The Politics and Theory of the Nobel Prize in Economics: Why Abhijit Banerjee and Liberal Theory will not work

A look at the world of politics, statecraft, diplomacy and books

The announcement that Prof. Abhijit Banerjee and his wife have been awarded the Nobel Prize for Economics has been met with estatic glee by both the CPM and the Congress. This fact alone should alert us to the fact that Economic Policies and prescriptions are not altogether free of political and ideological biases.

Western Economic Theory has had an importnat place in Indian political discourse. Nehru adopted the Planned Economy model of Command Economy though the Planning Commission and ensured that India does not grown beyond 3.5% every year. Man Mohan Singh and the then Prime Minister Narasimha Rao opended up the economy and the growth sputtered to 9 to 10%. The Congress in its 2019 Manifesto promised a Universal Income of Rs 72,000 per family. This schem appartently was suggested by this year's Noble Prize winner, Dr Abijit Banerjee   and we will turn to this particular scheme as a proverty alleviating meaure.

The sub prime lending crisis that hit the American Market and let to a Global slowdown in the Worls Economy and more recently the recession that was partly mitigated by huge infusion of funds from the Federal Reserves are all classical keynesian measures. India with its triple problem of Poverty Population and Politicians cannot be so sanguine about political theory offering a way out.

Abhijit Banerjee was afgainst the DeMonitization launcehed by the Hon ble Prime Minister. The economic theory underlying his approach is regnant with the amorality of liberal economic theory. The "Black Money" can be taxed at the consumption end and so it is not bad for the economy. The circulation of Balck Money was to the extent od 33% of the National GDP. And so when the money is spent some of it gets taxed or so the liberal theory goes. What this theory ignores is the fact that much of the politically generated Black Money was being sent abroad as the slew of procecutions now demonstrate and so was of no import as far as the Indian Economy went. Hence this precious assumption of Liberal Economic theory just does not hold any substance.

Another measure that these "poverrty economiists" advocate is untramelled Government spending. In fact the sort of Universal Income Scheme that the Congress promised would have resulted in stagfaltion and a complete melt down of the Economy. Why do I come to this conclusion. Because the whole venture was to be financed not through production of goods and services but thriough deficit financing. Hence it was poison from the word Go. Unfortunately our Left oriented economists cannot think beyond the Liberal economic theory.

What the present Governemnt has been doing is very sensible. It has tried to beep infation down while increasing public spending. The classic Macro Economic measures like interst rates, basis points reduction, lowering GST ect are all welcome measures while they do turn Liberal Economics on its heads has proved quite robust in dealing with the proble.

I would like the Union Government to invite the top economists from China for a one on one interaction to learn from the Chinses example. We must not be taken in by these entrpernuers of poverty.

President Xi and Prime Minister Modi: Sino-Indian Relations at the crossroads

A look at the world of politics, statecraft, diplomacy and books

The Summit Meeting between President Xi of the Peoples'Republic of China and the Prime Minister of India, Shri Narendra Modi at Mamallapuram on the shores of the Bay of Bengal is yet another milestone in the Statecraft of the Prime Minister. The success of his diplomacy is evident from the fact that the Chinese Government has come out with a statement that Kashmir is a bilateral issue and has to be settled between the two countries. This statement is essentially a reformulation of the Chinese position vis a vis India and it certainly augurs well for Sino Indian relations. It is very clear that the two great civilizational giants of Asia--India and China-- are taking steps towards a fundamental transformation in the state of existing relations. China with the dominance of a single party and India with the nationalist BJP Government enjoying a single party dopminance over the political system are both well placed to deal with the issues confronting them from a civilizational perspective. China has been far more successful in protecting its civilzation as the CCP except for the madness during the Cultural  Revolution is well palced to defend its Civilization. India with its corrupt multiparty democracy until quite receently aws incapable of effectively protecting its heritage. There is no doubt that Narendra Modi, a global leader in his own right and Presidentr Xi who like the Prime Minister has risen from the ranks are both well experienced statesmen  will make the effort to set both the great civilizations on a course correction path.

Apart from the border dispute and bickering over the OBOR investment in PoK, there is also the issue of the huge trade deficity with China. I am sure Modi will want China to buy more from India. China is now a global leader in Higher Education and India isn struggling to make the cut. It will be a good step if India learns from China's exprience and jettison American models as far as University education goes. The Indian elite which is "English" educated is quiite at home with US and it stirs up hostility over China. It is the same elite which writes petitions on every single incident and lobbied to have the then Chief Minister of Gujarat banned from entering US. India needs a new Asia centric vision and good relations with China is central to the realization of this dream, Afterall did not the great Chinese intelelctual Hu not say that India conquered China without sending a single soldier. This goodwill was lost due to the stupidity and cussedness of Jawaharlal Nehru and Modi is certainly right is steering a fresh furrow.

