Recently, in our skepticism and fervor to criticize, a trend has emerged – to blame the citizens for growth of corruption as almost all of us have at some point or the other we have given in to bribing one or the other element in huge set up of public administration machinery.
But there is a fundamental mistake in looking at things from this perspective. It is like missing the trees for the woods!
All through the era of “License & Permit Raj”, Government bred, knowingly as well as unknowingly, a system where there was least transparency and high amount of bureaucracy! So even if you rightfully and legally qualify for something, you are denied the same until the situation reaches to the point of your desperation and frustration. Then, you arrive at the conclusion, after years of struggle that nothing but paying bribe will get your done. So you pay a bribe. Not because you want to encourage this tribe of bribe taking officials, but because otherwise you will be denied of your Rights and "EQUALITY" of opportunities.
When a person dies, for example, his family is supposed to get a death certificate from health department. But when you seek the same, you are insensitively asked to come on some other day, or to go and meet some other official, or to bring his birth certificate first! Now, in a country like India, there are many people, even today, who don’t have such documents. But, because rules are rules, and have to be followed, you will have to submit the same!! Then, comes the masterstroke – a person approaches you and says that no birth certificate will be required and you will get what you want by just paying X amount!
It is here that an average Indian confronts dilemma! Whether to complain or to cough up? Complaining will cause further delay while paying bribe is not right morally as well as legally! Now, as a responsible and good citizen you decide to complain. The aftermath becomes horrendous. You have to go to court testify as well as procure proof for the same. The process goes on and on for 5-6 or maybe even more years! In the meantime you don’t get the death certificate, in absence of which you may not get your rightful claim on your property! Finally you realize that paying X amount was better! Not because your morals say so, but because you have understood your own economic reality!
Many countries have legalized paying bribe while taking the same is an offence. Why? So that, a responsible citizen doesn’t fear being harassed and report corrupt practices without compromising on his genuine interests. But, in India, even paying bribe is an offence!
So where does it all leave you? Before one criticizes an average Indian for greasing the palms of officials, first look at the ground reality.
A soldier, who dies fighting enemies of the country, makes a great sacrifice. In India, what does he get? A medal and assurance of livelihood to his family. But that is it – an assurance. To get that source of livelihood his family has to grease the palm of many or else be prepared to fight a long and arduous court battle. Is it feasible? A student, despite appearing in exams, is marked absent in his marks-sheet! How does he get to know his marks? Either run from pillar to post for months or cough up? Is the student at fault? A harrowed farmer has no option but to bribe to get electricity for borewell or else standing crops will be ruined? Is he at fault when he bribes? He takes heavy loans for planting seeds. If he complains to vigilance – not only he loses his crops, he risks being burdened by debts which he will never be able to repay?
On top of that, Indian vigilance has itself repeatedly made to the most corrupt of government departments across the world!
So, is the system pushing us or are we making the system?
Perhaps, this Lokpal might not be able to root out corruption. But, it will certainly help in stemming the rot! So why not welcome it! Why point a finger on the victims?
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
Friday, March 26, 2010
Even More Rotten Souls!!!
"Politics", according to Aristotle is a system whereby few men run the government in their self-interest...when few people rule for the overall good of the citizens, it is called a polity.
Anyways, the technicality aside, politics is understood mainly as a system to govern the country.
Once,politics used to be a ground where enlightened people were to be found aplenty, anywhere in the world... George Washington, Abraham Lincoln,Adam Smith and so many.Of course there were unscrupulous people too...like Niccolo Machiavelli,Napoleon Bonaparte, Bismarck, and so many more. But these men had a vision for their nation...the Germany as we know it owes its existence to Bismarck,though his policies promoted an aggressive Germany on war path;but if not for this great statesman, one can only wonder what would have been the fate of Germans.Napoleon did for France single-handedly what generations of emperors could not.
Coming back to India. We have had our own set of politicians.Some were of such calibre that the world marvels at them - Chanakya, Ashok, Samudragupta, Kanishka, Harshvardhan,Akbar, Madan Mohan Malviya,Tilak, MK Gandhi, Subhash Chandra Bose, Sardar Patel.
