[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: secession

Postings not related to the writing of the Manifesto or policy chapters
are likely to be summarily rejected. Thanks for your understanding. IPI
I cannot agree more with Ram!!!! It is disasterous if our intellectuals
waiste their time talking of Secession from India.  Granted there are a
lot of things wrong with India and needs to be corrected. But the
solution does not lie in cutting at one of its areas of strengths. Given

the complex ground realities, the situation defies solutions. In this
setup, what is needed is a more focussed debate on key issues and
suggest remedial measures that are doable rather than indulge in the
oversimplistic theoratical negative campaign.

It is very easy to criticise things and a lot more harder finding
solutions to problems. There are equally compelling statistics from all
sides. I would advocate that one takes a committed approach to listing
the top three or four issues, give a few weeks for members to go out and

research the key issues and then start a debate on this forum. The
objective should be that in a month's time, we will find a set of
recommendations that could provide a practical ACTION PLAN for the
policy makers to follow. I would imagine, this action plan will be
backed up with statistical and logical support data.

The country today needs commitment, sacrifice and concrete way forward
approach papers, not ideological rhetorics. Having been in USA and
India, I would like to observe that many of our NRIs, with the best of
intentions, make suggestions that are a projection of USA and often do
not fit into the Indian context.  The first thing to do is to recognise
that not all the people at the helm of affairs are not a bunch of
incompetent fools ( I must admit most of them are!) and if given a way
forward, they do push for change. Often our committed competent leaders
(especially those that are honest) do not have either the budgets or the

staff to research issues. This forum could help a great deal in filling
the void.


>From owner-india_policy@cinenet.net Thu Mar  4 19:25:03 1999
>Received: (from majordomo@localhost)
>       by tahoe.cinenet.net (8.8.6/8.8.6) id TAA17802
>       for india_policy-list; Thu, 4 Mar 1999 19:22:19 -0800 (PST)
>Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1999 19:22:19 -0800 (PST)
>Message-Id: <199903050322.TAA17802@tahoe.cinenet.net>
>X-Authentication-Warning: tahoe.cinenet.net: majordomo set sender to
owner-india_policy@cinenet.net using -f
>From: "Ram Narayanan" <loraln@worldnet.att.net>
>To: debate@indiapolicy.org
>Subject: Re: secession
>Sender: owner-india_policy@cinenet.net
>Precedence: bulk
>Reply-To: debate@indiapolicy.org
>Postings not related to the writing of the Manifesto or policy chapters

>are likely to be summarily rejected. Thanks for your understanding. IPI

>Ram Narayanan
>No, no,no,no,no............................Please drop this provision.
>even think of it. If IPI is going to contribute even remotely to the
>vivisection of India, I will have nothing to do with it!
>Ram Narayanan

This is the National Debate on System Reform.       debate@indiapolicy.org
Rules, Procedures, Archives:            http://www.indiapolicy.org/debate/