3. Democracy: An Explotative Political System!

Science of Exploitative Democracy
New Oppressors’ business models in the Third Millennium
(http://basudebsen05.blogspot.com)

Preface


At the age of 10, my soccer playmates elected me as the captain of the under-12 boys of our local club through a spot democratic election conducted by a senior club official charged with the responsibility of facilitating daily football play for our age group. We were all nurtured in democracy quite young in the fledgling, independent Indian Democratic Republic. We grew up from early childhood with Democracy as our faith, hope and ideal, much more valuable than God, family or knowledge. In the high school we came out stronger in conviction with our faith in the most modern, romantic dictum’ of the people, by the people and for the people’. Only at the post graduate classes, a slight doubt had occurred when I had to read articles/ books of Noble Laureate economists on the complications of deriving optimum societal choice from individual choice: I guessed that my elections as Captain in my childhood had been as unscientific and irrational as the evolution and practice of democracy.
In my romantic endeavour with democracy I did not care to put the nebulous concept of democracy to scientific test of consistency and integrity: I did not try either to find out the probable adverse implications of democracy on the lives of citizens. As I grew up, I found how democracy ensured total surrender of my elementary individual rights to the elected representatives and the politicians authorized to exercise their privilege of commanding rights in the name of State’s sovereign power. I started experiencing how democracy as a political philosophy empowers a few to exploit the citizens in various ways.
I failed to remain a blind devotee to worship democracy after I quit working for a living in 2002 as my mind’s eyes enjoyed plenty of time to view the democratic dramas engulfing the nation with social irresponsibility, oppression, exploitation, cheating and corruption. The addiction to democracy continues despite the inherent weaknesses of the concept of democracy unfolding ceaselessly entertaining melodramas that parallel the dramas enacted during the days of with monarchy, aristocracy and dictatorship regimes in history.
Since 2009, I used the democratic right to entertain myself without affecting others through postings in my blog ‘Science of Exploitative Democracy: New Oppressors’ business models in the Third Millennium’ at http://basudebsen05.blogspot.com/ . Some of these posts have been put together in chronological order in this book as a tribute to Democracy’s strength to survive repeated fooling of the citizens of democracy.
Pramita, my wife who studied Political Science and Law at the graduation level us a firm believer in democratic decision-making in the few areas she considers I can have a feeble voice to raise. It would be only proper that I dedicate ‘Science of Exploitative Democracy’ to her with sincerity, love and gratitude for tolerating my anti-democratic exploitation.
Basudeb Sen
Diwali 26 October 2011
Kolkata, India


Apr 21, 2009
Flourishing Democratic, Republic Monarchs in the Third Millennium

The recent fall of the King in Nepal did not herald the end of the last remains of Monarchy in human civilization. Old wine in a new bottle is more attractive and addictive but the toxicity and the taste remain intact. The philosophers, dead long ago after they had propounded and argued for Democracy and Republics may be happy that virtually all countries in the modern world are democracies and / or republics; but the fact remains Monarchs have proliferated and flourished since I had studied Modern World History as a school student 45 years ago. The chapters on the rise of the Parliament in Great Britain, the French Revolution and failure of Napoleon to establish a dynastic rule, the American War of Independence and Abraham Lincoln, the Marxian call for the Dictatorship of the Proletariat and the Russian Revolution, the mysticism of Mao’s People Republic of China and the socialism of East European states and finally the establishment of the Socialist Democratic Republic in India (not secular at that time) were fascinating and absorbing readings in history that would have firmly convinced the teenagers that the earth had been cleansed of Monarchial atrocities, exploitation and oppression.

Forty-five years down the line, Democracies and Republics of the World can boast of a distinct class of monarchs who are much more powerful, wealthier, dishonest, exploitative, oppressive and irresponsible than the monarchs that ruled the World for centuries until, say 300 years ago. We now have much richer countries throughout the World that can afford more monarchs to enjoy life than before. Such monarchs have proliferated and flourished in religious democracies like Iran, peoples’ republics like China, secular democratic republics like India, post-glasnost democracy in Russia, Military-controlled democracies in Bangladesh and Pakistan, Communist democracies like Cuba and North Korea, strife-ridden democracies in Africa and Latin America and economic disaster spreading, color-blind democracy like the United States of America.
To find out the reality and identify the modern monarchs and their kingdoms, one needs to lift the democratic / republic veil.

2. Before one is able to lift the veil, it may be worthwhile recollecting little that one knows about the formal definitions and practice of different organizational forms of the political state in different countries. Monarchy is the single or sole ruler of a state, the hereditary (often constitutional) head of a state like king or queen, or is a person or thing that surpasses others of the same kind. A monarch enjoys supreme and absolute power as the head of state, for life or until abdication, and "is wholly set apart from all other members of the state”. It was a common form of government in the world during the ancient and medieval times. Holding unlimited political power in the state is not the defining characteristic, as many constitutional monarchies such as the United Kingdom and Thailand are considered monarchies. Hereditary may be a common characteristic, but there are elective monarchies like the pope, sovereign of the Vatican City State, is elected by the College of Cardinals). On the other hand, some states may have hereditary rulers and yet call themselves as republics (the Dutch Republic, or the Fiji.

3. In a republic state, the people (or at least a part of its people) have an impact on its government: In most modern republics, the head of state is termed president. In republics democratic republics like India, the head of state is selected for a given period of time or term/s, with / without restriction, through a direct or indirect election. This type of democracy was used in ancient India and Rome. If the head of state of a republic is at the same time the head of government, this is called a presidential system (United States). In semi-presidential systems and parliamentary republics, the head of state is different from the head of government prime minister/premier/ chancellor. Republic head of state may have the characteristics of a monarch: some republics have republics a president with life-long tenure and powers to make the post hereditary (Syrian Arab Republic). Monarchies can also resemble a republic in some ways: the political power of monarchs may be purely ceremonial or the monarch may be replaced by the people through some kind of referendum.

4. Republics are often associated with democracy but there does not seem to be one to one correspondence. Before the concept of "one equal vote per adult" got generally around the middle of the last century, in all democracies the right to vote depended on one's financial situation, sex, race, age, etc. Political parties in many representative democracies fear and abhor direct democratic instrument like referendum. Marxist and communist republics / democracies that seek to establish the dictatorship of the proletariats seldom allow political freedom and hate reforms like glasnost and perestroika of Gorvachov in Russia. In Cuba’s basic democracy, "popular committees" allow participation from citizens at the local level but far-reaching political power is beyond the proletariat mass. However, the communist / socialist rulers have used the term’s peoples’ republic and people’s democracies quite extensively to describe countries like China, former East Germany, North Korea and Mongolia and other countries that practiced complete totalitarianism and hence were essentially opposite to the concept of either democracy or republic.

6. In a democracy, power is held directly or indirectly by citizens under a free electoral system and ideally supposed to be based on two principles: (a) all members of the society (citizens) should have equal access to power and (b) all members (citizens) enjoy universally recognized freedoms and liberties. No real world democracy seemed to have fully adopted these principles in practice. Democracies do not as yet know how to reconcile through democratic process "majority rule" and minority rights, neither has it been possible to establish procedures that are fair and ensure substantive competitive elections. Marxist revolutionary, Che Guevara, once said "Democracy cannot consist solely of elections that are nearly always fictitious and managed by rich landowners and professional politicians." Real world democracies have so far failed to devised mechanisms that would make democracy an efficient social / political system. Efficiency of democracy depends on the assumptions of rational voters, competitive elections, and relatively low political transactions costs: these assumptions are far not valid in reality.

Voters are highly uninformed about many political issues, especially relating to economics. Even if they have information they are and politically conscious, they are generally poor interpreters of information. Different sections of the societies are often strongly biased by their sectional interests rather than the national interests. While on the one hand, democracy has remained grossly inefficient as a political system, the communists, religious leaders and conservatives tied to cultural traditions dislike attempts to make democracies more efficient because democratic freedom leads to questioning of the authority of rulers and leaders, of the cultural and social codes in favor of respect to the clergy and the seniors and even of the powers of God.

7. If the real world democracies and republics are in so weak state and so poor in quality despite the politicians claim that democracies and republics are the best form of political organization, it is hardly surprising that these political regimes have become active breeding grounds of and covers for implicit monarchs and monarchies. Essentially, the concept of democracy is merely an extension of the concept of democracy. It accepts the fundamental superiority of and absolute power of the Ruler in relation to all other citizens of a State. The concept of democracy does not question the distinction of the Ruler and the Ruled. It only establishes procedures and a rational for such procedures for choosing the ruler: the Ruler in a democracy is chosen by some form of selection process in which citizens participate and this participation of the citizens in the choice of the Ruler by majority votes is believed to be a good thing in that each citizen can perceive to have enjoyed equal power in choosing the Ruler by casting his/ her vote. Just as in the case of Monarchies, there is not just a single person Ruler in practice. Beyond the size of a family, the ruler of a group has often to be a team headed by a leader: there would be various government departments and minister and bureaucracies through which administration of the Ruler functions. Democracies and republics may also allow citizens participation in the choice of the entire Ruler network from the national level to provincial level to local area level. The ruler network is hierarchical not only in terms of geographical areas but also in terms of functional areas like legislation, administration of policies, internal security, external security, economy management, international relations, etc.

8. The essential emphasis is only on the choice of the Rulers at various levels through some process of election/ selection by the citizens. Clearly, a large number of Rulers of varying powers are chosen and once chosen each elected ruler is free to enjoy the power to rule over others in the respective jurisdiction. Democracies and Republics are nothing but legitimizing the rulers by making the citizens feel that they enjoy the ultimate power to elect the rulers who will actually enjoy the real powers to rule. Democracies and republics are therefore are formal systems of creation of monarchs. These have really nothing to do with justice, equality, peace, progress or efficiency and do not contribute in any way to fulfilling national aspirations or eradication of poverty or protection of human rights or eradication of corruption. The probability of having a good king delivering good governance for 40 years in a period of say 200 years of monarchy is higher than the probability of good governance for 40 years in 200 years of democratic or republic rule.

The above may appear strong negative assertions about democracy and republic rule. But if one closely studies the inherent structure of democracies and republics and evaluate the empirical evidence, it would become clear that democracies and republics are nothing but weaker versions of essentially monarchial form of government. We will explore these assertions in this series.

Apr 21, 2009
Maximizing Tax Revenue for Democracy

The oldest democracy of the latest epoch of politics is under turmoil. Some citizens are up against proposal to raise taxes on earnings above a cut-off limit. They organized tea parties that those who like others to be taxed as racists and irrational. Those who wanted taxes to be rationalized and reduced, and not increased, felt sad and dejected with the apprehension of higher taxes on all of them soon. God felt pity for them and sent them an answering machine that would make them happy if they seek answers to their questions.
The answering machine was installed by TV channel and the Question and Answer show was telecast live. Here is the transcript.
Q: Who has sent you here?
A: The God of Democratic Science.
Q; What's Democratic Science?
A: It's the Science of Society developed democratically.
Q: What's the purpose of this science?
A: To eradicate all exploitation and unfair social practices.
Q: Why is it called a Science?
A: It is a Science because it is the most democratic. Its hypothesis is logically and empirically verified to be correct.
Q: Why has God sent you here?
A: To enable you to get answers to your questions so that you become wise listening to me and forget your worries like the one arising from the threat of higher taxes.
Q: Can we ask you questions?
A: Yes, as many as you like. But only one at a time. That is the reason I am in this REALITY show.
Q. Why should taxes be raised?
A: Because taxes are lower now and can be lowered again if required.
Q: Doesn't higher taxes mean suffering for the tax payers?
A: No: Higher taxes are beneficial to all. When taxes are raised, they release incentive to some people to reduce income to reduce tax incidence and reduce economic disparities. Some people get the incentive to become innovators of devices to evade taxes. Some others happily pay taxes.
Q: But why should one pay taxes at all?
A: Because it has been decided democratically to tax as much as the democratically elected Governments wish to spend.
Q: Why should Governments spend as much as they like?
A: Because that has been decided by democratically elected representatives who legislate.
Q: But why do democratically elected legislators decide to tax or raise taxes/
A: Because that is the way to strengthen democracy. Most people are poor and do not like to pay taxes and want richer people to pay more and more taxes. The representatives want to get votes. They must become popular. That is why they legislate for higher and higher and more and more taxes.
Q: Isn't that contradictory to become popular by imposing higher taxes?
A: Not really. What is the percentage of current voters in the total number of voters? Not the dominant one. With higher cut-offs in the lower range, the percentage will continuously decline. More people will vote for higher taxes because most people will not get hurt by higher taxes. Rather, a disutility of a voter paying an additional dollar as taxes is much lower than the utility derived by the voters who do not pay taxes (or pay lower taxes) from additional dollar of tax paid by someone else. This is called externality in (negative) tax consumption. So, higher taxes are very desirable in accordance with democratic science principles.
Q: But why do Governments need higher and higher tax revenues?
A: We have no more time for this episode of the show. Wait for the next episode next day next time.

Apr 30, 2009
Taxing Non-voting Citizens

Q: The question remained unanswered in the previous show: why does Government need higher and higher tax revenues?
A: Purpose of the Government is to spend as much as possible under any circumstance. The higher is the Government expenditure higher is the value and importance of the Govt. The number of problems afflicting the country is never going down. The Government must solve all these problems like new diseases, new religions, new types of marriages, movement of people across borders, promotion or saving of democracy elsewhere, aid to poor people globally, maintaining external diplomatic policy for alliances and international peace, maintain and grow establishments to regulate the behavior of human beings in so many different areas of their activities, promote education and health care, ensure adequate care for the babies, education for the children, health care for the poor, ensure adequate income for retired senior citizens, care for the mothers, care for the workers, care for the immigrants, care for the wild life, care for the drug addicts and smokers, care for the unemployed, care for the mentally and physically handicapped, care for the sports persons, care for the teachers, care for.. . Such a caring institution like Govt. needs lots of money because care cannot come without cost. So Government requires increasing amounts of money.
Q: Why can't every one care for themselves?
A: First, many people do not have money to care for themselves. Like children or old people. Second, private care is costly to buy: Govt care comes almost free. Third, many people just do not care either for them or for others and so Government has to enter. Fourth, many people do not know how best to care: this is known only to Govt. because Govt. can buy the best knowledge wholesale at the cheapest cost and make available that knowledge virtually free to all. Finally, what happens when there is bad recession like the one we currently have? Govt. has to spend to raise demand and arrest recession and stop prices from falling to levels at which no producer or seller will be willing to produce and sell. And, when big banks are about to fall, Govt. has to save them by giving them money as otherwise many people will lose jobs and many persons savings with such banks may erode in value significantly. Govt. therefore needs money to bail out big firms and their employees.
Q: Where does the Govt. get all this increasing amount of money from? It just prints currencies?
A: Unfortunately printing currencies does not itself get Government purchasing power to finance its spending. If the Govt. prints double the amount of currency now available and starts using that currency, it results in higher demand for whatever govt. wants to purchase. Given the fixed supply of goods and services available at any point of time, higher demand results in higher prices. So Govt. may buy but some other individual and firm buyers have to be satisfied with lower quantity of purchases than before. Yes, through inflation other people's buying is reduced and Govt. spends with printed currency. Since Govt. is caring and does not like people to suffer from inflation in this manner, Govt. tries to spend by (a) raising tax revenues, (b) charging fees for giving its services and (c) taking loans from the people who save from their income.
Q: Does that mean that govt. takes a portion of the income of individuals and firms in some manner to spend?
A: Correct. Govt. taxes the income of individuals and firms means transferring income of individuals to Govt. by law. When individuals purchase something they pay a higher price than what the sellers keep for themselves because the seller gives a portion of the price paid by the purchaser to the Govt. as sales tax or value added tax. All these are straight transfer of income from individuals and firms to Govt. But such taxes and fees collected by the Govt. seldom proves adequate to meet govt.'s growing expenditure. So, govt must raise taxes, charge higher fees and just borrow from individuals and firms. Most Governments therefore run huge deficits that are covered by taking loans from individuals and firms.
Q: But how will a Govt. always in deficit repay the loans it takes and pay interest on such loans?
A: Simple. The Govt. takes more and more loans again and again. After all there will always be some rich persons who will have large savings and whatever poor people saves goes into banks and mutual funds which in turn gives loans to Govt.
Q: Then, people must get angry with the Govt. taking away their incomes through taxes and taking away their savings that are never effectively returned?
A: You are right, people get angry. So, govt is careful to see that there are more and more people who pay very little taxes and very little direct loans to Govt. hat is why taxes are high on rich people and low on poor people. In some countries poor people who do not pay income taxes or pay very little are the vast majority. And, that is what democracy is all about. Democracy is the rule of the majority and majority must be least taxed. Then the majority will vote for one govt. or the other.
Q: What happens to the minority of tax payers?
A: They protest for sometime and then try to reduce their income so that they have to pay less tax. This helps sustain democracy with more and more people joining the ranks of low tax paying class. Those who are unwilling to reduce their income, try to evade taxes or just keep paying high taxes.
Q: But tax evasion is bad and criminal offence.
A: So, most people therefore reduce their work effort and income. Except the corporations. Bigger corporations try to increase their income. Their incomes should ultimately flow down to the shareholders but the Govt. is clever enough to tax away part of the income before they get distributed to shareholder of these companies. And, since there are millions of shareholders they do not really come to realize that the Govt. is taking away a part of their incomes that would come through the companies. Specially, the Government, the media and the intelligentsia keeps telling the people that it is the corporations who create most nuisances like pollution, job cuts, lower wages, higher prices, fat salaries and bonuses for executives to the detriment of the shareholders, flout accounting principles and prudential codes. So higher the taxes on corporations the better are the voters pleased.
Q; But heavily taxed corporations may ultimately get into trouble?
A: They do. But that may be taken up in the next episode day next time.

May 3, 2009
Democracy Ruler is Always Right

Q: High tax regimes can cause problems of companies getting into trouble and individuals reducing work effort.
A: Yes, but the choice of level of taxation is democratic choice. If the highly taxed corporations suffer and are unable to create more and more employment directly or through linkage effects, the level of taxation may be reduced by a future Govt. through democratic choice. Both high and low taxes are good as and when the choice of high or low is made by governments chosen democratically. And in democracy, there is scope for opposite views: so the democratically chosen opposition party has the obligation to demand for lower taxes when ruling Govt. wants higher taxes and vice versa. In today's democracy, every policy is correct: so you apply the rule of majority to choose policy. That is the basic rationality. In earlier times, the choice was always wrong because the choice was not made by majority rule.
Q: But the high deficits financed by high debts are supposed to be bad.
A: Everything is Good in democracy since the choice is always made by democratically installed Govt. Truth depends on the majority opinion in democracy.
Q: But high debts incurred today will be a burden to the future generation. They are not fully participating in democratic choice.
A: You are right. But any debt created by Govt within the country by borrowing from its own citizens, is also an asset of the citizens. As the future generations bear the burden of repaying the debt, they also receive the proceeds of debt retired by Govt. in future. So, it is democratically fair.
Q: So we should not worry about high national debt?
A: Follow the majority rule and forget worries unless you are in the opposition whose task is to create worries over extant govt. policies.
Q: What about debt from other countries?
A: That is really the headache of foreign countries that give us loans.
Q: Why foreign loans need not be repaid?
A: They have to be repaid. But such repayment is possible not by giving money. A foreign loan taken is a purchasing power borrowed and is used to buy goods and services from abroad. Repayment of foreign loans will mean foreigners will have to paid by goods and services produced or owned by us. If the foreign country does not buy our goods and services, they cannot take back the loan.
Q: Then one day China has to buy up US goods and services to get repaid?
A: Yes.
Q: Then why does China lend so much of money to America at so low interest rates so that the latter buys cheap goods from China?
A: Because China is a People's Republic. What their Govt. does is always correct.

