Tikhram Netas vs. Grounds up Netas

Tikhram Netas vs. Grounds up Netas

By: Amit Bhushan Date: 27th Jan. 2017

While elections have many themes especially in backdrop of Demonetization which has catapulted economic discussions to the forefront. While netas want yesteryear issues including social justice and the roar of backward and under-privileged sans any real demands that needed to be fulfilled, be the ‘issue’ once’ again. Then of course some other Netas want their championship of religion to be propped up of horizon so that they can re-cycle old slogans on their ‘way to victory’. Then of course is test of the influence of the influential families on open display amongst Netadom claiming ‘almost won’ status. The Netas skirting issues of people and trying to force their agenda, is likely to have limited political dividends. Although this fact is seldom acknowledged by Netas who savour deals since it robs people of popular choices by tilting balance to the favour of Netas by creating barriers whereby new difficulties are raised for new Netas to rise ( http://www.managementparadise.com/article/8993/deal-netas-vs-grounds-up-netas ).

What essentially is the test in such a case is that people are encouraged to identify ‘approachable Netas in fray rather than the Netas ‘made popular’ by the media. This is because quite often the expectation of the people is select from one of winning Netas, so that they can have a relationship with the winner rather and therefore media projection of ‘winner’ does influence voting conglomeration and supporter base to some extent. To help the winning Netas further. Commercial news media easily gives in to the Netas’ wish of doing away with ‘tough questions’ while they continue to sing paeans to near all their quest for power. In fact sharp questions from public can be termed as cynicism and allow Netas to get away without any answers. Such settings essentially reduce the competition to a selection choice to one between Grounds up Neta, who are raising issues of interests to public versus Tikhram Netas, carting wishes of the super Netas with wide support from the commercial news media amongst public. It depend on how the Netas are reaching out as ‘individuals’ to the respective constituents.

While we continue to have large posters all over, with the kowtowing of local netas eager to push the envelope of themselves amongst the galaxy of Super Netadom and to garner attention of the commercial news media with its sway over sections of votes. The understanding here is that by singing songs of the ‘ground connect’ of the super Netas which the commercial news media is ready to cart to public, alongside their own imagery including willingness to bend a little as long as it brings the garland of flowers. This is all the while they may skirt local issues or may not full understanding, but may just be relying on local loafers, to keep them updated as well as their coffers filled with various canvassing options. Economy, the knowledge or its understanding may be very far away from their thoughts although ‘promise making’ continues mainly because neither ordinary public nor the commercial news media would be questioning or allowed to question. The ground connect of Neta is depicted by their ability to take questions from people, rather than mock ‘shows of strength’ of public rallies. However the commercial news media is seldom attracted to such Netas, but won’t mind spending extra dime on Netas depicting rally strength including readiness to release ‘news bites’ which has little public interest but ‘hot’ on trendiness.

A lot of humour could have been easily used when the Netas ‘create trending issues’ with some very basic questioning. This can be as innocuous as say: Who resembles more closely with Daud – Whether a ‘bina mooch wala Abhineta or a Mooch wala N***. With litany of linguist and experts in poll parties, artist community as well as with the commercial news media, such basic questioning can be expected, however their refusal to buzz is approval for the show of Netadom to go on and also they are not be called ‘commercial’ otherwise they have right to feel offended as well. But fact remains that neither the ‘opposition’ of such Netas, nor the commercial news media Anchors/ Journos/Reporters want to spoil the ‘party’. In fact, they won’t mind voicing their concerns that ‘Social Media’ has already spoilt their ‘Relationship’ with the Netadom on open forums. This also raises the questions that we have activists in every faucet of life like bureaucracy, lawyers, scientists, cine and television artists or even the most unlikely fields like ‘Judges’, but we have no activist Journos or Anchors (at high table), even though a number of claims about violence against the profession make for huge issues. (The point here is that why some of the Journos or Anchors have not used humour to pinprick ‘biased comments’ designed to attract or ‘polarize, so to say’ about Netadom, given their independence). This is because such visible display could have only garnered them better audience, however their caution of commercial news media speaks a lot. What may also need to be appreciated that the news media, which was a handy political tool prior to and in early post-independence years, holds its status no longer amongst active political parties/Netas who may be most willing to capture power by unseating the present incumbent, however the (Senior) Jounos won’t ever think about it themselves, even as they continue to shed crocodile tears over the sacrifices. The rush to cover ‘shows’ than news, is seldom frowned upon and the quality metric of good Journo is now better coverage of ‘shows’ to give them ‘news value’, although no commercial news media would ever acknowledge.

