Apropos the story on Akhilesh Yadav (Sins of Our Fathers, Feb 11), do you think Tamil Nadu, which has two major political parties that are no better than the ones in Uttar Pradesh, still delivers better economics and development. Any thoughts? I deduce that this was made possible by state leaders from the past, who from the 1940s till the ’80s focused on bringing about social uplift, especially through education and a democratic dismantling of the old feudal order. In contrast, the feudal order still looms over Uttar Pradesh. But of late, Tamil Nadu has seen a strengthening of regressive and casteist forces not unlike the kind that blights UP.
Sampath Kumar, Bangalore
When Mulayam made his son the CM, it was evident he would rule through his son.
Parshuram Gautampurkar, Sawai Madhopur
At the National School Athletics meet in Etawah, CM Akhilesh gifted each participant a bicycle, which happens to be the symbol of his Samajwadi Party. Thank God the party symbol wasn’t a train.
K.S.C. Nair, Indianapolis
The people of Uttar Pradesh pinned their hopes on Akhilesh Yadav. Little did they realise what was evident from the beginning—that his father and uncles and their henchmen would continue to rule the state by proxy.
Pramod Srivastava, Delhi
UP will start shinning as soon as bjp comes to power in the state even in a coalition ala bihar. As soon as it goes out of power it will become backward. Same goes for every state even India.
Why UP is backward ??
Its one discussion that is quite close to my heart as I was born and bread in old Lucknow. Let me first start by saying that the Gangetic plain east from Delhi to Bengal, before British takeover of India was complete around 1857, was the most fertile, prosperous (even better than Punjab) and industrious in North India. 1857 is a year that is as important in Indian history as 1947. Although its been infamously called as the Great Mutiny but the fact is that it was the last armed stand that Indians - Hindu and Muslim united - took against the British. It is coincidence exactly 100 years to that pivotal battle of South Asia which turned the tables, that Nawab Sirajuddaula of Bengal lost to Robert Clive of British East India Company (EIC) in 1757 at Plassey.
Not just for the control of the territory, this battle was actually about the money in Gold and Silver that came in as part of the revenues from trade, a virtual loot. EIC had managed to obtain the dastak (permit) for duty free trade and to collect revenues in Bengal by a firman (royal decree) from emperor Farukhsiyar (1717). The returns were enormous from the flourishing trade in Cotton and Slik goods, yarn, sugar and saltpetre (Patassium Nitrate, KNo3 used in Gun powder).
However, to cut the story short, after the battle of Plassey with Mughals fading away in Delhi, the EIC had a virtual monopoly over all of Bengal (then including most of East Bihar and North Orissa). The UP was just next door. The farmers were forced to grow Indigo instead of traditional food crops and with the regular enforced payments of Lagan, they were systematically uprooted from their lands. The whole community of very skilled handloom weavers of fine silk and cotton cloth, between Varanasi and Murshidabad were starved as the company brought in cloth manufactured in English Shires. There were instances of even their thumbs being amputed from their hands that over milleniums had manufactured textiles that were taken to Rome by Gujrati/Arab merchants and later by early European traders to medieval Europe and Ottoman sultanate of Turkey.
The Awadh (legendary land of Lord Ram) comprising East UP and West Bihar was land of plentiful, culture and arts. The treasury of the Nawabs of Awadh was even larger than England and France put together. A truely syncretic culture excelled in music, dance, poetry, crafts and in its Varanasi Silk. A happy people who celebrated Diwali, Dusshera and Id togheter. Muslims enthusiastically participated in Ram Lilas and Hindus offered their oblations and sought blessings at Sufi shrines. They still do ..
Post independence, this land, India's soul was ignored and left behind by even those who claim they belong to it and come to get elected from here. But, Nehrus of Allahabad dont belong to it any more. They go there just to secure their seats in the parliament. The pahalwans of Etawah are just in plain simple straight forward language - Goondas and dacoits ...thats why UP is poor and backward ...
The reason why UP is backward and TN is not has to do with many factors.
However, the most important are Geography and History.
Even here Geography has been the determining factor for History.
UP, a state largely made up of the Indo Gangetic Plains has been the cockpit of Indian subcontinent.
Invaders came as marauders, raiders and destroyers.
Significantly, usually wars everywhere are fought between aspirants to position of rulers and mostly the general population remains untouched. Not so in UP. The plains allowed no hiding place. The warring armies would fight everywhere and with everything and impact everybody-combatants and non-combatants.
The rich farmlands also caught the greedy eye of those who wished to grab and hold.
