scorecardresearch
Thursday, March 28, 2024
Support Our Journalism
HomeThoughtShotSatyarthi on cybersex, Panagariya on 'sensationalising' GDP figures, Palshikar on majoritarianism

Satyarthi on cybersex, Panagariya on ‘sensationalising’ GDP figures, Palshikar on majoritarianism

The best of the day’s opinion, chosen and curated by ThePrint’s top editors.

Follow Us :
Text Size:

Protect our children from the dangers of the Internet

Kailash Satyarthi | Child-rights activist and Nobel Peace Laureate 2014
Hindustan Times

Satyarthi supports the need for a “legally binding international convention against online sexual abuse of children”. He highlights the extent to which child pornography is being disseminated on the internet, and how difficult it has become to control it. “Cybersex trafficking of children is proliferating as one of the most brutal forms of modern day slavery,” he says.

He also says that in the past 12 months multiple global leaders and organisations have come out in support of such a convention. These include Pope Francis, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and International Trade Union Confederation, among others.

Such a convention will “ensure a convergence of policy and efforts at national, bilateral and international levels”, he adds.

Slippery slopes of democracy

Suhas Palshikar | Co-director, Lokniti and chief editor, Studies in Indian Politics
The Indian Express

Palshikar argues that BJP’s rise is the result of an “extraordinary coincidence of the demand side of political culture and the supply side of BJP’s politics”. He says that since Congress’ decline, which began in 1989, one can observe two “intertwined narratives of victimhood and dominance”. While Indian society considers itself being left behind, it also harbours dreams of becoming a global power.

This, he says, has led to the politics of Hindu assertion. BJP has not only shaped this sentiment but also articulated it well. Also, the sentiment for a strong leader who can provide “effective stewardship” has been constantly rising. From a little over 30 per cent in 2004-05, now approximately 66 per cent of people prefer a strong leader.

He cautions that Indian democracy is taking a rather difficult route where it is hard to convince voters about the threats of majoritarianism.

The loss is not just Istanbul

Mohammed Ayoob | Senior fellow, Center for Global Policy, Washington, DC, and University Distinguished Professor Emeritus of International Relations, Michigan State University
The Hindu

Mohammed Ayoob argues that President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s grip over Turkey seems to be weakening. The recent results of Istanbul’s mayoral election saw Erdogan’s party lose to the opposition candidate.

This verdict is very important since one-fifth of Turkey’s population lives in Istanbul. The city also has a share of more than 30 per cent in the country’s GDP. In other major cities as well, such as Ankara and Izmir, Erdogan’s party has lost the elections.

He attributes this decline in Erdogan’s popularity to his mishandling of the country’s economy. The Turkish lira has had a precipitous fall in the past year, and the government has spent large sums on needless projects such as new airports, bridges and gigantic mosques. Further, his constant quarrels with Fethullah Gulen, the US-based Muslim cleric blamed by Ankara for a failed 2016 coup, has also alienated members of his Islamist supporters.

Factors like his ultra-nationalist stance has alienated the Kurds, and contributed to his declining popularity.

India’s China syndrome

Abheek Barua | Chief economist, HDFC Bank
Tushar Arora | Senior economist, HDFC Bank
Business Standard

Barua and Arora write about some of the questions raised about India’s GDP estimates, following the release of a paper by former chief economic advisor Arvind Subramanian. They say that Subramanian’s paper has familiar elements of intense debate about the reliability of Chinese economic data. They point out how Subramanian’s argument revolves around proxy indicators that are similar to the ones used by Li Keqiang, the current Chinese premier. The authors argue how a declining correlation between growth and other indicators, such as credit and exports, capture the shift in India’s national income structure towards a consumption-led growth that is similar to China’s.

Dangers of Sensationalism

Arvind Panagariya | Professor of Economics, Columbia University
The Economic Times

Meanwhile, Panagariya criticises the overestimation of GDP claims by Subramanian and calls it “problem-ridden” and far fetched. He argues that Subramanian has either blundered or proceeded with it, despite its shortcomings, in the hope of creating a sensation.

