March 5, 2012
The week-long first series of five T20 ties is over. The score is 5-5. Both sides claimed they have won. CPM said they won the first tie in Ganguly Bagan under Buddhadev's captaincy. Since in the second tie at thesame Ganguly Bagan grounds on the following day, Trinamool could gather fewer people than CPM's previous day win, CPM won the second tie as well. Third day, Mamta led Trinamool to a huge gathering that surpassed the combined score of the previous two ties, Trinamool declared they have won all the three ties at Ganguly Bagan, but CPM alleged that by collecting crowds from outside the hinterland of their ransacked party office, the Trinamool has lost by qualification all the ties at Ganguly Bagan. On the same day CPM won handsomely at Rajarhat under the leadership of Biman Bose,leaving Biman passangers stuck just a mile away from the Airport terminal where the airlines were eagerly awaiting them . The fifth tie at the same grounds on the following day was won by Trinamool under the leadership of Mukul Ray, even though he could join the team a bit late because of the huge scores already gathered by his team. Though the score margin was hugely in favour of the Trinamool, CPM disqualified Trinamool on grounds of gathering crowds from outside the hinterland of Narayan pur in Rajarhat: this allegation was wrong according to Trinamool as Trinamool was on a bigger ground of issue. So, the score reads 5-5.
The citizens have both enjoyed the thrill and emotions as well as slogan cheer leaders of all the ties and sufferred the pains of traffic jams. They consider that the tickets of michhil T20s are too costly. So what next.
There is little chance of another series soon. CPM has tested the waters after a long while and finds that the turf is responsive to their calls for protests, however disruptive to the citizens. This was a kind of practice series for them. They are now more cinfident that they can click michil any time they want and suceed. Trinamool is a;so satisfied that thier machinery is working fine in respect of lunching michil warheads at short notice. Both have succeeded in the test runs and satisfied for the presentand do not want to continue with more such T20 series for the present and gather further displeasure of the ordinary citizens. CPM does not want it to be perceived in a hurry to show off their dscomfort without state power. Trinamool does not want it be perceived as a party playing into the trap of retaliation sought to belaid by the CPM. Moreover, the political game is now ready to be shifted to the StateAssembely and Parliament floors. They need time to prepare for that. Then, they will see when the next set of T20s can start.
But citizens are pleading that the T-20s in fiuture be organised preferabbly after 9-30 PM at best on two of the following three days in a week: Friday, Saturday and Sundays. Live TV coverage would be welcome. Trucks, buses carrying michil participants be banned from reaching nearthe grounds before 9PM.
Sunday, March 11, 2012
Prelude to Kurusehtra 2012: Congress vs Tranamool
February 21, 2012
The bandhs and strikes are good sports for CPM and Trinamool because they have the strength to contest such bandh tournament ties. But Congress in West Bengal would not be able to muster as yet the required popular and goons backing except in certain pockets to fight or organise bandhs. So, they have opened a new tournament - the TV tournament. Here, each of the contenders have to tie up with one or the other Newspapers and TV channels. The reorts and debates would cover only one aspect: Mamata's performance and attribute on Good Governance. This has started a little while ago. Any incident on atrocities on women is getting picked up with suggestions about failure, incompetence and carelessness of the Police since Mamata is not only the Chief Minister but also the Police Minister. Any incident of deficient services in State hospital is currently the top priority news item because Mamata is also the Health Minister. As soon as the incident happens the TV will report such news suggesting that the Police or the Heath Department is at serious fault, even though the investgations into the incidents would just start. Mamata however is equally smart in accusing the TV with misleading, sponsored and distorted reports by the newspaper and the TV channel concerned. Now, rather than enjoying the debates on Good Governance that the Congress wants the TV and newspapers to project, Mamata has turned this into a controversy over cooking up and arranged reporting by the concerned TV channels. The fight has now become over the credibilty of news reporting and investgation. However smart the TV anchors are, they are in distress over the credibility issue.
