The Narendra Modi thread

[ravishingravi]

Amartya Sen doesn't want Modi to be the PM so he is a "shameless fool" - statements like these are what makes people say that Modi's fan(atics) will be his biggest liability in days/months to come.

I agree with this. Amartya Sen is a great man and is giving a view point which has to brought into the discourse.

[surajmal]

Sen is a fool for a multitude of reasons that have been fairly well documented. He is shameless and perhaps even insane (Einstein's definition apropo in this case) because he has had a front row seat of the debacle that is the dole culture of India. Yet, after all that he continues with his bs of not only continuing with the status quo but expanding it. ******* has the Gaul to even write a book on it with Mata Sonia's poodle Dreze. I don't give a rat's ass what this **** has attained in his career. He and thousands like him are responsible for wasting india's last six decades and sending 100's of millions to their doom.

[ravishingravi]

Sen is a fool for a multitude of reasons that have been fairly well documented. He is shameless and perhaps even insane (Einstein's definition apropo in this case) because he has had a front row seat of the debacle that is the dole culture of India. Yet, after all that he continues with his bs of not only continuing with the status quo but expanding it. ******* has the Gaul to even write a book on it with Mata Sonia's poodle Dreze. I don't give a rat's ass what this **** has attained in his career. He and thousands like him are responsible for wasting india's last six decades and sending 100's of millions to their doom.

I agree, it is BS. His leaning and partisan position is pretty well known. His awareness of ground realities in India is also in serious doubt. Although, I would say 7 out 10 people from west bengal believe Hindu = Communal. So, he is not a misnomer in that regard. His tried and failed economics can also be challenged academically and have bee challenged. But but but. He has a voice and should be a part of discourse. Ad hominem attacks doesn't help.

[The Outsider]

I agree, it is BS. His leaning and partisan position is pretty well known. His awareness of ground realities in India is also in serious doubt. Although, I would say 7 out 10 people from west bengal believe Hindu = Communal. So, he is not a misnomer in that regard. His tried and failed economics can also be challenged academically and have bee challenged. But but but. He has a voice and should be a part of discourse. Ad hominem attacks doesn't help.

Your post is nothing but ad hominem. You have not argued against a single idea by Sen on the basis of facts, figures, and logic beyond attacking his partisan position, his lack of awareness of India etc. etc.

[ravishingravi]

Your post is nothing but ad hominem. You have not argued against a single idea by Sen on the basis of facts' date=' figures, and logic beyond attacking his partisan position, his lack of awareness of India etc. etc.[/quote'] Honestly you should be the last person to decide on what qualifies as ad hominem attacks considering what you have so consistently demonstrated on this board. I hope this is not banned. I am not doubting his credibility. Far from it. These are not his new views. I have debated about it extensively in the past maybe not on this site. I actually partially agree with him on lot of matters pertaining to economic criticism of Guj development model.

[The Outsider]

Honestly you should be the last person to decide on what qualifies as ad hominem attacks considering what you have so consistently demonstrated on this board. I hope this is not banned. I am not doubting his credibility. Far from it. These are not his new views. I have debated about it extensively in the past maybe not on this site. I actually partially agree with him on lot of matters.

Huh? I was telling you that your post was an irony given that it was criticizing ad hominems and was full of ad hominems. Do you agree with that or not? I don't care what you discuss with Bong Uncle or on other sites.

[ravishingravi]

