The fallacy of balanced approach

Interesting News article today: Left out: Marx, Engels to play minor roles in Bengal school books

It is surprising to see that Politicians/Academicians in West Bengal are striving to reduce/remove Marx and Engels from History. We can ignore the Economics part as hardly anywhere in world is Marxian economics taught. A News channel debate today explained that the 34 years rule of Communists in West Bengal resulted in a lot of Marxism being taught. It didn't explain than that why didn't a Communist revolution occured in WB in last 34 years? Why was Social democracy so closely knit into the political fabric of Bengal for these many years and not pure Communism? Why was there 'State Capitalism' in WB and not Communism as envisaged by Marxist ideas?{1} Many more questions remain unanswered though.

This is yet another instance why Marx is being suppressed and neglected as much as possible. These bourgeois personas of West Bengal's ruling party think they can suppress Karl Marx. Even if that's done, it makes no difference to Marxist methodology at all! As such, who needs mainstream syllabus to teach anything relevant today?

Today's case of Bengal clarifies how much afraid the dominant politicians and their bourgeois compatriots are of Marx{2}. Schools, Colleges and Universities are centers of brainwashing young population so that they can obey the dominant ideology and safely skip what they must actually know.

No doubt then, that most of the syllabus in India is filled with ideological biases of the ruling class. If they feel threatened by Marx's ideas, they can indeed reduce/remove him. Still, these ideas will return, with far more strength and endurance. Sad that History is being politicized. And sad that hardly anyone understand's Marx's ideas except that he was a Communist{3}.

Can there be a balanced approach?

The fallacy of balanced approach is very clearly visible in mainstream History and Economics curricula. Every new political party in power wishes to introduce its own ideological standpoint so as to bring changes it wants. That's not bad per se{4}. What is bad is that Marx's ideas are hardly taught in their correct, real form. What is presented in the name of Marxism is a critical analysis of his ideas by some other ideologues who have completely different ideological standpoints. This is dangerous. Such a trend will destroy the very future of our young generations. If we wish to have a better India, we need to allow "bias-free" flow of ideas. 

Balanced approach in Economics and History is a fallacy, and a dangerous one. It is to fool people that the committees framing curriculum is a bias-free, neutral set of humans. That's not possible. Every human has an ideology, whether she knows it or not. In the name of balanced approach, a different ideology is presented. The brainwashing still continues.

Agreed. Marxist ideas may have been overdosed in Bengal due to the Communist party's rule there for many years. But that is not a good reason to say that the now-ruling party is a balanced party. Far from it. A newer ideology will be put. Pro-Capitalism, Pro-markets and Pro-capitalist ideas will be fostered, maybe to create a well-obeying, pro-capitalism youth that turns out to be a 'productive' labour force{5}.

Is Marx really understood today?

Talking in terms of India, Marx is hardly even known to majority of the people. A nation where a large chunk of population resides in poverty/sub-poverty/near-poverty levels, its hard to expect them to read Marx and forget about their stomachs. That's not possible for now. But even the well-off sections of society do not understand Marx except the experts in various related subjects. Common populace must understand Marx's ideas in its originality rather than learning it in schools and colleges from ideological tutors- who nevertheless will promote their own ideologies. 

Today, we have a growing number of Austrians in Government colleges. They're able to help people understand their ideas well by engaging in productive teaching which is a healthy sign. Same must be done by Marxians. Just like Marx's ideas, even Austrian Economics is hardly taught or even understood in India. Dare you find a book by Ludwig von Mises or Murray Rothbard in school, college libraries{6}. You might find Marx though- but that's the only good thing. 

This boils down to one simple point: There's nothing like a balanced approach in History and Economics. Both are the pillars of Politic's justification in its present form. Common people must disapprove such a move. The brouhaha about introducing Indian point of view of History is equally fallacious. It is being talked as if only Marx was taught in Bengal's curricula till now, and Indian history was kept aside. There too, comfortable ideas will be put, challenging ones reduced/removed. People must resist such political manoeuvres. Let us focus more on solving nations's immediate problems 

rather than politicizing academic subjects which can be best left 

to academicians to sort out.

In the end, we can say that there's not too much of Marx in Bengal's schools, but a lot of politics to justify the society in its 
current form and skip the ideas people now really need to understand.

Notes:

1. State undertaking decisions that private competing firms must be taking is merely capitalism replaced by political executives taking those decisions. That's far more harmful.