This new game will go on for a while as Mamata is going to keep information on incidents up her sleeves and use them only when she can embarrass the TV channels. The Bandh day has witnessed one such game. A TV reporter gets beaten up while trying to take pictures of alleged Trinamool supporters and a policeman not in uniform on the rowded road near a CPM office allegedly ransacked by Trinamool supporters. In the afternoon, Mamata dubs this incident as an arranged incident and in the evening her police department reports the incident in detail including the incidence of beatinmg up a TV reported who has been hospitalised. People will naturally start wondering how the reported came with the camera along with the CPM activists in the first instance at a place where there was no fighting going on? How is it that this office happens to be in the constituency of Buddhadev Bhattacharya who reported has not taken to streets to encourage the party activists to deal with the Trinamool dominance in the territory resulting a defeat of Buiddhadev in the ekections by a hige margin nine months ago. Was this to create an opportunity for Buddhadev to return to his constituency. Unfortunately, the TV channels by concentrating on their collegues being beaten up, missed the opportunity of covering live another incident in Rajarhat where former CPM minister has returned to on a bandh day program? The Cat and mouse game will bring in entertainment. But sad, that the news media is getting entangled in such a game and thereby losing even the apparenty credibilty of beinmg objective and fair in reporting.
But all the same we are asured of lot of entertaing TV games on this account. Let us see how Congress is able to convince the people that Mamata is not civilized, somewhat whimsical, cannot control his police department and health department staff, not a good administrator, is an empty vessel that sounds much, has no care for the distressed women, and is a dictator desireous of dictating the newsmen also. How can we have such person as Chief Minister? How can we rely on a party that is led by her? We will get tyhje answers to these questions before 2015 if not in 2013?
The bandhs and strikes are good sports for CPM and Trinamool because they have the strength to contest such bandh tournament ties. But Congress in West Bengal would not be able to muster as yet the required popular and goons backing except in certain pockets to fight or organise bandhs. So, they have opened a new tournament - the TV tournament. Here, each of the contenders have to tie up with one or the other Newspapers and TV channels. The reorts and debates would cover only one aspect: Mamata's performance and attribute on Good Governance. This has started a little while ago. Any incident on atrocities on women is getting picked up with suggestions about failure, incompetence and carelessness of the Police since Mamata is not only the Chief Minister but also the Police Minister. Any incident of deficient services in State hospital is currently the top priority news item because Mamata is also the Health Minister. As soon as the incident happens the TV will report such news suggesting that the Police or the Heath Department is at serious fault, even though the investgations into the incidents would just start. Mamata however is equally smart in accusing the TV with misleading, sponsored and distorted reports by the newspaper and the TV channel concerned. Now, rather than enjoying the debates on Good Governance that the Congress wants the TV and newspapers to project, Mamata has turned this into a controversy over cooking up and arranged reporting by the concerned TV channels. The fight has now become over the credibilty of news reporting and investgation. However smart the TV anchors are, they are in distress over the credibility issue.
This new game will go on for a while as Mamata is going to keep information on incidents up her sleeves and use them only when she can embarrass the TV channels. The Bandh day has witnessed one such game. A TV reporter gets beaten up while trying to take pictures of alleged Trinamool supporters and a policeman not in uniform on the rowded road near a CPM office allegedly ransacked by Trinamool supporters. In the afternoon, Mamata dubs this incident as an arranged incident and in the evening her police department reports the incident in detail including the incidence of beatinmg up a TV reported who has been hospitalised. People will naturally start wondering how the reported came with the camera along with the CPM activists in the first instance at a place where there was no fighting going on? How is it that this office happens to be in the constituency of Buddhadev Bhattacharya who reported has not taken to streets to encourage the party activists to deal with the Trinamool dominance in the territory resulting a defeat of Buiddhadev in the ekections by a hige margin nine months ago. Was this to create an opportunity for Buddhadev to return to his constituency. Unfortunately, the TV channels by concentrating on their collegues being beaten up, missed the opportunity of covering live another incident in Rajarhat where former CPM minister has returned to on a bandh day program? The Cat and mouse game will bring in entertainment. But sad, that the news media is getting entangled in such a game and thereby losing even the apparenty credibilty of beinmg objective and fair in reporting.
