Search This Blog

Monday, September 2, 2013

Official Transition: The Experiment

Greetings all!


My month-long hiatus now comes to a close this Labour Day. And now, in what may come as a shock to loyal readers, I will present a format change for my site for the future. From here on out, as part of an attempt to expand my own horizons and skills as a writer, I will be experimenting with publishing my poetry here. I've been writing poems for a fairly long time now, despite having only once or twice shown them to others.

I realize this means I won’t be churning out political essays and such with as much frequency as I normally do. I expect this to be a consequence of my choice, and as such, I will still be taking offers from friends or those ready and willing to contribute guest work if they so choose. Hopefully, this will help to fill the gap. I will also continue to write my own essays, but likely significantly less often, perhaps once a month or so.

To clarify exactly how this will work out, assume that I will write on average two poems a week for this site, if not more. I’m certain a fair portion will be political in nature, so as not to completely disappoint those who have always read my work for its messages. The following poem is the first of what I hope will be many works to come. This week’s quote comes from Mohammad Mosaddegh, an Iranian prime minister who deserves greater recognition nowadays than he gets.

Maybe

Maybe I could have been there,

            for each time I missed it I hurt.

Maybe I could have heard your voice,

            and been soothed into a bittersweet surrender.

Maybe I could have known you better,

            and known a world through your eyes.

Maybe I could have reached over to you,

            and brushed my hand against what was not there, not for me.

            But I never did.


Maybe I could have seen what I was missing,

            but I was blinded by what came before.

Maybe I could have realized it sooner,

            but we were too far apart for me to hear you cry.

Maybe I could have been better for you,

            but the taste of failure drove me away.

Maybe I could have had you,

            but you could not have me.


            And I always loved you. 

Sunday, August 25, 2013

Mercury in the Medicine: Indian Privatization

This week’s piece comes from Tigerlegion on DeviantArt. Check his page out, and support his work! Also, the week’s quote is from Elizabeth Warren, an American Senator.

Today, over two decades after India introduced IMF constructed neoliberal economic reform, many Indians are concerned with the evaluation of economic-reforms to find out how the reforms have affected the country's growth, development and ultimately the standard of living of its countrymen. The context in which these reforms may be viewed, is of course, of the era of intensive planning, and high level micro-management, particularly through restrictive production caps. For any economy of India's nature, that being, an underdeveloped, predominantly rural and agrarian economy, would maintain the long term objective of planning not only being to achieve growth, but also to ensure equality as well as eradication of poverty. The success of any economic reform process should thus be judged by the social and economic objectives it achieves, to put it into context with the previous era. In a country like India, reducing poverty level is by far, the most important manifestation of socio-economic progress, signifying improvement in standard of living, such as better health and education.

India as a nation, is founded on the principles of a parliamentary federal government and a progressive, democratic state and society. This theoretical foundation of the Indian state and society is clearly outlined in the constitution of India. The ideas of Fabian socialism and the welfare state also find expression in Part IV of the Constitution on directive principles of state policy. However, these principles are not enforceable in a court of law in contrast to Part III on Fundamental Rights of citizens and communities, which are legally enforceable, which in fact goes against their original role, which was to be an essential regulating mechanism in Indian polity. The constitution is thus at pains to point out, that the directive principles, even though non-justiciable, are to be "fundamental in the governance" of the country. The Supreme Court and High Courts have often invoked the directive principles to buttress their rulings, sometimes even going to the extent of clothing with the status of fundamental rights.

In practice, the Indian state led by the first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, initiated a massive strategy of development of what it professedly called "the socialistic pattern of society" by the means of centralized democratic planning. It actually amounted to industrialization under a dominant public sector, in a mixed economy aimed at a nationally reliant industrial economy. This system of autarky proved itself capable to function in many sectors, as displayed by such firms as BHEL. The primary issue arising was not of ability to produce, or quality, but management, which could be avoided as seen in the case of SAIL, the state steel producing firm. Due to further distortions, like the trend of neo-feudal rent-seeking in the public sector and in the governmental apparatus in general, the Indian state was driven to make a paradigm shift to neoliberal capitalist reforms in 1991 to deal with a serious crisis of balance of payment in international trade and the fiscal overload on the government in India (Predominantly due to the oil crisis resulting from the Gulf War), under pressures of an almost neo-feudal rent-seeking by the political and bureaucratic class as well as populist public policies to placate a socially and politically mobilized, and demanding electorate.

