It comes as a grave shock to see the budget allocation for a ‘Green Revolution’. It seems like our elected representatives don’t learn—or don’t want to learn—neither from their own experiences nor from the experiences of others. The original Green Revolution has been strongly criticised by eminent scientists and economists for the havoc it wrought in states like Punjab. I’m concerned that instead of actually improving the lives of farmers the money spent will only line the pockets of corporations—as this money will be provided by way of subsidies for the purchase of fertilisers and pesticides. This is an expedient way to transfer money to the corporate sector in the name of programmes to aid poor farmers.
I cannot help notice the token investment of Rs 800 crore for wind energy in the Budget. Although the FM explicitly mentioning the commitment to promoting wind energy is an encouraging sign, Chidambaram could have used his budget to boost these renewable sources of energy as an avenue to balancing economic needs with environmental concerns like global warming. The truth is that thermal and hydro power plants have a very high social cost as they require very large tracts of land, thus displacing large sections of our people. And this forced displacement has been a key contributor to increased violence on people and even armed-conflict.
Instead of wiping away the tears of the aam aadmi, the government is determined to formulate policies that only lead to large scale displacement, and migration. As far as I know, 92,000 villages have vanished from the Indian map in the 65 years since Independence and in 29,000 villages, Dalits do not even have a graveyard. Rather than allocating money to acquire land for homesteads, the government is in a rush to acquire land for corporations. Rather than demonstrating their commitment to the aam aadmi by formulating a progressive land acquisition bill that actually puts the villagers’ interest ahead of acquiring land, the government is showing its commitment to the corporate sector by setting up a regulatory body to fast-track acquisition of land for road construction.
Indeed, I am disheartened to see the complete absence of land reforms as a strategy for pove, landrty eradication in the budget. Instead of allocating money to initiatives like setting up fast-track courts and land tribunals and acquiring land to provide homestead land (as had been promised in Agra), the government is allocating Rs 1,000 crore to provide the youth with skills training that will prove useful in the corporate sector. Acquiring land for people with lives revolving around agriculture and the homestead will make it possible for them to keep their identity, dignity and security, while prioritising only the development of youth skills will only make them unequal runners in this capitalistic race.
Though there are good decisions, like the allocation of Rs 1,400 crore to set up water purification systems in villages hit by arsenic and fluoride pollution, raising the allocation for the rural development ministry by 46 per cent, setting up six AIIMS-like institutions, doubling allocation to address maternal and child malnutrition, the budget has been a disappointment. Many policies that appear pro-farmer are not. Rather than formulate policies to make people self-reliant, the government is making them stand before babudom with a begging bowl for its various welfare schemes.
The writer is president of the Ekta Parishad; E-mail your columnist: ekta.rajagopal AT gmail.com
Thank you to all those who have taken the trouble to read the article and share their thoughts. Out of the arguments made here, there are two that perhaps need answering. So here they go.
1. The first part of the article compares outcomes (relative percentages of population of the religions concerned) irrespective of the process that led to those outcomes - whether immigration, relatively faster population growth or conversions. This was for two reasons. One, to put the figure of 2.3 per cent in "numerical perspective", as the article itself explained. The second reason was that outcomes are ultimately what the crux of debate is about. The rest of the article in any case dealt with process - or conversions in this case, from both a contemporary and historical perspective.
2. Some commenters have tried to cast doubts on the reliability of Census 2001. Those who do this should bear in mind that Census 2001 was conducted by a BJP government. Considering the extreme importance that BJP gives to this issue, it would be reasonable to expect that IF it had perceived a problem with the methodology that was distorting the numbers, it would have fixed it. As the article mentioned, BJP or BJP-supported governments have been in power for 10 of the last 40 years, or about a quarter of the time, and the only reasonable conclusion one can arrive at is that any misreporting of numbers, real or perceived, would be marginal and hence, not of importance.
To all other arguments made, my answer is the following: Please read the article again, with particular focus on the quotations of Vivekananda and Monier Williams, and the history of the missionary efforts in Bengal and their outcome.
Feminist schemes at the cost of hard working males, either in the form of 'Women Bank', 'Feminist Wefare' ( $ 40 bn ), or MREGA are bound to put pressure on a economic system that is even otherwise under strain from corruption.
The conequence of unbridled capitalism is polarization of wealth.India which was tottering between socialism and capitalism has adopted capitalism without any checks which will be good initial stages.Gradually few rich will control the many poor.Then it will become so many to so few.If Mr Chidambaram's budget reflects this,it is no wonder.He is only a part of the system that controls the people and the legislature.
"Rather than formulate policies to make people self-reliant, the government is making them stand before babudom with a begging bowl for its various welfare schemes."
Agreed. Our elite are either feudal or mai-baap paternalistic ... our liberalism is also a challenge because it comes from the mindset of "protecting" the children. Also, it works well for the electoral process ... so the probability of change is very very low.
I didn't want to coment here but @Maleunblocked: BE A MAN!
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.
2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads
3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site
4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.
5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT
6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.
7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.
8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.
9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:
a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com
b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com
c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments
d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you
10. We have an online thread for our comments policy:
You are welcome to post your suggestions here or in case you have a specific issue, to directly email us at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT