PDA

View Full Version : WHAT WERE CHARAN SINGH'S CONTRIBUTIONS AS A JAT, or AS A LEADER FOR COMMON PEOPLE ?



ravichaudhary
September 15th, 2004, 08:05 PM
What were Charan Singh's contributions?

rkumar
September 15th, 2004, 08:28 PM
Ravi Chaudhary (Sep 15, 2004 10:35 a.m.):
What were Charan Singh's contributions?

Answer: To make all jats keep their heads high with self respect and pride.

Rajendra

anilkc
September 15th, 2004, 08:32 PM
This is what UP walas have to say:
http://www.upportal.com/politics/cm_charan.asp

Chaudhary ji on a stamp:
http://www.indianpost.com/viewstamp.php/Alpha/C/CHARAN SINGH

Interesting:
http://www.terraplanepub.com/worldview/india.htm

rkumar
September 15th, 2004, 08:46 PM
anil chaudhary (Sep 15, 2004 11:07 a.m.):
This is what UP walas have to say:
http://www.upportal.com/politics/cm_charan.asp

Chaudhary ji on a stamp:
http://www.indianpost.com/viewstamp.php/Alpha/C/CHARAN SINGH

Interesting:
http://www.terraplanepub.com/worldview/india.htm

Hi Anil,

The first link pertains to the views written by one Awasthy and I am not at all amazed by his views. Brahman and banias could never digest Ch Charan Signh. So let us not brand that article as UPwalas ...This is just what a Brahman says about Ch. sahab..

The brief write up on the stamp release page tells very clearly the contribution of Ch. sahab on Zamindari abolition, which Ravi may like to take note of.

Rajendra

jatdevta
September 15th, 2004, 11:45 PM
In my opinion Ch. Charan Singh was the only leader who cared about farmers and JATs..And he was the only person who united all the JATs in UP...Because of him all JATs used to vote for Lokdal only.
I don't know a lot about his role as a Prime Minister. I heard from lot of people that it was his mistake. Can anybody highlight it?

ravichaudhary
September 16th, 2004, 12:31 AM
Allow me to argue an opposite site, to be a devil's adovcate if you will


The postage stamp blurb is authored by one " Ajit Singh". Is that his son ?

The tide was already against the Zamindari system, it was eliminated all over India. Land consolidation bills were also passed all over India, at the same time.

So he was simply carrying out his master's orders.

The process was already well on its way.

For those not familiar, the Zamindari system was simply a tax collection system where some"zamindar's" were given contracts to collect tax revenue from a number of villages.

These zamindars took grand titles, like Thakur, Raja and so on.

Then Charan Singh was simply going with the flow.

His hanging on to the Congress coat tails got him a berth in the anti jat Pant government, a few crumbs, when he could get no further, and his use was over, he deserted.

In other words, it could argued that he was on the' make' - simply looking for the trappings of power.

When he obtained power, he did not know what to do with it, for he had no vision to start with, except to get some trappings of power.

He may have conned the ignorant peasantry into thinking he was doing much for them, but he was out of touch with them, their hopes, their toils, and aspirations, and despite his long years in politics from 1928 on( as law minister and as chief minister and as Prime minister)- he did not even get one primary school created in his home district, let alone an institution for higher learning or a road, or drinkng water or primary basic heath facilities.


Opposite concrete views please, with refernces

rkumar
September 16th, 2004, 12:59 AM
Dear Ravi,

I was always under the impression that you have good knowledge about things and you talk things logically and based upon merits. But today you seems to be proving me totally wrong. First of all your language is highly sarcastic and does not go well with any healthy debate. Asking that who is Ajit? Is it his son and things like that does not go well. You seems to be having no idea even what so ever what zamindari was. If zamindari to you was just a tax collection, then I am sorry to say that you need to do some home work. Let me control my outrage at your post now and tell you few things;

1. Zamindars were not only collecting tax, they were the real owners of the land. Zamindari abolition gave rights to those peasants who were cultivating that piece of land. My own grandfather got land rights as a result of zamindari abolition from Verma family of Shamli.

2. You seems to be wriring everything with your efforts to downplay Ch Charan Singh as comapred to Sir Chotu Ram. Now since both are dead and certainly I won't like to cross my limits, I would advise that you come out of your mind set and be objective when you write.

3. What made you think that Ch Charan Singh was only playing to his master's orders? If that be the case then except PM or the highest person in power is the only one who should get credit for everything. By your logic even Gandhi and all freedom fighters did not do anything as British were anyway going to set India free.

4. You seems to be heading exactly same way as that Delhi University professor Prabha Datta or whatever her name is. You are almost behaving like an authority in history now by writing things through your skewed vision.

5. Can you give me one proof that G.B. Pant was anti Jat? Had that been the case, not a single jat family would have got the almost free land in Tarai region of UP..Hope you know that it was Pant who called people from Haryana and punjab andf gave them land all over tarai in UP.

Without going any further for the time being, I would request that you show some maturity in your writing so that debates do no loose their meaning.

Regards
rajendra

ravichaudhary
September 16th, 2004, 01:56 AM
Debates mean taking contrasting positions.

I have written that I am being the Devil's advocate, i.e. taking the opposite view deliberately.

Now you make not like the opposite view, but it is still an opposite view,

It is not enough to say simply that someone who presents an unflattering view is a bania, brahmin or immature and therefore incorrect.

The writer Avasthi also called Charan singh - honest, but arrogant

So why the outrage ?

Is it possible to step outside the box, and simply examine his deeds and action, without getting all laudatory about him.

You can simply provide evidence of Charan Singh's work and achievement.

That is the way to demolish Mr Awasthi's writeup,

simply calling him names will not do it.

Do I make sense ?

ravi

rkumar
September 16th, 2004, 01:58 AM
Ravi Chaudhary (Sep 15, 2004 04:26 p.m.):
Debates mean taking contrasting positions.

I have written that I am being the Devil's advocate, i.e. taking the opposite view deliberately.

Now you make not like the opposite view, but it is still an opposite view,

It is not enough to say simply that someone who presents an unflattering view is a bania, brahmin or immature and therefore incorrect.

The writer Avasthi also called Charan singh - honest, but arrogant

So why the outrage ?

Is it possible to step outside the box, and simply examine his deeds and action, without getting all laudatory about him.

You can simply provide evidence of Charan Singh's work and achievement.

That is the way to demolish Mr Awasthi's writeup,

simply calling him names will not do it.

Do I make sense ?

ravi

I am sorry..you make no sense at all what so ever...

Rajendra

mbamal
September 16th, 2004, 02:29 AM
Rajendra Kumar Kalkhunde (Sep 15, 2004 04:03 p.m.):
Delhi University professor Prabha Datta or whatever her name is.

Nonica Dutta..Miranda House...I think!

mbamal
September 16th, 2004, 02:37 AM
Rajendra Kumar Kalkhunde (Sep 15, 2004 04:03 p.m.):
Dear Ravi,

I was always under the impression that you have good knowledge about things and you talk things logically and based upon merits. But today you seems to be proving me totally wrong.

