It is not wrong if one may see student elections as the Launchpad for mainstream or national politics- a ticket to have a national exposure.
The recently concluded Delhi University Student Union Elections and Jawaharlal Nehru University Elections were among the topmost news last week. So much so, that the results of DUSU Elections were a top trend on the social media sites like Twitter. #DUSUElection2018 was trending all over the Twitter. For someone who has been part of Universities other than Delhi University or JNU, the amount of coverage and impetus the Student Body elections get, comes with a package of astonishment and a lot of important questions. Why in the first place, the DUSU, and JNU election get so much importance? There are total 819 odd universities in India enrolling lakhs of students. Why is it that we rarely hear about the student elections from any other university? And most importantly, do the student elections from Universities really matter in a national political arena?
India has a long history of student movements and indeed a very successful and powerful one. Right from India’s freedom movement in which youth and college-going students took part in large numbers to the most recent Anti-Corruption Movement led by Anna Hazare, the student involvement was something that was at the core of why the movements gained importance. Thus, student politics and student elections remain a point of fascination. There are even people who readily equate the outcomes of DUSU Elections and JNU elections to that of national politics and mood of the nation at large. Whether these arguments hold water or not is a different question altogether.
It is not wrong if one may see student politics as the Launchpad for mainstream or national politics- a ticket to have a national exposure. After all, a leader like Finance Minister Arun Jaitley, Delhi Congress President Ajay Maken, Delhi’s former BJP president Satish Upadhyay are among the many national and state-level politicians who began their political career from the student politics and the elections. The student elections are also an opportunity for the existing political parties to reach out to the young voters brimming with enthusiasm. If looked at it from this perspective, it is easy to understand why student elections thus become a matter of prestige for political parties and their student wings.
For now, let us take the example of DUSU elections that happened this year. The largest central university in the country has more than one lakh students. Out of which 44.5% turned up for elections. It was a clean sweep for BJP and RSS backed student wing ABVP. While ABVP won 3 seats including that of president’s, BAPSA won 1 seat. On the other hand, JNU which has been in controversy for a few years due to various reasons, saw a red storm taking the center stage.
Being the largest central university and the most controversial university in the national capital which is the center-stage for national politics, the student elections tend to reflect the national political culture at the student level. The politics at this level is heated and as much amount is splurged in these elections as in Municipal Corporation elections. The student elections in recent years have been marred by the incidents of violence, poll code violations, and expensive campaigning. Thus, the elections that are a week’s affair suddenly gain national importance.
But for those, sitting away from the politically charged Delhi environment, this treatment to student elections is alienated. In country’s economic capital Mumbai, student elections hardly make it to the news headlines, let alone the front page. The elections in Mumbai University which houses more than 5 lakh students and is affiliated to as many as 700 colleges, rarely see the kind of coverage that DU or JNU student elections get.
At a time, when student body elections have become a part and parcel of national politics, the one who stands at the losing end is a student. While the topics as OROP, Triple Talaq, Rohingya Muslims take the center stage in the presidential debate, issues that worry the students in their academic and campus lives are rarely addressed. We also have heard a lot of students complaining about the disturbance in their classes and invasion of privacy in the days of student body elections. The solution is not taking the politics out of institutes. The politics which is deeply entrenched in our system is equally necessary for education institutions to hold the authorities accountable. The need is to decide what should be the degree or level of politicisation being allowed.
For starters, we can keep student elections, an affair limited to the concerned university rather than blowing it up as a reflection of the nation’s mandate at large!
Raghuram Rajan says coalition govt may slow down economy. Does history support his claim?
It was during UPA’s coalition govt. a tenure that India’s GDP growth rate touched the two-digit number for the first time.
“These days’ efforts are being made to popularize a failed experiment in the history of Indian politics by the name of Mahagathbandhan,” fired PM Modi from the podium at BJP’s national convention at Ramleela Maidan. His attack on the opposition came few days before the United Opposition rally at Kolkata’s brigade ground. “These people are trying to make a ‘majboor sarkar’ (a helpless government) and not a “Majboot Sarkar” (A strong government),” he charged further.
