tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6533591839334339949.post1142205693231519813..comments2019-07-26T10:32:50.685+05:30Comments on On the road to Liberty: Commonwealth Games: The Politics of SportsBarun Mitrahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16622261378991052890noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6533591839334339949.post-47021320960440914612010-08-12T20:00:46.973+05:302010-08-12T20:00:46.973+05:30First, government spending will not go away just b...First, government spending will not go away just because we would like it to.<br />Secondly, it is only by greater scrutiny of public finance and expenditure, would there be realisation that public expenditure may not be the answer.<br />Thirdly, it is from such realisation will there rise the need to explore other approaches.<br />Finally, which is why I mentioned the IPL example, in spite of all the problems related to IPL management, in contrast to public supported sports event.Barun Mitrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16622261378991052890noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6533591839334339949.post-42101878168684219682010-08-12T17:16:16.906+05:302010-08-12T17:16:16.906+05:30Barun,
I was in agreement till the last paragraph...Barun,<br /><br />I was in agreement till the last paragraph. But, then it sounded like considering all the arguments you presented till then irrelevant. It is as if you have admitted that strengthening democracy means more government spending-under intense public scrutiny of course.<br /><br />I get your point that Government spending won't go away if we wish it to, and that more public scrutiny would deepen democracy. But, I really doubt if it is going to work that way. History is full of examples of government spending which failed miserably. But, few have learn't a lesson from it(Maybe some academic economists and their followers, who are consistent critics of spending), because no such conclusion can be reached empirically. The argument would be whether it happened because of spending or despite of it. Politicians and bureaucrats are very unlikely to say " We are sorry. It didn't work. We were wrong".<br /><br />I don't think anyone thinks that government spending is going to go away if we want to. No matter how we defend it, it is going to stay. It would be unrealistic to think otherwise. But, the same could be said of criminal acts. Few would refuse to condemn such acts.Shanu Ahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12920504618646686178noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6533591839334339949.post-22095013469872134112010-08-11T11:06:50.844+05:302010-08-11T11:06:50.844+05:30Unlike China and South Africa, India did not have ...Unlike China and South Africa, India did not have any common desire to showcase itself. And given India's diversity, it would be very difficult to find a common object. Being an open society, the beauty of the Taj Mahal, to the squalor of the slums, the success of the IT industry to the popularity of Bollywood, all are visible to all. Likewise, the Commonwealth Games is perhaps an attractive symbol of emerging India for one segment, but is irrelevant for many others. This seems to be the most plausible reason why the political capital was not invested in these games.Barun Mitrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16622261378991052890noreply@blogger.com