May 5, 2009
Tax the Minority Rich for the sake of Democracy

Q: The political leaders are against use of tax payers' money for bail out of private corporations whose executives acted irresponsibly and took away large sums of moneys as bonuses.
A: You are right. They also like corporations to pay more taxes.
Q: It means that corporations as a section of tax payers should contribute more money for bailing out corporates in difficulty.
A: That maybe one of looking at the issue. But corporates that need bailout now already contributed large amounts of taxes when they and the economy were doing well. The Govt. collected huge amount of taxes from the booming construction activity and financial services activity. Where did all these money go? Did the Govt. not save some of this taxes that could now be used for bail-outs? Bailouts do not help merely the bailed out companies but also the recession-afflicted economy in general.
Q: So where did the money go?
A: In democracy one does not go back to past: it is the current majority opinion on whom we like to manage our future that matters.
Q: What is the majority opinion?
A: Tax the bad and the rich more and more of their incomes and wealth.
Q: Who are bad and who the rich are?
A: Corporate executives and the corporations, and of course the taxpayers in the top income bracket. Consider the US economy, the largest in the World. US population is a more than 300 million. Exclude the children, home-makers and the very poor who does not earn enough income to pay taxes, you get slightly less than 50% of the population who pays income tax. By majority rule, more than 50% do not pay tax. They could not have. Of those who pay tax, again by majority rule, 50% contribute only about 3.3% of taxes going to the Govt. This is good because they earn only 13.4 % of income of all tax payers. They are poor. It is better that these 50% of the tax payers do not pay taxes at all. Instead the top earning 5% tax payers whose share in all taxpayers' gross income is 33.4% and currently contribute 37% of the taxes collected by the Govt., pay just a little bit more, say 10 % more taxes (i.e. contribute 40% of income tax revenues).
Q: That is a great solution. The top 5% contribute a little more and we reduce the number of tax payers' by half.
A: Yes, that is the appropriate application of the Golden Rule by Majority in modern democracy.

May 11, 2009Democratic Urge to Rule
Q: But, why do majority people want others, especially the rich to be taxed?
A: That is because modern democracy rules out the choice of zero taxes on all citizens. If you have a poll among the citizens where you ask each citizen whether he/ she would like the Govt. to withdraw all taxes on him/ her, everyone will vote for zero taxes.
Q: What if the question is: Tax others and not me'?
A: Everyone will vote Yes. But this cannot be implemented as it is impossible to leave each person without tax while making others pay taxes. You need a cut -off to satisfy jealousy. The poorer people would be allowed to be granted to effectively enjoy their choice based on jealousy. So the closest question one can try is: Tax only those richer than I am. Everyone will again vote YES. But you will get majority satisfied if you impose no taxes on the bottom 51% of income-earners.
Q: So, you mean to say that modern democracy is based on satisfaction of jealousy of the majority.
A: You are right. Assume there is no jealousy; all taxes will be rejected by referendum.
Q: That cannot be true. Many people will be willing to pay taxes to enable the Govt. to take care of national security, law and order, public health, education, public health.
A: Yes, most people would be agreeable to your view. But this is because of the assumption that the Govt. is not capable of running commercial businesses and making huge profits and not capable of doing philanthropy.
Q: What do you mean?
A: Assume that Govt can run the most efficient commercial business and make more money than the private corporations. Assume Govt. is philanthropic. The, a Govt. can earn as much money as it needs to meet all expenses is budgets for and the entire budget would be philanthropic efforts to provide national security, internal security, justice administration, education, health-care and infrastructure and science. Even the Govt. can seek donations from the people instead of taxing the people. Just like Bill Gates running Microsoft, Govt runs big businesses in competition with private corporations, makes huge money and uses the entire surplus profits to Govt. as donations to fund govt. expenditure. If Govts can make policies, guide and regulate companies, govts may be well qualified to run businesses and do better than the private sector.
Q: Do you mean that 50% or more of the manufacturing and service sector companies/firms shall be owned and managed by the Govt.? That is nationalization and socialism!
A: Whatever you choose to do you are going to aim at socialism only in modern democracy. You can have more of tax-dependent socialism or you can have more of tax-independent socialism. But, Govts that are scared about controlling angry rebellious crowds of citizens generally rely more on tax-dependent socialism and call their countries liberal democracies. Those countries where Govtshave the muscle power to throttle opposition of any kind rely more on tax-independent socialism and call their countries people's democracy or republic. Which ever way one goes, democracy and republics will necessarily be a grand design of massive exploitation of the people by the Govts for the smart and mighty few.
Q: What is the solution then to end this extensive exploitation?
A: In the last millennium, the solution to the problem of exploitation of the people was found out by great philosophers time and again. As it turned out each of their solution (like monarchy to democracy, capitalism to socialism, multi-party electoral systems to single party dictatorship of the proletariat) have been successful in replacing exploitation of the people by another system of exploitation of the people.
Q: Philosophers and political thought leaders do not appear to be as smart, talented or gifted as the natural scientists or the actual politicians are. So long as one has the strong urge to rule over others to make a worthwhile living, you have to curtail the freedom of others in exchange of impossible to keep promises to make others future brighter. One just will find ways to use theories and ideologies to innovate on how to exploit the others.

May 12, 2009

Democratic Corporate Governance
Q: Why Corporate Governance is important?
A: Because Governance of countries is not corporatised.
Q: What do you mean?
A: Government is not organised as a corporation with shareholding distributed among the citizens equally.
Q: How can we structure Govts as we do in the case of publicly listed corporations?
A: Why, is there any problem? You can name the firm as National Democratic Corporation (NDC) with specified Vision, Mission, Charter of business activities, strategies, objectives, Plans and Performance Disclosures. The shares will be listed in the market. If the share price falls, it would mean the citizens are viewing the performance of the management of the Govt. as poor.
Q: So, the NDC's shares will be listed and publicly traded! But then the NDC's shares will be corned by the rich.
A: There will be two classes of shares. Class A shares will not be traded as each citizen is issued a share free of cost as soon as one is born and extinguished as soon as one dies. Class B shares are to be purchased by citizens if they wish to with money. Govt. can issue fresh shares at any time it requires money by issuing Class B shares at prices that will be accepted in the market. Class B shares will be traded in the market. The NDC can raise money by issuing bonds, debentures, certificate of deposits, etc. But that will be subject to a prudential leverage (debt-equity) ratio.
Q: What about voting rights?
A: Class A shares held by adults will enjoy political voting right only. Class B shares will have no such voting rights. But will be entitled to get dividend at the highest rate of dividend offered by any private company in the country or inflation rate plus 5%, whichever is higher. NDC can never be liquidated. If it defaults in payment to class B shareholders or to lenders/ creditors, the ministers and the entire set of legislatures will be penalised as per the provisions of criminal law applicable to fraud or murder. The ministers and legislatures can go to court for justice but will automatically lose their positions ad fresh elections will be organized. Each candidate must hold a specified minimum number of class A shares to be eligible to become an election contestant. The elected legislatures and the ministers would have to deposit specified minimum class B shares to an independent custodian company till the time they hold office. During this period the class B shares deposited to the custodian cannot be withdrawn or traded. At the end of their term the legislatures can take back the shares.
Q: It is becoming increasingly complicated now.
A: But only complicated systems can ensure Corporate Governance. The legislators pass so many laws and appoint so many regulators to improve Corporate Governance. Now, they will make the same laws and regulators applicable to NDC and therefore to themselves. That will ensure that the legislators and ministers do not take irresponsible or imprudently risky decisions when making laws or policies or when implementing their decisions. It should be easy for democratic leaders.
Q; You mean Corporate Governance should begin at home - the political system and should be just the same as in corporations!
A: You are right. But that would be undemocratic. Democracy means different standards for legislators and ministers. They belong to Royal Class. So, you do not have to worry about Corporate Governance standards being imposed on the political parties or the Govt.

May 24, 2009
Funny Democratic Number Games: Indian Elections 2009

In multi-party democracy, elections often produce funny arithmetic. In this number game sometimes, the powerless minority’s votes may assume great value. Here minority voters implies those who are prepared to shift their allegiance to particular parties for various reasons: generally, most voters get accustomed to casting their votes in favor of one party believing that the party each one of them votes for is better than or less evil than the other parties. If there were three parties (A, B and C), often one would find 5%-7% difference in the individual shares of votes of at least two of the parties, say A and B, claiming together 75% - 90% of the votes cast is only about 5% to 7% only. It is like A + B = 85 and A – B = 5 %, and, therefore, A = 45, B = 40 and C= 15. More strikingly, in most cases A will have more than 50% of the seats in the Parliament and rule the country or in the case of direct election of the Chief Ruler A becomes the President of the country having being discarded by the majority voters. In case of four or more parties, coalitions get formed so that two opposing coalitions have vote shares of 45% and 40% with the one with 45% rules the country
The other funny game is that the 5%-7% voters who are prone to shifting their allegiance raises the value of their votes as they can make A weaker and B stronger and B becomes the ruler. These voters shift not because they are not committed: they are independent-minded people who will not permanently commit their political thoughts and expressions in favor of a particular party for any reason whatsoever – whether ideological or practical or personal benefits. In extreme cases like political or social waves / turmoil, a larger percentage of voters may shift their preferences. But in general it is the 5%-7% voters who are more prone to shift their preferences for supporting a particular political party whom they start liking for reasons of the party’s recent activities or voting against a particular party for reasons of disappointment with the recent activities of that party. But most such voters who shift their preference generally keep it extremely secret that they are shifting their preference and exit polls or opinion polls normally would not be able to track them in their samples. Yet, these voters who contribute to significant weakening of the predictive power or accuracy of exit poll and opinion poll based forecast of election outcomes. That is why after the elections, often political parties call the results as surprises or unimaginable.

May 24, 2009
Indian Elections 2009: Surprised Politicians

Independent minority voters outwitted the forecasters
The recent federal parliamentary (Loksabha, lower house of people’s representatives) elections prove the importance of independent voters. At the all-India level, no political party or analyst or exit polls or opinion survey could predict that the Indian National Congress (INC) would win more than 200 seats on it own, that the INC would need much support from other fronts or the left to rule, or the regional parties would lose their bargaining strength in the formation of the Govt. It is a new phenomenon that practically none of the regional parties could sweep the majority of the seats in their respective regions / provinces/ states. After more than two decades, voters in different regions/ provinces/ states have started showing varying preferences within their region insofar as the parliamentary elections. They may vote for a party at the federal elections that is different from the party they voted for in the State-level elections held earlier. This is happening because of the voters who shift their preferences according to their own assessment and will to exert their independent decision. As a result, very few regional parties are able to get a large chunk of the parliamentary seats in their provinces. This reduces the bargaining power of such parties in coalition formation unless two national parties get almost equal but far less than the number of seats required to form Govt. with very little or no support from alliances.
The second largest national party, BJP has seen a decline in its share of seats. The CPM has lost seats heavily in two of the three states in which it had traditionally been very strong. The SP and the BSP could not make any mark while the INC pulled off large number of seats in the State of Uttar Pradesh. The regional parties led by Lalu Prasad and Ram Bikas Paswan lost out in Bihar. Sivsena, another regional party lost out in Maharashtra. The only regional party that made a remarkable come back was the TMC in West Bengal. In Tamil Nadu and Adhra Pradesh no single regional party swept the parliamentary seats in their states in their favor, weakening the bargaining power in the Central Government formation. In Orissa, the ruling regional party did well to get parliamentary seats even after breaking out of their previous alliance with the BJP.
Why has all this happened this time that the shifting voters contributed to this kind of electoral outcomes that are very different from the past and all predictions became largely out of line with the actual election results? It may be interesting to explore this issue in the light of the developments during the last few years.

In West Bengal, the percentage of votes in favor of the dominant party ruling the State for over three decades without a break fell in 2009 elections by a few percentage points from the 2004 elections, correspondingly increasing the percentage of votes polled by TMC and INC who formed an alliance. But the result in terms of seats won changed dramatically. TMC increased its seats from 1 to 19. TMC- INC alliance got 25 out of the 42 seats while the CPM-led left alliance got 15 seats. The forecasts predicted 24-28 seats for the Left alliance after taking into account the brighter prospects of TMC and INC because of their nick of the time pre-poll alliance and the certain adverse events that put the ruling CPM-led Government in bad light in the media. What explains this surprise or unimaginable outcome in West Bengal? This has been explained by the leftists as the national wave in favor of the INC for stability of national government. But that is hardly any explanation as the national wave in favor of the INC itself was a surprise needing explanation especially as the CPM and other leftist parties were so sure of the possibility of forming a viable non-BJP, non-Congress third front that just two days before the election results were declared the CPM General Secretary Mr. Karat alleged that the US Ambassador to India was meeting various party leaders other than the leftists to lure them into supporting BJP or INC in government formation and ensure that the third front was not able to from a government. As a feeler to the INC the leftists even announced the INC the possibility of leftists’ support in the event that other regional parties rally around the BJP to scuttle the third front government initiative.

May 24, 2009
Absence of Constructive Opposition Bolsters Congress Image

Most politicians were all very busy in dreaming and scheming except the INC, the TMC in West Bengal, the BJD in Orissa and some others. There was considerable infighting going on about leadership and prominence in the BJP and the CPM in Kerala. The SP and BSP in Uttar Pradesh were preparing to fight among each other and against the BJP, ignoring that the Congress could still mobilize votes in UP a state whose citizens have suffered from the competitive corruption and fights between the SP and the BSP and their belligerent attitude to extract from the government at the Center. The BJP had a built up an image of a party that cares little for the people except doing high drama in the Parliament and supporting some Hindu’s past glory revivalists. The BJP did nothing constructive in the Parliament during the past five years. They seemed to be enjoying the plight of the leftist-oppression of the INC-led federal government and merely waiting for the fall of the Government so that they can get their turn. They not only did not seem to be a party with a cohesive leadership, they did not care to make the extra effort to keep their NDA-Alliance together. Such a passive, indifferent and disintegrated attitude did not help develop an attractive and vibrant image of BJP outside the state of Gujarat. Such an image was unlikely to enthuse voters to get attracted to them at the time of the elections.
On the other hand, the INC was concentrating on building up its organization in UP and other states, while at the same time pursuing alliances in regions where they cannot quickly strengthen the organization. Sonia and her son Rahul gave priority to strengthening the Congress organisation at the lowest levels, especially in Uttar Pradesh where the regional parties captured the Lok sabha seats, and Kerala where the Communists ruled and formed alliances with regional parties like DMK in Tamil Nadu and Trinamul Congress in West Bengal to weaken the strength of other regional parties with strong bases in these States. There was a very concerted endeavor to get higher number of seats in the Parliament so as to reduce its prevailing weakness of being black-mailed or brow-beaten by a handful of regional parties including the left that do not have much influence on the nation-wide electorate. It was at the same time consolidating the image of its pro-poor, secular policies by pursuing such policies that its leftist allies would never object. Whatever the goodwill benefits of the pro-poor policies they pursued with the support of or at the insistence of the leftist allies – all accrued to the INC for unlike their allies only the INC had a nationwide presence. On the other hand, the INC also fostered an image that being dependent on such always reform opposing allies like the leftists they were unable to deliver more benefits to the people at large, poor or the rich or the middle-class. This clearly projected an image of a part with good intentions and delivering results despite all odds from its own allies and constrained by unreasonable and corrupt regional elements. This is an image that would draw support to INC both from beneficiaries of pro-poor policies all over India (employment guarantee scheme, loan-waiver scheme and schemes directed at minorities and backward castes and classes) and from those adversely affected by the stalling of the economic reforms by the leftist allies. The blackmailing of the INC-led UPA government by the leftists on the issue of the nuclear deal with USA may have raised the leftist’s status of their heroism against the US among the anti-US voters in the intelligentsias largely concentrated in West Bengal and certain urban pockets, the large mass of the beneficiaries of economic reforms in business, skilled labor force in emerging sectors and professional all over India became more sympathetic to INC. During the months of CPM-led obstructions to the Union Govt. initiatives in the area of nuclear deal and reforms in banking and insurance, whenever I happened to meet business executives outside West Bengal in official meetings, they used to point out as if Bengalis like me from West Bengal are hurting national interest of India’s economic progress: my only answer was that all this was happening only because a Delhi-bred Keralite was in-charge of the communist battalion of the Bengalis. My friends outside West Bengal were reflecting the sympathy that the INC was drawing from voters outside the 6% or so communist-block voters in India. Clearly, the majority would not tolerate such miniscule minority obstructing what the non-communist majority thought as national interest.
About CPM and the leftists see later.

May 24, 2009
CPM, the Fallen Hero Assumes a Villain Image

Now consider the performance and image of the leftists during the past five years. Among the communists and their sympathizers, the performance was very good. They have successfully been able to rein in the INC-led UPA Government from doing anything the leftists did not like. They continued to rule in the states of West Bengal, Kerala and Tripura without virtually any effective opposition and crushing opposition wherever required with state force. The communist supporters enjoyed the State support in securing jobs, land, business orders/ contracts, in sports bodies, in cultural initiatives, in education – practically in every field. The image was one of a gallant, unbeatable hero. The CPM General Secretary with control over 60 Members of the 442-strong Loksabha seemed to the boss of the Prime Minister of India and poised to bring in the historic first Communist-led Third Front Government in India. This was a great image one can dream off before the 2009 Indian Elections. But the voters outside the three CPM-ruled states unfortunately did not share this image. They did not relish the image of CPM as the Crown Price of India. Rather, they feared that a third front of greedy, power-hungry regional party faction leaders shepherded by the CPM implied a great disaster to India. They would not vote for the parties joining hands with the CPM.

Within the CPM ruled states, Tripura with just two MP seats did not matter much to Government formation at the Center. What was CPM’s image in Kerala? It was one of two state leaders fighting for control in Kerala and with utter disregards to the all-India Keralite General Secretary of the CPM. Such an image was not so conducive to attract voters who cast their votes independently of ideology and winning elections and India’s most literate state voters did not have a large industrial trade union based cultivation of communist ideas. Over the years the number of families becoming rich with non-resident income inflows had increased dramatically and with increase in wealth many would start harboring political ambitions without any commitment to communist ideology and without having to go through the seniority system in CPM. They were searching for alternative opportunities to rise in the business of politics in India. INC was set to exploit these conditions in the state.
West Bengal with 42 Lok Sabha seats is the real stronghold of the CPM. But its pro-people, pro-West Bengal image was getting tarnished. It was fast developing an image of intolerant, arrogant ruler more proud of its three-decade rule in West Bengal rather than a party that is capable of re-establishing West Bengal’s premier status in the Indian economy. The people at large was increasingly realizing that the CPM Employees Union dominated State Government employees would never make the Chief Minister’s dream of efficient government services to the citizen’s a reality. The bloodbath in certain pockets of the two Midnapore districts and elsewhere between CPM and other parties might have been liked by the committed CPM supporters but painted CPM government as an oppressive ruler among voters who are independent and liked CPM for long. The Chief Ministers distinction of “Good” and “Evil” synonymous with “We (CPM and its supporters)” and “They” created an impression that the Government was not willing to protect the citizens unless they completely align themselves with the CPM and compete with others to seek the favor of the CPM leaders at different levels. The CPM bullying even upset the other left front partners. This gave rise to an impression that the leftist alliance is really a divided one and CPM is the only party that a citizen ha no option but commit to. The Chief Minister seemed more interested in protecting and rewarding the obliging, loyal bureaucrats even if they had committed mistakes and meted out injustice to the common people as in the case of tragic death of Rizanur, a poor young professionally qualified Muslim falling in love and getting legally married to a Hindu girl of a rich Marwari business family and where the State police leadership intervened to break the marriage at the instance of the rich Marwari father of the girl. The independent voters clearly did not enjoy the Chief Minister interfering with the lections of the State Cricket Association nor did they rejoice the distinction introduced by the Chief Minister and others between ‘ CPM intelligentsia of intellectuals, celebrities in art, culture and education” and “anti-CPM intelligentsia of such personalities” for state patronage.
The selection of Delhi-based Brinda Karat and Yehchuri to represent West Bengal in the Rajya Sabha of the Parliament might have been a necessity of the CPM but was not liked by independent voters with pro-Bengal sentiment. The Speaker of the last Parliament became a Bengali icon rather then enhancing his image as a CPM party leader: his removal from the CPM party was seen as a great insult to West Bengal and a meek submission to an arrogant Keralite CPM General Secretary by the State CPM leaders.
The growing image of the CPM state leadership as an arrogant, oppressive party out to destroy all opposition within West Bengal and yet so dependent on mere English-competent Delhi-based intellectuals without any connection with grassroots of politics would fail to enthuse the independent voters, especially the younger generations.

