National Agenda for India, 2010-2050

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 02 Dec 2009 10:23

RayC wrote:RAISING OUR AMBITION
- To build a brand, India must be best in making some things
writing on the wall
Telegraph

Funny Ramana posted the above in Psy-ops thread on how the above was essentially a psy-ops piece.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 02 Dec 2009 10:31

Everything that exhorts a Nation or people into action scould be termed Psy Ops.

At the same time, important is the lessons that the article brings to notice.

I think either I read an article or heard on TV and interesting thing said by the Vice Chief of Air Staff. He said we gloat that HAL is making the doors for Boeings, when the Chinese are making the complete aircraft.

Time we start taking ourselves seriously and use our abounding talent to go places rather that be satisfied with the crumbs!

Let us not wallow in our past which were golden and then came much injustices but what of it? We survived. Let us look to the future within the confines of the contemporary realities because that is the environment in which we have to work our way to present and future glories. We can't change the contemporary environment recalling our glorious past and the injustices thereafter.

We have it in us and we must exploit the abounding talent.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 02 Dec 2009 10:42

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjO4duh

Sanjay M from Indian UK thread

Aggressive atheism

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 02 Dec 2009 17:45

I do hope people have heard the Youtube I posted above which was posted by Sanjay M.

That will indicate how religion derails intent!

Progress has to have scientific temper and not religious discourse slipped in to derail each thread with high ideals!

The issue is National Agenda!

Even the great Holy Roman Empire collapsed since it was religion oriented!

The focus has to be on the National Agenda and not only peripheral issues and agendas.

There is a different thread on Indic values.

In case we continue with religion in a direct or indirect way, we will have to close the discussion.

It is time to remain focussed!

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 02 Dec 2009 17:57

Manish,

Is your post contributing to the National Agenda which is the topic?

You could have X posted and started a thread, which could have been interesting!

Please all, let us stick to the topic!

Japanese Zen master Sesso warned, “There is little to choose between a man lying in the ditch heavily drunk on rice liquor, and a man heavily drunk on his own ‘enlightenment’!”

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 02 Dec 2009 18:07

RayC wrote:Manish,

Is your post contributing to the National Agenda which is the topic?

You could have X posted and started a thread, which could have been interesting!

Please all, let us stick to the topic!

No Ray just saw my favourite zen story and could not resist posting the link, if somebody was interested in reading more of them.

I feel it contributes by showing the difference between homegrown spirituality which is very much scientific as opposed to belief oriented ones coming from outside.

Still delete if you want, I'll post it in Indic thread.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 02 Dec 2009 18:15

Let it remain here also.

Post it on the Indic too!

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 02 Dec 2009 18:17

Thanks

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 02 Dec 2009 19:38

This has been my dream subject and I have developed few thoughts in few key-areas. In no way my thoughts are complete, but I believe implementation of majority of these ideas would propel India into its rightful place in the world-stage. Such a progression will automatically resurge Bharatiya Civilization.

I will post my thoughts on each subject and would like to see your feedback and comments, both negative and positive. At the end of the discussion I hope to develop a road map that contains the plans, risks – probability & impact, mitigation plans, etc details.

And we can compare those plans with GOI’s initiatives and see how the reality compares with our roadmap.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 02 Dec 2009 19:40

Gentlemen,

Great thoughts.

Lets go back to National Agenda.

Link it!

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 02 Dec 2009 19:48

Foreign Policy

The focus of Foreign Policy should be to enhance Indian National Interests by positively influencing and contributing to key multilateral bodies such as UNSC, WB, IMF, G-15 etc. The Foreign Policy must focus on enhancing Indian technology, business and defense industries in each nation on the globe, while exporting Indian values (as the custodian of Human knowledge) of Vasudhaika Kutumbam, Reverence to Nature and local traditions, and celebration of life in all its forms.

The strategy is to develop two concentric circles around India.

A – Firmly establish Indian civilizational influence in the Indian Sub-continent. This requires a well-concerted economic, military, environmental, and humanitarian program.

My definition of Indian-subcontinent: India, Sindh, Balochistan, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Nepal, Bhutan, Burma, Malaysia, Maldives, and Mauritius.

Budget - $2B per year

Focus Areas:
1. Education & Health
2. Infrastructure – Interlinking of Roads, River Systems, trade routes.
3. Economic Security – Energy Security, Economic Policy & Planning
4. Military – Permanent bases in return for H/W aid (LCA, Arjun, TBMD etc)

B – Enhance Indian sphere of Influence beyond Indian Sub-continent. Establish four focus areas – African Union (~40 nations), ASEAN (~10 nations), CAR (~10 nations), and South America (~ 10 nations)

In each of the focus area

1. Establish 1 IIT (~4000 seats), 1 IIM (~1000 seats), and 1 IIMS (~4000 seats) funded by GOI. Seats are distributed among all nations of that group prorated by national population. Location of the institution will be given to the nation which establishes a strategic relationship with India, and this may include setting up Indian military/communication base. Total Cost: $2B capital costs + $250M operational cost per year.

2. Establish 10 (grades 1-12) charity-schools (10,000 students per school) and 10 (primary & secondary care) charity-hospitals (1000 beds per hospital) in each region. Establish student sharing programs with these regions. Total Cost: $1B capital costs + $250M operational cost per year.

Total Budget: ~$4B first year and $2.5B thereafter.

Notes:
1. It doesn't matter if IIT/IIM/IIMS are good/bad or represent Indian values. All that matters is the presense of primary Indian Institutions that build next-generation of economic, industrial leaders.

2. The costs might appear a little high given Indian budget. But it is ~2-3% of Indian budget and develops long-term Indian interests. IMO, Indian efforts in this direction are already costs more than $1B per year. By bringing all those efforts into one nodal office helps.

