls made public a document released earlier in the week by Home Minister Chidambaram on the Congres Party’s pledge on protecting India from Terror.

In his e-mail Mr. Ramesh lists a number of measures taken after the Mumbai 26/11 attacks like the NIA and the UAPA. Mr. Ramesh however fails to mention any measures taken by the UPA between 2004 and November of 2008.

Mr. Ramesh’s email is also conspicuous in its silence on the ill-famed India Pakistan Joint Anti-Terrorism Institutional Mechanism, that was announced by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh after the deadly 7/11 serial train blasts of 2006 in Mumbai.

Mr. Ramesh’s email claims the Congress will not waste a single day in fighting terror while being woefully silent on the period since the scrapping of POTA in 2004 and the deadly attacks in Mumbai in November of 2008.

The document also makes it a point to highlight that “Religious Polarization” is inimical to the fight on terror, a strange comment after having scrapped POTA on grounds of Muslim sensititvities and not replaced it with any new law for 5 years till 26/11.

The document is not short on scoring political points with references to Kargil, Kandahar, Prakram and the allegation that IPS recruitment suffered between 1998 and 2004.

Nevertheless the Congress Party’s promise on Terror must be dissected and analysed for its worthiness. The document is 13 pages long and begins with a Section titled “Context” which interestingly enough carries a tacit admission of guilt by the Congress that the document only lists measures taken after 26/11.

It lays out five tenets as the foundation for the Congress Party’s anti-terror strategy but only talks of preparedness and response to threats after they manifest. The strategy is silent on pre-empting threats before they manifest.

The most significant aspect lacuna in the strategy is it doesnt highlight capabilities needed to eliminate threats that manifest outside the borders of India and capabilities needed to root out sponsors of Terror who are sheltered by sympathetic foreign governments.

The section on Human Assets focuses more on scoring political points against the BJP while explaining little on what was done to rectify IPS recruitment between 2004 and 2009. It only talks of plans to improve recruitment post 2009. 

The much maligned 100 day roadmap makes an appearance after complete silence from the Government ever since it was announced. More promises are made on plans to come including review of VVIP security.

The most glaring gap in the section on Human Assets is no talk of how external Intelligence will be revamped to infiltrate networks of terror outside Indian borders. With most Terror in India manifesting outside our borders it is strange that the Congress Party’s strategy is silent on how it will learn of new threats to come and how it will anticipate new modus operandi.

The section on Actionable Intelligence and Cutting edge Analytics sounds more like a commercial for Oracle BI with more talk on Databases like the NATGRID and the CCTNS.

It also curiously includes a treatise on the National ID Card Project. The document makes it a point to say ID Card project was not pursued by NDA but fails to explain what the UPA did for 5 years on the ID Card project.

This section has more technology jargon on what tools the Congress intends to develop to make intelligence actionable but it fails to explain how the Intelligence will be acquired in the first place. 

A closer look at the technology jargon used in this section is a must for it sounds more like a listing of Graduate School project topics

Threat Assessment Modeling, Artificial Neural Networks and Three Dimensional Modeling of Critical Infrastructure

Another curious and out of place proposal is a Citizen’s Campaign with no explanation of what it has to do with Actionable Intelligence or Advanced Analytics.

The section on empowered and coordinated Security Agencies is vague on what new Command and Control structures will be in place and how they will be empowered on decision making. The lone exception is the recent decision on the Indian Navy being the nodal authority on Coastal Security.

The second pillar on Rapid Response is again woefully lacking on the National Security Architecture to respond to acts of terror. It instead passes the buck to the States by disposing off the subject with adequate support shall be given to the States.

It goes further to explain how mistakes and lessons from the last terror strike will be addressed like the non-availability of aircraft while demonstrating little imagination on anticipating likely future needs and how they will be provided for.

The Permanent Crisis Management Group (War Room) and a Standard Operating Procedure with a U.S. like color coded threat level scheme are promised for the future. It doesnt however explain how the War Room will be empowered to make decisions within the National Security Architecture with the buck being passed to the States on response to threats.

The rest of the document describes how the Congress will bring Terrorists to justice while failing to explain how it will address the unique problem facing India where the key conspirators and sponsors of Terror reside outside India.

In conclusion it is fair to say that the Congress’ anti-terror strategy rests on dealing with Terror threats on Indian soil after they have manifested rather than pre-empting and preventing them from manifesting before they reach Indian soil.

In fact the entire 13 page document stands out for making zero mention of safe havens for terrorists outside Indian borders in Pakistan and elswewhere which makes this whole exercise highly questionable.

Any credible anti-terror strategy must first begin by articulating the nature of terror threat faced by India.

It must go on to outlining the National Security Architecture needed to deal with that threat before spelling out the different Protocols and Command/Control structures needed to deal with terror threats pre-emptively and after the fact.

It must then specify the necessary tools from a surveillance, intelligence acquisition, analysis and dissemination standpoint to aid in real time decision making

Finally it must outline the legislative framework necessary to bring the terrorists and their sponsors to justice irrespective of where they are.

On all of these counts the Congress Party’s Anti-Terror strategy is woefully inadequate.

In closing it must be said that rather than view National Security wholistically the Congress Party continues to view the Terror threat from the narrow lens of the Union Home Ministry, thus leaving unstated where finally the buck will stop in protecting India from the Terror threat.

Filed under: Chattisgarh Polls 2008, Chhattisgarh Polls 2008, Delhi Polls 2008, DesiPundit, Dharma-debates, Dharmayudh-2009, Gujarat Polls 2007, India Elections 2009, Karnataka Polls 2008, Lok Sabha Polls 2008-2009, Madhya Pradesh Polls 2008, Rajasthan Polls 2008, War on Mumbai, War on Terror, betrayal of aam admi, jeetega-bharat