What happened to Mamata's Trinamul Congress? See the next post.

May 24, 2009
Mamata’s Tantrums Build an Image of the Saviour of the Oppressed

In contrast to the valiant heroic image that the CPM sought to cultivate the Trinumul Congress led by Mamata Bannerjee cultivated an image of the struggling protector of the oppressed. All who suffered from the atrocities and displeasure of the CPM leadership found a sympathetic treatment from Trinamool. Wherever there was any incident of atrocities or violence against even an individual or group, even if they are not supporters of Trinamool, the Trinamool leaders rushed for help and protection. The pro-poor image, the protector image of the CPM was slowly but steadily shifting to Trinamool Congress and its leader Mamata. She along with only a few of her aides worked incessantly in agitating mood to rally around every person adversely affected by the State and CPM bullying and atrocities. Yes, Trinamool Congress and CPM supporters fought violent battles in different pockets. But the non-committed voters did not view this as Trinomial’s hooliganism against the CPM or the State as CPM had tried to make out. Rather, these incidents were seen as Government supported bullying of CPM over others, especially as the Chief Minister cam out as the distinction between “We” meaning the Govt and the CPM and “They” meaning all others in the State. Hardly surprising, even some smaller leftist parties had to come close to the Trinamool to have some unity against CPM onslaughts. The INC realized this later but very accurately when the left withdraw support from their UPA government: INC national leadership had the political maturity to foster an alliance with Mamata’s Trinamool. They well knew that if the BJP stands a threat, CPM and the left would again come to support to INC after the elections, but here was a chance to weaken the CPM strength in the Loksabha by supporting Mamata emerging strongly with an image of a protector of the people oppressed by the CPM. It released information that would show that the CPM government did much less to improve the conditions of the Muslim minority in West Bengal in comparison with other states. Mamata did create a problem for industrialization by supporting the agitation of a few hundred farmers who were reluctant to give up their lands to the Government of West Bengal for transfer to the Tata for the Nano car factory. But Mamata gained very positive image from this struggle. This was seen all over India as a struggle to protect the poor farmers. All of India recognizes the contribution Mamata has done through this struggle to stop Governments’ forced acquisition of farming land in any part of India anymore. Humanist from other states extended their support to Mamata’s agitation to protect the poor and the oppressed in Nandigram and Singur and elsewhere. And, Mamata with great maturity maintained that she was pro-industrialisation but not anti-farmer and anti-agriculture. She offered a compromise that would still leave land for the nano factory. But the CPM could not work on the compromise to keep the Tata Nano factory in the State. While Mamata’s past image of a whimsical and immature partner for any alliance still a disadvantage, there was no doubt of her honest struggle against oppression by the State and the CPM.
But images do not get projected on their own - they need dissemination technology. See next post.

May 24, 2009
Media and the Electoral Process outwits Rigging Machinery

Electronic Media makes roaring business Monitoring Politicians
Images were not transmitted to the people merely by the parties themselves, their activities and by their struggles. The electronic and the print media played an important role in independent people forming their opinions based on facts rather than party campaigns. The electronic media sensed tremendous potential in TV channel business in West Bengal, especially given the CPM bullying of weaker elements. Covering the government and CPM with investigative and close monitoring would attract considerable viewer-ship to attract considerable advertisement revenue: Bengali channels mushroomed. Any event that would involve scandals, political violence, corruption, administrative inefficiency and police atrocities would have to be covered to attract viewers. About a score of Bengali channels would soon come up. As these would not always be sympathetic to the state government, the CPM reportedly bought shareholding in some channels to control content and coverage. In some cases, the cable operators being allowed to do business only with the patronage and protection of local CPM leaders, certain channels would be blocked in certain localities as they aired reports that adversely affected the image of the Govt. or the ruling party. But all this would not help: nothing could any longer be done in West Bengal that would remain outside public knowledge. TV coverage could make ministers and leaders exposed: one could try to become popular but also had to run the risk of revealing weaknesses, excesses, rash and rude behavior, inefficiency, inconsistency and other inadequacies that could be subject of public evaluation. One cannot just bully people secretly and go unnoticed. Such a media environment reduces the advantage a ruling party usually enjoyed over the opposition forces in the previous decades. Independent and politically unbiased opinions and reporting started weakening the force of Government propaganda and secrecy.
Election Commission makes Rigging Machinery Obsolete
Image and media exposure alone cannot determine actual voting in elections. Election management machinery of political parties had to keep pace with the administrative and technological advancements effected by the Election Commission. The party machinery to rig polls was being slowly made obsolete and useless by the Election Commission. The electoral rolls have been cleaned up considerably in the last few years. There are no more regular exodus illegal Bangladeshi immigrants that the political parties managed to convert into Indian citizens through inclusion of names in the electoral rolls. The fictitious entries in the electoral rolls have been considerably weeded out, though many non-CPM voters may still be outside the electoral list in traditional CPM stronghold areas. The phasing of elections on different dates helped the Commission control the deployment of officers, security forces and observers more effectively. The selection of officers to manage the work at the polling booths and their deployment and better coordination with the security forces, together with the alert electronic media helped reduced the incidence of booth capturing, false voting, and gagging of the EV machines. It had become difficult to rig elections. All this reduced the advantage of any ruling party over others. There was very little that the skilled machinery to rig elections could do now.

Given the improvements that the Election Commissions had made, the penetration and alertness of a highly competitive electronic media industry and the image the parties cultivated made the election outcomes more dependent on the preferences of the 5%-7% non-committed, independent voters. They were clearly not in favor of a BJP without integrated leadership, or in favor of the corrupt power hungry regional parties, or in favor of the obstructing and arrogant CPM and it left partners. They were sympathetic to the Congress that implemented pro-poor policies but were opposed by the BJP and the left in implementing economic reforms. In West Bengal they were not in favor of an arrogant, oppressive and opposition-demolishing CPM and in favor of the pro-poor role of Trinamool leader Mamata Banerjee’s as the only protector of the weak and the oppressed. And, these voters determined the outcome of the Elections in which INC and Trinamool showed a performance that beat the most optimistic forecasts of the opinion polls, political analysts and politicians.

So, what next? What would be the strategy of the Congress, the CPM, the BJP, and the Regional Parties including the Trinamool Congress in future? We await later posts.

Jul 30, 2009
Wonderland of Experiment in Applied Communism

The province of West Bengal in India has long been the laboratory for applied experiments in communism. This wonderland has proved to be the most congenial environment for experiment in the application of various strands of communist ideologies discovered by great theoreticians from outside West Bengal. Marx and Engel were little known in Bengal till the Russian Revolution. A few relatively unknown, self-educated Bengali intellectual extremist freedom fighters, fed up with Indian Congress Party's struggle for Independence from the British Queen, developed a taste for communist ideas, especially as they needed to flee the country to escape arrest by the British rulers and landed into the attractive trap of the anti-British Germany and later into the trap of Lenin and Stalin seeking to spread the communist empire in India and Asia. The Communist Party of India (CPI) was set up abroad by Indian in exile as they contributed, with their knowledge of English picked up in British India, to develop the theories of applied armed revolution-centered communism in the heartland of Lenin-Stalin Russia. Bengalis, born since the late 19th century are good at developing ideological theories from half-baked ideas of foreigners who did not belong to the mainstream intellectual elite. Within a decade the founder of CPI had transformed into a radical congressman again. The CPI became a party controlled by good orators from Bengal and Kerala. In another three decades, the relatively less prominent intellectuals in the party checked out to form the CPI (Marxists), now referred to as CPM. Within a short period, the younger generation with stronger academic credentials formed their own extremist outfits as the Communist Party Marxists Leninists and other parties who were collectively referred to as Naxalites or Maoists and who had once claimed that Chairman Mao of China was also their Chairman.
After being in action for the last ninety years, the communists in India has been successful enough to keep their influence largely limited to the three states of West Bengal, Kerala and Tripura with the extremist Maoist communists operating from the hideouts in relatively inaccessible or tribal-inhabited forest areas in parts of West Bengal, Bihar and Andhra Pradesh. The communists polled about 7 % of the votes in recent Indian elections. The greatest atonement of the communist movement in India so far has been ruling the State of West Bengal for the last three decades and killing of thousands of people, mostly poor, unarmed policemen and wealthy rural oppressors. The dream of establishing the dictatorship of the proletariat would continue to remain unfulfilled for the next few decades, if not for another century. And, after the loss of substantial strength in the National Parliament, the communist movement in India seems to be in quandary and lost in the labyrinth of their difficult-to-explain ideologies of class struggle.
What would the communists do in the next few years?

Sep 30, 2009
No Quality Pre-requisite for Democratic Rulers

Monarchies are the most despised form of political rule. The reason is nothing but primarily that the chance of a Monarch being good is very very low. Yet even in the beginning of the first millennium, or say in the Ramayana / Mahabharata days of the 3000-5000 BC, the intellectuals had developed various criteria for a Good Monarch from the point of view of the citizens/ society/ nation or mankind. Rama was called an ideal king because he satisfied the properties desired of a king. His kingdom was called Ram Rajya which means a kingdom that is the most sought by the citizens. The intention here is not to discuss the ideal properties or Ram's great characteristic as a ruling monarch. The point is that the common people knew what the desirable properties of an ideal king were and these were developed by intellectuals of those days 5,000-7,000 years ago. And the concept was applied to judge the monarchs. That is why Emperor Ashoka was called a great monarch after the end of his war against the king of Kalinga. Even Emperor Akbar was called a Great king.
Rama, Ashok (transformed after Kalinga War) and Akbar offered honest, fair, non-corrupt and non-oppressive governance and administration.
Yet, after such great advances of civilization over the last three centuries, the great philosophers who have developed the concept of modern democracy has failed to develop any criteria of ideal democratic government. The euphoria over the idea of rulers being elected by the citizens had so obsessed the minds that no one thinks that democracy by itself does not yield good, non-oppressive, fair and honest governance. That is why not a single government in any of the World's democracies has earned the position of ideal or close to the ideal in the last three centuries. Even today if we look around so many democracies in the world, we would not find a government which satisfies most of the properties desired from an ideal ruler. Democracy, republic and communism seem to be desirable in them because monarchs are not there: even if democracies, republics and Communist governments are oppressive and corrupt, they seem to be still desirable. Monarchs could not fool people: people knew which monarch is good or bad. But citizens of democracies, republics and communism are forced to accept that any government that rules under these set-ups is ideal. There are indices/ ranking of countries in terms of GDP per person, quality of human life, economic freedom, political freedom, corruption, cricketing countries, tennis players, and boxing champions and so on. But no ranking of Governments. There is extreme poverty of intellectual activity in this regard. Governments are like Gods - Almighty's that can be praised only: they are far above independent evaluation and ranking by experts.

Sep 30, 2009
Quality of Indian Democracy: Transparency, Accountability, Disclosure and Governance of Political Parties

India is the largest democracy in the world with long six decades of existence: Governments, corporations and individual citizens in the country are bound by laws and regulations which require them to follow practices that make them accountable for performance and transparency with lot of disclosures. India is also a country that takes justified pride in the use and development of information technology, especially software, mobile and the Internet. Her politicians are also technology savvy and media savvy. The use of SMS, e-mail, websites, blogs and mobiles is widespread among politicians. Many politicians enjoy participating in TV programs telecasting live or recorded debates, discussion and interviews on political, social and economic issues – local, national and international.

Yet, when we come to the individual political parties supposed to be pillars of democracy, the standards of content, up-dating, visitor-friendliness and transparency in web sites are extremely poor, though some are much better than others. I have observed the following:
1. Some even do not have contact us or feedback buttons for visitors.
2. Those which have feedback or contact us buttons may not bother to respond to comments or queries from visitors.
3. The content lacks any specific articulation of macro-economic management or economic activity structure (presumably, the parties do not have any such economy vision or do not have adequate knowledge of economics beyond some out-dated or fashionable economic terms.
4. There is no overall or indicator specific performance report of the party over decades and years: the party websites do not give performance targets in respect of the coming year/s.
5. There are no disclosures on compliance with laws and regulations.
6. There is no data on number of members of different categories: district-level/ local level secretaries of functionaries and their contact numbers or addresses.
7. There is absolutely no information on income, expenditure and assets / liabilities. No audited accounts are posted.
8. The highest level governing bodies of some parties with elected representatives mostly from one or two states have more members from States with zero elected representative seats in the Parliament. For example, in CPM Politburo the Bengali leaders with roots in West Bengal or Tripura, where the party has the overwhelmingly dominant support of the people and contribute to dominating share in the Party’s seats in the Parliament, are in absolute minority.
9. There is no information on women representation, minorities’ reservation, OBC Reservation in the party’s official hierarchy.
10. There is no information on the academic qualifications and experience of the party functionaries or the salaries, allowances and other benefits.
11. There is no information on inter-related party transactions.
12. For months there is no new posting on some of the party websites.

How do future citizens or even the current citizens, especially the senior citizens choose among parties? What are the accountability of the party’s and their managers? What quality of democracy can a country enjoy and be proud of in the 21st century of high technology, transparency, governance and accountability for performance and resource use even so many things are missing?
Some people interested in democracy, governance and civil society must find out the facts and the Truth before they comment on the political parties activities based merely on media reports and sporadic, impressionistic personal visit surveys in some pockets here and there.

Oct 1, 2009
Ranking Political Parties against ideal benchmarks

Political parties need to be rated against desirable attribute benchmarks, irrespective of whether they are in the ruling government or in the opposition and irrespective of whether they are national or provincial, regional or local parties or even banned/ underground parties.
Intellectuals should develop a broad range of criteria with sub-criteria. Political parties can submit information to the Rating agencies on all aspects of their mission, operations, support, base and performance. Even if they do not submit required by rating agencies the rating agency itself can collect required information as far as possible and rate them. Such rating should be done for base year and thereafter updated every month based on latest developments and information. Each criteria and each sub criteria will have appropriate weights and measured in a scale of 0 (zero, the lowest) to 10 (the highest).
The broad criteria could include:
1. Objectives with sub-criteria as relevance of objectives to civilized society, clarity in expression of objectives, consistency among objectives and the relative priority of the objectives, quantification and measurable property of objectives (vague objectives could be given low points),
2. Organisational Strength: number of members, number of active members, educational background of the top 10 functionaries/ officials), the number of whole-time members and their emoluments and benefits, the quality of inner party democracy, etc
3. Leadership Capability & skills: educational and professional attainments of the top 10 or top 5% of the officials/ functionaries, the closeness and accessibility to the members and the public at large, quality of the written documents of the party available to the public in terms of content, clarity of content and effectiveness of communication, quality of public speaking of the top 10 leaders, the quality of debating and negotiating skills of the top 10 leaders, the gender composition of top leadership, the team spirit and co-ordination among top 10 leaders, etc.
4. Knowledge: The depth of knowledge of the top 10 leaders at each level in international political and economic relations, in economics and finance, in social and religious issues as also in general sciences and technology as relevant to the common citizens, competence in high school mathematics.
5. Societal Orientation: Exposure to and familiarity with the lives (style, habits, preferences, aspirations and difficulties / concerns) of the people of different economic and social strata among the top 10 leaders at national and local levels.
6. Negative Baggage: criminal record, record of failure in academic examinations, corruption, and promotion of relations and loyal, loan servicing record, income tax records, connections with criminals/ Mafia, illness record, abuse of power, law violations record - both for the 10 top leaders and the party functionaries at all levels in general.
7. Income - Expenditure and Assets and liabilities record of the Party - whether certified by competent auditors/ auditors report thereon, income and expenditure in cash and through bank cheques etc, etc.
8. Performance: in terms of protecting/ rescuing people under threat or actual oppression/ extortion, non-violent and non-disruptive campaigns conducted ( call of bandhs/ strikes/ processions with adverse effect on national production activities earning negative points), performance in terms of participation in debates and attendance in parliament/ legislative/ civic bodies, etc.
9. Electoral Performance: percentage of votes polled in national/ regional and local elections, percentage of seats won to percentage of seats contested, etc.
10. Use of technology: visitor-friendliness, content, updating, and responsiveness to inquiries in respect of websites, use of mobiles. Emails and Internet in part-offices, use of audio-visual computer technology in party meetings, etc.

The above are just illustrative criteria and sub-criteria.

Let political parties demonstrate their knowledge, skills, aptitudes, intellect, governance standards, social responsibility, transparency standards, and civilized behaviour through scientific evaluation by independent rating agency. Let them compete to earn good rating instead of forming oligarchic cartels to exploit the people with mere lecture-bajis. Let them face the electorate continuously and not just during election campaign elections in democracies.

Oct 2, 2009
Political Regimes Sans Rating = Medieval Monarchy

One of my friends with considerable experience in relevant fields and highly imaginative and analytical mind had prepared some notes on rating/ ranking of elected representatives in terms of performance against their own set goals. I have however felt that all politicians, their associations/ parties, all legislative and executive bodies of elected representatives as well as each elected representative and each official of any political party should be under continuous rating scan and such rating should not only cover performance against targets but also their record in honesty, morality, educational standards, association with goons and corrupt people, their ethical standards and their living style and financial condition. That more and more Indians are thinking on similar lines for improving the quality of democracy augurs well for the utility and relevance of Indian democracy to the country’s future citizens...

If democracy has to be any meaning and purpose in this twenty-first century, there has to be an independent non-official market for at least four different types of political ratings:
(a) Rating of each Government: comparison of actual performance with three benchmarks: with promises/ goals, comparison with governments of other countries/ states/ regions/ localities, comparison with ideal standards.
(b) Rating of each political party on similar benchmarks as also over time for the same political party,
(c) Rating of each elected representative, and
(d) Rating of each legislative body like the Parliament or the Senate on a half-yearly rolling basis.

With regard to (d), it is necessary to point out that the institutions of legislative bodies or the Chief of State are definitely constitutionally sacrosanct, but no individual legislative body or individual Chief of the State or any individual government or any particular elected representative with given tenure is any more sacrosanct than the individual citizen. Even the Parliament's own performance and procedures should be subjected to independent rating without any fear of Parliamentary retaliation through resolution or action by the Parliament.

All the four ratings are equally important, even if they may be somewhat inter-related. Without these ranking systems in place, democracies, republics and communist regimes are actually inferior form of political system than monarchies of the medieval or ancient times.

My friend suggested that the rating of elected representatives be done under the aegis of the Election Commission. He was worried about how an independent rating agency could compel the people it rates to provide data. If the rating agency does not get data then how does it rate?