3. Many nations in Indian-subcontinent are wary of Indian capabilities and influence. Start with the nations that are friendly and need most help.

Ananya · Post by **Ananya** » 02 Dec 2009 19:59

for this to happen the fundamental change that needs to come is from the change in political setup. West minister from Democracy would not do.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 03 Dec 2009 22:40

X-posted...

Chiron wrote:
Prem wrote:Af-Pak needs Punjabi domination but of the right kind. Now i understand why Ba...d British made sure to finish the blood line of Maharaja Ranjit Singh .
I have slightly different take on this.. Although I agree with the basic template that Punjab should be the base from where NWFP and Gaandhaar should be controlled. Taxila (Islamabad) is ideal place to project the wresting control over NWFP and central Asia. Attock and Taxila are truly the "Gateways of India". The boundary of Bhaarat should at least be till this door.

However, Punjab in turn must be under tight control of Heartland central powers. It is ironic to note that, except Harshavardhan of Thanesar, there was no Punjabi king in history of Bhaarat who wrested control over gangetic plains. Even MRS did not come for Gangetic plains (just because he was preoccupied with NWFP and it is impossible to control everything in one generation). The biggest misfortune of Sikhs was that they could not encash the ideology (of Panth) to propagate a new and sustainable race of leaders who will continue the good work of MRS. Thus, MRS comes as a pleasant exception instead of an evident rule. There should have been 3-4 more rulers like MRS in succession. This also shows one more thing. When Indian heartland and peninsula is consolidated under one power and that power is hell-bent on conquest of Punjab and NWFP, there is nothing Punjab (Or for that matter any other province) can do to stop it. During Harsha's time, the gangetic plains were dispersed; whereas during MRS's time, it was almost totally consolidated (after 1818, British were de-facto the rulers of India). Republic of India should do with Pakistan what British-Indian Empire did with Sikh Empire after death of MRS.

I believe that if Madhavrao-1 Peshwa had lived for 20-30 years more, there would have been a stable Sikh lineage in Punjab (Marathas would never have ventured again in Punjab; once was enough) and there would have been no British OR French. The early death of this excellent prince was the biggest misfortune of Bhaarat. India was moving towards a stable 2 OR 3 Indic state structure. There would have been 2-3 stable Indic nations within Bhaarat, instead of today's scenario of 7 out of which 2 are rabidly non-Indic and anti-Indic and other 4 are not completely within the writ of central power.

Whenever Punjab in its entirety is controlled by gangetic plains, there are never any problems from NWFP. When Punjab is completely independent but totally amicable and allied with central Indian power, there are no problems from NWFP. however a partitioned Punjab ruled by asswholes who are bickering with central Indian power for no reason, is sure invitation for a bamboo from NWFP and central asia to do Amritraj.The Gangetic plains are the real "Strategic depth" of Punjab. As long as this strategic depth is secured and sympathetic, NWFP and Central Asia is not a problem but an opportunity to earn tremendous profits. Which is what traders of Shikarpur did (for instance).

By nature, Punjabis are more of merchants, than administrators of a stable kingdom.. The ability to do business comes naturally to Punjabis owing to their natural access to Central Asian trading routes. Even untill last year, most of the money lenders in Swat valley were Hindu-Sikh Punjabis before they were driven out by Taliban. This was the case before partition as well. Due to their efficiency in business, there requires a stronger forces from heartland which ensures stability and tranquillity.

My view as of now is:

MMS grand strategy is to have the US control TSP's Punjab and leverage Indian economy as an incentive for US to do so. That is the AF-Pak connection to Indian rise. You have to fight with what you got.

BTW, good segue to Shikarpur traders. A lot of books are coming out on this aspect now. Eg Scott Levi's book on Central Asia and Indian traders.

Jarita · Post by **Jarita** » 03 Dec 2009 22:55

Sorry Ramana - Have not heard anything abt Shikarpur traders. That generation is dying out

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 03 Dec 2009 22:56

But their thought pattern exists in the business classes from Punjab. And we do have one of them here.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 03 Dec 2009 23:04

The "core" idea is Pakjabis must be either captured or destroyed . There is no other way . Balochi,Pakhtoons can go their own way and Sindhi can decide their own future. For lasting peace and prosperity, prune half Pakjab and scatter the rest . lets hope Uncle stays little long till India achieve the capability to replace Sammy.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 04 Dec 2009 09:19

ramana wrote:But their thought pattern exists in the business classes from Punjab. And we do have one of them here.

There are lessons to be learnt, chiefly among them that in the exclusive pursuit of profit, we lost a home land. There is a larger lesson for the entire Dharmic community, that if we do not invest in organized force, soon enough, the lack of this investment will come to bite you, as it did for the Shikarpuris. It is only when all four varnas are fully invested in their societies, shall the society flourish. MMS should fully exploit the situation Af-Pak finds itself under. But, if he does not invest wisely, or invests narrowly, then our future generations will pay heavily.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 04 Dec 2009 09:35

I have not really participated in this thread, or even read, till ramanna, moved some of my posts here. So, let me start with a question on this wide ranging topic. In the Indian context, who is sovereign?

Atri · Post by **Atri** » 04 Dec 2009 11:17

Brihaspati ji,

The soft approach necessarily demands that Indus valley in general and Punjab (up to Taxila) in particular be in complete control of central Indian power.

Since the days of Maurya, the trans-Indus lands (gandhar, Arratta, Kapisa Kamboj etc) have been the Aha-Gana-Sthaan (land of allied tribes). They were allies to whom? They were allies of rulers of Gangetic plains. The administrators and the keepers of the Sindhu were the political appointees of central Indian power. Whenever the frontier was endangered by wave of central asian invaders, the central Indian power threw their entire weight behind Punjab and protect Indus and system of 5 rivers as 5 walls protecting India, in case Indian defenders are overwhelmed. The classic example of this is Samrat Skandagupta.