While there is much better appreciation of the ‘issues’ as well as ‘factors’ amongst Netas, with a few almost threatening to break-free; however what is usually being weighed is ‘fate’ if such a step is indeed taken. The Netas want assurance in electoral battles when their own Super Netas also are increasingly unable to give them the same as commercial news media has already lost the battle to social media even though the technology penetration might be very low still. And because of fear to spoil party of the Super Netas as well as the media remains, so electorate won’t get all the possible humuor as well, but just some calibrated ‘tough talk’ show of ‘power’ to make a case for vote in the favour of Neta’s party. This essentially turns the electoral battle into a Ground up Neta who can take questions from masses while taking masses along with answers. Such Netas may fancy chances against the Tikhram Netas who are propped up by ‘factors’ rather than by people themselves. Let’s see the ‘Game’ evolve further…..

 

[Swaswati Borpuzari]

Tikhram Netas vs. Grounds Up Netas: A Comparative Analysis​

In the dynamic landscape of Indian politics, the terms "Tikhram Netas" (also known as ‘Hawala Netas’ or ‘Money Power Netas’) and "Grounds Up Netas" have gained significant traction. These terms encapsulate two distinct approaches to political engagement and leadership, each with its own advantages and drawbacks. This article aims to explore the characteristics, implications, and potential outcomes of these two types of political leaders in India.

Tikhram Netas: The Influence of Money Power​

Definition: Tikhram Netas, often referred to as 'Hawala Netas,' are political leaders who primarily rely on their financial resources to gain and maintain political power. These leaders are known for their ability to mobilize funds, often through questionable means, to support their campaigns and influence electoral outcomes.

Characteristics:

1. Financial Muscles: Tikhram Netas have substantial financial resources at their disposal. They often use this wealth to fund lavish campaign events, buy votes, and secure political endorsements.
2. Lack of Grassroots Connection: These leaders may not have a strong connection with the local community or a deep understanding of grassroots issues. Their influence is more often based on their financial clout rather than their ability to connect with the electorate.
3. Short-term Gains: Their primary focus is on winning elections, often at the expense of long-term governance and development. This can lead to a lack of accountability and a disregard for the welfare of the constituents.
4. Cronyism and Corruption: The reliance on money power often leads to a culture of cronyism and corruption, where political appointments and policy decisions are influenced by financial considerations rather than merit or public interest.

Implications:

• Erosion of Democracy: The dominance of Tikhram Netas can undermine the democratic process, making it difficult for genuine leaders to emerge and ensuring that political power remains in the hands of the wealthy few.
• Policy Distortion: Policies and decisions are often skewed to benefit the financial elite, leading to inequality and socio-economic disparities.
• Public Distrust: The influence of money in politics can erode public trust in the political system, leading to apathy and disengagement from the democratic process.

Grounds Up Netas: The Power of Connection and Service​

Definition: Grounds Up Netas are political leaders who rise to prominence through their deep connection with the local community and their commitment to addressing grassroots issues. These leaders often start their political careers at the local level and build their support base through consistent service and engagement.

Characteristics:

1. Grassroots Connection: Grounds Up Netas have a strong and genuine connection with the local community. They understand the needs and aspirations of their constituents and work tirelessly to address them.
2. Service Orientation: Their primary focus is on providing effective governance and addressing the immediate concerns of the people. This can include improving infrastructure, ensuring access to basic services, and advocating for local development.
3. Long-term Vision: These leaders are more likely to have a long-term vision for the community and the nation. They prioritize sustainable development and the well-being of the constituents over short-term gains.
4. Ethical Governance: Grounds Up Netas are often more transparent and accountable in their governance. They are less likely to engage in corrupt practices and more likely to promote ethical leadership.

