Nataraj

Hi Team,

I've been a subscriber for years, but I’m not sure how long. Maybe show that on the website? Everyone, including people I respect, keeps saying CJP shouldn't start a political party.

They're wrong. India cannot fundamentally change without fixing politics itself. CJP has a unique opportunity. To create a new blueprint for politics as a career. 

A modern party funded by small donors, built on transparency, focused on constituency results, and open to ordinary, aspirational Indians. 

Think Newslaundry, but for politics.

The argument that India has enough parties is RIDICULOUS.

We have enough bad parties, but no modern alternatives where ordinary Indians can build political careers. 

Today, becoming a politician often means becoming a goon first. No wonder the system sucks.

Without changing this, we'll repeat the same cycle every 10–15 years. Today it's Modi, tomorrow someone else.

If we can't change politics, we can’t change the country.

***

Methodman

This is about your inequality discussion, and a broader point about diagnosis vs treatment.

Among the many famous statements about Marxism (“Great Theory, wrong species”, “running out of other people’s freedoms”) is the one that has the right diagnosis, but the wrong treatment.

I'm not a libertarian. And I do think it's essential to track inequality — more because we are a society that shares so little, and if the rich have a very different experience from the poor, PLUs will fully secede from the union (into gated communities, private security, air filters, private schools, and healthcare). There's even less incentive to work together. The centre cannot hold.

But. I don't see a solution that the state can offer that isn't worse than the disease. So let's agree on the problem and talk about solutions? To me, it's Gandhian opinion-building and philanthropy, which ought to be in the interests of the rich, because otherwise we are facing the guillotine. And deservedly.

***

Somsubhro

Dear NL Team,

Was in India during the October protests in Delhi. Saw NL in action, and felt happy that I'm doing something useful with my salary (subscribing to NL and NL Sena's, i.e.). Said hello to all, and got a warm hello back. 

To those criticising Anand, he brings a unique way of discussing a point. If everyone on a panel spoke in the same curated way, then might as well host a podcast with AI bots. I am always happy when Anand is on the panel, and I miss Shardool. Perhaps Shardool can be invited from time to time.

The museum in Patna is absolutely amazing. Also, it is important to mention that it is not just the exhibits, but also the shop and restaurant that "complete" the experience. They have done it phenomenally well.

Love and funds,

Som

***

Merlyn

Hello hello,

Just a rant following Abhinandan's remark on US TV shows and journalists still holding truth to power. First, how much of the US admin’s (un)governance is a replica of our government's (un)governance? But if in the US it seems to be taking place only at the top, in India it is everywhere. Even my university works as such. A govt-backed VC and her appointed aides have pushed out and compelled those with any ounce of rationality to leave. Every bureaucratic process is now passed or rejected at will. There is no process, no rules. Even if there is a regime change, it will take generations to return to the universities that were, let alone build anything better. Second, the small no. of people talking about this kind of institutional dismantling in India. Thank you, Newslaundry, for the courage.

***

Sumant

Hi,

I am a subscriber and normally find your podcasts good, but No. 614 was deeply disappointing because the speaker did not bring out the most important aspects of the data supporting the government's claim.

Firstly, he never mentioned that the data was India’s data and was not collected by the WB.

Second, he did not mention that the poverty level was measured using consumption figures, not earnings.

Third, he did not mention that the consumption also included rations given by the government, which gives the wrong impression, as if the ration had been bought by the person.

Fourth, the person did not point out that the consumption figure also included purchases from loans taken by the family, which is misleading.

Fifth, the exclusions and inclusions in the data used for India differed from those of the rest of the countries. Why this was done for India is not clear.

It would have been helpful to have someone who had studied the data closely so the public gets accurate information.

Regards,

Sumant 

Complaining about the media is easy. Why not do something to make it better? Support independent media and subscribe to Newslaundry today.