At first glance, India appears to be a fairly successful case of a developing democracy in the South both in terms of "free and fair" elections and governance. But if we probe deeper, this impression does not stand up-to scrutiny. With the neoliberal shift in the economic policy in India, especially since 1991, two major trends have evidently gathered momentum. These are the rise in the clout of the capitalist classes in the industrial, commercial, service, agricultural sectors, and the rise of politics of identity and ethnicity, most strongly mobilized in the form of the increasingly fascist Hindutva (many groups such as the RSS organized on Nazi party and fascist lines, and expressing admiration for such groups) in the national arena and a variety of regional parties based on religious, caste, and tribal identities. There has also been an unprecedented growth of the weeds of corruption and criminalization of politics since the rise of neoliberalism in the Indian political economy. It is not to be said that these vices were non-existent prior to the neoliberal shift; rather that they have become more endemic since then.

The foregoing new trends in the Indian polity have had a considerable corrosive effect on the elections, party system, and governance. Corruption and criminalization of politics have made the elections an affair of the rich and powerful, by and large. This point is illustrated by the number and proportion of "Crorepatis" (individuals residing in residences with a net worth of over 10 million rupees.) in the 15th Lok Sabha (lower house of parliament), elected in 2009. The proportion is a clear majority. Similarly chilling data exists on those charged with crime in the 15th Lok Sabha. In the Lok Sabha as a whole, 57.8 percent, or 315 of 545 MPs (Members of parliament) are Crorepatis. In the two major national parties the percentage of such members is as high as 70 percentage in the Indian National Congress and 50 percent in the Bharatiya Janata Party. In several regional or nominally national parties the figures are also quite high or in fact higher. The percentages of the charged MPs in the two major national parties are 37.93 in the BJP and 21.36 in the INC. As a whole, 162 of 545, or 29.7 percent of MPs have been charged with various crimes.

In ideological and democratic vacuity, none of the major political parties can mobilize genuine grassroots support. In the legislative arenas too, the fragmentation of the party system is sought to be bridged by immoral coalitions for governance and opposition through political maneuvering corruption, and crime. Politics of defection that first surfaced in India in the aftermath of the 1967 general election have continue, despite the 1985 Anti-defection Act incorporated in the 10th schedule of the Constitution. In fact, the bribing of legislators to win confidence vote, not only in states where it first made appearance in the late 1960s, but also in the Parliament in New Delhi, has become an uncontrolled and recurrent political menace. The Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (JMM) bribery case decided by the Supreme Court in 1999 indicting the P.V. Narasimha Rao Congress minority Government brought out the extent of moral and legal decadence to which Indian democracy has descended. In addition, instances of bribes for raising questions in the Parliament, selling of ministerial and parliamentarians' discretion in allotment of services and utilities, and economic and political scams, etc. have enormously multiplied since the 1990s. The biggest among the scams being investigated at present are the cases relating to the 2-G spectrum allocations by the telecom ministry, the Commonwealth Games of 2010, and the Adarsha Housing Society allotments in Mumbai, all involving the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance Governments in New Delhi and Maharashtra. There are scams galore also at the state level, involving all political parties and governments across the board. Perhaps for the first time in Indian politics, ministers and MPs of the ruling dispensation have been put behind the bars in the course of investigation in the 2-G spectrum and the Commonwealth Games cases. The leakage of taped conversations of Nira Radia who was lobbying first for the Tatas and later for Mukesh Ambani have revealed how the corporate capitalist sector has begun to influence the news and views of supposedly free media and even the allocation of ministerial portfolios in the federal coalition governments headed by national parties like the Indian National Congress and steered by supposedly clean politicians like Manmohan Singh and Sonia Gandhi.