I would not like to rely merely on the Election Commission or Official Agencies. Such Rating should be done by one or more independent non-political bodies using experts who affirm that they do not either support or are against any political party, government or elected representative anywhere in the world. If there are multiple agencies doing the same job political ratings, this should be rather welcome. Transparent free market for providing rating services is what is required - no Govt., no elected representative, no political party can go to court against any such rating so long as the detailed process of rating is made transparent and worksheets are available to the public within 24 hours of any rating announcement.
It is better for the citizens to rely on the market development of credible rating. Initially, no political party or government would like to provide data. But there is lot of data available in the newspapers, electronic media, the election commission, the parliamentary/ legislative bodies' records, the party manifestoes, press releases, party newspapers and websites. These can be used in the rating model. For some parameters and variables, estimates can be used. and, for some other parameters, low scores would be used because of the non-cooperation of the parties in providing information despite requests made to them. Then the ratings are published along with complete party wise worksheets with notes on information/ estimates the rating model has used. Once these are published at regular intervals in newspapers and internet sites, some parties will contest the rankings on incorrect information and methodological issues. These criticisms have to be responded with revised ratings. Once the political parties get drawn into debates over rating, they would get trapped because they have to accept the information used or release correct information available to them. These become scrutinisable in the public domain. Politicians change parties and are also in power struggle within their parties. The confidants of such politicians may turn out to be a good source of information. Once these debates start, public will become more aware of political parties activities, secret trades, and other bad things. This will generate a pressure on parties to become transparent and give disclosures.

A well-thought out strategic game has to used by the rating agencies: the release of information, use of estimates, the use of secret sources, moves to attract information, moves to create public pressure on releasing the True information, use of investigative journalists reports, the response to criticisms, the credibility of the model and its robustness (sensitivity) to small errors or large errors in information used, the credibility of experts of who make judgments on relative weights and analysis of the inconsistency between actions and policies of party as revealed through their speeches and behaviour, etc.

The task is not going to be easy in the beginning: but becomes easier and easier with time after the first few rounds of data collection, analysis, and estimation work are over.
Who will fund this? Any group of non –government voluntary agencies and Civil Society Foundations could provide funds. Or, retired, wealthy businessmen could provide funds. In an era of globalization, an international foundation operating from an advanced country can do this if it has resources. If Wall Street Journal can monitor what is happening in rural areas of emerging developing countries, organizing the development and implementation of such political ratings would be rather simple affair for an international association of newspapers and magazines as also universities.
If we were to do this by Law, it will not happen. If we want Government to do this it will be another mockery. In the US, some left-minded people ran a TV channel only on Democracy for a few hours in a day with donations - it probably did not survive beyond a year. On the other hand TV serials based on what goes on in the political parties: these channels get lot of public viewer ship and commercial advertisement s- of course they run the risk of sudden death because of the arm-twisting by the powers that be. But some succeed. But the ultimate test of political ratings would have to be the thousands, millions and billions of the citizens of different countries and localities.

Success does not come from mere ex-ante guarantees/ risk mitigation strategies: success comes through using such strategies, dynamically changing them to fight the obstacles.
This posting is a kind of lecture-bazi. But hopefully this posting will generate alternative ideas to the people who would like to keep their controls of legislative bodies, elected representatives, political parties and governments: on this Mahatma Gandhi Birthday, I may be incapable of making hard work, making sacrifice and practicing Satyagraha: but there may be millions who can practice what Gandhi preached to domesticate the wild animals that the philosophers of the World have created in the form of political parties so that people really control political party behaviour rather than become the victims of political party behaviour.

Feb 11, 2010
Robin Hood Monkeys, Wolves and Saintly Cats

Some enjoy extremely excessive income and wealth, while many starve. Is this difference due to extent of hard work or luck? Does choice of family or place explain such inequality and injustice?

What had happened in the childhood story that happens in real life now? There were two cats. Every day one of the cats would get steals some food but the other would demand a share. And they started quarrelling, fighting and settling among themselves. A Robin Hood monkey came and suggested that they should not do this exercise of fighting over sharing - they should share on a fair basis. But they did not know how to divide fairly. The monkey offered help. He became the arbitrator. He divided the food into two unequal parts and offered the bigger part to Cat B. Cat A complained that it was not fairly divided. So the monkey ate another portion of the larger part and asked for the opinion. The Cat B now objected that this share was not fair. So the monkey ate a portion of the other part. And, this process continued. At the end, the cats reluctantly received smaller shares each compared to the average sharing when they used to quarrel and fight every day. This monkey took away quite a large share doing nothing but eating away. This made the cats weaker and weaker. As a result, the quantity of food they could manage to procure/ steal from households became lower (deflation). So sometimes, the monkey would take smaller share so that Cats become stronger enough to steal more food. Once the Cats get stronger, they get more food and the monkey would takes away greater portion of the food as his arbitration fees.

Let us look at a simple case. Let there be a rich New Yorker and a poor starving old man in the same city. You do not like this. Good. One economic policy is to take away 50% of the income of the rich by tax and transfer the amount to the poor guy. That should be fair. But once you do that would there be any one willing to work or inherit wealth just to be disposed off to the extent of 50% for the benefit of a person who is starving? Would some one not like to be idling and starving for a while to get 50% of the income and wealth of a rich person?
Why would any of the two cats steal/ procure any food at all: they would prefer to remain hungry for a while, demand a share from the earnings of other cats and elect a Robin Hood monkey to take away some food from the earning cats and distribute to these two poor, starving cats for days to come. Are all these fair transfers at all? Why should even 1% of the income of the rich be reached to the poor? Bill Gates and his friends beat IBM: Gates was a weak poor person and he could beat such a huge organization like IBM? Is it fair that Bill Gates did that? These questions do not bother civilized minds anymore as the business of transferring income and wealth has become a fabulously prospering industry worldwide. The modern-day Robin hoods are no more outlawed: they themselves make laws that suit their business.

Forget fairness and create a Robin hood institution called Government (Govt.), if necessary by forming political parties and getting through elections. Then, the Govt. can take some money away from Bill Gates and give to the poor IBM or poor children all over the world. There is no need to depend on the whims of Bill Gates giving away his wealth himself by creating charitable foundations of his own? Instead, let the politicians and governments take the role of Robinhood monkeys, the most inefficient and useless constituent in the civilized world, enjoy life without doing anything.
The cats are of different types: rich and poor. Earlier the rich voluntarily shared with the poor. The monkey is the philosopher/ social scientist and politician. The whole system is democracy with concern for the weaker. And, each government says that they are potentially the best in ensuring social justice and equity. These systems - political systems are called by various names: Capitalistic or socialist mixed economy democracies or republics. They are designed to cheating and fooling cat citizens by elected or self-appointed Robinhood monkey arbitrators. Exploit the rich cats and make the poor cats dependent on the Robinhood Monkey Govt.: that is the motto of democracies and republics. To be fair to them, the Robinhood monkeys are, of course, very articulate and do everything based on written documents called constitutions, election manifesto, economic policy statement, budgets and social transformation strategy\y committee reports.
One important policy the Robin hoods often pursue is called fiscal policy. These are designed to ensure fairness, reduce inflation and arrest/ cure depression, though these policies seldom, if ever, achieve all the intended goals. That however is beside the point. Their intention is to serve the people through arbitrary arbitration and redistributive transfers with huge arbitration fess and leakages by force of law. The pious intention is what counts.

In some countries, the Robinhood monkey is replaced by a bold wolf who declares that the cats should be slave citizens and steal/ procure food as per the commands of the wolf (and his relatives, friends and fans) and give everything to the wolf. The Wolf will give them some share as it thinks fit. This is communist or military dictatorship command economy. The wolf (and his pack) has his own perspective about what is fair and the cats can have no opinion on this after they have gone through a cultural revolutionary brain-cleaning. This is the second answer to fairness.

The third solution to fairness does not need either a monkey or a wolf. When the monkeys who do business of promoting and selling concepts of fairness and providing service to implement such fairness policies, they force down a concept of fairness of their own to sustain and grow their lucrative business to fool the common citizens - rich or poor. The wolf is more straight forward: he makes everyone else accept that he is the fairness personified as the supreme leader. But the cats do not need the wolf also: they can just kill the problem because it does not make any sense.

Some of the cats say that enjoyment of life, starvation, accidents, deaths, births and birth locations - everything is beyond human beings: these are the outcome of random chances generated from a probability model not yet known to mankind. Whatever happens just happens - beyond fairness and unfairness, irrespective of the differential consequences on different individuals or groups of individuals. The whole idea of conceptualising fairness is unfair, unrealistic and illusion-driven, jealousy-driven activity that we are trying to define and achieve. The monkey or the wolf may continue to enjoy the game of fooling some cats, but other cats may just ignore the issue of fairness. These few saint cats sacrifice the desire to share any specific portion of wealth and income and yet food and clothes flow to them. They greet the poor weak cats with love and affection. They preach everyone to give away income and wealth to feed the poor. Some cats follow their advice and some others continue to fight. The saint cats remain unperturbed.
Why do they do that? Is that fair? Are they rational? They believe that are rational but do not impose their belief on to others, not they fool and cheat the ordinary cats. Only some fake saint cats may do that.

We have these three solutions to fairness: (a) the monkey model, (b) the wolf model and (c) the saint cat model. The first two models do not like the third model. But the third model helps ordinary cats to live in peace with the first and second models. When one is with the saint, it does not matter who oppresses or fools you under which model!

Mar 14, 2010
Democracy For Innovation

Some good Indians want that Indian society to become an innovative society. Everyone knows that lots of Indians have proved themselves as high class innovators while being in India or after immigrating to other countries, especially to the United States. Besides those we know in the area of science, sports, management, films and music, there are many Indian factory workers, farmers, traders and artisans who have make lots of innovations every year but we do not come to know or fail to recognize them. However, the good and smart Indians wish that most Indians become innovative. And, as is usual of Indians, they want government in the country to do something about making most people innovation-inclined, innovation-motivated and innovation capable.


It is this that is most amusing of the innovative attitude of the Indians: they will always depend on Government to lead as Masters or Parents while the Governments are supposed to be servants of the people. Indians think of Government as the tremendously powerful ghost that appears on the scene as soon as the magic metal lamp is rubbed to take orders from the owner and then promptly delivers whatever the lamp-owners or rather the lamp-rubber commands the ghost to do. India has been freed from foreign rule only 63 years ago: still a relatively child society that believes in fair tales.



Children do not have the capacity to realize that human beings and societies are naturally and inherently innovative, especially when they face challenges and problems and when they are not yet rich enough to be able to afford wasting their time in non-innovative activities. Children perceive the issue as one of creating an innovative society while the real issue is of not forcing human beings to become slaves of unscientific beliefs and faith on the magical power of Governments, political parties and bureaucracy. If you keep people addicted to the constant music that governments, especially of the democratic and socialistic variety are the savior of the people, the societies become copy cats, initiative-less, dependent and behave as slaves of the government and political parties. Slaves cannot become innovative. When people get addicted to dependence on Governments to solve their problems of technological backwardness, illiteracy, poor education, lack of heath and poverty, innovation just keeps waiting for people to come out of poverty, low technology skills, illiteracy, poor education and poor health.


To be innovative, individuals in a society needs to face problems and solve the problems through innovation, rather than resorting to gimmickry and dependence on government’s money and efforts. Since governments are only as good as the people are, especially in a democracy and communist framework, they cannot become innovative. When Governments are believed to be necessary evils that can only destroy societies rather than build societies, governments are stopped from taking the powers away from individuals to solve their own economic problems. When governments become slaves of the people rather than people becoming slaves of governments and political parties in the name of democracy or some outdated, and irrelevant, two- or-more-century old religious scriptures and ideologies, innovation deserts such societies. In fact, the question "how to make India innovative" is a symptom of minds that does not have faith in powers of the individuals to innovate. Innovations make innovative societies. Debating about how some people can transform a society from the stage of non-innovativeness to the stage of being highly innovative is just the opposite of innovation. Innovators do not ask how to innovate, they just do that. Our mindset is counter-innovative because we believe that some policies are needed to make us innovate. Former British slaves started ruling this country for so many years: they succeeded in making their subsequent generation to convert from slaves of the foreigners to slaves of the natives. Innovation does not come that way through planning and policy-making and State intervention. Innovations come from each individual taking the responsibility and freedom in solving each person's problems without hurting others. Only such free people with responsibility to solve their own problems can innovate and use their education, knowledge, skills and imagination.

Mar 14, 2010
Democratic Reservation Syndrome: A Psychological Sickness

People have been debating in recent days about reservation of Lok Shava (Parliamentary) seats for women. Most people agree, but a few object. Those who object say that they are not against reservation for women, but they want simultaneously reservation for minorities (meaning Muslims). Just as women are backward and handicapped so are the minorities. Those who support women reservation say that one can think about reservation for minorities later: some of them feel that reservation for minority women within reservation for women is a fallacy. No one has however said that reservation on religious basis is anti- secular. If seats can be reserved for one religious community, so can the geographical areas: that is only a good step towards creating another Islamstan again by India.
But Indians are more addicted to the right of getting reservation quotas than the issue of secularism. Today’s secular parties are by their acts accepting that creating Pakistan out of India in 1947 was a great secular reservation quota act on the part of the freedom fighters trying to end their British slavery.

The height of rational argument is that each possible formation of groups like for example those who are gays, those who were specs, those who have aids, those who are thugs, those who are Maoists, those who support foreign terrorist and the like are backward and handicapped groups and therefore each such group deserves reservation quota Of course all Indians are a special category accounting for only 16% of the World population and are economically, technologically backward. Therefore, in the world there should be quota for India and Indians. Hindus are a small percentage of Word population and hence Hindus need a special reservation by the Hindus. Each individual is a minority and many individuals are weak and backward in India. All such individual therefore must have a quota: for example, 15 years of free education quota, followed by 30 years of employment quota and a quota of a Parliamentary seat for 1 month in a lifetime. If necessary, the Constitution could be amended to increase the number of Parliamentary seats to 5430543 with 54330000 seats filled in through a lottery scheme.
Quota within quota is not a mere fallacy: it is a double compensating fallacy. The first fallacy of the highest order is the Quota without further quota itself; subsequent quota within the first quota is another fallacy that compensates for the first fallacy because their conjunction. There are alternative valid options available, but Indians prefer fallacious logic. So they ignore simpler solutions. Men and women are roughly equal in number. Just ban all men from casting votes for women and women from voting for men. Why go in for such complicated percentage calculations unnecessarily? Women will ensure that there is just one female candidate in each constituency and at least two men candidates.

Reservation earlier days required paying a premium. But Indians want everything free. Reservation is a free commodity. You normally reserve your right to something by paying something in advance: reservation free of cost is looting and anti-democratic.

Democracy was not designed to look at the past but to look at the present and the future.

But Indian democracy is all about correcting the past. The rich, the higher castes, the Hindus and the like- all had enjoyed quota privileges in the past without democracy. Now democracy should correct the past making present and future quotas for the people who did not enjoy reservation in the past. Except for the Adivasis: they had reserved the forests and the jungles for the, selves in the past: if they have to give up the jungles in favor of factories and animals, they must get fresh reservation outside the jungle/ forest areas.

Quotas must be defended by statistics and experts. Statistics is about past and Indians have great attachment for the past. But why quote Committees/ Commissions of the past? Just take another survey by another commission: you will know how millions of good and honest men, who prefer to remain silent, are being exploited by cruel women at home while so many husband and wife political party couples exploit other men and women. You will find Independents do not get much seats in elections. Non-political independent candidates also require reservation. Have reservation for people not belonging to political parties: 25% quota for the Independents: 10% for gays and 10% for lesbians and 15% for animal lovers, and of course 39% for retired criminals and 31% for retired Maoists and other terrorists as they need to be encouraged to come back into the mainstream.

Mar 14, 2010
Democratic Statistics For Government Decision Making

I have been reading news papers on among other things about what they write about economic affairs for the last 50 years or so. They come up with the same conclusions in different languages every x number of years. The same conclusions, of course valid ones, on the quality, reliability, timeliness and comprehensiveness official statistics have now come up again for the nth time. Statistically good performance by newspapers: only they are yet to learn the habit of referring back to the dates when they had published the same conclusions. That would be too much of statistical work to expect of journalist!

Founded by Professor P.C. Mahalanobis in Kolkata on 17th December, 1931, the Indian Statistical Institute gained the status of an Institution of National Importance by an act of the Indian Parliament in 1959. The Government of India had set up a Central Statistical Organization, National Sample Survey Organization and a Planning Commission, besides carrying out Census every decade. So many statisticians are employed by the Central and State governments. Like IAS there is a IS (Statistical) S. What the people in ISS have been doing for all these years? Producing unreliable, inadequate and out-of date statistical information for decades (rather more than half a century)?

In any case, even if data were collected with diligence, processed accurately and reliable information generated without much time-lag, how that is going to help? If the inflation is high, or food scarcity is acute or the fiscal deficit is high or electricity and coal pilferage is high, Government will still continue to say that they are taking all the various measurers to solve these problems. Quality Statistics is useful in the hands of or to the brains of Quality Decision makers. Poor quality decision-making brains cannot be compensated by improved quality statistics. How much of even the quality statistics currently available helping the Nation? What more information do we need to know more accurately and timely about the percentage of females in the age-group 18 -80 and the conditions of women in order to select women candidates to represent political parties in elections or reserve constituencies for women? How much time we require to decide on these: 60 years or14 years? How much more information did we need to know that which farmers have the lowest productivity in wheat/ rice production per labor or per acre or per kg of fertilizer? What information more is required to decide about what is the optimal pricing of fertilizers?

Statistical information is the staple food for analysts and researchers. They need more information and quality information to search out underlying trends, patterns and probable truths. Statistical information is also required to impress others about the great knowledge that one has: speakers in conferences, political gatherings, elected representative bodies and public debates and TV panels need to give out statistics (relevant or irrelevant, true or contrived, partial or misleading) to make an intellectual impression on the audience and other speakers).

But Statistics has also other probably no less important uses. One of this is for decision-making., rather informed decision –making. When decision-makers require they get out the best possible statistical evidence and take calculated risks to arrive at decisions. Decision-makers know what statistics they need and also know that they cannot get all the statistics they need because statistics data collection has a cost. They therefore follow the rule of working with the minimum but critical statistical information. Good decision makers and policy makers do not complain about statistics not being available: they ensure that the minimum critical and reliable information gets collected. But such good decision makers capable of and actually relying on quantitative statistics are rare. The Government decision-making being a time consuming process involving political, inter-departmental/ ministerial bargaining and clash of ego-based/ ideology-based opinions/ beliefs, seldom does availability of reliable, up-to-date and comprehensive statistics seem to matter much. Only when people trust statisticians on the reliability of statistics they supply, both raw and analyzed, and the decision-makers shed their hunches, beliefs and hidden interest in the decision-outcome, there is a meaning of spending money in collecting and processing statistics. Democratic processes do not make a very congenial atmosphere for effective use of statistical information and methods as decision-making inputs: rather they make a mockery of the use of statistics. Citizens tend to disbelieve the statistics supplied to support official decisions. My observations are simply untested hypothesis: they can be tested by statistics and statistical methods. But such attempts would never be made possible in democracies even if it was possible to effectively enforce the right to information, unless, however, there is a separate and independent government decision evaluation commission that continuously reviews each government decision on a continuing basis and sends its report directly to the office of the President for record.

Mar 17, 2010
Education Gurus' Democratic Monopoly

Although some part of industry had to be forced to accept foreign competition in the domestic markets, the inefficient State-dependent educations Gurus are lobbying hard to stop foreign universities from entering higher education service in India. They would cite various reasons why foreign universities should not be allowed to operate from within India.

The first and foremost, of course, is the Leftist Group and their chamchas in colleges and universities. They do not like any thing American: so American Universities should not be allowed in any case (just as in the case of supply nuclear electricity generating equipment and atomic fuels), may be Russian Universities may be allowed (as in the case of the proposed nuclear power plant at Nayachar in West Bengal with Russian support). Why? Anything foreign is bad unless the foreign thing has been purified in Marxism. Marxism is the only foreign thing that is allowed by Indian leftist. This is understandable: those who dream to exploit one-sixth of the World population, would always insist that anything non-Marxist be banned in India, though many of today's Marxist leaders grew up eating wheat collected in begging bowls by India as alms from America. Scottish whisky may not require Marxist purification. Maybe some leftist like Russian Vodka.