Implications:

• Strengthening Democracy: The rise of Grounds Up Netas can enhance the democratic process by ensuring that political leadership is more representative of the people. It promotes a culture of engagement and participation.
• Policy Relevance: Policies and decisions are more likely to be relevant and beneficial to the majority of the population. This can lead to more equitable distribution of resources and better governance.
• Public Trust: Grounds Up Netas can rebuild public trust in the political system by demonstrating a commitment to service and accountability. This can lead to higher voter turnout and increased civic engagement.

Comparative Analysis​

Effectiveness in Governance:

• Tikhram Netas: Their effectiveness is often limited to short-term electoral gains. They may lack the vision and commitment required for long-term governance and development.
• Grounds Up Netas: They are more likely to be effective in governance as they have a deeper understanding of the community's needs and a long-term perspective. Their policies are more likely to be sustainable and beneficial.

Impact on Society:

• Tikhram Netas: The influence of money power can lead to a skewed distribution of resources and a concentration of power in the hands of the few. This can exacerbate social and economic inequalities.
• Grounds Up Netas: They promote a more inclusive and equitable society by ensuring that the voices of the marginalized are heard and their needs are addressed. This can lead to a more cohesive and harmonious community.

Public Perception:

• Tikhram Netas: Public perception is often negative, with people viewing them as corrupt and self-serving. This can lead to a lack of trust and cynicism towards the political system.
• Grounds Up Netas: They are generally perceived more positively, as they are seen as genuine leaders who are dedicated to the welfare of the people. This can foster a sense of hope and optimism in the community.

Sustainability:

• Tikhram Netas: Their political careers are often unsustainable in the long run as they rely heavily on financial influence. Once the flow of money is disrupted, their power can quickly diminish.
• Grounds Up Netas: Their political careers are more sustainable as they are rooted in the trust and support of the community. They are more resilient to changes in the political and economic landscape.

Conclusion​

The contrast between Tikhram Netas and Grounds Up Netas highlights the fundamental differences in political leadership and their impact on governance and society. While Tikhram Netas may achieve short-term electoral success through financial clout, the long-term sustainability and effectiveness of Grounds Up Netas in promoting ethical governance and addressing grassroots issues cannot be overlooked. For a robust and inclusive democracy, it is crucial to support and empower Grounds Up Netas who are dedicated to the welfare and development of their constituents.

 

[Dhruv Bindhani]

Tikhram Netas vs. Grounds up Netas

By: Amit Bhushan Date: 27th Jan. 2017

While elections have many themes especially in backdrop of Demonetization which has catapulted economic discussions to the forefront. While netas want yesteryear issues including social justice and the roar of backward and under-privileged sans any real demands that needed to be fulfilled, be the ‘issue’ once’ again. Then of course some other Netas want their championship of religion to be propped up of horizon so that they can re-cycle old slogans on their ‘way to victory’. Then of course is test of the influence of the influential families on open display amongst Netadom claiming ‘almost won’ status. The Netas skirting issues of people and trying to force their agenda, is likely to have limited political dividends. Although this fact is seldom acknowledged by Netas who savour deals since it robs people of popular choices by tilting balance to the favour of Netas by creating barriers whereby new difficulties are raised for new Netas to rise ( http://www.managementparadise.com/article/8993/deal-netas-vs-grounds-up-netas ).

What essentially is the test in such a case is that people are encouraged to identify ‘approachable Netas in fray rather than the Netas ‘made popular’ by the media. This is because quite often the expectation of the people is select from one of winning Netas, so that they can have a relationship with the winner rather and therefore media projection of ‘winner’ does influence voting conglomeration and supporter base to some extent. To help the winning Netas further. Commercial news media easily gives in to the Netas’ wish of doing away with ‘tough questions’ while they continue to sing paeans to near all their quest for power. In fact sharp questions from public can be termed as cynicism and allow Netas to get away without any answers. Such settings essentially reduce the competition to a selection choice to one between Grounds up Neta, who are raising issues of interests to public versus Tikhram Netas, carting wishes of the super Netas with wide support from the commercial news media amongst public. It depend on how the Netas are reaching out as ‘individuals’ to the respective constituents.

