Re: Is India a model Democracy?

["Siva Karuturi" <siva@buydeal.com>]

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Please help make the Manifesto better, or accept it, and propagate it!
---------------------------------------------------------------------
gentlemen

i think u guys have choosen a very "Surreal Title" for this discussion.
i
can boldly say that we never had true representative democracy for more
than
40 years - i would gladly welcome a separate discussion on  this topic.

coming to FM radio broadcasts - look at what happened in reality - any
of u
guys remember how cable TV came into the country - i don't remember any
one
seeking the Govt. of India's permission to  broadcast - the govt. tried
to
do some sort of ham handed regualtion after they were fully entrenched -

more over they don't have any technical means to do it.

i don't see any reason for regulation of the radio spectrum either -
it's
just a matter of time before technology catches up and some one will
attempt
to broadcast with out regulatory approval - that would be fun to watch -
i
fervently wish that there could be irreverent talk show hosts Howard
Stern
and Rush Limbaugh in India.

sivaram

----- Original Message -----
From: Padmanabha Rao <kvprao@igidr.ac.in>
To: <debate@indiapolicy.org>
Sent: Monday, January 08, 2001 11:51 AM
Subject: Re: Is India a model Democracy?


> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Please help make the Manifesto better, or accept it, and propagate it!

> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> On Sun, 7 Jan 2001 Npsingh123@aol.com wrote:
>  The reason why government is lukewarm to truly Independent broadcasts

>  and greater freedom on the internet is because of the fear that the
hold
>  of corrupt politicians and corrupt government on every aspect of our
>  lives will be considerably weakened if we have a real freedom of
>  expression.
>
> Corruption is a procedural issue and cannot be called "CurrentNews".
It
> would be a current issue in the polity -meaning for a period of time
> longer than atleast a day- and such (dis)coverage would be within the
> definition of public investigation. "CurrentNews" needs to be defined.
I
> think the definition would have in terms of the content and its
> 'timelessness'. It can become a never-ending thing if we harp on what
> constitutes 'time' and I guess there does not exist one public
definition
> of 'time'. God, this leads to nowhere. Conflicts occurs for the simple

> reason that each of us transcend 'time' or understand it differently.
That
> is not at all a problem. But for a public body such as a government,
whose
> purpose it is to safeguard the interests of ALL the people
simultaneously,
> it will go about with a definition of 'time' or 'timelessness'
depending
> on how competent it is to contain those conflicts. This is all plain
> thought. So, we can all either believe in a government for ALL people
or a
> government for a FEW people (the few who will give those definitions).
I
> argue for the former, and so abide by the definitions it presently
gives
> and applies that in the policy of not allowing CurrentNews coverage by

> FMs.
>
>  Of course with greater freedom comes greater responsibility. But our
>  system of laws and courts is quite capable of dealing with any
serious
>  deviations from responsible broadcasting.
>
> Yes, of course. Ten years after the killings are past. I like to live
in
> peace every moment.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Padmanabha Rao



--------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the National Debate on System Reform.       debate@indiapolicy.org
Rules, Procedures, Archives:            ../debate/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------