This notion that the coalition governments are weaker and not capable of delivering on their promises has been prevalent in the Indian electorate and media for a long time. On Thursday, former RBI governor Raghuram Rajan too expressed the possibility that the Indian economy may slow down if a coalition government comes to power after the 2019 Lok Sabha election. His comments took many by surprise as he has been critical of the demonetization and other economic policies launched by the Modi government-a majority government.
But, does the hysteria that coalition governments are bad for the economy, hold any water? Well, to answer that we first have to look at the history. India has had a long list of coalition governments. Since the time of Morarji Desai to Manmohan Singh’s UPA, in the last fifty years, India has mostly been under the coalition government. The only two elections when the political parties were able to get the majority were- general elections of 1984 and 2014.
Let us first go through India’s GDP growth figures over the years, as it is considered the core indicator of development. We will present the numbers since 1991, as the economy was liberalized in the year. Incidentally, the major economic reform was brought by the PV Narasimha Rao-led coalition government.
According to the World Bank data, in the year 1991, India’s GDP growth was 1.05%. The country was on the brink of an economic crisis when the PV Narasimha Rao government brought in measures to resurrect the economy. From ending license Raj, introducing LPG policy to opening up India’s equity market for the foreign investors, the government transformed the economy. The success of the government in bringing the required economic reform can be gauged by the sheer amount of Foreign Direct Investment. India grew from the minuscule US $132 million in 1991–92 to $5.3 billion in 1995–96. In the last year of the coalition government’s term, the GDP growth of India was recorded at 7.55%.
After the hung parliament in 1996 General Elections, 13 different non-congress, non-BJP political parties came together to form United Front with Deve Gowda as the Prime Minister. He held the office for a brief term before stepping down from the post and making a way for his successor IK Gujaral. During the United Front government, the GDP Growth rate for 1997 and 1998 were 4.5 and 6.1 respectively.
After the United front government, came the coalition government led by BJP’s Atal Bihari Vajpayee. In his five-year tenure from 1999 to 2004, the GDP growth of India went through many ups and downs. While in 1999, the growth rate was 8.84%, in the subsequent years it fell to 3.84%, 4.82% and 3.80% respectively before taking a jump and hitting 7.86% growth rate in 2003. In the next year, it moved slightly upward and registered 7.9% growth rate.
In its term of five years, the Vajpayee government worked towards increasing foreign investment, modernisation of public and industrial infrastructure, the creation of jobs, rising the high-tech and IT industry. The policy shift was focused on the salaried class urban and young people.
Then came the UPA government led by the Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. As many as 22 parties came together to form the United Progressive Alliance that ruled the country for 10 years from 2004 to 2014. During the first term and half-way through the second tenure, India’s GDP remained constantly rising, except in 2008 when it collapsed to 3.89%. It was during UPA’s tenure that India’s GDP growth rate touched the two-digit number for the first time. The 2006-08 was a period when the poverty fell down drastically.
There was a high rate of growth in manufacturing industries between 2004-05 and 2010-11. In 2012, the UPA government decided to disinvest in the public shares, if successful there would have been a receipt of 20,300 crores that would have provided some relief to the fiscal deficit. The aim of UPA was to bolster economic growth and make India an attractive destination for foreign investment. In 2013, it introduced 51% FDI in the multi-brand retail sector. However, it was met with a lot of opposition.
After 2014, when the Modi government came to power with an absolute majority, India’s growth rate was 7.41%. It rose to 8.41 the subsequent year and then plunged to 7.1% and 6.6% in 2016 and 2017 respectively. The major economic reform that the Modi government undertook was the introduction of GST.
