Each one of us acknowledges that politics is full of drama. If someone makes the brave decision of entering this insanely erratic and terrifying space, then you know they’ll experience their fair share of developing dirty secrets, scandals, corruptive tendencies and whatnot. Such is the impression which we the common people have about the field of politics and to be fair, it’s not our fault. The lack of trustworthiness the public places in politicians is all thanks to the general opportunism, hollowness and vileness observed in their words and actions. One such incident which brought to light these exact things within the political sphere of South Korea happened some years ago. This disturbing yet eye-opening incident, also popularly known as “Choi-gate”, illuminated the ever-increasing uncomfortable proximity between business and politics which strongly characterizes South Korea. That’s enough suspense, let’s unpack what really happened.
Category: Politics Page 1 of 9
The Indian National Congress (INC) was the force behind the crucial independence movement, the party that ruled for 60 years, the party that stamped authority over every crucial policy making decision about the country, the party that represented our motherland in every form, the party that had been in power in nearly every state overwhelmingly, that party, the grand colossus has now diminished its coverage and shed its voter base to a great extent after successive elections drubbing.
The INC, or the Congress Party as we call it, was a party of leaders of great stature like Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, Mahatma Gandhi, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel and other “n” number of leaders of colossal magnitude. The general elections of 1952, 1957 and 1962 was dominated by the Congress Party and there was no-one who could challenge the Grand-Old Party. Jawaharlal Nehru kept steering the party forward until his death in 1964, where the whole nation was in a standstill and a major political crisis was surely about to occur with everyone having one question, “After Nehru what?, After Nehru who?” To a major relief, Lal Bahadur Shastri succeeded and a major political crisis was averted.
In the 21st century world revolutionised by Information Technology, the Internet has become the preferred and most widely used mode of communication. Many human rights activists and scholars, including the United Nations, have supported the claim that access to the Internet is a human right. In many countries like Estonia, Finland, France, Greece and Spain, the Right to Internet Access has already been declared a human right. The underlying argument is that the Internet is essential for life in the 21st century. The Right to the Internet can also be seen as an integral part of pre-existing fundamental and Constitutional rights like Right to Freedom of speech and expression, Right to Healthcare, Right to Trade, Right to Education and even Right to Life. Under the Indian Constitution, the State is responsible for ensuring these rights and any restrictions on the same need to pass the tests of ‘proportionality’ and ‘reasonableness’. In light of this context, this article attempts to analyse the role of Internet access in the backdrop of a global pandemic and the state-announced lockdown measures.
We often tend to treat economics and politics as mutually exclusive fields. Somehow the thought “Good Politics is Bad Economics” is deeply rooted in our minds. Is it actually the case? Is it possible to have both good economics and good politics? This article will take you through the various perceptions revolving around this question.
Let’s first understand how these two influence governance. Economics is majorly concerned with monetary policy as we all know that it’s the Central Bank which formulates it. Politics on the other side designs the fiscal policy of a state/country. It’s only in theory where economics is considered to be a non-political concept. However, in real-life, economics acts as the key to the political battle-ground.
Bernie Sanders, the seventy-eight-year-old senator from Vermont, did not emerge as the Democratic nominee in either of his two presidential bids (in 2016, and 2020), but he is said to have reshaped the American politics with his youth-led movement for sweeping a much-needed change in the country.
When Bernie Sanders first started seriously entertaining the prospect of bidding for the presidency, in 2014, he never used phrases like, ‘As President, I will…’, or ‘When I am President…’, instead he always talked about building movements and educating people. Even when he announced his candidacy, one would have expected a big rally in his home state, but all he did was walk out of the Senate, and held a ten-minute conference with a scrum of reporters, and headed back to work. So, the first words of his ‘political revolution’ were, ‘We don’t have an endless amount of time. I’ve got to get back.’
Now that thousands of migrant workers are returning home via state facilitated buses and trains, it would be difficult for them to sustain without any jobs or work to do. One of the solutions to this problem is the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) which provides guaranteed employment opportunities to the rural poor. This flagship government program would help the many native and migrant workers who are dependent on NREGA in coping with the immediate stress. The person/ household, rendered destitute, needs a short-term unemployment benefit which will tide them over till the principal earner gets a job again. The government had announced in the lockdown 2.0 guidelines that NREGA would continue on and workers working under the scheme would be guaranteed minimum wages. The scheme also stipulates that if workers register for work, but are not provided employment, they are eligible for an unemployment allowance amounting to a quarter of their wages in the first month, half in the second, and full wages thereafter.
India and Bangladesh have had a strong bond since the birth of Bangladesh. India was the first country to recognise Bangladesh as a separate independent state and established diplomatic relations with it immediately after its independence in 1971. Since then they share a friendly tie and are regarded as a textbook example of a neighbourly relationship. There is much in the past and present that unites these two countries. Their relationship is anchored in a shared history, common heritage, language, cultural ties and, values of secularism and democracy. It is based on sovereignty, equality, trust, understanding and a win-win partnership.
Before addressing the main topic of this article, it is important to be aware of a unique paradox. Only after that will one be able to understand, with clarity, the dynamics of Indo-Nepalese relations. In the realm of international relations, the term ‘bilateral-cooperation’ is intimately connected to feelings of stability and peace. Whenever two countries sign a landmark bilateral agreement, there is a mood of jubilation among the ruling dispensation and media of both the countries. This gives the impression that the greatest achievement of a diplomat is establishing new avenues of co-operation with other countries of the world. But this is only partly true.