Mayday! Mayday!! – III

This is the third and final installment of the action points that have been proposed as a necessary course correction for independent India. These concern the social and international aspects. These are likely to be even more unpalatable to the Indian public than the structural and economic policies that have been covered in the two earlier posts. These are extremely personal. The economic policies demand renouncing the socialist dreams but even their ardent supporters have to concede that they have not worked. A claim that government cannot deliver an egalitarian economic order may be resented but most Indians do not get anything in practice in any case. The richer segment disdains to use them. The middle class is only interested in the jobs that simultaneously offer job  security with a reasonable remuneration by indian standards without having to actually work. The poor get no real benefit. So it is possible that there could be a willingness to at least listen. But the action points listed here may not be acceptable at all. Nevertheless they are needed if only to provide a written proof that all aspects of Indian situation have been taken into account while outlining this program.

1. Individuals with socioeconomic disadvantages, those from rural, impoverished households and whose parents have low educational qualifications cannot be expected to directly compete with those who do not have these disadvantages. A graded weightage to compensate for these is only just and has to be provided. At the same time, the current scheme of reservations leads to caste animosities. Socially and numerically strong groups demand to be included in the reserved categories even if the socioeconomic disadvantages are minor. Even more worryingly, the benefits offered to the really disadvantaged castes are cornered by the relatively better off members, particularly those whose parents are highly educated.  Any call for change however will be immediately suspect. To establish the bonafides and fairness of the program, the weightage for real disadvantages will be provided separately under both the reserved and unreserved categories. As an example, an individual from a low income family with uneducated parents scoring sixty percent in a qualifying examination will get (say) a ten percent benefit while in both the reserved and general categories. ​A successful implementation of such a program would hopefully provide support for moving away from the current group right concept to humanitarian assistance to compensate for individual handicaps.
2. As a further demonstration that the current advocacy of individualism is not a cloak for the continuation of medieval discrimination, the government shall implement a carrot and stick policy towards private sector institutions. Entities which present statistical evidence of non discrimination in personnel policies shall be given tax rebates and those that are implicated in discriminatory practices in a sting operation by a government sponsored agency will face financial penalties. However, neither the owners of the entities, the higher management or the employees will face criminal charges.
3. When individuals are accused of discrimination, intimidation of weaker sections of the society, hurting sentiments of disadvantaged groups and other such crimes, proving guilt beyond all reasonable doubt has been replaced with a virtual demand that the accused prove their innocence in many modern societies. In western societies, freedom is still sacrosanct and criminal charges and demands for prison sentences are not common. The punishment imposed through the judiciary, the government or even public opinion is consequently financial. Still there are examples of a small politically incorrect speech or comment causing immense professional damage. The judicial process is relatively fast providing some relief against over jealous vigilantism. In India, the situation is diametrically opposite. The stoic acceptance​ that it is better for a thousand guilty individuals to escape than for one innocent person to be convicted does not exist. A perception of miscarriage of justice turns into a mad rush to alter the law. If an accusation comes from the member of a “weaker sections” immediate incarceration of the accused  is considered necessary for justice to prevail. The demands for severe punishment are unbelievable! Virtually every fatality in a case of drunk driving is sought to be converted to premeditated murder particularly if the driver happens to be a rich man. If the prosecution fails, corruption or conspiracy is assumed. More than any other single issue, this mindset of Indians has to be changed. Nearly fifty years ago the then prime minister wanted a committed judiciary; committed to socialism. Just as the Indian experiment with economic socialism failed to provide an egalitarian society for the economically weak, these experiments to tweak the western judicial system left by the British failed. What we have is a failed judiciary where it is the law abiding individual that fears the courts and the eternal delays.  This is the reason for limiting the punishments for statistical evidence of discrimination mentioned and not invoking criminal charges. For exactly the same reasons criminal laws introduced over the years, diluting the core principle of innocent until proved guilty beyond all reasonable doubt shall be erased. These changes do not protect the weak in reality. They are only misused and even more worryingly contribute to legal delays.