Well, history does not lie but it gives us lessons. And even the former RBI governor YV Reddy agreed that the coalition government produce a better economic result. However, bringing major economic changes mostly depends upon how stable is the prevailing government- coalition or majority. As HW News Business Editor remarked that even if there is a coalition government, the dominant party should be strong enough to push through the economic policies. “A fractious coalition may lead to compromise on various Economic policy issues,” he said.
The Two Gandhi Theory
The formal entry of Priyanka Gandhi in the party ranks may lead to the emergence of an alternate power centre in Congress.
“One should never say never in life — I really meant in life, I didn’t mean in politics,” said a resolute Priyanka Gandhi in an interview as she reiterated her decision to not venture into active politics. That was in 2010. Nine years later, the “other” Gandhi scion finally entered the politics. There is nothing new about Gandhi dynasts joining politics, except, her entry was much awaited. The media persistently kept anticipating it over the years while the Congress cadre yearned for it. Even before the Congress’ debacle in 2014, the cadre seemed to have believed that it is the other Gandhi scion that can revive the party.
After the loss of 2014, the sentiment became even stronger. With her bob, cotton saree and skills to connect with people, she seemed a replica of her Grandmother. A shrewd politician with mass appeal. How can one forget her riveting speech in 1999 against her uncle Arun Nehru-also a BJP candidate, which displayed her political acumen? Arun Gandhi, who was expected to win with a huge margin against the fresh political entrant Sonia Gandhi, lost badly.
At one point, she was even considered the successor of the throne of Congress party president over her brother Rahul who was tagged a reluctant politician. But, even after several requests from the Congress workers, she largely confined herself to the duty of campaign in-charge of her family’s traditional constituencies of Rae Bareli and Amethi.
Priyanka Gandhi would largely remain low-key, behind the scene supervisor of the sort during elections. This changed on Wednesday. Rahul Gandhi, her brother and the Congress President made her an AICC General Secretary in-charge of Eastern Uttar Pradesh. Moving from passive politics and being a shadow to her brother and mother, she is now brought into the mainstream.
Talking about it, an assured Rahul Gandhi said, “My sister is capable and hard-working. I am personally very happy and excited that she will work with me.”
UP is central to building a new hope filled & compassionate India. The new UP AICC team lead by Priyanka & Jyotiraditya, will herald the dawn of a new kind of politics in the state. We will offer the youth in UP a dynamic new platform to transform the state.
— Rahul Gandhi (@RahulGandhi) January 23, 2019
More than the news itself, it was interesting to see how many portrayed it as a “trump card” or “Brahmastra” of the Congress. For the starters, I believe it was more of a need-of-the-hour than a strategic move for the Congress party. Apart from motivating the cadre, it was also a message to SP-BSP and a move to stun the BJP. The cadre has already considered her 21st Century Indira Gandhi. With the slogans like “Indira Ka Khoon, Priyanka Gandhi coming soon”, the cadre might have known that it was a matter of time that she would be introduced to formally to politics. Besides, making her in-charge of eastern UP signals that the party leadership entrusts her with a big responsibility of penetrating the Modi-Yogi bastion.
While this could very well be deemed as a clever move on the part of Congress, it might prove to be a short term gain for long term loss. It was in the 1970s that we saw two Gandhis- Sanjay Gandhi and Indira Gandhi, reigning the party as well as the country. We all know how the political party was reduced to the family affairs of Gandhis. Moreover, the history stands witness, when there are two powerful forces at the same time in the same organization, it leads to the tussle between the two. The Indira vs Sanjay stories are still recounted in the Delhi circles.
Though, the Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi were an exception to this, can the Rahul-Priyanka duo be the exception too? I think otherwise. As Congress President, Rahul Gandhi has revealed his aggressive side. We can no more call him the reluctant politician. Priyanka Gandhi, on the other hand, has always been the one with the political prowess among the siblings. Though she stayed away from the political limelight so far, now that she has entered the political scenario, she may even steal the thunder from her brother.