2. This might be the case in face of the recent crisis in Capitalism that has engulfed most of the capitalist countries- E.U., U.S., etc. Justification for the American model of Capitalism is possible when it is justified and taught as if it were the best way to achieve human freedom.

3. The common people in India hardly understand Marx other than the mainstream ramblings against his ideas. Former USSR, Eastern countries,  &c. are publicized as failure of Marxism- as if they had anything to do with Marx.

4. Healthy spreading of one's ideology is always good. World needs different ideologies. But replacing something to introduce another while calling it a balanced approach is very mediocre.

5. Indeed, if wage-labour system is justified in the minds of young people, they'll end up accepting it as the sine qua non of modernity. That's dangerous too. It keeps radically different viewpoints about History, Economics and Future deliberately away from them. We can't afford that.

6. There is a lack of awareness about Austrian Economics in India. Moreover, one will hardly find the literature by this school of thought in Economics- except a few. At least this blog's author has experienced so. That's unfair. Such radically different ideas, diverging from mainstream perspective must be fostered and promoted. Combustion of ideas is the key to prevalence of truth.

---------------------

The Greatest Parliamentarian in Indian History

Today, i.e. on 26th March, in 1902, Gopal Krishna Gokhale, carefully trained in Indian Economics, made his first seminal speech on the Budget of the then British India. The British authorities took pride in the budgetary surplus that they had saved. Just then a man stood up and took lock, stock and barrel the entire British administration for their shameful deeds. 

He pointed out that having a budgetary surplus while majority was either starving or dying, wasn't a thing to be proud of. He then took up the annual budget, clause by clause and brought out the negligence and apathy of the Colonial administration, concluding that India was poor because its Economy was subservient to British interests.

Since that day, he's known as the Greatest Parliamentarian in the history of India. His views are very much true even today! While today's authorities and the "booming" middle class are busy in 'maximizing their marginal utilities', about 80% of Indian population resides and struggles at $1,25/day. There seems to be a need for another Gopal Krishna Gokhale.

The blind pursuit of consumption-maximization, the idea that a nation can be happier with more material wealth to consume, the old trickle down theory of Economics and the lack of interest in the larger field called Society, are some of the reasons for the contradictory state of world we live in. On one hand we have Consumers who want to maximize their marginal utilities and feel 'free to choose' in the market; on the other hand its this very class of consumers who has to produce in order to be able to consume. The lack of interest of people in Production while understanding the society isn't a healthy sign and must be reformed.

We don't need Economists to help us make our lives better. We need Social scientists who can rather help us understand the larger phenomenon called Society. And you know what- there's someone who can help us here; Karl Marx!

Following are some links that will help readers know more about Gopal Krishna Gokhale:

AICC's website: Click here.

Wikipedia's article: Click here.

Union Budget 2012-13: Key Features

Here are a few links that will provide the readers with key features about the Union Budget 2012-2013:

- Finance Ministry's site:

http://indiabudget.nic.in/ub2012-13/bh/bh1.pdf


- The Hindu's article: 

http://www.thehindu.com/business/Economy/article3002242.ece

More updates and issues-specific analysis shall come next month. 

Commodities, Production & Poverty- Part 1

Commodities. How essential and omnipresent this phenomenon is. It embodies a sort of magical character, phantom-like as Marx would say. A key difference between human species and other animals is that of possession of commodities. Before we embark upon a brief journey about this phenomenon, lets look at the its meaning:

Commodity: 

A Good or Service that has a use-value(utility) for users and an exchange-value(price) on market. Food, House, Cars, Pens, Fan, Tubelight, Petrol, Diesel, Bed, Spoon, Mobiles, Laptops, Facebook, Google, you name it! How fascinating this is. We humans are surrounded by a plethora of commodities. It is the prime objective phenomenon that differentiates us from other animal species.

Human Kingdom vs. Animal Kingdom:

Homo sapiens produce, distribute, exchange and consume commodities(both Goods and Services) on a large scale, not matched by any other organic species. Our lives are 'defined' by the commodities we use. A basic difference between a poor and a rich is the differences in the 'possession and utilization of commodities', isn't it? A rich family would be characterized by qualitatively and quantitatively better consumption as compared to a poor household. Suppose if all had the same houses, cars, &c, i.e. exactly same amenities. there wouldn't be any differentiation in rich and poor.