Rajendra Ji,

Dont b so judgemental so rashly...Ravi has a very well informed and comprehensive overview of Jat history. I guess he is just being more inquisitive..

birbal
September 16th, 2004, 03:20 AM
This post has raised several issues and I would like to add my two cents worth based on my own experience and observations.

I believe Chaudhary Charan Singh contributed immensly to the uplifting of the Jat community. Irrespective of the past history, the vast majority of Jat population had faced hard times after 1857. There were very few Jats who occupied the privileged position after that time. For that small group, people like Ch. Charan Singh ( and Ch. Kumbha Ram Arya, Sardar Harlal Singh from my local perspective) were a nuisance, but for the most youngsters like me these people were great role models. Of course, now that I find myself in a fairly priviledged position, my children and grandchildren do not feel the same need of a community leader as I did.

So, I agree strongly with Rajendraji in this regard. I would also like to point out several other people in that era who made immense difference to their whole communities. The ones I can recollect are Dr. B.R. Ambedkar for the Mahars in Maharashtra, E.V. Ramaswammy Naicker for the non-Brahmins in Tamilnadu, and Babu Jagjiwan Ram for the Chamars. Thanks to people like Ch. Charan Singh that the Jat community today has a much stronger voice in the country than it had in centuries.

There is no truth to the argument that the Zamindari system was going to go anyway. It took a lot of effort to get rid of it and Ch. Charan Singh was the principal leader for this. Many people do not realize that although India got freedom in 1947, the Jagirdari system in Rajasthan was abolished in Rajasthan in 1953 through a great struggle and its two main leaders in the Rajasthan legislature, Ch. Kumbha Ram Arya and Sardar Harlal Singh were Charan Singh loyalists till death.

There is ample evidence and agreement that Ch. Charan Singh was extremely honest person and that is a rarity in Indian politics. He did not steal from the people and as far as possible did not allow others to steal and for this he was highly disliked by senior bureaucrats who happened to be mostly upper caste people.

I see nothing wrong in the fact that he joined hands with people like Pant. In politics one has to choose sides and usually it is the lesser of the evils. Even by that standard, Pant was a fairly decent person.

The accusation that Ch. Charan Singh started the defection process is totally baseless. Many politicians, even those considered great by all Indians left their party to join some other party long before 1967. Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose had won the Congress Presidency despite opposition from Gandhi and later had to leave the party. Congress stalwarts like Kripalani, C.D. Deshmukh, C. Rajgopalachari left the Congress party in frustration soon after the independence for losing out to Nehru. Well known leaders like Ashoka Mehta were taken by Nehru in his cabinet after ditching their party.

So, in my opinion, Ch. Charan Singh gave a sense of empowerment to many downtrodden people that included vast majority of Jats including myself. His ability to unite Jats, Ahirs, Gujars, and Muslims showed his immense political skills. Of course, most prejudiced upper caste people I have known hate him and that makes me think that he must have done something right.

ravichaudhary
September 16th, 2004, 06:06 AM
Mandeep Bamal (Sep 15, 2004 05:07 p.m.):

Rajendra Kumar Kalkhunde (Sep 15, 2004 04:03 p.m.):
Dear Ravi,

I was always under the impression that you have good knowledge about things and you talk things logically and based upon merits. But today you seems to be proving me totally wrong.

Rajendra Ji,

Dont b so judgemental so rashly...Ravi has a very well informed and comprehensive overview of Jat history. I guess he is just being more inquisitive..

Dear Rajendra

Please, The last thing I wish to do is to prove you, of all persons, wrong.

I would rather prove you right.

Mandeep is correct, in fact has hit the nail on the head.

I am simply putting some very difficult questions forward,with a deliberate position, much like a lawyer arguing a case

No right, no wrong

and I am not expecting you personally to carry the torch for the other side.

I am asking some hard questions. That is what one does in an analysis of history, so do not get worked up and hot under the collar.

It is only by asking some hard questions, that we have a different view of our Jat history today.

The questions force some hard thinking. The result is always better.

If you think my questions are rough, ,wait till you have to tackle the professionals, who simply pooh pooh and ridicule everything that the Jat historians have to say.


I am not expecting immediate answers either, unless someone has some concrete information.


Ravi

ravichaudhary
September 16th, 2004, 06:29 AM
[quote]Dr. Birbal Singh (Sep 15, 2004 07:59 p.m.):

Dear Dr Birbal Singh

Beliefs are great things.

Quite obviously the abolition of Jagirdari and Zamindari were wonderful things, and required much struggle and had serious opposition.

Did this help Eastern UP or Bihar???

On what basis, beyond belief, would you say that this was the creation of Charan Singh. What is the hard evidence on the ground ?


So he reached a high political position, and that was a role model for some peoplel( including you- no disrespect).

What is it exactly that Charan Singh did do for the Jats, or for the common people???

The question still stands

Any schools , education, infrastructure, taking the community in a new direction ???.

How did his becoming a political leader help anyone- except himself ??

No knee jerk reactions please

ravi

nvedwan
September 16th, 2004, 09:44 AM
Chaudhary Charan Singh was a consummate politician, first-rate intellectual, son-of-the-soil, and simply one of the most influential politicians India has produced in the twentieth century.

Given below are some of the principal achievements of his political career, a tour de force in truly inhospitable circumstances, in a rough chronological order. His socio-cultural impact, which is not discussed here, was in all likelihood even more profound and far reaching. These are mostly taken from Byres (1988):

1939: Debt Redemption Bill
Charan Singh introduced the bill to provide relief to heavily indebted farmers in teeth of tremendous opposition from members of his own, Congress party.

His struggle to limit the power of landlords spans the period before Independence and up to the 1960s. As early as 1939, he attempted to introduce a bill in the UP legislative council which aimed at 50% reservation in jobs for those of rural origin. In the same year, he also drafted a resolution that sought to transfer proprietorship of agricultural land to people who actually tilled it (“Land to the tiller”, as opposed to absentee landlords). The draft was approved in the AICC meeting in Calcutta in 1945.

His interventions on behalf of, and vigorous advocacy of the peasantry were not just limited to initiating legislative measures. He also wrote numerous articles in the national dailies (e.g. HT), presenting convincingly the case for the liberation of the oppressed peasantry from a web of exploitative relations. This helped, in general, to mobilize public opinion, and gave voice to a section of population historically absent from debates concerning its own fate.

Zamindara Abolition Act (1952…)

Post-independence, Charan Singh’s long standing resolve to destroy the parasitic class of Zamindars culminated in the passing of “Zamindara abolition act”, perhaps the single most important step to lead to the rise of a robust, assertive and politically influential peasantry. The enactment of the law abolishing Zamindari, it turned out was only the first half of the “mortal struggle against landlordism”, the implementation had to be carried out in face of fierce resistance from large landlords—the traditional constituency of the Congress.

The Consolidation of Holdings Act of 1953

Charan Singh had observed, as early as 1925, the debilitating impact of fragmentation of land holdings on agricultural productivity. Again, consolidation was effected in face of resistance from well-entrenched interests. Both the abolition of Zamindara and Consolidation were greatly facilitated by the dismissal of the notorious ‘patwaris’ who acted brazenly in favor of landlords, often by falsifying records of possession and cultivation.

