########################################################################## # If Goanet stops reaching you, contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] # # Want to check the archives? http://www.goanet.org/pipermail/goanet/ # # Please keep your discussion/tone polite, to reflect respect to others # ##########################################################################
Dear Fred, The 1999 article is still YOUR VIEW of what Bandodkar did. You cannot analyse Bhausaheb's vision through Dr.Radhakrishnan's[ not the President of India] thesis for a Goa University Ph.D. Go to Mandrem and ask someone who is sixty years old or so. In fact, you can even ask around in Panaji. You will then realise who Bhausaheb really was. Armchair analysis may be interesting. It is not the real thing. A discussion in the streets can be more educative than a thesis in Goa University library....and by far more accurate,too. For a detailed analysis of the Mundkar Acts, Goanetters already have access to the postings of Valmiki Faleiro in Goanet archives. He may like to react to your posting on that area of the debate. I am restricitng myself to rebutting your arguments here. Why I believe that Bhausaheb[ with his limited formal studies] was a man of vision , unlike Rane, Luizinho or Sardinha [ with claims to more degrees than they posses], I will state later. For the present ,we will even keep Parrikar out of the discussion. > From: "Frederick Noronha (FN)" [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Yesterday I challenged the view that Bandodkar was a 'chief minister with > a vision'. Managed to fish out a 1999 article on the subject, which argues > in more detail the point sought to be made by me. -FN > ------------------------------------------------------ > GOA'S POLITICAL HEROES: DEIFIED, BUT WITH FEET OF CLAY > > By Frederick Noronha > > Goan politicians are gods. With feet of clay. Men at the helm here are taken a bit too seriously. So, they hardly face any tough questioning -- during or after their tenure in office -- that could challenge their growing arrogance and couldn't-care-lessness. Miguel: Is that what the Nitoll Jinn Trust, the CAG, GAG, PMCA, Goa Suraj Party, Bhailancho Saad, Peaceful Society and other organizations doing ? Deifying Parrikar? He was not even there as a CM in 1999! Is any Congress ex-CM deifying any other ex-CM? Is Shashikala deified? To whom is Rane a God? Ravi Naik even jailed Churchill. That he resurrected to be a MP is another matter. > > Over the past four decades, durable and not-so-durable politicians called > the shots here have hardly had their role challenged. Resultantly, > politicians at the top have acquired a deadly anything-goes attitude. It's > almost as if the reverential attitude towards the former Portuguese colonial master continues to the modern ones. > This holds true for the three chief ministers that dominated Goa in the > 'sixties, 'seventies and 'eighties. It is also valid for the string of chief ministers that ruled Goa over nine years of this decade. Miguel: Does it ,really? > So, they've all got away with amazing arrogance, unquestioned corruption, > sometimes a devastating rising-son's syndrome, controversial deals, and even functioning as businessmen and lobbyists from the chief minister's chamber. Miguel: Any takers for the Lok Ayukta? > Now, there's a book published quite some months ago, which focuses on Goa's > first CM, Dayanand Bandodkar. This mineowner who got the chief ministership > on a platter, has left behind a legacy that has been largely evaluated only > by hagiographers. So, he has been deified all along. > > **N Radhakrishnan, a senior official at the Raj Bhavan,** came out with a book > that is equally laudatory of the Bandodkar legacy. But, despite this, this > work makes it easy for someone to evaluate the role of Goa's first CM. > Because, when seen over time, one gets an idea of how wrong and misconceived > so many of Bandodkar's intentions and policies simply were. > > Set the tone > ------------ > > Of course, Bandodkar is not the only controversial chief minister that Goa > has had. Or not necessarily among the worst. But the mere fact that he set > the tone of Goa's politics in the crucial 'sixties means a lot. > > That was a time when Goa was just emerging out of a difficult stint of** 451 > years of Portuguese colonialism.** What parameters that Bandodkar and his > fellow-travellers set in the 'sixties still haunt this state uptil today. Miguel: This is an oft repeated lie that seems to be the truth. Portuguese had 450 years and 23 days continuous rule only over Old Goa-Ela and possibly Ribandar. They controlled Bardez intermittently with the Bhonsales, Ranes and others. Pernem was hardly ever under direct Portuguese control; so also Bicholim and Sattari talukas. Read INSIDE GOA by manohar Malgaokar: it gives some useful insights into Goa's political history. The date of printing even suggests why the Goa Government published the first edition but refused to do so for the second edition...once one reads the text. > > This was complicated by other factors too. For instance, the principal > challenge to Bandodkar's brand of politics came from an equally-discredited and conservative Catholic elite. Their's was a rather questionable brand of politics, as represented by people like Dr Jack Sequeira.