Re: [silk] Prime Ministerial candidate
Also I think the trance band Enigma named a song Mea Culpa which means, My fault or My blame (the root of the word culpable) in Latin. Although it appears the local police may have tried to stop the party where that music was played., lest there be obscene dancing... :-) On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 9:24 AM, ss cybers...@gmail.com wrote: On Monday 23 Mar 2009 9:11:34 am Biju Chacko wrote: where the heck else would those of us who missed out on a classical education have come across the word?
Re: [silk] Prime Ministerial candidate
Peccavi. Isn't that in Pakistan? There is an urban legend linking this word to the province of Sind in Pakistan, and it depends on an awful pun. And yes, Sindh is in Pakistan, which indicates that Biju probably had prior knowledge of this most atrocious pun. -- Sumant Srivathsan http://sumants.blogspot.com
Re: [silk] Prime Ministerial candidate
--- On Sun, 22/3/09, Sumant Srivathsan suma...@gmail.com wrote: From: Sumant Srivathsan suma...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [silk] Prime Ministerial candidate To: silklist@lists.hserus.net Date: Sunday, 22 March, 2009, 11:30 AM Peccavi. Isn't that in Pakistan? There is an urban legend linking this word to the province of Sind in Pakistan, and it depends on an awful pun. And yes, Sindh is in Pakistan, which indicates that Biju probably had prior knowledge of this most atrocious pun. -- Sumant Srivathsan http://sumants.blogspot.com Hmmmph. Suspected as much. Tricky customer, that Chacko chap. Needs to be watched like a hawk. Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Go to http://messenger.yahoo.com/invite/
Re: [silk] Prime Ministerial candidate
On Sunday 22 Mar 2009 11:30:38 am Sumant Srivathsan wrote: Peccavi. Isn't that in Pakistan? There is an urban legend linking this word to the province of Sind in Pakistan, and it depends on an awful pun. And yes, Sindh is in Pakistan, which indicates that Biju probably had prior knowledge of this most atrocious pun. Well Pakistan has sinned pretty badly and it appears that Biju knows this. shiv
Re: [silk] Prime Ministerial candidate
--- On Sun, 22/3/09, ss cybers...@gmail.com wrote: From: ss cybers...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [silk] Prime Ministerial candidate To: silklist@lists.hserus.net Date: Sunday, 22 March, 2009, 1:08 PM -Inline Attachment Follows- On Sunday 22 Mar 2009 11:30:38 am Sumant Srivathsan wrote: Peccavi. Isn't that in Pakistan? There is an urban legend linking this word to the province of Sind in Pakistan, and it depends on an awful pun. And yes, Sindh is in Pakistan, which indicates that Biju probably had prior knowledge of this most atrocious pun. Well Pakistan has sinned pretty badly and it appears that Biju knows this. shiv Venkat, you bad man, it's all YOUR fault. Any moment, now, Ram will swing by on a curtain, brandishing his Smith and Wagah. Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Go to http://messenger.yahoo.com/invite/
Re: [silk] Prime Ministerial candidate
2009/3/22 Bonobashi bonoba...@yahoo.co.in: Ram will swing by on a curtain, brandishing his Smith and Wagah. Swat a Wagah, you mean. Ram
Re: [silk] Prime Ministerial candidate
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 11:24 AM, Bonobashi bonoba...@yahoo.co.in wrote: Peccavi. Isn't that in Pakistan? -- b It means I have committed a sin. It's in Latin. It was my way of apologising to Venkat and sending him away somewhere else before his rollicking sense of humour completely overwhelmed his dicretion. There is an urban legend linking this word to the province of Sind in Pakistan, and it depends on an awful pun. The pun only works if you translate that as I have sinned. BTW, I would have the thought the allusion would have been obvious -- where the heck else would those of us who missed out on a classical education have come across the word? :-) -- b
Re: [silk] Prime Ministerial candidate
On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 5:00 AM, Kiran K Karthikeyan kiran.karthike...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/3/21 Nikhil Mehra nikhil.mehra...@gmail.com I don;t know about this debate. I don't think it is even real. India cannot have a Presidential system because I don't think this nation is capable of a consensus candidate. The interests of the constituent states has to be represented at the centre because the power sharing arrangement in the Constitution as it stands is heavily biased in favor of the centre. Greater power was not granted to the states at the time of independence because there was a genuine fear of fragmentation. I agree that states have more power in the US, but not sure how that has a bearing on the presidential system. If you have a presidential system and lesser power for the states then states have a lesser say in governance. Now, with a Parliamentary system, where we end up with coalition governments like it's going out of fashion, effectively regional entities have