|
|
|
|
|
| HOME | NEWS | DEAR REDIFF | |||
|
COMMENTARY
|
|
|
E-mail from readers the world over
Date sent: Tue, 21 Apr 1998 13:37:10 +0800 What Jaya asks today from Atal may be correct. But she and Swamy have to apply the same rules for themselves before calling others corrupt. With the SPIC deal, Jaya publication case, Chandralekha case, foster-son marriage etc etc. pending against her, what moral right does she have to talk about others? Arul
Date sent: Mon, 20 Apr 1998 19:12:12 -0700 Ms Pot says to Mr Kettle -- you are black!! Jayalalitha Jayaram -- the biggest enchilada of them all -- now points fingers at others!!! What have we reduced ourselves to?? Anyone just doing their job becomes a hero... all the others are parasites sucking whatever blood there is left within the voting public. Sack 'em all I say. Anarchy is better than this riff-raff we have masquerading as our saviours... filthy, corrupt, pond-scum -- all of them!!
Date sent: Mon, 20 Apr 1998 11:18:44 PDT Make all languages official? Hahahaha! Sure make it a choice. Like Hindi is a choice in the Tamil state. That way even Hindi will be reintroduced in Tamil Nadu. On the other hand North Indians will never learn Tamil. I am sure of that. Because 90% notherners can't even read or write Hindi. This is a joke played by the AIADMK. South Indians have at least four languages. They can't decide which one is supreme and they want to overpower Hindi which is the language of ONE whole region comprising eight states at least. Besides Gujaratis and Marathis and some other states are linked to Hindi. In fact, I come from MP, and we speak Marathi and Hindi at home. There never is any problem there (in MP) where Adivasis (scheduled tribes) have a different language. Tamils are first Tamil, then Indian. They say Hindi is as foreign to me as English. If they were more Indian (some are), then they would say Hindi is the language of my country, English the language of my oppressors. Too bad they have such a bad reputation.
Date sent: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 09:34:29 -0700 This has been a nightmare waiting to happen in a country whose priorities are set incorrectly by its politicians -- who will stop at nothing to exploit their own motherland for moments of empowerment, and its citizens who allow themselves to be like puppets (this is even worse than what British did to us because we are being done in by our own)! I think as a country we should have an extensive dialogue by an independent panel, where members representing each language group are appointed by the president and not the prime minister, and also have town hall meetings across the country. The common man should be made aware of the issues at hand before deciding on this. Maybe this is high time for the youth of this morally drained country to wake up and fight for the integrity of our country, rather than just sitting on the sidelines and chewing tobacco. Maybe it's about time we show our patriotism and love for India rather than only during an India-Pakistan cricket match. Maybe this is where we the INDIANS, not Tamils or Bengalis or Punjabis or Gujaratis, or Maharastrians, nor Hindus or Muslims or Sikhs or Christians, but INDIANS will stand up and say to our political leaders that we will not fall for this again. Shaun Trivedi
Date sent: Sat, 28 Mar 1998 08:52:46 EST Dear Ms Swaraj, It disturbed me greatly to read your interview with Pritish Nandy, particularly since I remember the measures you had taken in your earlier stint in this ministry. Before I go any further, let me say that I actually like many of the things that the BJP stands for (including the Uniform Civil Code, which you dropped from the national agenda) -- so this is not an anti-BJP tirade. My views on this issue would be the same regardless of the party in power. So here goes .... While some of your other manifesto commitments have been watered down to accommodate your "partners," this attempt to "defend our culture" is quite likely to succeed since it is in no one's interest to waste their time in opposing it in a meaningful manner. While it may appear to be a very laudable aim to "preserve our culture," it begs some very important questions like: 1. What gives the government the right to control the information and entertainment that Indians may or may not see -- surely, in a democracy, the right of the public to see and hear what they want and to make judgments therefrom is a sine qua non for informed decision making. 