Another remarkable, or rather terrifying trend which has largely emerged in conjecture with the reforms, is the rise of the Hindu nationalist (see fascist), and "secular" right wing, being the BJP and INC respectively.  None of the two major national parties (the Indian National Congress and The Bharatiya Janata Party) appear to have viable political alternatives in governance and development. One is democratically stymied by dynastic control, not only as seen in Prime Ministers (Although a significant bulk of Nehru and Indira Gandhi's measures were undeniably pro-people, The Emergency aside), but MPs, and the other is democratically debilitated by its nexus with non-democratic Hindu traditional Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and neo-Hindu conservative Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), both of which have been associated with atrocities against minorities such as the 2002 Gujarat Pogroms, and openly admire Hitler and the Nazis. Hindu communalism and neoliberalism have become its staple programme. The Congress has lost its former socialist inclined progressive programmatic posture of Nehru as well as political populism of Indira Gandhi. It exists in an ideological vacuum, so to say, since its acceptance of the neoliberal capitalist persuasion, on the one hand, and contingent political populism under the pressure of "vote bank" politics, on the other. The Indian mainstream left wing, which electorally survived the global onslaught of neoliberalism until the 2009-10, continuously ruling in West Bengal since 1977, in Tripura, and intermittently in Kerala, has now been badly mauled. While in recent years, many of their actions, such as the Maruti factory incident, are questionable, their achievements are undeniable in terms of social indicator development. While far from revolutionary, their social policy and opposition to neoliberal crimes continues to be a significant force, as is their influence in Kerala, West Bengal, Tripura, and other states, and their role in the trade union system. The regional political theater is sadly devoid of any viable democratic alternatives on the whole, even for their respective states, to say nothing of the national or federal politics.


The sites of democratic political action that rightfully belong to the party-political processes have been practically vacated by the political parties. The decline and stagnation of the party system is therefore being partly compensated by judicial activism, investigative journalism, civil society movements against corruption like those of Anna Hazare, and new social movements on environment and ecology, quality of life and services, child rights and gender justice, administrative and political transparency and accountability, and human rights in general. But the sustainability of these factors and trends depends on the overall extent of repression, which has been seen emerging through mass surveillance, extrajudicial executions, and the police-political party complex. It is sad to note, that this is merely the tip of the iceberg.

Sunday, July 28, 2013

The Players in the Game: In April 2014, South African Voters Shall Take to the Polls to Let Their Disgruntled Voices Heard.

Disgruntled: the word to describe the attitude of South Africans today towards the national government. Plagued by corruption, abysmal service delivery, and the intra-ANC-politicking that distracted from good politics (see: Mangaung Conference) that happened throughout the Zuma administration, it is no wonder South Africans are exhausted by the ANC's national rule.

The Democratic Alliance has taken it upon itself (as a sort of self-appointed job) to bring the myriad of Zuma-led ANC issues to the table for the public to assess -- they are the official opposition after all. But I suppose that's the ultimate issue with the DA: they're too focused on being in the opposition, rather than attempting to lead.

With winning the Western Cape during 2009 elections, the province has become their prime example on those rare occasions when the DA tells you how it's going to govern. "Look how clean, litter-free it is," they beam about their pride and joy, Cape Town. An important aspect to note is that Cape Town was always like that. Cape Town was always well-managed & cleanly due to being a key tourism point -- it serves as a Mediterranean-esque getaway in Africa. They haven't pulled a miraculous revamp like Mayor Abraham Beame had with New York City in the 1970s -- not that the DA hasn't been provided the opportunity to prove themselves in this manner. On the West side of Table Mountain, poorer, predominately black and coloured communities live on a wide area known as the Cape Flats. Still stuck in their Apartheid classified "locations", these neighborhoods are ravaged by violence, crime, vandalism and drug problems and their accompanying gangs. The problems faced in '70s NYC and the Flats are blaringly obvious, and until they are solved by the DA, which is the moment when the party can boast about well-governed Western Cape.