a substantial say in matters of governance. Is this good for the country? I wouldn't dismiss coalition governments outright. They have posed problems not on account of regionalism but because of ideology (The Left with the Congress) or petty politics looking for the limelight (Mamata di with the BJP). The latter hardly causes a substantial policy deviation. The former is a vital process that only lends further to a democracy because it gives a voice to a certain group in society whether we agree with them or not. While a consensus candidate might be difficult, I think even the US constitution foresaw this possibility and instituted the electoral college. However, in most elections so far, the electoral college members of a state have voted for the candidate that won in that state. Yes, we could have an electoral college, but what will be its composition? The US did not have anywhere near the ethnic variation that we did at the time of independence, and continue to have now. Also, in the US now there is immense diversity on account of immigration over generations, but the idenitities forged are not regional. They are racial and ethnic. So there is a lesser fear of rebellion against the Central authority where the demand is for sovereign control over territory, which territory can be historically traced to the group in question. I guess what I am saying that states in India can make a far stronger case for Statehood on the classical parameters of what constitutes a State than those in the US. What the presidential system (or something similar) does in my opinion, is put a national campaign for presidential candidates beyond the scope of most regional parties. This would over time lead to a consolidation into a few major national parties, and therefore to more stable governments. Laws are still passed by the house where states have representation so I don't see how their representation decreases under this system. I don't understand this aversion to coalition politics. Our best years of economic growth have had nothing but coaltion govts. Our nation was soporific in responding to the basic needs of the citizenry and we barely had a development vision when we had effectively single party rule. And coalition govts have been stable. Narasimha Rao, Vajpayee and the Congress have all lasted 5 years with a coalition govt. The issue for the center has not been a lack of stability, rather the fact that there are more constituencies that they have to answer to. And for me this makes for a more vibrant democracy. Even though states have representatives in Parliament, they would be toothless because they'd deprived of the No-Confidence Motion. A prez would have veto which quells regionalism. Impeachment under any prez system is a very difficult process. Another advantage is the possibility for an independent candidate to run for elections and hold the highest office if he/she can mobilise the funds for the campaign. Why is an independent candidate a good thing? He/she doesn't have an ideology. He/she has never had to engage in the political process in the past except for selfish interest. He's/she's never had to have the vision for a nation which is expected from the chosen few by political parties. What makes him or her ready to be head of state? And why is it good? As we stand today, the comparitively more educated (and richer) section of the Indian population hardly votes or rather can't make a real dent in the elections and instead get things done through bribes. Err the Presidential system will end bribery in India?? Right, And I'm late for my threesome with Nicole Scherzinger and Scarlett Johansonn. Nordic blonde and ethnic brunette - priceless. If the more educated sections in India do not vote, then I don't think they will suddenly because they have one man/woman to vote for. In fact, the numbers will be even worse against them. They are a minority and right now there
Re: [silk] Prime Ministerial candidate
If you have a presidential system and lesser power for the states then states have a lesser say in governance. Now, with a Parliamentary system, where we end up with coalition governments like it's going out of fashion, effectively regional entities have a substantial say in matters of governance. Is this good for the country? I wouldn't dismiss coalition governments outright. They have posed problems not on account of regionalism but because of ideology (The Left with the Congress) or petty politics looking for the limelight (Mamata di with the BJP). The latter hardly causes a substantial policy deviation. The former is a vital process that only lends further to a democracy because it gives a voice to a certain group in society whether we agree with them or not. I don't see the difference. In my opinion, canvassing of votes during a goverment's term should be push a piece of legislation through, not to remain in government. What we have is too much of the latter. Yes, we could have an electoral college, but what will be its composition? The US did not