Now, given this scenario, soft approach is the best approach to eliminate Jihadi Islamism from land of allied tribes. Remember that, after Islamization of Iran, Islam did not conquer Ahaganasthaan. It went on to conquer Central Asia. After that, the central asian muslims overwhelmed and Islamized the land of allied tribes. Ahaganasthaan resisted for 250 years, before Sabuktijin conquered Gazni from Raja Shiladitya. This was the power of India's soft power. And this power was result of goodwill of traders from Indus valley which was under firm control of Gupta and later Harsha. After harsha's defeat by Chalukya king Pulikeshi on banks of Narmada, his stronghold over Punjab decreased as well. The Punjab was then ruled by small Indic kings, which were bickering amongst themselves, but were subservient and/or amicable with Gurajara-Pratihara kings of central India. Central Indian plains continued to be the largest consumer market for the good flowing from GT-road and Silk route.

Soft power was one of the most important factors which enabled afghanistan to resist islamization for 250 years. India will have to invest considerable amount of soft power for quite long to win the land and the tribes back. A strong, invincible yet benovalent India (starting from taxila) should be the image in the minds of Pashtoon tribes which will coax them to return to Dharma via trade. The basic dharma of Pathans too is trade. The "mercantile character" exists there as well.

Furthermore, nothing is permanent. Even if we manage to consolidate Indian subcontinent politically under one rule, even that will be disintegrated within 200-250 years. What needs to be done in those years is tremendous investment of Indic soft-power in land of allied tribes (Afg and Myanmar-SE Asia). And for soft power, free market and trade have no substitute.

It was traders who inculcated Dharma in SE Asia, not political conquests. Traders take with them culture, movies, arts, gods and goddesses, mythology, temples, customs. Its not just about money. The Indian Vaishya class is known to patronize lots of Saadhus, Sanyasis, Bhante, Jogis and similar other people. This is how Buddhism was spread in CAR and China; by monks patronized by Indic traders because it was king's policy to patronize too. So, patronizing the monks also means earning good-will of the incumbent king. Same goes with dancers, singers. If Birla opens a grand birla temple in kabul which encourages learning of Indian classical music and dance (for example), the local afghan kids will learn about Saraswati, Shiva, Parvati while learning malkauns, Kedar..

This is how the soft-power is spread and mediated by trading interests. In long term, it does affects the foreign policy in subtle manner. The traditional "Vaishya" class of India is not just cold-hearted money making machine. This tendency is still seen in modern business houses like Tata, Birla, Ambanis and others. They are known to patronize and propagate culture and hence soft power. The power wielded by such barons is very attractive to many who are alien to Indian culture.

ShauryaT wrote:I have not really participated in this thread, or even read, till ramanna, moved some of my posts here. So, let me start with a question on this wide ranging topic. In the Indian context, who is sovereign?

I guess, in today's India, regional Satraps are the only sovereign entities. They always have been sovereign since medieval ages. narrow minded and parochial yes... high mercantile character, yes.. but also sovereign..

dipak · Post by **dipak** » 05 Dec 2009 03:06

RamaY wrote: My definition of Indian-subcontinent: India, Sindh, Balochistan, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Nepal, Bhutan, Burma, Malaysia, Maldives, and Mauritius.

RamaY ji, just wondering - Sri Lanka is not in your calculation, or it was just an inadvertent omission!
Also, we have close cultural and historical ties with Tibet.
Thanks!

ShyamSP · Post by **ShyamSP** » 05 Dec 2009 07:16

-xpost- as it seems to be relevant for this thread

Reading comments from Acorn link led me to the following. Interesting discussion.

"2009: Platform Sessions (Rethinking Secularism)"
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p ... 7A276689BB

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 06 Dec 2009 06:04

States reorganization is an old issue, and we do not appear to have gotten over the tendency to "divide" and acknowledge distinct "identity" based entitlements.

Should a national policy evolve about states reorganizations for the future? Should we not drop linguistic or ethnic criteria to identify "states"? Sooner or later it will lead to "religious" or "faith" based claims for statehood. How about considering economic integration and complementarity as criteria? Should we think of natural irrigation networks, or pre-existing economic networks, or potential for an integrated and self-sustaining region as the basis for "statehood"?

Atri · Post by **Atri** » 06 Dec 2009 09:58

brihaspati wrote:States reorganization is an old issue, and we do not appear to have gotten over the tendency to "divide" and acknowledge distinct "identity" based entitlements.

Should a national policy evolve about states reorganizations for the future? Should we not drop linguistic or ethnic criteria to identify "states"? Sooner or later it will lead to "religious" or "faith" based claims for statehood. How about considering economic integration and complementarity as criteria? Should we think of natural irrigation networks, or pre-existing economic networks, or potential for an integrated and self-sustaining region as the basis for "statehood"?

Brihaspati ji,

Linguistic and ethnic diversity is fact of India. In fact, this diversity has saved the day for India, and will continue to exist, until the day is completely saved. Until the cultural coherence of Indic civilization and the behavioural aspects of Indics vis-a-vis abrahamics is completely normalized and standardized, the linguistic basis of states reorganization should not be changed, especially with those states which are to the south of Chambal valley and Vindhya. religious OR faith based claims will come from only one socio-religious group, and we know who they are. That remand will come not from diverse deccan to the south of chambal.. that demand will come from linguistically homogenized Gangetic plains. So destroying the linguistically reorganized states (as of now) to avoid future religious claims is barking under the wrong tree.