Opposition to taxation of agricultural land

Beginning in the 1960s, the arena for peasant’s struggles shifted to urban areas. The battle lines were now drawn between the urban and rural interests, rather than between sections of rural interests. One of the first issue to emerge in this regard was that of increase in taxation of agriculture. In 1962, Charan Singh opposed, while being a Congress minister, his party’s attempts to increase land tax by 50%.

His opposition to increase in taxation, in characteristic fashion, was framed as “a combination of intellectual arguments, pleading and political warning” (Byres 1988:157) in a memorandum conveyed to the then UP CM CB Gupta.

Resistance to Compulsory Food Procurement

The consecutive years of drought in 1966-1967 led the Central government to consider procuring food grains directly from farmers at prices which would have been highly unfavorable to them (the govt’s main concern being feeding the urban poor at an affordable price). Charan Singh, then the CM of UP, resisted the procurement initially and proposed that the govt procure from the wholesale traders. When this did not succeed, he modified the central govt’s plan to the advantage of peasants by offering them a much higher procurement price than the prevailing market rates. The infrastructure he put in place for this led in time to the regime of Minimum Support Price for food grains (and other crops), which has provided stability to the prices of food grains and thus ensured that farmers are not exploited by merchants.

Charan Singh’s rally of Dec 23, 1978

One of the biggest rallies ever to be held in Delhi, the demonstration of the might of Indian peasantry--its coming of age--became evident to all: the anti-farmer government, condescending intelligentsia, and the urban elite who were oblivious to the silent revolution-of-sorts that was brewing in the countryside. The emergence of farmers as a vocal, powerful political constituency owes a great deal to this unprecedented show of strength.

Charan Singh’s budget of 1979

Reduced duty on chemical fertilizers by half. Reduced or abolished taxes on mechanical tillers and other inputs, established NABARD (rural credit)


Charan Singh’s intellectual contributions

Terry Byres (The School of Oriental and African Studies, London), one of the most prominent and astute political economists to have studied Indian agriculture for over half-century sums up Charan Singh as an intellectual, thus:
“My judgment is that on the most rigorous definition Charan Singh was clearly an intellectual; and not only that, a most unusual one” (1988:167).

Moreover Charan Singh is no run-of-mill intellectual: He is an “organic” intellectual.
Again Byres (quoting Gramsci, a Marxist theorist) defined an “organic intellectual” (by the way an influential concept in the social sciences):

“The thinking and organizing element of a particular fundamental social class. These individuals are distinguished….by their function in directing the ideas and aspirations of the class to which they organically belong”

Charan Singh left behind a corpus of work remarkable for its clarity, consistency and penetrating insights (See list below for a sample). A large part of Charan Singh’s intellectual life was devoted to wrestling with the so-called “Agrarian question”. In other words, what is the most appropriate path for a mass of subsistence peasantry to be ushered into capitalism. Methodically, in his numerous writings, he dealt with the various alternatives; collectivization (“there is nowhere in the Indian literature that the case against collectivization is better presented”) and unbridled capitalism. Ultimately, he settled on the principle of “peasant proprietorship”/family farm in the American literature.

Examining the Russian collectivization experience in detail, he offered a devastating and prescient critique on pragmatic, psychological, and social-historical grounds. In addition, he demonstrated the historical relationship between individual peasant proprietorship and emergence of democracy. The analysis and prescriptions are particularly important because of their stubborn independence of prevailing favorable sentiment towards cooperative agriculture among certain sections of the Congress party and the bureaucracy. Brass places Charan Singh’s thinking, his ideology, on economic issues squarely in the neo-populist tradition (which, in very simple terms, argues for the primacy of the people over the corporations or the cooperatives as means to economic transformation). In fact Charan Singh propounded the famous “Urban bias” thesis and its role in perpetuating poverty in the underdeveloped countries, which was later picked up by the well-known political-economist Michael Lipton. In terms of the cogency, influence, sheer output and the remarkable continuity in his arguments over a span of half century, he is often likened to the famous Russian neo-populists like Chayanov, who defended the “family farm” in face of the relentless capitalist onslaught.

From 1947 onwards, Charan Singh used the famous “inverse relationship” between land holding and productivity to buttress his argument against cooperative agriculture. In his writings, he was a prolific but discriminating user of data and statistics. Fully conversant with the current agricultural economic research, he deployed findings to both support his arguments, and to guide his political practice.




Let’s now turn our attention to concerns that have been raised here: the “mistakes” of Charan Singh:

“Not taking the community in a new direction”: so freeing the community from the clutches of blood-sucking Zamindars was not a new direction. I guess if he had taken them over a cliff, it would count!

Not building concrete structures. Hmmmm…. What has that great institution the “Sarv Khap”, of which we have heard many a wonderful tale, left us with, and how about that great emperor Harshvardhan “Virk”? But wait, maybe, we will soon find out that they built the Taj Mahal!

“Zamindars are tax collectors”. Yeah and Holocaust was a picnic!
You know it is these sweet Zamindars, these great tax collectors who have made Pakistan the wonderfully progressive nation it is today. These feudal elements, in combination with the military, control most of the land (in absence of effective LAND REFORM) and resist democracy tooth and nail at every step. I guess, according to some people we will be better off under that system, as long as these Zamindars are Jats! For some people, believe it or not, feudalism is still a virtue!

How we have to evaluate National leaders on basis of their contribution to their castes:
Evaluate Gandhi on the basis of his contribution to Gujarati banias. Result: FAIL

But no one should be surprised by the comments of Mr Chaudhary and his highly disrespectful tone. These views are logical corollaries of a mindset that takes a purely communal view of history. And then we blame Jinnah for being parochial and not nationalist enough in demanding Pakistan. Charan Singh wasn’t screaming “Sarv Khap Zindabad” (or Jai Harsh Vardhan!) from the ramparts of the Red Fort, but he accomplished a lot for the peasantry, including Jats, without making a huge show of his affinities and allegiances.

Regarding hanging on to the coattails of anyone including the Congress, Charan Singh simply was too proud, and too much his own man, to do that. Besides his record and achievements speak for themselves. He was opposed in most of his actions on behalf of peasantry, by the Congress. He perhaps could influence agricultural policies more being in the Congress, than if he had been outside it. Very skillfully, he reminded the Congress party, from time to time, using a combination of tactics, of the political stupidity of alienating the countryside. And he knew where to draw the line. He was the only leader to have the balls to stand up to Nehru when the latter proposed collectivization of agriculture in the Nagpur session of the Congress. Charan Singh, being the pragmatist that he was, knew that the fiercely independent peasantry would have trouble with the alien concept of cooperative agriculture. Nehru had to relent in face of his unflinching resistance.