have anywhere near the ethnic variation that we did at the time of independence, and continue to have now. Also, in the US now there is immense diversity on account of immigration over generations, but the idenitities forged are not regional. They are racial and ethnic. So there is a lesser fear of rebellion against the Central authority where the demand is for sovereign control over territory, which territory can be historically traced to the group in question. I guess what I am saying that states in India can make a far stronger case for Statehood on the classical parameters of what constitutes a State than those in the US. Agree about the ethnic diversity being concentrated in regions. But the US did also have a civil war, India so far hasn't and I don't think its just because of the Centre having more power in the constitution. But if they can make a strong case for statehood, the Centre having more power does not prevent them from seeking it. I don't understand this aversion to coalition politics. Our best years of economic growth have had nothing but coaltion govts. Our nation was soporific in responding to the basic needs of the citizenry and we barely had a development vision when we had effectively single party rule. And coalition govts have been stable. Narasimha Rao, Vajpayee and the Congress have all lasted 5 years with a coalition govt. The issue for the center has not been a lack of stability, rather the fact that there are more constituencies that they have to answer to. And for me this makes for a more vibrant democracy. Even though states have representatives in Parliament, they would be toothless because they'd deprived of the No-Confidence Motion. A prez would have veto which quells regionalism. Impeachment under any prez system is a very difficult process. I'm not sure if any government can take the credit for the economic status of India today. The '91 reforms, which kickstarted the reform process were catalysed by economic conditions rather than ideology or policy committments during elections. Lack of political stability is a major concern for most investors in India and I see it being mentioned in almost every article which talks of a foreign company investing in India. A no-confidence motion prevents legislation even when the majority in Parliament want to push it through. Why is an independent candidate a good thing? He/she doesn't have an ideology. He/she has never had to engage in the political process in the past except for selfish interest. He's/she's never had to have the vision for a nation which is expected from the chosen few by political parties. What makes him or her ready to be head of state? And why is it good? Err the Presidential system will end bribery in India?? Right, And I'm late for my threesome with Nicole Scherzinger and Scarlett Johansonn. Nordic blonde and ethnic brunette - priceless. If the more educated sections in India do not vote, then I don't think they will suddenly because they have one man/woman to vote for. In fact, the numbers will be even worse against them. They are a minority and right now there are certain constituencies where they can elect a candidate solely on their voting power. That will be near impossible on a national scale election where they are a woeful minority. I think it will make them even more cynical about elections. Yes, that would be priceless but you missed the point I was trying to make. The minority, instead of voting bends the rules to its liking instead of seeking legislation because they don't see a candidate they can identify with. No it won't put an end to bribery, but presents a viable alternative. Political parties can do this too. Looks like you're referring to an Obama-like model which essentially needs a strong vibrant personality. We havent had one in over a generation. The Presidential system would
Re: [silk] Prime Ministerial candidate
Bonobashi wrote: So it has started. Woe is me. Don't say, at the end, that I didn't warn you. ^^^ This is what you wanted to say, I suspect. The other 97 lines were just for added effect, yes? :-) Yes, me again. Same guy who said something about the top-posting and quoting. Call me bad, it makes it difficult to read on my blackberry and my mail client. Let's make a deal to snip unnecessary lines, please. Pretty please with sandesh on top? I really like your writing style. Just not the quoting style, though. Cheers... V
Re: [silk] Prime Ministerial candidate
On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 7:12 PM, Bonobashi bonoba...@yahoo.co.in wrote: Peccavi. Isn't that in Pakistan? -- b
Re: [silk] Prime Ministerial candidate