The religion based claim as already started in a meek voice (harit pradesh/braj bhumi). Uttaranchal, Harit pradesh/Braj bhumi, Awadh, Bundelkhand, Purvanchal, Bihar, WB; this is the proposed reorganization of Gangetic plains.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Up-subregions2.svg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harit_Pradesh

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 06 Dec 2009 21:37

dipak wrote:
RamaY wrote: My definition of Indian-subcontinent: India, Sindh, Balochistan, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Nepal, Bhutan, Burma, Malaysia, Maldives, and Mauritius.
RamaY ji, just wondering - Sri Lanka is not in your calculation, or it was just an inadvertent omission!
Also, we have close cultural and historical ties with Tibet.
Thanks!

I were to include them. Somehow I missed them. Thanks for the catch.

JwalaMukhi · Post by **JwalaMukhi** » 06 Dec 2009 22:10

Chiron wrote: Linguistic and ethnic diversity is fact of India. In fact, this diversity has saved the day for India, and will continue to exist, until the day is completely saved. Until the cultural coherence of Indic civilization and the behavioural aspects of Indics vis-a-vis abrahamics is completely normalized and standardized, the linguistic basis of states reorganization should not be changed, especially with those states which are to the south of Chambal valley and Vindhya. religious OR faith based claims will come from only one socio-religious group, and we know who they are. That remand will come not from diverse deccan to the south of chambal.. that demand will come from linguistically homogenized Gangetic plains. So destroying the linguistically reorganized states (as of now) to avoid future religious claims is barking under the wrong tree.

The religion based claim as already started in a meek voice (harit pradesh/braj bhumi). Uttaranchal, Harit pradesh/Braj bhumi, Awadh, Bundelkhand, Purvanchal, Bihar, WB; this is the proposed reorganization of Gangetic plains.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Up-subregions2.svg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harit_Pradesh

Good post. The diversities that originated within the natural course of events inside the subcontinent are what has saved India by providing innoculation and immunity from succumbing to inimical forces completely. However, in other alternative models there is pre-eminence of thoughts that are ever ready and willing to compromise and short change genuine national interests. This arises primarily because compromisers are interested in phyric victories, by converting what are should be handled at local levels to national level. Hence, the energy of the national forces are spent and squandered in dealing with trivial local issues. The spirit needs to be generated, so local issues are dealt at local level and not escalated to national level. Once local level issues acquire national level importance, then there can only be very few national issues that the support of entire population can be garnered for the project. The political and other human interest capital should be sparingly used where national level issues are concerned. The homogenization projects generally tend to make mountain out of mole hills.
For example, Mumbai, Bengaluru, Chennai are Kalighatta are local projects. So should be many similar others in the making such as Indraprastha, Prayag etc. Any compromise on nautral diversities in the Indian subcontinent is a wrong way to approach homogenization. But homogenization should be to focus for dealing with artificial diversities (not moored in Indian subcontinent but primarily from outside).

Atri · Post by **Atri** » 06 Dec 2009 22:53

JwalaMukhi wrote:
Chiron wrote: Linguistic and ethnic diversity is fact of India. In fact, this diversity has saved the day for India, and will continue to exist, until the day is completely saved. Until the cultural coherence of Indic civilization and the behavioural aspects of Indics vis-a-vis abrahamics is completely normalized and standardized, the linguistic basis of states reorganization should not be changed, especially with those states which are to the south of Chambal valley and Vindhya. religious OR faith based claims will come from only one socio-religious group, and we know who they are. That remand will come not from diverse deccan to the south of chambal.. that demand will come from linguistically homogenized Gangetic plains. So destroying the linguistically reorganized states (as of now) to avoid future religious claims is barking under the wrong tree.

The religion based claim as already started in a meek voice (harit pradesh/braj bhumi). Uttaranchal, Harit pradesh/Braj bhumi, Awadh, Bundelkhand, Purvanchal, Bihar, WB; this is the proposed reorganization of Gangetic plains.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Up-subregions2.svg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harit_Pradesh
Good post. The diversities that originated within the natural course of events inside the subcontinent are what has saved India by providing innoculation and immunity from succumbing to inimical forces completely. However, in other alternative models there is pre-eminence of thoughts that are ever ready and willing to compromise and short change genuine national interests. This arises primarily because compromisers are interested in phyric victories, by converting what are should be handled at local levels to national level. Hence, the energy of the national forces are spent and squandered in dealing with trivial local issues. The spirit needs to be generated, so local issues are dealt at local level and not escalated to national level. Once local level issues acquire national level importance, then there can only be very few national issues that the support of entire population can be garnered for the project. The political and other human interest capital should be sparingly used where national level issues are concerned. The homogenization projects generally tend to make mountain out of mole hills.
For example, Mumbai, Bengaluru, Chennai are Kalighatta are local projects. So should be many similar others in the making such as Indraprastha, Prayag etc. Any compromise on nautral diversities in the Indian subcontinent is a wrong way to approach homogenization. But homogenization should be to focus for dealing with artificial diversities (not moored in Indian subcontinent but primarily from outside).