Finally, I would like to recount an anecdote which Terry Byres, a committed Marxist, and not certainly one sympathetic to Charan Singh’s political goals, writes in the latter’s obituary. The incident being related goes to the heart of the condescending, belittling and contemptuous attitude that urban intellectuals held Charan Singh (and let’s not forget, also the class he came from) in. An Indian student from an urban background (not unlike our Mr Chaudhary) walks in Byres office, and spotting Charan Singh’s “Economic Nightmare of India…” on the professor’s desk dismissively remarked: "Did he really write this?” Unfortunately, even almost twenty years after Chaudhary Saheb’s death we still have people displaying similar arrogance and ignorance. But then his memory and legacy continues to live and resonate among millions of farmers and others - the toiling masses, whose lives he immeasurably improved by his actions and ideology. The amazing array of qualities that he embodied—incisive intellect, charisma, earthy charm, unsparing candor, rugged individualism, unbending integrity, steadfastness of purpose and vision-- while retaining ties to his culture, have endeared him greatly to Jats, who love to see these qualities in their leaders. It is this silent majority--the motor of history-- which shall remain the failsafe repository of Ch. Charan Singh’s ideas.


REFERENCES (Including selected works of Charan Singh)

Bose, Ajai. 1987. Champion of India’s Peasant’s is Dead. The Observer. May 30.

Brass, Paul R. 1965. Factional Politics in Congress in Uttar Pradesh. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Brass. Paul R. 1980. The Politicization of Peasantry in a North Indian State: Part 1. Journal of Peasant Studies. Vol 7. No. 4.
Byres. Terence J. 1978. Charan Singh: An Assessment. Journal of Peasant Studies. Vol 9. No2. 139-189.

Lipton, Michael. 1977. Why poor people stay poor: a study of urban bias in World Development. London: Temple Smith.

Singh, Charan. 1947. Abolition of Zamindari: Two alternatives. Allahabad: Kitabistan

--1949. Abolition of Zamindari: Critics answered. Allahabad. Suptdt. Printing and Stationaery. United Provinces, India

--1956 Whither Cooperative Farming? Allahabad. Suptdt. Printing and Stationary. Uttar Pradesh, India
--1958 Agrarian Revolution in Uttar Pradesh. Allahabad. Suptdt. Printing and Stationaery. Uttar Pradesh, India

--1959 Joint Farming X-Rayed: The Problem and its Solution. Allahabad: Kitabistan

--1964 India’s Poverty and its Solution. London: Asia Publishing House.

--1970 The story of New Congress-BKD relations: How the New Congress Broke the UP coalition. Lucknow: BKD

--1978 India’s Economic Policy: The Gandhian Blueprint. New Delhi: Vikas Publishing House

--1981 Economic Nightmare of India: Its Cause and Cure. New Delhi: National Publishing House. [Once prescribed text at Harvard University]

Sreeraman, N. 1966 A note on field consolidation in Uttar Pradesh: A field survey. Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 66

rkumar
September 16th, 2004, 01:24 PM
Ravi Chaudhary (Sep 15, 2004 08:36 p.m.):

Mandeep Bamal (Sep 15, 2004 05:07 p.m.):

Rajendra Kumar Kalkhunde (Sep 15, 2004 04:03 p.m.):
Dear Ravi,

I was always under the impression that you have good knowledge about things and you talk things logically and based upon merits. But today you seems to be proving me totally wrong.

Rajendra Ji,

Dont b so judgemental so rashly...Ravi has a very well informed and comprehensive overview of Jat history. I guess he is just being more inquisitive..

Dear Rajendra

Please, The last thing I wish to do is to prove you, of all persons, wrong.

I would rather prove you right.

Mandeep is correct, in fact has hit the nail on the head.

I am simply putting some very difficult questions forward,with a deliberate position, much like a lawyer arguing a case

No right, no wrong

and I am not expecting you personally to carry the torch for the other side.

I am asking some hard questions. That is what one does in an analysis of history, so do not get worked up and hot under the collar.

It is only by asking some hard questions, that we have a different view of our Jat history today.

The questions force some hard thinking. The result is always better.

If you think my questions are rough, ,wait till you have to tackle the professionals, who simply pooh pooh and ridicule everything that the Jat historians have to say.


I am not expecting immediate answers either, unless someone has some concrete information.


Ravi

Dear Ravi,

I just expected a balanced start-up from you on this debate and not sarcastic remarks...You almost started like a examiner asking a question.....

Rajendra

rksehrawat
September 16th, 2004, 05:00 PM
Dear Raviji and Rajendraji,

Taking a typical jat view, you will perhaps agree that whatever his policies or programmes, he was the undisputed leader of jats and the jats could do anything for him during his life time. I am sure you might not have foregotten the day he was dropped from Cabinet by Morarji in 1978. Jats were all over Delhi and Government was struggling to control them. He had not to arrange for his supporters to be brought in hired buses. He and Ch. Devilal had not to hire beggers from Hanuman temple and daily wagers from different parts of Delhi as the other leaders often do. When he was alive and even now no one could utter a single word against him in rural areas, around Delhi at least. No doubt he was the champion of people from Amritsar to Patna so what if he was not as cunning as were his adversaries, he was a leader of masses and one like him is needed badly today.

As regards his policies and programms, the same people who are trying to be champions of farmers now used to call him "Kulak" when he took up the cause of farmers. Now the pseudo leaders of farmers in order to impose themselves are stealing leaves from the great economist of a farmer. Don't foreget most of today's so called kisan and mazdoor leaders used to sit at his feet, Vajpayee, Mulayam and Laloos included. I myself had listned to Vajpayee saying in a public meeting that the country will rue one day for ignoring Ch. Charan Singh's advice for rural development. Now the Government is talking of social forestry which was the brain child of Ch. Charan Singh but during his lifetime they used to laugh at him whenever he uttered this word.

All those books and articles referred to in this thread were mostly written by anti-jat authors mainly to please the detractors of Ch. Charan Singh, mainly Indira Gandhi.

nvedwan
September 16th, 2004, 05:36 PM
Dear Mr Sehrawat,
Please see the list of books (and numerous articles, not mentioned here) that Ch. Charan Singh wrote over a long period to make the case for the upliftment of farmers.

As far as articles/papers written by others, it is not correct to think of them as having been written in support of the Congress/Indira. Some of these scholars(Byres, Brass) have impeccable credentials, in research, as well as, their intellectual independence. As for calling Charan Singh a Kulak leader (maybe inaccurately), it is, first, not a term of abuse but simply refers to his economic class (Kulak being the Russian term for farmers who are profit-driven and market-oriented, and are perhaps engaged in money-lending, etc). Charan Singh resented the term and rightly so because he was for the most part arguing for the interests of the peasantry as whole and not just the interests of rich farmers) Again, these largely academic debates about his "class identification" do not diminish his importance as a political and social phenomenon, the like of which we see only once every century or so.

--Neeraj

ravichaudhary
September 16th, 2004, 05:40 PM
[b]Rajendra Kumar Kalkhunde (Sep 16, 2004 03:54 a.m.):


Dear Ravi,

I just expected a balanced start-up from you on this debate and not sarcastic remarks...You almost started like a examiner asking a question.....

Rajendra

Dear Rajendra

Ok

and obviously I upset you ( and others).
Please accept my apologies.

