Agneepath Scheme: Right Intent, Right Idea, Poor Positioning

 For leaders and policymakers, developing good ideas is essential, but effectively marketing and positioning those ideas is even more critical. Every idea has limitations, and it is vital to understand what to communicate and emphasize. Proper communication and marketing ensure awareness, engagement, and adoption by clearly conveying the benefits, building trust, and differentiating ideas in a crowded landscape. Effective positioning highlights the unique advantages and relevance, ensuring the idea resonates with the intended audience.

The ruling party in India, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), is reasonably good at generating sound ideas. Many of their schemes, policies, and initiatives demonstrate vision and good intent. However, these ideas often face rejection or public backlash due to inadequate communication, marketing, or positioning. For example, the Farm Bill introduced in 2020 aimed to benefit farmers by increasing their earnings. Nevertheless, the lack of clarity and effective marketing allowed opposition and vested interests to incite massive protests, ultimately resulting in the bill's rollback.

Another example, a hot topic, is the Agneepath Scheme, which in a nutshell is a recruitment scheme for the Indian Armed Forces. It involves recruiting young people, called Agniveers, for a four-year tenure. After this period, a portion of Agniveers may be offered permanent commission, while others will leave with a severance package and skills training. The scheme aims to reduce the average age of the armed forces and provide youth with disciplined training and experience.

The Agneepath scheme has several drivers and benefits. It aims to create a younger and fitter force, as a youthful workforce brings more physical agility and adaptability. Enhancing the Indian Armed Forces' youthful profile ensures maximum risk-taking and effectiveness in battle. The scheme also focuses on skill development, with Agniveers gaining discipline, teamwork, and technical skills. Additionally, reducing the average age of soldiers significantly lowers the pension burden. Agniveers not retained after their service will benefit from practical military experience, discipline, and skills, along with a financial cushion of Rs 12 lakhs to start businesses or further their education. This scheme presents a unique opportunity for young people to serve their country and support nation-building, creating an energetic profile for the armed forces.

However, the scheme has some implementation issues and limitations. It would have benefited from a smaller-scale pilot before full implementation. Moreover, the current form is more suitable for the Army and less for the Navy and Air Force, where longer training durations are required. Concerns about job security and the impact on military ethos also arise, as a shorter service period might hinder the development of a strong military culture and camaraderie. While the scheme has its pros and cons, analysis and discussions with military personnel and experts suggest it is indeed a step in the right direction. It is a 'work-in-progress' and not a finished product yet. There is significant scope for improvement, which the central government acknowledges and is open to addressing. Various state governments are also introducing related schemes to help Agniveers find suitable employment opportunities after their service.

The focus here is not to debate the efficacy, implementation, or limitations of the Agneepath scheme but to discuss whether the scheme was properly marketed and positioned. I feel that the scheme could have been positioned differently and effectively.

India is grappling with a significant unemployment crisis, with the youth unemployment rate being alarming. According to the latest data from the Centre for Monitoring Indian Economy (CMIE), an independent think tank, the unemployment rate in India stood at 9.2 percent in June 2024, a sharp increase from 7 percent in May 2024. This issue necessitates focused government interventions, skill development initiatives, and job creation to address the pressing challenge of unemployment. The issue of unemployment is being heavily discussed in parliament, public forums, social media, living rooms and is a key grievance against the current government.

On a separate note, I believe that the current government did not create the issue of unemployment; rather, it is the result of decades of negligence and a lack of vision and initiatives. Unemployment is more of a ‘by-product’ stemming from challenges such as uncontrolled population growth, high illiteracy, and a significantly inadequate education system at the grassroots level. While there are thousands of public and private schools, are we really preparing our children for the current and future requirements? The answer is a big no. Companies hire and then invest considerable time, resources, and effort in training new hires because they are often not sufficiently prepared to hit the ground running. A young individual with a degree but inadequate skills lacks employability.

While the current government inherited the unemployment problem, it is accountable for addressing it. It is another point that they are also not doing much to solve the root causes of the unemployment issue, so it serves them right!!

The Agneepath scheme, amid this backdrop, could have been positioned as a powerful tool for job creation. Instead of focusing on cost-cutting and demographic changes within the armed forces, the scheme should have been primarily positioned as an employment scheme with relaxed selection criteria, guaranteed employment for four years, along with a monetary benefit at the end and potential for future re-employment. That’s it. Plain, simple and effective. It would have resonated strongly with the target audience. This approach would have aligned with the nation's pressing need for job creation and could have mitigated some of the initial public resistance. Proper positioning of government initiatives is crucial in addressing complex societal challenges like unemployment.

Hopefully, some lessons have been learnt by the government and the bosses and in future, they would ‘read the room’!!

The Myth of Hindu Unity

In the grand tapestry of Bharat's socio-political landscape, one of the most enduring myths is that Hindus form a cohesive majority. Official statistics may indicate that around 80% of Bharat’s population identifies as Hindu, but beneath this numerical facade lies a complex web of divisions that belies this apparent unity. The notion of a monolithic Hindu identity often seems more like a political construct than a reflection of the country’s true socio-cultural fabric.

