Technically the second PM.

"People forget that democracy is more natural to India than to any other country. There was democracy in India before any other country in the world ever dreamt of it...We had republics, fully, fairly elected, 2500 years ago."

The people of India have a long tradition of indigenous democracy, going back to the Mahajanapadas of antiquity to village Panchayats even today.

Democracy is not the gift of the West to an unsuited public. The public wanted democracy, but were given 'feudalism with elections'.
"It is not that India did not know what is Democracy ... There was a time when India was studded with republics, and even where there were monarchies, they were either elected or limited."

Dr Ambedkar, presenting the final draft of the Constitution, 1949

asian-voice.com/Opinion/Column…
Democracy is a vehicle - one of many possible methods of reaching our goals, not a goal in itself.

We need to stop congratulating ourselves for being the "world's biggest democracy" in exchange for praise, and start pursuing the aspirations of the people.

Lokniti, not Rajniti.
Democracy, liberalism, secularism, or socialism as currently practised in India are not achievements for Lokshakti.

They are only an achievement for Rajshakti: the state's abstract values (and rent-seeking gatekeepers) over the socio-economic aspirations of ordinary people.
Bottom-up, indigenous democracy, placed in the hands of the people and reflecting their values, is a powerful, radical tool of decolonisation and self-respect.

We have the opposite - a top-down, colonial polity, designed for winning approval abroad, not uplifting people at home.
It is very easy to use "democracy" as a stick to beat the country with, or as an excuse for all our ills.

Simplu put, we have invested democracy in the wrong places. With not enough real democracy where it matters.

A thread on Lokniti-Lokshakti reforms:

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Ruchir Sharma

Ruchir Sharma Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @ruchirsharma_1

2 Feb
Hindutva does not belong to Modi nor his party, it belongs to the people as a unifying, decolonial ideology similar to pan-Africanism or Yugoslavism.

His own brand of "positive secularism" is even milder - deepening special rights and welfare schemes for religious minorities.
After the disbanding of the Hindu Mahasabha and Jana Sangh, Hindutva as a political ideology does not even exist, except as a bogeyman in the minds of the Anglophone elite.

Even the BJP gave up Hindutva for civic nationalism, Gandhian socialism, and positive secularism in 1980s.
Under Modi, there has been compete policy continuity on minority rights and welfare from the Congress era, with little to no "Hindutva agenda" coming to see the light of day.

The most radical policy they can dream of is religion-neutral laws and equal rights for equal citizens.
Read 18 tweets
22 Jan
From its inception, the dominant view in the US was that democracy/modernity was a unique invention of Protestant genius, and idolators like Catholics, Orthodox Christians, and Pagans were fit only for despotism and autocracy.

That informs how they perceive the world even today.
E.g. This illustration from 1913.

Portraying Catholicism as the opposite of everything American (i.e. Protestant) values stood for, and as a dangerous and subversive influence on society and morals.

Such fears were easy to project onto others, to uphold American exceptionalism.
As @vjgtweets found in his archival research for @HindooHistory, much of modern American literature and reporting on India, such as horrific, exaggerated depictions of the "savage healthen Hindoo", were motivated by a desire to show audiences back home the dangers of Catholicism.
Read 5 tweets
21 Jan
Indira Gandhi had neither badassery nor iron resolve.

She had massive insecurities and paranoia, so both her inner circle of bureaucrats and the Soviet Embassy worked tirelessly to paper over this weakness, by buying the loyalty of the media, academia, and state institutions.
Basically,

1. She grew up isolated, with her father was in prison and her mother dying of TB in a sanatorium.
2. On an unofficial visit to the USSR, her KGB hosts won her over by showering her with attention. Saw her as easily mouldable because of her insecurities and paranoia.
3. After Shastri's convenient death in the USSR, the Congress promoted her to party leader, as a "goongi gudiya" puppet.
4. The Soviet Embassy began financing her as an asset, regularly sending suitcases of cash to her official address, in person.
Read 7 tweets
15 Jan
@jbenton @Harvard @niemanfdn @ShorensteinCtr Don't fall for her spin as the victim here. Nothing more than a cynical veteran hack scrambling to do some damage control.

All after having been called out for masquerading as a Associate Professor at Harvard, to build clout through speaking engagements.

@jbenton @Harvard @niemanfdn @ShorensteinCtr A case for @Harvard's Trademark Program,which oversees the registration of Harvard’s trademarks and guards against their unauthorized use by identifying and resolving cases involving the misuse or infringement of Harvard’s trademarks on a worldwide basis.

trademark.harvard.edu/pages/about
@jbenton @Harvard @niemanfdn @ShorensteinCtr In addition, this was her Twitter headline over this period, while profiting from this dubious association with @Harvard through speaking engagements and media appearances.
Read 11 tweets
31 Dec 20
Right. To build upon this cutting-edge analysis, here's a bit of historical context.

1960 - Literacy: 28%; Congress: 371 Lok Sabha seats
1980 - Literacy: 43%; Congress: 163 seats
2000 - Literacy: 64%; Congress: 114 seats
2020 - Literacy: 78%; Congress: 52 seats
Just waiting now for the inevitable डूबते का तिनके का सहारा response.

"But later in 1980, under our infallible Indiraji's leadership, Congress got 43% of the vote in the election, and the national literacy rate was also 43%. Coincidence? I think not!" 😂

#StatsLikeTharoor
And for the curious, the other years.

1950 - Literacy: 18%; Congress: Turned the indirectly elected Constituent Assembly into a provisional parliament.
1970 - Literacy: 34%; Congress: 283 seats
1990 - Literacy: 52%; Congress: 197 seats
2010 - Literacy: 74%; Congress: 114 seats
Read 6 tweets
30 Dec 20
"If religion is beyond the ken of our State, let us clearly say so and delete all reference to rights relating to religion. If we find it necessary, let us be brave enough and say what it should be."

- Lokanath Mishra, Constituent Assembly Debates, 6 December 1948
"Indeed in no constitution of the world, [the] right to propagate religion is a fundamental right and justiciable. The Irish Free State Constitution recognises the special position of the faith professed by the great majority of the citizens."
"tabooing religion and yet making propagation of religion a fundamental right is somewhat uncanny & dangerous. Justice demands that the ancient faith & culture of the land should be given a fair deal, if not restored to its legitimate place after a thousand years of suppression."
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!