Jwalamukhi ji,

homogenization (in some form) is requisite of time.. ultra-linguistic feelings are centrifugal in nature.. looking at direction of subcontinent, it is surely heading towards turmoil. hence talking in terms of time line until 2040, i think the linguistic organization of states should not be disturbed. The proposal which brihaspati ji is asking for is in principle the necessity for delaying the rise of centrifugal forces and solidify the integrity.This proposal was put forth by Nehru and Savarkar (only occasion when both were in agreement) in 1950.

but, given the status of India then, it was wise to give the necessary space to every linguistic group. India is basically a confederation, than a union, and as long as the necessary space is given to everybody to preserve and pursue their linguistic identities, the centrifugal forces loose their steam and the integrity of Rashtra is unchallenged. I won't mind reorganizing the states, disrupting the existing equilibrium, shake the system and allow it to settle and evolve into new combinations and patterns, but only after the problem of Pakistan is fundamentally solved and entire subcontinent is politically united under one stable rule with Indic civilization's assimilation of Abrahamic memes.

the reorganization which will happen thereafter will be creative and enrich the diversity of Bhaarat. the mess India is heading towards, give me creeps at the idea of political reorganization of existing equilibrium.. hence I put forth the idea of popularising the usage of common script by public awareness. Government will not even think of altering the current system, today.. that requires leaders which are of different class and generation; perhaps those born in 80's and 90's..

GOI is doing its best by trying to introduce Hindi as a stabilizing and homogenizing factor and it is slowly working.. since Hindi(hindusthani/khadi boli/popular Hindi today) is nobody's mother-tongue, nor it has any medieval classics composed in it, it is best suitable to contribute towards bringing in necessary homogenization, as much as is allowed by current environment. because everybody is free to phuck up with this language, bend it, break it, put in new words from any other language without hurting any one (what goes of anybody's father), it is slowly getting popular..

Standardizing the common script will be the option I will propose to prepare the ground for reorganization of states. But I am only concerned with timing... Until Pakistan and the mentality which gave birth to it is eradicated, the reorganization of states to the south of Chambal river should be avoided.. The reformation and the reconquista will come from this region, better not to be upsetting the forces which are building up southwards beyond Vindhya....

The single biggest factor which can effectively link people and bring about a great deal of homogenization and bolster the Sanskritik unity is the River-Linking project. The leader who actually accomplishes that will be the Bhagirath of modern age. Sadly, it is not possible without bringing in the Indus, Brahmaputra and Ganga completely under India's dominion. Until these three river systems are not controlled by India (from source to mouth, every cubic millilitre of water flowing through these systems) the river-linkage project is pointless and the biggest card which can shake up the established cultural settings to a new system cannot be played effectively to yield creative results...

The 2010-2050 primary agenda I propose is striving to bring these three river systems completely under the control of India, and linking these rivers with those to the south of Vindhya mountains.. That does not mean that we should wait until political conquest is complete. The non-himalayan rivers should be linked first, and the work should start now. This itself will regularize many heterogeneous and centrifugal anomalies of the otherwise smooth Rashtra-fabric.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 08 Dec 2009 02:46

River water and distribution remains a solid area of subnational mobilization on the subcontinent. From the Indian side, planning has to be based on the entire catchment and natural distribution systems. It is difficult and inefficient to plan for this respecting each and every demand of BD, or TSP. Until a formal incorporation of these regions takes place with political integration, quite tough economic and and other concession extracting processes will go on in these countries.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 11 Dec 2009 01:01

If economic factors are behind any "climate change response agenda", then the advantages are great for both ruling elites of developed as well as developing nations.

A formal summit like that in Copenhagen about the climate change response, is not entered into to formulate a new "proposal". Typically all such summits have several versions of draft proposals. Also formal negotiations are more for the benefit of the media and political posturings in terms of image for the elctorate (if a democracy). Even from a practical viewpoint, to really make the "summit" useful, it is more efficient to have preliminary levels of intensive interaction and formulation of a common draft by representatives of "developing" and "developed" countries - before the actual summit.

In terms of economic cutbacks in the consumption of energy, "the climate doomsday" is an effective tool in the hands of the elite of both the developed as well as developing countries, to be excused from delivering greater consumption for their respective societies - especially the non-elite portions of both societies. It is a safe route to maintain consumption differentials or not being able to increase non-elite energy consumption.

There are three things here which are relevant for us to consider as part of the national agenda:

(a) Does India really need to copy everything that needs high energy consumption, as a supposedly better life style? This debate may appear innocent but has deep political ramifications, including that of the hot-potato arguments by certain sections of "leftists" or "tribal revivalists" - who lambast current criteria of development as being "elite driven" and out of tune with the land and its people.

Can India develop an alternative which is distinct from both the western model and criteria of growth and "development" as well as the "status quo" "revivalism" forwarded by certain schools of thought?

(b) What role does population management play formally in our national agenda? Can we take the thorny and "sensitive" issue of potentially unsustainable levels of population?

(c) If India's "leadership" does finally adopt the "western" model of high energy consumption, can it actually go for sustainable high energy output based on an indigenous programme that looks at such production from the perspective of India's climate, natural resources and natural sources of energy? A programme which is independent of any model developed by the "developed" countries?

Is there a need to explicitly build in preventive measures to immunize Indian economy and R&D from getting hijacked by "already high consumption econmy"'s agenda - even under the garb of science?

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 13 Dec 2009 06:38

The more idiots differentiate 'Western' which is actually not so original from 'Modern' that compromises a lot of processes based in Indic, that we will continue to hold a reverence to anything with less melanin content.

First Western means forced conversions, enslavement, holy people calling for murder of slightly less holy people, homosexuals, witches. It means exploitation of animals, children, other races, women. It means despoiling the environment and raping an entire planet,

Modern means

This is jaw dropping sculpture in Copenhagen harbour.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 13 Dec 2009 12:25

harbans wrote:
Despite Ray Ji's stature and service i want to say that India and right minded Indians/ Indics MUST differentiate the appropriation that media and governmental elites in the West are appropriating as "western civilization'. Apologies, many of the most refined concepts in 'Western thought' originate from Indic sources.

Hrabans,

I am all for what is Indian and have no qualms on stating so.

Yet, the beauty of India is that we assimilate all.

What I find reprehensible is the Bush philosophy that is adopted by the Indic boys - You are with Us or Against Us.