Here is something that I would want to see more discussion on than this useless secularitis distraction. "Academic brawl: Bhagwati-Panagariya pitch for Modi while Amartya Sen backs Nitish EW DELHI: What happens when academic rivalry spills over into the political arena? A riveting contest ensues, if the one being played out in the run-up to the general elections along with the Narendra Modi-Nitish Kumar showdown is any indication. While the Jagdish Bhagwati-Arvind Panagariya combo - both professors of economics at Columbia University - are packing a fair punch, Nobel Prize-winning economist Amartya Sen is ducking and dodging, but without ceding turf. The Bhagwati-Panagariya duo is unapologetically in favour of Gujarat CM and BJP's poster boy Narendra Modi. "We are impressed by Modi's economics," they said in an interview to ET. Sen, on the other hand, has let his actions do the talking: a few months ago, he slammed opposition lawmakers bent upon "disrupting" Parliament and stated that they were guilty for the deaths being caused by non-passage of the Food Security Bill, suggesting that the government take the "ordinance route" - which it subsequently did. With the Congress warming up to Kumar's JD (U), which recently snapped its 17-year-old ties with the BJP, a book on the Bihar model of development - titled 'New Bihar' - in which Sen is one of the contributors, is slated to be released by president Pranab Mukherjee on Sunday. The book, edited by JD (U)'s member of Parliament NK Singh, will be released at the Rashtrapati Bhavan, where Congress leaders are expected to turn up in large numbers. Bhagwati has often invited Sen for an open debate on whether it is growth or investment in human capabilities that will result in development. With both sides treating it as the chick-or-egg argument, what becomes significant clearly is the political hue the arguments have acquired. Sen has refused to be drawn into a debate of sorts - the author of 'The Argumentative Indian' maintains he is not interested in a brawl. "Jagdish has tried it many times, but I have never said a thing about him," Sen told ET recently. The debate is nonetheless fast turning into an academic brawl. Late last year, in their book 'India's Tryst With Destiny: Debunking Myths That Undermine Progress and Addressing New Challenges', Bhagwati and Panagariya brought back to the fore the Kerala Model vs Gujarat Model debate. Sen had often lapped up what he called "Kerala experience" - state-driven development - as a role model for other Indian states. In Bhagwati-Panagariya's book, the "Kerala Model" is a metaphor for a primarily redistribution and state-driven development while the "Gujarat Model" is a metaphor for development driven primarily by growth and private-entrepreneurship. Opposing Sen's "anti-growth assertions", the authors argued that growth is the single most important instrument of poverty reduction and that India needs both to accelerate growth. Sen, who refused to be drawn into a debate over the issue, however, came up with a book that he co-authored with eminent economist and former NAC member Jean Dreze. 'Uncertain Glory', their book, argues that the feasibility of high economic growth is threatened by the underdevelopment of social and physical infrastructure and the neglect of human capabilities, in contrast with the Asian approach of simultaneous pursuit of economic growth and human development, as pioneered by Japan, South Korea and China. Evidently, that was a strong riposte to 'India's Tryst With Destiny'. Meanwhile, the attack from Bhagwati & Co has continued unabated. In a recent interview with ET, Bhagwati said, "You must ask Professor Sen, not me, why he will not engage in a debate with me, even though he has been invited to do so by others. After all, he is the one who used the phrase "argumentative Indian" to describe Indians." Bhagwati has also attacked Sen over his recent "obsessions" with Bangladesh and China, countries lauded by Sen for greater state participation in health care, education, etc. "An educated and healthy workforce brings economic growth and for that we need a fundamental change," Sen said. In the face of attack from his rivals such as Bhagwati over "pamphleteering", Sen has said that "Jagdish may be interested in talking about me, but I am not interested in talking about him". Bhagwati and Panagariya have launched their book overseas with a different title, 'Why Growth Matters: How Economic Growth in India Reduced Poverty and the Lessons for Other Developing Countries'. Dreze and Sen will launch their book, 'Uncertain Glory', in Delhi on Monday. " http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/academic-brawl-bhagwati-panagariya-pitch-for-modi-while-amartya-sen-backs-nitish/articleshow/21133902.cms?curpg=2

[Sachin=GOD]