There are already many Congress workers who believe that Priyanka is better than Rahul. Many top leaders of the party refuse to admit it on record but have accepted in private that Priyanka Gandhi can be a far better leader than Rahul for the Congress party. Her formal entry in the party ranks may lead to the emergence of an alternate power centre in the Congress. The coteries of yes men will surround the Gandhi siblings, which will eventually lead to a wider rift. In this assertion of power, the one who will stand to lose is the Congress party. As they say, there is no congress without Gandhis and the Gandhis are nothing without the Congress. The two Gandhis will not only lead to the creation of alternate power centre but also may weaken the party. Haven’t we seen this already?
Having said that, I must also admit that it is just a possibility. As of now, the two Gandhis who are completely different from each other will be working together. Rahul Gandhi yesterday clarified that he hasn’t sent Priyanka to eastern UP for just two months. This hints towards the long term plan the party may have for Priyanka Gandhi. Being the high stake state, Congress cannot afford to be put on the backburner in the region. Thus, there must always be a Gandhi in UP. Would that also mean that Rahul Gandhi is making the arrangements to ensure that he smoothly shifts to Nanded to contest next Lok Sabha election?
Well, possibilities are all we can present in the uncertain world of politics. For now, the brother-sister duo is the new hope of the revival of Congress.
Is Modi government playing with fire with the Savarna Reservation?
We have seen a number of examples in the past where political leaders tried to meddle with the reservation policies which resulted in nothing but the electoral disaster.
On Monday, the Modi cabinet raised the heat amidst the ongoing winter session of parliament by clearing 10% reservation for the economically weaker upper castes. The cabinet decided to amend the Constitution so that the “economically backward” upper castes will get 10% reservation in direct recruitment in government services and admission to higher educational institutions.
The proposed reservation will be over and above the existing 50 per cent reservation enjoyed by the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and the Other Backward Classes, taking the total reservation to 60 per cent. Among the major castes to benefit from the proposed law are Brahmins, Rajputs (Thakurs), Jats, Marathas, Bhumihars, several trading castes, Kapus and Kammas among other Upper Castes.
As the news took over the TV screens and print columns, it was projected as a “Master Stroke” by the Modi government. Some even called it a “Surgical Strike” ahead of the 2019 Lok Sabha elections. Considering the Savarna backlash that the government received over the SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities (amendment) act, this might have been a last-ditch attempt by the ruling BJP to save its Upper Caste voters. Incidentally, the upper caste Hindus are its core vote banks. Thus, this move was being seen as vote bank motivated.
The question, however, remains whether it is actually effective or ground? Whether it will pay the electoral dividends the party is hoping for? Will the move achieve consolidation of both, Dalit and Savarna voters in favour of BJP?
BJP may hope the answer is in affirmative. But a quick scanning of pages of India’s political history can easily tell that it is otherwise. On the contrary, we have seen a number of examples in the past where political leaders tried to meddle with the reservation policies which resulted in nothing but the electoral disaster in the immediate elections.
Karpoori Thakur was the first political leader to have felt the heat on the ballot box due to his decisions regarding the reservation policies. The socialist leader who was Bihar’s first non-Congress Chief minister first introduced the reservation for the economically backward upper castes in the country. His decision was based on the findings of the Mungeri Lal Commission. This commission had suggested a total 26% reservation in the state, of which 20% were for the OBC, 3% for the women of any background and 3% reservation for the poor Savarnas.
Karpoori Thakur decided to implement the reservation formula in Bihar in November 1978. However, he decided to divide the OBC category into two other sub-categories for the distribution of quotas, i.e. Extreme Backward Class (EBC) and Backward Class (BC). While EBC were allotted 12% quota, BC was allotted 8%.
Electorally, it proved to be disastrous for the leader. He had to endure major upper caste backlash for this move. Within a week, he had to vacate the CM chair. The reservation policy he introduced is popularly known as “Karpoori Thakur Formula”. The policy was halted in 1992-93 until the Supreme Court quashed it. However, with the Modi government’s new reservation card, the demand for implementing the formula in government jobs and educational opportunities has started gaining pace in Bihar.