4. Indians tweaked with the western concept of secularism. As usual the demands by a group of individuals is conceded. Individual subsuming his identity for the socialist ideals was best but in its absence any group identity was preferable to individualism. Secularism became respect for all religions. Deferring to religious sentiments of the minorities not only harmed the weaker individuals belonging to the minority religion but in the long run formed a convenient handle to create a militant majority identity. There is an ongoing legal circus about the triple talaq, which is part of the muslim personal law and empowers the husband to divorce a wife merely by uttering the word talaq thrice. This continues where the Shah Bano case concerning alimony payable to destitute Muslim divorcees left off. How to modernize personal law? The best course is for the government to simply take personal law out of the purview of courts and treat it as a private agreement and secular law taking precedence. If a woman wants a more equitable economic right, nothing prevents her insisting for a civil marriage!!! Individuals must look after their own interests and should not look for a government to protect them at every turn.
5. There is no question that Kashmir remains the biggest problem for India. On three counts it is a self inflicted wound. India unnecessarily and unilaterally took it to the United Nations. It did not press on and occupy Pakistan occupied Kashmir. The ceasefire was accepted at the most geopolitically disadvantageous time for India. Most importantly by providing a special status to a regional entity, it has encouraged Kashmiri nationalism. The historical mistakes naively made by the first prime minister cannot be corrected. But rectifying the mindset that continues to encourage the stupidity of believing that Kashmir has been an integral part of india needs to be changed. This mindset is the root cause of all the problems of the north east. A country is not a geographical entity. It is a voluntary association of people who are willing to resolve their differences peacefully and democratically and have equal individual rights. The minute India abolished the right of an average Indian to  buy property and settle down in Kashmir it’s sovereignty has already been conceded. The history of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana illustrates that providing concessions to a local region will inevitably lead to partition which can be postponed but not avoided. In 1956 when composite state of Andhra Pradesh was formed, the region of the erstwhile Hyderabad state was legally recognized as distinct. Periodic agitations later (1969,1973, etc.) the bifurcation had to be conceded. It incidentally proved that language was no proper basis for provincial government formation. Group rights are a cause of malady. But it is silly to think of abrogating the special privileges unless the right of the individuals to volunteer to join the association highlighted above is respected. Thus not merely Kashmiris but the people of any region of India must have the right to advocate a peaceful separation from India through plebiscite. This includes not merely the Bodos or Nagas but even the residents of Jammu and Ladakh!. (This necessity was also included in an action point in the first post). The confidence that challenges to the integrity of the nation can be won in democratic plebiscite is a social change that is most essential.
6. Post independence, Indian actions in the international arena mirror the domestic naivety and spinelessness. Successive governments have characterized the nuclear non proliferation treaty as an apartheid system where those having the bombs ordered prevented the rest from having them. Having failed in our original goal of using our own thorium technology for power generation, the goal set by Homi Bhabha to generate 10,000 MW by 1960 has not been achieved fifty years later, we refuse to give up on nuclear power. So we have endless negotiations simply to get a few private companies establish a few nuclear power plants. We have given up the principled position on NTP, and fool ourselves by thinking that we are getting respect with these negotiations. The ultimate joke is that nuclear power makes no economic sense if the cost of guarding the radioactive waste and decommissioned old power plants for generations to come in included. In any case, if NPT is an apartheid, so is the United Nations and the security council. We are unwilling to bear the slightest pain of our convictions and self respect. This abject servitude has to end. India has to stop the nuclear negotiations, find alternatives to nuclear power and take principled stand not to be a participant in either NPT or UNO till the hegemony by the winning side of the second world war is ended.

