Kalia_Test Posted August 16, 2015 Posted August 16, 2015 To me he is one of the best PMs we ever had, especially in those circumstances where our country had to pledge Gold to meet obligations. The person responsible for liberalization of Indian Economy ( for which MMS falsely claims credit) , the one who killed license Raj ( the reason why Indians today drive Ford and Toyota and not Ambassador or Padmini ), one who kept India alive ( if he gave/authorized bribe to some MPs - good on him. We would have been worse off if the Govt. failed ). Post Rajiv death, there was a huge fight between Sharad Powar and Arjun Singh for post of PM IIRC. No group was ready for the other group so PV had to be called from retirement as a compromise. A compromise that changed the course of India. One great interview of him below :- 5XqPEo9FANw
Texan Posted August 16, 2015 Posted August 16, 2015 In my best 3 ever PMs of India, as I had mentioned in my thread on ICF. I only rate LBS and ABV above him.
Kalia_Test Posted August 16, 2015 Author Posted August 16, 2015 In my best 3 ever PMs of India' date=' as I had mentioned in my thread on ICF. I only rate LBS and ABV above him.[/quote'] True. Unfortunately LBS had a short tenure and ABV never had mandate to push all he wanted. PV also had nothing ( nothing even in LS ) but he was a visionary. He is supposedly from Congress but Gandhi family never owned him. He never figures in any Congress campaigns. Always pictures of Nehru, Indira or Rajiv - never PV.
G_B_ Posted August 16, 2015 Posted August 16, 2015 meant to ask what was the impact of Rao in local Andhra politics? Was only CM for 2 years.
Kalia_Test Posted August 17, 2015 Author Posted August 17, 2015 meant to ask what was the impact of Rao in local Andhra politics? Was only CM for 2 years. Nothing. No Congress CM of AP had much of stature bar YSR. Delhi ( read Nehru family ) used to change CMs of AP every couple of years with no regard whatsoever for local sentiments. AP had stood by Congress even during Emergency but was taken for granted. That was the time and reason NTR started the Andhrula aatmagouravam movement ( self-respect of Andhraites ) and came to power in a record 13 months after starting TDP IIRC.
Khalpat Posted August 17, 2015 Posted August 17, 2015 May be anyone of you can confirm about his role in resolving the Terrorism problem in Punjab. If I can recall correctly, it was during his tenure as PM this problem got resolved right? I always thought may be after the death of Indira Gandhi if either Rao or Vajpayee would have got that mandate which Rajiv Gandhi got and become the Prime Minister in 1984, may be things would have been slightly different, no opening of Ram Mandir, no appeasement , no bofors (which started shameless corruption at highest level).
Gollum Posted August 17, 2015 Posted August 17, 2015 I remember reading that to please Sonia Gandhi YSR didn't even allow his family to perform the last rites peacefully. Apparently his dead body was half burnt and dogs were hovering around it. Also his body wasn't allowed into the AICC HQ. Sonia Gandhi hated him a lot, even today Congress tries to distance itself from the great man. What scumbags !!!
G_B_ Posted August 17, 2015 Posted August 17, 2015 Nothing. No Congress CM of AP had much of stature bar YSR. Delhi ( read Nehru family ) used to change CMs of AP every couple of years with no regard whatsoever for local sentiments. AP had stood by Congress even during Emergency but was taken for granted. That was the time and reason NTR started the Andhrula aatmagouravam movement ( self-respect of Andhraites ) and came to power in a record 13 months after starting TDP IIRC. Maharashtra has had a similar experience with the congress. 2 years in one term and then moved out. Many popular leaders like V Shankarrao and Yashwant Rao Chavan were moved to the centre (where they became home or finance min mostly) not a demotion but it was to ensure they did not rebel. From 1980 to 1995 Congress had 8 CM in Maharashtra This only changed when the NCP was formed. Congress did change CM's but it was due to scams, Vilasrao Deshmukh did serve 2, 4 year terms before mumbai 2008 attacks cost him his job. In stark contrast to the BJP, Modi, Shivrah Chohan Raman singh etc all serving long terms. Even people like Raje and PArikar etc serving out full terms.