When we examine the internal dynamics of Bharat, the picture is far from unified. We are fragmented by numerous factors: geographical regions, ideological differences, economic disparities, caste, creed, and even fan loyalties. The nation's divisions are so pronounced that it is almost a given that we will find reasons to stay apart—whether by region (North versus South), political orientation (right wing versus left wing), or caste.

The historical narrative that Bharat remained a Hindu-majority country despite centuries of invasions and colonial rule often overlooks a critical issue: our internal disunity made us vulnerable. Additionally, while Hindu theology identifies kama (Desire/Lust), krodha (Anger), lobha (Greed), mada (Ego), moha (Attachment), matsarya (Jealousy), and alasya (Laziness) as key mental obstacles, many of us do not genuinely work to overcome these challenges in our daily lives. These factors highlight why we were subjected to rule by invaders (like the Mughals and British) and dynasts (such as the Indian National Congress) for so many centuries.

We take pride in the fact that, unlike many other countries that were religiously converted by invaders, Bharat remained a Hindu-majority nation. Statistically and on paper, this is accurate. However, what if the invaders did not exert significant effort to convert us? What if they considered us worse off remaining Hindus, or if they did not want their faith to be corrupted by our mindset?

Consider this: if Hindus were genuinely united, no one could have mocked us. No one could have taken things away from our plate in the name of appeasement. No one could have jeopardized Bharat’s medium to long term growth potential by playing vote bank politics. I am not at all suggesting that we should have been like a militant outfit and troubled others. Bullying others just because of the strength of numbers is cowardly. Saving cows is great, making Muslim drivers eat cow dung is not. Just a strength in character would deter people to not take us for granted.

Our divisions are laid bare during elections and in various other arenas, revealing a society where allegiance to caste and regional identity often outweighs national cohesion. The recent Lok Sabha elections offer a telling example. The ruling party, various other blunders aide, lost several seats due to the pervasive influence of caste-based voting. In certain constituencies, candidates were chosen based on caste affiliations rather than merit or party allegiance. It is actually good to not consider the religion while deciding who to vote for but then the consideration should be national interests, economic growth, integrity and not caste or freebies. This fractured approach to voting diminishes any party’s ability to implement substantial change.

In Bharat, the political and social landscapes are often shaped by fragmented vote banks such as Jats, Yadavs, and Bhumihaars. This fragmentation hampers the possibility of a unified and effective Hindu vote. In contrast, similar unity among other communities results in a more consolidated and influential political force. For instance, while Shia or Sunni vote banks may exist, they typically come into play only when the competition is between Muslim candidates.

Take the example of Rampur, Uttar Pradesh. Despite the BJP's reputation for Hindu-centric policies, the party allocated numerous houses under the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana to residents of Rampur, which has a significant Islamic population. However, the BJP faced a significant defeat in this constituency. Why? Because, unlike the fragmented Hindu vote, the Muslim voters in Rampur were largely unified. While this unity helped them defeat the so-called 'Hindu party,' it came at a cost. Leaders who engage in vote bank politics rarely serve their constituents' best interests. Their aim is to keep people divided and perpetually dependent.

By failing to stay united and prioritizing caste-based interests and freebies over national and economic growth, we perpetuate a cycle of poverty and political myopia. Consequently, we later find ourselves lamenting issues such as unemployment, rising prices, and the loss of job opportunities, academic seats etc. Let us not play victim in a situation that we have created for ourselves.

Arguments against CAA and NRC: Are they valid?

A section in India is protesting against CAA and the 'yet to be drafted' NRC. In the past couple of weeks, I have had discussions with some people, who are against CAA and NRC. I have made an attempt to understand their reasons and reservations. Following are some key reasons that have been expressed during such discussions;

Reason # 1: CAA is against Indian Muslims and it would take away their citizenship

Fact: CAA is not about taking anyone's citizenship. Instead, it is about granting citizenship to minorities (not limited to Hindus) from certain countries in our neighborhood. There is no way that CAA would take away citizenship of existing Indians.

Reason # 2: Thousands of people would come to India due to CAA. In present economic environment, it is not advisable to bring in more people

Fact: CAA will not grant fast-tracked citizenship to anyone who comes to India today or in future. It is about giving citizenship to people who are already in India since 2014 or before. 