What is good of everything should be embraced so that we come out stronger and better.

It is utter nonsense that Indic boys state that they are purest and to feel their ideology is without blemish and everything else is with blots and blemishes!

Judge Not Lest Ye Be Judged!
and
Let He Who is Without Sin Cast the First Stone

That is my advise to those who adopt the Holier than Thou approach.

And it is not you I am telling. It is for the Indic boys!

Telegana is burning and India is about to follow suit.

Where is all this Indic big talk when the Indics are burning themselves and destroying India?

If it were there as we hear on this forum, then why is this huge conflagration?

I have been stating all through cut out the big talk and get down to business and keep India one. I have given the example of the Army and invited the ridicule of the Indic boys. If we can do it, so can India.

Foolish big talk and pseudo intellectualism cannot!

Destroy your differences before your differences destroy us!

Atri · Post by **Atri** » 13 Dec 2009 21:15

brihaspati wrote:River water and distribution remains a solid area of subnational mobilization on the subcontinent. From the Indian side, planning has to be based on the entire catchment and natural distribution systems. It is difficult and inefficient to plan for this respecting each and every demand of BD, or TSP. Until a formal incorporation of these regions takes place with political integration, quite tough economic and and other concession extracting processes will go on in these countries.

Brihaspati ji,

Hence, reverting back to River-system based boundaries is existential requirement of both "Indic" and "India". Rivers (Sapta-Sindhu concept) has been the traditional identification of the "Home-Land" since ancient times. This concept has expanded from Punjab (Earlier Rgveda) to entire northern plains (Later Rgveda, 10th mandala, nadistuti sukta) to entire subcontinent in puranic times.

http://kalchiron.blogspot.com/2009/05/i ... indhu.html

Hindutva literally means Indian-ness. The core of very ideas of India and Indic is found in Vedas which is allegiance towards land of Sapta-Sindhu and culture and civilization of Sapta-Sindhu. The definition which Veer Savarkar gives for the word Hindu is

आसिंधु सिन्धु पर्यन्ता यस्य भारत भूमिका l पितृभू पुण्यभू च एव स वै हिन्दुरिती स्मृतः ll

- One who refers to the Indian subcontinent as Bhaarat and considers Bhaarat as his fatherland (or motherland) and most revered land (Punyabhoomi) is a Hindu/Indic.

This concept of revered land has its origin in the term of "Sapta-Sindhu" which is widely cited in Vedic and post-Vedic literature.

This concept and high reverence of Sapta-Sindhu is central concept of Vedic literature. The most interesting part of Bhaaratiya civilization is the process in which the domain of this Sapta-Sindhu region increased and expanded with time.

The original Sapta-Sindhu region in early hymns of Rigveda comprises of 5 rivers of Punjab, Saraswati(in Rajasthan) and Kubha (Kabul) river in NWFP. This land is glorified as Sapta-Sindhu. The dwellers of this land are Arya people who are pure, rich, righteous and civilized men on earth who are Kavis (poets) composing beautiful literature and performing grand Yagnas to please their mighty Devas.

In later Rigveda, in nadi-stuti sukta of 10th mandala, the Sapta-Sindhu region includes Ganga and Yamuna as well. Thus, now, this idea of Sapta-Sindhu, its culture and civilzation comprised of entire north Indian plains, from Bengal to NWFP.

In Puranic times post Rigveda, new Sapta-Sindhu concept became popular with time. This is seen in famous verse

गंगेच यमुनेचैव गोदावरी सरस्वती l नर्मदे सिन्धु कावेरी जलेस्मिन सन्निधिम कुरु ll

Now, Sapta-Sindhu includes the region of Ganga, Yamuna, Godavari, Saraswati, Narmada, Sindhu and Kaveri. Basically, entire Indian subcontinent. Interestingly, the rivers west of Sindhu were no longer considered as part of Sapta Sindhu region. This expansion has to be seen with its connection with shift from Indra to Trinity elaborated in Part-1 of this series.

Sapta-Sindhu is the term which gave birth to the word "Hindu". The Civilization of Sapta-Sindhu was referred to as Hapta-Hindu by Persians and other outsiders. The people of this region and culture, the Sapta-Saindhavas were referred to as hapta-Haindavas by Persians and other outsiders. All these terms are found in Zend Avesta of Zoroastrians.

In all its context, Sapta-Sindhu has been the homeland of Sapta-Saindhavas (Bhaaratiyas). This has been the Punya-Bhoomi (revered land) of them. This has been the Pitrubhoomi and Matrubhoomi for them.

Thus, the very concept and identity of India or Bhaarat originated from land of seven legendary rivers and expands with the same. The concept of Bhaarat was Punjab and adjacent areas during Vedic war of ten kings where Sudas is a king of Bhaarata and Sapta Sindhu. The concept of Bhaarat in Vishnupuran was same as pan-subcontinental identity of Sapta-Sindhu.

One more defining feature which was preserved all throughout the history of our civilization is the sense of supremacy of Arya over Anaarya people. The famous quotation of कृण्वन्तो विश्वं आर्यम (lets make the whole world "Arya" or civilized) denotes the same fact. Vedic memes did that, by extending the status of "civilized/Aarya" to all the residents of Indian subcontinent who accepted the Dharmic way of life. The land of "Arya/civilized" automatically became Sapta-Sindhu and hence Bhaarat. Howmuchever it is denied, this identity of civilized Arya people and barbaric Anaarya people still exists, with different names and in subtle forms in the subconscious psyches of Indian population.