An action, a reaction Vir Sanghvi, Hindustan Times New Delhi, July 22, 201

One of the most pivotal moments in the BJP’s history occurred in 1995 when LK Advani announced that AB Vajpayee was the BJP’s prime ministerial candidate. At the time, this decision took the party faithful by surprise. Vajpayee had been sidelined after the debacle of the 1984 election and had distanced himself from hardline Hindutva and the Ayodhya movement, both of which had revived the BJP’s fortunes. So, why did Advani, whose rath yatra had heralded the BJP’s resurgence, renounce his claim to the top job and declare that Vajpayee was the BJP’s prime minister in-waiting? Advani has offered two explanations. On the record, he has stated that he deferred to Vajpayee’s seniority. Off the record, he has been more pragmatic: if the BJP was to win an election, it needed a moderate leader like Vajpayee. Advani’s own image was much too hardline to attract uncommitted voters or potential coalition partners. The second explanation makes more sense. By the mid 1990s, the BJP had the hardcore Hindu vote all sewn up. Thanks to the ineptitude, paralysis and corruption that characterised the last days of the Narasimha Rao government, the BJP also appealed to the frustrated middle classes. The challenge was to move beyond these two constituencies and to win a larger mandate. As we know, the strategy worked well. The only elections that the BJP has won have been those where Vajpayee was the prime ministerial candidate. Over the last few months, Narendra Modi has given the impression that he has learnt from history. His campaign has downplayed the 2002 riots and projected Modi as a champion of governance and integrity. In his own speeches, Modi has not only focused on developmental issues but his speaking style and gestures indicate that he is consciously channeling Vajpayee. Until a couple of weeks ago, that is. The first signal that Modi was tiring of pretending to be Vajpayee's heir came in his now-famous Reuters interview. A question about the Gujarat riots gave him an opportunity to break new ground. He could have expressed regret for the events of 2002 (without necessarily admitting any guilt) and talked about the need to heal those wounds. To another question about whether he was a Hindu nationalist, he could have emphasised that he was a nationalist Indian not just a Hindu patriot. Certainly, this is what Vajpayee would have done. Modi chose to do neither of those things. He gave a wry response to the Hindu nationalist question. ("I was born a Hindu and I am a nationalist.") And as for the riots, he compared himself to a passenger in the backseat of a car when a puppy ("kuttey ka bachcha") was accidentally run over. Not only did he stop well short of any expression of regret, he sparked a controversy about the term "kuttey ka bachcha". Was it intended to be dismissive? To be derogatory? And so on. A few days later, he did it again. Making an otherwise unexceptional point (you can't keep using secularism as an excuse for bad governance), he used the phrase "secularism ka burqa". He might have got away with it had it not come so soon after the "kuttey ka bachcha" remark. Modi is a skilled communicator. So, was he deliberately using imagery that demeaned Muslims and appealed to Hindu communalists? Modi's supporters have provided their answer: Yes! Yes! Yes! Last week, huge hoardings came up all over Bombay, referencing the Reuters interview. Large photos of Modi carried such captions as "I am Hindu Nationalist". (The 'a' in that sentence was deleted as it was in other such hoardings as "I am Patriot". Clearly, the Modi camp does not just hate journalists. It also has a problem with articles.) The Hindutva element in Modi's comments has also been welcomed with aggressive enthusiasm by the Parivar's internet storm-troopers. There is a sense of déjà vu in all this. At the assembly election that followed the riots, Modi offered no healing touch. Instead, he exploited the communal divide with repeated references to "Mian Musharraf", subliminally linking Gujarat's Muslims with Pakistan. More recently, there has been rhetoric about the Sohrabuddin encounter killing. And, of course, there is always the attack on the Delhi 'Sultanate'. Given how smart Modi and his strategists are, they must have considered the consequences of a shift away from a moderate stance. Clearly they think that a more Hindutva-centric approach will win them more seats, making the BJP the obvious choice to lead a coalition in the next Parliament. But this approach is fraught with risks. At present, it is hard to see how even a resurgent BJP can win much more than 180 seats. That leaves the party nearly a hundred seats short of a majority. Where will the allies come from? Vajpayee was able to build bridges because of his secular image. But a hardline Hindutva leader will struggle to find any allies beyond the Shiv Sena, the Akalis and the AIADMK. And, to quote Modi, every action has a reaction. The hardline Hindutva positioning will be met by a consolidation of the Muslim vote, probably in favour of the Congress in many states. Moreover, it will also scare away uncommitted Hindu voters who prefer a more consensual approach. One possibility is that the Modi campaign will recognise that it has lurched too far towards Hindutva and that there will be a mid-course correction. But it is the other possibility that is truly frightening: an election fought on Hindu-Muslim lines, that polarises India. No matter which party wins, India is certain to lose.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/Delhi-Comment/An-action-a-reaction/Article1-1096487.aspx seeing that Vir Sanghvi is the writer I expect Modi fans to make sarcastic comments or to not even read this article but he does make some valid points, especially about the Hardline Hindutva positioning leading to consolidation of Muslim votes. This IMO is a very real possibility now and one that means a certain victory for Cong.

