Letters to the Editor

A mockery of democracy

Arindam Chaudhuri in the editorial “If you thought India...”(TSI, Mar 25) has made an apt analysis that it is not our country only where the black money dominates the elections in a shameful manner but the USA too where the money power is quintessential for any political party to perform well in the elections. The only difference is that the electoral system of Uncle Sam has been legally endowed with formal procedures to direct cash flows into the system. Thanks to a much debated Supreme Court decision, individual rich donors and corporations are now free to throw unlimited millions of dollars into so-called Super PAC committees to support a candidate and savage his opponents. Thus both India and America are actually making a mockery of the election. In this context it is worth mentioning that if more than 10000 crores is spent by our political parties for the Lok Sabha elections, the US President Barack Obama, following the same path as a fund raiser, has piled up a cool five million dollars in a lucrative single-day campaign blitz and has already raised more than $140 million for his re-election bid in 2012. It is expected that he is well on the way to trumping more than $700 million he piled up in his 2008 run for the White House. There is no denying the fact such a huge spending on the election campaigning lays a deep foundation for a corrupt empire. The editor has rightly summed up that the influx of money and mushrooming of Super PACs are not only allowing a select few to control the entire election process but comes as an insult to those millions who recently came out on the streets for the ‘Occupy Wall Street’ campaign. It is really unfortunate that the great American election is actually meant for 50 rich individuals at the maximum, who dictate terms at the Wall Street and whose diktat is followed verbatim by the American President. And that is a huge shame!

Dilbag Rai

Chandigarh

 

A whole new ball game

Arindam Chaudhuri's incisive analysis in “1982-2012: Ten Decisive Changes In India” (TSI, Mar 18) of the changes that have swept the India's socio-political fabric ever since the late Rajiv Gandhi entered the centrestage, made for a very engrossing read. There is no denying the fact that telecom and communication revolution has transformed politics, just like the lives of ordinary Indians, into a whole new ball game. There is, however, one hidden factor which has not changed. It has withstood the technical tsunami like a rock. This hidden factor is the overwhelming tendency of the Indian electorate to prefer leaders who connect with them at their doorstep. Earnest effort by any leader, irrespective of his/her political ideology, to understand and empathise with the travails of the common man, has always been rewarded by the voters. Late Rajiv Gandhi, Late VP Singh, Jaiprakash Narayan, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, Mamata Banerjee, Narendra Modi and Nitish Kumar have all been able to identify with the man-on-the-street. Rahul Gandhi has not been able to do that. This is a food for thought for all his well-wishers.

Dr Gulbahar S Sidhu

Jalandhar

 

 

Dravid the real star 

This refers to “The star of Dravid” (TSI, Mar 25). As Rahul Dravid's retirement from international cricket brought to an end a glorious chapter and a spectacular cricketing career spanning 16 years, his well-deserved nickname "The Wall" is not only apt but will be etched in the memory of numerous fans and cricket lovers for ever. His consistency, concentration and commitment to perform on any given day anywhere was a treat to watch. Indian cricket will certainly be hard pressed to find a real and worthy successor. In short, this gentleman cricketer was not only a great player but a fantastic human being too who always believed in fair play in the midst of winning or losing the game. Now that his fans will sorely miss this admired cricketer, one hopes Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) utilises his services in a better way to train young and budding talent.

R. Srinivasan

Secundrabad

 

 

Be the change

Arindam Chaudhuri’s editorial, “1982-2012: Ten Decisive Changes In India” (TSI, Mar 18), kaleidoscopically and nostalgically brought back an array of vivid memories of the political history of India over the last three volatile yet significant decades. It is no denying that over the last three decades India has witnessed innumerable critical and epoch-making upheavals in the modus operandi of political system. Plumes are many, prizes are abundant, laurels are countless and writ large are the miraculous accomplishments and achievements over the period. We must reflect on the reasons for such hero-worship of the people towards the so-called modern day messiahs. Majority of the people say that politics is pollution; politics is corruption and most importantly last resort of scoundrels. Butthe question is: after all who has allowed the situation to take this turn? We, and no one else. What we need urgently in India is not the knowledge of the indices of the 3Rs, but legal, moral, ethical and more than anything else, value education. Mahatma Gandhi once said that we must be the change we want to see. It is high time we begin to act and not philosophise. What we need to do presently is to urgently stir the inert and callous attitude of the country.

Shreeprakash Sharma

Samastipur

 

 

Good for the aam admi

Arindam Chaudhuri has given very useful suggestions in his Alternative Budget (TSI, March11) that due considerations should be given to transform the judiciary, to focus on education and healthcare, to focus on employment generation schemes and slum removal schemes, to give people dignified existence by providing the biometric photo identity cards to directly subsidise goods and services meant for the truly poor, to make the IT system more practical and simple and to abolish most fuel related subsidies with the allocation of more funds as compared to the funds allotted in 2011-12 budget. If his proposals are followed by the FM it will be good for the Aam Aadmi. The government should take tough decisions on “reforms”, such as easing inflow of foreign direct investment into various sectors of the economy, including multi-brand retail and insurance, cutting subsidies on diesel, cooking gas, kerosene and fertilisers, resolving coal supply constraints for power projects, relaxing restrictions on mining and paring down the fiscal deficit which is expected to exceeded the target of 4.6 per cent of gross domestic product by at least one percentage point, perhaps more. Those espousing such policies argue that February 2013 would be too close to the next round of general elections for the Budget to propose anything other than “populist” measures. In other words, it is for Pranab Mukherjee to seize this chance of “fiscal consolidation”. Consequently, with economic inequalities widening in the Indian society, the government has to try and ensure that the sharp plummet in its popularity ratings is checked by, among other things, announcing policies and programmes for the poor, such as operationalising the right to food law, that are relatively less contentious. The current debate on the right to food is essentially about whether the public distribution system should be made universal or targeted towards a particular section of the population. What then can Mr Mukherjee do under the circumstances? The choices before him are few and difficult. He cannot please all sections although he may try, even if the happiness is spread rather thinly. But the question is if the Finance Minister would be willing to consider these points? We are not too sure. 

Bhanupriya 

Mohali

 

 

A herculean task ahead

Arindam Chaudhuri's alternative budget for 2012 (TSI, March11) made for an interesting read. With Didi breathing down Pranab-da's (and Congress') neck, there was little choice for him but “to be cruel only to be kind”. Nothing was mentioned about fighting corruption by increasing the strength of the judiciary. Apparently, the word “corruption” is a taboo now and has been conveniently shelved for the time being. The voters have conveyed, loud and clear, that they are not averse to living with corruption but they want good governance, which Akhilesh was quick to promise in his own style, devoid of rhetoric. The points raised in the alternative budget are worthy of being implemented properly and will definitely lead to reduction in corruption in a few years. However, in a coalition government, with the power centres changing frequently, implementation becomes a herculean task. It requires a very tough leader who is prepared to go ahead come what may to implement the rules for all and sundry! There is little doubt that if the revenue losses due to corruption are reduced substantially, India would become one of the richest countries in the world. 

Subroto Sinha

Pune