But not merely the leftists but most Indians abhor anything foreign (other than what they purchase of foreign origin for private use and possession) and do not at all like foreign universities teaching Indian students in their Indian campuses. But most of these Indians have a daily dish containing potato, except those who became diabetic after 30 often avoid potato: it does not however matter that potato did not originate in India but was introduced here through European influence and Europe got this from South America. India is the third largest producer of potatoes in the World but it is basically something foreign, even though Marx also ate potatoes when he lived in Britain.

What are the things that are not foreign in India but purely domestic and indigenous? Virtually Zero. Yes, the concept of zero or Sunnya had originated in India along with some amount of Algebra. Astronomy, Astrology, Vedas, Upanishads, ayurveda (Indian medicine), epics like Ramayana and Mahabharata, Kama Sutra, and the like originated in India. But modern mathematics, modern science and technology - all are essentially foreign. Even long after India stopped importing foreigners to rule India, India has continued to import or copy science, technology and education from abroad.

Education is essentially universal and universities are true to their name if they are universal, rather than being parochial or local. Higher education is all the more universal. Countries and nations that put up barriers to free flow of foreign education are destined to remain frogs in the well. India had suffered on account of this during the period after Akbar and then again after Independence in 1947.

Even now Indian higher education is largely foreign or Universal rather than being Indian. Only elements of higher education in India that are weak are of British-India origin: they are (a) continuation of out-dated technology of imparting higher education, (b) dominance of incompetent university education administration in most universities (exceptions being certain institutes of management, institutes of technology and some others), and (c) overwhelming dominance of poor quality teachers not required to upgrade themselves. These weaknesses persists because higher education is monopolised by State-subsidised universities and their employees, both teaching and non-teaching.

Even now most progressive teachers recommend textbooks authored by foreign scholars or modeled on foreign textbooks. The teachers who oppose foreign universities setting up campuses in India are mostly those who studied foreign books during their post-graduate days. Why then they oppose the entry of foreign universities in India? Simply because the apprehend that this may break their monopolistic exploitation of the bulging size of the Indian students in higher education and they may find some of their colleagues get higher pay in foreign universities and thereby degrade them as second class teachers.

But they do not say this explicitly. If you look at the silly arguments they put forward, you can easily what distresses them. First, they say that foreign universities are not necessarily good or better than Indian universities. That is true. But what is the problem? Do they think that the Indian students are fools and pay for getting degrees from lower quality universities when better quality universities are available?

Second, they say that good foreign universities will not set up campuses in India. What is their problem then? Indian students can still go to study abroad in good universities.

Third, they say that only students of poor quality but belonging to rich households will go the Indian campuses of foreign universities. Even if this were correct, what is the problem? Let those students purchase a degree: their real worth would be found out by the employers through interviews, selection tests and actual performance in jobs. Either poor quality rich students improve their quality or they will be discarded even if they have a degree.

Fourth, they say the foreign universities will lure away teachers from Indian Universities with higher salaries. So? If the teachers concerned are worth higher salary they should get that. Why should the rest be jealous? Moreover, higher salary may be on short tenure, renewable on performance basis other than life-long employment at public money subsidised university employment.

Fifth, they say that the foreign universities may not have to bear the obligation of reservations and therefore Indian universities will be disadvantaged. But then foreign universities will not get subsidy from the government also: they have to fend for themselves by charging higher fees and therefore with restricted size of student population and provide higher quality to attract students. They would not get meritorious students from low income families while the Indian university teachers will have the benefit of such good students captive to them.

Sixth, foreign universities are a business. They will enter India of only they are allowed to make profits. But Indian universities are also making extraordinary high profits and passing on them to the teachers: the teachers get paid by the government: it is ultimately the tax payers who make losses on university education. And, if foreign universities do not make money, they will not come. So, there is n problem. If they make money, then the Indian universities should also be able to make money and draw lower subsidy from the Government. In primary and secondary education as well as management and engineering education, lot of Indian privately set up educational institutions are making money, while Govt.- subsidised schools and universities are drawing subsidy from the Govt. This has been happening. Nothing different will happen if foreign universities enter India.

Seventh, the number of Indian students going for study abroad at their own expenses is negligible, less than 1% of the potential students for higher education in India. Why should the Government take the trouble of passing a law allowing foreign universities for the tiny minority of rich students? India has a huge population. A small percentage may mean a large number. India is a country of minority democracy. There are laws for tribal minority, language minority, ethnic minority, religious minorities and so on. The number of rich industrialists is small. Yet government passes laws to protect them or remove barriers or restrictions on them. What sin have the rich students wanting to have foreign education within India at a lower cost than going abroad done that Government should not pass a law? Besides, if foreign universities set up campuses in India, some people will get employment there. What is the harm?

There may be more such silly arguments coming from learned men extending higher education policy-making service in India. But they might also ask: what is the great benefit from allowing foreign universities to set up Indian campuses? Very good silly question. I would not like to enumerate the benefits. But why do we need a benefit to remove a restriction on higher education in India? Why should an Indian student be not allowed to study in a foreign university's Indian campus approved by Indian government authority? Removal of such a restriction is the greatest benefit: in a democracy, the State should allow as much freedom to its citizens as is possible.

Sep 21, 2010
Of, By and For the Political Party(ies)

A great person defined democracy as the rule of the people, by the people and for the people. In Monarchy's the rule was of, by and for the King. In the Hindu epic Ramayana, Rama's rule was of Dharma (Righteousness), by King Rama and for the people. In the later Hindu Epic Mahabharata, the rule was of the Royal families, by the crooked of the royal families and for the royal families and the warrior class. In history throughout muscle power dominated: the earth for the enjoyment of the brave, talented fighters. There were times when small kingdoms were ruled by democratically elected leaders (must have been voice votes for the smartest or the most physically powerful (with or without weapons) men. Even Napoleon got elected to rule and turned France into his Kingdom. Some monarchs were just plain dictators: some enjoyed a court of physically weak learned men and men of arts. Dynastic rule by royal families became accepted as the just rule of, by and for the royal families. Some kingdoms were ruled as a collection of oligarchs, each a king of a given territory and they combined to have a lead super king of the conglomerate of consolidated territory.
Modern democracies have been founded on the same principles of the past but principles are couched in words that have magical powers to fool the common citizens. Multi-party democracies have allowed leaders to emerge along a hierarchical chain. Parties are nothing but instruments to throw new people's representative kings up. Party is a machinery to collect votes in favour of leaders they happen to get and market them to the electorate. The marketing literature of parties talk of various ideologies (which generally are lot of verbose and slogan the citizens do not understand but like them to be couched in attractive enough words and phrases that one would consider to be fashionable), tall and hence inherently false promises to the citizens (that are seldom capable of being fulfilled by any party in power). But parties need workers and they get them - a few get fooled by ideologies, some aspire to become leaders one day and enjoy like kings did, most others work against compensation in monetary or other material terms. Let alone the ruling party functionaries, the opposition party functionaries in modern democracy have their share of power to abuse and can provide benefit in terms of getting commercial contracts, access to State funds ostensibly earmarked for great social, cultural, sports, academic research and etc work. Most party workers work for getting these doled out by the party leaders.
Leaders are generally those who have failed to succeed in any kind of economic activity or interested in using political clout to beat rivals in competition that can only be distorted by the abuse of the power of the Government or legislation. Except for a few exceptions, most political leaders have failed to compete for the top positions in academic career, sports, acting, professional or vocational skill acquisition (however, once they come into leadership, they find that the media and the public have found in them lot of talents and skills in sports, culture, painting, singing, literature, etc and even some of these political dullards with public oratory skills manage to get recognised as intellectuals and philosophers). Some great person had said democracy is the rule of the idiots. The business of Ruling (administration, law and order, policing, is best done by idiots only: the skilled and the talented are best used for actual productive work and scientific/ technological advances.
So, the business of democratic politics offers a good avenue of building a financially successful career with lot of name and fame including for being philanthropic and benevolent (at the expense of tax payers' money). Bulk of the money collected through taxes are essentially coercive levies of thee type collected by hooligans. The businessmen of productive economic activities like manufacturing, banking, insurance, other services and construction, transport and trade, if they have to continue, their business must pay both official taxes to the Government for the comfortable living of the people' elected representatives and donations ( charges?) to various political parties.
The business of politics requires very little owners/ promoters capital. It does not require borrowing at all. Monies flow to political parties from the citizens because they cannot live peacefully if they do not pay the political party charges.
All parties swear in the name of the people at large and promises to do only good for the people. But most people complain that political parties did nothing for them. Yet being in democracy, they have to pay the political party levies either through the government or as donations/ subscriptions to the political parties directly. When in power, the ruling political party gets the most of the donations and subscriptions. / Political party charges.
The strategy of a political party is to get the maximum number of the party nominees elected as people's representatives. If the number they get in the elections is a clear majority, they enjoy a full term of five years to exploit the people. Even if they get fewer seats, they can still get into position of membership of various committees of the elected representatives which are associated with lot of pecuniary benefits and little work besides traveling and dining after meetings. Moreover, if no political party gets a clear majority, more than one party forms a coalition to rule: the benefits are distributed in proportion of the relative electoral successes hey have and how critical they are for not allowing an alternative coalition government.
Almost all parties want to become the only party in the country. This has happened in the Democratic Republic of China: Communist Party is the only political and non-political party in that country. That is the ideal of democracy. But that ideal is seldom reached. In Countries like India which are federal democracies, some political parties try to concentrate only on one or two provinces and try to ensure that in the province no other party is able to win a single seat in the election to the provincial legislative assembly. The Congress Party did this in West Bengal for about two decades after independence, and then the Communist Party Marxists did the same for the next three decades and is still continuing. Single party is best for democracy: there is no inter party fight and murders etc and corresponding law and order chaos. But one does not get the best situation all the time.
Political parties are seldom wound up: sometimes there are mergers and acquisitions in the business of political parties. Even those who do not believe in democracy and capitalism, form political parties and vow to struggle until both democracy and communism is established. In India there are many such political parties - they are nowadays called Maoists parties (somehow the Indian political parties get their names by borrowing from abroad: there is the Congress Party and Trinamool Congress Party, and there are many socialist or Samajwadi party, there a number of communist parties and now a number of Maoists parties: foreign ideas and names always get a premium value in the Indian market). The Maoist parties are capturing inaccessible, Forest areas and running their own governments in those places. They recruit young people, train them to modern weaponry to fight the police in guerrilla war fare, they collect their levies from the people in the locality even if they are poor, run ancillary smuggling and narcotic businesses, arrange for sexual comfort for their party men and even arrange insurance from Indian insurance companies for their terrorist party men if they die while fighting with the police or the other political party armed cadres. Most political parties in India have to raise some sort of armed cadres for the protection of their leaders and for collecting money from the people at gun point. Only the ruling parties enjoy the benefit of State police acting as their additional armed cadres to fight other political parties.
Indians think that democracy is the best thing in the World. And, they think that political parties are the pillars of democracy and therefore become politically conscious by being a blind supporter of one of the parties. Without political parties, Indian cannot live. There is little chance for apolitical, independent citizens to be elected representatives. No one can be elected if he or she is not a nominee of a political party. India is truly a democracy of, by and for political parties. India is proud of her great democracy of, by and for political parties. People are dead.

Sep 24, 2010
Democratic Dislike for Independence

Since democracies are of, by and for political parties (or, a single party), the citizens are not entitled to enjoy independence: each citizen must be fully dependent on and committed to one political party at any point of time. One can change sides once in a while and de-link one's dependence and full loyalty/commitment to political party X and link one's dependence to another political party Y or Z, but at any point of time one must be completely subservient to a specific political party. Otherwise, you can only be treated as a queer animal without political consciousness and a citizen not worthy of democratic rights. No citizen worthy of a democracy can have the right to criticise all political parties at the same time.
This principle is very fundamental to the success of democracy and its sustenance through oppression and exploitation. A person who does not depend on a specific political party is useless because no party can count on him for his votes. Second, a person who is not willing to show allegiance to a specific political party can not enjoy the right to benefit from favors granted by the political party to him. Third if such independent, non-conformist persons become a significant percentage of population, its a threat to the sustainability of the business of politicians in democracy as such independent citizens will grow in number and treat the politicians as slaves rather than being slaves of a political party or another.
That is why political parties are very active in promoting multiple trade unions affiliated to them, students joining political parties and forming the nucleus of the brainwashing and indoctrination of young minds to dependence on political parties. Even if the citizens realise that the political parties are useless, they must continue to how allegiance to one political party or another. Politicians cannot effectively oppress and exploit the citizens unless the citizens feel dependent on the political parties. It is somewhat similar to the dependence of religious minded people on the priests. Unless there is a strong attachment of people to one or the other political parties, they can organise political agitations, demonstrations, movements, struggles against so-called undemocratic and foolish policies of the ruling party in power or support blindly whatever the ruling party does. Democracies are meant to be for continuous wars and battles among political parties - continuous Kurushetra war: war cannot be fought with dependent armies led by the hierarchy of political leaders.
Just look at the history of Independent India and its any province, say West Bengal. It will be easily seen that the greatness and success of Indian democracy is essentially due to dependence of citizens on political parties for every thing. Political leaders help citizens to get educated, get jobs, get weapons to fight, to get protection against police interference, to get important positions in State appointed committees, to get preferential allotment to state-owned land, to organise film festivals to make money, to organise sports events to make money, to run business without much labor problems or problems arising from violations of law and regulations concerning businesses, to get reservations in jobs, to get state grants in aid, to get admissions to schools and colleges, to get etc. That is why every citizen including prominent businessmen and the small ones, the talented actors, the super sportsperson, the novelist, the intellectual, the government officers, the doctors and paramedical staff, the students and teachers, the traders and the transporters, the policemen and the newspaper editors and their reporters, the TV anchors and newsreaders are now fully and publicly attached to one or the other political parties - sometimes publicly supporter of one party and secretly supporter of another party. You will be always running the risk of being oppressed or exploited or both, but allegiance and dependence to political parties is a lottery ticket to get some favours from political parties time to time. See what happened in land acquisition for SEZs all over India, what happened in Nannur, Nandigram , Singur, Rajarhat, Lalgarh etc in West Bengal, Common Wealth Games mismanagement in New Delhi, massacres by armed political party cadres in different parts of West Bengal, political intervention in the love and marriage affairs of young couples through the oppressive police machinery, the circuses of inauguration events with speeches by politicians at so-called mass rallies (how much time politicians spend on giving lectures to people in different stages/ rallies vis a vis the time they have for serving the people), and so on. To be in democracy, one has to learn to live with the political consciousness that in a rule of, by and for political parties, citizens have only to choose the masters - one of the political parties, they have to accept the destiny of being dependent on political parties. There is no right to human life of dignity if you choose to be abnormal and there fore independent of political party connections, affiliations.
It is sad that the scientist have not yet been successful in inventing a childhood shot that protects citizens for life against possible attacks of the virus or bacteria of apolitical or political party independence syndrome!!!
How would a democratic country function if most of the citizens became completely independent of slavery to one or the other political party? Would that mean democracy sans exploitation and oppression citizens? How can there be legislatures who do not belong to any political party?
Can we think of a society where citizens are the masters and political parties and politicians are their servants? Let’s explore that dumb anti-democratic idea later.

Nov 18, 2010
Scam-tainted Democracy: Indian’s Addictive Entertainment

From our childhood days in the 1950s we have been brought up with the news of scam. Most scams attracted the attention of people to politicians or bureaucrats in high position or pointed to a nexus between them and rich businessmen. As children we understood very little about what the scams were really about. As we grew up to realise that scams meant money flowing to politicians and bureaucrats through mechanisms that involved political and bureaucratic decisions in favour of particular businessman or business group. As we grew up further we came to learn about defense deal and government contract award related scams. The country moved very fast to state-controlled and dictated economy so that scams became so routine and mundane like loan melas by public sector banks, and leakages down the line in the food procurement, food distribution, license allocation, coal supply linkage allocation, wagon allotment for goods movement, etc. Then, people stopped using the term scam to such regular systems of corruption associated with government functioning. Late Prime minister had observed that out of any Rs 100 of government expenditure meant for the benefit of poor and weaker sections of the society, only Rs 15 reached the beneficiaries, the remaining were drained out by government appointed middlemen like employees and contractors entrusted with the responsibility of carrying the benefits to the intended beneficiaries. Nobody used the term SCAM to such systematic misappropriation of money.
The Scams do not become scam in India unless Crores of Rupees are involved as bribe money or siphoned off money with a big private sector company or private industrialist or a minister being involved. Scams have a cut-off floor to be included as SCAM for debates, discussions and political shadow fighting and then hiding the SCAM under the carpet through a dilatory process of CBI Investigation, Joint Parliamentary Committee Probe, etc. After a long time a few small fries are sacrificed as scapegoats at the public anger pacifying Alter.
No one admits that introduction of industrial licensing was a Scam, or recognise that creation of public sector was a Scam or not using competitive market mechanism for any government action is a scam. No one realizes that the larger the number of decisions that the Government or its employees are entitled to make on the basis of their discretion, the greater the scope and exploitation of Scam opportunities. No one finds that the details of many laws and regulatory procedures are structured to allow breeding of scams. People are happy if a Scam involving hundreds of crores of rupees along with a large company or a minister are reported in the Press because this is an opportunity of entertainment of political dramas around such a scam. People have no illusion that the country will ever get out of unearthed routine scams or big, scams. Often people know of the brewing Scams even before the Scams are recognised by the Press which waits in most cases for leaks from auditors or inspecting committees and in a few cases on their own investigative journalism. No one is interested in nipping the scam in the bud: everyone is awaiting the Scam to complete its process so that the Scam can be reported with sensational details and the post-scam drama can be enjoyed. The people have become almost addicted to big scam news everyday. Naturally, such insatiable demand for scam entertainment creates its own supply. The year 2010 has been able to record continuous entertainment with a series of high profile scams: IPL bidding of teams, Common Wealth Games Capital Expenditure, Adarsh Building apartment allotment in Mumbai, Telecom 2-G spectrum licensing, Rajarhat land acquisition in West Bengal, Land allotment in Karnataka, Ratan Tata's revelation that Tatas did not enter aviation business because a minister demanded Rs15 Crore bribe money. Each case involves big money - not just a crore or two. Each case involved governments and ministers/ bureaucrats/ politicians. Most cases have already seen some ministers resigning. Each case has led to political wrestling drama including in some cases stalling parliamentary work sessions. And, each case was known from the very beginning as one of a brewing high profile scam with great potential for public entertainment in due course as if these are great movies directed by start directors and involving star actors in the process of shooting and editing with the public awaiting the announcement of the date of their release. And, the sixty year long tradition of intellectual outbursts expressing their concern and anguish over such huge corruption and malpractices in the country in the newspaper/ magazine columns (and now TV debating episodes) continue as part of the National addiction to Scam-based entertainment. The public at large are all the more happy if a few persons are penalised in some way or other for being the scam heroes at some point of time but they need a scam story read everyday just as they would like to glance at the daily cartoon or daily weather forecast or the stock market price chart: it is indeed a pleasant addiction to scam entertainment.
This is the vision of democratic India that those who brought us Independence wanted us to inherit!

