Demanders and Suppliers of Freedom

To: Leaders and Followers

Please feel free to circulate.
This is also available and updated at http://pro-prosperity.com/demanders-and-suppliers-of-freedom.html

Subject: Demanders and Suppliers of Freedom

Students of Jawaharlal Nehru University (at New Delhi, India) are now eloquently demanding freedom (AZADI) from the malaise stifling freedom in India. The bottom line underlying this malaise (made clear in JNU sloganeering) is stagnant personal income in terms of rupee which is eroding its purchase power.

Longing for freedom has been universal since time immemorial. The only novelty in JNU sloganeering - branded by media as Made in India Politics - is demand for freedom without thinking deeply about the suppliers of freedom.

The JNU slogans are oblivious of the universally understood equilibrium relationship between demand and supply of freedom that determines price which is the purchase power of rupee.

Does JNU consider government as the supplier of freedom? A dispassionate review of JNU slogans leaves no doubt that JNU thinks of government as supplier of freedom and that a change in government in 2014 has choked freedom.

It can be rationally proved, however, that the JNU thinking that government is the supplier of freedom is, per se, the true malaise stifling freedom of Indians. It can also be proved, rationally, that such JNU thinking is unsustainable (leading to social unrest), economically inefficient (leading to decay in national competitiveness and, hence, erosion in the value of rupee) and fundamentally unfair (unconstitutional):

Rulers since independence (swayed by oxymoronic JNU thinking) supplied freedom by printing and distributing rupees as doles after, of course, keeping sufficiently for their kith, kin and cronies. Purchase power of rupee was equivalent to that of one US dollar in 1947. US has also debased its currency since 1947. During the last 8 years, USA has printed massive amounts of dollars: $11 trillion of newly borrowed money and $4.5 trillion of new Federal Reserve money. Yet, the purchase power of rupee has declined in relation to US dollar to an all time low of about Rs.68 per dollar. As someone with dollar earnings and savings, I should not complain when rupee declines. But self-interest is never my motive and will never be so.

Declining purchase power of rupee since independence proves that the demand for freedom (met by printing rupees) has been unsustainably increasing in relation to supply since independence.

A rational conclusion, therefore, is that government printing of rupees for distribution as doles cannot supply freedom, effectively.

The JNU thinking of the government as the supplier of freedom (through printing of rupees) is, thus, an illusion.

The JNU thinking of government being the supplier of freedom is unsustainable because printing of rupee to give AZADI is a mirage: the more the government printing/borrowing of rupee, the larger the inflation and erosion of purchase power of rupee.

The JNU thinking is economically inefficient because printing rupees for subsidies and doles breeds indolence among able and skilled people as well as among indolent rulers and their kith, kin and cronies.

The JNU thinking is fundamentally unfair to the true suppliers of freedom, i.e., those who prop up the value of rupee by toiling overseas and working hard within India as farmers, producers of industrial goods, service providers, public servants, defense personnel as well as professors like me who have discovered through dispassionate research and propagated the findings of this research with enormous sacrifice that the JNU thinking is unsustainable, inefficient and fundamentally unfair.

The JNU thinking is unconstitutional because "fundamental fairness" is the hallmark of Indian constitution, according to the Supreme Court of India.

The purchase power of rupee should be the true measure of nationalism. The JNU thinking thus props antinationalism.

The current government won a landslide in 2014 by espousing an anti-establishment philosophy of fostering suppliers of freedom. It has squarely defeated the already failed, unsustainable, inefficient and unconstitutional JNU thinking or dogma that nurtures indolent demanders of freedom.

The winning philosophy of supplying freedom, as opposed to demanding freedom (which I have indeed practiced since childhood) should be the real hostile target of JNU thinkers or their ilk as well as political patrons worldwide. It is frivolous for the JNU thinkers and their patrons to target any party or group, which comes and goes, as per the current prime minister.