Reason # 3: It is derogatory towards other religions (for example Muslims) staying in those countries

Fact: There are documented proofs that the minorities under the scope of CAA have faced discrimination and religious persecution. Yes, others may also be facing issues in their countries. However, have they come to India? (Remember, India is not inviting people but fast tracking citizenship to certain people who are ALREADY in India). People who did come - e.g. Adnan Sami - receive citizenship after undergoing certain formalities. Some may even be fast -tracked, depending on the case. India is not saying that people from other faiths will not be given citizenship. However, they would have to follow the 'regular' process i.e., the process that has been defined by statutes and have been followed by all past governments. Now some of the those political parties are questioning it!! If they have an issue, why did they not change the law earlier? And even if the point that 'Why not Muslims' is considered, why are people *OPPOSING* CAA. Why are they not requesting for inclusion of Muslims? Consider this example. Suppose 100 people from different religions/faiths came to India from Pakistan in 2012. Out of that, 60 were Hindus/Sikhs/Parsis/Jains/Buddist/Christian and 40 were Muslims. CAA says that India would grant fast-tracked citizenship to 60 and would consider the request of remaining 40 in due course. Those 40 would go through the *usual (nothing additional)* documentation/formalities and depending on the case, they will either get citizenship or would be denied citizenship. That is the process. It is similar to getting a visa. Some people get visa, some do not. The first 60 would become citizens of India and would have documents to prove it. They can lead a normal life and also pay taxes. Now, if nothing is changing for 40 but you are making a positive impact in the lives of 60, why should anyone have a problem with that? If people want CAA to be rolled back then essentially means that they do not want positive changes in the lives of 60. If people want 'everyone' to be included in CAA then they should demand exactly that. But my question to them is *where were they earlier?* Were they talking about the remaining 40 before this? No, they never talked about them. They never protested or signed petitions to grant citizenship to those 40. Why is it an issue only NOW? Is it because non-Muslims are going to be benefited? If yes, then those protesters are the ones who are dividing India. But I do not think that is the reason for MOST. Most people are protesting against CAA because they have fallen for the false narrative that has been created by leftists, commies, Muslim fundamentalists, opposition parties and their sponsored media. And it is going on and on because (a) of recent decisions on 370, Ram Mandir, Triple Talaq and proposed Uniform Civil Code and (b) Delhi elections are round the corner. AAP will almost certainly win Delhi elections - most people know that. It is thanks to the freebies given by them. But now, when they do win, the narrative would be that Delhi has said no to divisive politics of BJP. One must understand that BJP is not the party in power in Delhi. It last formed a government in Delhi more than 20 years ago. So, they are not 'losing' the elections. However, that is the picture that the media and opposition parties want to paint for next elections and beyond.

Reason # 4: If not CAA, NRC would take away the citizenship of Muslims

Fact: Nationwide NRC has not even been drafted yet. Assam NRC is a different matter altogether. The need was different over there. Nationwide NRC would be nothing like Assam NRC. So, if people are protesting against NRC, they are protesting on the basis of speculation and fear-mongering. Someone even said "people are not scared of what would be there in NRC but they are scared about who (BJP) is proposing it"!!! That is absurd. If I see 10 Muslims sitting and talking in a corner and I attack them on the basis of a speculation that they must be planning a terrorist attack then people would say (and rightly so) that I am insane and bigoted. The argument that nationwide NRC, whenever it is drafted, would be against Muslim - just because BJP government would be proposing it - is equally absurd.

Reason # 5: Present government is fascist and is trying to silence the voice of students. The violence against students is uncalled for and is not acceptable

Fact/Response. Firstly, it is not a reason for opposing CAA/NRC but is a response to what happened afterwards. Police beat protesters in Jamia but they were burning buses and pelting stones. They pretty much invited the wrath of police. Reports suggest that the group of protesters included several non-students from nearby areas. So it was not an action against students. It was an action against vandals. Yes, may be some innocent bystanders may have got hurt but in such cases, we can not blame the cops. They cannot ask for student ids while lathi-charging vandals. And they have no way of figuring out who pelted stone or burnt the buses and who did not. If you be near a violent mob, there are high chances that you would become a collateral damage through one of the parties involved. What happened in JNU had nothing to do with CAA/NRC. It was a university fight and something which must not have happened

Article 15: Does the director believe in it?

Recently watched the much talked about movie 'Article 15'. For the uninitiated, Article 15 of the constitution of India says 'Article 15 (1) and (2) prohibit the state from discriminating any citizen on ground of any religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them'.

The movie discusses the important topic of caste discrimination, which is rampant and is a major social evil in India. The plot is 'based' on a true incident but has been tweaked to suit the views of the maker. The movie has great actors and they have delivered powerful performances. Overall, the movie is interesting and I did not feel bored at any point of time.

However, such movies make you think. That per se is not an issue. Every movie on a real issue should make you think. But this one also makes you think about the intentions and motives. There is a background to it as well. I have watched the previous movie ('Mulk') of the director and have also watched several interviews. He seems to have certain views against the major religion in India and takes a consulting-like approach to narrate or weave the story. He develops hypotheses and then creates a narrative to prove that hypotheses. 

I really liked his previous film - Mulk. It talks about targeting Muslims and thinking that every Muslim is a terrorist. That is incorrect and it must be said. The film did show an Islamic terrorist but the director spent only few minutes on that. The rest of the movie showed how the family of the terrorist was targeted, asked to move to Pakistan etc. I would not say that it does not happen. I also agree (and firmly believe) that every Muslim is not a terrorist and that it should not even be discussed. However, the fact also is that >90% of the terrorists follow or claim to follow Islam (the reason I say "claim to follow" is because I firmly believe that most Islamic terrorists (and their handlers and religious leaders) do not even understand Islam). But it is a fact that over 90% terrorists are Muslims. Will the film-maker make a movie on that? No. Because then he would be scared of his life. 