There has been progress in India since independence. But this is despite the government not because of it. Governments failed not because of individual selfishness, corrupt politicians, capitalist exploitation, international conspiracies, muslim invaders, high caste dominance, etc. The government of today us a hindrance rather than a help because of the choice by an overwhelming democratic majority. Would they be willing to change their attitudes? Would they be willing to learn from the erstwhile colonial masters? Frankly I am not hopeful.

Mayday! Mayday!! – II

Having looked at the structural changes to the indian democracy that are essential for any realistic possibility of a change in the current system in the previous post, action points in the sphere of economic activity are listed in this post. As usual with posts in this blog, the vision​ of a incorruptible, empathetic leader leading a strong, powerful government is rejected. It is precisely this attitude of looking for a leader in democracy as a replacement for a god in heaven that has turned independent India into a functional anarchy. Short explanations for the action points have been provided here. More comprehensive analysis is available in “India: My India”. Those interested may download from the “about” page of the blog.

1. A balanced budget amendment is necessary and should be immediately implemented.  Modern society has rightly dispensed with both debtor prisons and inheritance of debts by succeeding generations. But debt incurred by sovereign nations due to deficit financing continues​ to be a burden on succeeding generations of citizens. This is completely unacceptable and must be phased out in a very small fixed time frame.
2. The  opening of the economy should be taken to the logical conclusion and  government owned industries must be denationalized  if they do not have a monopoly because of the opening of the economy.  Government owned banks, industries, insurance companies etc cannot commercially compete with private sector units. Where there is a specific social purpose, they should be protected and not subject to market forces or demands for profitability. For example, SBI, LIC endowment policies, employee provident fund management, post office banking service can serve a common purpose, providing absolutely safe and long term saving facilities for the poor and low income groups. The interest rates would be lower. They will not offer large loans to avoid corruption and large losses. Similarly, food corporation of india will be part of the effort to provide a universal minimum food security but operate on non commercial basis. The rest of the public owned commercial and industrial entities must be denationalized. Other Nationalized banks other than SBI,  general insurance companies etc  will be privatized. Air India, doordarshan, BSNL, etc. have to compete with private sector undertakings and are being continued purely because of intellectual mulishness of refusing to accept reality and partly to protect the existing employees. They also need to be denationalized.
3. Protecting the existing employees is  very important since they have been too used to the government style of functioning and are no more capable of competing for private sector jobs than the undertakings in which they “work”.  Continued payment of the salaries of existing employees will be borne by the government. The cost of these continued salary payments will be offset by the savings on other expenditure ranging from utility bills to further investment in lost causes. The employees would be deputed to work in any vacancy in the government service that they are qualified to perform. The employee shall have to accept such placement or renounce his salary security.
4. The most likely  reason for private sector interest in government owned entities may be the prime real estate owned by them. This attempt to make profits by real estate transactions has to be stopped once and for all. Large land holdings of industries,  educational institutions or even hospitals will revert to government ownership if the land is to be sold for commercial or residential purposes. Such large land tracts were collected by the government by compulsive procurement under government orders. They have to continue to provide the service that was originally promised even with a new ownership. Land use for other purposes will result in forfeit of ownership.
5. The recent practice of public-private partnership where government procured land, part of which is provided to private developers is to be banned by law. Eminent domain procurement of land by the government must be restricted to completely public requirements.  In other cases, if absolutely necessary, a more transparent process involving a mediator would need to be set up with the locals having a referendum type arrangement to approve.
6. All perks and privileges provided to government employees and politicians must be in monetary form only and the exact cost clearly identified. The government so far has been supporting individuals based on their position in the hierarchy. Everyone complains of the privileges and perks approved for themselves by the politicians.  But they approve funds for everything from guest houses, transportation, medical facilities etc to a vast number of government employees. It should not be wondered that they vote themselves something better. After all the government which barely provides a low cost medicine to the common man provides unlimited coverage to government employees with the highest ranked officers getting luxury rooms in the best private hospitals.  There is not even an estimate of the fraction of the administration engaged in providing or approving these perks of government service. There is no telling,  what fraction of the government expenditure is spent on these. Entire departments and offices setup to provide such services. A strictly monetary payment, for example by way of insurance premia will prevent hidden subsidies and clearly reveal the cost of governance.
7. The government will provide free food, shelter, education and medical services but in non monetary form. The level of such services will be decided by financial constraints rather than empathetic demands. Market mechanisms and direct monetary transfers are much praised alternatives but will not be employed.  Once the government infrastructure disappears, the costs would spiral out of control of a hapless government. Particularly, in the Indian context, cartelization, cheating and misuse will become rampant. The employees made redundant by the closing of public sector industries and those government employees currently providing perks to other government employees would come in handy for providing these services. These are minimum support and a safety net. This is not an attempt to create an egalitarian society. The private sector may provide better services for those who can afford them. Trying to force cross subsidization will lead to resentment and cheating. The government trying to pay will lead to rapidly escalating costs making the program unviable.
8. A minimum alternate wealth tax is to be imposed which will be calculated on the net wealth of an individual at current prices. Hoarding wealth in the form of gold and real estate is an established phenomenon in India. This complements the approach of the companies to increase stock value rather than pay taxes on dividends. This tax will try and maximize tax revenue while simultaneously making this activity less attractive.
9. A small tax will be levied on every transaction on the stock market.  Buying and selling after very small intervals, often using computerized programs is simply gambling. Transactions at such small intervals have no relevance to productive economic activity which needs far more time to be a success or failure. This tax will add to tax revenue while simultaneously dampening this undesirable activity.
10. Attempts will be made to migrate to a simple tax regime with no taxation by provincial and local political authorities and a constitutionally mandated sharing of revenues between the central, state and local governments. Thus would obviously require a total dominance by the present ideology and is thus a long term goal. At that point, customs duties, minimum alternate wealth tax, inheritance tax, royalties from natural resources, sales tax on property including shares will be the sole sources of tax revenue. All other indirect taxes will be abolished.

This is clearly a program designed to provide a minimum universal safety net and ignoring economic inequities. It concedes that redistribution program will fail to deliver in a free democratic society,​ particularly in a country like India where the fraction of population currently paying income tax is very very low. Before admiring the cradle to grave protection of the Scandinavian countries one has to aldo realize that at least half the population in those countries is tax neutral. That Is to say, they pay as much in taxes as they consume in social services provided by the government. Even then there are periodic swings to the political right, trying to balance the budget! It is simply unviable for India.