Perhaps I should not have raised the question.
He was a public figure and these questions get raised , by others who are not quite so sympathetic to the Jat cause.

In a discussion on a history class, the advocate of Charan singh's judging by what I see so far, would get torn to shreds.

Now could everyone please treat it like an examination question.

[Rajendra that is a good expression].

Can we get some hard evidence, instead of perceptions?

ravi

rkumar
September 16th, 2004, 05:56 PM
Dear Neeraj,

Please accept my congratulations for presenting well researched thoughts. High time we have a chair to his name in major Economics departments in the country. He was a man of vision, integrity, honesty and simplicity. In my view he was the greatest Indian Jat of 20th centuary. His personality is matter of reaserch topics and I am sure many Ph.D thesis can be produced.

Rajendra

rkumar
September 16th, 2004, 06:02 PM
Ravi Chaudhary (Sep 16, 2004 08:10 a.m.):
[quote][b]Rajendra Kumar Kalkhunde (Sep 16, 2004 03:54 a.m.):

Now could everyone please treat it like an examination question.

[Rajendra that is a good expression].

Can we get some hard evidence, instead of perceptions?

ravi

Ravi! Do you think Neeraj has has not provided hard enough evidences in his post? Do I have to paste the doccumnets where my grand father was given ownership of the land he was cultivating for years ? If these are not hard enough, will you please define the degree of hardness which will pass the test?

Rajendra

nvedwan
September 16th, 2004, 06:09 PM
Dear Rajendraji,
Thanks. You are absolutely right about the need for establishing a chair to honor him. Only then can we ever hope to combat the contempt with which he is often treated in our media, by our urban-centric intelligentsia.

You, Dr Birbal, and others had raised most of the points that are covered in this still-inadequate writeup, but I guess I found myself too outraged by some of the disrespectful and ignorant posts and forgot to acknowledge that! Anyway thanks for correcting some of the reigning misperceptions here on Jatland. As you noted, an authoritative and comprehensive biography of Ch Charan Singh is sorely missed. The need for it has never been greater.

Sincerely
--Neeraj

ravichaudhary
September 17th, 2004, 07:56 AM
Rajendra

The 'deed papers', would be real historical documents , and if you would not mind sharing it with us, do please scan a copy and upload it.

On Charan Singh, he was the only Jat primeminister of free India. So Jats should shout that in a thousand sites, so that when someone does an internet search 150,000 or more hits come up. He should have a detailed writeup on this site too, presumably that will happen sooner or later.

I also agree about chairs in universities being named after him, the more the merrier
.
I am with you there.



Also "Kulak" is a perjorative term in current English usuge,esapecially in Indian media, for a feudal landlord, who exploits his serfs and thralls. Most jats with their sense of republicanism and egalitarianism, do not fit into that category, and rightly resent terms such as that being applied to them.

*********************
Now going back to my devil's advocate role-

when are we going to see some real evidence about him ?.

Am I now going to upset two persons?

What exactly has Neeraj written beyond referring to books and articles, he does not list or name ?

He[ Neeraj no offence intended] is presenting his opinion, but without any evidence [or did I miss something]

For a new reader who has never heard the name Charan Singh, I really wonder how much that reader would have learned, if this thread was the sole source of information about him.


ravi

nvedwan
September 17th, 2004, 08:11 AM
Dear Ravi,

You write:

"What exactly has Neeraj written beyond referring to books and articles, he does not list or name ?"

What I wrote is drawn exclusively from the list of references provided at the end. I don't understand what you mean by the above statement.

For starters, you might familiarize yourself with the thoughts and actions of Charan Singh by reading some of his books (listed at the end, especially "Nightmare of India's economy"). If you want more information about the role Charan Singh played in correcting the "Urban Bias" in Indian planning, you may want to read Ashutosh Varshney's "Democracy, Development, & the Countryside: Urban-Rural Struggles in India". 1995. Cambridge University Press. Also, read Byres article of Journal of Peasant Studies, which is where the bulk of what I said comes from.

If the evidence of Charan Singh's steadfast vision extending over half a century, and political actions over the same period, which helped the emergence of the so-called "Farmer lobby", doesn't pass muster with you as "achievement", I frankly don't know what will. Please let us know of the dictionary you are using, and then we can finally understand what you mean by "acheivement".

Perhaps, instead of looking outside for evidence or the lack thereof of Charan Singh's greatness, you should start with a little introspection. That might help in removing some of the heavy blinkers, which are preventing you from seeing and acknowledging the obvious.

Also, your description of "kulak" as feudal, etc is wrong. Kulak is a term that has a historically specific meaning, and it is used for relatively affluent farmers who also also assume the role of merchant. Again, it is used to explain socio-economic evolution (from Marxist standpoint) and the category represents the transition from subsistence to fully capitalist farmers. You should not casually throw these terms around without regard to their specific analytical and historical import.
Sincerely
--Neeraj

rkumar
September 17th, 2004, 03:02 PM
Ravi,

When you post material on Sir Chotu Ram, that becomes hard evidence and when Neeraj posts much more analytical evidence, that still remains soft. What will one call this? Is it not setting diffent rules? This is our typical Indian mind set and reflects in India justice system.." One is guilty unless proved otherwise. Onus of proof is on the accused.".... You started this thread as devil's lawyer and you are behaving true to your role....hahahaha... I am sure this is how most historians behave...Thank God most of us have seen Ch sahab with our own eyes, else some of your breed will make it sure that after 100yrs he would have become Gulshan Nanda novel character. Trouble is that it pays to write biography of Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi, but not of Ch Sahab. How many Jats will reead his biography in english and how many copies will sell if this is written in English? This is why the legacy of Ch sahab will remain in his beneficiaries for generations to come. Paragraphs or no paragraphs in history book won't make much difference.

This further reminds me of a Rama temple at Lodhi Road which is next to Satya Sai Baba temple. I hardly see a devotee in Rama temple whereas hords throng into Satya Sai Baba temple. Does that make satya sai baba a bigger God??? It is the place in the heart of millions what makes a great leader and not few paragraphs written by paid historians/ news papaers.

Can I ask you few counter questions? You are putting so much of efforts to argue the case of Sir Chotu Ram and whole lots of disputed or non-disputed jat kings, what have you done so far on Ch sahab? Or , have you concluded that Ch sahab was not a jat of any significance? Is that the onus of proof is on us in the witness box and you have taken the role of ridiculing whatever proof we bring?

Rajendra

nvedwan
September 17th, 2004, 06:34 PM
Dear Rajendraji,
Let me offer a hypothesis about why Ravi thinks Sir Chhotu Ram was a much taller leader of Jats than Ch Charan Singh.

Ch Chhotu Ram belonged to the Unionist party, and yes, that was the party primarily of big landlords (feudal as opposed to Kulaks). But from Ravi's perspective the class (rich/poor) is irrelevant, but what is important is that he brought about "unity" among the Jat farming community of the Punjab (here I am referring to Muslims as Jats, which is whatRavi's perspective probably is). Now there are two big assumptions going on here:

1. That the Jat identity really mattered for ALL the farmers, belonging to the Unionist Party, and trumped muslim farmer's religious identity. This is clearly something that Ravi sees because of what he chooses to see rather than what existed in reality.

