I read in yesterday’s Times of India’s editorial page, an article by Mr. Jean Dreze titled “Interpretation of Dreams.” He wrote mainly about why the BJP manifesto’s preamble an exercise in obfuscation.
First, let me make absolutely clear that I have no particular love lost for the BJP and for that matter for any other political parties. My earlier professional training and requirement has made me apolitical except that I do vote. But I vote for a candidate and not a party. My choice in voting is largely guided by my understanding of the caliber and track record of candidates I am supposed to choose from. A “swing voter” in American election terminology!
Coming back to the TOI article, I thought I should comment on it because: first, it has appeared on the editorial page and so the views expressed in the article assume greater importance; and second, it is written by a well-known and respected development economist Jean Dreze, whom I have always admired and have held many of his views in high regard. However, reading his mentioned article in the TOI, I was a tad disappointed. My disappointment was largely due to the fact that a person of the stature of Mr. Jean Dreze chose to comment on a thing as mundane as a political manifesto. Was it because it was the BJP’s manifesto? I have no problem with that either. His main focus is the preface to the manifesto of the BJP. He describes it as an exercise in obfuscation.
First, let me make absolutely clear that I have no particular love lost for the BJP and for that matter for any other political parties. My earlier professional training and requirement has made me apolitical except that I do vote. But I vote for a candidate and not a party. My choice in voting is largely guided by my understanding of the caliber and track record of candidates I am supposed to choose from. A “swing voter” in American election terminology!
Coming back to the TOI article, I thought I should comment on it because: first, it has appeared on the editorial page and so the views expressed in the article assume greater importance; and second, it is written by a well-known and respected development economist Jean Dreze, whom I have always admired and have held many of his views in high regard. However, reading his mentioned article in the TOI, I was a tad disappointed. My disappointment was largely due to the fact that a person of the stature of Mr. Jean Dreze chose to comment on a thing as mundane as a political manifesto. Was it because it was the BJP’s manifesto? I have no problem with that either. His main focus is the preface to the manifesto of the BJP. He describes it as an exercise in obfuscation.
Well, there is nothing greatly revealing about that assertion. According to me manifestos of all parties are equally an attempt to deceive voters in their reflection of past achievements and future promises. For example, while the Congress manifesto proudly proclaims as its biggest achievement the NREGA, an employment guarantee scheme, Mr. Dreze will agree with me that like all other welfare schemes, the NREGA also suffers from pilferage and misappropriation of funds as well as other irregularities in its implementation.
The preamble in question celebrates the richness of ancient Indian civilization and its achievements in the fields of science, education and health. It also notes that India used to be “a land of great wealth and even greater wisdom.” What is so confusing about it? We all know about and proud of it. I see nothing wrong or any grave distortion of facts or mythical elements in it. But Mr. Jean Dreze finds it as peddling “a series of myths (of “India Shining” variety) about Indian history and civilization.” When I read the preamble, I found nothing of that sort. May be Mr. Dreze allowed deep prejudice for the BJP to overcome his brilliance and automatically prompted him to see devil in the established historical details. For consider the following and let him disagree when the prejudice has finally run its course:
The World's first university was established in Takshila in 700 BC. Students from all over the World studied more than 60 subjects.
The University of Nalanda built in the 4th century was one of the greatest achievements of ancient India in the field of education.
Sanskrit is considered the mother of all languages for its grammatical perfection and therefore suitable language for computer software - a report in Forbes magazine, July 1987.
Zero was invented by Aryabhatta. The place value system, the decimal system was developed in India in 100 BC.
Ayurveda is the earliest school of medicine known to humans. Charaka, the father of medicine consolidated Ayurveda 2500 years ago. Today Ayurveda is fast regaining its rightful place in the world.
Christopher Columbus was attracted India's wealth and was looking for a route to India when he discovered the American continent by mistake.
The art of navigation was born in the river Sindh 6000 years ago. The word ‘Navigation’ is derived from the Sanskrit word NAVGATIH. The word navy is also derived from Sanskrit 'Nou'.
These are just but few examples among many such accomplishments of ancient Indian civilization.
Mr. Dreze also takes objection to another noting in the preamble which refers to
pre-colonial India as one with an “economy as flourishing as its agriculture.” The preamble nowhere claims that there were no instances of hunger or famines, but Mr. Dreze seeks to read exactly that in that simple statement and goes on to refute his own perception. Alluding to good aspects of a period in history doesn’t mean acknowledging that there was nothing wrong during that period. It is disappointing that Mr. Dreze chose to comment on what was not said in the preamble.
And finally, I was disappointed because Mr. Dreze made a case which was quite unbecoming of coming from an economist. Referring to a statement in the preamble that Gandhi “was absolutely right in saying that India was more illiterate in 1931 compared to its state of literacy 50-60 years ago, i.e. in 1870,” he simply says “Gandhi was wrong on this” and “We know that from census data.” Where are those data? He has furnished no data to refurbish his claim. As an economist he should have supported his statement with actual data he was talking about, particularly when he called someone like Gandhi wrong. He only backs up his argument by saying that Gandhi was wrong because he used to get emotionally carried away on many occasions. He writes “that Gandhi once touchingly described an Indian shepherd as a finely built man at a time when vast majority of the Indian population was wasted and stunted, with a life expectancy of less than 30 years.” Wow, what an economic generalization! At a time when life expectancy was less than 30 years, were there no ones who lived beyond 30 years? When vast majority of population was wasted and stunted, were there no individuals with healthy body? When Gandhi was referring to shepherds being strongly built men, he was “absolutely right” because people in shepherd community on an average have strong physics because of their genetic traits, like Punjabis too normally have well-built body or as one will find people in Kashmir generally tall and fair.
In short, his piece reads like a political rhetoric than a balanced view expected of a visionary like Mr. Jean Dreze. Actually, by choosing to comment on a political manifesto, he treaded on a wrong trajectory. How disappointing!
No comments:
Post a Comment