Mayday! Mayday!! -I

Mayday! Is an internationally recognized distress call. The first day of May is also International Labor Day and is an occasion for workers to chart out a program for mutual benefit. The present post is the first of a series of three listing action points for a new program for India. The action points are consistent with the philosophy of the posts in this blog that have consistently been extremely critical of the current direction of the country. The points are a response to those demanding to know what has to be done rather than what is wrong. Why these specific action points are needed has not been included here. The  “why” was elaborately and clearly discussed at monograph length in “India: My India”. Those interested may download from the “about” page of the blog.

The current post concentrates on selection of proper individuals to govern the country. Some of these points can be implemented immediately. A few desirable changes to the constitution are also presented. The subsequent two posts will identify social and economic policies. The action points regarding government formation identified in this post should be acceptable even to those antagonistic to those social and personal policies. Even more, they are absolutely necessary for any meaningful improvement. The only thing necessary for implementation is a group of individuals who accept them and spread the message using the free social media.

1. First and​ foremost, democracy is the only option. With all its faults democracy is better than any​ other system of government ever devised by humans. There is no point cribbing about conspiracies, counterproductive to dream for leadership or be envious of its first cousin, dictatorship.
2. While aspiring for democratic power, existing political parties in India do not practice internal democracy and are thus unviable instruments fo  transforming the system.
3. No party in India recognizes that  government schemes for social justice, be they reservations or financial handouts unfortunately have negative consequences and limitations.
4. Failures of the efforts of the governments since independence are universally attributed to corruption, conspiracies, colonial exploitation or capitalist greed.
5. New parties emerge claiming that their honesty will solve the problems while following the same philosophy
6. However, the current Indian scenario of complete indiscipline and lawlessness is due to the lack of an intellectual challenge to these post independence views.
7. Forming a completely new political “Free Democratic Party” with a completely different operational structure and socioeconomic policies  is thus necessary.
8. The proposed entity will use the currently available electronic connectivity and ensure that all decisions are taken by a direct democratic choice of the members.
9. The party will contest every election if the primary members in the constituency so decide. The primary members will also approve the candidate by two thirds majority.
10. No individual who has previously contested an election as the representative of another political party can be considered as a candidate. There is no question of defections and returning to the party fold.
11. The candidates will give primacy to the programs. It is best if they are not professional politicians spending their entire life in politics. Consequently the maximum period for which an individual can “serve” in an elected office will be fifteen years.
12. The only money collected will be towards the mandatory security deposit demanded by the election commission. This money will be used for other elections if not forfeited in one election.
13. All canvassing and soliciting of voter support will use the contemporary free electronic social media.
14. There will be no rallies, public meetings, advertisement etc. which eliminates the need for money. Such a policy will have it’s own advertisement value.
15. There will be no joining of any alliances  with other political parties either before or after elections. If in power the policies outlined here will be implemented. If not, policies of those in power will be supported if they are in accordance with the policies outlined here.
16. Voters may choose not to give any political party a clear majority. But that is not a cause for the party to compromise its policy prescriptions and form a coalition government.
17. If the party gets a majority in a state assembly or parliament, the leader for the post of the chief or prime minister will again be decided by a two thirds majority.
18. The size of the ministry and selection of individual ministers will not be a prerogative of the leader but will again be decided by two thirds majority of the elected representatives
19. Constitutional amendments will be brought forward in due course for the following.
20. The respective assemblies or parliament will decide if a minister is required for a specific​ administrative department.
21. The governors of states will be elected by the assembly with a two thirds majority.
22. The president will also be elected by two thirds majority.
23. The elected governor can announce his desire to impose  governor’s rule. But the state assembly can revoke such a claim of a non cabinet government by simple majority restoring the  cabinet. The president and parliament will operate similarly.
24. Consequently, there will be no mid term elections for any assembly or the parliament nor any question of dissolving them and calling for fresh elections.  They will be for a fixed term. If representatives cannot run a government the governor or president will rule for the remainder of the term
25. Political parties will name successors to members who die mid way through their term. Independents elected to the assemblies or parliament will specify the successor even before the election to take over  for the reminder of their term in case they are incapable of  discharging their responsibilities midway. So once again there will be no bye elections.
26. Elections for all bodies, from the village pancharatra to the Parliament will be held simultaneously.
27. Elections to the rajya Sabha, and any second chamber of the state will also be coterminous with the term of the elected assembly.

As is clear, the philosophy behind the operative guidelines of the proposed “Free Democratic ” and the constitutional amendments is to restrict the so called prerogatives of the leaders. Obviously, this need not necessarily be restricted to a party committed to free democratic economic​ and social policies. The two subsequent posts in the Mayday series however will be more restrictive. They will outline socioeconomic​  policies fundamentally opposed to the post independence Gandhi-Nehru legacy.