--- On Sat, 21/3/09, Nikhil Mehra <[email protected]> wrote:
> From: Nikhil Mehra <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [silk] Prime Ministerial candidate
> To: [email protected]
> Date: Saturday, 21 March, 2009, 3:01 AM
> I don;t know about this debate. I
> don't think it is even real. India cannot
> have a Presidential system because I don't think this
> nation is capable of a
> consensus candidate. The interests of the constituent
> states has to be
> represented at the centre because the power sharing
> arrangement in the
> Constitution as it stands is heavily biased in favor of the
> centre. Greater
> power was not granted to the states at the time of
> independence because
> there was a genuine fear of fragmentation.
>
> In today's scenario, I think the lack of consensus over any
> one candidate,
> and in fact the impossibility of it, is betrayed by the
> constancy of
> coalition politics. Hence, I think having a President is an
> impossibility.
> Yes, the BJP may be trying to project a single leader, but
> so is everyone
> else. If Sonia were willing to be PM there would be no
> doubt about the
> Cong's candidate. And even if a proxy is elected, there is
> no doubt about
> who is in charge. The left does not name a PM candidate
> because they are not
> capable of producing a PM - they've never even attempted
> it. The only way
> they can is through horse-trading in Parliament.
>
> As for efficiency, what ever the system, it'll still be the
> same people
> manning that system. It can be distorted by preying on the
> same moral
> deficiencies.
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 9:21 PM, Thaths <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 7:47 AM, Kiran K Karthikeyan
> > <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > >> ITYM *execution*. The House and Senate in the
> USian system take care
> > >> of the legislation.
> > > Yes. And it is the legislative bodies which are
> pre-occupied with
> > retaining
> > > the majority in the gov't. Perhaps I wasn't
> clear, but the presidential
> > > system seems more stable. With our current system
> any small regional
> > party
> > > can bring the governement down and maybe even
> force re-election which
> > > effectively means an entire year or more wasted,
> not to mention the
> > costs.
> >
> > Aren't the Real Executive in the Westminister system -
> the
> > bureaucracies in Whitehall and South Block - protected
> from the coming
> > and goings of MPs to a certain extent? You do have a
> point about costs
> > of elections.
> >
> > > If this has been discussed elsewhere, please do
> forward the links if
> > > possible. I would like to know the arguments
> against a Presidential
> > system
> > > (with or without an electoral college).
> >
> > Africa is full of faltering democracies (de facto
> dictatorships) that
> > chose the Presidential system. I suspect the
> Presidential system in a
> > newly democratic country lends itself handy to
> strongmen (and they
> > have all been men).
> >
> > Thaths
> > --
> > "You'll have to speak up, I'm wearing
> a towel." -- Homer J. Simpson
<sigh>
So it has started. Woe is me. Don't say, at the end, that I didn't warn you.
Connect with friends all over the world. Get Yahoo! India Messenger at
http://in.messenger.yahoo.com/?wm=n/
