Aloha Guys,
It is GD/PI season once again and I thought I would use the Blog to try to have some GDs. Let’s see if the experiment is successful.
I will post one topic every day and after reading the same, put down points that you would make in a normal GD. Obviously you will have to put down the points in the Comments section. Before making those comments it would make sense to take a look at the points that the others have made. Your points could be in response to those points or they could be stand alone ones.
This is open to all students and is not restricted only to the CAT 09/CET 10 students.
The first topic is:
"Creation of smaller states is the only way forward to ensure social and economic development in
Looking forward to a vibrant discussion,
Ciao
Even though creation of smaller states might encourage the economic growth of some states like Mumbai for example, which if made a separate state might gain an economic advantage considering the fact that it is the financial capital of the country.
ReplyDeleteBUT there are two points in the given topic that sound rather blunt and inappropriately generalized.
Firstly, Social and Economic development may not go hand in hand. While creation of smaller states MIGHT ensure an economic development to some, it can end up destroying the social balance; Creating more number of states discourages the idea of 'Unity'.
Secondly, even though in certain rare cases, the given topic might hold true, it most definitely is not the ONLY solution towards ensuring social and economic development of India.
Social & economic development of a country depends upon the way of thinking of ministry and people belonging not upon the formation of small states. today's politics is once again based upon divide and rule, there is no concern of development. lets hv example of bihar and jharkhand, after division there is no improvement in the condition of both state, but the politician became billionaire, the reason behind it both the government is not concern about development,jharkhand has all accessories to nurture it,full of mines of coal, bauxite, iron but there is not any additional attachment of industry occurred, condition of people is same, education system in same condition. economically, state is moving downwards.
ReplyDeleteSo we can say that development depends upon how we think and how our government think, they want to utilize the resources or want to fill there respective pocket.
i agree to a great extent with what sawn soi said that economic and social development might not go hand in hand. there are a few classy examples where smaller states have been formed from larger ones in the past..like jharkhand from bihar. It was formed on the pretext that jharkhand wanted to free itself from the backward bihar and develop itself into a sociallly and economically sound region.Though it might have achieved it's economic targets the social scene remains as bleak as before with the naxalites having their way, rampant corruption and unstable governments. One of the major drawbacks with this theory is the emergence of regional politics which does more harm to both state and the country equally.
ReplyDeleteAlso the basis for creation of a newer smaller state has to be credible and not a mere emotional issue if a new state has to be formed because of lack of proper governance and unfair allocation of resources it still is an acceptable matter.
On the whole it does not appear to be the only way for a social and economically developed india
i believe generalizing in any sense is inappropriate,some well articulated points i agree that having smaller states doesn't necessarily mean better governance,might be a technique to fill pockets,but each case is different....i believe that smaller area to concentrate on can have several advantages,firstly it might facilitate to keep an eye on every process of administration,secondly it will prevent the state hiding under development of certain areas,but not state as a whole inclusive growth as we say..don't u think mumbai as a symbol of Maharashtra's growth,now if vidharbh is separated it cant hide behind such development claims,but greatest problem facing the government is to segregate genuine claims from the not so honest ones...
ReplyDeleteCreation of smaller states cannot be the only way to ensure social and economic development in our country.creation of smaller states needs better governance and should financially strong to ensure the betterment of the state.but in a country like India, it would only lead to corruption and encourage our politicians to have their share of profit.
ReplyDeleteMy view is against the creation of smaller states eg Mumbai developed despite being a part of Maharashtra. More number of states would mean more number of ministers in power, which would mean more tax money going to the Swiss banks
ReplyDeleteLet us first put the reason that this topic has been put into limelight. The fight for Telangana as a separate state. As soon as the strongman and staunch opposer of a split state, Chief minister YSR passed away, the power vacuum was being fought for by K. Chandrashekar Rao as he now wanted a bigger piece of the power pie. Following his fast-to-death campaign which almost worked in his favor, the power hugry ministers of BJP wanted Gorkhaland as a separated state for some more power.
ReplyDeleteNo matter how the given topic is disected, I am sure that more than enough diplomatically correct theoretical answers can be come up with. Mr. Sawn Sai has it bang on in that respect. But the fact remains that in our particular case, the breaking down of the states is simply a propagandistic attempt of parties like BJP to become no. 2 again after the brow-beating that they have taken in the elections of Congress. As more and more BJP leaders want a piece of the power cake as well as somewhat of a comeback and hoard cash in offshore bank accounts enough to feed an entire nation, we are leading away from the concept of a united perspective of this country. What economical benefits will come from a Maoist dominance in one extra state is beyond me. The economical benefits of making Mumbai a separate state is way beyond me. As we make more borders, we are not only making the mentality more localistic as opposed to nationalistic but we are also introducing more states with more interdependencies which will make running things more complex and fragile. When smaller states are built, a number of variables get added and although there is more intense representation of problems to the central government, we are also adding more lines of connection which can be exploited with more red tapism and more bureaucracy. Increasing Bureaucracy is the last thing we need today for this young growing country. It is neither socially nor economically helpful to make smaller states at this juncture for India.
