Mains 2019 Preparation and Discussion Thread

@AequitasA question from a junior preparing for this year pre. A/c to him, d is the answer from official key.

@Behemothb hoga na
Students educational subsidy and other grants given by the govt
Limiting beurocracy can reduce revenue expenditure

@Lazydreamersaid inMains 2019 Preparation and Discussion Thread:

@kochikaame
It had been done after the woke section of democrats lead by ilhan omar openly criticized india post 370 abrogation and republicans mostly gave a muted or supportive statements

If government gets influenced to support a political party going by the opinion of some random woke liberal, then they lack Emotional Intelligence to put it simply. That wasn't a stand of democrats in first place.

Also, imagine PM of a country openly endorsing Rahul Gandhi. How would you feel? Most people would call it as interference in domestic matters.

@ZongmaDoes downsizing of bureaucracy have relation with fiscal deficit?? However a simple argument would be that downsizing reduces salaries and other expenditures.

@Aequitassaid inMains 2019 Preparation and Discussion Thread:

@kochikaamehowdy came only after 'Crazy Bernie' took a radical left stand on Kashmir.
Also should have seen the Fab-4's constant negative attitude towards India's policy.

Fab 4 aren't the leaders of democrats and neither is Bernie the representative of Democrats yet. My point being India has always received bi-partisan support in USA and there was no need to alter that.

@Lazydreamerd is the option in answer key.

@kochikaameit was not a random woke liberal but rather manybdemocratic congress members starting from bernie sanders elizabath warren who are potential nominees of democratic party as well as ilham omar who is part of the "squad" lead by cortez who is growingly influential in that party and India sees it as part of interfering in its internal affairs.
And modi did not exclusively endorse trump but it was more under the carpet endorsement where various signals where sent in the light of these statements from them.
And previously othere leaders like cameron and former canadian and australian pm has shared stages on diaspora events in order to woo indian voters to vote for their parties so this is not the first time its happening and various countries have actively used their diasporas to influence stand of parties and government and i dont necesserily see it as a bad thing if it is done sublimenely

@BehemothIf the question is from a UPSC exam and Ans from Official key it can be taken, otherwise many coaching questions do man ki baat.

@Aequitasyes the question is from prelims 2010.

@Aequitasthe keyword is governance in question, may be its because of that the answer is d

@LazydreamerCompletely agree.
Plus Modi's statement "ab ki bar trump sarkar" was twisted, he was merely repeating what Brother Donald said in 2016 election campaign to woo Indian voters.

Also there is an angle of Democrats wooing the Pakistani Diaspora, so had to counter it. The signal should be for Dems to be neutral if they expect neutrality.

Also I think that it is the same Global PR agency handling Trump and Modi, lot of overlapping bw PR outreach of Modi and Trump.

@BehemothThat could be the reason.

@AequitasTrue. There are reports of recently concluded u.k election where loads of indians shifted their votes to torreys after labour had issued very anti India resolutions on Kashmir. If diaspora is our strength which it is we should actively use it to further our intrests which is the basics of diplomacy

@LazydreamerYes, Should look at Diaspora beyond our source of $ bills, especially the ones in West with high level of education and White collar jobs.

@BehemothAnswer should be D. Bcoz 2 cannot be the correct answer as revenue output from privatisation may not always be positive. Basically one cannot categorically say that selling HEI would help in reducing Fiscal deficit, esp in long term.

@majormiketangoyes d is the answer.

@Behemoth
dekh rhe no bhai agar mains na hua to pt ke v chances kam hi hai

@TETRACYCLINE
Another fact that SC considered while giving verdict upon the disputed site was the presence of SITA Rasoi adjacent to the demolished site which was present before the existence of mosque and also that Rasoi drew many worshipers, so SC went with the view that Hindus had been worshiping that place prior to the existence of the mosque.
So if I were asked this question that the verdict is a victory of faith over fact, I would be of the stand that no, the decision of SC was very much based upon facts example being the presence of some historical monument(quoting ASI),the Ram Chabutra, the Sita Rasoi and so on...

@AzadHindFauzBhai fir Monday?

@AequitasMonday ki listing me naam to aa gaya hai.. lets see aage kitna time lagta hai