Looking back through centuries we can see India and China not as adversaries but as civilizational partners. Thepicture on theLeft is of the Chinese Pagodas or Buddhist Temples constructed near Nagapattinam, a major port from where pilgrims from China landed to visit Buddhist religious sites further to the north. Unfortunately, the towers were pulled down in 1858 by Jesuits missionaries. Buddhism was an importent strand in constituting good civilizational links with India. Yendu was the word by which the Chinese referred to India and is obviously a translitteration of Indus/Hindu. In the early historical text, Shi Ji, Shendu/yendu is referred to and it is obviously, Indus, the Great River. In the fourth century Faxian visited several places in India and records the presence of Buddhist viharas in Kanchipuram. Xuanzang and Yijing visited Nalanda in their search for Buddhist texts. We get a lot of information about Chinese perception about India from these books. Obviously as the Land of Buddha, India had a status far beyon that of a third rate post colonial State the Nehru wanted India to be.

There are references to Indians in Chinese records. Nanti/Zhu Nanti is a ship owner, obviously from India whose name is found in a Buddhist text, Chu sanzang ji ji. A Tamil temple built by merchants has been discovered in Guangzhou. A Tamil inscription found there records the presence of a diasporic mechant community in the flourishing port, once visited by Marco Polo.The technology for extrecting Sugar may have come from China and of course, Cinna Pattu or China silk is referred to even in Pallava inscriptions at Kanchipuram. South Indian physcians were valued in the Tang couts and Indian medicines were sought after in China. Jiva and Nagarjuna are frequently encountered in medical texts from China. The Tang Bureau of Astronomy had the Navagraha Samhita transklated as Jiuzhi li.  Qutam Zhuan, Gautama, was the son of Gautama Siddhartha who settled in Tang China. All these references culled from Tan Sen's book India China and the World; A Connected History show the deed and abiding links between India and China. The Mamallapuram Summit hopefully will reconnect India and China with their civilizational past.

The great Ming Admiral, Zheng He visitied South India diring his 7 voyages from China to Africa. The presence of Ming copper coins in South India attest to the trading linka. There are refences to the Pandyans of Madurai sending as many as seven trade missions to China. In Markanam on the Bay of Bengal coast of Tamil Nadu large number of Chinese coins of the type illustrated on the left have been found.

China was the world's largest producer of copper in the medieval world and perhaps was the source of copper used in South India.

The last chapter in Sino Indian relations is not happy as the troops who faught in the Opium Wars were sent from Madras. It was the Madras Regiment that faught and won China for Great Britain. It is a tragic episode in that opium grown in India was forced into China in order to finance the hugely profitable Tea Trade. India is still held in contempt for the role it played in forcing a Great Civilization like China to get addicted to Opium at the behest of its white masters. Perhpas this generation of Chinese will understand that India did not contorl its destiny and asa citizen I am ashamed of this chapter in India's past.

The Summit between India and China is off to agood start. Both Xi and Modi are experienced Statesmen and will set right the niggling problems inherited from the Nehruvian past. India inherited several problems from Nehu and the dynasty obsessed Congress Party and I am sure that the wisdom of Modi and Xi will set the tone for a new beinning.

2019 Edition of Pondi Lit Fest: Full of Sound and Fury

A look at the world of politics, statecraft, diplomacy and books

LG at the Event caption

The Three Day extravaganza in Pondicherry, the Third Edition of the Pondicherry Lit Fest, the first genuine attempt on the part of those who do not subscribe to Red Fascism that dominates the intellectual discourse in India got off to a flying start with Her Excellency Dr Kiran Bedi making a remarkable speech, both scholarly and intersting, on Tamil as a Global Language and Literature. Her presentation was sharp focussed and in all respects flagged the pupose for a Lit Fest. Unfortunately her plea for an inclusive and caliberated approach towars Language and Literaure seems to have falllen on the soil of Carthage.

Professor Anand Ranganath was devastating in his criticism of the Left Eco system. We are all aware that Red Fascism at the intelelctual level was backed by State Power and the Right was reduced to a bit player during the 70 years of Congress dynstic rule. The suppression of intellectual freedom, the absolute bureacratization of culture through various state sponsore Akademis, the infringement of the academic freedom of Universites by imposing a third rate curriculaum through the agencies of state are all the ills that can be laid at the door step of the Left and their acolytes. But the Question remains: Are the Nationalists doing enough to reclaim lost territory or are they replacing one set of "sarkari" intellectuals with another

Anand Ranganath

From the eloquent speech of Professor Anand Ranganathan it was clear to me that a deep hurt resides in the heart of intellectuals. Years of rejection humiliation and alienation has opened up and demotratized the public sphere and that is due not to the intelelctual class but to Narendra Modi. It was his spectacular victory that has democratised the public sphere and intellectuals like Prof Anand ranganathan are in reality the beneficairies of that political victory. He is quite right when he rejcts the notion of of a "Right Wing Ecosystem". The fact is the Right in India, unlike the Left is riven with dissent and it is not possible to contruct a monolitic alternative to Red Fascism that has rule the Indian mind for nearly a century. And if we go by the example set by the "New Intelelctuals" of the present day sarkar, it is unlikely to make a serious dent in the legitimacy of the Left.