But all the same we are asured of lot of entertaing TV games on this account. Let us see how Congress is able to convince the people that Mamata is not civilized, somewhat whimsical, cannot control his police department and health department staff, not a good administrator, is an empty vessel that sounds much, has no care for the distressed women, and is a dictator desireous of dictating the newsmen also. How can we have such person as Chief Minister? How can we rely on a party that is led by her? We will get tyhje answers to these questions before 2015 if not in 2013?
Prelude to Kurushetra 2016: CPM vs Tranamool
February 28, 2012
Political parties in democracy are long-term strategic planners. They do not take rest for long after any defeat or win. The advantage they have is that they work with a calenar of scheduled Wars, battles and territorial skirmishes for the medium term future. The Bengal Elections Kurushetra War 2011 was over just eight months back and the next Kurukshetra is due in 2016, But between these two big wars, there are a series of battles already scheduled: the Panchyat and District Parishad Elections 2013, the Lokshabha Elections 2014 and the Municipal Elections 2015.
But even before that territorial skirmishes have to start. In fact, February 28, 2012 is already set as the curtain raiser in Bengal. The Ruling coalition (mainly Trinamool of Mamata) and the position (mainly CPM) will stand face to face for a show of strength and test who blinks first. CPM says that they would not force people to join the bandh/ strike they are organising on Feb. 28. The TMC is against the bandh/ strike but will not be on the streets to force people to open shops and offices. But the Government will do everything to facilitate those who would not like to join the strike and take actions against people trying to coerce people to abstain from work by intuimdation and threat on the streets.
Both parties will in the evening of 28 Feb congratulate the people of West Bengal for making the strike/ bandh sicessful and unsuccessful even as the TV newscasters report of the strike being largely a success or largely a failure depending on what market sement they cater to. We know which channel is going to report what. Throughou the day they journalists will be on the street to see whether the police or the strikers get provoked into fighting or become victim of unprovoked violent attacks. The channel in support of the Congress will wait for opportunities of finding the Police and the Ministers on the wrong foot: other channels will target the CPM and Trinamool as per their preference.
If the things turn out rather peaceful, both parties and the Congress will have to wait for the next territorial shirmish. But any incidence of violence would be taken as an opportunity to project an image of being a victim to get public sympathy. And, violence is likely if any party blinks first at any place on the streets and at strret corners: each might be ready with their forces not to let the other party go unscathed.
Political parties in democracy are long-term strategic planners. They do not take rest for long after any defeat or win. The advantage they have is that they work with a calenar of scheduled Wars, battles and territorial skirmishes for the medium term future. The Bengal Elections Kurushetra War 2011 was over just eight months back and the next Kurukshetra is due in 2016, But between these two big wars, there are a series of battles already scheduled: the Panchyat and District Parishad Elections 2013, the Lokshabha Elections 2014 and the Municipal Elections 2015.
But even before that territorial skirmishes have to start. In fact, February 28, 2012 is already set as the curtain raiser in Bengal. The Ruling coalition (mainly Trinamool of Mamata) and the position (mainly CPM) will stand face to face for a show of strength and test who blinks first. CPM says that they would not force people to join the bandh/ strike they are organising on Feb. 28. The TMC is against the bandh/ strike but will not be on the streets to force people to open shops and offices. But the Government will do everything to facilitate those who would not like to join the strike and take actions against people trying to coerce people to abstain from work by intuimdation and threat on the streets.
Both parties will in the evening of 28 Feb congratulate the people of West Bengal for making the strike/ bandh sicessful and unsuccessful even as the TV newscasters report of the strike being largely a success or largely a failure depending on what market sement they cater to. We know which channel is going to report what. Throughou the day they journalists will be on the street to see whether the police or the strikers get provoked into fighting or become victim of unprovoked violent attacks. The channel in support of the Congress will wait for opportunities of finding the Police and the Ministers on the wrong foot: other channels will target the CPM and Trinamool as per their preference.
If the things turn out rather peaceful, both parties and the Congress will have to wait for the next territorial shirmish. But any incidence of violence would be taken as an opportunity to project an image of being a victim to get public sympathy. And, violence is likely if any party blinks first at any place on the streets and at strret corners: each might be ready with their forces not to let the other party go unscathed.
