|
|
|
|
|
| HOME | NEWS | COMMENTARY | DEVIL'S ADVOCATE | |||
|
April 15, 1998
SPECIALS
|
How Readers reacted to Pritish Nandy's last column
Date sent: Tue, 07 Apr 1998 09:31:25 -0500 I read this with interest! The problem of a highly fragmented polity (which I also think has been a disaster for India), can be fixed quite easily. The Election Commission can do it in one swoop. As a requirement in any election, the winning candidate must obtain 50% plus of all votes cast. If such a candidate only has 45%, force a runoff of the top two candidates. Over a period of time, the runoff system will ensure that miniature 'fungus' parties vanish and yes, we will indeed have two parties: one that is left-leaning and another that is right-leaning! Ganesh
Date sent: Tue, 07 Apr 1998 11:51:27 -0400 Nandy's column about India already having a two-party system sounds convincing at first sight. However, look at his list of what needs to be focused on -- healthcare for all, education for all, jobs for all, etc etc. If these are the issues of both coalitions, then what choice is there between the two coalitions as he states? Everyone is for all these things! What is the difference then between the two coalitions? Vijay Sreedhar
Date sent: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 10:22:20 -0000 Mr editor, enough is enough. Please stop printing Mr Nandy's articles. Let's have some peace... It is obvious from readers' reactions that this guy's article doesn't actually go down well with most of them. Please, please oblige sir. Raviraj Rao
Date sent: Mon, 06 Apr 1998 23:13:14 -0500 I have no idea what you guys think is decent and civilised, and what sort of audience you cater to. This writer uses terms like Hindu rate of growth. He does not mind that this would offend Hindus. Why not use Muslim rate of growth instead? That would be communalism and fascism right? And he states the word Hindu would be politically incorrect. I strongly feel you should give more coverage to this man. The more people read such articles, the more pro-Hindu they become. I thank you all for your service.
Date sent: Tue, 07 Apr 1998 12:02:17 +0800 It seems pseudo-intellectual. He has big borrowed western glasses to look at things. Dear Pritish, wake up! Our real problem is population and only population, you solve it and the rest follows. Unfortunately nobody is talking of it. Swadeshi or no swadeshi, remember for progress you need to have confidence in yourself, and be proud of what you are. So swadeshi is nothing but gives confidence in ourselves. Grow up man, and do not just be an enemy of the BJP! Look at the issues. Anurag
Date sent: Mon, 6 Apr 1998 19:15:08 -0400 (EDT) Interesting article. It begrudgingly forces me to admit that Mr Nandy, leftist par excellence, has a point. However, I would like to add that while the creation of genuine economic opportunities for the youth of India *should* take precedence over everything else, it is equally important to secure India's international security -- for without security there can be no internal peace. And for this security, what Nandy refers to as "nuclear adventurism," is actually *necessary*. One must not close one's eyes to international realities -- there is plenty of precedent that proves that nuclear weapons give a nation a degree of security and more importantly, leverage, that conventional weapons just do not. And then comes the matter of swadeshi -- is it just me or has Nandy simply failed to notice the ambiguity of the BJP's slogan of swadeshi? For all any of us know, the BJP may interpret swadeshi as a form of economic nationalism, not totally unlike what the Americans did towards the end of the Bush presidency. So given that no one really *knows* for a fact how the BJP will enforce and interpret swadeshi, why not wait and see before we go and pooh-pooh the concept? Some other points which Nandy talks about, which I believe are absolutely necessary if India is to ever get *anywhere* in this world, are the Uniform Civil Code and redesigning reforms. As far as the UCC is concerned, it is necessary for one very simple reason -- no nation can last long if it has two systems of law for two separate communities. The UCC will serve to bring together the nation in a way the present legal system fails to. Redesigning reforms is *also* necessary. After all, what is the purpose of reforms? Is it to give spoiled rich kids from Bombay designer clothing? No -- it is a *substitute* for doing what the government has failed to do. That is, provide economic opportunities. And what does India need for greater economic opportunities? A well developed system of infrastructure would be a good beginning, as opposed to say, a well developed system of Pepsi bottling factories. Therefore, that is where the emphasis should be, on attracting investments in sectors which require a high amount of capital -- such as infrastructure. Should MNCs be kept out of consumer goods? No -- the rich spoiled kids of India's big cities are as Indian as the garib villager, so they deserve the right to a little entertainment. I mean, it's not like they're going get more spoiled, right? But the emphasis should be on sectors where investment is actually needed. I believe that is the emphasis of swadeshi, and if my interpretation is correct, then it deserves as much support we can give it. Abhijit Mitra
