During a quiz in college in 2011, my team was leading towards the end of a quiz and the quizmaster was informed by the organisers that there is a lack of time. I jumped at hearing that and suggested we don't mind stopping it then. But he said we could quickly finish off one more round of questions and finally we ended up second by a margin of 2 points (102 to 100 I think). I love quizzing, more the questions the better and I simply love answering them. But I wanted to end while I was ahead, while the result was in my favour, but it definitely would have been unfair to stop before completing all the rounds and I knew it well.
When we are leading, when we have what we want, we want things to stay the same. Any change could threaten our existence or hegemony and could even end it. We become conservatives in order to preserve the status quo. The more a society progresses and private capital expands its profits, the more it will want things to stay the same. It will only want change to advance itself or retain the conditions which promoted its growth. It is either advancement based on my terms or conservatism.
The 91 reforms did bring about an increase in economic activity, more jobs, foreign investment, better pay for an educated section, increase in informal employment which is the only reason why the situation has not exploded, technology, internet and more lifestyle choices for a large section of our population. There are those who were genuinely benefited by these reforms, we learned the taste of economic freedom due to these reforms. But the current direction is towards the promise of self- preservation for those who have benefited from these reforms, domination for those who have exploited the reforms through cronyism and corruption and utter neglect, apathy and continued exploitation for those who have been left out. Those who want to protect their modest gains are wary of anything and everything that could threaten their well-being and this is exploited by those who want to preserve their current domination.
We have economists and corporates trying to scare the public by blaming the Food Security Bill for a fall in the value of the rupee, we blame an overambitious CAG (doing the right job honestly is overambition in government service), over-reaching judiciary (trying to right a blatant wrong to ensure justice by cancelling spectrum licenses gained through not so honest methods is over reach) and environmentalism for policy paralysis. Conservatives are trying to build a strong base for conservative opinion in this country that uses the smokescreen of minimal governance that promotes entrepreneurs and reduce government inefficiency to actually promote a state that favours corporates and designs policies for them while ending all expenditure and its role towards a fair and just society. They are trying to curb government spending in health, education, infrastructure and regulation so that the only organisation that can represent the people and stand up to the combined might of corporates is either too defanged to work even with a set of idealists or too corrupted to bother about the people.
The rupee fell because of the mishandling of the economy by the government, global factors, unbalanced economy post 91 (chasing easy profit) and policy paralysis. It is not just because of a widening fiscal deficit but also the widening current account deficit created by rising purchases of gold, luxury cars, consumer goods and petroleum products, the benefit of which are mostly exploited by the middle and upper classes. Even if it is because of a widening fiscal deficit, no one bothers to take a look at the section in our budget on revenue foregone as a result of excise, tax and duty cuts to corporates, on luxury items and jewellery. Policy paralysis was created by the prevalence of cronyism and corruption in the system which went roughshod over legitimate environment and sustainability concerns.
Yet we do not want to counter these factors but we want the food security bill and such social interventions to be extinguished (I do agree that it was just a vote grabbing gimmick), reduce corporate taxes so that there is better compliance while there is no equivalent call for reducing income tax (not suggesting a policy measure, just saying that the objectives show the source of these arguments), curb all regulations since they are a barrier to business and remove constitutional authorities like CAG that point out government misdoings and curb the judiciary's role in order to protect cronies and politicians that favour them.
Conservatism is gaining foothold in India and its vanguard are those who have exploited the system so far to reach dominant positions. They do not want any new players and challengers, they want to preserve their domination and manipulate the system for that while maintaining the label of a democracy which is why it tries to incite the middle class against government spending and welfare measures. The cure definitely is not in curbing the income of corporates and middle classes and overburdening people with taxes and redistribution of wealth, it is not about a reversion to a state controlled economy and no one is against plugging leakages in our social sector interventions. But by deliberately corrupting the government, introducing and forcing more and more leakages in order to discredit social sector interventions as wasteful expenditure (but at the same time chase favourable policies and allotments from the government), people are turned against their own interests and plays straight into the hands of the corrupt and corporates.
When we are leading, when we have what we want, we want things to stay the same. Any change could threaten our existence or hegemony and could even end it. We become conservatives in order to preserve the status quo. The more a society progresses and private capital expands its profits, the more it will want things to stay the same. It will only want change to advance itself or retain the conditions which promoted its growth. It is either advancement based on my terms or conservatism.
The 91 reforms did bring about an increase in economic activity, more jobs, foreign investment, better pay for an educated section, increase in informal employment which is the only reason why the situation has not exploded, technology, internet and more lifestyle choices for a large section of our population. There are those who were genuinely benefited by these reforms, we learned the taste of economic freedom due to these reforms. But the current direction is towards the promise of self- preservation for those who have benefited from these reforms, domination for those who have exploited the reforms through cronyism and corruption and utter neglect, apathy and continued exploitation for those who have been left out. Those who want to protect their modest gains are wary of anything and everything that could threaten their well-being and this is exploited by those who want to preserve their current domination.
We have economists and corporates trying to scare the public by blaming the Food Security Bill for a fall in the value of the rupee, we blame an overambitious CAG (doing the right job honestly is overambition in government service), over-reaching judiciary (trying to right a blatant wrong to ensure justice by cancelling spectrum licenses gained through not so honest methods is over reach) and environmentalism for policy paralysis. Conservatives are trying to build a strong base for conservative opinion in this country that uses the smokescreen of minimal governance that promotes entrepreneurs and reduce government inefficiency to actually promote a state that favours corporates and designs policies for them while ending all expenditure and its role towards a fair and just society. They are trying to curb government spending in health, education, infrastructure and regulation so that the only organisation that can represent the people and stand up to the combined might of corporates is either too defanged to work even with a set of idealists or too corrupted to bother about the people.
The rupee fell because of the mishandling of the economy by the government, global factors, unbalanced economy post 91 (chasing easy profit) and policy paralysis. It is not just because of a widening fiscal deficit but also the widening current account deficit created by rising purchases of gold, luxury cars, consumer goods and petroleum products, the benefit of which are mostly exploited by the middle and upper classes. Even if it is because of a widening fiscal deficit, no one bothers to take a look at the section in our budget on revenue foregone as a result of excise, tax and duty cuts to corporates, on luxury items and jewellery. Policy paralysis was created by the prevalence of cronyism and corruption in the system which went roughshod over legitimate environment and sustainability concerns.
Yet we do not want to counter these factors but we want the food security bill and such social interventions to be extinguished (I do agree that it was just a vote grabbing gimmick), reduce corporate taxes so that there is better compliance while there is no equivalent call for reducing income tax (not suggesting a policy measure, just saying that the objectives show the source of these arguments), curb all regulations since they are a barrier to business and remove constitutional authorities like CAG that point out government misdoings and curb the judiciary's role in order to protect cronies and politicians that favour them.
Conservatism is gaining foothold in India and its vanguard are those who have exploited the system so far to reach dominant positions. They do not want any new players and challengers, they want to preserve their domination and manipulate the system for that while maintaining the label of a democracy which is why it tries to incite the middle class against government spending and welfare measures. The cure definitely is not in curbing the income of corporates and middle classes and overburdening people with taxes and redistribution of wealth, it is not about a reversion to a state controlled economy and no one is against plugging leakages in our social sector interventions. But by deliberately corrupting the government, introducing and forcing more and more leakages in order to discredit social sector interventions as wasteful expenditure (but at the same time chase favourable policies and allotments from the government), people are turned against their own interests and plays straight into the hands of the corrupt and corporates.
No comments:
Post a Comment