--- On Sun, 22/3/09, Biju Chacko biju.cha...@gmail.com wrote: From: Biju Chacko biju.cha...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [silk] Prime Ministerial candidate To: silklist@lists.hserus.net Date: Sunday, 22 March, 2009, 7:38 AM On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 7:12 PM, Bonobashi bonoba...@yahoo.co.in wrote: Peccavi. Isn't that in Pakistan? -- b It means I have committed a sin. It's in Latin. It was my way of apologising to Venkat and sending him away somewhere else before his rollicking sense of humour completely overwhelmed his dicretion. There is an urban legend linking this word to the province of Sind in Pakistan, and it depends on an awful pun. Did you know? You can CHAT without downloading messenger. Go to http://in.webmessenger.yahoo.com/
Re: [silk] Prime Ministerial candidate
Karat commented yesterday that this is due to the BJP yearning for a presidential form of government, and always trying to fit our present Westminster style parliamentary democracy with PM and cabinet responsible to the house and determined by a majority in the house to a quasi presidential system. Wouldn't a presidential system actually be better than the coalition goverments we've been getting? I.e. they can get things done? Instead of trying to prevent a Vote of no confidence/withdrawal of support, they can concentrate on legislation and also reduces chances of re-election. The Indian election is a very costly affair - http://indian-election2009.blogspot.com/2009/03/cost-of-indian-election-2009.html . Kiran
Re: [silk] Prime Ministerial candidate
http://indian-election2009.blogspot.com/2009/03/cost-of-indian-election-2009.html . Found this in the comments of the link above which I just sent - As our goal to promote astrology, we invite the political election candidates to get their horoscopes analyzed by DecisionCare and be provided to the voters. DecisionCare will provide this horoscope analysis free as long as the birth details (date, time and birth place) come from the candidates directly. This is to avoid confusion about the accuracy of available birth data. We urge all voter readers to pass this information to political candidates participating in Indian elections. Http://www.decisioncare.org Speechless! Kiran
Re: [silk] Prime Ministerial candidate
--- On Fri, 20/3/09, Kiran K Karthikeyan kiran.karthike...@gmail.com wrote: From: Kiran K Karthikeyan kiran.karthike...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [silk] Prime Ministerial candidate To: silklist@lists.hserus.net Date: Friday, 20 March, 2009, 1:29 PM Karat commented yesterday that this is due to the BJP yearning for a presidential form of government, and always trying to fit our present Westminster style parliamentary democracy with PM and cabinet responsible to the house and determined by a majority in the house to a quasi presidential system. Wouldn't a presidential system actually be better than the coalition goverments we've been getting? I.e. they can get things done? No. It's been debated to death elsewhere, we are highly unlikely to add fresh ideas to that stale mix. Think of Chaudhry Charan Singh remaining head of government for a fixed tenure. Think of Deve Gowda. Please, let's not even go there. Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Go to http://messenger.yahoo.com/invite/
Re: [silk] Prime Ministerial candidate
--- On Fri, 20/3/09, Kiran K Karthikeyan kiran.karthike...@gmail.com wrote: From: Kiran K Karthikeyan kiran.karthike...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [silk] Prime Ministerial candidate To: silklist@lists.hserus.net Date: Friday, 20 March, 2009, 1:36 PM http://indian-election2009.blogspot.com/2009/03/cost-of-indian-election-2009.html . Found this in the comments of the link above which I just sent - As our goal to promote astrology, we invite the political election candidates to get their horoscopes analyzed by DecisionCare and be provided to the voters. DecisionCare will provide this horoscope analysis free as long as the birth details (date, time and birth place) come from the candidates directly. This is to avoid confusion about the accuracy of available birth data. We urge all voter readers to pass this information to political candidates participating in Indian elections. Http://www.decisioncare.org Speechless! Kiran Promises, promises Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Go to http://messenger.yahoo.com/invite/
Re: [silk] Prime Ministerial candidate
Not to say that current reality is in any way excusable, but I shudder to think of the implications of a unilateral power centre in this democracy. Tangentially, Perry Anderson has been writing polished analyses of the decay of parliamentary democracy in Italy in the London Review of Books: he has this piece, http://www.lrb.co.uk/v31/n04/ande01_.html on the new order of the '90s being subverted by the problems of the old order, and this one, http://www.lrb.co.uk/v31/n05/ande01_.html on the death of the Italian Left [NB, I haven't read the second one in entirety yet]. I only wish there were some way to predict what sort of government would be better for a FIFA World Cup victory. On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 1:36 PM, Kiran K Karthikeyan kiran.karthike...@gmail.com wrote: http://indian-election2009.blogspot.com/2009/03/cost-of-indian-election-2009.html . Found this in the comments of the link above which I just sent - As our goal to promote astrology, we invite the political election candidates to get their horoscopes analyzed by DecisionCare and be provided to the voters. DecisionCare will provide this horoscope analysis free as long as the birth details (date, time and birth place) come from the candidates directly. This is to avoid confusion about the accuracy of available birth data. We urge all voter readers to pass this information to political candidates participating in Indian elections. Http://www.decisioncare.org Speechless! Kiran -- roswitha.tumblr.com