These days when the critics appreciate a movie, I start doubting the movie and the intentions. These days it has become fashionable to talk against Hindu religion. Any movie which shows Hinduism or a certain political party in bad-light gets good reviews from critics. Take for example the movie 'Mukkabaaz'. It is a good movie about a boxer of lower caste fighting against the system for his career and love. However, there are two scenes in the movie that I found questionable. In one scene, the goons target the boxer and his coach by falsely accusing them for consuming beef. While I agree that there is an actual case which got a lot of attention from media, pseudo-seculars, so-called liberals and of course political parties. However, there is no case where someone from Hindu religion was targeted in such a manner. The goons could have targeted the boxer and coach in many different ways but the maker (another guy who seems to hate Hindu religion and was quite vocal about the case) chose this as it could  have given the movie free publicity. There is another scene in which the protagonist unnecessarily and repeatedly says "Bharat Maata ki Jai" while bashing the villain - who is a prominent local politician - in front of the cops. While the intentions were not absolutely clear but may be the film-maker tried to show that you can get away with anything by saying that. This in my opinion was a cheap tactic to garner free publicity for an otherwise good movie.

Article 15 also primarily bashes the Hindu religion or upper caste Hindus. I am not at all denying that in several parts of India, such caste-based discrimination is rampant. However, caste based discrimination is not specific to a religion. Have you not heard about the term 'Dalit-Muslims'? Although Islam does not recognize any castes, Muslim communities in South Asia (especially India) apply a system of social stratification. It is developed as a result of ethnic segregation between the foreign conquerors and the local converts. Why was that not correctly portrayed in the movie? Because it would not fit the hypotheses? 

It is important to make socially-relevant movies but it is equally (if not more) important to ensure that it is portrayed in a non-biased way. Else it would only stem (or rather further escalate) communal tensions. Such movies also suggest (or at least fails to suggest otherwise) that majority of upper-caste Hindus think like this. It is as wrong as thinking that majority of Muslim are terrorists. That goes against the very intention behind Article 15.

We Vote for Good Future, We Vote for India, We Vote for Modi

Is there an Ace up your sleeve?

In the last 3+ years, Modi government has taken several steps in the right direction. Some have started to pay dividends, some are in WIP stage (will pay dividends in future) and some probably missed the target. I am happy about even those steps that failed to achieve all the desired objectives because (a) they did not fail completely and did deliver on some counts and (b) they were steps in the right direction and were backed by all the right intentions.

Let us discuss the positives first. Following are some of the key achievements of Modi government (note: these include achievements as well as steps/plans);

1. Strategic relationships with several nations
2. Make in India initiative
3. Swachh Bharat Mission
4. Jan Dhan Yojana 
5. River linking project
6. Fast tracking of defence purchases
7. Smart Cities (100) project
8. Surgical strike
9. Demonetization*
10. Implementation of GST*
11. Program for divestment of public sector companies
12. Direct Cash Benefit Transfer Scheme 
13. Initiative to link Aadhar Card with other systems

* Have been discussed under positives as well as negatives

Now let us discuss the negatives;

1. Alliance with PDP in Jammu and Kashmir: (Though there is no place for emotional decisions in politics and it is a fact that politics is game of numbers, this alliance either should not have happened or BJP should have better handled the alliance with clearly laid out terms and conditions)
2. Demonetization*: Though I firmly believe that demonetization delivered several benefits (e.g. reduction in terror/naxal funding, increase in number of tax payers, even winning the UP elections), it is being argued that 'black money' did not 'go out' of the system. It is being said that 99% of the money found the way back. Having said that, the argument from the government also sounds valid. If the expectation was that the black money that was stored in cash would disappear as the culprits would not find a way to legalize that money then probably it was a failure. However, the government argues that though it is probably true that most of the money came back into the system, that is also a major positive. As per the government, the money moved from "No. 2 economy" (i.e., the black market) to the "No.1 economy". If that is true, it means that the money is no longer black money and has come back in regular circulation. It has become legal money and would help in strengthening the economy. Hence, technically the 'black money' did 'go-out'. Having said that, since demonetization failed to catch the culprits, it did miss the mark as it failed to deliver ALL the desired benefits. Hence, it has (also) been discussed under the negatives
3. Implementation of GST*: Though it is certainly a move in the right direction, the Finance Minister and GST Council could not have done anything more to complicate  matters. In most countries where GST has been implemented, there has been a single tax for everything. India has separate taxes for various good and services and the tax rate depends on the type of goods or service. To make the matter worse, VAT continues to exist on fuel!!! There is a significant and urgent need to simplify GST.