Owing to this, sadly, Muslims and Christians are still considered as Anaarya and Mlenchha by certain section of orthodox Indic people. Same is true about certain section of Muslim population as well which propounded and propagated two-nation theory, which resulted in partition of India in 1947. This exclusivity perhaps worked in medieval times, for good or for evil, with Muslims and Christians of foreign origin. Indian Muslims and Indian Christians, especially in post independence era, are as much Indians as Indian Non-Abrahamics are. Hence, this strategy needs to be changed and updated.

The concept of Arya needs to be extended to IM and IC who understand, appreciate and follow the concept of Dharma and delineate and differentiate their personal faiths of attaining Moksha from pursuit of Dharma-Artha-Kaama in day-to-day life. This differentiation is of utmost importance in Indian context. Separation of Dharma and Moksha is the true definition of secularism in Indian context.

This origin and the true meaning of the terms "Dharma" and "Arya" and identities of "Sapta-Sindhu", "Bhaarat" should be explained thoroughly to every single resident of Indian subcontinent. This will generate an enormous selective pressure on Indianization and assimilation of Abrahamic memes into mainstream Indic society.

Just like followers of Abrahamic ideologies should Indianize themselves, the followers of Indic ideologies must increase their inclusiveness and expand their idea of Sapta-Sindhu once again. Christians and Muslims in India will be able to retain their Christianity and Islam as personal paths of achieving Moksha/Salvation without letting it interfere with their pursuits of Dharma-Artha-Kaama of daily life in society.

If this happens, who knows, perhaps Tigris, Euphrates and Jordan rivers will become part of Sapta-Sindhu 500 years from now.....

Time is preparing Indians for one major leap ahead.. The Sapta-Sindhu will now definitely encompass Brahmaputra river basin as well from her source..

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 13 Dec 2009 22:33

RayC wrote: Telegana is burning and India is about to follow suit.

Where is all this Indic big talk when the Indics are burning themselves and destroying India?

Dont understand your point here.

Do you think it is Indic leadership that triggered current Telangana developments? What is the relationship between these two? How did you come to the conclusion that it is Indics that are burning themselves and destroying India?

Or are you asking for an Indic solution to Telangana issue?

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 15 Dec 2009 09:03

brihaspati wrote:RayC,
if you do not respond to arguments pointwise - and choose to go onshouting out adjectives, there is no point in responding to each others comments.

For once get a hold on yourself and stop pretending that you are the only courageous/upfront person around. You also hide behind the burqa as you put it. You never responded to my observation that compared to the volumes of "knickerbockerwallah/Indic boys/airconditioned chaterati......" that you apply to the "Indic/Hindu", you never apply similar streams of adjectives to Islamists or Ej'ists - and in such profuse perspiration. Your persistent attack on only the Indic/Hindu (as you define them) only shows that you also try to hide your bias behind a pretense of being unbiased. You are not.

I am at least honest in openly stating my philosphical basis and understanding. You do not even have the honesty or courage to spell your ideology out. Or it is possible that you never had any. But that seems doubtful - given your selective fondness for attacks on what you term "Indic/Hindu".

Asking to take the discussion to GDF was a cold decision to prevent you from hijacking this thread to pursue your "Indic/Hindu" bashing agenda. You have yourself started such a thread in GDF, where the argument we are having could be taken. If you want to dub GDF as a "burqa" and it is something you do not like, you should take it up with the rest of admin.

I would request posters who want to contribute to the "agenda" discussion to ignore any calls for discussion specifically on "Indic/Hindu" here on this thread. Posts that are trying to provoke can very well be ignored as if the poster and the post does not exist. There is already a thread for discussing "Indic" started within GDF. Any discussion on this or response to provocations can go there.

My own apologies, since I did respond to one such provocation. But I will avoid future such posts. Please do not repeat my lapse of judgement.

The title of the thread is National Agenda 2010 etc.

Therefore, it should be about National Agenda and not on Indic, EJ etc.

I have started a thread on Indic contribution just for the purpose so that those who are keen on discussing the same could do so there and therefore such discussion would best be done there.

An overdose in every thread is exasperating.

There is also a thread on Indian Epics.

I have spelt out my ideology many a time. It is preservation of the unity of India and attempt to not foment religious, regional and other hatred directly or couching it in words that are ambiguous.

You also do not answer posts pointwise, instead go into a thesis. And then come back with a self effacing hurt that is so appealing to the core group!

My post Posted: 14 Dec 2009 05:57 am is in context.

If there is a post that indicates something grossly incorrect done by the evangelists or the Islamic fundamentalists, I will not hesitate to condemn them as I did in the Kandamal thread and when the allurement for conversion in Gujrarat was shown in the Youtube clip. I have also been caustic over the last Pope and his 'harvesting the soul' message or about the fraudulent activities of Benny Hinn. I have been critical of Harsh Mander and Setalvad. If you wish to overlook these, I can't force you to see them. As the saying goes - you can bring a horse to water, but you cannot make it drink! Therefore, your belief that I am an Indic basher, as you so quaintly state, is fallacious and malicious!

I have nothing against Indic, but it has to be in context. National Agenda and other threads (Something about Strategic Leadership) all start with good intention and they boil down to Indic and avenues are contrived to get such a discussion going. And there is no going away from the fact that you are the hub of such deviations. Apparently, you have vast knowledge of Indicism and history and so you have the urge to display and dazzle by veering everything to the same issue. And because of the various fissures in the Indian polity of late, polarisation has taken place and hence there are many votaries to emphasise the differences and your thoughts feeds fat to the grievances and is lapped up leading to a very discomfiting feeling. So long as the Constitution and motto - Unity in Diversity is not changed, what can one do, but lump it? Even the BJP could not change anything. They changed themselves. Why rub salt on the wounds of society?