Of course, some of the readers might argue that its the amount of 'money' owned that makes this difference. I shall have two arguments against this proposition:

1. Money, in itself is not the end- though its a debatable issue in today's commodity fetish society. Its the amount of 'purchasing power' that money commands is what makes it an end; thus in the end the amount of commodities it can purchase.

2. Even if money were an end in itself- again, today this might be so in many cases, still money too is a commodity.  Thus money as an end, is after all a commodity as an end.

Why commodities are essential to human existence?

Commodities give shape to human life. They define our method of survival(even in Darwinian sense). They also smoothen  our organic processes. We wouldn't go in detail of this role of commodities, but briefly putting it, these add to the enrichment and easing of our day-to-day processes; Eg. Sleeping, Eating, Working, Travelling, Communicating, Thinking and so many more. Thus, commodities are very essential for leading a better life- both materially and immaterially. 

Economics and Commodities:

Marx begins in his magnum opus Capital-Volume 1:

"The wealth of those societies in which the capitalist mode of production prevails, presents itself as ―an immense accumulation of commodities, its unit being a single commodity. Our investigation must therefore begin with the analysis of a commodity."(1)

An a priori assertion, though a valuable one. He's one of the few Economists who give a completely fresh way of looking at the society and economy around us. Here, we can understand that accumulation of commodities is an essential feature of a capitalist society. Indeed it is. The prime aim of majority of population is gathering(or in market terms- earning) money, it being a commodity or commodity-buying power. The constant consumption of commodities is what keeps the flow of Economy going. 

A simple model of Economy: The PEDEC model

Production > Exchange > Distribution > Exchange > Consumption   

{PEDEC model}

Two stages are of prime importance. One- Consumption and Two- Production. Production is the source of Consumption and Consumption is the reason for Production.

Thus, we find an interconnected, contradictory but unitary relation between these two processes of Economy. It becomes crucial then, to point out that modern economics is mainly 'Consumption-focused' economic theory. Not just that. We as consumers are hardly concerned about the Production side of the commodity under our scrutiny. What matters is its objective appearance, its use-value and its exchange value.

Production and Economics:

Having said that, Production is still a very important process that needs to be emphasized for a better understanding about the Economy around us. One may call it capitalistic, socialistic, mixed, based on whatever one's ideological standpoint. But, production side of the coin remains equally crucial to focus. Modern Economics is the culmination of years of combustion and application of many competing ideas. Still, the excess focus on Consumption process of the Economy is debatable. 

Production: Two major components:  

We may thus define Production as the expenditure of human labour on natural resources and other raw materials to transform them into consumable commodities. Note that Capital Goods such as Machinary, Equipments, etc. are all the product of human labour. We consider them here as non-natural resources of production. Natural Resources are the Primary source of all the production that occurs. 

Then comes Human labour, that transforms the natural resources into the commodities we use as consumers. Here, we may include the Entrepreneurs who perform specific important functions in the economy(2){more on 'Entrepreneur' in future posts}. Hence, every commodity is a product of many different sorts of labour(3){more on types of labour in future posts}. The pencil that comes in our hand, is but a product of numerous labourers and the expenditure of their labour. The breakfast on our tables is a product of so many labourers. Its fascinating how wonderful the Production process can be if we can just rewind the many economic activities behind any given commodity. Human labour hence is the Secondary source of all production that occurs.

GDP- A mass of numerous commodities:

GDP- Gross Domestic Product, is today the most essential indicator of Economic growth of an Economy. Globally, policy-making is extremely sensitive to GDP growth rate and its trend. Recent RBI's monetary tightening vs. economic growth(4) phenomenon was an important indicator of the importance of GDP and its effects on the growth of a nation.

Let us try to understand GDP's importance from the above discussion we had. GDP, as said above is a mammoth mass of numerous commodities(both Goods and Services) which indicate the available wealth of a nation. This wealth, then has to percolate through the entire economic spectrum of a nation. This shall result  in, argue Macroeconomists, upliftment of the poor section of the society.

If we look at this statement, a crucial fact emerges. A poor is one who has very less or no access to commodities, as simple as this! Lack of commodities and access to them is poverty. The scale of this 'lack of access' may change as per the nation, need, economy, &c. But the fact remains that Poverty removal means enhanced availability of Commodities. Once enough commodities are available to a poor household, they are uplifted from the poverty trap. This availability may be in the form of increased money availability, but as argued above in the beginning, money is but a commodity. 