The Three day event was sponsored by Republic TV abd therefore as part of its Corporate Social Responsiblity underwrote this Three Day Event. I could not help wondering if the racuous crowd from Aranb's stable was just beamed into our Pondicherry. We had the same gaggle of 'tele intellectuals" M R Venkatesh, Sunil Pandit, Tavleen Singh, Vikram Sood, General Dua and the whole host of faces already seen on Republic TV and of course we had the bhadralok, Dr Swapan Das Gupta and Hanchan da. An interesting set of debates followed.

The Kasmir issue was discussed thread bare and the issue was addressed with due seriousness. Arif Mohammad was quite eloquent in his ple for a Civil Code. Hindutva and Hinduism were discussed.

Of ourse the new icons like Anirban Ganguly and Virkam Sampath were visible during the presntations. What need to be done is that "Intellectuals" should stop becoming appendages to the State. Because the Red Fascists were propped by by the then Government is no reason for us to expect the State's largess for survival. There was hardly any particiaption from Pondicherry but it is the good fortune of Pondicherry to be a prop for: In search of an Indian Intellectual.

Romila Thapar and the controversies in JNU

A look at the world of politics, statecraft, diplomacy and books

I begin by statting that professor Romila Thapar is one of India's most outsytning scholars and as a Historian she has substatial contribution to her credit. I am familiar with her work ans can say with a degree of conficence that Ashoka and the Decline of the Mauryas and her most recent Past Before Us will remain enduring works for some years to come. Thugh she does not belong to the Fernand Braudel type of Historiography which was both challenging and inventive, Thapar did introduce a distict methodological armature to the study of early India. She was a student of A L Bashyam and took her PhD under his suprevision. Along with her were R S Sharma, the reputed Maxist historian and Dr D Devahuti the celebrated author of Harsha A Political Study. The fact is that Dr Devahuti who was far more talented both as a Historian and as a teacher was percecuted by the Marxist goons who taught in JNU and Delhi University and drove this great histoan to death. My complaint is that when D Devahuti was being tortured to the point of suicide the like of Romila Thapar did not utter a single whimper of protest. Hence, I do have the firm convictin that being a part of the cabal of so called leftist historians, Romila Thapar was quite content to see her friend and shishya of the same Guru killed. She lacks a small detail called character--stand up for a colleague who is being targetted.

Niw waht are Romila Thapar's contibution to Indian Historiography. There is no doubt that she and Sharma not quite in command either of Epigraphy or Sanskrit relied primarily on secondary data. For Thapar the field had been cleared by Sten Konow and D C Sircar who translated and published Ashokan Inscriptions. Even the one stray Aramaic Inscription of Ashoka was translated by yet another of Bahshyam's student, A K Narain. R S Sharma studied the Shudra caste and assimilated all social groups who were not disctinctly Brahmin or Khatriya as Shudras. This contradiction he later tried to expalin away by stating very ingeneously that Land Grants led to the proliferation of castes.
Romila Thapar, on the other hand, directed her attention to the rather tragic encounter between the Turks and the Indians. Her Somnath: Many Voices of History attempted an analysis of the contradictory evidence pertaining to the desctruction of the Somnath Temple. Conceding that the evidence is contradictory does not preculde the historical reality of the destrcution of the Somanth Temple. The record of Turkish/Islamic invasions not only in India but al;so Persia and other parts of Asia are replete with instances of wanton dececration of religious structures. Romila does not care to answer the question: Why should the Turks behave differently here. The need to fabricate a politcally correct version of History runs right through the works of Thapar. And the Western Academia obviously lapped up her work because it confirmed their preconceived notions of Islamic history.

JNU Administration has asked for the CV of Romila Thapar in the same manner in which it has asked for the CVs of all Professors Emeritus above the age of 75. Such is the sense of entitlement that Romila Thapar has refused to furnish her CV. In the Press the strident Leftists put out their argument that Romial is being singled out. This is just not true. All Professors above the age of 75 are being reviewed and Romila also falls within that age range. Her refusal to give the CV to the authorities bespeaks of unmistakable sense of entitlement and arrogance.

The real reason why the image of Romial Thapar took a solid beating is due to the fact that she supported a JNU leader, Kanaiya Kumar who was accused of several indecent act on the campus by his female colleagues and pf course, he won notoriety all over Inidia by shouting the infamous slogan, Tukde Tukde Kar denge, Inshaallah, Isnshaallah. A historian of her stature should not have rubbed shoulders with the likes of Kanaiya Kumar who went on to lose his deposit in the Begusarai MP election in May 2019.

Romial Thapar comes from an elite background. Born to wealth privilge and social status, her concern for the poor and the deprived sound hollow.