[world-vedic] Home truths for India's President

[Guest guest]

>OFBJP <OFBJP

>OFBJP Editor <Editor

>Home truths for the President

>Sun, 6 Feb 2000 16:17:00 -0500 (EST)

>

>----

>Overseas Friends of the BJP (USA) ........... Voice: (718) 271-0453

>54-15, 108th St. ............................ Fax: (718) 271-1906

>Corona, NY 11368............................ WWW:http://www.ofbjp.org

> BJP's Website: http://www.bjp.org

>

>Home truths for the President

>Author: Swaminathan S. Anklesaria Aiyar

>Publication: The Sunday Times of India

>January 30, 2000

>

>Dear President Narayanan,

>

>Congratulations for telling us some home truths in your address on the 50th

>anniversary of the Indian republic. You rightly say that our moth-eaten

>republic has fallen far short of the ideals set by its framers. Forgive my

>rudeness if I point out that you yourself are a prominent member of the

>system that has let us down so badly.

>

>You rightly say that 50 years after becoming a republic, we should be

>ashamed of our appalling poverty and illiteracy, our mistreatment of women

>and social and religious minorities, the erosion of accountability and

>criminalisation of politics, the sad lack of justice or voice for the

>common

>man.

>

>I agree wholeheartedly with you that the way public servants treat the

>public, the manner in which we squander or pollute precious reserves like

>water, the way we allow children to be exploited and the disabled to be

>passed by, all speak of a stony-hearted society, not a compassionate one.

>

>But who is responsible for this state of affairs? On this you have little

>to

>say, and what little you say is incomplete or false. Many people, many

>political parties, many sections of society are responsible for the mess we

>are in. But the Congress Party has been at the helm of the country's

>affairs

>for the overwhelming part of the last half-century, and must bear the

>overwhelming share of the blame for the mess.

>

>You knew this when you retired from the foreign service. Yet you joined the

>Congress. It was a passport to power. You rose fast in its ranks, and this

>helped ultimately elevate you to the Presidency. So you have done rather

>well by joining a party which bears the most responsibility for the

>stony-hearted mess that you decry in your Republic Day address.

>

>This is a time for home truths. Too many of us have done well by joining

>the

>existing system instead of opposing it from outside; too many of us have

>compromised with corruption, banditry and injustice because it helps us get

>ahead.

>

>You are not the only one; I and many fellow journalists are also guilty of

>making too many compromises. But you are the President and we are not, so

>excuse me for focusing on you in this column.

>

>You say the three-way fast lane of liberalisation, privatisation and

>globalisation must provide a safe pedestrian crossing for the unempowered.

>Fair enough. But why do you not say that this very skepticism about

>economic

>freedom was the excuse for imposing the neta-babu raj which has ruined us?

>Or that you yourself were part of and supportive of that same neta-babu raj

>which castrated economic freedom? You fail to mention that poverty and

>illiteracy dropped much faster in neighbouring Asian countries that

>emphasised the very policies which you now warn against.

>

>Left-wing intellectuals, among whom you are counted, failed to see that

>outward-looking policies would soon make Thailand 10 times richer than

>India, Korea 30 times richer, Singapore almost a hundred times richer.

>

>You leftists sneered at these countries for being neo-colonial puppets. The

>supposed puppets have become prosperous, literate and healthy, while the

>system you espoused has failed on all three counts. I wish you had talked

>about this home truth too.

>

>India today is a land without justice. Nobody is convicted for corruption

>although it is omnipresent. Murderers and thieves are not in jail, they are

>in Parliament.

>

>Law-breakers have become lawmakers. Why? For many reasons, but one stands

>out: the dissipation of government energy on issues other than the ones

>crucial for good governance.

>

>You socialists saw the prime role of government as being the ownership and

>control of industry and commerce.

>

>In your eagerness to snatch economic control, you neglected primary

>education and health, administrative fairness, legal fairness, and all

>systems of accountability.

>

>Indeed, in the name of protecting workers, you created a system where no

>government employee could be sacked for incompetence or corruption, thus

>encouraging both.

>

>In the holy name of socialism, left-wing politicians imposed a thousand

>controls, and then used these to line their pockets and create patronage

>networks. In the name of democracy, ministers obtained the power to

>transfer

>any official at will, and then used this power to literally sell lucrative

>transfers and make officials accomplices in political crimes.

>

>All this was supposed to be strengthen socialism and the power of the state

>to do good. In fact it created the callous, stone-hearted mess you now

>complain of Merit and excellence today do not count for much.

>

>Money, muscle and influence count for much more. This has caused glaring

>inequalities and injustice, not economic freedom.

>

>Bihar is poor today not because it was neglected in Plan allocations, not

>because it had insufficient quotas for dalits or tribals, not because of

>liberalisation or globalisation, but because governance there collapsed

>long

>ago and shows no sign of reviving.

>

>This is the root cause of injustice, Mr Narayanan, and it cannot be tackled

>just by quotas for dalits, tribals or backward classes. Justice rests

>ultimately on good governance, not on giving every community a quota in bad

>governance and banditry.

>

>There is indeed a case for reverse discrimination as a temporary measure,

>but there is a much stronger case for meritocracy and good governance.

>

>Consider two prominent dalits, Mayawati and you. Mayawati represents dalit

>power through quotas, maladministration and a division of spoils. You

>represent honesty, meritocracy and dignity. Which of you two constitutes

>the

>better route to social justice? Your speech, surprisingly, suggests that

>Mayawati is the superior route. I much prefer you. I may criticise your

>policies, but cannot fault your professionalism. You have risen to the top

>not through quotas or reservations but through professional excellence.

>

>We badly need social justice, but this must ultimately be achieved through

>good governance for all, not a division of spoils among rogues of all

>communities. That is a home truth I sorely missed in your Republic Day

>speech.

>

 

____