The Failed Nation Theory of Development - There is numerous definition of development based on the philosophy of the social scientists, but the most prominent were described by the professions who were deciding the fate of the nation. The political class with its objective to propagate their thought till they are in power as every thing is for the national development. Till they attain the position of opposition its failure of the development remarked mostly in the discourse for getting power in next election.
But the parties which came to power after 60 years of the nation history, and being part of the active opposition for three decades, now finds very difficult to take it forward. There idea is to reject the past with its complete trace of development history. The political discourse now a days has moved towards projecting India as nation failed to achieve any thing during past 60 years (a mere political context). The agenda of the earlier parties in power was never acceptable even though its scripted ditto by the current ruling alliance. The leaders were quick to select the points of disagreement but later found nothing can be found justified whether its, rural India, urban, agriculture, defense, foreign policy, finance etc. they found the 60 years of history must be shed to give rise to new India.
As if we have entered into the royalty the end of one dynasty saw the rise of new and changed the direction of the development flow. The groups which were rejected by the political commentators have nothing to do with freedom of India, is now seeded to power with more stronger nation concept. The believers and non-believers concept of political ideologies are promoted with the tizzy cocktail of captialist frame of development. The ruling party now wants to select and change the system one by one for the national development with very profoundly believe in the failed system of development.
Albiet the theory for the development and means or methods remains same it would be only time which would converge two political thought which might talk to integrate India with rest of world. The pain and gain of the citizens now depends upon their voting pattern, the 2016 election like 2014 may not be land mark when the change happened after 60 years of political dominance. The current ruling party in now challenged within two year. What is there in India's DNA politically is non-alligned to an ideology where there is maximum diversity which political parties urge to unite. The plural character of nation is being brought down to desire for singular frame to worship 'Bharat'. The ideal and ideologies have changed but whether the citizens who voted them to power also changed? Do not know. When the 10,000 British men can rule India for long a handful of political leaders ranging from 500-2000 committed leaders can dominate Indian political landscape.
What is expected for the leaders who try to rule (rather to serve) in democracy? A fan following who belive in the character of development, When majority were made to believe in 'failed' nation theory the lack of continuity is expected, But this would also associate the political unrest and change of sub-systems and non-cooperation from the state who do not believe in ideologies of the party who is running the national development agenda. How difficult it would be agree in future?
But the parties which came to power after 60 years of the nation history, and being part of the active opposition for three decades, now finds very difficult to take it forward. There idea is to reject the past with its complete trace of development history. The political discourse now a days has moved towards projecting India as nation failed to achieve any thing during past 60 years (a mere political context). The agenda of the earlier parties in power was never acceptable even though its scripted ditto by the current ruling alliance. The leaders were quick to select the points of disagreement but later found nothing can be found justified whether its, rural India, urban, agriculture, defense, foreign policy, finance etc. they found the 60 years of history must be shed to give rise to new India.
As if we have entered into the royalty the end of one dynasty saw the rise of new and changed the direction of the development flow. The groups which were rejected by the political commentators have nothing to do with freedom of India, is now seeded to power with more stronger nation concept. The believers and non-believers concept of political ideologies are promoted with the tizzy cocktail of captialist frame of development. The ruling party now wants to select and change the system one by one for the national development with very profoundly believe in the failed system of development.
Albiet the theory for the development and means or methods remains same it would be only time which would converge two political thought which might talk to integrate India with rest of world. The pain and gain of the citizens now depends upon their voting pattern, the 2016 election like 2014 may not be land mark when the change happened after 60 years of political dominance. The current ruling party in now challenged within two year. What is there in India's DNA politically is non-alligned to an ideology where there is maximum diversity which political parties urge to unite. The plural character of nation is being brought down to desire for singular frame to worship 'Bharat'. The ideal and ideologies have changed but whether the citizens who voted them to power also changed? Do not know. When the 10,000 British men can rule India for long a handful of political leaders ranging from 500-2000 committed leaders can dominate Indian political landscape.
What is expected for the leaders who try to rule (rather to serve) in democracy? A fan following who belive in the character of development, When majority were made to believe in 'failed' nation theory the lack of continuity is expected, But this would also associate the political unrest and change of sub-systems and non-cooperation from the state who do not believe in ideologies of the party who is running the national development agenda. How difficult it would be agree in future?