[The Outsider]

Some 20 posts deleted on bublu's request. Hopefully, we'll have better discussions now.

[The Outsider]

BTW, as part of the Modi effect some BJP MLAs have already defected to JD-U and there are rumors even of a split in the Bihar BJP with one third willing to walk out. Is this the cadre mobilization that Modi supporters were referring to?

[Crookbond]

Amartya Sen is a "fool" - if you disagree with him!

[randomGuy]

What a shameless fool. Specializes in Welfare Economics (WTF does that mean anyway?) and is married to a Rothschild.

Nobel Laureate Shameless Fool Amartya Sen.

Jurno to the Economist: What do you think of the Modi governance model? Economist: Modi is communal. His comments have nothing to do with the him being a Nobel laureate(in Welfare Economics). His comments would be more credible if they were on the relative economic management and development work done by various states if his specialization is Welfare Economics. The day even a Lallu yadav or a Mulayam, Netaji, Yadav makes Bihar or UP a power surplus state, provides 24X7 power to every village, provides water to every village, grows his state at the rate of over 10% over a decade or has no major corruption/criminal charges against him, I am ready to cast a vote for him being the PM.

[dial_100]

Where was Mr. Sen when Congress looted my country. He is not a young guy. They have been ruling for more than 5 decades. We are not anywhere close to the world standards on any of the social, economic or health indicators. These are all nonsense talks. They were sleeping for 9 years with FSB. Now they will beg money to provision for FSB. Great and for that I need some kinda expert to tell me that this is justified. In my life, I have never heard that these idiots were following any growth models other than corruption of 1.6 lacs crore and 6000 cr...4500 cr... and so on. Thats all. We dont need someone to tell us what growth model congress is using is better. As soon as Gujarat started talking about growth and some model, all of them are going after them as if they are some outsiders living in the country. This attitude need to change. Guj was 6.8% of Indian economy 2005 7.1 in 2006 6.9 in 2007 7.0 in 2008 7.1 in 2009 7.2 in 2010 7.5% in 2011 Figures are approximate but the trend is obvious. They will work on Social indicators in this term. He has been constantly working on education and building a strong middle class which will sustain the economy. As for those who talk about Social indicators, what were they before 2001. Look at how rapidly sex ratio was falling in Gujarat since 1900. See what were the figures in 1980, 1990 and 2000. There was a huge fall in sex ratio during these decades. Since 2001 to 2011 the ratio fall has been controlled from 921 to 918 vs 934 to 921 in the previous decade. There are many factors. You cannot change the population overnight. Previous government has done $h1t to improve any of these HDI. If anyone has any proof open a thread and I am ready to argue. I read the whole statistics from 1900 about sex ratios. Some states managed because their respective govt had done some efforts and since 1980. their situations improved. In Gujarat those efforts where never made until 2001. If there were then someone pls show me.

[Sachin=GOD]

BTW' date=' as part of the Modi effect some BJP MLAs have already defected to JD-U and there are rumors even of a split in the Bihar BJP with one third willing to walk out. Is this the cadre mobilization that Modi supporters were referring to? [/quote'] these are BJP's agents being sent by the Dear Leader to tell him JDU's secret strategies :sherlock: :giggle:

[Crookbond]

