I am not saying everything lands on her shoulders solely and squarely. By Indira Gandhi I mean her administration by extension. She is the Head of govt, ultimately she is responsible for the policies implemented since she can veto them....and definitely had a large hand in the overall direction of the more instrumental/large scale ones.
I'm not talking about the banks actually....but many of the medium scale industrial companies in manufacturing, textiles and so on that existed outside both the PSUs and the few private giants that had the right political connections. I'm talking things like minerals, metals, coal, cotton mills, textiles etc. She did this a few years after the banks iirc....thinking its a one solution fits all solution for every sphere of economic activity.
Nationalising the banks was an ok move overall. It had its pros and cons which are quite complicated....and a lot of it is from hindsight only. I don't blame her for that decision, though I wish she didnt do it so full scale but just picked a certain selection of them instead. Like you said the goals were noble in this regard and some very valid achievements in savings and credit access to the rural areas was achieved that helped the green revolution. The main problems were the lethargy that eventually ensued and lack of banking diversity and inability to adapt with changing conditions after the objectives were largely met. Things like microcredit could have easily been pushed through in India to counter the loansharking that was and is still prevalent in many rural areas.
I'm also ok with her nationalising the oil companies somewhat since they were snooty about providing oil to indian military in 1971. Though again just 1 or 2 and leaving some private would have been ideal in hindsight.
Yah but how much of that was to simply keep the top dawg status for INC as long as possible? Cutting off all sources of corporate funding to every political party means the biggest one carries its power/popularity momentum for a good long time. Not so noble imho. It would have been noble after a truly pluralistic political environment was first created...not when one party has monopolised all political discourse pretty much.
Its sort of the reason I really wish that both Gandhi and Nehru, although instrumental persona in the INC, should not have endorsed themselves as direct members of any specific party esp when Nehru became first PM....something to the effect of how George Washington did so for the US.
She started a few things. Maruti UDYOG started under her tenure as well I believe under official stewardship of Sanjay. Problem is these industries need SME clusters to operate efficiently. That culture can only be spawned by massive deregulation...and no govt interference in day to day activity. I mean the parts to make just one car would fill up probably the entire shop floor with govt paperwork in just a few hours I would think under the old system (I am not kidding!).
It was a good move. But it could have been done much earlier....and been followed up a lot earlier with other crucial industries. No reason to wait till 1991 when the situation became forced.
I am a harsh scorer. You can calibrate to your needs
. You hear me praise Modi generally and I only give him a 6. Someone getting 2/3rds of his score is pretty high praise overall....because I value her strong decisive leadership w.r.t Pakistan, cold war in general and internal security matters.
Most politicians and leaders in world history on average score between 0 - 2 for me. Just keep it in mind for reference
One more fun fact. I appreciate how she handled the train locomotive driver strike that occured some time during her tenure. I wonder if
@anant_s knows that story
It's a kid or at least a toddler.