Date sent: Mon, 06 Apr 1998 14:11:30 -0500 It is very easy for people to praise the Ambanis and Tatas, whereas the poorest are becoming even more poorer and the rich, richer. Let us accept our differences and build a nation based on consensus. Also, if India leaves its spiritual heritage and blindly goes after materialism, we are doomed. Vijay
Date sent: Mon, 6 Apr 1998 11:54:13 -0700 The author does not feel any need to elaborate when he says, "And there is no way such a target can be met unless we are ready to dismantle our existing economic system and put in place wide scale reforms." It's taken for granted that economic reforms is the only and right way, uh ? We have seen lot being written about opening up the economy since '91, so much that now we think that it's the only truth! Goebbels was right when he said that bombard anything constantly till it sounds like truth! I liked the article though. Makarand
Date sent: Mon, 06 Apr 1998 11:31:39 -0700 As usual, Pritish Nandy is again on his rampage to assault the BJP and us Hindus. He coolly says, "Gone is their obsession with Ayodhya and the Ram temple. They are as secular or as communal -- depending on how you look at it -- as the Congress or the UF. They have diluted their stand on Ayodhya and Kashi, Kashmir and Article 370. They no more speak of a Common Civil Code. Common sense says, these is a good agenda for India but the same common sense also says that one cannot implement its agenda until it has enough votes." The perception that the BJP is communal is only in the minds of leftists like you, Pritish Nandy. It is true, the language of fascism is dead and that's because by the BJP coming to power, fascists like the Congress, CPI and UF can't force their fascist agenda on the rest of the nation. He again says, "The BJP knows -- exactly as the Congress-UF do -- that it is no longer possible to form a stable government at the Centre unless the minorities and the backwards are with you. The numbers cannot work. So the upper caste bias of the BJP is changing. The Muslims and the backwards are being wooed. The Scheduled Castes and the neo-Buddhists will be the next target of their affection and, even if Kanshi Ram does not succumb, the Republican Party of India might." This bull will not fly. The BJP's bias of upper caste is the creation of the media and media alone. If what you say was true, BJP would not be winning these many reserved constituencies. BJP does not have to woo anyone. All they have to do is make education their priority. In the Congress raj, the minorities were purposely kept uneducated so that they could be manipulated. The next lie that is being spread by leftists like Nandy is, "The Hindu rate of growth has also been jettisoned." This is far from the truth. If BJP chucks overboard the entire baggage as Nandy claims, they would become a Congress or UF clone and we know what has happened to India under these misfits. Gaurang R Desai
Date sent: Mon, 6 Apr 1998 12:00:55 -0400 This clearly confirms that Pritish Nandy is nothing but a voice of the Communists. It does not augur well for an educated person like him to be party to the Communists. I did not want to comment on his article on swadeshi as it was nothing but crap. But he has gone too far. If he has to go so much against the BJP then he better go to some Communist Web Page and write there. He should understand that by being the largest party BJP has proved that it has the maximum support in India, and how can Pritish go about blasting the majority. It is sad that in our country, we allow people like Pritish to go scot-free after blasting the majority without any logic in it. He should stop condemning the BJP and start seeing the other side also. What is the alternative for India, Laloo + Mulayam combined Left Front or a Sonia lead Congress. We better get down to real terms and give the BJP a fair chance to govern India. I feel Rediff should not publish any article which is totally biased against a section of the Indian public. Pritish's article is directed against the Hindus by all means. Pritish says that no one can win without the minorities' support. I ask him, what happens if all the Hindus unite together. Out of the 87% Hindus, even if 70% vote for BJP, then they will easily get 400 seats. Pritish will have to scamper for cover then. Ajay Gannerkote