However, the topic at large is definitely a debatable one at best. With differing conditions, where there is too much of anarchy, smaller states help in faster efficient little systems which provide expertise. So, the jury is still out as the topic in itself is too broad to cover.
Dividing a country which is already divided will make things worse and this is surely going to affect our economy and in no way this will be beneficial for our country in achieving a developed status.
ReplyDeleteSmaller Sates means better governance. It is clearly visible from the development of Uttarakhand and Chattisgarh.
ReplyDeleteAnother important aspect for social amd economic development is who is governing.In Bihar Nitish Kumar gov. is performing very well. People have given green signal to his work in Lok Sabha election also.
Creation of small states is good in the sense that it will be more governable . The best example for that would be Uttar Pradesh .Its a state so huge that for 17 of the last 20 years no single party has got a majority and therefore leads to instability ,horse trading and lack of governance . Also look at the fact there is one high court for nearly 180 million people . Officials at the top level cannot deal with problems of all region . Simeltaneously it has drought (Bundelkhand) and floods (Poorvanchal).
ReplyDeleteSurveys such as India Today Survey show that small states perform better and small states improve a lot . Also regional aspirations and separatist tendency(Assam) can be kept at arms length . Also look at democratic units all over the world , UK has many counties ,US 50 states so India's population to state ratio is inferior to these Democracies .
But is it the ONLY way , no i didnt think so like the NREGA which focus on backward districts rather than states . It is the way foward in the sense that Backward districts should be grouped together ,concessions be given to invest there . Also focus could be given on empowering panchayati raj and decentralisation .
I don’t know why, but I somehow feel that the topic is being dragged away, from its true point of discussion, to ridiculing the politicians in India.
ReplyDeleteI think we should stay focused on what the discussion actually demands and that is not entirely the political aspect of the impact that several small states would have.
Well, I've got to disagree with Dheeraj. We just simply cant compare things in India and the other countries. The division may have worked well for other countries. But in India, a country pegged with corruption, it has never served its true purpose. Moreover, division poses a serious threat to the integrity of the nation. It will be seen as a motivation for other minority communities to demand a state of their own. The attitude "If they can have it, why cant we have it" will become more prevalent.
ReplyDeleteUltimately, it will lead to total unrest.
Smaller states will never help in devloping the country. But it will increase the expenditure of the country. A seperate system of governance has to be formulated, elections obviously will have a major share. this will continue in the future also without any extra income.
ReplyDeleteCreation of one state will have an effect on other undivided states.this will initiate some other group of people to ask for a seperate and it is cumulative. there si no cure....
As per my opinion I don't think Creation of smaller states is the only way forward to ensure social and economic development in India
ReplyDelete1.If people are satisfied with the benefits which their state has promised Why on earth they want a separate state.
2.Most of the separatisits wish to get the power,but in a larger state they are numericaly very less.They are strong only if they get separated.So they lead the public on their way.
3.The central government thinks Instead of spending 30 or 40 years of janathas tax amount which will simply be wasted to suppress the social unrest and by the destruction of social property ,a separate state is good.On a second thought They can satisfy the people with their needs which will give them more votes next time.
4.If a state is corrupt, its 45% due to the politicians and 55% due to people of that state.Because Janatha electing 'the power' to rule them.Growth can be made by the effective involvement of central goverment in a state.Central government has the responsibility to measure the social unjustice poverty and illiteracy of a particular region if the state governement failed to do so.
5.If a state is small, it can lead to better governance , better education , better involvement of janatha in the running of the system ,Better ecnomic growth of state and less amount of social unjustice.But its rarely happening in our country due to poverty and illiteracy.
6.The irony is, most separation is made either on religious case or language case or lack of social improvement in that area."Unity in diversity" is India's identity. We should check how much this sentence has relevence in our nation.
Well I would like to add on to what Noel has said.The size of population in countries which Dheeraj has stated is far less compared to India.As the population of India is too high if the divisive tendency which is now prevailing in the states like Telangana is allowed to continue,it will result in jeopardizing the national integrity-a situation which will wreak havoc in the future.To avoid such a situation it is better to promote administrative efficiency in exisisting governments rather than chop the contry for unfounded reasons. Tamil Nadu can be taken as an example of big state with considerable progress in all fields.
ReplyDeleteDividing a state into smaller ones will help in governance, thus improving the social and economic conditions. But this is not what we see happening today. There is always an intention by the powerful to make money or gain power out of it. If this is not the case, smaller governance always helps in development socially and economically. Smaller states will bring AAM ADMI into picture giving him the better understanding on how things run and also giving him power to decide on many things that will help improvement on his own surroundings.
ReplyDeleteMust admit I'm floored by the faith shown on our khaki tribe.But, what about the poor 'voting' tribe? What about that poor Indian, who has to travel miles to reach the nearest central government establishment (High courts, Universities, Govt. Hospitals, Major railway stations, Open markets and such.)? Spare a thought for this poor majority (in all literal sense, for this is the suffering majority as well...). Why doesn't one talk of bringing government closer to this population?(Does one consider what it means to sacrifice a days wage and spend the time and money on travelling?)
