A friendly diplomat

Sir ? The short stint of John Kenneth Galbraith as the American ambassador to India allowed both the nations to shed their pretensions, leading to the forging of stronger bonds (?Galbraith and India?, May 27). It is unfortunate that his far-from-reassuring prophecies regarding the dynamics of the market have come true. Most big nations today are virtually ruled by modern corporations instead of being governed by the choice of the people. The ?conventional wisdom? of Galbraith was quick to anticipate the ill-effects of consumerism. However, today?s market gurus give blanket approval to consumerist principles to serve their vested interests. India has learnt to ignore the danger signs to meet the demands of modernity. Perhaps it ought to have heeded Galbraith?s warning instead.

Yours faithfully,
Arvind K. Pandey, Allahabad

Sir ? I remember seeing John Kenneth Galbraith at the convocation ceremony of Calcutta University in 1963. All those who, like me, received degrees that day felt doubly proud to do so in his presence. Few people know that he was the brain behind the setting up of the computer science department in IIT, Delhi. His brief speech during the CU convocation about the value of education and the role of students in building the country is still fresh in my mind. In his book, The Affluent Society, Galbraith argued that his country?s economy was producing individual wealth but had not invested in public needs such as schools and roads. The ?shining? India of today has much the same problem. With Galbraith?s death, the world has lost a great economist, a friendly diplomat and a good human being.

Yours faithfully,
Bidyut Chatterjee, Faridabad

Sir ? John Kenneth Galbraith was India?s friend in more senses than one. He served as US ambassador to India between 1961 and 1963, but continued to visit the country even after he had ceased to hold the post. But JKG, as he was popularly called, was also a friend of the world, who set his heart to the uplift of the poor by various improvisations in the economic field. His views certainly influenced economists like Amartya Sen and Manmohan Singh. What Galbraith wrote about the universal tendency of individuals and nations stand truer today than ever before: ?As people become fortunate in their personal well-being and as countries become similarly fortunate, there is a common tendency to ignore the poor.?

Yours faithfully,
P. Chakravorty, Calcutta

Think again

Sir ? Like Malvika Singh, no sensible person can support the contention that an incompetent person can become a doctor simply because he comes from a backward class (?Tyranny of the smug?, May 23). Even in its present state, the medical system of India is in an abysmal condition. Reports of medical negligence resulting in deaths have become common. An influx of more unskilled doctors from the ?lower? castes would undoubtedly further degrade our healthcare system. But the political leaders of India hardly care for the ordinary man. The minister for human resource development, Arjun Singh, and others in favour of reservation have their own selfish agenda to fulfil in backing the proposed increase of quota in medical colleges.

While there can be no doubt about the callousness of political leaders, it would be wrong to assume, as Singh does, that every doctor who hails from a backward class lacks ability. There are several doctors from the ?upper? castes who are woefully inept in their job. It is important to understand that even if a student gets admitted to a medical college by virtue of his caste, he then has to compete with the ?regular? students to become a registered physician. In this, his caste will fetch him no extra benefit. It has been reported that there is a higher dropout-rate among students from the backward classes in the medical colleges. This would further underscore the impractical nature of the policy framed by leaders like Arjun Singh.

To solve the problems besetting Indian politics, Malvika Singh has offered a unique solution. She insists that the ?older? politicians should gracefully step aside and make way for the ?new generation?. Is the author so na?ve as to believe that all the ?older? leaders are corrupt and all politicians from the ?new generation? would be honest? India needs honest leaders, and they might come from all age groups. Writers like Malvika Singh need to appreciate this before anything else.

Yours faithfully,
Kunal Saha, Columbus, US

Sir ? Malvika Singh criticizes Arjun Singh in a forthright manner, but it remains to be seen whether such criticism can inspire him to mend his ways. However, it is surprising that the author does not speak a word against Sonia Gandhi, who not only backs the new policy, but is also responsible for the presence of ministers like Arjun Singh in the cabinet.

Yours faithfully,
C.R. Bhattacharjee, Calcutta