next time, try writing a coherent comment.

Thanks. Corrected that.

I will be very happy if the Indian voter proves me wrong and provides the correct incentives on corruption.

Reference few islands of poverty: That was an error. I guess it was corrected sometime right after you posted this. In any case that should be clear from the context it self.

For the rest. Okay let's start: You advocate development should be redefined. Kindly explain?

Btw, some may that argument for US too that it is no more than a giant market for Chinese goods..

Dear Shivam,

a) I personally find caste abhorrent but if we are going to have caste-driven reservations, then caste-census is essential.

b) Please note: The caste census is only the first step. The second and the most important step is to classify who is an OBC, and then ensure the list is revised periodically and reflects geographical variations.

Btw, what difference does it make to you? Not that you have cared much about data, ever. You already just knew...

Thanks for the feedback! Was posted in a hurry but no excuses.

You raise a fair point. However, the only answer to that can be more discourse. If we have enough number of people then it would be harder for falsehoods to spread. I understand the filter argument has its benefits in terms of bunch of disinterested professionals parsing through news and giving us the true story but I am skeptical how it plays out in real life. Everyone has their own interests, afterall.

Thanks, everyone who pointed the two mistakes. It has been corrected.

Jai,

Allow me to further expand my point. When I say partially succeeded in the political process, what I mean is failure. In my opinion, whoever presides over a state when such riots happen---whether due to sins of commission or omission----should lose elections. Unfortunately, it has not happened. Neither in case of Rajiv Gandhi or Sharad Pawar or Narendra Modi. Nevertheless, that Modi's rise as a national leader has been stymied by the riots is something which gladdens my hear. For politicians are driven by incentives. We encourage bad behavior as voters and that is what we will get.

What you allude to as conversation between Jaafri and Modi is part of the legal process. Now, whether Modi is guilty by legal standards is not to be judged by me but by the Courts. SIT is a step in the right direction.

Nevertheless, as a voter, I would not vote for him based on the political price principal. However, I would still defend his right to due process of law. As I have done in case of terrorists or anyone else for that matter.

Unfortunately, the political and legal process is often confused. Something to guard against.

Jai, frankly, speaking, I am not really interested in what conversations Modi had.

What I am interested is in process---both political and legal. The political process in case of Modi has only partially succeeded; he has won elections in Gujarat but his appeal outside the state is limited. Note, this does not require Modi to be actively complicit in Gujarat riots but merely the fact that he presided over the state at that tine should be enough to pay the political price.

The legal process is a parallel but separate debate where the axiom innocent unless proven guilty must be respected. Unfortunately, a lot of people are not prepared to do that. This is not very different from people of different ideological persuasion who think that every terror suspect caught must be summarily shot. Reflect on that please. It is a case of sacrificing legal principles because the accused does not reflect your world view.

You do a disservice to this blog by thinking we conflate Modi with national interest. Modis will come and go; India that is the nation-state has survived for thousands of years and will hopefully, survive all of us!