2. Charan Singh would have better served Jat interests by aligning himself with the Unionist party/Chhotu Ram. Never mind that the interest of Jat farmers and others in the then United Provinces had more in common with farmers of OTHER CASTES in that province rather than the so-called Jats of remote, Northwestern Frontier.

Fortunately, for Jats of UP and elsewhere, Charan Singh was not a day-dreamer and did not have his head comfortably buried in the sand. He realized with his customary clarity that one cannot achieve much in politics without alliance building with similarly placed groups (and sometimes even, hold your breath now, the evil brahmins) especially in UP where the Jats don't enjoy numerical superiority.

So, Ch. Charan Singh is being "punished" (behind all this talk of Bhakra Nangal and what not) for not being "visionary" enough to work for the, I might add mythic, unity of Jats. The funny part here is that this is coming from a historian, who should know that relgious identities had become much stronger than the caste identity by the early twentieth century, if not earlier, and Charan Singh would have been attempting to go against the forecs of social/historical evolution, had he thought about Jat community in such romantic but outdated terms.

rkumar
September 17th, 2004, 06:58 PM
Friends,

In India we have many paradoxes. This is highly strange that how images are built and damaged. Let me empty my thoughts here under the context of Ch Sahab.

1. G.D. Birla was the smartest man in India in 20th centuary as he could build up the biggest industrial empire (which I am sure could not have been done without being in good books of British) and at the same time could remain closely associated with Mahatma Gandhi. Gandhi used all his hospitality and took him every where including to round table conference in London.

2. Look at all these ex maharajs like Scindhias, Capt Amrinder Singh etc how they colloborated with British and now controlling both BJP and congress as well...

Modern day historians dare not to ink a word against them and never question their contributions to the masses as they all know what will they get back in retaliation. Birlas control the mass media and feed all these writers.

So where to point the guns then? At people like Ch sahab, communists or for that matter anyone who sided with masses. To uplift our identity we are willing to fabricate the caste of some king long dead and forgotten, where as they are doing their best to erase every work about the persons who died for public cause...This is what the reality is all about..High time we accept and when people like nonica dutta or irfan ridicule us, don't feel surprised..This is all part of same forces acting at all level..

Rajendra

anilkc
September 17th, 2004, 08:42 PM
U r right Rajendra Ji abt paradoxes.
Ppl with loudest mouth and biggest stick can re-write history. And history changes with time. Other examples that come to my mind are that of Netaji and Savarkar. Till 1970 Communists were telling everybody that Netaji was fascist, now he is tallest freedom fighter. For that matter they called Gandhi a capitalist. Savarkar and RSS were bitter enemies and today they are hailing him as true patriot and a true Hindu.
But over time (really long time) when the prejudices are numbed, the real history comes up. Actions cannot be changed but the interpretation of intention can be. So, just let us collect the hard facts and leave it to individual for interpretation. Lets not worry abt who is taller, as long as they did something good, its good enuf for me.

saharawat
September 17th, 2004, 09:33 PM
Rajendra ji and Neeraj thanks for a great text on Ch. Charan Singh.

Definitely it is not enough for Ravi, but a lot who admires the Ch. Charan Singh achievement for Jat community as well as for poor.

"Balak (Child) aur jhota (Bhaisa) ek baar hat (jid) mar jaaye to usko phir koi na mana sakata"

"Mai Swarg me jakar Ch. Charan Singh ji se zaroor puchoonga ki unhone nahar (canal) aur school kyon nehi banwayi"

anilkc
September 17th, 2004, 10:07 PM
Just trying to understand the school/nahar issue:
During Ch. Sahabs tenure as the CM of UP, were no schools or canals or anything build?

How much property (land/cash) did he own during his lifetime?

rkumar
September 17th, 2004, 10:16 PM
anil chaudhary (Sep 17, 2004 12:37 p.m.):
Just trying to understand the school/nahar issue:
During Ch. Sahabs tenure as the CM of UP, were no schools or canals or anything build?

How much property (land/cash) did he own during his lifetime?

Anil,

I won't know of Schools and canals, but I can tell you one thing which he did during his CM-ship in UP and which tells very clearly his feelings on catse based institutions. He gave ultimatom to all the schools and colleges whose names were caste based to change the names, else face action. Overnight the vaishya colleges became Viyaparic mandal colleges and jat colleges became janta colleges...This was his way of taking actions.

Chakbandi was another step in which he played vital role. Scattered land holdings were consolidated, thereby helping the farmers to have infrastructures like tubewells etc..

Let us accept one thing. Taking administrative steps in India is far more difficult than getting sanctions for few buildings and roads. Ch. Sahab was a minor sardar patel in every aspect and that speaks from his actions.

Rajendra

ravichaudhary
September 18th, 2004, 02:29 AM
Sorry I had missed Neeraj's post completely. My oversight

Is Myres a Marxist? Leninist?

The other references, what exactly do they say.

Are they just a list that has been appended, or is there something specific that our attention is being dircected to- if the latter we are missing page numbers and the relevant quote.

can we have some detail ?

ravi

ravichaudhary
September 18th, 2004, 02:47 AM
Rajendra

This is not about Chotu ram vs Charan singh. and I will request everyone not to make it so. As mentioned earlier I had no idea who Chotu Ram was until some years ago

back to topic:

When you see evidence, on the other thread, the quotes are specific and clear to follow. That is what is hard primary evidence.

Here we have opinion, analysis, being passed off as evidence.

So Myres has a opinion.? What of it ? Any one not agreeing to it is branded pro Indira Gandhi or anti Jat ?

Is that to be our yardstick?

Get the material out, scan and post it.

Let us see how we can go from a commited marxist ideology to capitalism in three easy steps.


I hope other members will also pitch in and scan and post the material, so we can all judge for ourselves

On as a slight aside the history text " An Advanced history of India" By R C Majumdar etc 4th edition, 1990, a prescribed University level text

Mentions Zamindari abolition, but there is no mention of Charan Singh's name at all[ in the entire book].

Was he really prime minister?

Let me be impartial- Chotu Ram is not mentioned either

Ravi

nvedwan
September 18th, 2004, 02:59 AM
Hi Ravi
It's Byres--not Myres. Read his "assessment of Charan Singh". He is a Marxist (mentioned in the article). I doubt if you have really read what I wrote.

I should also remind you that this article is from a preeminent agrarian studies journal which is "PEER REVIEWED" unlike what you present here as "evidence", which is mostly written by retired and bored bureacrats indulging their fancy.

Charan Singh introducing the Zamindara abolition act--if that is not good enough for you, I don't know what will be. So you will ask if Abraham Lincoln abolished slavery or not. Please read what I wrote again.

Neeraj

varuntomar
September 18th, 2004, 05:47 AM
anil chaudhary (Sep 17, 2004 12:37 p.m.):
Just trying to understand the school/nahar issue:
During Ch. Sahabs tenure as the CM of UP, were no schools or canals or anything build?

How much property (land/cash) did he own during his lifetime?