Uneconomic Politics & Unpolitic Economics
Since 1960s I have heard many people say that Economics as a subject was only useful if it is useful to the society. This was generally the views of student of economics who were perturbed by economic poverty and inequity and thought Marx was the only economist relevant to the society. There were others also who were not so Marxian in their thoughts but followed the arguments of economist Mrs Robinson and thers who argued against the dominance of neo-classical economics of mainly the Americal schools using assumptions of rationality in decision making, perfect competetion, as well as use of mathematics and statistics in economics study. Then came the new Keynesian economics school trying to formulate new socially relevant economics. Still later the Club of Rome doosday mongering thought econlogical and environmental economics was some thing that is only socially relevant. Still later, some economists started modelling economics on more realistic basis to build up what they thougt as Real World Economics (http://www.rweconomics.com) / Alternative economics. So far however they have not been able to master economics studies in a manner that would dominate the study of economics: the neo=cassical economics with mathematical and statistical mdelling still dominate the maistream study of economics. On the other hand, physiicists have starting taking the cues from Financial economics maths to develop what they would like to call Econophysics. Meranwhile real economies have continued to experience business cyucles, inflation, unemployment, balance f payments problems, financial sector collapses and sovereign debt crisis. Economists now seem to be completely at a loss in explaining real economic phenomenon in different countries and the world at large. While classical economics and Neo-classical Economics have long well known limitations by their assumptions to explain economic phenomenon we have seen since the middle of the twentiesth century, all attempts to formulate an alternative economics / real world economics have so far failed miserably to put together a comprehensive and consistent economic theory that beats the mainstream neo-classical and Keynesian economics in explaining or predicting economic behaviour of individuals, groups, national economies and the international or global economy.
Even as those uncomfortable with mainstream neo-classical or keynesian synthesis economics have failed to develop a coherent and cogent theory or models beyond repating the flaws of standard economic theories and market mechanism, politicians have successfully convinced the citizens that the politicians know the best economics. Following the lead made by Soveiet political masters and Japanse political regimes, the World Bank and the IMF sponsored the proliferation of development economics that could support all kinds of political philosophy for State dominance in national economies. This orthodoxy has successfully messed up economic theory and practice to allow politicians to determine economic theories of their own until such orthodoxy failed to deliver economic prosperity to most parts of the underdeveloped World and then a new orthodoxy of State initiated economics structural reforms started in the 1980s and dominated the 1990s. These reforms did indeed improve the conditions in the underdeveloped World in terms of economic growth, but adversely affected the competitiveness of many developed economies.
India however had plenty of politicians educated in Britain and considerable faith in Soviet politicians to become great economists themselves and took over management of the economies of poor, backward countries, some of which fondly called themselves developing economies. Since the 1950s, Indian politicians had taken over the mantle of economics study and practice. They became specialist in Gandhian economics, Marxian economics, Economic Planning techniques, Macro-economic Control design, and the like through the help of bureacrat ecnomists in the Planning Commission and the Finance Ministry. They deliveed lots of planning documents but delivered very little in terms of average annual growth rate of not exceeding 4% during the four decades until 1991 when their continued foolishness made the country bankrupt and had no alternative but to adopted some sort of liberalisation, privatisation and globalisation and accepted greater scope for market mechanism with regulation. This helped raise the annual economic growth and in the next two decades economic performance in terms of GDP growth improved substantially though India continues to be among the poorer countries in the World in 2012. The extent of corruption and inefficiencies continues to be hiogh and even increased because of the half-hearted economic reforms and dominance of politics. We would continue to suffer in the years to come.
The Indians seem to have blind faith in Uneconomic Politics and Poltically determined economics: they continue to believe in promises of politicias to solve all economic problems. So, to solve the problem of unemployment and poverty they have designed and are implementing grand schemes like the various poverty reduction programs and rural unemployment guarantee schme, right to food, right to eduction schemes. Despite all this, rather because of the continued practice of these uneconomic politics or rather politically convenient economics, the country is fast heading to the next diaster and messy, slower economic development with farmers committing suicides, entrepreneurs and industrialists developing cold feet in new capacity creation, and the common people sufferrng the consequences of high rate of inflation. Unable to deliver anything positive, the poltical parties and politicians have started repeatng the standard age-old political confrontation with economics by delaying anti-corruption legslation, disinvestment of public sector, rationalisation of tax laws, introduction of common good and services tax act, etc. Government continues to spend more and more money collected both through taxes and borrwings from the public at large and they run huge and expanding budget and fiscal deficits.