Re: [silk] Prime Ministerial candidate
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 12:59 AM, Kiran K Karthikeyan kiran.karthike...@gmail.com wrote: Instead of trying to prevent a Vote of no confidence/withdrawal of support, they can concentrate on legislation and also reduces chances of re-election. ITYM *execution*. The House and Senate in the USian system take care of the legislation. Thaths -- You'll have to speak up, I'm wearing a towel. -- Homer J. Simpson
Re: [silk] Prime Ministerial candidate
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 1:28 AM, Bonobashi bonoba...@yahoo.co.in wrote: Think of Chaudhry Charan Singh remaining head of government for a fixed tenure. Think of Deve Gowda. Please, let's not even go there. With a Presidential system Charan Singh would never have happened. And there is always the impeachment option for the likes of Deve Gowda. Thaths -- You'll have to speak up, I'm wearing a towel. -- Homer J. Simpson
Re: [silk] Prime Ministerial candidate
ITYM *execution*. The House and Senate in the USian system take care of the legislation. Yes. And it is the legislative bodies which are pre-occupied with retaining the majority in the gov't. Perhaps I wasn't clear, but the presidential system seems more stable. With our current system any small regional party can bring the governement down and maybe even force re-election which effectively means an entire year or more wasted, not to mention the costs. Its either that, or if you do provide support, then you're locked in for the term. If this has been discussed elsewhere, please do forward the links if possible. I would like to know the arguments against a Presidential system (with or without an electoral college). Kiran
Re: [silk] Prime Ministerial candidate
Tangentially, Perry Anderson has been writing polished analyses of the decay of parliamentary democracy in Italy in the London Review of Books: he has this piece, http://www.lrb.co.uk/v31/n04/ande01_.html on the new order of the '90s being subverted by the problems of the old order, Parts of it sound almost like an alternate ending to Citizen Kane...media tycoon getting into gov't. Kiran
Re: [silk] Prime Ministerial candidate
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 7:47 AM, Kiran K Karthikeyan kiran.karthike...@gmail.com wrote: ITYM *execution*. The House and Senate in the USian system take care of the legislation. Yes. And it is the legislative bodies which are pre-occupied with retaining the majority in the gov't. Perhaps I wasn't clear, but the presidential system seems more stable. With our current system any small regional party can bring the governement down and maybe even force re-election which effectively means an entire year or more wasted, not to mention the costs. Aren't the Real Executive in the Westminister system - the bureaucracies in Whitehall and South Block - protected from the coming and goings of MPs to a certain extent? You do have a point about costs of elections. If this has been discussed elsewhere, please do forward the links if possible. I would like to know the arguments against a Presidential system (with or without an electoral college). Africa is full of faltering democracies (de facto dictatorships) that chose the Presidential system. I suspect the Presidential system in a newly democratic country lends itself handy to strongmen (and they have all been men). Thaths -- You'll have to speak up, I'm wearing a towel. -- Homer J. Simpson
Re: [silk] Prime Ministerial candidate
I don;t know about this debate. I don't think it is even real. India cannot have a Presidential system because I don't think this nation is capable of a consensus candidate. The interests of the constituent states has to be represented at the centre because the power sharing arrangement in the Constitution as it stands is heavily biased in favor of the centre. Greater power was not granted to the states at the time of independence because there was a genuine fear of fragmentation. In today's scenario, I think the lack of consensus over any one candidate, and in fact the impossibility of it, is betrayed by the constancy of coalition politics. Hence, I think having a President is an impossibility. Yes, the BJP may be trying to project a single leader, but so is everyone else. If Sonia were willing to be PM there would be no doubt about the Cong's candidate. And even if a proxy is elected, there is no doubt about who is in charge. The left does not name a PM candidate because they are not capable of producing a PM - they've never even attempted it. The only way they can is through horse-trading in Parliament. As for efficiency, what ever the system, it'll still be the same people manning that system. It can be distorted by preying on the same moral deficiencies. On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 9:21 PM, Thaths tha...