Property( land/cash) he didn't own anything only thing his wife inherited after his death was his official residence..........but loyalty towards him among jats was such that on his call all the jats( who love their land like their child) would have given it away.......

ravichaudhary
September 18th, 2004, 06:17 AM
Neeraj Vedwan (Sep 17, 2004 05:37 p.m.):
Hi Ravi

I should also remind you that this article is from a preeminent agrarian studies journal which is "PEER REVIEWED" unlike what you present here as "evidence", which is mostly written by retired and bored bureacrats indulging their fancy.


Neeraj

Irfan Habib works are also peer reviewed


http://jatland.com/cgi-bin/ub/UltraBoard.cgi?action=Read&BID=19&TID=1181&SID=21007
. Irfan Habib's Theory - Jats from Shudras and outcastes



Ravi Chaudhary

nvedwan
September 18th, 2004, 06:34 AM
Is Irfan Habib your only, or even prime source for your pet theories?

How about the one who believes that Sir Chhotu Ram made Bhakra dam?

Was his work peer reviewed?

ravichaudhary
September 18th, 2004, 09:11 AM
Neeraj Vedwan (Sep 17, 2004 09:05 p.m.):
Is Irfan Habib your only, or even prime source for your pet theories?

How about the one who believes that Sir Chhotu Ram made Bhakra dam?

Was his work peer reviewed?
Rajendra

Is your query directed at me or Neeraj.?

If me, I can only point you to the primary data, in the extract from the book, which you have already seen.

The references are there, and complete quotes from the speeches in the Punjab assembly.

Perhaps you could review them

Again ,please stay with the topic.

Attacking Chotu Ram, or someone else will not resolve the issue about Charan Singh. It may create a lot of noise, and drown the original question, but that is about it.


So far all Neeraj has presented are the opinions of one Marxist, as he admits the person is.Marxism is a bit of a failed ideology.If he has other primary data, I have asked him to present it.If some else has it, they can also help us out.

I have also suggested our readership is intelligent enough to discriminate between genuine and false data/evidence.

It time is required, that is fine. The original unedited material will certainly be most helpful to genuine seekers


or is all that can be said about Charan Singh has been said by a British Marxist living in London, whom we are expected to rely upon, because he wrote in some " Peasant's journal".

Is that what you wish to see in the proposed writeup on Jatland about him ?

I would like to think, we have more authentic information

To continue,

back to my other hat:

you have ably pointed out his first action as Chief Minister,

of renaming the Jat college into Junta College[by order]. That was per you, as an example, expressive of his true feelings.

Others may call that lip service

He could have also tripled the education budget for rural areas instead.

I wonder which would have been more effective for the common man?


Ravi

ashu
February 12th, 2005, 02:39 PM
Hi,

I am late entrant to this discussion which ended in September 2004 after Neeraj Vedwan's detailed note where Chaudhary Charan Singh's contributions were highlighted by him. It is wonderful to know that he was instrumental getting in so many things done.

However, what I would like to understand is why did he and others who followed him, including his son, fail to do anything about the infrastructure in Western UP in particular! If you go to Baghpat or Baraut or Muzaffarnagar or Shamli etc, one finds pathetic roads, pathetic condition of drains and sanitation. The towns and Cities seem to have grown without any proper planning. The transport links are pathetic - train connections are pathetic. Other than the Medical College in Meerut, I dont think there is anyother institution of higher learning that is well recognised outside this region. I believe that Meerut College used to have a good standing but now it has gone to the dogs. I dont have much knowledge about educational institutions in Haryana but still it has State level and National Level institutions which are bettern known viz. HAU, Hissar, NDRI, Karnal, REC, Kurukshetra.

My perceptions is that the politicians and leaders who rose out of Western UP, among the Jats, dont seem to have made any substantial difference to infrastructure in this region. The law and order condition in this region vis-a-vis parts of Haryana is pathetic. Just consider the comparision between Ghaziabad and Gurgaon. What is amazing is that NOIDA was able to survive and grow.

Any thoughts

Cheers
Ashu

ashu
February 12th, 2005, 03:01 PM
Apologies. Somehow I missed the discussion that followed Neeraj Vedwan's detailed note.

Still my question remains unanswered. And if we are discussing somebody's contributions then we ought to be able to analyse where they failed to make a dent as well. And hospitals, schools, roads, rail links, power plants contribute to the economic well being of all - poor as well rich. I am sure there is enough economic and historical work done to prove this. In fact since we did not give proper heed to these, we fell behinid the "Communist" China as well, what to talk of South Korea etc who started way behind us in 1947.

Cheers
Ashu

devdahiya
February 12th, 2005, 03:03 PM
My dear members,

I would like to give out my own assessment of chaudhary sahab.Frankly speaking , i have a great respect for this genius jat.He was thorough bread Jat in real sense and thats why he was so popular in jatland be it haryana/up or rajsthan.His mass base was greater than any other jat in the history. Where he failed was practical work.he did a fine job of talking to people and guiding them.Infact he was one leader acceptable to many other casts as well . He could not get funds launched in rural belt of western UP,during his long carear in politics........reasons can be many and one could be his mildness when question of taking stand for his people came[may be because he always tried project himself a National leader acceptable even in Tamilnadu.which always elluded him.........A DREAM TURNED SOUR]. In comparison Leaders like DEVI LAL could perform much better on ground and are still worshiped for that approach taken. All said and done CH. Charan Singh's contributions are no small thing as he was a great scholar and a successful leader in his own right.

Ram-ram

rkumar
February 12th, 2005, 03:45 PM
Apologies. Somehow I missed the discussion that followed Neeraj Vedwan's detailed note.

Still my question remains unanswered. And if we are discussing somebody's contributions then we ought to be able to analyse where they failed to make a dent as well. And hospitals, schools, roads, rail links, power plants contribute to the economic well being of all - poor as well rich. I am sure there is enough economic and historical work done to prove this. In fact since we did not give proper heed to these, we fell behinid the "Communist" China as well, what to talk of South Korea etc who started way behind us in 1947.

Cheers
Ashu

I agree with you Ashutosh on the issues you have raised. There are different priorities at different times in history. Gandhi's priority was freedom for India, Chaudhary sahab's priority was to form an alternative political entity where rural masses have their say and so on...

If you look carefully, the issue of infrastructure is very recent. We never used to hear about it when we were even in our late 20s. There were hardly any cars and roads used to be empty. One could drive on either side of road without spotting a car for miles. It all started in 80s with the arrival of Rajiv Gandhi on scene. May be this was when entire world was going through change. Soviet Union was crumbling; Germanys were uniting and so on.. This was the time when China started reforms and India also started waking up. Needs of Indian masses suddenly got pumped up and demand grew for everything starting from a colour TV, Cars, good hospitals and so on. With Colour TV came more TV Channels and then exposure to entire world culture. Old infrastructure started crumbling under the pressure of heavy demands and high expectations. Schools and Colleges, which were started by our grand parents in early 50s, became highly inadequate to meet the needs and expectations of present generations. This is where the present generation of leaders from western UP failed measurably. One would expect that a person like Ch Ajit Singh, who was young, educated and exposed to western world, would do for the upliftment of western UP. This is where we in western UP started sliding in comparison to other states. Ch Bansi Lal brought Maruti factory to Gurgaon and this is when the entire Gurgaon started moving forward.