While the mainstream economics seem baffled by economic phenomenon since 2008 and the Real World Economics yet to show any signs of getting matured enough to gain credibility, a few mainstream economists are exposing the foolishness of uneconomic politics and politician dictated economics: these economists are not mesmiserside by the tall taks of politicians and the verbose, inconsistent thories and policies of the politically convenient economics. They are not willing to be economic pleaders of the Government and politicians/ political parties. People would do better to stop listening to political party and official government economists and instead start listening to these few economists to judge how the governments and politicians are misleading the common people in the name of what they call socially relevant economics.
Even as those uncomfortable with mainstream neo-classical or keynesian synthesis economics have failed to develop a coherent and cogent theory or models beyond repating the flaws of standard economic theories and market mechanism, politicians have successfully convinced the citizens that the politicians know the best economics. Following the lead made by Soveiet political masters and Japanse political regimes, the World Bank and the IMF sponsored the proliferation of development economics that could support all kinds of political philosophy for State dominance in national economies. This orthodoxy has successfully messed up economic theory and practice to allow politicians to determine economic theories of their own until such orthodoxy failed to deliver economic prosperity to most parts of the underdeveloped World and then a new orthodoxy of State initiated economics structural reforms started in the 1980s and dominated the 1990s. These reforms did indeed improve the conditions in the underdeveloped World in terms of economic growth, but adversely affected the competitiveness of many developed economies.
India however had plenty of politicians educated in Britain and considerable faith in Soviet politicians to become great economists themselves and took over management of the economies of poor, backward countries, some of which fondly called themselves developing economies. Since the 1950s, Indian politicians had taken over the mantle of economics study and practice. They became specialist in Gandhian economics, Marxian economics, Economic Planning techniques, Macro-economic Control design, and the like through the help of bureacrat ecnomists in the Planning Commission and the Finance Ministry. They deliveed lots of planning documents but delivered very little in terms of average annual growth rate of not exceeding 4% during the four decades until 1991 when their continued foolishness made the country bankrupt and had no alternative but to adopted some sort of liberalisation, privatisation and globalisation and accepted greater scope for market mechanism with regulation. This helped raise the annual economic growth and in the next two decades economic performance in terms of GDP growth improved substantially though India continues to be among the poorer countries in the World in 2012. The extent of corruption and inefficiencies continues to be hiogh and even increased because of the half-hearted economic reforms and dominance of politics. We would continue to suffer in the years to come.
The Indians seem to have blind faith in Uneconomic Politics and Poltically determined economics: they continue to believe in promises of politicias to solve all economic problems. So, to solve the problem of unemployment and poverty they have designed and are implementing grand schemes like the various poverty reduction programs and rural unemployment guarantee schme, right to food, right to eduction schemes. Despite all this, rather because of the continued practice of these uneconomic politics or rather politically convenient economics, the country is fast heading to the next diaster and messy, slower economic development with farmers committing suicides, entrepreneurs and industrialists developing cold feet in new capacity creation, and the common people sufferrng the consequences of high rate of inflation. Unable to deliver anything positive, the poltical parties and politicians have started repeatng the standard age-old political confrontation with economics by delaying anti-corruption legslation, disinvestment of public sector, rationalisation of tax laws, introduction of common good and services tax act, etc. Government continues to spend more and more money collected both through taxes and borrwings from the public at large and they run huge and expanding budget and fiscal deficits.
While the mainstream economics seem baffled by economic phenomenon since 2008 and the Real World Economics yet to show any signs of getting matured enough to gain credibility, a few mainstream economists are exposing the foolishness of uneconomic politics and politician dictated economics: these economists are not mesmiserside by the tall taks of politicians and the verbose, inconsistent thories and policies of the politically convenient economics. They are not willing to be economic pleaders of the Government and politicians/ political parties. People would do better to stop listening to political party and official government economists and instead start listening to these few economists to judge how the governments and politicians are misleading the common people in the name of what they call socially relevant economics.