Yet, the fact that it lay on the main trade route of India-the Grand Trunk Road-from Afghanistan to Burma and with the most famous ports Karachi and Surat at one end and Calcutta and Dhaka at the other, it retained it's importance through trade, and education. However,close association with Delhi through the Moghal era, as well as the British Era made UP people always think of Delhi and India instead of UP or Awadh as rightly pointed out by Abhinav in one of the posts.
But stability always eluded the citizens of UP and prosperity was something dependent on closeness or allegiance to royalty (Badshahs of Awadh and then the British rulers) and could be there for some time and be lost also suddenly.(Characteristic of feudal society)
Post independence too the politicians of UP always thought of governing India-they were successful too largely for a very long time. We have had the largest number of important politicians from UP. Region was not their main priority.
But this was not the main reason for decline of UP from being the one of the most important state of the Union.
The real reason was partition-which sundered the organic link for trade by raiing artificail boundaries suddenly turning the legitimate trade to illegitimate and illegal ones.
Families affected by this moved en masse to Pakistan or Bangla Desh. Many moved to Mumbai and Surat to set up their trading activities through the ports of Mumbai and Surat.
War with China too made trade to North impossible.
A very well connected trading route suddenly became land locked and devoid of genuine opportunities for growth and employment.
Ironically, the politicians of the state still kept on dreaming of ruling India with their large number of MPs little aware that the earth below their feet was moving.
The contrast with TN would be evident to you on a number of points which I may not need to go through here.
Sampath Kumar >> The reason being Tamil Nadu is a socially developed state compared to UP. UP still has strong feudal tendencies and has shown little development on social indicators. On the contrary tamil nadu atleast in the first 3 decades after independence had leaders who were focussed on social freedom and the oppressed communities found their voice.
UP and TN are 2000 plus kms apart. and so leave that comparison aside. Why is UP so much behind its next door neighbour, Haryana? Or how is that its hilly, northern neighbour Uttarkhand doing much better on various economic parameters?
#1, #13 and #15,
The reasons why UP Is so extremely backward and in absolute terms most poor state in India is because:
1. Population - 20 crore people, one state. If UP were separate nation, it will be 5th biggest nation in population behind Brazil and USA. UP's present population is greater than population of USA in 1960, less than population of Soviet Union in 1930s, less than population of British east india company ruled India in 1840. The state is so diverse. It is bread basket/rice plate/sugar bowl of India but how many know that in this state there is such an arid, unfertile region (bundelkhand)? Only language is uniting factor but if language is reason to make a single state, haryana and himachal should be merged into single state. The sheer numbers make it so hard to govern even by well meaning ruler.
2. Dynasty rule of Congress - out of 65 years of independence, 40 plus years went wasted with congress rule which ruled by pandering to feudal elite among upper caste and dalits and muslims and thus creating solid votebanks. In last 20 years, non congress rulers have ruled and infact things have bit improved. But unfortunately, BJP did not have sensible leadership in this state and did not get the correct vote bank arithmetic and then we had lot of time spent and only now we have a 2 party system SP/BSP and SP represents same rotten feudal elements as Congress of past and so there is no improvement. BSP is relatively better and Maya has relatively been better than the other worthless rulers who ruined the state from 1947..
3. Dependance on farming - Outside West UP, 85% of population is tied to farming and with no investment in modern farming techniques and reliance on pseudo socialist subsidy/loan waiver/support price economics, agriculture is unable to give good standard of living to the people. Sadly with severe power shortage and poor infrastructure, industries are also not going to employ people, thus perpetrating the feudal backwardness
4. Lack of state directed investment in social sector - Even BSP, a party supposedly pro social justice has not done much of investing time and effort and public money in driving schools and healthcare to remote villages and this ensures that the state rots in backwardness and people are forced to move to other states for self improvement and livelihood.
Now what is solution to improve the state? For one, good leadership. But it is time that the state is divided into 3 or more states and power decentralized from Lucknow. But not even a single one of our intellectuals are talking about that. The nandys the tejpals and rushdies and roys , these intellectual busybodies,why dont we ever hear from them about these subjects of critical importance?
R Saroja >> I was not aware of the relationship between caste and prevalence of joint family system. Of course TN is more than 95% shudra among hindus and there is a substantial Christian population and they were responsible for most of schools and colleges before independence
It is not clear if you are "Indirectly" suggesting that the progress of TN is due to its very low population of upper castes and/or the backwardness of UP is to do with its large upper caste population. In which case, I would only suggest that it is better to stop comparing TN and UP, two states with very different social histories, geography, and instead compare UP with its neighbouring state Uttarkhand and examine why UP is so backward in economic and social indicators with its nothern neighbour.
And interestingly Uttarkhand as a state has perhaps the highest percentage of upper caste (as proportion of total population) than any other big state in India. So much for the theories of arm chair intellectuals ...
