Economic Times carried an interesting article on 30 May 2009 on Page 3
In West Bengal CPM claims a party membership of 3.21 lakh and a mass organization membership of 3.43 crore.
But CPM got only 33.1% of the vote share.
About 70 to 75% of the states 4.89 crore electorate cast its vote this year. This means CPM did not get votes to a large extent from its mass organization members.
Reason: I keep arguing is that party members (Of all political parties in India) are not meeting nonparty people systematically.
In Kerala, the party membership is over 3.64 lakh and mass organization membership is around 1.42 crore. Kerala's electorate is two crore. Around 60% voted and CPM got 30.48%. Once again party members could not even mobilise their mass organization members.
The combined membership of all mass organizations belonging to CPM increased to 6,17,93,166 at the time 2008 party congress. The earlier party congress figure was 4,91,54,970.
Is there a need for party members to develop intimate contact with nonparty persons. Yes it is there. People in general will welcome if political party members take interest and meet them regularly.
Showing posts with label Political activity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Political activity. Show all posts
Saturday, May 30, 2009
Friday, January 23, 2009
Emphasize Representing People
Politician at any level in a democracy is a representative of the opinion of people. Both political party members and elected representatives need to have systems in place to accumulate public opinion within their constituency.
Unfortunately such systems are not visible.
There is more emphasis in media as well as in party and government affairs on the leadership and authority and the role of representing people is almost forgotten.
There is a need to emphasize representing people in democratic systems.
Unfortunately such systems are not visible.
There is more emphasis in media as well as in party and government affairs on the leadership and authority and the role of representing people is almost forgotten.
There is a need to emphasize representing people in democratic systems.
Sunday, March 16, 2008
In response to a blog post - Bourgeois Bureaucracy
http://astrangethingcalledlife.blogspot.com/2008/03/bourgeois-bureaucracy.html
In the above blog the following issue is brought up.
If the officials are responsible for every failure then they must also be the ones behind every success of the government... How come the credit of success is always given to the ministers while every failure is the result of an erring official???
How can officials be blamed for govt policies???
The policies are drafted by the cabinet, the officials are responsible only for implementing them... As such the failure of the policies must be seen as lack of foresight on the part of the govt; the only blame that can be leveled against the officials is in the delay of implementing the plans... But then bureaucratic red-tape is a well accepted drawback inherent in such system...
My response to the post in an orkut community discussion is:
http://www.orkut.com/CommMsgs.aspx?cmm=7753845&tid=2586633211450203329
The post of politicians and bureaucrats is interesting and important.
Bureaucrats are judged by politicians and politicians are judged by people.
Definitely we should have system whereby some bureaucrats are recognized for their exemplary service. Such bureaucrats may be identified by multiple sections of the society, media, politicians, NGOs, and people in general. There can be a committee MPs and MLAs at state level who receive nominations from various people and organizations and declare some awards that recognize bureaucrats. There is no doubt that many of them are doing a fair days work or more than a fairdays work.
When politicians criticize them public there may be some truth in it. And also politicians are trying to deflect the blame from them. But we are there to make our judgments and many sitting MPs, MLAs and ministers are losing elections because of our judgment.
I like the issue raised by you and I am including your post and my reply in this community in my blog on political and social philosophy.
I request to think more into the issue and collect opinion of others also on the issue.
In the above blog the following issue is brought up.
If the officials are responsible for every failure then they must also be the ones behind every success of the government... How come the credit of success is always given to the ministers while every failure is the result of an erring official???
How can officials be blamed for govt policies???
The policies are drafted by the cabinet, the officials are responsible only for implementing them... As such the failure of the policies must be seen as lack of foresight on the part of the govt; the only blame that can be leveled against the officials is in the delay of implementing the plans... But then bureaucratic red-tape is a well accepted drawback inherent in such system...
My response to the post in an orkut community discussion is:
http://www.orkut.com/CommMsgs.aspx?cmm=7753845&tid=2586633211450203329
The post of politicians and bureaucrats is interesting and important.
Bureaucrats are judged by politicians and politicians are judged by people.
Definitely we should have system whereby some bureaucrats are recognized for their exemplary service. Such bureaucrats may be identified by multiple sections of the society, media, politicians, NGOs, and people in general. There can be a committee MPs and MLAs at state level who receive nominations from various people and organizations and declare some awards that recognize bureaucrats. There is no doubt that many of them are doing a fair days work or more than a fairdays work.
When politicians criticize them public there may be some truth in it. And also politicians are trying to deflect the blame from them. But we are there to make our judgments and many sitting MPs, MLAs and ministers are losing elections because of our judgment.
I like the issue raised by you and I am including your post and my reply in this community in my blog on political and social philosophy.
I request to think more into the issue and collect opinion of others also on the issue.
Saturday, March 15, 2008
Interest of Youth in Army and Politics
Orkut topic
http://www.orkut.com/CommMsgs.aspx?cmm=370&tid=2588941956088267428
тєяє bαρ kα bαρ
youth of india not intrested in Army and politics
9:04 pm 15.3.2008
youth of india have lost intrest in joining either Indian army or Indian politics
they rather prefer MNC's having a good salary
where indian army is facing marketing problem India politics is so much defamed that no one wants to join this field
My opinion posted
Narayana Rao
Defence - pay them more
10.31 pm 15.3.2008
At some points some professions become attractive and unattractive professions have to be made more attractive.
If private sector is rolling in profits and paying its employees fat salaries, well tax them and pay more salaries to defence officers. Wealth has to be shared in some logical manner.
It is not lack of interest in politics but going up in politics is tough job and probably only new parties now offer chance to new people. All old parties already have dynasties in each and every constituency in the country. Young persons from nonpolitical families have to come up through parties like BSP. Tough road ahead - tough people are required. It is not every body's job unlike that of private corporate sector/public sector or government job.
http://www.orkut.com/CommMsgs.aspx?cmm=370&tid=2588941956088267428
тєяє bαρ kα bαρ
youth of india not intrested in Army and politics
9:04 pm 15.3.2008
youth of india have lost intrest in joining either Indian army or Indian politics
they rather prefer MNC's having a good salary
where indian army is facing marketing problem India politics is so much defamed that no one wants to join this field
My opinion posted
Narayana Rao
Defence - pay them more
10.31 pm 15.3.2008
At some points some professions become attractive and unattractive professions have to be made more attractive.
If private sector is rolling in profits and paying its employees fat salaries, well tax them and pay more salaries to defence officers. Wealth has to be shared in some logical manner.
It is not lack of interest in politics but going up in politics is tough job and probably only new parties now offer chance to new people. All old parties already have dynasties in each and every constituency in the country. Young persons from nonpolitical families have to come up through parties like BSP. Tough road ahead - tough people are required. It is not every body's job unlike that of private corporate sector/public sector or government job.
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
Mass contact by political parties
An active worker of a political party can contact easily 50 persons, who could be their potential supporters at their house every year. Around 2000 members will be required at a parliamentary constituency level to meet 1,00,000 persons. But no political party seems to be practicing this mass contact. Why?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