While we continue to have large posters all over, with the kowtowing of local netas eager to push the envelope of themselves amongst the galaxy of Super Netadom and to garner attention of the commercial news media with its sway over sections of votes. The understanding here is that by singing songs of the ‘ground connect’ of the super Netas which the commercial news media is ready to cart to public, alongside their own imagery including willingness to bend a little as long as it brings the garland of flowers. This is all the while they may skirt local issues or may not full understanding, but may just be relying on local loafers, to keep them updated as well as their coffers filled with various canvassing options. Economy, the knowledge or its understanding may be very far away from their thoughts although ‘promise making’ continues mainly because neither ordinary public nor the commercial news media would be questioning or allowed to question. The ground connect of Neta is depicted by their ability to take questions from people, rather than mock ‘shows of strength’ of public rallies. However the commercial news media is seldom attracted to such Netas, but won’t mind spending extra dime on Netas depicting rally strength including readiness to release ‘news bites’ which has little public interest but ‘hot’ on trendiness.

A lot of humour could have been easily used when the Netas ‘create trending issues’ with some very basic questioning. This can be as innocuous as say: Who resembles more closely with Daud – Whether a ‘bina mooch wala Abhineta or a Mooch wala N***. With litany of linguist and experts in poll parties, artist community as well as with the commercial news media, such basic questioning can be expected, however their refusal to buzz is approval for the show of Netadom to go on and also they are not be called ‘commercial’ otherwise they have right to feel offended as well. But fact remains that neither the ‘opposition’ of such Netas, nor the commercial news media Anchors/ Journos/Reporters want to spoil the ‘party’. In fact, they won’t mind voicing their concerns that ‘Social Media’ has already spoilt their ‘Relationship’ with the Netadom on open forums. This also raises the questions that we have activists in every faucet of life like bureaucracy, lawyers, scientists, cine and television artists or even the most unlikely fields like ‘Judges’, but we have no activist Journos or Anchors (at high table), even though a number of claims about violence against the profession make for huge issues. (The point here is that why some of the Journos or Anchors have not used humour to pinprick ‘biased comments’ designed to attract or ‘polarize, so to say’ about Netadom, given their independence). This is because such visible display could have only garnered them better audience, however their caution of commercial news media speaks a lot. What may also need to be appreciated that the news media, which was a handy political tool prior to and in early post-independence years, holds its status no longer amongst active political parties/Netas who may be most willing to capture power by unseating the present incumbent, however the (Senior) Jounos won’t ever think about it themselves, even as they continue to shed crocodile tears over the sacrifices. The rush to cover ‘shows’ than news, is seldom frowned upon and the quality metric of good Journo is now better coverage of ‘shows’ to give them ‘news value’, although no commercial news media would ever acknowledge.

While there is much better appreciation of the ‘issues’ as well as ‘factors’ amongst Netas, with a few almost threatening to break-free; however what is usually being weighed is ‘fate’ if such a step is indeed taken. The Netas want assurance in electoral battles when their own Super Netas also are increasingly unable to give them the same as commercial news media has already lost the battle to social media even though the technology penetration might be very low still. And because of fear to spoil party of the Super Netas as well as the media remains, so electorate won’t get all the possible humuor as well, but just some calibrated ‘tough talk’ show of ‘power’ to make a case for vote in the favour of Neta’s party. This essentially turns the electoral battle into a Ground up Neta who can take questions from masses while taking masses along with answers. Such Netas may fancy chances against the Tikhram Netas who are propped up by ‘factors’ rather than by people themselves. Let’s see the ‘Game’ evolve further…..

This article offers an exceptional deep dive into the complexities of political policy. The writer's writing style is both analytical and accessible, making intricate policy discussions understandable and engaging for a broad audience. Their ability to translate dense political mechanics into relatable prose is a significant asset, demonstrating a profound understanding paired with strong communication skills. The structure is meticulously organized, systematically breaking down the policy in question and exploring its various facets with a methodical yet engaging approach. This allows readers to grasp the nuances and implications thoroughly. Furthermore, the outstanding clarity of the policy analysis is a defining feature. The arguments are presented with such precision, and the potential outcomes so plainly articulated, that the article becomes an invaluable guide for anyone seeking to understand the real-world impact of political decisions.