So, where do we stand? While I feel that Modi government could have done better, I am not unhappy at all. I see, acknowledge and appreciate the right intentions. And I do understand that 'Rome was not built in a day'. I am prepared to show patience. In any case, I do not see an alternative. Modi, by far, is the best bet for 2019 and for India.

But am I concerned? Little bit. While I hope that most people would make a rational decision in 2019, I do feel that people are losing patience. Though the steps are indeed in the right direction, the fact that the steps are yet to deliver quantifiable results worries me. Some voters may be tempted to try something new.

It must also be noted that the judiciary has done everything possible to step on the cake. Every decision/bill/policy/move has been questioned by the SC. They are pissed with the government as the government wanted a say in appointment of judges. However, this is also something that people would not consider in 2019. 

Hence, I believe that Modi government needs an impactful 2018. It should have something for everyone.

Do I mean that the government should distribute freebies? Certainly NOT!!!

There is a need for a thorough cost benefit analysis. In my opinion, the government can consider the following;

1. Changes in Income Tax laws. While Dr. Swamy says income tax should be abolished in India, I am not sure if that is feasible. Though only about 1% of Indian population pays income tax, it is still a high source of revenues for the government. With all the infrastructure projects planned, I am not sure if government can really afford abolishment of income tax. However, the threshold can be changed. For example, if the bar is raised to something like 1 crore per annum, it would give a relief to a large chunk of people in middle class. It would definitely have a negative impact on the revenues. It should also be noted that it is unlikely to have a major impact on sentiments as only about 1% of Indian population would be benefitted. Hence a cost-benefit analysis is required.
2. Lowering the fuel prices. High fuel prices impact a large chunk of Indian population and if the government manages to lower fuel prices by removing state taxes, it would do wonders to the sentiments. Again, it should not be a freebie and a thorough analysis of the pros and cons is required.
3. Scrapping of Article 370
4. Removal of MFN status given to Pakistan
5. Strong actions and retaliations on Pakistan border

There are several other actions that come to mind and are really important. However, the idea for 2018 should be 'Maximum Impact, Minimum Controversies'.

Modi and Shah are smart and they must have planned for some quantifiable actions for 2018. 

I just hope they have a real Ace up their sleeves!!!

Bahut Yaraana Lagta Hai!!!

There is this girl in the office. She started in a different team but - owing to insufficient work in that team - she was transferred to our team. Not sure if the move was purely due to insufficient work or it performance issue also played a part. In our team, she started with another reporting manager and continued for ~1 year. Later, I was asked to manage her efforts. I could detect some performance issues but more importantly, I spotted serious issues with attitude, behavior and discipline. I let the concerned people know about the issues. I was feeling that - after already trying to  accommodate her in multiple teams  - they would probably outcounsel her. However, to my surprise, they are prepared to try her in another team! I asked a colleague why such a long rope is being extended in this case. As per the colleague, there are other - unofficial & unprofessional - reasons involved.

From now on, I'll call her Arun Jaitley!!

Was Demonetization Successful?

I have been asked that question on several occasions. It amuses me. I am no expert in economics and people know that. Yet, they ask me that question because as per them, I am a "Bhakt". Well.....I do not deny that. I am a Desh Bhakt and so I am also a Modi Bhakt. They ask me this question as they feel here is an opportunity to pin me down.

Though I have already put a disclaimer that I am no expert in such matters, I do feel that Demonetization missed the target. When the move was announced, I was really excited and there were several reasons behind that excitement.

Firstly, I was proud that "my leader" has the balls to take such a step. It was not easy but Narendra Bhai had it in him to go for it. That's what I like about the man and it gave me an immense sense of pride that my country has such a bold leader.

And there were other reasons. The move was targeted at stopping/curbing black money, terror financing, funding the stone pelters in Kashmir and so on. I must say that, with my limited knowledge of the facts, my perception is that black money was indeed impacted but it has found its way back. And same goes for terror financing and other targets.

Could it have been planned and rolled-out better? No, I firmly believe that such a move required an element of surprise and hence, it was announced suddenly.

Then why did it fail?

Well....I believe that one of the main reasons that it failed was because several of us made it fail. I personally know at least couple of people who told me that their clients wanted help in converting black money stacked in their house. I am not sure whether they were just making stories or did it actually happen...and I do not know whether they did help their clients in converting the money or not...but several people did that. Now, these very people are questioning the success of the move!!! That is like insult to injury. First you do your bit in making the initiative fail and then you question the initiative!!! Well done!!!And there were several others. Politicians, bank employees, administrators, agents....they did their bit in making the initiative fail. Certainly not generalising the whole thing and pointing fingers at everyone but you know who you are and you know the others around you who played a part.

Having said that, I don't think that it is fair to put the blame entirely elsewhere. I do wish that the initiative was handled better by EVERYONE. It could have paid rich dividends.

Does this put a question mark in my mind regarding the effectiveness of Modi? ABSOLUTELY NOT. I still firmly believe in Narendra Bhai. My first and foremost reason behind getting excited about Demonetization is still intact. I am still pretty much proud of my PM. It would require a major screw-up for that belief and trust to go away. I firmly believe that the move had the right intentions. It just did not achieve all that it was set to achieve. That happens.