Saturday, March 3, 2012
Eliminating Three R’s in Bengal Politics
For the past 65 years, Indian politics has fostered the spread of three R’s in politics. In Bengal, politics is now fully matured with the three R’s. Now, the three R’s dominate Bengal’s political, social and economic life. Of late, civil society activists and news paper editors have been voicing their disgust over the rise of the three R’s in politics in the State, but the political parties and leaders seem to have become so dependent on the three R’s that they are helplessly watching how the three R’s are controlling politics and determining the fate of the political parties. They do not have either the guts or the competence to eradicate the three R’s. But everyone knows that the economy and the society of Bengal will only go down the hill under the impact of three-R rule.
If at all, anyone can risk and challenge the three-R rule now, she is only Mamata Bannerjee, the current Chief Minister of West Bengal. Unfortunately, the three-R force seems to be developing further strength to subjugate her. Yet, she is still our only hope: she must realize that her greatest battle now is not with any political party or the Government of India, but with the fast spreading three-R's in politics and society. True, that all other parties are dependent on the three R’s strength and if she were to fight the three R’s, this may provide an opportunity to the rival parties to enhance their three R strength. It is equally true however her party is the only party which is fully dependent singularly on her and given her past background and experience, she can only destroy the three-R evil from West Bengal politics that none of the previous chief ministers of West Bengal could be bold enough to take on and some just kept their eyes closed for fear of losing their positions or popularity. Her top most priority must be, not economic development or good governance, but eradication of three R’s from West Bengal politics. Without this, her efforts at economic development and good governance will not deliver the intended results to the fullest extent. She therefore must immediately lunch a prolonged, determined and planned War against the three R’s: Rogues, Rowdies and Ruffians.
But before she can draw up and implement a plan to wage a war against three R’s in politics in West Bengal, she needs to be convinced that going into such a war is desirable. Weak political strategic advice would be against Mamata getting into such a war to eliminate three R’s. First, attempt to drive out three R’s from her own party will strengthen the muscle and manipulative strength of the rival parties as such resources flow to where they can get shelter in a mutually beneficial way. This however is a wrong advise because the war that one has to take is not against the section of R’s who happens to have infiltrated her party but against all R’s in the entire political, administrative and social spheres. Rather, by making a sudden and radical war against R’s in and around her party, she will pave the way for all parties to shed R’s. If done with an imagination, this can be a positive sum game for all political parties, rather than a zero sum game in terms of democratic and moral values of political parties as a group.
The second objection to an all out war is that driving out R’s out of politics would lead to a rise in crimes in the society as R’s would try to infiltrate other activities. This will create a great law and order problem for the administration and the society. This again is an invalid argument. By being part of the political system, the R’s do not reduce their crimes but increase criminal activities and makes it difficult for the administration and the police to control such crimes that actually occur rather than those that get recognized and pursued by effective enforcement of law against crimes and criminals. On the other hand, R’s without political support or credentials will have difficulty in organizing crimes freely as they have been doing so far and the police will have no political interference in being after the R’s and bringing them to punishment without delay.
The usual third argument is what these poor R’s will do earn their livelihood once they are driven out from all political shelter – they may join the extremists or commit suicide. No one is a born R; they are victims of circumstances and need sympathy and reformation/ rehabilitation assistance to turn non-R. This argument is also invalid. Because, this would mean accepting the growth of R’s in society as a social responsibility till such time the society is capable of ensuring that there are no circumstance arising that would turn a person into a R. Rather, it is by making life difficult for R’s that one can reduce the incentive and increase the risk of any person acting like a R.
Fourth, argument is that the R’s are a significant part of the voting population and they should have their democratic right to live with dignity – there should be attractive opportunities for R’s to become non-R’s. This is a silly argument. The percentage of R-population among voters is very negligible, though their impact of voters’ freedom to cast vote without fear and influence is great. Moreover, unless there is an all out War against R’s, the population of R’s will only increase.