As a dispassionate selfless thinker, I have always welcomed rational criticism and discourse of my philosophy of fostering suppliers of freedom. My claim that the philosophy of fostering suppliers of freedom is unanimously agreeable can be easily refuted through a publicly stated counter/rejoinder by any (leader or pundit) demanding freedom or promoting such demands at JNU or elsewhere in the world.

The simple fact that the media dreads to even mention my unanimously agreeable philosophy of governance - to promote freedom suppliers as opposed to robbing them by demanders of freedom - is sufficient proof that no leader or pundit advocating demand for freedom has courage for a public discourse of two antithetic philosophies.

Mere demands for freedom from a winning philosophy of governance that is proved as stable, efficient and constitutionally fair is blatantly specious and oxymoronic. Indian media is still imbued in indolent fame and unsustainable prosperity based on specious oxymoronic demands of freedom. The most prominent global news papers like the New York Times are facing serious existential problems (bankruptcies) because of such hubris. Indian media is acting like an ostrich hiding its head under the severe anti-establishment wave blowing over the establishment in USA now.

Conclusion

Self-serving rulers and their anointed pundits have nurtured an unsustainable, inefficient and unconstitutional JNU thinking across university campuses since independence of India. This thinking bred so much of indolent demand for freedom that the true suppliers of freedom had shrunk badly to face a humiliating military defeat in 1992 and an economic defeat with rupee bouncing in 1991-1992.

For India's reemergence as a global economic powerhouse that a vast majority of enterprising Indians are capable of delivering, the failed, unstable, inefficient and unconstitutional JNU thinking has to be completely extinguished. This can be achieved through awareness and training of faculty and students across India about the truth that AZADI is possible, not through indolent demands for it, but through skill development and hard work for production of globally competitive goods and services and facilitating free interstate commerce through passage of acts like the GST.

One of my delivery trucks from Gujarat was recently blocked for days at an Odisha entry gate because the commercial tax officer there refused to collect Rs.100, notwithstanding his authority to collect, e.g., entry tax on CST, which I mistakenly did not fill in the VAT402A form as a part of the value of merchandize 'imported' from another part of India. The commercial tax commissioner was extremely helpful, but the gate keeper refused to obey orders. The CM very promptly intervened and replaced the commissioner. It was a case of systeming blackmailing of the truck driver, the road-transport company as well as the workers at a public service project in which I am a mere facilitator. GST is an efficient resolution of such blackmailing. Why are MPs authorized by people to pass the GST bill delaying its passage? Are they not promoting systemic blackmailing of AZADI providers? Where are the JNU thinkers?

Globally competitive goods and services obviously includes deep intellectual thinking (at the university campuses) which can sustain supply of AZADI efficiently and constitutionally.

The unanimously agreeable system (rules) of governance is not some esoteric Acharya's philosophy (point of view). This system is attained in general equilibrium within a comprehensive mathematical model of microeconomics among stakeholders of the economy (dynamic game theory model) designed to obtain macro policies. This mathematical model is the most general model ever scripted in the literature. The established punditry has thus far failed to challenge it or its axioms. Elite academic journals have returned this paper along with my submission fees without a review! As a dispassionate researcher, however, I continue to welcome any challenge by any pundit, government or industry leader in the establishment. I have conveyed this to US President Obama and Congressional leaders as well as to Indian leaders.

Ultimately, the elite academy has accepted (perhaps not unanimously yet) my philosophy of unanimously agreeable system of governance (promoting azadi suppliers, not demanders): my paper proving that the current system of money and finance is fundamentally unfair (unconstitutional), unstable and economically inefficient and presenting the unanimously agreeable system of governance as the alternative was invited and published in 2013 by the Journal of Financial Transformation, which has 18 Nobel Laureates as authors.

Being dispassionate means apolitical. This means that I do not subscribe to any political movement, though I am naturally in every political movement which explicitly subscribes to the unanimously agreeable philosophy of governance, which is to foster azadi suppliers and which is not to rob private or common wealth even surreptitiously; this means explicit avowal to repeal all laws that even surreptitiously facilitate systemic robbery of wealth creators who are the true pillars of a country.