The main enemies of grassroots vigilance are personality cult, loyalty to party 'high command', sycophancy and a controlled economy where permit-licence is a pre-condition to economic survival, Minoo Masani wrote in 1989.
It is not capitalism which is responsible for the evils of permanent mass unemployment, but the policies of the stateman which paralyse its working, wrote BS Iyer in 1971.
In a welfare state, the rule of law has been defiled and public opinion and sovereignty are being superseded by the undemocratic decrees of the ministers, wrote GN Lawande in 1958.
Being founded on class war, any State founded on Marxism is bound to set itself in opposition, bitter and all-out, against all other nations, libertarian commentator MA Venkata Rao wrote in 1963.
To every economic policy, we must apply the acid test—how far will it bend our people to fruitful ends and how far will it dissipate them in coping with a bumbling bureaucracy, Palkhivala wrote in 1977.
The biggest capitalist has to consider what the smallest man in the market wants. This is how the consumer is king and this is what is called a free market economy, Minoo Masani wrote in 1966.
Is there a place for a counter-bureaucracy, or a separate and competing bureaucracy to counterbalance the force of the executive’s bureaucracy, asked author MH Mody in 1980.
Demonetisation is no terror to politicians, officials and big businessmen who had enough notice to take necessary precautions. It'll catch dumb goats, not black sheep, Prof BP Adarkar said in 1973.
The immediate benefit of Single Tax would be to reduce the sale prices of land to nominal ones. Landowners would no longer find it profitable to keep idle lands, wrote DM Kulkarni in 1960.
Liberty is not accepted in India as the ultimate goal of political systems. This is why, for instance, there is so much paranoia about foreign investments, wrote economist Ashok V Desai in 1995.
Learning from the Second World War, the world seemed to move toward making war subject to law and reason. These ends were, however, almost immediately subverted.
West Asia war threatens to push already fragile industry deeper into crisis. Latest disruption is playing out differently for bigger and small-scale players in Surat’s diamond industry.
The Nirouyeh Vijeh Pasdaran Velayat, or NOPO, was the only force Ali Khamenei trusted.It was founded in 1991 and is more feared than the Revolutionary Guards.
Rating democracies is a tricky business. I am only using the simple metric of who in the Indian subcontinent has had the most peaceful, stable, normal political transitions and continuity.
Cut to eighty years later. How much privatisation has taken place in the last eleven years. Ask anyone in the SME sector how easy it is to do business in India today.
Even though this article was written in 1960s I still think what is written here deserves a dislike and I wish Print would understand this request of mine. Secondly, Nehru and the Congress belonged to the period of that era which just came out of the exploitive rule of the Raj and what were the policies of Raj? I don’t think I have to describe them. So Nehru did what he had to do cause he was in an era where majority of the population was uneducated and under poverty who were exploited by the Raj. During that era Socialism was the famous idea especially due to the success of USSR. The author talked about how they decided pre independence that Socialism would be the policy to move forward with and gives example of abolition of landownership was a dictatorial act rather than democratic and this is the most absurd and bullshit statement ever made. I guess the author never knew of the Karachi Session of the Congress and how is the abolition of zamindaris who were a tool of the Raj who actually forced people to pay and never actually worked or invested in the land dictatorial? Like how stupid can you be? Well maybe the author was angry that he lost his land and could not exploit his dear Indians anymore. He talks allot of things but says nothing just technical jargon to sound intellectual. He could have made an argument about how Nehru could have done something else but he makes stupid arguments.
Outdated neoliberal understanding which stands completely exposed in the current world when under our very eye the alternative system, i.e. neoliberal western world constructed on the rampant loot and plunder of global south is crumbling.
Jawaharlal Nehru singlehandedly led India into socialist misery. To give the readers an idea about how much did we suffer because of socialism, Swaminathan S. Anklesaria Aiyar mentions, “India has suffered a major human tragedy because of its prolonged experiment with socialism, and its delay in introducing economic reforms that accelerated growth. The most horrifying consequence has been 14.5 million ‘missing children’. Almost as bad are the 261 million ‘missing literates’ and 109 million ‘missing non-poor'”.
Cut to eighty years later. How much privatisation has taken place in the last eleven years. Ask anyone in the SME sector how easy it is to do business in India today.
Even though this article was written in 1960s I still think what is written here deserves a dislike and I wish Print would understand this request of mine. Secondly, Nehru and the Congress belonged to the period of that era which just came out of the exploitive rule of the Raj and what were the policies of Raj? I don’t think I have to describe them. So Nehru did what he had to do cause he was in an era where majority of the population was uneducated and under poverty who were exploited by the Raj. During that era Socialism was the famous idea especially due to the success of USSR. The author talked about how they decided pre independence that Socialism would be the policy to move forward with and gives example of abolition of landownership was a dictatorial act rather than democratic and this is the most absurd and bullshit statement ever made. I guess the author never knew of the Karachi Session of the Congress and how is the abolition of zamindaris who were a tool of the Raj who actually forced people to pay and never actually worked or invested in the land dictatorial? Like how stupid can you be? Well maybe the author was angry that he lost his land and could not exploit his dear Indians anymore. He talks allot of things but says nothing just technical jargon to sound intellectual. He could have made an argument about how Nehru could have done something else but he makes stupid arguments.
Outdated neoliberal understanding which stands completely exposed in the current world when under our very eye the alternative system, i.e. neoliberal western world constructed on the rampant loot and plunder of global south is crumbling.
Jawaharlal Nehru singlehandedly led India into socialist misery. To give the readers an idea about how much did we suffer because of socialism, Swaminathan S. Anklesaria Aiyar mentions, “India has suffered a major human tragedy because of its prolonged experiment with socialism, and its delay in introducing economic reforms that accelerated growth. The most horrifying consequence has been 14.5 million ‘missing children’. Almost as bad are the 261 million ‘missing literates’ and 109 million ‘missing non-poor'”.