I believe that any initiative towards an all encompassing growth in India requires NaMo at the top. And for that BJP (though I do not like the party) needs to have an absolutely majority in both houses. So even if the only good thing about demonetization was that it helped BJP in winning the election in UP, I can live with that....happily!!!

I am prepared to be patient. Change would not come in a day. It does not matter whether things have completely improved or not. What matters is whether we are heading in the right direction or not. And we are indeed heading in the right direction. There are some speed breakers/bumps/turbulence that we are encountering but did we expect the journey to be absolutely smooth. A democracy with over 1.2 billion is moving.....ground is bound to shake.

And to everyone who is criticizing Modi....I know that you would continue to do so. No amount of reasoning or facts are going to change that. Some of you have religious reasons to criticize him and some of you do it just for the heck of it. Modi is the popular opinion and some people like to irritate others. So do continue with it....whatever is your reason. But do answer, one question. If not Modi, you would you rather have at the top? Rahul, Kejriwal, Mamta, Lalu, Sharad Pawar, Owaisi, Uddhav, Raj Thackeray, KCR, Mulayam, Akhilesh, Mayawati...whats your alternative? Answer that honestly - not to me but to your yourself.

Haha

RS to Dr. Swamy, ORS to opposition

The lack of majority in Rajya Sabha has been an achilles heel for the development agenda of the current government. Majority is still not in our favour but am glad and relieved that the 'One-Man-Army' i.e., Dr. Subramanian Swamy is going to Rajya Sabha!!!  Opposition will have to drink 'ORS ka ghol' before coming to RS!!! 

Who Controls NDTV?

Some channels and politicians (usual suspects) are using this tragedy as an opportunity to press for the demilitarization of Siachen. 

Unki niyat mein 'Pakistaniyat' nazar aati hai.

#SiachenAvalanche #Siachen

Selective Outrage

Rajdeep Sardesai said that they could/did not cover Malda due to the "tyranny of distance". Yugpurush Kejriwal said that he cannot comment on Pathankot incident as he is the CM of Delhi and is only concerned with matters related to Delhi. 

One should not forget that he was the first political opportunist to reach Dadri and politicize the issue. With his demonic super-powers, he was able to pull Dadri inside the geographical boundaries of Delhi. And now, since he has commented on the issue, seems Hyderabad has been colonized by Delhi. 

So, commenting on and politicizing Dadri and Hyderabad is okay but Pathankot and Malda are irrelevant. Bhai Waah. 

For any issue in a BJP ruled state, state government is blamed and for every other issue, Modi to hai hi!!!

Tale of 2 Suicides

One week ago a social worker in a village in Muzaffarnagar district of UP, 150 km from Delhi, committed suicide after a video clip of her being raped was made public. It was not a news, because she was from the wrong religion, and her rapist was from the protected religion. No TV cameras reached her village, Rahul Gandhi did not visit her family, Kejriwal did not demand resignation of any ministers.

A student in Hyderabad university, who was suspended for beating a fellow student in his hostel room, committed suicide yesterday, and all the political vultures are flying to Hyderabad to milk the tragedy for all its worth.

All suicides are equal, but some suicides are more equal than others.

A Case of Wrong Information & Premature Ejaculation

This the post and picture that AAPtards were sharing a couple of days back. They were suggesting that, while Modi is busy with foreign trips, Yugpurush and his men have already taken action against Sheila Dikshit and have filed a FIR.

Till then, their law minister had only made a recommendation to his bosses to file a FIR against Dikshit and no FIR had been filed yet. But AAP, like always, started giving a wrong picture to the public and AAPtards started to have premature ejaculation.

Anyways....since then I have been eagerly and anxiously waiting for an action by AAP and today they did take an action. They removed their law minister!!! :P

They may still file a FIR later against Dikshit to avoid further bashing but they prioritized the action against their Minister!!! After all, how dare he suggest an action against the real bosses in Congress!!!!

AAPtards bhaiyon, maan gaye....aapke yugpurush aur aapki mand-buddhi....donon ko!!!

'One Rank One Pension (OROP)': The Rights and Wrongs

Someone asked me what is my take on the demand for 'One Rank One Pension (OROP)' by retired defense personnel in India. I am son of a retired Indian Army officer and thus OROP, if and when implemented, is going to directly benefit my family. My father gets a pension and naturally his pension would also increase if OROP is implemented. So, one may think that I am fully supporting the demand as well as protests/agitations by the veteran defense personnel in New Delhi. 

Right and Wrong.

I do and firmly believe that defense personnel, serving as well retired, should be the best paid men in the country. Unlike everyone else in the country, the soldiers stay away from their families for long periods, serve in remote and inhospitable areas and face dangers on regular basis. Paying them what they deserve is the least we can do for them. Some people argue that defense personnel already get a lot of perks in forms of rations, subsidized products in CSD canteens, rebates on flight tickets and so on. Indeed they get all that but they do not get enough money to give their families the comfort that they and their families deserve. The life of an army officer may look very glamorous from outside but it typically is not as glamorous as it looks. Defense personnel and their families give a lot to the country and they definitely deserve better financial benefits. I do know that I am deviating from the topic as the current demand is not related to salaries at all; it focuses on pensions.