Subramanian is the first economist to write in such sensational terms, soon after leaving his position, he says and many outside India are bound to think that Subramanian was privy to an “insider’s information” that could impact investors’ confidence. This will also discourage talented “outsiders” to join the government.

National monetary authorities should wake up to the Libra challenge

Niranjan Rajadhyaksha | Member of the academic board of Meghnad Desai Academy of Economics
Mint

Niranjan Rajadhyaksha writes on Facebook’s plans for a new digital currency that has raised “hackles worldwide”. He points out that this Facebook currency will be linked to official financial systems in two ways – through banks and currencies issued by sovereign governments.

“This is quite different from the libertarian promise of Bitcoin that sought to build a monetary unit with no formal links to fiat money”, he wrote.

He points out that the bigger question is whether “governments will, or even should, allow private companies to muscle into such sovereign territory” and adds that the challenge is more acute for an emerging economy like India.

Subscribe to our channels on YouTube, Telegram & WhatsApp

Support Our Journalism

India needs fair, non-hyphenated and questioning journalism, packed with on-ground reporting. ThePrint – with exceptional reporters, columnists and editors – is doing just that.

Sustaining this needs support from wonderful readers like you.

Whether you live in India or overseas, you can take a paid subscription by clicking here.

Support Our Journalism

1 COMMENT

  1. I read articles of both Arvind Subramanian and Arvind Pangariya with interest. Both are well known economists in their own fields and former is well known in the field, personally not known to me and the later is my class-mate from Uni. Rajashan Jaipur. However, Arvind Surbamanian appears more close to the field of economic growth than Panagariya who is a basically is an economist of International trade theory but became a development economist overnight promoted by Pro-American promoter of IMF/World Bank outdated ideas and failed development models prescribed to developing countries which resulted in resignation of Stieglitz from Chairmanship of World Bank. In fact, following the worldwide financial crises many great economists including Nobel Laureate Paul Krugeman rejected neoclassical models although there on difference between Subramanian and Pangariya on relevance of neoclassical models except on a minor methodological issue.

    In my view, Panagariya’s attack on Subramanian is too harsh and appears politically motivated as this undermines success of neoclassical models of growth in period of 2012-216 covering the years under both the Congress and BJP governments to which either Panagariya has championed their success and got Padmabhooshan or served as the Vice-Chairman a toothless body, NITI Ayog. He had no impact on public policy at all during his tenure at NITI Ayog. Panagariya’s in attacking Subramanian’s methodology on the basis of PM Modi’s Economic Advisory Council consisted of corporate interests namely, Swaminathan Aiyar, Surjit Bhalla, Bibek Debroy, Charan Singh, and a Govt body CSO whose credibility has been called in question many times which backfires on his criticism of digging Subramanian’s motives for writing his article. In fact, he lost all his professionalism in attacking Harvard University to attack his credibility. Although everything emanating coming from Harvard and Columbia does not provide a litmus test may universities’ working papers are far more credible than any published paper in a peer review journal. The fact of the matter is Panagariya’s own predictions of GDP turned out to be false, for example, in 2011 at the Econometric Society Conference (though not an econometrician) held in Indore, based on an IMF report he openly eulogies Dr Manmohan Singh’s achievements and declared with a bang and show that a 10% growth in GDP is sustainable and also claimed that after adjusting India’s GDP with Purchasing Power parity (PPP) is 11.5% greater than China which I found quiet absurd then, but subsequently his dream was shattered when GDP plunge to 4.8% in 2012-13. Soon after that Panagariya has taken a 180 degree turn and started advocating Modi’s success in Gujarat who late rewarded him with Vice Chairmanship of NITI Ayog. If on applies a legal test to Subramanian’s prediction, an independent observers, who is not overly sensitive, will come out with a belief that he was right and Panagariya was wrong. I did not find any serious flaw in Subramanian’s methodology contrasting with Govt and its agents’ assertions.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Most Popular