The Political Slugfest and Political Turning point

The Political Slugfest and Political Turning point

By: Amit Bhushan Date: 23rd Dec. 2016

We have a rush of discussions on Political opinions especially on Demonetization where there seems to be no dearth of opinions on either side. (http://www.managementparadise.com/article/9096/the-new-curbs-on-old-notes) Basically, we have situation of low level growth in Cash-less (just 3x to 4x, rather than required 15x to 20x), deemed low focus on rolling out incentives for the same in the initial phase and leakages of ‘Cash’ from banks including queues at bank phenomenon. So political focus on demonetization stay including rather miniscule unearthing of the black monies, rather than benefits from Cash-less and better compliance et al. And then we have cacophony of charges and counter-opinions. We seem to have a rather curious consensus on the top regards some 50 odd family’s patronage as a must for the survival of the national level netas. What the communication may still not be telling is that we have a next level revelation of some next 150-250 odd families, who may be having some decisive say at different levels of governments and their banking/contracts/policy-mix priorities. Let’s see how the competition for the states with several state level parties competing brings out. Their side of the ‘game’ revelation is still not heard and the journos therefore are still rightly not considering these parties to be in the ‘game’.

The ‘intellectuals’ quite steadfast in ensuring public about robustness of banks seem to have gone for a holiday and the situation is likely to remain so at least till the elections are over. The state level issues related to public works or licensed businesses or government employment related woes or mining leases, seem yet to be raked for any of the states or by any of the parties including the Common People’s party. This is where the competition seem to be headed but with strong barriers as political champions seem quite cagey to raise hackles amongst the influential sections. That they need support of legal fraternity as well as from strong backing from those in administration is obvious. It is with administration that they find dealing with as almost impractically difficult as even with the Right to Information, usually very little actionable information seem to be forthcoming. And tedious court procedures almost always ensures that those in power would get away riding of support of the democratically elected. Despite the fact being known, improvement in capability and capacity of the Judiciary seems to be on no one’s agenda, including all those Neta’s making noise. It is here that the ‘game’ has had little impact except for that the Apex court striking a unanimously passed statute for good. May be with the current hype the court should consider making the names of the bank defaulter’s, public. This is because the cloak is increasingly seeming to be worn out although very few would admit it.

 

[Dhruv Bindhani]

The Political Slugfest and Political Turning point

By: Amit Bhushan Date: 23rd Dec. 2016

We have a rush of discussions on Political opinions especially on Demonetization where there seems to be no dearth of opinions on either side. (http://www.managementparadise.com/article/9096/the-new-curbs-on-old-notes) Basically, we have situation of low level growth in Cash-less (just 3x to 4x, rather than required 15x to 20x), deemed low focus on rolling out incentives for the same in the initial phase and leakages of ‘Cash’ from banks including queues at bank phenomenon. So political focus on demonetization stay including rather miniscule unearthing of the black monies, rather than benefits from Cash-less and better compliance et al. And then we have cacophony of charges and counter-opinions. We seem to have a rather curious consensus on the top regards some 50 odd family’s patronage as a must for the survival of the national level netas. What the communication may still not be telling is that we have a next level revelation of some next 150-250 odd families, who may be having some decisive say at different levels of governments and their banking/contracts/policy-mix priorities. Let’s see how the competition for the states with several state level parties competing brings out. Their side of the ‘game’ revelation is still not heard and the journos therefore are still rightly not considering these parties to be in the ‘game’.

The ‘intellectuals’ quite steadfast in ensuring public about robustness of banks seem to have gone for a holiday and the situation is likely to remain so at least till the elections are over. The state level issues related to public works or licensed businesses or government employment related woes or mining leases, seem yet to be raked for any of the states or by any of the parties including the Common People’s party. This is where the competition seem to be headed but with strong barriers as political champions seem quite cagey to raise hackles amongst the influential sections. That they need support of legal fraternity as well as from strong backing from those in administration is obvious. It is with administration that they find dealing with as almost impractically difficult as even with the Right to Information, usually very little actionable information seem to be forthcoming. And tedious court procedures almost always ensures that those in power would get away riding of support of the democratically elected. Despite the fact being known, improvement in capability and capacity of the Judiciary seems to be on no one’s agenda, including all those Neta’s making noise. It is here that the ‘game’ has had little impact except for that the Apex court striking a unanimously passed statute for good. May be with the current hype the court should consider making the names of the bank defaulter’s, public. This is because the cloak is increasingly seeming to be worn out although very few would admit it.

In the often-murky waters of political commentary, this article shines as a beacon of clarity. The writer's writing style is refreshingly direct and remarkably insightful, capable of distilling even the most convoluted political machinations into understandable terms. It's a voice that not only informs but empowers, cutting through partisan rhetoric to focus on tangible realities. The structure is intuitively logical, carefully organizing arguments and evidence in a way that progressively deepens the reader's understanding of the political issue at hand. This thoughtful arrangement allows for a comprehensive grasp of the intricate relationships between policy, power, and people. Furthermore, the exceptional clarity with which the political arguments are articulated is truly commendable. There's no room for misinterpretation; the issues are presented with such transparent precision that the article serves as an essential guide for navigating and understanding today's political environment.

 

[Simran Rai]

This reflection on the fallout and framing of demonetization brings into sharp focus the deeper structural issues that surround India's policy and political architecture. While demonetization was pitched as a game-changing move against black money, its actual implementation appears to have resulted in limited tangible gains—especially in terms of black money recovery—and more so a disruption in the lives of ordinary citizens, manifested in long queues at banks and cash shortages. The much-anticipated transition to a “cash-less” economy saw only a modest boost rather than the transformational leap originally promised, mainly due to inadequate incentives and infrastructure in the initial phases. Moreover, the narrative around demonetization quickly veered toward political point-scoring rather than a substantive examination of long-term gains like digital compliance or tax base expansion.


The undercurrent of power politics, especially the influence of a few elite families over national and state-level decision-making, subtly weaves into this story. There is mention of about 50 prominent families whose support national politicians seem to covet, and another tier of roughly 150–250 families holding sway at different governance layers. Yet, many state-level parties remain sidelined in this conversation, possibly because their internal dealings and power nexuses remain undocumented or underreported by mainstream media. The lack of political will to unearth these deeper power structures points to a larger problem—the unwillingness to challenge entrenched interests.


Adding to this is the disappointing silence on key state-level concerns such as mining rights, public infrastructure, or bureaucratic employment issues. Despite the presence of laws like the Right to Information (RTI), real transparency remains elusive, and court processes are often too sluggish to ensure accountability. Even the judiciary, hailed as a final arbiter, seems under-resourced and curiously absent from public reform agendas. This reveals a core paradox: while citizen outrage simmers and digital debates abound, the real levers of reform—especially those affecting governance capacity and legal enforcement—remain untouched. The call to publish names of major bank defaulters reflects a growing public sentiment for greater openness and fairness, but political courage to act on such demands still appears scarce.​