Dec 18, 2010
Democratic Violence Breeding Campuses: Leftist Legacy

Unless you practice violence you cannot get hold of all pervasive State
power to oppress and exploit the common citizens of democracy and abuse them to benefit the political party and the politicians elected to continue democratic exploitation. If you are in power, you launch violence to scare citizens away from supporting any opposition political party. If you want to grab power, you as opposition party must be capable of organizing counter-violence to scare away citizens from further support to ruling political party. And, violence must be exercised before the elections so that citizens without political support stay away from polling booths and citizens with political support can be assured of no risk of being affected by counter-violence by rival political parties and vote for the party which has established their terror without any opposition in the territory concerned. Thus before the elections democratic political parties must establish their unofficial zamidaries in different areas so that most areas are controlled by the terror of one or the other political party, and only a few remains for violent battle grounds for the political parties.
Even before the elections, the capturing of territories by political parties settles who is going to win the elections. The Communist Party of India Marxist or CPI(M) or simply CPM led left front in West Bengal has been in power for the last 34 years on the relatively greater capability of capturing territories through violence in most of the areas, thus ensuring that they get the votes they want to win the elections.
The Election Commission of India has been trying to eliminate the intensity and spread of violence during the elections and offer a peaceful climate for fair and manipulation free elections for the last 10- 15 years and has been increasing successful but not yet been able to eradicate violence for access to democratic power of the State in many areas. The partial success or failure of the Election Commission in curbing the impact of political violence on citizens’ access to free and fair elections and on election results is due to the fact that most violence takes place much before the election day.
So, violence continues to be an important instrument of securing votes to get into power.
But, how does one organize violence. The political leaders themselves cannot get directly involved in physical violence except occasionally and in dire need. So, the political system has to have a process of organising violence without the political leaders directly participating in violence so that leaders can remain free to enjoy the fruits of power brought through violence by their supporters and recruited muscle men. Over the last 50 years the leftists have perfected the process of democratic violence organisation and processes. The other parties where they have to fight the CPM and the leftists also adopts the same strategy of winning first the violent political battles in various territories before they can hope people to cast their votes in their favour.
In West Bengal, this violence strategy was practiced in selected cases. Little known people got through to win elections in the early 1950s with the help of leaders of criminal gangs. The criminals proficient in murders, looting and extortion worked for selected leaders before and during elections against payment of large sums of money to force voters to come to booths and vote for the political leader who commissioned them to terrorise the voters and capture polling booths and stamp the ballot papers as per their desire. But this was not an efficient method for a political party for various reasons and risky for even a single political leader.
The strategy of violence to power developed in a more organised and professional manner during 1970-1990, with the cues from the dissident Naxal groups in the late 1960s and 1970s. The Naxals were, just as the Current Maoists are, breakaway communists. The Naxals of the 1960s were dissatisfied with the slow progress of the communist movement to bring the communist revolution to the fore and capture State power and also with the addiction of the elderly, non-adventurous gentlemen type leaders' ambition to capture State power through democratic elections and keeping the date of the Communist Revolution of the Soviet or Chinese style at bay for indefinite period. The young Naxalites in the city of Kolkata wanted immediate recognition as famous revolutionary leaders which the CPM old guards denied because they sensed that that they could win the elections given the public frustration over the incompetent Congress Rule that allowed other States in India to march ahead in economic development at the cost of the State of West Bengal in the name of balanced development. The ruling Congress Govt. fought the armed Naxals with armed police, but the CPM had to hold its territories of influence by fighting the Naxals on the streets with the help of recruited cadres of musclemen. That was the begging of the leftists’ conscious efforts to induct and foster violence capability within their political organisations.
By the end of the 1970s, the violence capability strength of political parties had considerably increased and just needed a link to the State security administration network. With the home/ police department under ministers, it was just a matter of time for political parties to build up a virtually unbeatable violent terror cadre to ensure that the political party wins each and every election through political terror and violence to nip all opposition forces in the bud. The rogue ruffians and criminals were as much part of the organisation as were the police and administrative forces. They had to be coordinated by the loyal party leaders at various levels. Not everyone can be leader capable and trained to deal with the effective implementation of the strategy of violence and terror. The leaders had to be groomed from their young stage. The political parties recognized the need to convert all their trade union units and their student units into centres of breeding leaders capable of dealing with the violence-terror strategy. The schools, colleges and universities became the nursing ground for future political party leaders. As a potential leader you must not merely be a follower of the party's professed ideology, but lead and expand student organisations and take active part in violence with appropriate links with the local police to remain unaffected and provide protection to the supporters and recruits deployed in the violence and terror actions. As you go up the ladder with success your active involvement in terror and violence would reduce but given the grass-root level experience and networking, you should be still in remote control of the violence and terror activities of the party in territories you are made responsible for. When you are about to join the higher levels of party leadership and ministerial positions, you must have a clean record and appear as a peace-loving, honest gentlemen with no connections with any criminal activity. But you continue to have remote control over the violence-terror establishment of the party.
This matured state of violence and terror based political democracy had been reached by 1995 or so. But not all parties are equally strong in this regime and hence only the best gets elected to power. The formation of Trinamool Congress was probably based on this recognition of the highly evolved mechanism of democratic politics in West Bengal. It has made substantial progress in acquiring the qualities needed to wrest power in a State accustomed to politics based on violence and terror. And, no wonder, it has continued to win elections in the State at Parliamentary, panchyat and municipal elections. Now they are about to fight for the State elections. Before that the college student elections must be won to provide the party with potential future leaders who can deal with the strategy of violence and terrorism on a comparable footing with the ruling political parties. The outbreaks of violence in recent weeks at different colleges are nothing but the preparation by the political parties for the State Assembly elections in 2011. After a long time, the State will witness an election where major rival parties are more or less matched by their violence-terror strength/ potential. This may be the beginning of the end to violence-terror strategy of politics in West Bengal and the parties may soon be in search of alternative strategies to get into and retain State power. Or, am I dreaming? This may be just the beginning of heightened political terror and violence before the state of despair after Kurushetra with all parties and the society nursing grave wounds and losses to life and property.

Feb 6, 2011
Remarkable Quotes on Democracies & Republics

How some personalities did sense what would happen all over the democratic World including India? We know why there is so much corruption and yet we have blind faith in democratic Government and Legislators to act as God, the Almighty when in fact the institution of Government is inherently oppressive and corrupt.

"Laws are like spiders' webs which, if anything small falls into them they ensnare it, but large things break through and escape." -Solon
"Useless laws weaken necessary laws." -Charles De Montesquieu

"The more laws are enacted and taxes assessed, the greater the number of lawbreakers and tax evaders." -Lao Tzu
"Nothing is more destructive of respect for the government and the law of the land than passing laws which cannot be enforced." -Albert Einstein

"Never forget that everything Hitler did in Germany was legal." -Martin Luther King, Jr.
"The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws." -Ayn Rand


"There are laws to protect the freedom of the press' speech, but none that are worth anything to protect the people from the press." -Mark Twain
"Policemen so cherish their status as keepers of the peace and protectors of the public that they have occasionally been known to beat to death those citizens or groups who question that status." -David Mamet

Feb 8, 2011
Democratic Accountability: Does Vikramaditya's Principle Apply?

A friend, Sunil, recently forwarded an e-mail story. It's about King Vikramaditya's Ruling on the Liability of the Honest. The story goes like this:
Once there lived an old and pious man, renowned for his honesty. One day his neighbor, a rich merchant comes to him with a request. The merchant was leaving on a voyage and wants the old man to safeguard his wealth, until his return. The old man agrees and with God as witness promises to protect and safeguard the merchant's wealth.


The old man then entrusts the safe keep of the merchant's wealth to his son, from whom he takes an oath of propriety and honesty. Slowly the son starts dipping into the merchants’ wealth; people notice this and warn the old man of the son's misdeeds. The old man calls his son asks him to explain, he also reminds him of his oath on following the right path. The son rubbishes the accusations as rumors and the idle gossip of jealous people, who could not bear to see his prosperity. The old man accepts the son's explanation and things go on as before.


The merchant returns and demands his wealth. The old man calls his son, who hands over a quarter of the merchant's wealth saying that is all there was. The merchant realizing that he has been cheated approaches the King. The King listens to the merchant's complaint and summons the old man. The old man comes to the court with his son and handing him over to the King says "your majesty, the merchant is right. My son has confessed to the crime. Please punish him." The king has the son flogged and imprisoned. He then praises the old mans honesty and dismisses the case.


But the merchant demands punishment for the old man saying, "I have still not received justice. I had entrusted my wealth to the old man which he swore by God to safeguard. The old man’s integrity is intact, but what of me, I have been robbed of my life’s savings, and made a pauper. It was the old man's decision to entrust my wealth the son for safe keeping. As far as I am concerned the old man is the culprit, and should be punished." The king is astounded by this demand. The old man, was neither a party to the theft nor did he benefit from it. In fact, he had sent his son to jail. Yet, the merchant was asking for the old man's punishment.


The Betal asks Vikramaditya, "What should be the King's decision." Vikramaditya's replies, "Though the old man is innocent of the actual theft, he is guilty of dereliction of duty. The son's crime was a straight forward one, the old man's was a graver crime. He did nothing to protect the merchant's wealth. Far from being vigilant he failed to take action even when he was warned of his son's misdeeds. Because of his laxity the merchant is condemned to a life of penury. He should be punished." End of STORY.


The forwarded email now asks why this Principle is not applicable to India in 2010. Dr. Manmohan Singh, esteemed economist, former Governor of RBI, Deputy Chairman of Planning Commission, former Finance Minister, a man whose personal ethics and integrity are unblemished, takes oath to protect and safeguard the Nation and its assets. He appoints Raja, as his Cabinet Minister for IT Telecom. Unlike the story, this heist of a precious national asset is carried out in full view of Dr. Manmohan Singh and his cabinet colleagues. Newspapers across the country cry out at this outrage in front page headlines. The Indian Constitution grants the Prime Minister absolute power in running the country. He is the head of the Government and the Union Cabinet functions at his pleasure. As per the Transaction of Business Rules the Prime Minister has the unrestricted right to demand and get any file, any record from any Ministry. Dr. ManMohan Singh could have at any time stopped this heist of a National asset, yet he chose to remain silent. The Minister's failure to exercise his constitutional rights has caused irreparable loss to the Nation.


But I am not sure that the lesson of the story is learnt. The story's principle would apply to an honest man who failed to keep up his promise taken in the name of the God. The principle may not apply to the King. just because he happens to be honest and has taken oath under the Constitution. Although I would like the principle to apply in all cases. That would have been fair and democratic also. But application of Vikramaditya's Principle is not really much meaningful or effective.


My objection is not against the principle of Vikramaditya. My worry is that the principle by itself does not help us solve the basic problem. Even if Dr. Man Mohan Singh accepts the responsibility of failure to stop a cabinet colleague from doing an alleged activity in complete disregard to the protection of the Nation's Wealth/ Assets, this action on his part would have no impact on the problem of corruption: it may merely help comfort the hearts of those of us who agree with the story's lesson on the principle of Vikarmaditya. What we would really achieve is merely embarrassing an honest person and prove that we are not willing to accept that there exist honest persons.
For, there is no dearth of politicians in India who would be willing to be PM for a few months and resign/ get punished for not being careful enough to discharge the responsibility of protecting National Wealth through a system that encourages corruption: he/ she would just have to wait till a scam by his cabinet colleagues/ officials gets unearthed.


But, our national macro position with regard to corruption would remain unaltered. Vikramaditya's Principle does not ensure that ministers or bureaucrats or lowly government clerks or the policemen have no access to viable opportunity for becoming corrupt and therefore ensures that the corrupt has no incentive to be in politics or government. It would be foolish to expect that punishing the old man's son as well the old honest man, as was done by the King, would become a great deterrent for the corrupt to become honest in general. The system may not even allow the old man and his son to endure the consequences of an exemplary punishment. Because, it takes a long route to establish that the alleged corrupt really acted corruptly and the someone really had abated the alleged corrupt activity that resulted in a great loss to the Nation.


On a micro-plane, the question still remains as to what should honest people like Man Mohan Singh do? The age old saying is “Do not keep company with evil doers". Did Mr. Singh follow this wise dictum even after the age when most people retired? Maybe, he had to be in the company of corrupt people when he was the Economic Advisor or Finance Secretary or accepted the post of Deputy Governor to make a living. But an honest person has to decide whether to be in the company of known evil and the corrupt. It is another matter if the given societal system really allows an honest person to keep himself/ herself miles away from the corrupt.


When Mr. Singh became PM he had expressed the hope that and extolled honest and good people to join politics in large numbers to drive out the evil, the corrupt and the criminals. But, is that way to make the politics honest and corruption-free? Are the Constitution and the laws are so designed to nip any attempt to promote falsehood, incompetence, dishonesty, corruption and crime in politics? Just look at the details of the design of the Socialist democratic republics and the legislative actions during the last 60 years to find out if there has been any provision that specifically deals with making corruption economically unviable in India. Yes, there are number of laws to penalise the corrupt and enforcement agencies to detect corruption and investigate after the incidence of corruption. But there is nothing that is designed to make opportunities of corruption economically unviable or inaccessible to the corrupt. Rather, there are more components in the system designed to make available opportunities to profit from corruption. The laws, rules and regulations are so designed that opportunities for corruption are many and provisions that can easily make honest persons getting entangled in corruption even without their knowledge.


Only a social movement of the people, by the people and for the people can possibly change the design of the system. People are unreasonable if they expect a few honest guys here and there in politics will stop corruption. There is no point in merely fighting against corruption after they take place unless you design a system that makes profitable opportunities of corruption inaccessible to the politicians, bureaucrats, government employees, the industrialists and others.

We need a separate Betal story and ruling of Vikramadity more appropriate to our problem.

Feb 9, 2011
What does C stand for?

A young friend was reading out from an email forward. It was so entertaining that I had requested him to forward the mail to me. Probably, he forgot or by chance deleted the mail. I cannot recollect the contents of the mail but I can recollect the subject matter. So, I thought of making up one piece that would give a sense of the subject. It was about a new University degree that is being launched in some country. The admission brochure runs something like this:


University of Emerging Technologies

In replacement of the MBA Degree, the University has launched the MCM Degree in view of the huge potential of self-employment, employment and wealth generation potential of C- Technology and C- Culture.
Details of the Two-Year Master of C-Management (MCM) Degree Program are given below:

Program Objective:
(a) Provide Advanced Education to the Aspiring Wealth & Power based on state of the art Knowledge in the area of C- Philosophy
(b)To impart effective and competitive C-skills needed to succeed in life in fast growing C-based economies.
Eligibility for Admission:
(a) Age - Between 18 and 30; for meritorious students of up to 45 years may be considered.
(b) Qualification – A graduate degree in any subject: those with demonstrated aptitude in application of C-skills may not require more than high school exposure.
Fees: Negotiable with a minimum Amount equivalent to US $ 100000 payable in 4 equal installments.
Other Requirements: Students have to make their own arrangements for accommodation, boarding and lodging.
Target Students: Those already active or desire to join democratic business institutions and firms in the area of administration, investigative journalism, auditing, political leadership, liaisons and public relations, event organization, etc.
Loan Facilities: Easily Available from C-skilled financing firms

Faculty: Internationally well recognized leaders of C-Philosophy and C-Skills with successful track record in practice like Professors Dr. SP Owner Dr. La Loo, Dr. May Awatee, Dr. R Aja, Dr. L M Ody, Dr. Kalm Adie, Dr. Achau Han, Dr. Y D’apa, Dr. R Eddee, Dr. NR Adea and Dr. SS Wamy. Special lectures will be delivered by icons from Prime Time TV anchors, Political Commentary lobbies, political parties and retired C-professionals.

Program Details: Semester 1: 30 hours of lecturers, group discussions, project work in each of the following 6 Papers of 100 marks each:
1. Basic C- Concepts, terminology/ language
2. Simulated Simple C-Games,
3. Introduction to C- Philosophy,
4. History of C- Development from ancient times to 2050AD.
5. Use of C-oriented Statistical Methods
6. C-Communication & Presentation
Semester II: 30 hours of lecturers, group discussions, project work in each of the following 6 Papers of 100 marks each:
7. Fundamental of C-Economy and C-Economics
8. C- Accounting & Finance
9. Principles of C-Marketing
10. Organization and Methods of C-Operations
11. Design, Evaluation/ Appraisal of C-Projects
12. Analysis of 6 Major Reported C-Cases
Semester III: 3 weeks of internship in C-flourishing and C-constrained Organizations
Semester IV: 30 hours of lecturers, group discussions, project work in each of the following 6 Papers of 100 marks each:
13. IT-oriented C-skills and C-applications
14. Ethics and Values in C-Applications
15. C- Team work Principles and practices
16. C-Leadership
17. Legal Framework for C-Operations
15. Humane Relationships in C-Environment
Semester V: : 30 hours of lecturers, group discussions, project work in each of the 6 specialization papers of 100 marks each in any one of the specialization areas:
1. C-oriented Media and Public Relations
2. C-based Politics and National/ State/ Local Policy Design and Implementation
3. C-Infiltrated Administration and Regulation
4. C-induced Non-profit Activity
5. Spiritual Living in C-Environment

Semester V will provide in-depth exposure to frontiers of String Operations, Stealth Planning, Collusive Strategies, Communications Tapping, Audit Proofing, Investigation Jamming, Record and Trail Erasing, Probe Insurance including JPC gaming, Threat Annihilation, Disaster Blasting, Trial Disintegration, PIL Foiling and Effective Spoil Distribution Strategies.

Campus Recruitment: Assured employment on completion of degree in political and economic firms and government consultancy / service assignments. Earnings Prospect -sky is the limit but guaranteed minimum of US $ 250000 pm to pa.

What does C stand for?






Feb 19, 2011
Response is in the Perception of the Brain holder

From poets to pedestrians, politicians of different hues and social scientists of different colors, intellectuals to high government officials, representatives of civil society to the faithful if particular ideologies, and, of course, from ministers to the scared girls, their parents and the common people have shown different reactions to the single horribly sad and distressing incident. Everyone is aghast and angry that such a disgraceful incident can take place.


It was few minutes before midnight on February 15 when three drunk young goons insulted and molested a 21 year lady returning home from her work and murdered her 15 year old brother who tried to plead and protest against the goons' outrageously uncivilized behavior while the brother was riding home in his bicycle along with his elder sister from the Rail station along a road that is flanked by the policemen-guarded residences of high-ranking government administrator, police official and judge in the populous town of Barasat, about 45 kms from the City of Kolkata. The girl had sought help from the armed policemen guarding the government official residence in vain while her brother was being beaten to death. The boy was taken to hospital by some passing rickshaw van puller while the murders fled. The boy soon thereafter died in the hospital. This is not the first incident of its kind in West Bengal cities and towns in many years: such incidents are regularly reported with high frequency in the Calcutta dailies and TV channels. Even as one of the murders of February 15 was arrested by the Police, reports of further similar incidents that led only to injuries inflicted by goons but not death have been reported in the next two days.

It is an interesting study of varying perceptions and the poor quality of Bengali intellect that gets revealed from the reactions. First are the Chief Minister’s actions: he visited the bereaved family to console them the very next morning, offered them all help and two lakh rupees as assistance. He did just the right thing as he must have perceived that as the chief of the political administration in the State he needed to be beside the family affected by a gruesome incident. He also had perceived something more. After returning to office, he issued fresh instructions to the police that they need to be more vigilant in patrolling and should be responsive to demand for quick action while the goons are busy committing crimes, etc. This was indeed the just reaction from his perceptive perspective as the minister in charge of the police department. How wide-angled had his perception been that the Chief Minister did not see that he as the minister of the police department needed to own the moral responsibility for the incident resulting from allowing the Police to function so incompetently that they were not guarding/ patrolling roads known to be the roaming place of goons and criminals at night, causing danger to common people who needed to use the road. He was probably very nervous about his failure to discharge the responsibility of protecting citizens traveling on a major road from known, operative local goons. The danger was known to even the common residents but his policemen did not bother beyond guarding the security of the residences of the government officials. His perception might have been that this was a rare incident and the police department should wake up to its basic responsibility only now. So, he forgot to appeal to the citizens’ at large seeking their pardon for his failure to keep the police department in proper shape to serve the basic cause for which a police department is supposed to exist. He must have done right as he never perceived that he has done any wrong or mistake and that he has no accountability for the acts of the goons freely roaming along the main road to commit crimes at their will.