The DA comes across as desperate, to the point where a person dismisses the party as a serious contender, not just the official opposition. The tipping point was their 12 minute video entitled "Know Your DA". The video outlined the role that Democratic Alliance members. Ignoring the fact that the DA was only officially founded in 2000, the video clutches at the history of apartheid heroine Helen Suzman. In the video, the DA illustrates its connection to the greatest struggle hero Nelson Mandela, by showing Suzman and Mandela embracing, as well as Mandela's words praising Suzman (and by extension, the DA). The motivation behind their video is understandable: relation to Mandela has made people vote for a party in the past, and the trend will probably continue. The issue is that Helen had never officially affiliated herself with the DA, whereas Mandela's history is certainly attributed to the ANC.

The video cheapens the ultimate goal of the DA. Perhaps it was a realistic strategy to undergo, but unfortunately backfired. The DA fails to show how it stands independent of the ANC -- even in campaigns to know the DA as a party fear, sticking to its "official opposition" title. The DA can only be considered a serious contender by the undecided voter the day they take themselves as a serious party, not just the official opposition.

But noting struggle credentials in South Africa is nothing new and has been the approach of the African National Congress since 1994.The ANC unfortunately has a monopoly over struggle heroes and exploits this for votes at the polls, so a person can excuse the DA's desperation.

In 1994, with big weights such as Mandela and Tambo in its history, the ANC passed the struggle credentials test, and continued riding its success. Struggle credentials were the key to bagging votes in 1994 -- by proving your party/its members role to defeat the Goliath Apartheid worked, and this approach has been taken ever since by the ANC.

The approach to voting in 1994 differs to what influences voters 20 years onwards. 2014 marks the election where born frees -- the generation born after 1994 who did not experience Apartheid -- are now old enough to vote and may have different motivations for voting than their parents. Post '94 babies (I suppose "adults" now) are disinterested in hearing about the past. They are appreciative of the actions done to defeat Apartheid, but a keen to know what will happen now and next. To them, the particularities of who did what for the struggle are a bore and are a point at which they cannot relate.

The older generation has also changed their motivation behind voting: the ANC throughout these last 4 years of national rule has ostracized itself with the middle and lower class voter. Harrowing screw-ups in education, failing health care facilities and unpopular policies such as the electronic tolling of national roads have the public fed up with ANC government. The citizen is looking for hope in a new political party. The voter wants a political party that focuses on the contemporary problems. The voter is looking for a national government that considers and values its opinion -- and in this search for a hopeful alternative is where Congress of the People (COPE) found its niche in the market in the 2009 national elections.

COPE, a break away from the ANC, quickly gain popularity, but with the same projectile, tanked. COPE's edge was offering an alternative to the ANC that stood for its core principles and is unable to be deterred. But with power struggles over who the new party's president should be vaporized their proposed image. The drama distracting from the good governance it promised as its edge. The intra-politicking showed, making COPE live up to the same manner as its root political party. Some votes still believed in the idea behind COPE, making this political party make contemporary history as the first party to win the most parliamentary seats in its first election.

COPE remains as a registered political party for the 2014 elections. With the power struggle sorted out by the judiciary and out of their way, COPE is finally prepared to fulfill its promised mandate. A major error from publicity perspective is that COPE had not campaigned its new organised and prepared party, leaving their image tarnished in long-gone supporters' eyes. The solution to the presidency issue was a minuscule report in major newspapers. COPE has become synonymous with disappointed hope -- the taste of change that went away before it could be problem. COPE is likely to fizzle after its (relative) bang of 2009.

COPE and 2009 elections illustrated the desperation of the voters which still lingers for the 2014, hoping that will be the year they are heard.

With the 2014 elections nearing, new political parties are springing up. Three are note-worthy entries
1) WASP
2) Agang
3) EFF

The Workers and Socialist Party (WASP)
Out from the Marikana tragedy where striking miners resulted in over 40 deaths, comes a worker-oriented political party. The party noted the Marikana massacre of last year was pre-empted by a lack of representation of the miners to the mine bosses, which lead to restlessness and a violent outcry for attention.

The issue with basing a political party on history or emotion provides the party a fleeting foundation -- ask the ANC. They have used the struggle against Apartheid as the ANC's main approach to winning elections and it becomes exhausted as people become disinterested and irritated by repeated information. A party needs to be greater than a historical happening, and clear about what they stand for independent of "not allowing the [insert historical piece here] to happen again."