Date sent: 31 Mar 98 11:36:07 MAST That was a good article, but maybe you were overreacting just a little bit. I believe in the virtues of capitalism as much as you do. And I believe in all that stuff about being competitive and not begging for protection from the government. You trashed the businessmen that beg for protection and again, maybe you are justified. I only differ with you in that I am more moderate. Maybe these "trashy businessmen" need more time to get adjusted to the giants coming into the market. Don't disregard the enormous resources and expertise these MNCs come with. We are no match for them. Of course I agree that keeping global competition out is not -- and should not be -- the solution to anything. But at the same time we should also be careful not to meet the global giants head-on without being prepared for it. I am no expert on this and I have no great ideas for solutions to this. But anyway, looking at the buying power and thought processes of the average Indian consumer today, I doubt if any party can keep global competition out for long in the name of swadeshi. But it would be sad if they do succeed even for some time, because it would definitely be time lost for India. Krishna
Date sent: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 04:39:40 PST Only a person who doesn't care about his countrymen, only a person who thinks that India needs foreign companies to make shoes like Reebok, drinks like Coke, dolls like Barbie for Indians -- can write such an article filled with nothing but rubbish. At this point, I would like to inform Pritish Nandy that I have studied world economics for four years. I have lived in the Middle-East for 10 years, in Delhi for six and now I am currently living in Toronto for the past two years. Swadeshi means protecting one's interests. Protecting the interests of our country. China has been practising swadeshi for the past five decades. Even today, it has only slowly started opening its markets to the West. India needs to do the same. 1. By bringing in McDonalds restaurant, what are we trying to prove. That we need American multinationals to cook food for us??? Can't we make our own meat, Coke and shoes? 2. Pritish says in his own words, multinationals have strength. Yes, they in fact have too much strength. They can survive shocks and much greater impacts than ones own small scaled companies. Here, in Canada there is a big controversy going on with the US based huge fishing corporations. Ever since Canada opened its seas to US fishermen, the small-scaled Canadian fishermen couldn't catch half of what they need for a living. That is because, huge gigantic American ships come over, they have the latest technology for catching thousands of fish at a time which leaves the Canadian fishermen with nothing left to catch. 3. Multinationals come with billions of dollars up their pockets, ready to bribe any Indian politician just so that they can get the multi-million Indian market for their products. In addition, they get excessive protection from their respective embassies located in India. But, on the contrary, if an Indian has to start a business, he will get absolutely no support from his government, he has to bribe his way up and with limited finances, it is almost impossible for him to start a similar business is a similar fashion. 4. That is why you admire Ratan Tata?? That is nonsense Pritish. Ratan established himself as a successful businessman decades before talk about liberalisation even began. Give time, opportunity and the biggest of all -- fair dealing to other Indians and you will see how Indians can move up. After all we Indians living outside India have made at least 10% more progress than any other community no matter what our profession is. 5. It makes sense to invite corporations with which Indians can benefit, like IBM etc, but stop it right there. When I was talking about this opening of McDonald's in Delhi for the first time, my friends said that there is no harm in that. After all there are so many Indian restaurants in the US. My genuine answer was, these Indian restaurants were opened keeping in mind the business they will earn by the Indian population. In no city where the Indian population is negligible are there any Indian restaurants. 6. In the Middle-East, countries like Kuwait are trapped. They get milk from Denmark, shoes from Canada, telephones from US and so on. They have no choice except to dance to the tunes of the US because the day they chose to go their own way, the US will stop all trade and they wouldn't be able to survive a day on their own. Tell me Pritish, if you think we Indians can't make the smallest daily life products ourselves, if we can't help ourselves, what makes you think foreigners will help us? First be self-reliant and then take help from outside just for support, not for surviving. We need computer chips, not potato chips. Long live swadeshi!