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 7:47 AM, Kiran K Karthikeyan kiran.karthike...@gmail.com wrote: ITYM *execution*. The House and Senate in the USian system take care of the legislation. Yes. And it is the legislative bodies which are pre-occupied with retaining the majority in the gov't. Perhaps I wasn't clear, but the presidential system seems more stable. With our current system any small regional party can bring the governement down and maybe even force re-election which effectively means an entire year or more wasted, not to mention the costs. Aren't the Real Executive in the Westminister system - the bureaucracies in Whitehall and South Block - protected from the coming and goings of MPs to a certain extent? You do have a point about costs of elections. If this has been discussed elsewhere, please do forward the links if possible. I would like to know the arguments against a Presidential system (with or without an electoral college). Africa is full of faltering democracies (de facto dictatorships) that chose the Presidential system. I suspect the Presidential system in a newly democratic country lends itself handy to strongmen (and they have all been men). Thaths -- You'll have to speak up, I'm wearing a towel. -- Homer J. Simpson
Re: [silk] Prime Ministerial candidate
2009/3/21 Nikhil Mehra nikhil.mehra...@gmail.com I don;t know about this debate. I don't think it is even real. India cannot have a Presidential system because I don't think this nation is capable of a consensus candidate. The interests of the constituent states has to be represented at the centre because the power sharing arrangement in the Constitution as it stands is heavily biased in favor of the centre. Greater power was not granted to the states at the time of independence because there was a genuine fear of fragmentation. I agree that states have more power in the US, but not sure how that has a bearing on the presidential system. While a consensus candidate might be difficult, I think even the US constitution foresaw this possibility and instituted the electoral college. However, in most elections so far, the electoral college members of a state have voted for the candidate that won in that state. What the presidential system (or something similar) does in my opinion, is put a national campaign for presidential candidates beyond the scope of most regional parties. This would over time lead to a consolidation into a few major national parties, and therefore to more stable governments. Laws are still passed by the house where states have representation so I don't see how their representation decreases under this system. Another advantage is the possibility for an independent candidate to run for elections and hold the highest office if he/she can mobilise the funds for the campaign. As we stand today, the comparitively more educated (and richer) section of the Indian population hardly votes or rather can't make a real dent in the elections and instead get things done through bribes. However, a few thousand crores could be mobilised from this demographic by the right candidate. Under the current system, an independent candidate cannot possibly aspire to be PM. And this possibility would make most parties clean up their act. Ross Perot ran for the US presidential office in '92 and he gave the established parties quite a scare. Thoughts? Kiran
Re: [silk] Prime Ministerial candidate
--- On Fri, 20/3/09, lukhman_khan lukhman_k...@yahoo.com wrote: From: lukhman_khan lukhman_k...@yahoo.com Subject: [silk] Prime Ministerial candidate To: silklist@lists.hserus.net Date: Friday, 20 March, 2009, 8:49 AM In these days of fighting elections fully prepared with a PM candidate and usage of terms like PM in waiting sounds so silly. (not just one party) Like eating the cake before baking it. Its almost like making the voters beleive that, that particular party has somehow already won the election or at least a win is guaranteed. It also implies that the results will be so predictable that this party will surely be in the majority. What they are actually saying is .. Each of us voters is a sucker with our thumbs firmly in our mouth? Anyone else feels something different. Lukhman Karat commented yesterday that this is due to the BJP yearning for a presidential form of government, and always trying to fit our present Westminster style parliamentary democracy with PM and cabinet responsible to the house and determined by a majority in the house to a quasi presidential system. Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Go to http://messenger.yahoo.com/invite/
