Timeline for Wealth disparity in India
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
21 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 27, 2019 at 5:07 | history | edited | Alexei |
edited tags
|
|
| May 27, 2019 at 5:03 | answer | added | Hari Prasad | timeline score: 2 | |
| Apr 8, 2019 at 3:46 | comment | added | Niteesh Shanbog | @GraySheep The preamble to the constitution of India says "WE, THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a SOVEREIGN SOCIALIST SECULAR DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC and to secure to all its citizens JUSTICE, social, economic and political; LIBERTY of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship; EQUALITY of status and of opportunity; and to promote among ......" | |
| Apr 8, 2019 at 3:45 | history | edited | Niteesh Shanbog | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Added source
|
| Apr 5, 2019 at 20:20 | comment | added | Gray Sheep | The name of the state is Republic of India, not a socialist name. | |
| Apr 5, 2019 at 20:04 | comment | added | agc | Re "...wealth disparity increasing...": please provide a citation for this stated growing disparity, (many Politics.SE readers are unfamiliar with modern India). | |
| Apr 5, 2019 at 14:30 | review | Close votes | |||
| Apr 5, 2019 at 20:17 | |||||
| Apr 5, 2019 at 11:58 | comment | added | armatita | I believe the OP means Socialism as is seen in most European countries among other areas of the world. Social-democracy, democratic socialism, etc. In the case of India this was (is) particular important given some cultural specifics (like the caste system). As far as I know there has been a steady process of economic liberalization in the last decades. More recently there was also reductions to the budget of sectors such as environment and healthcare. So yes, India is moving away from those models. | |
| Apr 5, 2019 at 11:52 | comment | added | Philipp♦ | The ideological reasons for why Indian politicians don't act as socialist as you might expect them to would be hard to answer in an objective way. But maybe you have some more specific questions? Maybe about specific programs and why they didn't do what they were supposed to? Or why certain policies lead to economic inequality? Or what political resistance there is to some specific reform proposal which might reduce that inequality? | |
| Apr 5, 2019 at 11:20 | history | edited | Niteesh Shanbog | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Added additional clarification
|
| Apr 5, 2019 at 11:14 | comment | added | Alex | @NiteeshShanbog May I recommend that you don't focus on the use of the word "socialist" in the preamble? Apart from it being open to interpretation, it was added in 1976 and was controversial then and since. However, the Directive Principles of State Policy, which were there from the beginning, are explicit and explicitly socialistic. Including references to income equality and wealth distribution in Articles 38 and 39. mea.gov.in/Images/pdf1/Part4.pdf | |
| Apr 5, 2019 at 8:14 | comment | added | Niteesh Shanbog | India at independence was socialist. Most of the top leaders of the time were socialists. But whatever meaning was implied in the preamble, the fact that there exists a huge gap between the rich and the poor implies that socialism is failing. | |
| Apr 5, 2019 at 7:29 | comment | added | Aman Agnihotri | To pose a question like "why is India drifting away from socialism?" has a presumption in its structure that it was socialist at some stage, which is also not true. The textbook definition of socialism is also antithetical to the existence of governments and so it is even ironical for a government to state that its regime is socialist or that it will realize socialism. What we can consider here is that the meaning of "socialism" in Indian preamble implies "social democracy" and not "socialism as defined etymologically." That makes more sense and India has some features of social democracy. | |
| Apr 5, 2019 at 5:32 | history | edited | Niteesh Shanbog | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Added additional clarification
|
| Apr 5, 2019 at 5:31 | comment | added | Niteesh Shanbog | @Obie2.0 That is what I meant. Why is India drifting away from socialism even though its constitution explicitly mentions it to be one? | |
| Apr 5, 2019 at 5:20 | comment | added | Obie 2.0 | Well, there's no country in the world that fits that description, really, least of all India. | |
| Apr 5, 2019 at 4:53 | comment | added | Niteesh Shanbog | @Obie2.0 Textbook socialism - a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole. | |
| Apr 5, 2019 at 4:47 | comment | added | Obie 2.0 | @Niteesh - It depends on what you mean by socialism, doesn't it? Some people will tell you that having public healthcare is socialist. Other people will say that it's far from socialism. | |
| Apr 5, 2019 at 3:53 | comment | added | Niteesh Shanbog | @AmanAgnihotri The preamble to the constitution of India clearly mentions that India is a socialist country and makes it clear that the policies undertaken by the governments must be socialist in nature. How did it end up being capitalist? | |
| Apr 4, 2019 at 18:45 | comment | added | Aman Agnihotri | India is definitely not a socialist country. It has a thriving capitalist market economy. | |
| Apr 4, 2019 at 6:51 | history | asked | Niteesh Shanbog | CC BY-SA 4.0 |