What did the politicians do? The same thing they do in case of murders: claim that the victim was their supporter. Each political party's perception was that the incident, though very sad, is one over which they could draw sympathy from the public towards them in the current environment of continuing political murders throughout the State of West Bengal. Each party's perception was that this would be also yet another opportunity to blame the other party for being the home of the murders. The political parties reacted as per the common political party's perceptive perspective in these days. What they did must have been appropriate.

This time however the bereaved family and the neighbors objected to political party association and did not allow any political party to capture the opportunity to carry the dead body in a procession towards the cremation site. Whole of West Bengal knows that all most all goons and criminals in the State either enjoy the patronage and support of one political party or the other (and some enjoy a close friendship of the Police), or, patronize one politician or another (some patronize one policeman or other). So, the political parties' calls for a local bandh (strike) against the incident fizzled out. The next day the residents of the town made a silent condolence and protest signature campaign and lit candles and disallowed any political party activists/ members to come near. The common people had their own perception about the incident: they did not want any one responsible for creating conditions that have given rise to these kinds of incidents any where around during the expressions of protests and grief. They wanted the politicians to leave them alone in their moments of silent grief and tearful eyes enduring suffering under the oppressively idiotic political regime in the State. They must have been right in what they did: for a while they breathed air unpolluted by politicians and their armies.


Having failed to exploit a sad incident to their advantage before the forthcoming elections, they rushed to the TV studios to participate in debates over the sad incident. All of them expressed sadness over the incident. They did what they perceived their role to be: as leaders of people, each one of them expressed their sadness and grief over the murder and the incident (the chief minister did the same along with the Governor; the intellectuals and commentators did the same). As if without their expressions of sadness the public at large would be less sad! As if the people were waiting to see them expressing their sadness on the TV screen! They must have done the right thing.

But what do the politicians and intellectuals do during the debate other than expressing sadness. The opposition parties blamed the 34-year misrule of the CPM-dominated communist/leftist coalition government: this communist government, according to them, had patronized criminals and goons, had made the police force work according to the needs of the ruling party rather than in accordance with the responsibilities of the police force in a civilized, democratic State, and had encouraged the proliferation of liquor shops in every corner of the streets / roads of the State to get the youth turn into goons of the type capable of crimes witnessed in the incident of the 15th February night. No common apolitical citizen of the State would doubt the thesis of the opposition parties. The opposition parties did what was right: they gave us a brilliant analysis of the situation that gives birth to the incidents of this type.


The ruling party also did what they considered right. According to their perception such incidents are few and far between in the State and reported much less in terms of their occurring as compared to other states in India, that it is not possible to guarantee such-incident-free conditions to the 85 million citizens of the State with a 0.5 million strong police force, that the cause of youth taking to drinking at heart's content to become potential girl-molesters and murders on public roads is the consumption-oriented (capitalism) that has gained ground in the last two decades because of the Govt. of India's economic policies. Their response must be right because the whole world witnesses such incidents, because countries with capitalistic consumerism witness such crimes and because perceptions do not require to be justified by scientific and empirically tested/testable arguments. The only strength of their analysis is that they seemed helpless in not concealing their apprehension that given the consumption-oriented societal life, such incidents have to be experienced and endured even in leftist rule. They did right in stating the Truth at least on this occasion: people must be prepared to accept incidents like the one of February 15th night as part of life so long as the society remains consumption oriented and pursues the path of capitalism, globalization and liberalization. People must think what they want to do: the Maoist extremists are calling everyone to join them to destroy the current socio-economic set up of capitalism and consumerism! Or, do they want to endure crime against women.


What did the social scientists have to say? They perceived that all these kinds of criminal behavior of youth are essentially due to their upbringing in the family: today's murders and women-molesters are born out of neglect from parent's love, training and lack of education and extreme deprivation as well as the progressive disintegration of society into dispersed units without bondage of affection and cooperation. That is again a master piece of analysis: as if not widely known by most of the TV viewers. The social scientists are right. People have to wait. There is no magic wand available. Each parent must provide adequate love, affection, time, education and training as also facilities at childhood so that the children have difficulty of growing up with goons of the February 15th fame as their role models!


What about other intellectuals? They used their intellect to blame one or more of the following: the incompetence of the police force, the criminalization of politics, the turning of police from being the servant of the State to one of the ruling party politicians, the politicization of education and educational institutions, the inadequate generation of employment activities in the state, the degradation of societal value systems, and the like. They demanded immediate apprehension of the culprits and exemplary punishment to them (as if the common citizens were waiting for their considered opinion to demand the same).

The considerate commentators were worried that the criminals were drunk, as if crime committed in drunken state constituted a lesser crime than the one committed in a non-drunk state. They must be right as they perceive drinks are the villain of piece and known goons having the right to commit crimes in drunken state on the roads. There seems to be a law prohibiting driving cars in drunken state, but committing crime in drunken state on the road is not prohibited! Some others are sympathetic to one of the three goons apprehended so far comes from a poor family and hence must have been exposed at early childhood to regular incidents of torturing of women by men at home and in the neighborhood. These are real beauty gems of expert opinions: the child became adult and did not know what he was doing was a criminal act. God and the society forgive them who do not know what they are doing! God and society forgive them those responsible for preventing crime from allowing those ignorant of what constitutes a crime to commit crimes.


One government official however was a bit cautious: he seemed to have said something like 'nothing can be said about the incident as the investigations have just started and that the murdered boy's elder sister was probably a divorcee'. He was right in his perception: the risk of a divorce attracting attempt of molestation was higher. Maybe women will try henceforth not to get divorce, once married! A lady poet did write a column praising the bravery (as did all others praise the bravery in the face of beating and weapons with the criminals) of the 15-year old who protested at the time of the crime being committed but expressed her apprehension that in future such bravery would receive a great jolt because the brave people would be cowed down by the fear of getting murdered. Most interesting however her perception was that such incidence are the result of the age-old basic trait and instinct of Men perceiving women as a commodity of consumption. She is right: men are like that, it is immaterial that the man-dominated societies made laws to categorize certain behavior against women as punishable crimes and the 15 year old who tried to save the honor of his sister was not a man but a mere boy. Maybe she had not heard of a policeman, Bapi Sen, who was killed by goons when he tried to stop them from committing crimes against some women a few years ago in her own city.


The different elite sections of the Bengali society have done extremely well in throwing lot of light of knowledge, wisdom and prompt response after the incident. However, one is not sure if the roads will be illuminated enough or the girls and boys enlightened enough not to become victims of infamous incidents of the 15th February disgracing the entire Bengali society!

Feb 25, 2011
Poor, Law Breakers Right to Oppress Tax Paying Citizens

Democracy provides a big opportunity for encouraging the poor to break the laws and oppress the tax-paying residents in collaboration of resourceful law breakers capable of making law enforcement agencies inactive. And this is done with the active support of the Law Makers and Protectors of Law. There is no need for the poor to unite and participate in bloody revolution. The Police and the Civic Administration ensures that the poor can oppress the tax paying residents at their will.
One such taxpayer lady recently posted her helplessness against such oppression from immigrant labor occupying the public space for their residence at www.karmayog.org - a platform for social and civic issues:
"100 yards from the Anti Corruption Bureau office on P B Marg, right in front of the sprawling Kamala Mills Compound, diagonally opposite the Hard Rock Cafe, a large group of migrant labourers have taken up residence... with plastic sheets, tiles uprooted from the pavement, railings and bamboos pilfered from a nearby work site, and bits and pieces salvaged from trash heaps. They have even built a makeshift temple very recently out of these scraps where elaborate puja is conducted by the women. The pavement is completely blocked. So they have spilled out on the road. They have set up cooking fires on the road itself and bathe openly on the road itself. They also use the road itself to make their wares ... garlands and baskets and trinkets and food items which they sell. The children, especially the very young, crawl directly on the road. This road has become a very busy thoroughfare recently, due to all the offices in the neighbourhood. But half the road is taken up by the squatters. Pedestrians inch their way down the middle of the road, trying to dodge buses and cars. Young girls working at the BPOs in adjacent offices, run the gamut of walking through crowds of young men lolling around in their underwear, squatting on the road. At times, violent fights break out between the inmates, spilling out into the opposite lane. At peak hours, huge traffic jams start as the traffic moves forward in a single lane, barely inches away from the cooking fires burning away on the road. And at night, buses and trucks roaring down the ill lit road are in grave danger of running down the barely seen huddles of people sleeping directly on the road.

Apart from being filthy, unsanitary, a breeding ground for disease, apart from being a traffic hazard and a safety hazard, apart from being a complete transgression of all BMC and RTO rules, it is unthinkable that human beings are being given permission to live like this on such a busy thoroughfare - and they must be given permission by SOMEONE, because they can't just live like that in open sight, breaking all the rules without someone in authority turning a blind eye.
So who is this someone we need to speak to? Who is there in BMC who can help? Or the police? The local police have obviously been looking the other way and it obviously is worth their inattention. So nothing to be gained by complaining.
Any ideas? "

It is fortunate that she was born in India, even as she must be proud of India and Indian democracy. She however has failed to understand that how fortunate we are that the politicians who makes the laws and administer them also enjoy the powers to break the laws and allow others whom they like to break the laws. That is the fundamental principle of democracy. The politicians want the rich and the not-so-poor to give all sorts of taxes for the benefit of the politicians, their employees on the rolls of the Government and the poor at large. They also want that the rich and the not-so-poor share the poverty and poverty-related style of living along with the poor in the neighborhood. That is what the taxpaying residents of PB Marg in Mumbai must willing accept to do and endure. This is a cheaper and safer alternative that the politicians and their administrative employees and policy army offer to the residents. If sharing the neighborhood with immigrant labor was not accepted, the costs of construction of buildings and projects would go up and there could be revolutions organised by the politicians to force the residents to share their residences with the immigrant labor. The residents must therefore accept what is happening.
Clearly there is no point in complaining to police, municipality or the government or the politicians. Democracy still provides a solution that has a chance of success. The residents must form civil society groups to agitate on the roads and government offices, provided they can mobilize the active support of the electronic and print media along with the active support of a few socially-responsive High Court Lawyers who could file and pursue public interest litigation cases free of cost and fees against such gross negligence of responsibility and obligations of the police, municipal officials and the State Government. There are judges who still like those laws are enforced and not broken with the support of the civic authorities, police, administrators and politicians.

Enjoy also the various interesting responses to the Lady Citizens cry for help:
1. "u can complain to the encroachment dept of bmc in vt with a copy to worli police station."

I wish immediate redressal of the problem on complaining as above. It is very surprising, encroachment of public property by illegally by immigrants in a city observed by residents is not known to the Encroachment department and Police Station. The Indian Constitution provides for only right to complaint of law breaking in broad daylight at the same place for days together and no obligations on the Govt. and the Police to act suo motto against continuous, uninterrupted unauthorised misuse of public property.
2."It is definitely the job of BMC to remove the encroachments as the pavements and road maintenance comes under the jurisdiction of BMC. For getting the right information you may fill in the Application form for The Right to Information Act 2005 addressed to Asst. Engineer (Bldg. & Factories) Brihanmumbai Mahanagarpalika whereby you can put in your queries and the queries are addressed within a period of say 45 days. I would also like to inform you that Government officials are very slow in taking action, but keep writing, you may also visit the BMC, Asst. Municipal Commissioner at your Ward, there is timing for meeting the AMC, which you may find out at the BMC office pertaining to your ward."
3. "It is sad but true that only monetary loss spurs many public servants into action. Therefore, it is suggested that the salaries of the ward officer and workers be held up for as long as it takes to clear out the encroachers and a proportion of each higher-up's salary (right up to the Commissioner) be withheld till such time. Maybe this is all wishful thinking since surely; such action will require suitable legislation."
4."The least we can do is to spread this message to as many Mumbaikars as a possible. Some of us will know BMC officials, Maharashtra Govt officials etc. A repetitive and persistent sending of this message will move the right people to act some time at least."
5."Keep Media out, What they do is mere Business, Similarly, Also Keep Legal Help out, At times what one needs is simple help And if Namita cannot write directly to BMC, I can do it,"
6"Even under the existing municipal laws and Police Acts there are ample provisions to deal with such situations. The pavement dwellers have to be mercilessly evacuated but they have to be kept in specially prepared shelters in public spaces. It should not be difficult for the government to provide such shelters which can be taken as modern versions of free Dharamshalas (inns). Encroachments by humans themselves for residence or for trade (like keeping pushcarts for sale of goods, etc. or extending shops on to the pavements or keeping chairs, tables on the pavements as also goods and clothes for display either by shop owners or other sellers, etc.) should not be tolerated and dealt with as expeditiously as possible so that they will have no accrued rights of possession and hence sympathy."
7. "This is the case in almost all cosmopolitan cities and towns. Poor farmers and agriculture labourers migrate to cities in search of livelihood or brought to cities with false promises by the labour contractors. These labour contractors are in league with local politicians or their henchmen. No local police dare to look at such problems in right earnest. On the other side of the facts where else they can live when once they are forced to leave their homes due to acute poverty? Has any government formulated schemes for their welfare? It is better some local NGOs take up the issue with the local authorities and find ways to overcome the problem and at the same time provide shelter to such orphaned people."
8. "Don’t complain to the police constable; Instead meet ACP of that area &Asst Municipal commissioner who is supposed to look after the area. Don’t go alone take some members socially committed like you. Go to the officials with photos &write-ups. If they don’t cooperate politely tell them that you approaching higher official’s senior officers. I think this may solve this problem."
9. I can understand your frustration at the lack of information as to who is responsible for dereliction of their duty. I would suggest the following: File a written complaint, possible with names and addresses of a few other concerned individuals like yourself, to both the BMC and the traffic police. - Written complaints DO work File an RTI request enquiring who in the BMC is responsible for encroachments for that particular ward.
In this way the authorities cannot claim that they were unaware of the problem and would have acted if they would have known. Once you have the name of the officer, who gets paid by public funds and has decided not to do his job, or look the other way, file a complaint against them requesting departmental action. Involve the local press."
10."...unless the government and civil society breaks the nexus between builders, underworld and politicians, we can never have affordable housing in this city and would continue to see such encroachments growing. You think anyone would want to stay like this on a pavement, with families and kids? I am sorry but I found this comment elitist by this citizen who seems to be insensitive to the core issues faced by this city, Am sure this sight is nothing uncommon about many areas of Mumbai. Most of these pavement dwellers work in unorganised sectors as labourers. Majority are employed by some mega infrastructure projects (metro or flyover or towers) in this city whom all our citizens, like Ms. Namita want to get finished soon, yet they would get so offended by such sights. These pavement dwellers can hardly afford a basic roof over their heads...even in slums, where the rentals are unimaginably high. So what choices do they have? Please find that 'someone' who do not displace them but rehabilitate them in a decent housing!"
11. "Ask the authority to force them to move out. Arrange an alternative place for the residents and suggest them. This may help to prevent agitation and protest."

These are very interesting. Everyone is of the view that complain, complain and complain even if in vain! We have a Democracy by Complaints and of Complaints and for Complaints.
Another response is:" The real problem is not that your sensibilities are offended and that the middle class would rather that these poor people labor "out of sight", but that the builders/contractors have not provided transit camps, basic sanitation and classrooms for the people which is required under the law. The reaction of people to this issue is really disgusting. Find out which projects they work on, who the builder/contractor is and then find out why they have not provided them with facilities? Or else just use another road."

But the question remains: how did the authorities concerned gave permission or clearance to construction projects or other projects of private parties or public sector or government department without their showing how they will ensure that the temporary immigrant labor does not affect the civic life of the residents. So, there is a clear connivance of convenience to all - the sponsors of the project, the project contractors, the police, and the temporary workers to force the tax paying residents to endure the hurt and bear the risk of damage.

Mar 28, 2011
From State-Slavery to State-Independent Civilization

Today human beings cannot live without the Nation-State / government, Has the concept and institution of Nation State as a polity become a burden of liability to human civilization?
There are two propositions in this post:
(a) The current architecture of polity based on the nebulous concepts of the State, its sovereign power and the unrestricted access to such power by Governments does not seem to be delivering the protection the people continues to seek from all risks and uncertainties to life and quality of living.

(b) Maybe the time for abandoning this polity architecture and the concepts on which it is founded on. But some thing new, more effective is yet to evolve: a Stateless civilization is still not in the imagination of man to work on its practical design, leaving the citizens to suffer irrespective of the level of GDP, the index of quality of life and the risks of sustainability.

Most human beings want someone else to protect them from all uncertainties and risks of life and living. At the dawn of mankind with little knowledge of Nature and using Nature to advantage, Man created the concept of God to get help from HIM. Man worshipped God to get an insurance against shortage of food, loss f dependable shelter, disease ad accidental injuries as well as oppression by other human beings and wild life. But nothing could be done if God was not pleased enough wit all prayers and worship to grant such full protection cover. So, man invented within the mankind three demigod groups to emerge as persons with more than ordinary power: (a) the brave, bold, muscle power leaders called kings, (b) the piety-powered leaders apparently with some sort of direct communication with God to enhance the effectiveness of prayer and worships of God, and (c) the strong intellect-powered leaders of science and technology. We call them these three groups as political leaders, the pontiff leaders and the pundit scientist/ technologist leaders.

While political leaders and pontiff leaders need and seek followers among all sections of the society to achieve their goals, the pundits do not need and seek but happens to attract new pundits. The pundit scientists and technologists by their action may help improve the quality of human life irrespective of whether or not they are accepted as leaders of human beings, the political leaders and pontiff leaders promise to help enrich the quality of life of their followers. Pundits prescribes rules that one is at liberty to not to follow at his own risk. The political leaders and pontiff leaders set up rules that are binding on followers if they wish to remain as followers. One can bribe out of punishment for violations of political and pontiff leader-laid rules, but one cannot avoid the consequences of violating scientist/ technologist prescribed rules.

Not many scientist/technologist pundits have ever become simultaneously political leaders. No political leader has become at the same time a scientist/technologist pundit or a pontiff leader. Some pontiff leaders have become pundits at the same time and some pundits have become pontiff leaders after giving up the goals of a pundit. But pontiff leaders have several times tried to become political leaders as well. Most Pundits have accepted, if not become followers, the political and pontiff leaders. Even if the political leader or pontiff leader refused to recognize a pundit, the pundit remained a pundit among the pundit class and recognized as one such by most human beings even after their death.

Since the beginning of civilization, the political and pontiff leaders ruled over the people. But for quite a while, the political leaders and the pontiff leaders cooperated and mutually agreed to divide the spheres of their jurisdiction over the control over the people. Often though, these two groups had come into conflict over exercising influence and control on the people’s minds and lives. Even now this phenomenon continues. In Iraq, for example, the political leadership is taken over by the pontiff leaders. In countries like China, North Korea and Cuba, pontiffs of the opposite variety, piety-powered believers of non-existence of God provide the political leadership. Political parties rule in many democratic countries like USA, India, Japan, UK, France, Germany, Australia and Italy. In some countries like Libya and Indonesia, political parties do exist but the ruling political leadership is a dictator or a military Junta.

Over the years, political leadership has usurped all-pervading powers to an abstract illusive concept of the “State” and reduced the scope of individual freedom and liberty to virtually nothing. Individual citizens have very little scope to seek redress from State/ Government’s denial of even the little freedom / liberty they are entitled to under law or constitution through judiciary because individual resources to fight the State in the courts is generally very little. The ruling political party enjoys all that power is partly shared with elected representatives of the other political parties where democracies function. This power includes the power to oppress the citizens, murder them at will and forcibly appropriate the properties and assets of citizens, though in some countries the judiciary continues to exercise a degree of power to stop such atrocities and oppression of individual citizens by the State.