G_B_ Posted August 17, 2015 Posted August 17, 2015 I remember reading that to please Sonia Gandhi YSR didn't even allow his family to perform the last rites peacefully. Apparently his dead body was half burnt and dogs were hovering around it. Also his body wasn't allowed into the AICC HQ. Sonia Gandhi hated him a lot' date=' even today Congress tries to distance itself from the great man. What scumbags !!![/quote'] she believed that Rao sidelined her and would routinely break appointments with her despite winning on a sympathy wave generated by the death of her husband. She did not want to enter politics but her treatment by Rao pushed her towards politics (this is her version of events)
Sachin=GOD Posted August 17, 2015 Posted August 17, 2015 I remember reading that to please Sonia Gandhi YSR didn't even allow his family to perform the last rites peacefully. Apparently his dead body was half burnt and dogs were hovering around it. Also his body wasn't allowed into the AICC HQ. Sonia Gandhi hated him a lot' date=' even today Congress tries to distance itself from the great man. What scumbags !!![/quote'] Yes. His family wanted the funeral in Delhi but she forced them to have if done in Hyderabad IIRC. But in the end history does justice - Rajiv Gandhi is only remembered as a corrupt and ineffective leader while PVNR is remembered as one of India's best PMs.
Kalia_Test Posted August 17, 2015 Author Posted August 17, 2015 Some facts and tid-bits about PV ( from wiki and other sources ). - Rao who held the Industries portfolio was personally responsible for the dismantling of the Licence Raj as this came under the purview of the Ministry of Commerce and Industry. - Rao accelerated the dismantling of the License Raj, reversing the socialist policies of Rajiv Gandhi's government - Rao was also referred to as Chanakya for his ability to steer tough economic and political legislation through the parliament at a time when he headed a minority government - According to Natwar Singh, "Unlike Nehru his knowledge of Sanskrit was profound. Nehru had a temper, PV a temperament. His roots were deep in the spiritual and religious soil of India. He did not need to Discover India". - 11th President of India APJ Abdul Kalam described Rao as "patriotic statesman who believed that the nation is bigger than the political system" - He was a versatile personality with interests in a variety of subjects (other than politics) such as literature and computer software (including computer programming). He spoke 17 languages - His tenure as Chief minister of Andhra Pradesh is well remembered even today for his land reforms and strict implementation of land ceiling acts in Telangana region. - He rose to national prominence in 1972 for handling several diverse portfolios, most significantly Home, Defence and Foreign Affairs - He was the first person outside the Nehru-Gandhi family to serve as Prime Minister for five continuous years, the first to hail from southern India and also the first from the state of Andhra Pradesh. Since Rao had not contested the general elections, he then participated in a by-election in Nandyal to join the parliament. - He also broke a convention by appointing a non-political economist and future prime minister, Manmohan Singh as his Finance Minister. - He also appointed Subramanian swamy, an Opposition party member as the Chairman of the Commission on Labour Standards and International Trade. This has been the only instance that an Opposition Party member was given a Cabinet rank post by the ruling party. The list of his reforms including SEBI Act, Look East policy and FDI is mind-boggling :hatsoff:
Texan Posted August 17, 2015 Posted August 17, 2015 True. Unfortunately LBS had a short tenure and ABV never had mandate to push all he wanted. PV also had nothing ( nothing even in LS ) but he was a visionary. He is supposedly from Congress but Gandhi family never owned him. He never figures in any Congress campaigns. Always pictures of Nehru, Indira or Rajiv - never PV. How ironic that for a party that governed India for a large part of our post-independence period and the one family that either provided the PM or remote controlled the PM, it so happens that the best PM this party provided was one who was not controlled by Gandhi family. And even after that, the party wants to continue to rely only on the family.
Kalia_Test Posted August 19, 2015 Author Posted August 19, 2015 How ironic that for a party that governed India for a large part of our post-independence period and the one family that either provided the PM or remote controlled the PM, it so happens that the best PM this party provided was one who was not controlled by Gandhi family. And even after that, the party wants to continue to rely only on the family. Which is good in a way as Rahul is campaigning for the Opposition. The more he appears in media - the more people run away from Congress. Every time Rahul appears in media - BJP appears more credible. P.S. Eventually we need some strong force against BJP too. One single party becoming all too-powerful is never good in a democracy. At the moment, we have no-one ( assuming Congress will be fully wiped out in a few years ) - AAP is laughable but I would like some party ( or even a coalition of regional parties ) to be some sort of credible opposition.