Where was Mr. Sen when Congress looted my country. He is not a young guy. They have been ruling for more than 5 decades. We are not anywhere close to the world standards on any of the social, economic or health indicators. These are all nonsense talks. They were sleeping for 9 years with FSB. Now they will beg money to provision for FSB. Great and for that I need some kinda expert to tell me that this is justified. In my life, I have never heard that these idiots were following any growth models other than corruption of 1.6 lacs crore and 6000 cr...4500 cr... and so on. Thats all. We dont need someone to tell us what growth model congress is using is better. As soon as Gujarat started talking about growth and some model, all of them are going after them as if they are some outsiders living in the country. This attitude need to change. Guj was 6.8% of Indian economy 2005 7.1 in 2006 6.9 in 2007 7.0 in 2008 7.1 in 2009 7.2 in 2010 7.5% in 2011 Figures are approximate but the trend is obvious. They will work on Social indicators in this term. He has been constantly working on education and building a strong middle class which will sustain the economy. As for those who talk about Social indicators, what were they before 2001. Look at how rapidly sex ratio was falling in Gujarat since 1900. See what were the figures in 1980, 1990 and 2000. There was a huge fall in sex ratio during these decades. Since 2001 to 2011 the ratio fall has been controlled from 921 to 918 vs 934 to 921 in the previous decade. There are many factors. You cannot change the population overnight. Previous government has done to improve any of these HDI. If anyone has any proof open a thread and I am ready to argue. I read the whole statistics from 1900 about sex ratios. Some states managed because their respective govt had done some efforts and since 1980. their situations improved. In Gujarat those efforts where never made until 2001. If there were then someone pls show me.

If you have read Amartya Sen's views on Congress, he is equally critical of them as well. The point is that the credit for Gujarat's success should majorly go to the residents of Gujarat more than to Modi.

[dial_100]

http://www.indiancricketfans.com/showpost.php?p=2546459&postcount=2180 For other states, my point is that we should criticize the other states as well and not praise both of them. The problem is when we are inconsistent - praise one, criticize others. Well, the reason why the "agenda" theories have come out is because of certain claims made by the government to spin out a nice story. For example, I posted the milk production claim - it would be fairly straight forward to write that Gujarat is a "leading producer of milk" rather than "largest producer of milk" which it is NOT. The same goes for the China GDP statement and there are likewise many others. This forces critics to believe that there MAY BE an agenda. Of course, no one can be sure but there is valid skepticism nonetheless.

Thanks for the link. I missed it in my earlier post. I hope you know what that study is about. Its by some students in US university. The data they have used is only up to 2005. We are 7 years ahead of that. I think it is irrelevant in today's status. Gujarat is certainly behind in some aspects of social and health sectors. They shouldn't be considered as failures of the government in just 4-5 years. Say for instance this years gujarat budget, social gets 42% of total allocation and education sector got 42% more budget, Heath 25% budget increase, employment got 75% more budget. I see a clear intent of government.

[dial_100]

If you have read Amartya Sen's views on Congress' date=' he is equally critical of them as well. The point is that the credit for Gujarat's success should majorly go to the residents of Gujarat more than to Modi.[/quote'] No dude, i have not and I am not interested either. All I see is he is justifying this present congress regime. Who is that anchor? she totally looked puppet. As for credit of their growth, to tell you the truth I do not have any rights to undermine how people of Gujarat feel and vote. May be you do. If people of the state who voted for him give him all the credit then who am I to judge that? I am not a Gujarati.

[Crookbond]

No dude' date=' i have not and I am not interested either. [b']All I see is he is justifying this present congress regime. Who is that anchor? she totally looked puppet. As for credit of their growth, to tell you the truth I do not have any rights to undermine how people of Gujarat feel and vote. May be you do. If people of the state who voted for him give him all the credit then who am I to judge that? I am not a Gujarati.

It is far from it - in case you are open to it please read his critique of the Congress government. It's on the same lines and he's pretty much consistent. The voter theory is a fallacy. People of India have also voted for Congress - it does not mean they are good enough. I was pointing out earlier how a lot of success of the aam aadmi has been taken over by governments in India. It is not unique to Gujarat or BJP; the Congress and it's states are pretty much to be blamed for it too.

[bulbul]

these are BJP's agents being sent by the Dear Leader to tell him JDU's secret strategies :sherlock: :giggle:

It's easy to buy out MLA's , ask Yeddi :winky:

[dial_100]

I think person of his stature should not indulge in such trivial arguments like 1000 people die every day because FSB is not allowed to be passed by BJP. Whats your take on that? Is he not implying that Congress killed 33 Lacs people in last 9 years by not bringing this bill on the table on day 1 when they came to the power. I know voters theory is a fallacy but me judging the fabricated fact that gujarat growth is because people and not the BJP govt will be even greater fallacy. Because, agricultural and industrial growth has been noticeable in last few years. I do not have imagination to infer that it could be achieved w/o proper governance.