Who can forget the political debacle VP Singh brought upon himself by announcing the implementation of Mandal commission report. Not only the country burned for months following violent protests but the controversial move proved to be a fatal blow to VP Singh’s political career.
In August 1990, seven years after the Mandal Commission report on the identification of OBC’s based on 11 parameters, VP Singh in his independence day address declared his intention of implementing the commission’s suggestions. The report proposed OBCs to be given 27% reservation making the total number of reservation go up to 49%.
This move sparked a series of student protest. The Self-immolation committed by more than 50 students across the country and suicide attempts by more than 100 people marked the end of the VP Singh’s minority government. Just 11 months after he took oath as the Prime Minister, VP Singh had to step down and was succeeded by Chandra Shekhar.
Having witnessed the fire sparked by the controversial reservation policies, Congress (UPA) for most of its term kept the reservation off its priority. Until 2014, when it made a last-ditch attempt to win the election, touched the reservation issue.
On the face of elections, Congress proposed to include Jats in Other Backward Class category. The Jat reservation only resulted in violent protests and hartals in the state. The Supreme Court eventually rejected it. The Congress, as we know, was reduced to only 1 seat.
The Congress-NCP coalition government in the state of Maharashtra too followed the suite off Haryana government. The Prithviraj Chavan-led coalition government announced 16% reservation for the Marathas who have been demanding reservation since long. The move did not prove much fruitful as the coalition had to face dismal numbers in the immediate assembly election.
These and many other cases in the past prove that any decision with regards to the reservation is equal to playing with fire. Thus, it begs a question whether the Modi government has learnt the time and again tested lesson provided by Indian Politics. With the recent decision, it seems it hasn’t or perhaps, it has chosen to ignore it.
Will it turn out to be political suicide for Modi government as well? Or will he be successful in breaking the jinx?
Naveen Patnaik not interested in Odisha’s development: Yogi Adityanath
India objects to Pakistan’s use of abusive language at ICJ
Will BJP-Shiv Sena alliance work?
Three MPs quit UK PM May’s party over Brexit
Govt created situation where calls of violence against Kashmiris being openly executed: Yechury
Pay 453 crores to Ericsson in 4 weeks or face 3 months jail: Supreme Court to Anil Ambani
Won’t tolerate jeopardizing national security for self-interests: Chandrababu Naidu
Sensex jumps over 250 points; metal stocks rally
Home Minister Rajnath Singh reviews security situation in Jammu and Kashmir
FDI during Apr-Dec 2018-19 falls 7 percent to USD 33.49 billion
Saudi Crown Prince, PM Modi hold talks: All you need to know
Breaking: Supreme Court to hear Ayodhya-Babri masjid dispute on Feb 26
Karthik dropped from Australia series. End of WC dream ?
Breaking: SC asks Anil Ambani to 453 cr or face 3 months jail
BJP-AIADMK alliance finalised; AIADMK to remain big brother
Politics3 days ago
Sidhu, Majithia exchange barbs, SAD burn photos of Sidhu’s Pakistan visit
National3 days ago
SC refuses PIL seeking court-monitored probe into aircraft crashes of Indian armed forces
National3 days ago
Supreme Court refuses reopening of Sterlite plant, grants Vedanta liberty to approach HC
Politics3 days ago
Cricketer-turned-politician Kirti Azad joins Congress
National3 days ago
Two Jaish-e-Mohammed terrorist involved in Pulwama attack killed in Army encounter: Sources
Politics3 days ago
Shiv Sena targets PM Modi over Pulwama terror attack
Breaking News3 days ago
Pulwama attack: 2 JeM terrorist killed in encounter
Politics2 days ago
Shiv Sena-BJP likely to announce alliance for Lok Sabha polls today
National3 days ago
Kashmiri doctor claims he was asked to leave city, West Bengal govt comes to his rescue
International2 days ago
If India attacks, Pakistan will retaliate: Imran Khan on Pulwama attack