2. Why should the government decide the morality norms of the content in the various programs? Very often, the arts tend to reflect the realities of society in their time. It is no coincidence that violence, sex, degradation of the institutions of police and government in our movies and serials has been on an increase over the past decade. A perusal of the newspapers over the same period would reveal a similar increase in these areas in real life. So by banning quote "adulterous story lines" from Doordarshan, you are not defending our culture Ms Swaraj, you are merely trying to hide reality. Why, our very own Puranas and epics are full of episodes that involve adultery, kidnapping, lust for your neighbour's wife, polygamy (should ring a bell for the "Ram Rajya" people). These instances of objectionable behaviour have been taught to every Hindu in his childhood by parents, teachers and religious leaders, precisely in order to teach the difference between right and wrong. 3. Who defines Indian culture? After all, our culture is a rich interweave of such tremendous diversity that every emotion and aspect of human behaviour from bhakti to lust is part of it. So would you allow a serial based on the Kama Sutra as part of your cultural swadeshi movement? 4. The irony of you talking about the US media control as a precedent is laughable if it was not on such a serious issue. Do you realise at all how strong the First Amendment rights of the US media are? An injunction about dress code from the government would not only be laughed out of court, but would also expose the government to serious damages. More importantly, the government is not involved in any shape or form in the information business - there is no information and broadcasting ministry in the US, Ms Swaraj. The concept of control of information in this day and age is technologically naive. Why should an Indian with access to bikini-clad women on cable or even in Indian movies be yearning for the sight of a sleeveless newscaster on Doordarshan? I remember the outrage when college students were banned from wearing jeans? Are we going to say that it is OK for the government to decide on the length of their employee's sleeves ? Sleeves today, burqa tomorrow !!!! Ms Swaraj, we are adults. We do not like being treated like children and told what is good and bad for us by you. Before you trot out the age old "it corrupts our youth" slogan, let me tell you this. It is the responsibility of parents and in India, the extended family to teach their children the difference from right and wrong. Do you really have the arrogance to believe that a political party that is totally amoral and will do anything including forming alliances with known goondas and acid throwing thugs to stay in power is better equipped to take care of a child's moral upbringing than its parents and family? Maybe I am choosy, but I beg to differ. If you do a survey on who Indians trust to take care of morality, I am sure the I&B ministry will not come out anywhere near the top. By the way, I am not saying this about your party alone, most political parties in our country are amoral. Lastly Ms Swaraj, there is a story about Kalidasa (maybe apocryphal) where he is very upset at the denigration of Kali and goes to her temple and bemoans his inability to defend her name. The goddess appears and asks him a profound question -- "Do I protect you or do you protect me." The same question can be asked by "Indian culture" to you. India and the Indian culture has survived attacks on it by Mughals and the British and survived very well thank you. Your greatest service to it would be keep your politically stained hands off it.
Date sent: Fri, 06 Mar 1998 21:09:33 -0600 1. If not for Sonia Gandhi, the Congress would have failed to reach the 3 figure mark in the recently concluded election. BJP spokesperson Sushma Swaraj's blind ignorance of the fact depicts clearly that empty vessels make more noise. Sonia being a crowd puller or a vote catcher is definitely not a myth, despite Congress recording only 0/85 in Uttar Pradesh. 2. Instead of claiming that her party would provide a clean government, could she explain the alliances with Sukh Ram and Jayalalitha? To me, the BJP is no different from any other party. The country will know it in 2000. To all readers including Sushma Swaraj, please remember my name and opinion. The Congress will come back with a thumping majority after the BJP-led government tumbles on the sheer imbalance of internal pressures. 3. The BJP manifesto claims India to be 'One Nation and One Culture.' Congressmen rightly equated that to the doctrines of Hitler. India is not one nation, rather a union of different nations or nation-states. Tamilians, Telugus, Keralites, Bengalis and so on and so forth form a Union of Nations. How can India have one culture with so many tiny nations within them? Any political party should not tamper with sensitive regional issues, only then India can be united. Most of the Indians, despite language problems, do not want India to go the way of former Yugoslavia or Czechoslovakia. This is the singular reason why India cannot have a (and does not) National Language. Till date there are few Indians who know this fact.