It seems pretty bad, that the political scenario cannot help accusations against ministers and politicians. Even so, politicians put allegations on other politicians not on serious charges, and because neither they, nor the politicians they accuse will be facing court proceedings. I mean, this is again, why Indian politics is not savoury for well thought of leaders. Mr. Mulayam Singh is regarded in his community, and perhaps because he is a person, who is liked primarily.
Arun Maheshwari,
I think Abhianv makes a valid point. My view would be that to a great extent development takes not because of the Govts. but inspite of them. TN is different from northern states because of education level - schools are evenly distributed even in rural areas - thanks to Kamaraj. Teachers are better paid than in cities like Mumbai. The joint family system is almost absent and the land holdings are small - making feudalism unsustainable. May be there are more than 100 TV channels - there are also many news magazines in Tamil.
While looking for data to verify my impressions about joint famillies, I came across this - paa2005.princeton.edu/papers/51135 --
....studies have stated that the joint family in India is one of the common features among the higher castes. [It was] found that in India the joint family system is traditionally most common among the elite, the higher castes and those with more property. A preference for a joint family is demonstrated clearly in a variety of studies by urban and rural people, across caste and class A district wise analaysis of selected states in India by Kolenda and Haddon (1987) revealed that high joint family districts had more hindus and substantially fewer christians than the low joint family districts.
I was not aware of the relationship between caste and prevalence of joint family system. Of course TN is more than 95% shudra among hindus and there is a substantial Christian population and they were responsible for most of schools and colleges before independence.
Sharat Pradhan >>> All of which leads to why Akhilesh is, rather early in the day, being described as a “majboor” CM. His father’s legacy is actually becoming his undoing. Ironically, it is on the strength of his son’s performance that the wrestler-turned-politician from Etawah is hoping to improve his Lok Sabha tally.
Itawah Pahalwan swearing by Lohia "samajwad" turned Maulana Mulayam has clear aspirations to rule India from 7 Racecourse Road one day. If he does manage to do that [with Muslim votes in UP] he probabaly would have to take in Dawood Ibrahim as his HM and Saeed Hafiz as Defence minister. The Islamic Republic of India wo'n then just remain a dream ... it would become real ...
Arun, in my opinion the reason for relative backwardness of UP is that it doesn't have regional identity and during most of the time after freedom ruled by congress where CMs were more or less kept thier job by making congress bosses happy rather than doing anything for people.
Now with emergance of two regional parties things have started to change. This is the first time that both parties got full majority and you can already see some change. Infrastructure is better now and with time things will improve further. BJP and Congress will do better if they have regional face in UP but the problem with UP is that if there is a strong regional leader in these parties, he will become big contender for PM job and will start eclipsing the national leaders.
The only point, appears to us , in making Akhilesh Yadav, the CM, was - the SP supremo wanted to retain CM`s post with his family . And undoubtedly, looking to Akhilesh`s efforts, he made, to turn minds of the voters to SP, he deserved the post. Hardly there was any thought given due consideration by any one , if AY will be given quite a free hand to govern the state. The ultimate power was surely to remain with Shri Mulayamsingh ji Moreover, the law and order situation in the UP has always remained the same since long ,no matter who ruled in past or ruling currently the state. One would wonder even SP Supremo is not fully independent. He also has to keep others in his confidence. .P.Gautampurkar,SawaiMadhopur
Arun Ji- Yes.. it is correct to compare the case with the"Old wine in new bottle" but please think about the hapless electorate who had very little choice- "Koi Saanpnath to koi Naagnath"- whom to look at for mercy? In UP, there have been only four major political parties to vote for- while BJP and Congress failed due to their intra-party bickering and lack of organisational support, the erstwhile mal-governance by Bahen Ji was disappointing hence the SP with a new face lured the people to try- Yet they feel cheated now. Truly the UP appears to be an Unlucky Pradesh..jaayen to jaayen kahan ?
In that case, Pramodji, the electorate is "Alice in Wonderland" type fools and as the saying goes "we get the leaders we deserve". Old wine in new bottle is the same old wine ... the bottle (packaging) doesn't make a difference.
It for the electorate to decide that Politics unlike other professions/business cannot be a family run affair else one should at least be smart enough to know what one will get and not cry or feign surprise about it.
I hope some smart folks on Outlook online can shed light on original question of why inspite of the politics of TN/UP, at least as visible to layman's naked eye, being uncannily similar (difference of unees/bees), is the development levels substantially different.
The citizens of UP had pinned great hopes on Akhilesh who emerged with a fresh face in UP politics. But little did they realise that Akhilesh wore merely a deceptive mask of the party of dis-repute, surrounded by the father and uncles all-around who continue to rule the state by proxy.