If one starts dwelling on each of the above mentioned person's contribution to India, a whole book will have to be compiled, may be in several volumes.
But where are we today and why?
It is fashionable to say that Gandhi planted the seeds of such politics when he let the partition happen as he had a weakness for Nehru.Similarly, some say that he himself was selfish and people point towards Bhagat Singh as an example.Well, this i will talk about later,because I am not interested in defending Gandhi now.I am more interested in knowing where we are and why?
Well, first of all, if we are so smart that we know that Gandhi was wrong(and this is so because we have the benefit of seeing in the rear-view mirror of Indian history),then why do we not learn from it? why?
We abhor Nehruvian politics.At least many of us have the penchant for saying so,then how come we vote for a party that stands for that even today!
It was Nehru who because of the fear of losing power gave in to the regional politics.He gave in to the politics of linguistic identities as has been discussed in another post too.I would be very happy if anybody can enlighten me on the difference between Congress of that time and the Congress of present.Yet we vote for it. We have been silently watching the Indian politics become a fiefdom of few families. Nehru-Gandhi family, Abdullahs,Deoras, Cahavan, Yadavs, and many more, the list is long.These young scions get constituencies as heritage.Gullible voters are charmed and affected by glamour to vote for them.Do they even have a vision? Are they worthy enough to be called 'leaders'?
When Rahul Gandhi won election from Amethi he announced projects worth Rs 180 crores for Amethi.Why don't other constituencies get such princely sum?
Because not everybody is 'the' Rahul Gandhi.
Not only that.A great circus has been going on since last few weeks.Sample this:
1)Mayawati gets garland worth few crores,she is unperturbed...has the guts to order the police investigate into the matter concerning bee attack on her rally.
2)HD Kumarswamy in Karnataka says that he has no problem with criminals contesting elections if they are "popular".Well guys,. I suppose we can loot a few banks,distribute some money and get a ticket from Mr. Kumarswamy.Even better,guys get organized,collude with Maoists and then come back after a brief stint.Dear Mr. HDK will allow you all to contest in elections.He doesn't have a problem if you have messed with law and order! Who does? actually nobody!
3)The champion of OBCs and Muslim rights has the guts to make demeaning remarks about the women who contest in elections in a public rally.
4)Raj Thackeray...
The incidents no longer enrage me,rather i feel ashamed, hurt and sad,ashamed that these people represent India to foreign dignitaries.Imagine a sexual pervert talking to foreign dignitaries and making lewd remarks about the female ones afterward. Thank God that Veerappan is no longer alive or he might have been contesting an election too.Hurt that even "educated"people also fall for goons like Thackeray.
what more can one say.Wake up! We are the generation x.It is our duty to think for the country.Let us rise above the petty divisions of caste, religion, language, region etc.Let us work for the India that we all want it to be.If not anything else.Let us educate people.We can begin from our respective homes.
Anyways, the technicality aside, politics is understood mainly as a system to govern the country.
Once,politics used to be a ground where enlightened people were to be found aplenty, anywhere in the world... George Washington, Abraham Lincoln,Adam Smith and so many.Of course there were unscrupulous people too...like Niccolo Machiavelli,Napoleon Bonaparte, Bismarck, and so many more. But these men had a vision for their nation...the Germany as we know it owes its existence to Bismarck,though his policies promoted an aggressive Germany on war path;but if not for this great statesman, one can only wonder what would have been the fate of Germans.Napoleon did for France single-handedly what generations of emperors could not.
Coming back to India. We have had our own set of politicians.Some were of such calibre that the world marvels at them - Chanakya, Ashok, Samudragupta, Kanishka, Harshvardhan,Akbar, Madan Mohan Malviya,Tilak, MK Gandhi, Subhash Chandra Bose, Sardar Patel.
If one starts dwelling on each of the above mentioned person's contribution to India, a whole book will have to be compiled, may be in several volumes.
But where are we today and why?
