May 08, 2017Who Serves the country better?
Now think about the term “politician”. What did you observe? Is there something flashing on your forehead? If yes then it must be something like corruption, discrimination or something related to these. Isn’t is? In simple words, I want to say that, this is our society who is controlling our thoughts and leading us to think what is good or bad! Strange but true...! and in the case of politician, we are being led by our society to think that a politician is uneducated, fraud, corrupted or something related to these…
so what we are doing is we are following our society blind-faithfully and maintaining our thoughts according to them. Suppose there are two men named man A and man B. The first one, that is man A is living in USA; the second one, that is man B is living in India. If we observe them, we will find that man A’s thoughts, concept and opinions about a politician is far differ than that of man B (and it’s a fact!). because he is living in USA and man B is living at India. man A will think that a politician is admin of country and he is powerful and honest towards his/her duty. But the man who belongs to India I mean man B will think that politician is cheater, fraud etc. do you think why their thoughts are so different from each other? There thoughts are profoundly opposite to each other. In simple words the reason is society. This culprit society is responsible for our impure thoughts about politician. Politicians are not as bad as you are thinking about. I will give a example of Narendra Modi to prove it. And I will not hesitate to say that he is a workaholic man. As we know that a coin has two sides, even there is ugliness in moon, but that ugliness increases its beauty.
Same here don’t mind if we have one or two politicians of not good thinking; we should make them our strength after mending them because such type of politicians has lot of good ideas about life skills and basically, they are unused sharp-minded. So, use them in a positive way and get a extra ordinary and a healthy political group. If you think that some politicians can’t become desh bhakt from their very nature; so ultimately politicians are bad. You are wrong! just for some contaminated members of politics, should we blame whole political system of India? And the supporting traditional leaders. I think no.
No field is as pure as milk; each field has some culprit members.
In any democratic country, it is the politicians who represent the aspirations, opinions and voice of the people. People elect politicians who they feel best represent what they stand for, and implement what they believe the country needs. If the views of the people change or the government performs poorly, the ruling party gets voted out, and a new set of politicians (possibly representing a different ideology), again chosen by the people, are given a fresh chance. These politicians then go on to frame laws in the legislature, The Parliament, depending on the people's wishes and the party ideology.
Bureaucrats, on the other hand, are people who have strong knowledge and experience in certain fields of policy and governance - and thus, will know how exactly to implement certain policies planned by the government, and what the potential problems can be. In India, the IAS is the main channel through which politicians channelize their ideas and plans into successful on-ground implementation. Bureaucrats are chosen on the basis of sheer merit, and are not elected by the people. Instead, they use the laws passed by the politicians mentioned above as a framework to devise implementable solutions that are in line with those laws. They use their strong domain knowledge and years of practical experience to bring to fruition the plans and wishes of the country's people, which are represented and embodied by the politicians (and the laws that they make).
Thus, it is crucial that both politicians and bureaucrats work constructively together in tandem towards the development of the nation. A politician alone can understand the pulse of the people and know exactly what the people in his constituency demand - but may not be able to come up with practical solutions to properly tackle issues - which often require interdisciplinary knowledge across a variety of social and technological issues that only a bureaucrat can appreciate. A bureaucrat, on the other hand, may devise idealistic or unpopular solutions to several issues without knowing what the people (who will be most affected by his decisions) actually expect. Neither can do it without the other - both the intellect and skill of the bureaucrat, and a sense of the popular opinion and ideological direction that the politician brings, are required.
There are even several cases where a politician and a bureaucrat serve different, independent roles that the other cannot perform - for instance, one cannot have a politician as the head of the CBI, CAG and other regulatory agencies since they strictly require political neutrality. A good example of this would be the relationship between the Finance Minister and the RBI Governor - the Government would always like to spend a lot of money to boost economic growth, but that would lead to high inflation. Thus, the two functions of 1) boosting economic growth and 2) keeping inflation under check cannot be both given to the same entity due to the conflict of interest - which is where the RBI's role comes in. The Government - consisting of politicians elected by the popular vote - try to boost economic growth, while the RBI - headed by a non-elected but knowledgeable bureaucrat - keeps inflation under control by regulating interest rates even if that means slowing down economic growth. Both balance each other, and both are necessary for developing overall healthy policies for a fundamentally strong economy. Please see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ce...