Hence, the key reason on GDP growth lies in the fact that more the commodities, more its availability, subsequently more access to them for the deprived. Again, access to commodities is an issue that cannot be solved by merely having increased GDP growth. This requires sufficient measures to facilitate percolation of increased wealth to the "Bottom of the pyramid" to quote C.K. Prahald(5). Also, an active and a major involvement of the Private sector is needed. This is possible if rural India is seen as a huge and potential market opportunity, both by the Private and Public sector.

Conclusion

Commodities. How essential and omnipresent this phenomenon is indeed. It provides a fresh new way of looking at Capitalism. They surround us everywhere, that is what differentiates human species from other animal species. Excessive focus on Consumption process in modern economics must give some more space to Production process too. Commodities are not merely the products of the magic of markets, but a product of numerous diversified labourer and representative of expended human labour- including that of the Entrepreneurs.

GDP is a huge mass of commodities of numerous kinds that satisfy human needs. High importance of this measure of economic growth lies in the fact that it can enable enhanced access to commodities for the poor and deprived. Poverty is merely the absence of sufficient commodities to consume. This sufficiency is based on many variables and differ as per the country in question. Both public and private sector must look at Rural India, as brought out by the late C.K. Prahlad in his book "Bottom of the Pyramid", as a huge, untapped market opportunity.

References and Notes:

1. Capital, Volume 1, Karl Marx, 1890, Chapter 1, Section 1, Paragraph 1.

2. Entrepreneurs are Labourers after all. Labour here is used in terms of expenditure of human labour power. In Economics, Labour and Entrepreneurs are two different Factors of Production.

3. Here we refer to concrete labour in Marx's language. This means different types of labour such as weaving, tailoring, singing, &c.

4. Recently, headline inflation came down form +9% levels to below 7% figures. This succeeded a crucial debate nationally about the constraints RBI had over its tightening monetary stance. After more than 13 consecutive hikes in lending rate, RBI had to stop for two major reasons: A). GDP growth constraint and B). Waiting for the lag-effect of tightened policy to show results. Indeed, it has shown positive results, at least for now.

5. Bottom of the Pyramid is an excellent work by a Management Professor- Late Shri C.K. Prahlad. It brings out the hidden, untapped market opportunity in the Rural regions of India which represent a dynamic and a brand-conscious consumer segment. It busts many of the myths about Poor, their consumption habits and much more. Interested readers may purchase it here.

                                *******************************

Are Fundamental rights absolute?

No, they're not. This post attempts to put some argument for the said case that Fundamental rights as per our Constitution, aren't absolute. We then shall proceed to see that it would be harmful to the society at large if that were the case. This post comes at a time when a lot of discussion is occurring on whether one can express whatever he/she desires to and this right to do so must be protected as a fundamental right. 

Liberty: A modern day obsession

Liberty(i), in modern times has become an obsession, an end that seems to be the only correct goal for the homo sapiens species. Yet, Liberty is not an isolated, all encompassing end for Societies. Equality and Fraternity too are very much crucial for establishing, sustaining and nurturing Liberty. Pro-Liberty dogmatics tend to press hard for it without realizing that the other two elements are equally, or even much more essential for an efficient, fair and most importantly a happy and prosperous society(ii). Liberty, Equality & Fraternity are the three crucial elements for a truly developed, prosperous & sustainable society.

Ensuring Liberty, is not a naturally managed, non-interventionist task. It needs active participation of varied Social institutions. Also, Liberty has to be ensured, it is not naturally available to people. Institutions have to exist that protect it. For Eg. Private property is one such example which needs Institutions such as courts that enforce it & the State that recognizes it. Today, we are far better-off than our forefathers. We can be at home and relax that the property purchased by us is ours and no one would come and snatch it away. Yes, many a times injustice occurs, but we're secured as we have courts and a Justice mechanism to redress and solve it.

Liberty- Origination 

Where does Liberty originate from in Indian context? By Liberty, we here mean 'Freedom'. It is important to appeal to an authority to answer this question:

Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, on 4th November, 1948 said in the constituent assembly: "I am sorry to say that the whole of the criticism about fundamental rights is based upon a misconception. In the first place, the criticism in so far as it seeks to distinguish fundamental rights from non-fundamental rights is not sound. It is incorrect to say that fundamental rights are absolute while non-fundamental rights are not absolute.The real distinction between the two is that non-fundamental rights are created by agreement between parties while fundamental rights are the gift of the law. Because fundamental rights are the gift of the State it does not follow that the State cannot qualify them." 