ReplyDeleteWhy is everyone looking at the negatives?Why cry over the incompetence of politicians?
Instead - why not talk about the people who matter?
Most of us have grown up with our history books loathing East India Companies 'Divide and Rule' and the much relished expression of 'Unity in Diversity'. Does our Indianness depend on our zonal and linguistic identity? No. It comes from the privilege and pride of being born an Indian.
Research has shown our smaller states fare much better in areas of female education, higher voter turn out, State's per capita domestic product and many such very relevant parameters. Besides this, our traditional metros are saturated and the need is for investing in and developing newer financial, political and urban identities.
I'm not advocating cutting India to pieces but empowering every pawn on the board. If it is for the larger good of our fellow Indian, then the mere suspicion over the draculian figure of a politician shouldn't hold us back. A case in point , look at the 50 stars on the American flag, it has always belonged there and continues to.
I disagree with what jijith has pointed out to.
ReplyDeleteThe points he has mentioned do not sum up to conclude that Creation of smaller states is the ONLY way forward to ensure social and economic development in India.
And like I said before, corruption in Indian politics was never the sole reason disagreeing with the given topic of discussion.
I hope that all of you agree with the following answer to this topic:
ReplyDeleteIT DEPENDS.
Examples can be given on both the sides of the coin. On one side, it creates unnecessary local politics whereas on the other hand we may have better governance. I would like to stress MAY unlike some of my friends here who simply consider that Smaller states = better governance.
In effect, we may or may not agree on whether Creation of smaller states is the way forward to ensure social and economic development in India. However, we can always agree on the fact that Creation of smaller states is NOT the ONLY way forward to ensure social and economic development in India.
I hope we can come to a consensus on this issue.
If Jijith ever mentioned, creating smaller states is the ONLY way forward, I would be the first one to disagree with him.
ReplyDeleteAll I said or at least intended to say was we need PEOPLE centric policies and not a politics centric policy.
Let us put things into perspective here, If the cry for a new state is LEGITIMATE and the motive - empowerment and uplifting of the ignored, then lets not trivialize the issue in the name of nationalist sentiments. We don't have the right to ignore\side line the rights of our fellow humans.
We are missing a vital point here. What is the root cause of the demands for separate state and what is the alternative other than separate state. Without this, the conclusion will be meaningless.
ReplyDeleteThe root of demands for separate statehood is claims of NON-INCLUSIVE GROWTH. Currently the state governments are not being monitored region wise for their performance in important Social and economic indicators for inclusive growth like -
• Purchasing Power parity
• Literacy
• Unemployment
• Child mortality rate
• Life expectancy
• Public and private health care
• Irrigation facilities
• Educational institutions
• Percentage of people below poverty line
• Private sector investment,
• Public infrastructure development (road and rail)
• Availability of water, food and electricity
For example, the expenditure of Andra Pradesh govt for Telangana, Rayalaseema and Costal Andra have to be monitored. This will give a clear picture of what the problem is and who is the culprit.
If a new state is created , what is the assurance that in the new state growth will be inclusive? Once again there can be a demand for a smaller state within the new state. The crux of the problem lies in absence of a body which monitors - inclusive growth, tracks promises made by parties in their election manifesto and fulfilling it, distribution of state and central expenditure equitably across various sections of the society.
If a govt is found unduly favoring certain regions in distribution of resources in its state, strict action has to be taken against the political party and the chief minister.
If a cricket captain can be suspended for 2 matches for slow over rate, a CEO can be sacked for low profits, why can’t a CM be dismissed for lopsided growth? If 11% growth can be achieved in Bihar from -5% by better governance, why can’t other states do? This is a problem with the administration and a separate state is NOT EVEN A SOLUTION. Something similar to Article 374 has to be in place so that politicians are aware of why there are in the chair in the first place. BETTER GOVERNANCE and NEUTRAL MONITORING WITH ACTIONS is the best solution for this malice.
Being Practical and considering all that we discussed above we can conclude that 'It All Depends' as our friend Rock mentioned earlier. Smaller states may help in better governance by bringing people closer to the government. People should exercise their right to vote wisely electing representatives who would listen to the common needs and do something for them. If chasing power becomes a priority, this will hinder the path to progress be it a smaller state or a large one.
ReplyDeleteI think it would be better option either go for making the state smaller we can also work on the current situation , by measuring the number of people who are illeterate, BPL(Below Poverty Line), low income earners or the most important fact that is concentrating on the unemplyoed people... after this segmentations we can be more efficient to defined the problem ,e.g.problem of unemplyoment - we could encourage those unemplyed by providing them "MICROFINANCE" means providing them loans at cheaper rate that they could at least work with their skills and talents in which India is the most sophisticated.
ReplyDeleteThis would absolutely help India to develop economically and socially as well.......