Date sent: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 09:23:21 -0500 If the UP government settles an old score between Shias and Sunnis, it is respectable. Had the UP government spent a few million rupees on beautifying mosques, it would have been secular, but now that they are spending money on temples, "Oh my gosh, they are so communal." In fact this has made a Muslim comment in the Dear Rediff that Vajpayee's real face is now visible, as though Vajpayee passed a decree. Down with your double standards, you hypocrites passing as "journalists." Srinivas Murthy
Date sent: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 22:39:35 -0400 An excellent piece. Many thanks. We have had enough of Indian industrialists who have milked the market in decades of protected existence, and now talk of the consumers interest being different from the national interest. They suffer from an acute case of confusing their interest with the national interest. Enough of the tariff walls and restrictions that have enabled these feeble babies to lord it over us and now soil their nappies. 20% tariffs on any good are more than adequate to compensate for any presumed distortion and keep our producers noses to the grindstone, rather than make us consumers pay the price from their greed and sloth. More power to Isher and confusion to Mr Bajaj!
Date sent: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 18:08:55 -0500 I think the report was a good one. Here are some general observations on the topic... I will be grateful if they can be passed to the appropriate people -- Isher, Mr Baru and I would like to continue the debate with them through e-mail to understand the flaws in my logic and their points of view... Isher makes a good point that tariffs hurt Indian consumers. Mr Bajaj talks about raising employment, making India self reliant etc but clearly behind all his "noble" pontifications is his motivation to protect his company... The fact of life is: Mr. Bajaj's company is very inefficient and would not be able to compete with foreign companies -- both in terms of quality and price. Therefore, he needs protection to protect his revenue stream -- in the short and long term. Whenever an argument is made for tariffs, we should always remember who pays for it -- IT IS THE INDIAN CONSUMER. NOT THE FOREIGN PRODUCER. Every Indian is a consumer as well as a producer. When you protect the producer (by protecting people like Mr Bajaj) you hurt the consumer. There is transfer of wealth from the Indian consumer (many people) to the Indian producer (few people because they are currently protected) when tariffs are imposed. So NET- NET tariffs are BAD...PERIOD. I was surprised by Isher's reluctance to go to ZERO tariffs. ZERO tariffs on all goods and services are good for INDIA (or for that matter any other country. Now, not all of them practice zero tariff but that doesn't mean we should also not follow it. Two wrongs do not make a right). Zero tariffs help the Indian consumer by allowing them to purchase quality goods at a lower price due to competition, by forcing Indian and foreign producers to produce quality goods at a good price (by forcing them to be efficient/cost effective and customer oriented). The Indian consumer deserves the best products at the best prices, this can only be achieved through perfect competition. Now you say...well, that will completely clean out the Indian industry because they have been so protected for so long that they are inefficient, and cannot compete with the foreign companies (termed as unfair competition by the Rahul Bajajs of India as if it is the fault of the Indian consumer that they cannot compete). This will result in massive unemployment...the foreigners will dominate and this will be akin to economic colonisation once again....on and on and on.. The answer to each of these arguments are: 1. Tough: Mr. Bajaj you have been protected long enough at the expense of the Indian consumer and they deserve the best. So either you learn to compete or you perish. The Indian consumer deserves the best. If you can organise yourself to deliver the Indian consumer the best -- try that rather than trying to seek the government's protection 2. There will be NO massive unemployment: If one thinks hard enough and looks at the evidence elsewhere, one comes to the conclusion that competition will raise employment rather than lower it. Every producer trying to deliver goods and services to the consumers of India will try to deliver it in the most cost effective way. Guess what! given India's size and scale, 90 to 95% (except for things like Airplanes etc.) of the time this will require production facilities in India. Take a guess as to who is going to man these facilities -- the Indian people (managers and workers). Of course, there will be short bursts of unemployment ( mainly inefficient people) as inefficient means of production close down and resources are deployed towards more efficient means of production, but in a very short period of 6 months to a year one will see a productive redeployment of resources towards efficient uses. It will definitely hurt some people who are trained to do inefficient things and cannot easily transfer their skills to more productive ways -- and a safety net will have to be built for them, and that would be the government's only role. Now you say that is all theory, how about practice: In