Tiger80 Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 S - 11th President of India APJ Abdul Kalam described Rao as "patriotic statesman who believed that the nation is bigger than the political system" - B.S . He was home minister during 1984 riots. it was his duty to protect sikhs of Delhi he failed. He deserve credit for reforms but he was total failure during 1984 riots
Kalia_Test Posted August 19, 2015 Author Posted August 19, 2015 B.S . He was home minister during 1984 riots. it was his duty to protect sikhs of Delhi he failed. He deserve credit for reforms but he was total failure during 1984 riots I have no reason to disagree. However, riots are by nature spontaneous and no-one in world has been able to completely control them. Who in the world would have assumed that Indira would be shot dead by her own body guards? God forbid - if Modi is injured today due to some random muslim-group and riots start - no Home Minister of India will be able to assure zero-casualty. No one. And we are in 2015. Instigators of violence like Jagdish Tytler are definitely condemnable and should be punished ( but he got out ) but I am not sure how a Union Home Minister can suddenly ensure zero casualties in such a spontaneous/unexpected event. If there is any evidence that PV deliberately did not act in the immediate aftermath - I am not aware. Post event committees, reports,etc - all becomes political.
Texan Posted August 20, 2015 Posted August 20, 2015 Which is good in a way as Rahul is campaigning for the Opposition. The more he appears in media - the more people run away from Congress. Every time Rahul appears in media - BJP appears more credible. P.S. Eventually we need some strong force against BJP too. One single party becoming all too-powerful is never good in a democracy. At the moment, we have no-one ( assuming Congress will be fully wiped out in a few years ) - AAP is laughable but I would like some party ( or even a coalition of regional parties ) to be some sort of credible opposition. The problem is more deep seated than that. All the political parties that we have, barring the BJP, are socialist left leaning parties on economic policies. Congress, which was centrist, is becoming more and more leftist under Sonia and Rahul Gandhi. Pretty much every other regional party be it AAP or TMC are leftist. In fact, the real Left parties no longer have any distinct ideology as their opponents are also leftist. BJP is slightly right of center. Sure, they will also dole out some socialist policies, but for a country like India with such huge scale poverty and wide gap between the rich and the poor, some socialism might be required. However, BJP seems to be the only party today that wants to encourage industrialization. All other parties want to continue living in an agrarian economy. What we really need today is more economic right wing parties.
diga Posted August 20, 2015 Posted August 20, 2015 The problem is more deep seated than that. All the political parties that we have, barring the BJP, are socialist left leaning parties on economic policies. Congress, which was centrist, is becoming more and more leftist under Sonia and Rahul Gandhi. Pretty much every other regional party be it AAP or TMC are leftist. In fact, the real Left parties no longer have any distinct ideology as their opponents are also leftist. BJP is slightly right of center. Sure, they will also dole out some socialist policies, but for a country like India with such huge scale poverty and wide gap between the rich and the poor, some socialism might be required. However, BJP seems to be the only party today that wants to encourage industrialization. All other parties want to continue living in an agrarian economy. What we really need today is more economic right wing parties. Regarding PVN, agree that he is under appreciated as a PM.. but did he have any other choice other than to open up the economy? Austerity would have meant anarchy in the 90's India
Tiger80 Posted August 20, 2015 Posted August 20, 2015 I have no reason to disagree. However, riots are by nature spontaneous and no-one in world has been able to completely control them. Who in the world would have assumed that Indira would be shot dead by her own body guards? God forbid - if Modi is injured today due to some random muslim-group and riots start - no Home Minister of India will be able to assure zero-casualty. No one. And we are in 2015. Instigators of violence like Jagdish Tytler are definitely condemnable and should be punished ( but he got out ) but I am not sure how a Union Home Minister can suddenly ensure zero casualties in such a spontaneous/unexpected event. If there is any evidence that PV deliberately did not act in the immediate aftermath - I am not aware. Post event committees, reports,etc - all becomes political. Had the 1984 riots been spontaneous then this could have been justified. But they were state sponsored killing which went on for 3 days. after 3 days everything just stopped as if someone has pulled button.Rao been home minister should have ensured that there should be minimum casuality in capital as it was under direct control under him As I said earlier that not even in worst African nation hardly ever thousands of minority community die in capital as most nation ensure that Capital remain safe. Home Minister avoided us during 1984 riots: Paswan http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Home-Minister-avoided-us-during-1984-riots-Paswan/articleshow/2111236929.cms Also how could anybody forget that he even stopped trains and shut electricity to win no confidence motion in 1993. At that time he was considered face of corrupt govt he had some good points but overall he was just another congressi neta
Recommended Posts