Here is what Nitin Gadkari, the next BJP President has to say:

His roadmap for the party, however, is still to be inked. He is against religious conversion, but stresses that he does not believe in the politics of caste, creed or religion. “We are not against Muslims or Christians. Conversion from one religion to another should come from the mind and the heart, not by luring the poor with money.”
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1091213/j ... 857129.jsp

How am I any different in views from the flagbearer of Indicism?

Here is something from your post that started the thread:

I am aware that if the discussion appears to become critical of incumbent regime in power in GOI, or the political spectrum that supports such a regime, or highlight their opposing ideologies/cultures/political groupings not in unfavourable light, then some can try to label the discussion as "Hindutva through backdoor".

It is an open invite.

Was this paragraph needed unless there was some ulterior motive?

I have no intention to wade through the thread, but the intent is very evident.

FYI, this forum as far as I know does not subscribe to any political, religious, community, caste interest. Therefore, your statement is incorrect and inflammatory.

Indic boys is because there is a group led by you which deviate everything to Indic. Just as you call Jews, Christians and Muslim Abrhamic. It saves on words. RSS is called knickerbockerwallahs. I think Mani Shankar Iyer coined that word. I don't think there is any diktat that I should swoon at the mention of RSS.

It appears that the forum and threads are only centring around Indic with a suffocating overdose and with the same refrain.

Please understand that this forum is read internationally and is quoted in intellectual papers by noted scholars. India is a tolerant country and is acknowledged worldwide. So, if everything boils down to Indic and others are ridiculed, it surely would indicate that we are chameleons! And this forum will lose its credibility and pristine position!

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 15 Dec 2009 10:46

Let's get back to National Agenda for India, 2010-2050.

Nihat · Post by **Nihat** » 15 Dec 2009 12:56

Economy:Natioanl Agenda :: Money:Life

This is something I have always believed in , inclusive economic growth is everything that is needed for India to achieve what has been mentioned in the previous 12 pages. Ofcourse , there are different methods in which we could set about doing the same and need not be cloning the "American Way..."

We have a mid income group of 300 million people + today and it's for all to see where this has propelled ups vis-a-vis the past 10 to 15 years.

Population is a a massive problem but why it has come to this today is because of our flawed economic policies of 40 previous years , in civics I used to learn year after year the concept of "vicious cycle" and how we got stuck in it and the only way I see out of it is if families have more money ,if they are capable of supporting their kids education and see the value of having lesser number of kids which can be educated and empowered.

With rapid and inclusive growth Poverty vanishes too , insurgencies go down , global diplomatic and political clout increases , militaries can be mordernized and external threats can be crushed.

But we have to follow a different method of doing this then USA has done and China is now looking to do as this is not sustainable in even the medium term future owing to factors such as Climate change and energy security.

One of the major steps taken towards accomplishing national agenda was achieveing Food Security , we must not let this go as it is focal point of our progress.

We must find a way to avoid mass urbanization and instead keep the villagers in the villages while also updating thier lifestyle and eradicating difficulties , we must be the world leader in forest cover and green technology.

An all new method of governence and development is to be devised if we have to truly achieve what we have laid out plans for thus far.

Growth rate , economic development , which is sustainable and inclusive without being traditional is the way to go.

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 15 Dec 2009 21:35

I think the agenda for 2010 - 2012 should be
1. RENEWABLE ENERGY
2. INFRASTRUCTURE.
3. RESPECT FOR THE CONSTITUTION.

Item 1 is the key to independence and growth

Item 2 is much needed to improve quality of life (so is 1) and to ensure that the economic gains spread to every corner of India,

Item 3 is essential to integrity and internal peace and co-existence. Indian kids learn about the Constitution in elementary school. Then they grow up and ignore it in their lives. This must change.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 15 Dec 2009 21:46

enqyoob wrote
3. RESPECT FOR THE CONSTITUTION.

The Constitution is not even available in its entirety - unabridged and with all the clauses and amendments - in most school libraries. Another important text could have been the IPC. Could have saved a lot of "trouble" if kids knew what could be used against them in courts of law. Agreed that this would be no match for expertise of the lawyers/barristers/judges - but still to a certain extent could be useful.

I sometimes feel that because there is so much controversy about history, why not drop history teaching at the elementary level altogether. let them study the Constitution, IPC and the Civil laws over their schooling years. But let no editing - abridging - and whitewashing be done under any excuse. With the contexts of each provision and law clearly given and the background spelled out. Would be most interesting to see the effect.

Typically the version of the Constitution given in elementary texts was a moth eaten one. Now of course it is available in full on the web. But who will study it on their own at elementary level - it may not appear lucrative for the future like becominga n engineer or a doctor. So for serious study has to be included in the compulsory mode as part of syllabus.

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 15 Dec 2009 22:26

brihaspati wrote:Typically the version of the Constitution given in elementary texts was a moth eaten one.

That is if it is even there. I went to school in the 80s and early 90s, and we did not learn anything about the Constitution until grade 10. I believe the problem is that the Indian right wing itself does not believe much in the Constitution (witness the criminalisation of politics), hence the need to keep people ignorant of their rights.

Rahul Mehta · Post by **Rahul Mehta** » 16 Dec 2009 17:14

All,

What changes in laws would we need to achieve The Agenda?

.

Lilo · Post by **Lilo** » 16 Dec 2009 17:34

wanted to share this quote i recently came across in DH.

During the World War II when Great Britain was losing on every front, Winston Churchill, then prime minister, wrote to Lord Chancellor, the chief justice, to ensure that the judiciary delivered justice. Surprised Lord Chancellor frantically asked Churchill why he had expressed such a fear when his attention was focused on how to stop the advancing Nazis. Churchill replied immediately to observe that as long as people were sure to get justice, they would fight for the country even in the midst of reverses.

in todays india justice is denied to a significant portion of our pop and hence this aim should be an integral part of any national agenda.