Little has been heard from WASP post the week of launching and seems to be an idea unsupported by proper structures and media (as it always does), has moved onto the newer kid-on the block.

Agang
Beginning as a "political platform" where citizens can discuss their grievance with the status quo, Agang (the newer new-kid-on-the-block) has skilfully assess the problem with South Africa and resembles a similar approach to COPE during the previous elections. Agang seeks to motivate passive citizens to play an active role & centralizes its principles on the citizen as a key player in their country's governance.

Now officially registered as a political party lead by a struggle icon by Mamphela Ramphele, Agang was embraced with open arms. By engaging actively with youthful citizens on social media platforms, Agang brought the attitude that South Africans sought in COPE.

Agang shares similarities with COPE, bring the apprehension that it may suffer the same disappointing fate. Agang's diminishing popularity may not be its self-constructed demise, rather that South African's attention has been whisked up by the newest new-kid-on-the-block, EFF

Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF)
Founded by dismissed ANC Youth President Julius Malema, EFF wants to fight the ever widening gap of between rich and poor, which runs close to racial lines due to the legacy of Apartheid. Much of Malema's radical babbling whilst ANCYL president is intended to become EFF policy.

As it stands now, EFF seems to be a boys' club filled with radical members. Malema is joined by Kenny Kunene, an obscenely wealthy business man who is known to spend money at a whim -- epitomizing exploitative capitalism through eating sushi off of women's bodies at his elaborate, multimillion Rand birthday parties spanning three days. The hypocrisy of standing for the poor but behaving like their "masters" is also evident in Malema who is also known to sport expensive items such as a Breitling watch and red beret -- the red beret becoming synonymous with the new party. Since forming the party, the two have denounced their previous ways and claim to have changed their lifestyle to suit their word.

Regardless, EFF's popularity is booming. Having well-known members, but this party features a few important aspects: firstly, Kenny Kunene through an open letter to President Zuma outlined the issues with his administration in an unapologetic, fearless manner, voicing what makes South Africans concur. Secondly, they have clearly established who they stand for and fight for; and thirdly, they have a brief policy on how they shall through various means, including nationalization of mines. They have taken the first step away from rhetoric, and shown clearly they are against what has made the ANC deter from its principles: corruption -- South Africans are jubilated and many have deposited their hope for this maturing democracy in the red beret (ignoring that its leader Malema is under investigation for a corruption charge).

After learning from the e-tolling saga, South Africans are beginning to adopt an active role in policy making; they are beginning to demand policy talk. We are maturing as democracy, with voters no longer enticed by politicians' rhetoric, rather by policies that they intend to adopt. The focus on policy drives for political parties to speak more about their policies, and restores hope for national government efficiency in years to come.

South Africans have been begging for viable governance since 2009, and with the 2014 elections, they are spoilt with choice. Whatever the outcome, what can be concluded is that the road is getting shorter for the ANC with each passing election.

Written by Wandile "Carbon" Dlamini; a social and political commentator on a blog. To read more or contact through my


Editor’s Note—This week’s quote comes from Enver Hoxha, an admirable Albanian leader.

Monday, July 22, 2013

An Announcement

Greetings all!


Sadly, I will not be writing a piece this week. Nor will I be contributing here for at least the next three weeks, if not until the end of August entirely. I have decided that this break is necessary in order for me to give full effort and attention to a separate project. This project is one that I and several friends have been collaborating on for a while now, and with reduced resources among us, I need to take on greater responsibility to keep the project alive. Unfortunately, I must also keep the details of said endeavor private for now; in the future, I will likely disclose what’s been going on behind the scenes.

Do not fret; just because I cannot write something each week, this does not mean this site will go without activity. I will be vigorously searching out guest writers from among friends and comrades, and if nothing else, I will change the week’s quote every time the need arises. If I absolutely can find no help, I will simply provide links to strong news stories I encounter during the week. I apologize in advance for this hiatus on my part, but I promise that I will be back in due time. Thank you for your patience with me, and your loyalty as well. This week’s quote comes from Bruno Kreisky, an Austrian chancellor of high esteem.


As always, I can be reached for contact at my usual locations. Good night, and this is KnoFear, signing off.