99% of SP and other UP political leaders look like Sadashiv Amrapukar type villains of 80s and 90s Hindi movies. But their villainous connection goes beyond resembling faces. Little wonder if state of UP today also remind you of semi-Somalia like circumstances.
<p>Most of the political commentators like Sharat Pradhan forget that it is not only the&nbsp;&quot;Akhilesh&nbsp;Yadav government' but&nbsp; Government of the&nbsp;Samajwadi Party with all 'characteristics and elements' of the earlier Governments.A unique political and executive style has evolved in Delhi and Lucknow,where position is held by some and power by others.It is&nbsp;a new form of 'dyarchy' practized by British.&nbsp;Both Manmohan Singh and Akhilesh Yadav due to their personal integrity and honesty are reduced to symbols.The bureaucracy in U.P is divided on political lines since 1990 but B.S.P accelerated this process during its tenure.The article focussed only on negatives but several positive developments also took place during last ten months like farm loan waivers,new policy drafts in key sectors, long pending promotions in various departments and accessibility of Chief Minister for various groups and interests.</p></p>
Most of the political commentators like Sharat Pradhan forget that it is not only the "Akhilesh Yadav government' but Government of the Samajwadi Party with all 'characteristics and elements' of the earlier Governments.A unique political and executive style has evolved in Delhi and Lucknow,where position is held by some and power by others.It is a new form of 'dyarchy' practized by British. Both Manmohan Singh and Akhilesh Yadav due to their personal integrity and honesty are reduced to symbols.The bureaucracy in U.P is divided on political lines since 1990 but B.S.P accelerated this process during its tenure.The article focussed only on negatives but several positive developments also took place during last ten months like farm loan waivers,new policy drafts in key sectors, long pending promotions in various departments and accessibility of Chief Minister for various groups and interests.
'Fathers sins'
Clearly a sexist headline by the anti-male media.
Akhilesh Yadav is awarding a bicycle each to all the competitors in the National Schools Athletic Meet, Etawah. Thank God, SP does not have the Train as its election symbol.
Sampath ... thanks .... to continue ....
"UP still has strong feudal tendencies and has shown little development on social indicators."
In terms of feudal tendencies, I don't think I would say there is much differences across India (the differences if any are more in the Urban vs Rural setting but state wise the differences are likely to what in Hindi is called "unees - 19 bees - 20). DMK is a family party. AIADMK is Amma and Amma is AIADMK. Are they any less feudal than SP/BSP - in fact the similarity is uncanny - SP is family run and BSP is Mayawati. In terms of corruption too there might be much to choose from all 4. The observation is correct but that is the question - why has UP shown little development on social indicators compared to TN?
"On the contrary tamil nadu atleast in the first 3 decades after independence had leaders who were focussed on social freedom and the oppressed communities found their voice."
Are u saying before the advent of the DMK and AIADMK? Isn't this what SP and BSP also supposedly represent? Are you suggesting with continuation of SP/BSP, UP will eventually get there like you suggest TN did - just decdes later?
Would it be something simpler, like UP is still too big to administer? Or, that irrespective of other factors, Karunanidhi and Amma are better administartors than the Yadavs and Mayavatis. Or that Karunanidhi and Amma are slighly more enlightened and apply some of their power and share at least some of their wealth for the benefit of their people relative to their counterparts in UP.
I have often wondered why TN with two strong regional parties whose politics is not much better than SP/BJP but still manages to provide relatively speaking better economics and infrastructure, i.e., development. Anyone smart who can shed some thoughts?...I can perhaps try.. The reason being Tamil Nadu is a socially developed state compared to UP. UP still has strong feudal tendencies and has shown little development on social indicators. On the contrary tamil nadu atleast in the first 3 decades after independence had leaders who were focussed on social freedom and the oppressed communities found their voice. This led to the sidelining of the former feudal upper class and greater social awakening resulting in improved education levels and as a result greater social mobility. However recently there is a regressive trend with casteist forces on the loose and the state trending backwards towards more conservatism which if unchecked will lead to its downfall.
"Just 10 months in, Akhilesh Yadav is already the ‘majboor’ CM"
When your politics is almost 100% defined by caste and religion, what else would you expect but being majboor at the hands of the status-quoists and regressive elements.
I have often wondered why TN with two strong regional parties whose politics is not much better than SP/BJP but still manages to provide relatively speaking better economics and infrastructure, i.e., development. Anyone smart who can shed some thoughts?
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
But:
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: http://blog.outlookindia.com/default.aspx?ddm=10&pid=1669&eid=5
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