> > As expected, this lobby too responded 'aptly' but shortsightedly. It > converted the battle in Goa into one where contending communal-based lobbies were simply fighting for priviledges themselves. All in the name of > laudatory sounding principles, of course. Miguel: Was AN Naikdescredited, conservative or catholic? > > Though its effects are still to be adequately understood, one of Bandodkar's controversial-but-much-praised drives was the transfer of land from > middle-level owners to agricultural and homestead 'tenants'.> > In a state like Goa, with a high rate of outmigration, this spelt disaster. Many middle-class emigrant Goans lost their properties. At the same time, > four decades down the line the problem of landlordism continues. > Significantly, Goa has evaded ever having a land-ceiling act.> > Some of the 'tenants' became a new class of landlords themselves. Some > grabbed acres and acres of land, or a string of homes, depending on their > political influence. > Due to a complex set of factors, such reforms did not result in the expected rise in agricultural productivity. Instead, the production suffered > setbacks, as community-owned assets were simply neglected and fell into > disuse too. > In 1973, the Bandodkar government passed an amendment to the law to > "protect" the rights of tenants of "cashewnut and arecanut gardens". Nice > sounding words. In reality, the fact is that such laws created a new class > of landlords. "Tenants" who came to own huge hillsides. While have by now > been sold to business houses (as in the case of Calangute) or builders. Miguel: This according to me was a great error of judgement. However , others differ with me. > > Man of the masses > ----------------- > > Bandodkar has been shown to be a friend of the "poor" by friendly > journalists and others. Yet in 1972, his government passed a "prevention of > begging" act. Bandodkar's hagiographers worked overtime to promote his myth as a "man of > the masses". Yet, his class interests and pro-business motives are clear to any observer. In particular, his biases in favour of the mining industry, > where he and a handful of others made fortunes while devastating the Goan > environment. Miguel: Would the promotion of begging be a pro-poor legislation? I would rather look at employment generation and strict control of beggars. > > For instance, in March 1973 Bandodkar said in the Goa assembly that "as long as the mining industry is working well, the question of its nationalisation does not arise". Such a stand only shows the manner in which issues were > persistently fudged in early post-colonial Goa. > > "Working well"? For whom? For the workers who lived with horrible dust > pollution and moonscapes for a working environment? For the agriculturists > of interior Goa whose fields were caked with uncultivable mining rejects? > For the state which earned a pittance even as the rich natural resources > were stripped off to the tune of ten million tonnes or more for every Goan > man, woman and child every year? For the Japanese steel cartels who got iron ore for cheap, without the cost of accompanied eco-devastation? Or, for the mineowners who made a not-so-tiny fortune over the years? Miguel: Will you lobby for the cancellation of the Portuguese era perennial mining leases ? prepared to join such a lobby. > > Bandodkar was a contradictory political animal. As Radhakrishna's book > shows, he could talk with Congress leaders and Mrs. G in June 1973, then > hold a party meet to discuss the merger of his party into the Congress, and within weeks, "rule out" the possibility. Miguel: Similarly, Dr.Willy could take the UG into Congress [Urs}in 1980 and convert it enmasse to Congress [Indira] soon after the elections the same year. Politics is tha art of the possible. Kuch bhi ho saktha hai! > > After the defeat (in India's first-ever opinion poll) of his plans to merge > Goa into Maharashtra, Bandodkar announced that his plans would to work to > "attain working statehood for Goa". Whatever is that supposed to mean. Miguel: What we obtained in 1987 and have now is a working statehood, whatever that means. > > Bandodkar also played the role of an evangelist for big business, including > multinationals. Unquestioned, in a state just getting out of a long colonial > slumber, this had a strong impact. > > In January 1973, for instance, he inaugurated a "Fertilizer Festival" at > Kavlem where he urged farmers "to learn improved methods of agriculture for > higher productivity". This was around the time when Goa's first fertilizer > plant in Goa was shown by citizens to be indulging in large-scale polluting > local seas and villages. Today agricultural scientists are also shouting > hoarse over the impact of excessive use of fertilizers in Goa. Miguel: Fertilizer use and pollution by a fertilizer unit are two separate issues. One does not stop procreation because of