Here, following important observations are to be made:

1. There are two types of rights that need to be focused on: a). Fundamental and b). non-fundamental

2. Non-fundamental rights are those that are created by coming together of parties in an agreement. Eg. Contracts, Private property, Purchase and Sales, etc.

3. Fundamental rights are a gift of the state. Now that's a metaphor. It means that the state(Government) ensures that these rights are available to every citizens. It thus protects these rights and ensures its enforcement when needed.

4. The state cannot qualify them, meaning change them(as per the interpretation by this blog) as the Supreme Court has time and again ruled that the basic structure of Indian Constitution i.e. its Preamble cannot be changed by any Authority under the State(iii). Thus the central spirit of even the Fundamental rights cannot be changed if change/affect the spirit of the Constitution(iv).

Article 19, Clause 2 states: Nothing in sub-clause (a) of clause (1){refers to the freedom of speech and expression} shall affect the operation of any existing law, or prevent the State from making any law, in so far as such law imposes reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right conferred by the said sub-clause in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality, or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence.(v)

Hence, reasonable restrictions are to be put, on the freedom of speech and expression. This makes it clear that any expression that affects any of the above mentioned subjects, namely the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality, or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence; shall be prohibited/regulated/restricted.

The rationale behind this restriction:

India, as we know, is a vast, multicultural, multilingual, multiracial, multireligious and a very diversified society. It is very much possible that expression and speech  of a particular entity may affect the other entity in a manner, unacceptable to them. Thus, it becomes essential to prohibit any such activity.

Having said that, it also becomes essential to point out at the other side of the issue under discussion. It is very much possible and evident too that in the name of such entities, especially religion, caste, etc., unnecessary barriers to the freedom of expression and speech shall rise. It may take the form of bullying by fundamentalist groups, or pressure from some organizations claiming to represent a particular section of society, etc. These matters, though do occur, can be dealt with more amount of clarity in the law about what shall affect the above said factors due to which reasonable restrictions are required. Lack of clarity on which entities, to what extent must be allowed to exert restrictions based on the said factors(vi) is an area requiring immediate intellectual discussion among the Lawyers.

If Fundamental rights were absolute:

People in such a society and Polity would have to face serious consequences. It is well-known what happens when two or more communities do not respect each other. Communal riots aren't alien to India, are they? Due to reasonable restrictions, we as citizens are able to maintain harmony and peace. Indeed, disruptions occur, but are managed due to availability of such restrictions. Exempli Gratia- We don't go out and start abusing some community, religion or any entity especially in public, only because we feel that expression and speech is our freedom, do we? We apply restrictions on our actions and behaviour. Indeed, one may argue that these are Social norms and manners that we learn, but Law has a crucial role in shaping and more so strengthening our norms and behaviour. 

An 'absolute freedom' society would mean, expressions that, either may not have been made in a relative freedom(vii) society as currently in India or would have been prohibited/restricted/redressed under a relative freedom society. In such a situation, harmony would have prevailed. Since, in an absolute freedom society one can freely express whatever he/she desires to, non-state social entities(religious groups, communities, etc.) would exert control over the social behaviour(viii) of individuals. Its very well possible that there would be non-state regulating devices, wherein individuals may not be given sufficient rights and representation as is today under constitutional institutions. More on this topic in later posts.

Conclusion:

Freedom/Liberty is not an absolute concept. It is provided by the State, which derives its power from the people, thus ensuring certain fundamental rights to its citizens. These rights, as explained by Dr. Ambedkar, aren't absolute and possess reasonable restrictions. These restrictions, however offending, are important to maintain peace and harmony. The assumption that people shall respect each other even if Freedom were absolute is ill-founded. Restrictions on freedoms(which are minimal) help to tune individual behaviour in tandem with social harmony and tolerance. This means, in different nations, these restrictions vary. In a more tolerant or a largely homogenous society(Eg. nations where diversity in terms of religion, caste, etc. is less), restrictions would be less while more in a largely heterogenous society. Lastly, such restrictions have their flip side too. Unnecessary pressure may be exerted by various entities that may reduce Freedom of expression and speech to a large extent only to a paper-promise. This issue thus needs further clarity as per the law on the entities and sentiments that must be protected and which shall be considered as valid for reasonable restrictions. 

