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

RE: Judiciary, Prasar Bharati, Sen



---------------------------------------------------------------------
Please help make the Manifesto better, or accept it, and propagate it!
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Sanjeev,

With due respect to Amartya Sen, he seems as confused as most of our
other economists. What we need is not jargon and moralizing but what we
desperately need is the rapid & effective dismantling of our huge
bureaucratic apparatus and the state's involvement in business
enterprises. Government is there to govern; government has no business
to be in business. Words like left, right and centre have no meaning for
me.

Indrajit Barua.
>Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 18:05:16 -0800 (PST)
>From: "Dr. Sanjeev Sabhlok" <sanjeev@sabhlokcity.com>
>To: debate@indiapolicy.org
>Subject: Judiciary, Prasar Bharati, Sen
>Reply-To: debate@indiapolicy.org
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>Please help make the Manifesto better, or accept it, and propagate it!
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>Judicial corruption:
>====================
>
>We've not dwelt on judicial corruption on IPI much. Well, the Law
Minister
>of India is unequivocal. He said there is need to overhaul the "fatal
>combination of incompetence and corruption among police, prosecutors,
>witnesses and judges" (TOI, Delhi edition: 12th Nov, pg. 9).
>
>Thankfully and mercifully, the Mera Bharat Mahaan syndrome is on the
wane
>in India today and some truthful speeches are finally being made about
the
>actual state of affairs in India. 3 cheers to the Law Minister!
>
>He also referred to relevance of Vohra Committee report. Will try to
>procure a copy.
>
>Prasar Bharati:
>===============
>
>Very good suggestion by Vir Sanghvi in HT, 12.11.99, p. 11: "The
problem
>with the Prasar Bharati debate is that we take government ownership of
>Doordarshan for granted." He almost (but not quite, since he wanted DD1
to
>be with govt.) said what needs to be said: we must NOT have govt. in
ANY
>broadcasting function. That is NOT a governmental function.
>
>In a free democracy, citizens have the right to evolve their own radio
and
>TV stations and tune in to which ever they wish. Doordarshan is a major
den
>of corruption (which govt. organization is not?) in addition to being
the
>most incompetent in terms of quality of programs. Officers have been
found
>with crores of rupees stashed in their houses.
>
>I find the debate in India to be v. lukewarm. We are still to decide if
we
>are a free nation or a feudal pass-me-down of British imperialism.
>
>Amartya Sen:
>============
>
>Sen says in Outlook, Nov. 15, p.88: "social reform is as important as
>economic reform." Further, at p. 90: "along with the expansion of basic

>education and basic healthcare, we also have to foster economic
reforms."
>at p. 92: "there is no conflict between rapid economic reform and
expansion
>of equitable social opportunities." Sounds good. Only, he seems to be
>missing in the methodology for either of these. Need to read his books.

>Anyone willing to clarify what he means?
>
>Then he adds, shockingly, (p.92) "my own political position is
distinctly
>on the left." What??? Marx and Smith go together now-a-days?




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