rapes. > > Without even bother to camouflage his politics, Bandodkar believed in > cashing-in on caste-based divides. His legacy of chief ministers addressing conferences of certain caste groups (e.g. the Vaishya community, in October 1971) continues to date. Miguel: Even businessmen and academicians do the same thing. In fact , we even have academic for members of certain castes till today. Politicians are a reflection of the society in which they operate. > > In some ways, Bandodkar was perhaps no different from our current crop of > politicians. He too loved to travel the world. In April 1970, he left on a > month-long tour of the US and Japan "to study fisheries development, > international tourism, etc". Miguel: Tourism, specially the international avatar was a post-1967 hippie phenomenon. Do you want to suggest that Bhausaheb learnt nothing from this tour? When Chandrababu Naidu went to the USA, it was considered a great thing. > > Hopes crash > ----------- > > In many cases, plans that Bandodkar laid much hope in proved to have flopped > quite badly in the years to come. His government announced plans to ban > 'matka', the two-digit form of gambling. Yet his political heirs legalised > various forms of more serious gambling in the state. Miguel: What did you wish to suggest here. That he should have promoted Caravela and Chances instead trying to stop matka? The only other CM who tried to stop matka was Ravi Naik, also then of the MGP. > > This is also visible from the way in which his plans for setting up a sugar factory, a la Maharashtra, flopped in Goa. So did the much-touted drive for mechanisation of fishing with trawlers, which resulted in the immiseration > of traditional fishermen and wealth for the politically-influential. It did not give the local poor access to more fish-protein, as was promised. > Instead, it resulted in the West getting increased access to cheaper fish > exports from places like Goa, as local prices soared. Miguel: Is the fish we eat brought in by the ramponkars or by mechanized trawlers? Exports,by the way ,is not a state subject. > > In 1969, he promised to have a Master Plan for the development of Vasco. > Just look at the mess the town is currently in. Miguel: The ODP is anyway treated like a child's colouring book.! > > This is only the tip of the proverbial, political iceberg. Surely, a deeper > analysis is needed, to understand the role of politicians when judged over > the decades. > > In some ways, Bandodkar's legacy is not restricted to his "side of the > fence" and the non-Brahmin Hindu intermediary caste vote bank he built up > assiduously. Others continue to play similar games, many years down the > line. One flunky whose political boss depends on getting elected on the > minority Catholic vote, conceded that voters were upset with his employer. > "But what choice they have...," he asked with all the gumption one would > expect. After all, they would have to take "sides" based on accidents of > what religion they were born in. Thanks to the rifts created in the > 'sixties. > > This all has left behind its scars. Even though political leaders in Goa are treated with deference, their role is quite clear. > > Bandodkar was followed in power by his chief minister, Shashikala Kakodkar. Till not long back she remained a more articulate champion of the cause of > them mining lobby than arguably of the citizens who voted her to power. > Pratapsing Rane, who next ruled this state state with a vice-like for over a decade-and-half, got to be known for the aloofness with which he ruled like a semi-feudal rajah. Rane also will perhaps go down in history for the reign of corruption he presided over, and the questionable role played by his son. Very few raised their voices during Rane's tenure, but were quick to throw > stones figuratively after he was ousted. Down the line, Rane has shown his ability to survive regardless of the political dispensation in power. > > Other chief ministers also played a dubious role: Dr. Luis Proto Barbosa and Ravi Naik for the very corruption-prone nature of their governments. Dr > Wilfred de Souza, for starting off with a "Mr Clean" reputation and then > going on to unleash a whole set of ultra dubious forces on the state's > polity. Luizinho Faleiro for his double-speak, glimmicky nature of politics, and also dependence on a corrupt coterie of politicians to survive. > > It may well be unfair to blame only the politician. He is only one part of > the nexus of greedy businessmen, crooked bureaucrats and criminal elements > that so effectively worked out a modus vivendi. He may be just the front for this grand alliance, who every now and then goes on to replace and discard > politicians even while they carry on unchallenged in power. Nonetheless Goa could surely gain from being more critical in evaluating the real role of > its political 'leader'. --FN published c.1999. Which brings us back to the same point that I made earlier: Till Radhakrishnan, or some one else foolish enough to want a Ph.D from Goa University, writes a thesis on him, PARRIKAR IS THE BEST CM in Goa.!!!!!! Viva Goa Miguel >