Date sent: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 22:16:47 -0700 I do not know if the feedback actually comes back to you or just goes to Rediff. But nonetheless I am putting in my thoughts hoping that you Pritish would also be able to read it. I totally agree with you on this point Pritish. I am 28 years old today, but ever since I could think logically -- the wellbeing of India was an issue that I was as much concerned about as any other "genuine " Indian. I have not been able to understand the short-sightedness of Indian politicians to a large extent. It's not to claim that we have not had good politicians. We have but they have been far outnumbered by the bad ones. Again I am digressing...but I want to say so much that every time I get an opportunity or something triggers my thoughts, I let loose, so please bear with me and pardon me for that. I have worked in Dubai for some time and am now in Singapore. What I see here is also an effort that is not more than 40-45 years old. But look at what they have done? Wow, it's amazing. Not that the population here has more intelligence. Not at all, with no offence meant. The people are very average in terms of that, but are definitely very hard working and want to see their country do even better. Their success has been more because of planning and execution. The government lays down policies and implements them, whether people are happy in the short term or not. People do make noise, but when they see Singapore doing so well, everyone says just one thing and I quote "Hey what the hell...after all if we want to be big, we have to do this" ...which is so true. We probably need to do something similar for burning issues like population control and increasing corruption...otherwise these will stall anything positive. I know Singapore cannot be compared to India because of India's sheer size...but then we also have more people and more rugged infrastructure, which only needs to be cleaned now. The latter which seems missing in everything major we Indians try to do. More often it is that and not corruption which eats into the process like termites. If not corruption, then it's the short-sightedness of the politicians and the fast growing population. People in India have got so used to making a quick buck that they do not care a damn. Businesses want to rake in. Government officials want to rake in. Perhaps people in the private sector are the ones that have the most difficult time, since designations and pay packets and professional jazz sound attractive, but then at the end of the month, its just that 30-40,000 that you are going to get after slogging your brains out. And is that enough? I don't think so, go to Asiad village and have a meal for four without a drink each and the bill will be around Rs 2,500 to Rs 3,000. That's about 6.66% of your monthly income. Own a car (everyone owns at least 2), and the petrol bills will be around Rs 5,000 per month. That's another 12.5% of your income and I have assumed here that you are earning Rs 40,000, which is the best pay packet in booming private sectors like finance, advertising and information technology. Then there is taxation. I have had the opportunity to see some other places like the US, Europe and even Colombo, and in none of these have seen such a high cost of living. And we call ourselves a "country of the poor." It's small businessmen who are having a ball and of course they would not want an open market, because then they will have to offer the same quality that too at a respectable price, not an obscenely high one. The only way India can become a global power is if it decided to take on the world. We have the brains, we have the geographic resources, we have the potential. Flagging the concept of swadeshi will probably only serve in taking us back by 15-20 years. We should continue to attract foreign investment and if we really care for development of India, force these investment to plough back a small percentage of their profits into the Indian economy -- be it in the form of funds for schools, roads, medicine, agricultural research, information technology or whatever. I don't think any international company would consider this issue as a deterrent for investments in India. India is perhaps the largest potential market they can tap. Why not use this as a USP and keep some of the dollars back? This, if done for about 10 years will prove very constructive. I don't think many people have the vision to even imagine it. I am sure that you do and you as a spokesperson with some recognition need to voice this out to as many people you can through your columns. They reach a vast multitude. I read each one of them -- whatever I can lay my hands on, which is not very difficult -- thanks to the Internet. I think following are the areas where each day of delay from our side results in pushing us back. I list them in order of priority. 1. Population control 2. Corruption 3. Education 4. Opening of markets 5. Information technology 6. World class manufacturing within India 7. Defence We can definitely become a power within the Asian and South-East Asian region and successfully compete with countries like Japan, Singapore, Hong Kong, Malaysia and Indonesia. The question is how many of us want it, and how clean our intentions are. Lastly do we have the guts to take on the world? Jagdish Singh