Let us have a look at the performance of the State as an institution so far in various spheres of the lives of the people. First, have nation states remained nation states. Answer is mostly yes but there are many and continuing failures. Consider, the former USSR. Within fifty years, it has disintegrated into different Nations. Consider the Islamic State of Pakistan of former Indian Muslim Nation: it split into two nations of Pakistanis and Bangladeshis. Iraq is still held together as one nation but the Shias and Sunnis have not really merged into a single Nation. Sri Lanka after years of fight with the Tamil Tigers has extinguished them to become a single nation. In India, Muslims in a small part of the land in the North India still continues to demand that they are a different nation. For years, small populations in different parts of the Northeast India have gone on with armed struggle to become free nations different from the Indian Nation. In Africa, new nations have emerged. There are many Arab nations and some of them do not recognize the people of Israel as a nation. In the UK, it is not clear which is the Nation – the so-called blacks and browns or the whites. The German have reunited but the Koreans are split nations. The citizenry basis of the definition of State seems to be very instable, weak and fragile.

Second, how has the concept of State performed in the area of providing stability of law and order situation? The incidence of crimes, violence, rape, smuggling, corruption, fraud has not declined in any significant manner to make the citizens of the various States feel that they are better off than they were 200 years ago.

Third, how far has the State as an institution helped progress of education, science and technology? Yes, we have seen tremendous progress in all these areas in the last hundred years. But how far has this been due to the State? The States have deployed lots of resources in these areas and provided lot of encouragement and coordination. The spread of the impact of science, technology and education has been spectacular all over the World. But the discoveries, the innovations and the research and development efforts in the frontiers of science and technology continue to be concentrated in a few countries. Most of the States buy or borrow technology: some States are too small in size or too poor in quality of people to be an equal partner in the advancement of science and technology. People in States with large and poor populations look at the TVs in wonder as to how some parts of the World are so affluent in the way they derive the benefits of technology in their lives. By becoming a citizen of a sovereign State, very few individuals, households or corporations have access to the best of modern education, technology or science.

Fourth, how far has the State as an institution provided economic growth, quality of life, economic stabilization and economic equality? Reconstruction & Development Economics have made great strides with the World Bank, International Finance Corporation (Washington) and helped strengthen State-led initiatives for economic reconstruction and development in Japan, Europe, Asia, Latin America and Africa over the last six / seven decades. Russian economy and China made tremendous economic progress under State-led mechanisms. So, did Singapore, Korea, Thailand and Philippines. But State-led planned economic development failed miserably in India and Pakistan. Development finance institutions lost their prime status over the last two decades. Development economics has shifted emphasis on utilizing market mechanism for economic growth rather than merely on State planning and control. And, yet large parts of the World are afflicted by huge populations living below the poverty line, low productivity and stagnation in economic activity. The institution of State has not proved a panacea for faster and broad-based economic growth every where and for all times. Even the advanced economy States (governments) seem to be fumbling to maintain consistent economic growth as economic globalization progressed fast in the last three decades.

The institution of State has also not been able to show exemplary success in economic stabilization except for brief periods: recessions, stagflation, hyper-inflation, depressions have recurred time and again. Even attempts of State-led fiscal policy and monetary policies have shown mixed performance in ensuring stabilization: where the States succeeded in stabilization, they also created economic problems of high debt burden and external account imbalances. In the globalizing environment, the States have performed very poorly in terms stabilization. State is no longer a panacea.

Yes, the States have through the use of tax and subsidies effected considerable redistribution of income. But, inequalities of income and wealth continue to be a major problem facing most of the States. Even the communist States have not succeeded in achieving economic growth and egalitarian societies simultaneously.

Interestingly, the failure of the States to deliver the promises on a consistent basis all over the World has happened despite considerable international cooperation and dialogue among the States at the United Nations and other forum. Discontent with State performance persists almost everywhere. There is no stop to terrorism, corruption, warfare, drug trafficking, piracy and violation of human rights. Wherever the State operates, it has shown considerable wastage, low productivity, and high inefficiency, high costs, leakages of funds and corruption, delay in response. The State has failed to produce the magic solutions it has promised.



And, yet there is a vested interest in retaining the institution of the State as the best solution to mankind. The major beneficiaries of the institution of the State are political leaders (and to some extent the bureaucracy which serves them). The business of political leadership has become immensely profitable attracting many to enter politics to gain the right to use the sovereign power of the State. The business of politics has now become the dominant market share in the aggregate expenditure of many economies. The sovereign power to tax and borrow without limit is the key to sustaining the growth of the business of political leadership in modern economies. Government expenditure as a proportion of annual aggregate expenditure by all economic agents (households, corporations and governments) has increased from probably less than 10% hundred years ago to average of 40%-50% now.

Now, most learned people will disagree with the view here. First, they will cite so many successes. But they will forget the numerous incidences of failure. This proves the point that the concept of State is not a panacea for the citizens of the States or the World at large. Second, they will point out that the failures are on account of factors not within the control of the States. That is exactly the point - the concept of State does not help mankind to control social, economic and technological behavior of all the people: the institution of the State has no magic wand and unequal to the tasks of protecting mankind.

The wise and learned would say that the institution of the State is the second best magic wand available and the best is not in sight. That is exactly the point of view here. But once it is accepted: two courses of action are possible: one, how best can the concept of State be modified and altered to improve its performance and two, search for an alternative concept. No one it seems is interested in either course of action. This is unfortunate but natural. Concepts are not discarded till they threaten the very existence of human civilization.

Jun 6, 2011Democratic, Socialist, Secular Corruption System!
It is not so easy to recognize and accept the Reality that for 60 years the politicians in India prospered under a democratic, socialist, secular (for shorter period) republic based on a foundation of State-designed Corruption mechanism, that as a result corruption has become so secular, so democratic and so socialistic that almost 90% of the people have become corrupt or have accepted corruption as a way of national life. People do not mind corruption generated favoritism, nepotism, bribery of up to a few lacks of rupees and black wealth of a few hundred cores. When reports come about very high value corruption of 100 cores or more, people start thinking that this might be bad and jealousy over the riches of a few such big corruption beneficiaries leads to outrages demanding effective Jan Lokpal legislation and black wealth recovery by the State. A political economic system that encouraged black money / wealth generation in the country is difficult to change: it is the beyond the capacity of political parties even if their leaders wished to: rather the current political parties will be starved to death if corruption is rooted out and therefore they will never readily kill corruption: they can at best try to show that they are trying to curb black money through various measures (that would ultimately prove to be ineffective – at least that has been the history so far. And, yet people continue to believe in the political parties as gods and saviors.







Jun 12, 2011
Increasing Marginal Utility From Consumption of Equality & Equity

God, according to a simplistic interpretation of Adyavat of Santana (now referred to as Hindu) Dharma philosophical scriptures of ancient origin, is all prevalent, exits in everything - infinitely large or infinitesimal - that is there in the Creation that we know, discover and imagine, and is container of everything. It follows that each and everything is nothing but God and each and everything is equal and there is nothing iniquitous in this Creation or the Creator, irrespective of whatever we believe in as the origin of God.


Yet, physically each infinitesimal entity is not necessarily the one and the same thing as the other entity as we perceive from our senses: many things look different, tastes different, behave differently and interact with each other differently. This applies to human beings as well. But human beings urge for equality and injustice, especially if one happens to perceive that one is unjustifiably handicapped compared with others. So, there is demand from the God to make every thing identically equal. God has not cared to listen to these prayers and different things continue to maintain their different identities in terms of length, width, area, volume, force, capabilities, attitudes, mentality, tastes and preferences, etc.

This is a great problem. The religious leaders and spiritual leaders have tried to promote the concept of universal love to remove all perception of differences, inequality, inequity and distinctions: ignore the formal difference and love everything as being equal and part of the same identity of God. This makes people to believe and practice the knowledge of Unique Singularity in everything and forget formal differences. But these preaching have failed to ensure equality and equity in the world of individuals, groups, societies and nations. The scientists have not given the humans a technology that would ensure that from a specified date in future all human beings will be born as identical human beings in all respects and remain so throughout their uniform life: that would have ensured that after a later future date there would not be any scope for distinction between men and women, between higher and lower IQ, between tall and short, fair or dark skin, and so on. Because a single compulsory dose of medicine served at birth will ensure that the child could produce during its life time only x number of children without any need for sexual cooperation and all children produced by the medicated children at birth will be of identical configuration without any influence of parentage and genes. So, the medical solution to equality and equity in human race is not yet available.

But the cleverest of the human race, the politicians have found a great and sustainable business of distributing equality and equity. For they understood clearly that the demand for equality and equity will be the only permanent and perpetual: the want for equality and equity is essentially insatiable. If one gets to eat a sweet, delicious fruit, one will demand for another and after consuming the second will demand yet another. But the law of diminishing marginal utility will set in at some stage when the person will stop demanding another fruit to eat. Rather, the person will demand different item of consumption. Unlike this, the utility from consumption of the item called equality and equity is not afflicted by the law of diminishing returns. It is rather under increasing marginal utility rule.

Let us consider a recent example. The Government of a State made education from primary to higher secondary to college and university education completely free for students from poor families with income below a minimum cut-off level. People were all happy - a great decision by the Government, unlike the unchangeable, rigid God. This government produced good of equality and equity in education has a positive external effect: more educated people is expected to provide a better social and cultural environment besides contributing to economic growth by supplying more productive educated labour for industry, agriculture, trade and industry as also creating in the process a greater demand for all other goods and services in the country. Unlike the other method of generating equality/equity product through reservation of seats in education or jobs that reduces the supply of school/ college/ university education seats to the non-poor students and thereby leading to an external negative effect on consumption of equality/equity goods produced by the State, the direct supply of equality/equity goods through what some economists called entitlement / endowment/ empowerment approach is liked by both the direct consumers of the goods (the beneficiary students and the poor families they come from) as well as the others who has to procure the same education good at a cost besides giving taxes to the Government to fund the free distribution of education equality/ equity goods to students from poor families. Everyone is happy.

But the consumers of education equality/ equity goods demand more such goods because the consumption of these goods exhibit increasing marginal utility. Even after primary education was made free, many students from poor families did not regularly turn up at the school. So, free mid-day meals for students attending the school improved the quality of the education equality/ equity product and consumption of this product increased.

As soon as some students from poor families were promised free education at the university / college level because they scored very high marks in the Higher Secondary Examination, it was not only welcomed by all but some demanded an up gradation of this new education equality/ equity products. It was pointed out that these students are essentially of quality of students from rich families but will still suffer a handicap of lower nutrition food intake: so they need to be provided with the same food as the students of rich families get from their parents. Financial grants to such students would help improve the quality of the education equality/ equity product in university education.

But soon it would be realised that these poor student scholars with free university tuition and financial aid would still suffer a handicap in that they would have to face the consequences of family problems related to illiteracy and inadequate awareness of their parents as compared to the educational and financial strength of students coming from rich families in the cities and towns. For example, the richer students could afford special coaching by paid private tutors, personal computers and Internet connection at home and air-conditioned rooms at home along with more knowledgeable parents' help. So, the demand would be for free supply of computers, Internet broadband service and special coaching facility as part of the education equality/ education product. Problems would still remain to be solved: the poor students need to be supplied with knowledgeable parent-like loving guardians at the university and hostels so that they have a level playing field to compete with brilliant students from rich families in cities and towns.

Extending the same kind of logic, there would be demand for school children from poor families in rural areas to be supplied with rich pairs of adopted parents with proper educational backgrounds. The equality/ equity product improvement will have to be extended to parental gene levels. All engineering colleges have to become of equal standard Indian Institutes of Technology, all MBA schools have to be of the same quality Indian Institutes of Management, and so on.

The demand for improving the educational equality/ equity product will be never ending as the marginal utility from consumption of these products are characterised by the law of increasing utility. Governments, especially democratic ones, will have continuous growing business in selling these products at the cost of the tax payers. Equality and equity will improve as a result: but will the quality of education outputs improve?

Recently, I heard a few learned people discussing about international equality/ equity in teachers' promotion system in universities. A former Indian bureaucrat currently teaching in government funded private management institute complained that Indian teachers in Indian centers of higher education with record of publication in international / foreign journals get higher scores than those Indian teachers who publish their articles in Indian journals. This according to him and some others was discrimination against one's own country and probably reflected the mentality of slavery to the foreigners. Everyone knows that Indian research journals have not been able to get international recognition of their quality simply because international scholars do not find it worthwhile to publish articles in Indian journals. But the State has not been able to figure out how Indian scientific research journals can become accepted by the international community of researchers. So, there could be a demand for education/research equality/equity product that would remove the handicap the large section of Indian teachers who cannot get their papers accepted by internationally recognized research publications vis-à-vis the small section of teachers who can. What could be the essential design features of such a product by the government? One product could be like this: a special financial reward for each publication of any teacher/researcher in internationally recognised journal if that article is followed up by another publication in internationally recognised journal, which is co-authored by an Indian teacher employed in an Indian education/research centre who had not earlier been able to publish any article in an internationally recognised journal. The provider of the education / research equality/equity products, namely the Governments of poor countries surely should be highly innovative in designing such products, given the immensely high business potential in these countries for these products. But will the quality of the talent pool of Indian teachers and researchers improve as a result to bring India to the frontiers of education and research in at least some fields of knowledge that the World is pursuing?

Jul 4, 2011
Dictatorship of Elected Representatives: A Closed Political Regime

Gandhi left India in time: he had no chance in dictatorship of the democratically elected people's representatives. Gandhi was a popular man with large following among the Indians as a National Leader. He could be designated Father of the Nation. But he could not have become the President of India or the Prime Minister or the Speaker unless he was so elected by the people's elected representative in Independent Democratic India. The country could not have progressed if Gandhi had, as an apolitical Prime Minister or President of India, had forced his Government with a threat of going on indefinite hunger strike, to ban all modern textile industry and allowed only charkhas spinning wheels and hand looms to clothe the India nation. Gandhi might have been a good father of the nation but he cannot be allowed to dictate over the hundreds of legislators elected by the people of India.

What would have happened if Gandhi lived a few years more and went on hunger strike till the Nehru Government adopted a Lokpal Bill that would have created an Independent Lokpal organisation with power to try and punish, if found guilty, any government employee, elected representative, any minister including the Prime Minister, and any judge of any court in India for even the smallest charge of corruption? Gandhi would have been whisked away to Hospital for failing heath due to hunger strike? If Gandhi had nominated Anna Hazare and Yogaguru Ramdev to negotiate with the Government on the drafting of the Lokpal Bill, what would have happened? I do not know about the past.

But one can reasonably assume that today Gandhi, Anna Hazare and Ramdev would have been described by the political parties as uncivil unelected members of the so-called civil society. A legislator elected by elected representatives of the people would have commented based on his leanings at the Nehru University that he was a civilized member of the society and being an elected legislature could not allow unelected civilians to interfere in the process of legislation against corruption. All the political parties met together not to discuss what should be contained on the Lokpal Bill or the merits of the suggestions of Anna and Ramdev but declare the sovereignty of the democratically elected parliamentarians over the so-called undemocratic civil society representatives.

Did Anna or Randev tried to interfere with the Parliament's right to legislate Lokpal Bill? The politicians are trying to establish the theorem that anyone demanding a particular draft for the Lokpal Bill is adopting unconstitutional, undemocratic methods which cannot be tolerated and must be stopped from doing so. If Maoist are extremists and terrorists rising against Parliamentary democracy and the National democratic governments, aren't Anna and Ram extremist, terrorist civil society movements against Parliamentary Democracy and the constitutionally constituted Government?

This is the way politicians and political parties frustrate popular movements. Everyone knows that Anna and Ramdev enjoy popularity among the people. They got more popular by going on strike against corruption among government employees, ministers and others in high positions. They were trying to become people's representatives through undemocratic process and demand anti-corruption lokpal legislation that the legislators had failed to enact thrice during the past and was not showing any urgency to enact promptly. The 60-year old institution of the Parliament still does not have competence among its members to promptly evolve consensus on the Lokpal Bill contents and pass it in the last three sessions, while corruption scandals get unearthed in regular intervals over the last two years! The debates are about things like whether the Prime Minister should be covered and the Court Judges be covered or whether CVC and CBI should be under Lokpal or whether only govt. officers of the rank below joint secretary should be outside Lokpal/s purview. Instead of debating we could have passed a bill that provides for inclusion of the Prime Minister and the Judges as also of government employees below the rank of joint secretaries only on the recommendation of the Lokpal after five years with due approval of an amendment of the Lokpal Act by the Parliament. Similarlly the setting up independent investigation agency for the Lokpal could provide for merging of CVC and the CBI after five years based on the recommendation of the Lokpal with due approval of appropriate amendment by the Parliament. Parliament is all sovereign: it can enact new Laws, repeal any existing law or modify an existing law any time: there is no need to drag on debates indefinitely to still enacting the existing consensus with enabling provisions for review on controversial points based on recommendations of an already established Lokpal Authority..

Let Parliamentarians take their time to evolve consensus, refer to Select Committee for evaluation and so on. But if the common people are already frustrated with the extensive corruption at the lowest levels in the Government and political parties and some Anna and Ramdev - not interested in politics as such, pained by the degradation of social values reflected in widespread corruption, leads a popular movement against corruption by demanding the Government to take immediate legislative action against corruption, why should the political parties feel threatened and raise a great hue and cry?

The political parties have been threatened not because Anna and Ramdev have waged a War against the Constitution or Parliamentary democracy. The threat comes from the underlying loss of credibility of elected representatives' inability to curb corruption affecting the lives of the common people who are getting frustrated. So, first the politicians drew Anna and Ramdev into discussions and then tried to prove that these to civil / yoga society leaders as unreasonable and impractical and then organised dramas that would show them up as cowards or protégés' of communal elements. This has been done. Now the political parties assert that they are the undisputed authority on what is to be done about corruption. And, then they will take their sweet will and time to debate about what legislation of Lokpal to be appropriate.

Indian democracy is based on various premises. one of which is that the elected representatives belonging to political parties have not only the right but also the wisdom about what is the best for the country, society and the Nation. If there happens to be some knowledgeable, experts outside the political parties, they must join a political party or beg for political patronage for them to be merely heard and not necessarily to be endorsed by the political parties. There is no role for social activists or civil society. If the Parliament has failed to enact Laws to curb corruption or if the Government has failed to enforce laws effectively to curb corruption, the people have the right to feel frustrated but they cannot give vent to their frustration through social activist / civil society agitations. The only recourse is to work through political parties or abstain from voting at the time of elections at the end of every five years.

Indian democracy does not recognise philosophers, historians, scientists, environmentalists, economists, technologists, educationists, educated and knowledgeable expertise that do not come through endorsement of political parties or governments: such people cannot claim independence from political parties and become leaders of people to contest for power to influence the society and nation - a power exclusively reserved for the politicians, especially the elected representatives. That is the reason why most States have abolished the upper house (not clear why MamataBannerjee determined to revive Bidhan Parishad in West Bengal) and the Rajya Sabha members are elected politicians or political affiliates by elected legislators of various State assemblies. f people think that what Anna and Ramdev are asking for is the correct thing for the Nation to accept, then people should wait for people like them to form political parties, get election Commission recognition, contest the next General and State elections, vote them to absolute majority and get their frustrations redressed through democratically valid methods.

People who are writing and talking about corruption in anger and frustration have two choices: follow what the elected representatives have said in the all party meet or continue to find new methods of agitation to force the elected representatives realize the writing on the wall: ‘no political system heed to official / unofficial people's referendum on national issues on a continuous basis irrespective of the tenure of elected legislatures’.