Therefore, Mamata must be fully convinced that there exists no valid reason against lunching a war against the R’s. While this is important, this convincing case to lunch a war against R’s does not automatically lead to an effective, result-yielding war. To devise a strategy to win this war needs a greater knowledge about the R’s and their present networking with political parties, political leaders, political activists, businessmen, administrators, police forces, government employees, trade unions, clubs and various professions like drivers, various servicing shops, rickshaw pullers, doctors, wealthy individuals, lawyers, extremists’ organizations They need to be categorized into two/ three levels in terms of driving which R’s out from politics first gives the most gain in terms of the incidence of unreported crimes of high value, reduction in high level political interference on enforcement agencies against the criminals and the impact on the loss of confidence of the R’s as a group.
There are all possible combinations: a person can be just only rogue, or a rowdy or a ruffian or two of these simultaneously or all three at the same time. Many R’s often work in groups even within political parties. Some have political patronage at the heist levels, some at the lowest and administrative levels. These considerations should be taken into account to drive them out from political parties with dossiers on each of them passed on to the police and administration. Every day a list of R’s thrown out from the party should be put up on the party website and newspapers and TV channels given the same information through email. Only emails and press releases giving the list of persons with their location/ identifications is enough for the press and media to build up dossiers on each of them on computer-based on-line tracking of the expelled R’s from each political party and report on their subsequent activities including joining another political party.
It always best to remove the relatively wealthier lot of R’s from politics at the first instance. This will help avoid any criticism of discrimination against particular castes, communities and low income groups among the politically connected/ associate R’s. Any member caught on camera while in active political violence, student agitation violence, Ganorosh violence must be immediately suspended from party till the court finds one as innocent. No political party should call any person leading or associating in political violence even in retaliation or self-defense as the party’s assets but forth with suspend them for five years.
Simultaneously, Mamata’s police department must start acting including purging policemen seen in action of violence against others while not on duty to protect law and order. The police must maintain dossiers on each identified R’s and publish the list of such R’s on their website updated on a monthly/ annual basis. But not only police department, all government departments must have a list of their own people suspected of being R’s based on their behaviour.
Yes, I know I am writing plans that do not make sense in a democratic, civilized society as ours. I am in no way competent to do that. But the point I am trying to make is simple. We need an immediate war to eliminate R’s from politics and other societal activities. This war can only be initiated, led, pursued and won by only one person, Mamata Banerjee. And, she needs to convince herself that this is the top priority war for any one who seriously wishes to change the face of West Bengal for the better with high and challenging enough targets to be achieved. And, this war is to be led and implemented in a manner that all non-R’s can effectively contribute to the War without fear.
Bengalis have not really fought such a War for a long time. They need one, a prolonged one to cleanse them.
If at all, anyone can risk and challenge the three-R rule now, she is only Mamata Bannerjee, the current Chief Minister of West Bengal. Unfortunately, the three-R force seems to be developing further strength to subjugate her. Yet, she is still our only hope: she must realize that her greatest battle now is not with any political party or the Government of India, but with the fast spreading three-R's in politics and society. True, that all other parties are dependent on the three R’s strength and if she were to fight the three R’s, this may provide an opportunity to the rival parties to enhance their three R strength. It is equally true however her party is the only party which is fully dependent singularly on her and given her past background and experience, she can only destroy the three-R evil from West Bengal politics that none of the previous chief ministers of West Bengal could be bold enough to take on and some just kept their eyes closed for fear of losing their positions or popularity. Her top most priority must be, not economic development or good governance, but eradication of three R’s from West Bengal politics. Without this, her efforts at economic development and good governance will not deliver the intended results to the fullest extent. She therefore must immediately lunch a prolonged, determined and planned War against the three R’s: Rogues, Rowdies and Ruffians.
But before she can draw up and implement a plan to wage a war against three R’s in politics in West Bengal, she needs to be convinced that going into such a war is desirable. Weak political strategic advice would be against Mamata getting into such a war to eliminate three R’s. First, attempt to drive out three R’s from her own party will strengthen the muscle and manipulative strength of the rival parties as such resources flow to where they can get shelter in a mutually beneficial way. This however is a wrong advise because the war that one has to take is not against the section of R’s who happens to have infiltrated her party but against all R’s in the entire political, administrative and social spheres. Rather, by making a sudden and radical war against R’s in and around her party, she will pave the way for all parties to shed R’s. If done with an imagination, this can be a positive sum game for all political parties, rather than a zero sum game in terms of democratic and moral values of political parties as a group.