Date sent: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 23:17:24 -0500 Pritish Nandy glosses over the international monopoly market politics. What happened to Indian industries like textiles after the advent of the British? Swadeshi was coined in the freedom struggle by Mahatma. There is nothing wrong with the concept. It only means internal competition must precede external exploitation. Can the author assure jobs to the cottage industry employees if an international giant displaces them suddenly? Are all of them incompetent? Would he be willing to be one among them? Why do they say 'Buy American and be American' even in the most advanced and economically powerful country? The thought process in the article is over-simplistic and aggressively insipid. I read these articles and I think these are written without indepth thinking and with telltale prejudice. I am thinking of not wasting time on reading Nandy's articles any more. I do not miss much I think. Sankar-Rao Mopidevi, Rockville, MD
Date sent: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 21:43:10 -0600 A nation as competitive as USA has slogans urging people to buy American made goods (look at WalMart ads), so I do not see where 'Be Indian Buy Indian' implies hobbling, as long as it stays a slogan -- a way of selling. Though India should (and has) open up some of its market, it has to protect certain sectors. Every country including such competitive giants as Japan and USA do it. Sanat
Date sent: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 01:28:08 EST Cool one! Please forward it to the new government! Anu Chinta
Date sent: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 17:23:17 -0800 Another laughable silly article from this high dome of journalism. No doubt we all want best products at best prices. We all want our Indian companies to sell a quality product with outstanding customer service. These should be our goals. Multinationals have so many advantages which they enjoy: 1. They can borrow money at interest rates of 6-7 % as against 17-18% in India. We all know that builders and traders have to borrow short term loans even at 3 % per month. Where is the level playing field? 2. Multinationals enjoy outstanding communication facilities at very cheap rates even cheaper than in India. 3. Multinationals enjoy and the take full advantages of very good infrastructure which are offered by advanced nations. 4. Nowadays many multinationals are producing cheap stuff in China and Taiwan, and want to dump it in India at throw away prices incurring losses for 5-8 years just to grab market share. How can our companies survive such onslaught? We see our joint ventures decreasing equity from Indian partners due to this. 5. Multinationals also lobby hard with Congressmen and governments to pressurise countries like ours to open our markets for their grab. Unless we provide these advantages to Indian industry, they will not be able to compete. A time limited protection programme coupled with time bound development programmes on these fronts will make the field even. That is a time when we can open our markets for better competition. I was really mad to see a US company selling diaper packet of third quality at Rs 800 which is sold in US for $10, ie, Rs 400. If we compare the products and prices of goods sold by multinationals today in India with the prices in US, you will know the difference.
Date sent: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 16:47:58 -0800 I read your columns regularly and have always admired and liked them. But your latest on swadeshi, didn't meet your standard. I do not agree with you when you say swadeshi is for the lazy and incompetent. Yes, I agree that is what politicians mean these days. I do not understand what is wrong with trying to make India Self-sufficient and strong. Self-sufficiency is always a good quality, be it in a human being or a country. A mother pays extra attention to her weak child, and tries to instil confidence in him. That is not at all wrong. Yes, she should strike the right balance. Teach him to be self-sufficient and then let him deal with the outside world, on his own. Swadeshi, swayamkrishi, are not crutches for those who lack dignity and self-respect, but they are the props to rise in dignity and self-respect. Global presence and global insight might be good, but they are also the cause of brain-drain from India. Think, why are software engineers such a success outside India and not within India? Is there a dearth of multinationals in India? By saying this I am not supporting the NRIs, nor am I ridiculing successful Indian industrialists. All I am saying is a strong son will come up in the world, whether or not he gets attention at home, but for a weak son the attention is imperative. Aping the western culture has become the way of life in India. Articles like this, especially from intellectuals like you, tend to justify it. Manjula
Date sent: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 18:00:53 -0600 Excellent article. Swadeshi didn't work during the last fifty years and it will not work in the next 50 years, period. Mohan Marette Tell us what you think of this column
|
|
HOME |
NEWS |
BUSINESS |
CRICKET |
MOVIES |
CHAT
INFOTECH | TRAVEL | LIFE/STYLE | FREEDOM | FEEDBACK |
|