Coming to the demand regarding pensions, veterans are asking for same and standardized pension for every retired defense personnel at each designation. As per some sources, a Lieutenant Colonel retiring in 2010 gets higher pension that a Major General who retired in late 90s. It is definitely unfair and should change. The year of retirement should not decide the pension. If salaries are increased on the basis of increasing cost of living and inflation, pensions should also increase to match the current levels. I am completely with the veterans on this point. And so is the government. Government has already announced that it is committed to implementing OROP after ironing out some administrative challenges.

Now, lets talk about areas where I disagree with the veterans;

1. Veterans are demanding a 'Rolling Adjustment Plan' under which they want the pensions to be adjusted every year. There are around 22 lakh defense pensioners and the number would keep growing. A 'Rolling Adjustment Plan' would be quite difficult to implement. Plus, it would create a huge financial issue (do not want to use the word 'burden' due to my immense respect for the armed forces)
2. One should note that the usual norm is of a 10-year adjustment for all the other government pensioners (source: Times of India; as shown in the picture below). Hence, the demand is to make extremely drastic changes, which would have a long-term impact 
3. 
4. Veterans need to understand that the armed forces is not the only organization, which is eligible for such a system and benefits. Once this is implemented for the armed forces, other departments (e.g. BSF, CRPF, railways etc) would also ask for similar changes. The request would not be unjustified as others should also get better benefits. Keeping this in mind, the veterans must understand and appreciate the fact that the decision and calculation is not a straight-forward one for the government. Government has to ensure that they do not make a hasty decision, which is impractical. Else, they would face similar requests, agitations and protests from others
5. Another point (small one) is that I, personally believe that personnel from the armed forces, serving or retired, should not indulge in such agitations and protests. I do agree that it may have been difficult to make others hear their voices without such means yet I feel that defense personnel should not indulge in such protests and agitations. It is uncharacteristic for the defense personnel (even if they are retired) to adopt such measures. The government has already communicated that they are committed to implementing OROP. I think the veterans should now show some patience. Else, this would start to look more like 'arm-twisting' than anything else. This is also giving a lot of cannon-fodder to presstitutes, who do not even need a reason to target the government

Overall, the overall demand is justified and there are no two-ways about it. Veterans deserve better pensions and more. However, the adjustment plan is unreasonable and impractical, which would lead to an administrative and financial nightmare. And the approach is uncharacteristic. 

On a side note, majority of the people in India respect the armed forces and anything related to the armed forces becomes a popular topic. Several civilians are showing their support to the demand of the veterans, which is heart-warming. 

However, more than anything else, I am extremely pleased and proud that the government is making cautious moves instead of opting for hasty populist measures in order to earn quick brownie points. Approving the demand and implementing OROP without putting enough thought would have been and still is an easy option. But the government is choosing to weigh the impact from all angles before implementing OROP. This government does not seem to be interested in gaining short-term political mileage at the cost of long-term negative financial impact. 

That is why, I trust this government and leadership. 

Narendra Modi's performance: Where does the issue lie?

All my friends, family members, colleagues know that I am big supporter of Narendra Modi, the current Prime Minister of India. I like to call myself a 'believer' than a 'supporter'. It is funny that sometimes people come to me and ask me about Modi's policies and stances, as if Modi is my uncle who discusses such matters with me!!!

I am regularly pulled into discussions and arguments with people who do not like Narendra Modi. More often than not, such people do not have any preferred leader and criticizing Modi has become their favorite passtime. It is the latest fashion. Anyways, I do not really pay any attention to the opinion of such people.

In the past few days, I have also had discussions with few 'mild' to 'moderate' Modi supporters. I would be wrong if I say that I have not been alarmed by their questioning of Modi's policies and strategies. I have noticed that several Modi-supporters have now started doubting his abilities. They argue that nothing is happening on the ground. To get more weightage, they throw in statements like "Corporates have also been questioning Modi", "My clients, who are significant players, have been quite unhappy" and "I am in India, I know the situation at the ground level". More often than not, I respond with a 'Gautam Buddha-like' spiritual smile.

Yesterday, I spoke to a good friend, who I would categorize as a 'Strong' supporter of Modi. I asked him if he is also witnessing this new trend where Modi-supporters have started questioning his plans and policies. He responded in affirmative, which led to my follow-up question - "How do you respond?". His answer was quite interesting.

So, whenever people come to him and ask him about his views on Modi and why there is no development at the ground level, he says, "I agree that Modi is a failure. The previous Prime Minister was better. At least there used to be a new development every week in the form of a corruption scandal. We should bring him back"!!! He told me that shuts the people up in most cases!!! I found it an interesting response and I am going to try that!!!