Reference and Notes:

(i)- The term Liberty has different connotations as explained here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty, the above article refers it as Freedom of expression as stated under article 19 of Indian constitution.

(ii)- By prosperity I mean both Quantitative and Qualitative wealth. 

(iii)- Authority here means: - As defined under Article 12 of Indian constitution.

(iv)- Spirit of the constitution here is referred to the Preamble

(v)- As given in our constitution; for a link see here:

http://lawmin.nic.in/olwing/coi/coi-english/Const.Pock%202Pg.Rom8Fsss(6).pdf

(vi)- The said factors refer to: the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality, or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence, as given under Article 19, clause 2.

(vii)- Relative freedom society here means a society wherein Freedoms aren't absolute and have necessary restrictions. Indeed, these restrictions are minimal as evident in our constitution.

(viii)- Social behaviour here is referred to behaviour of individuals during social interactions/in Public.

Patriotism vs. Nationalism: Minimizing Armies

Image source: http://www.prwatch.org

Introductory note:

Since past few days, it has been noticed that there is a lot of murmuring about Militaries and their utilities for nations of the World. Youngsters are rejoicing the concept of Military and are expressing their perceptions about it. Most of them are very positive about 'expansion' of Indian Military(so are the people of other nations). This post intends to provide a basis for thinking in a better and a much more refined way. It is directed towards Military apparatuses of all the nations worldwide and not just India.

It is my initial assertion that 'smaller', 'qualitatively efficient' and 'effective' Military is a prerequisite for a Nation's security. The problem starts when an expansion-spree begins, as is evident everywhere in the World. This post aims at debunking that, more by using analytical and logical argumentation.

Military- A State Apparatus:

Army, Navy and Air Force together form the Military apparatus of our State(Government). It is a very crucial element in maintaining the Sovereignty of our nation. Many consider it as mutually exclusive from the Legislature, Judiciary & Executive, but it is not so. Military ensures the nation remains safe on its borders, from Foreign aggression. It thus works in coordination and direct command of the Prime authorities of India- namely The President, The PM and Council of Ministers. Military, in India at least, is quite well-controlled by the Ministers(Defense Minister being the prime bridge between Government and Military).

Historic continuance of Militaries:

Since the ages of Kings and Emperors, we've always had in the Indian subcontinent, Kings and Emperors waging wars with each other to grab territories, expand their rule-base, enhance their resources & win wars. Thus a 2 fold utility of Military rose:

1. Offense: Expansion of territories by Emperors and Kings; Waging wars; Increasing resources by snatching it away from other rulers and a few more reasons. This means Armies were there to be used as a tool of aggression.

2. Defense: Protection of territories, Fighting wars to sustain the territory, Protecting precious natural resources by having armed forces and a few more.

Military History of India:

India has one of the longest Military Histories in World. It dates back to several Millennia(1). Its mention as 'Armed Forces' is there in our Vedas and Epics like Ramayana and Mahabharata. India has seen the invasion of a plethora of races in its History- Kushans, Huns, Arabs, Turks, Afghans, Mongols, Moghuls and Europeans. Thus, the concept of having Armed Force is not a new idea for India. Same applies, though in twisted forms, to all the other nations of the World.

Indian Military today:

In modern times, Armed Forces is a large consumer of national Budgetary allocations, called in Indian Budgets as Defense Allocation. Latest data puts it at Rs 1,64,414.49 crore ($36.03 billion) making it the 10th largest Military-budget nation(2). It consumes around 2.2% of GDP and 13.07% of Indian Government spending every year(3). And it is increasing consistently except a few /exceptions.

The 'Arms race' World wide:

All nations today are in a spending-spree. Nations are competing with each other to have the latest and most up-to-date Armed forces ready to face any challenge. U.S., European nations like Germany and France, China, Pakistan, etc. are all in an 'Arms Race'. Competing with each other is the key necessity in order to 'prepare' for any future challenge.