the economic history of the world, every industry/service sector that has been exposed to competition (i.e, completely deregulated) has seen overall employment increases. Some recent examples of note: the automotive industry in the US both in the 1920-30s and in the '80-'90s. The telecom sector in the US and Britain in the late 80s and 90s, the software and hardware industry across the world in the 80s and 90s. The problem is we are just afraid of change and skeptical of our ability to adapt to change, but we ultimately do adapt to change 3. Foreigners will NOT colonise India again... First of all, before we start any discussion on this point, it is impossible, in today's communication age, for one country to dominate another country and get away with it. Put it another way, the British Empire cannot come into existence in the current age. Morally, it was a wrong thing and there are many checks and balances in today's connected world for such an atrocity to happen again. Having said that, the installation of production facilities to satisfy the needs of the Indian consumer will require funding, and clearly today, India does not have the resources to fund these massive investment needs. This means India has to allow foreigners to invest in India. Which means they will demand return on their investment. Which taken at face value appears like the flow of profits out of India... just like the British took the money in the good old days away from India. This must be bad for India. But hold on, think a bit more. All the money invested by the "foreigners," what is it being invested in --. buildings, bridges, plants, people -- where do these things reside? In India. Can they really take them away? Not really, because: 1. Physically it is not possible for them to do it, and 2. From a risk-sharing point of view, it will be in the interest of the foreigners (I put these in quotes because in a free global financial market there are no foreign share holders - Indians are free to own the stock of GE/Kellogg etc.) -- shareholders to find local shareholders who can own, nurture and leverage all these assets. So the money does not flow out, rather it remains with the people of India both as shareholders and (if you extrapolate the concept discussed above) consumers. Again, one would say that that's all theory but in practice a US or a Japan or a Germany will outdo Indian producers always and we will be back to slavery of the WHITE people. I say no!! Remember, Japan and Germany after WW II. They were demolished, grazed (you choose the appropriate synonym)... Their development was funded by US... Does the US currently dictate economic terms to these countries? Does the US dominate all sectors of their economy, do US shareholder owned companies dominate economic activities in these countries. Clearly, the answer is NO. I can continue to give examples of other countries (like Taiwan) where foreign investment was the initial jump start but not a means to economic colonisation. Isher and Bajaj, and other intelligent people need to understand that economic protection is BAD. The minute you move away from free competition, you create distortions and it is the consumer who pays a disproportionate price. By freeing markets, in the short run there will be some people who will suffer but they can be supported and transitioned into productivity along with most of the other people, for positive NET results. Freeing markets does not equal economic colonisation. It is a myth and the sooner we destroy it from our mind sets the better. Most people would say that the British rule was bad for India because they denied a people basic right to freedom, they squeezed them economically etc. etc. I think the British rule was a tragedy for the people of India because it disabled people from thinking freely. We are afraid of foreigners dominating us in the fields of economic, social and cultural activities. Why such lack of confidence is unexplainable. Some of the best people doctors/engineers/businessmen are Indians, the basic Indian culture has withstood 1000s of years of influx by foreigners, some of the best writers in English are Indians, some of the best philosophers of the world are Indians. It is a travesty that most of these best engineers/doctors/businessmen become best after leaving India. The intelligentsia (which includes people like you Mr Sanjaya Baru) needs to understand this "colonial termite" and exterminate it any time it shows signs of putting its head out.
Date sent: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 02:32:32 +0530 Tamil Nadu looks all set to have 100% reservations for the backward classes. Else where people are competing to increase reservation quotas. Could this please be extended to politics. Or would Prime Minister Vajpayee very urgently (before backward classes, women, physically handicapped, mentally handicapped get 100% reservation) please consider a 5% reservation for the non-backward classes. Rajesh
Date: Sat, 04 Apr 1998 15:26:55 -0500 A very cool story. I hope you'll have more of the same!
Date: Sun, 15 Feb 1998 10:25:51 +0000 This is an excellent feature and of great interest and a good source of information. Hopefully there will be a map of the journey in the next Nilesh Korgaonkar travelog. Jerome Wetmore
|
||
|
HOME |
NEWS |
BUSINESS |
CRICKET |
MOVIES |
CHAT
INFOTECH | TRAVEL | LIFE/STYLE | FREEDOM | FEEDBACK |
||