But I want to ask all the so-called supporters of Modi who have now started questioning him that who are they comparing Modi with? When they say that Modi has so far been a failure, what is the benchmark that they are using? Do they know of any other former Prime Minister who was able to perform better than Modi in little over 1 year? Do they know of any other current leader who they believe can do better than this? I doubt that answer would be 'Yes'. 

Currently, they are comparing 'Modi' with 'their own expectations from Modi'. Narendra Modi never said that he would be able to turn things around in one year. More importantly, anyone with sane mind should know that it is not possible. India is a big country and is facing all kinds of issues, which are deep-rooted. Turning things around would take time. And it would require investments. 

I would give another example. On several occasions, I have felt disappointment after watching a movie that I was eagerly and anxiously waiting for. However, when I have watched the same movie later (after a few months), I have enjoyed it. The issue was not with the movie. The issue was with the expectations. My expectations used to be so high that the movie was not able to match up to it.

I believe the same is applicable in the case of Narendra Modi and that is where the issue lies. Some of us were probably expecting that the man would come and turn India into a developed nation and an economic superpower within a few months. No one would be poor. Prices would fall down. Everyone would have jobs. Cities would be clean. Roads would be perfect. They may not agree that they had such expectations but they surely are behaving in this manner. I any case, there are no issues with expecting such things but one must be realistic about the timelines. As they say, Rome was not built in a day.

I urge people to be more patient. Modi government has been trying to attract investments. Without investments NOTHING is going to get better. Once the investments are in, things would 'slowly' and 'steadily' improve.

One more thing. If you are unhappy with Modi, think of an alternative. Do you really think Rahul Gandhi, Arvind Kejriwal, Mulayam Singh Yadav, Nitish Kumar, Mamata Banerjee, Laloo Prasad Yadav or Sharad Pawar would be better? If yes, then I really do not have anything to say to you. If no, then please stop questioning Modi's abilities. He is not only the best bet, he is the only bet!!! Please note that I am not discouraging discussions/arguments over new policies, priorities, stances etc. That should always happen. After all, we may or may not agree with everything that Modi does. I, myself, have some complaints from him!!! If Modi starts to falter, all of us need to start looking for an alternative. However, please do not question what has he achieved in 1 year, 1.5 years, 2 years and so on. Please do not look for short-terms gains. Such short-sightedness has already harmed us in past several decades. 

India needs to improve on multiple parameters (if not all) and that would require a long-term all-encompassing growth strategy. I firmly believe that Modi has the vision to take us there. As I said, I am a 'Believer'. 

A few years back I had read somewhere that if Bill Gates gave everyone on Earth $10 on Christmas, he’d still have $2.26 billion left (Not sure if its factually correct). Glad that #AAPtards, #CONgress and #Presstitutes did not read this analogy else they would have started beating their chests asking how come $10 has not been distributed to everyone so far!!!

Case Study

This is a case study of a business unit which had been continuously failing to meet its objectives. The employees were quite unhappy. The employees strongly believed that the management was not capable of reviving the situation. They demanded a change and forced the board to bring in a new management. 

The new management did a thorough analysis and found out that the existing resources are not sufficient to turnaround the situation. Instead of focusing entirely on 'managing' the existing resources and 'surviving', the new management gave high importance to improving the confidence of investors and in attracting the much needed investments. At the same time, they ensured that the internal situation does not get neglected and worsen.

The new management took several quick actions intended towards a long-term and all encompassing growth. With lot of efforts, they managed to improve the perception of investors and struck several deals with potential investors. It was decided that the funding would come in phases and would help in growing the business and in ensuring the welfare of the employees.

In the next AGM, they announced the plans and provided the details of the deals to the board as well as employees. But certain section of employees started questioning that if so many deals have been struck then how come the situation has not 'already' improved. It was explained to them that the investments would pour in steadily and it is a 'process'. It made complete business sense as that is the way businesses as well as economies work. Yet a certain section of the employees was not ready to understand and appreciate it. On top of it, some of them demanded instant results, freebies, bonuses, incentives. It was again explained to them by the management as well as some of the employees that the company cannot afford freebies. Also that the revival cannot happen overnight. Yet, some employees refused to buy that. 

Question (select all that are applicable):

1. Those employees are dumb. They should be given a dunce cap
2. Those employees are close to the earlier management and are intentionally creating unrest
3. Those employees should be completely ignored
4. Those employees had an overdose of 'Panchtantra' and 'Dada Dadi ki Kahaniyaan' in their childhood

I do not give a rat's ass to political opinion of people who 'choose' not to  vote for anyone as standing in a queue is too downmarket for them. These pseudo intellectuals just crib about anything and everything. Present them with facts and figures and they discount them. They do not form governments and they do not bring them down. They do not matter!!! Another 'breed' that I do not care about is the one that forms opinions through ScoopWhoop.com!!! More often than not, its the same bunch of people in both sets!!! (Disclaimer: This is NOT a work of fiction. Any resemblance to actual events or persons, living or dead, is entirely INTENTIONAL)