The problem with this race is that it has no end. Its an infinitely adding Monetary addition to the Budgets. Moreover, Defense companies in the developed World keep pushing for the sales of their products. Indeed the Governments demand so, but that's just the Demand =side issue. The Producers too keep innovating and thus while India is going to purchase 4th Generation fighter planes, U.S. is already ready to sell 5th Generation planes. One might point out the Indo-Russian cooperation which recently made the 5th Generation fighters, but they'll be introduced in around 2020 in India. The developed World(France, U.S., etc.) will have 6th or probably 7th Generation fighters ready by then. Its an arms race, Profits are the driving force.

Nations like U.S., France, etc. earn a huge chunk of their Yearly revenues through Defense sales and thus we see France and U.S.(even Russia) bidding for India's Defense purchase of 126 fighter planes. It really makes NO difference whatsoever, even if we were to purchase 100th Generation planes for Military. The reason? Here it is:

x, x+n model:

Basic Mathematics(precisely Arithmetic) may help us here. Suppose a nation A, increases its Spending on its Military apparatus by amount x. Its neighbouring and competing nations(in arms race) will tend to spend an amount that is greater than x, i.e. x+n. n here is the monetary excess as compared to the other competing nation.

This Monetary value 'n' has a tendency to keep rising. We can consider it as an infinitely increasing number. Spending on Defense has been increasing tremendously in India since Independence. Recently, China too expanded its Defense budget, matching that of India(4). This brings out two important variables governing the flow of Defense industry going on:

1. Competition: Every nation has to keep competing with each other in order to gain a competitive advantage in Defense abilities, over the threatening nations,. In case of India, China & Pakistan are two such nations whose Defense spending is a Geo-political signal for Indian policy makers.

2. Insecurity: It is a crucial element of keeping the Competition alive & the Defense industry(mostly in Developed nations and Russia) running smoothly. The moment a nation feels secured, some insecurity ought to creep in to keep the flow moving. Logically it follows, no nation is completely secured today, hence this arms race.

Spending and not an Investment:

Military expenditure is classified as 'Capital Expenditure' and not as Capital Investment. A nation only spends, there are 'no returns' whatsoever. Many people make the incorrect claim by asserting that it will save Billions in future. Its not so. Military expenditure is always a 'wastage' of Financial resources of a nation & only 'increases the probability of a War'. The 'billions saved in future' theory is wrong, nothing is saved. As explained above, x+n shows that 'n' tends to consistently increase. There's no scope for saving anything. Indeed the selling nation makes billions, but the purchasing nations are only at the losing end, feeding the Profit registers of those Corporations and Treasuries of the Developed World.

The Solutions:

Following are some very much applicable solutions:

1. Eliminating the arms race: This can be done only when International Organizations like U.N. intervene, provide a platform for this initiative. The nations currently selling and purchasing Defense products must work closely to reduce their insecurities by exhausting he Diplomatic channels.

2. Robot soldiers: This suggestion may seem odd at first sight, but is a very realistic one. Instead of Human soldiers, with life, emotions, abilities, talents and dreams being wasted in Armed forces, Robots must replace them. These Robot-soldiers would be controlled through some Headquarter by Computers. These robots can then go on wars, every nation can afford to do so. This means 'tremendously reduced' loss of Human lives. It means expanded Social Division of labour. Wars would be much cheaper comparatively, at least in terms of innocent Human lives that are lost when young people die in such a havoc.

Concluding note:

Thus, eliminating the arms race, replacing Human-soldiers with Robot-soldiers, thus letting the currently present Human-soldiers live a better, productive life, is the necessity of modern times. We boast of Technology in almost every sphere of life, Why not here too.

We must be Patriotic and not Nationalist. Service to nation is not about joining Armies. Its called Nationalism, which only harms. Lakhs of youngsters prepare to 'kill' lakhs of youngsters somewhere else, all in the name of nationalism. Its morally incorrect. Rather be Patriotic. Work better, Spread the truth just like the Father of our nation Mahatma Gandhi did, Educate yourselves, Spread creativity, Spread Knowledge and thus make India a better place to live. Rather, lets have an Education race, Health race & alike! 

Ending the discussion with the words of Charles De Gaulle, "Patriotism is when love for your own people comes first; nationalism, when hate for people other than your own comes first." 

References:

(1)- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_history_of_India

(2)- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Armed_Forces#Budget

(3)-http://business-standard.com/india/news/china-matches-india%5Cs-expansion-in-military-spending/427365/

(4)- same as 3rd.