With globalisation and privatisation the things have taken another major turn. Government is becoming more of a facilitator for the private investors and keeping away from direct investments into any sector except maintaining some existing infrastructure. Development of regions will be left to the mercy and assessment of these private investors. It will become entirely a marketing problem. External investments will come only when investor is satisfied of good returns on his/ her investments. Unfortunately, here also I don't see many hopes for western UP, as we have no leader who will lobby for western UP. On the top of it we have law and order problem and no one wants to even travel to western UP, what to talk of investment.

So, what is the solution? In my view there have to be local solutions first. Some of us those who understand the region and have some resources, should show the way to others. That will trigger the chain reaction and hopefully things will start moving forward.

Development of any region or society or nation is like a relay race where every runner has to run faster for his/ her leg of race.. Ch Charan Sigh ran fairly well for his leg of race. Unfortunately those who followed him have brought the disgrace to region. So if we want to remain in race, we the next batch of runners have to run even much faster...

Rajendra

devdahiya
February 12th, 2005, 03:50 PM
I agree with you Ashutosh on the issues you have raised. There are different priorities at different times in history. Gandhi's priority was freedom for India, Chaudhary sahab's priority was to form an alternative political entity where rural masses have their say and so on...

If you look carefully, the issue of infrastructure is very recent. We never used to hear about it when we were even in our late 20s. There were hardly any cars and roads used to be empty. One could drive on either side of road without spotting a car for miles. It all started in 80s with the arrival of Rajiv Gandhi on scene. May be this was when entire world was going through change. Soviet Union was crumbling; Germanys were uniting and so on.. This was the time when China started reforms and India also started waking up. Needs of Indian masses suddenly got pumped up and demand grew for everything starting from a colour TV, Cars, good hospitals and so on. With Colour TV came more TV Channels and then exposure to entire world culture. Old infrastructure started crumbling under the pressure of heavy demands and high expectations. Schools and Colleges, which were started by our grand parents in early 50s, became highly inadequate to meet the needs and expectations of present generations. This is where the present generation of leaders from western UP failed measurably. One would expect that a person like Ch Ajit Singh, who was young, educated and exposed to western world, would do for the upliftment of western UP. This is where we in western UP started sliding in comparison to other states. Ch Bansi Lal brought Maruti factory to Gurgaon and this is when the entire Gurgaon started moving forward.

With globalisation and privatisation the things have taken another major turn. Government is becoming more of a facilitator for the private investors and keeping away from direct investments into any sector except maintaining some existing infrastructure. Development of regions will be left to the mercy and assessment of these private investors. It will become entirely a marketing problem. External investments will come only when investor is satisfied of good returns on his/ her investments. Unfortunately, here also I don't see many hopes for western UP, as we have no leader who will lobby for western UP. On the top of it we have law and order problem and no one wants to even travel to western UP, what to talk of investment.

So, what is the solution? In my view there have to be local solutions first. Some of us those who understand the region and have some resources, should show the way to others. That will trigger the chain reaction and hopefully things will start getting moving forward.

Development of any region or society or nation is like a relay race where every runner has to run faster for his/ her leg of race.. Ch Charan Sigh ran fairly well for his leg of race. Unfortunately those who followed him have brought the disgrace to region. So if we want to remain in race, we the next batch of runners has run much faster...

Rajendra


RAJENDRA JI,

SAANPP NIKAL GAYA HAI,AB LATHHI PITNE SE KYA FAYDA? WE HAVE NOT LEARNT OUR LESSONS AND IT SEEMS NEVER WILL.

rkumar
February 12th, 2005, 03:55 PM
RAJENDRA JI,

SAANPP NIKAL GAYA HAI,AB LATHHI PITNE SE KYA FAYDA? WE HAVE NOT LEARNT OUR LESSONS AND IT SEEMS NEVER WILL.

Nahi dost. Saanp yanhee ghoom raha hai aur saath me sampan bhi...Sampan ne dher saare eggs bhi diye hain...bahut sanpole ghoome rahe hain....

So we need more laathis my friend...LOL

Rajendra

devdahiya
February 12th, 2005, 09:29 PM
Nahi dost. Saanp yanhee ghoom raha hai aur saath me sampan bhi...Sampan ne dher saare eggs bhi diye hain...bahut sanpole ghoome rahe hain....

So we need more laathis my friend...LOL

Rajendra


Wah Rajendra ji,


Baddi gehri baat keh gaye aap. Abb Mein sochh mein padd gaya huun ki aapkaa issaara kahan-2 hei? Baat mein damm nazar aaya jaroor par ye batao ye lathh aale kaththhe hon ge ya nahin? Aissa na ho ke ye sanplottiyas ghar-2 mein badd ke satyanass na kardein.Kuchh illaz bhi to batao..............AAJ KI KHABAR HAI KE GOVT HAS GIVEN PERMISSION FOR A NATIONAL HIGHWAY AROUND DELHI.............IRRADDE SAAF HEIN, IN JAT BHAIYON KO DIS-POSSESS KAR KE.......WAPISS INDUS-VALLEY CIVILIZATION KA RASTTA DIKHANNA SE..........ABB YE MATT BOLNA KE ISSMEIN SANPP KA ROLE NAHIN SE..................SLOW POISONING IS GOING ON on the name of infrastructure developement.................????????????????????? ??????????????

rkumar
February 12th, 2005, 10:12 PM
Wah Rajendra ji,


Baddi gehri baat keh gaye aap. Abb Mein sochh mein padd gaya huun ki aapkaa issaara kahan-2 hei? Baat mein damm nazar aaya jaroor par ye batao ye lathh aale kaththhe hon ge ya nahin? Aissa na ho ke ye sanplottiyas ghar-2 mein badd ke satyanass na kardein.Kuchh illaz bhi to batao..............AAJ KI KHABAR HAI KE GOVT HAS GIVEN PERMISSION FOR A NATIONAL HIGHWAY AROUND DELHI.............IRRADDE SAAF HEIN, IN JAT BHAIYON KO DIS-POSSESS KAR KE.......WAPISS INDUS-VALLEY CIVILIZATION KA RASTTA DIKHANNA SE..........ABB YE MATT BOLNA KE ISSMEIN SANPP KA ROLE NAHIN SE..................SLOW POISONING IS GOING ON on the name of infrastructure developement.................????????????????????? ??????????????

1. Bhai Sanpon ko control karne ke bahut tareeke hain...may be we have to use them all.. Laathi is just one of them...by the way Sanpon ko humne been ke lehre par nachte bhi dekha hai...nachane wala chahiye bas...

2. Now coming to these two roads..yes I have read the news item ...I have been applying my mind on this issue of acquiring the land for roads and other public utilities.. All it needs is application of mind and no one has to go to Indus valley...These roads will add a lot to our development...I will tell my solution to this after hearing from you as to why you think these roads will deprive us of our lands..

RK^2