The second objection to an all out war is that driving out R’s out of politics would lead to a rise in crimes in the society as R’s would try to infiltrate other activities. This will create a great law and order problem for the administration and the society. This again is an invalid argument. By being part of the political system, the R’s do not reduce their crimes but increase criminal activities and makes it difficult for the administration and the police to control such crimes that actually occur rather than those that get recognized and pursued by effective enforcement of law against crimes and criminals. On the other hand, R’s without political support or credentials will have difficulty in organizing crimes freely as they have been doing so far and the police will have no political interference in being after the R’s and bringing them to punishment without delay.
The usual third argument is what these poor R’s will do earn their livelihood once they are driven out from all political shelter – they may join the extremists or commit suicide. No one is a born R; they are victims of circumstances and need sympathy and reformation/ rehabilitation assistance to turn non-R. This argument is also invalid. Because, this would mean accepting the growth of R’s in society as a social responsibility till such time the society is capable of ensuring that there are no circumstance arising that would turn a person into a R. Rather, it is by making life difficult for R’s that one can reduce the incentive and increase the risk of any person acting like a R.
Fourth, argument is that the R’s are a significant part of the voting population and they should have their democratic right to live with dignity – there should be attractive opportunities for R’s to become non-R’s. This is a silly argument. The percentage of R-population among voters is very negligible, though their impact of voters’ freedom to cast vote without fear and influence is great. Moreover, unless there is an all out War against R’s, the population of R’s will only increase.
Therefore, Mamata must be fully convinced that there exists no valid reason against lunching a war against the R’s. While this is important, this convincing case to lunch a war against R’s does not automatically lead to an effective, result-yielding war. To devise a strategy to win this war needs a greater knowledge about the R’s and their present networking with political parties, political leaders, political activists, businessmen, administrators, police forces, government employees, trade unions, clubs and various professions like drivers, various servicing shops, rickshaw pullers, doctors, wealthy individuals, lawyers, extremists’ organizations They need to be categorized into two/ three levels in terms of driving which R’s out from politics first gives the most gain in terms of the incidence of unreported crimes of high value, reduction in high level political interference on enforcement agencies against the criminals and the impact on the loss of confidence of the R’s as a group.
There are all possible combinations: a person can be just only rogue, or a rowdy or a ruffian or two of these simultaneously or all three at the same time. Many R’s often work in groups even within political parties. Some have political patronage at the heist levels, some at the lowest and administrative levels. These considerations should be taken into account to drive them out from political parties with dossiers on each of them passed on to the police and administration. Every day a list of R’s thrown out from the party should be put up on the party website and newspapers and TV channels given the same information through email. Only emails and press releases giving the list of persons with their location/ identifications is enough for the press and media to build up dossiers on each of them on computer-based on-line tracking of the expelled R’s from each political party and report on their subsequent activities including joining another political party.
It always best to remove the relatively wealthier lot of R’s from politics at the first instance. This will help avoid any criticism of discrimination against particular castes, communities and low income groups among the politically connected/ associate R’s. Any member caught on camera while in active political violence, student agitation violence, Ganorosh violence must be immediately suspended from party till the court finds one as innocent. No political party should call any person leading or associating in political violence even in retaliation or self-defense as the party’s assets but forth with suspend them for five years.
Simultaneously, Mamata’s police department must start acting including purging policemen seen in action of violence against others while not on duty to protect law and order. The police must maintain dossiers on each identified R’s and publish the list of such R’s on their website updated on a monthly/ annual basis. But not only police department, all government departments must have a list of their own people suspected of being R’s based on their behaviour.
Yes, I know I am writing plans that do not make sense in a democratic, civilized society as ours. I am in no way competent to do that. But the point I am trying to make is simple. We need an immediate war to eliminate R’s from politics and other societal activities. This war can only be initiated, led, pursued and won by only one person, Mamata Banerjee. And, she needs to convince herself that this is the top priority war for any one who seriously wishes to change the face of West Bengal for the better with high and challenging enough targets to be achieved. And, this war is to be led and implemented in a manner that all non-R’s can effectively contribute to the War without fear.
Bengalis have not really fought such a War for a long time. They need one, a prolonged one to cleanse them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