It is fashionable to say that Gandhi planted the seeds of such politics when he let the partition happen as he had a weakness for Nehru.Similarly, some say that he himself was selfish and people point towards Bhagat Singh as an example.Well, this i will talk about later,because I am not interested in defending Gandhi now.I am more interested in knowing where we are and why?
Well, first of all, if we are so smart that we know that Gandhi was wrong(and this is so because we have the benefit of seeing in the rear-view mirror of Indian history),then why do we not learn from it? why?
We abhor Nehruvian politics.At least many of us have the penchant for saying so,then how come we vote for a party that stands for that even today!
It was Nehru who because of the fear of losing power gave in to the regional politics.He gave in to the politics of linguistic identities as has been discussed in another post too.I would be very happy if anybody can enlighten me on the difference between Congress of that time and the Congress of present.Yet we vote for it. We have been silently watching the Indian politics become a fiefdom of few families. Nehru-Gandhi family, Abdullahs,Deoras, Cahavan, Yadavs, and many more, the list is long.These young scions get constituencies as heritage.Gullible voters are charmed and affected by glamour to vote for them.Do they even have a vision? Are they worthy enough to be called 'leaders'?
When Rahul Gandhi won election from Amethi he announced projects worth Rs 180 crores for Amethi.Why don't other constituencies get such princely sum?
Because not everybody is 'the' Rahul Gandhi.
Not only that.A great circus has been going on since last few weeks.Sample this:
1)Mayawati gets garland worth few crores,she is unperturbed...has the guts to order the police investigate into the matter concerning bee attack on her rally.
2)HD Kumarswamy in Karnataka says that he has no problem with criminals contesting elections if they are "popular".Well guys,. I suppose we can loot a few banks,distribute some money and get a ticket from Mr. Kumarswamy.Even better,guys get organized,collude with Maoists and then come back after a brief stint.Dear Mr. HDK will allow you all to contest in elections.He doesn't have a problem if you have messed with law and order! Who does? actually nobody!
3)The champion of OBCs and Muslim rights has the guts to make demeaning remarks about the women who contest in elections in a public rally.
4)Raj Thackeray...
The incidents no longer enrage me,rather i feel ashamed, hurt and sad,ashamed that these people represent India to foreign dignitaries.Imagine a sexual pervert talking to foreign dignitaries and making lewd remarks about the female ones afterward. Thank God that Veerappan is no longer alive or he might have been contesting an election too.Hurt that even "educated"people also fall for goons like Thackeray.
what more can one say.Wake up! We are the generation x.It is our duty to think for the country.Let us rise above the petty divisions of caste, religion, language, region etc.Let us work for the India that we all want it to be.If not anything else.Let us educate people.We can begin from our respective homes.
Saturday, March 6, 2010
Politics of Secularism
Does the word "secularism" ring any bell? I think all those who have even slightest of interest in the Indian politics would have some idea as to what the word means. Yet I suppose before beginning with my viewpoint I should discuss the definition a bit.
Well the Preamble of Indian constitution declares India to be a secular state. The ideal of 'secular state' was enshrined in the constitution professing numerous faiths in the country and for the unity and the fraternity of India.
The word 'secular' was inserted into the Preamble specifically by the 42nd amendment act in 1976. Secularism is, thus, a basic feature of the constitution.
'Secular State' means that the state protects all religions equally and does not itself uphold any religion as the 'state religion'.The question of secularism is not of sentiments but of law.
Secularism is one of the hallmarks of Indian democracy, and as an Indian I am proud, that we are a secular nation. Secularism basically tells about the tolerance of the society towards other religions and acceptance of multi-ethnicity.
Anyways, let us come back to the constitution and secularism. India was already home to people from diverse religious backgrounds - Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Buddhists, Parsis, Jains and Christians etc.. before independence. The members of the drafting committee of the constitution were smart enough to take care that India's multi-cultural fabric be secured. So the fundamental rights included the right to practice one's religion and also mentioned that no religious discrimination be made between people. The articles through 25 to 28 establish the impartiality of the Constitution towards any religion. Yet, the word 'secularism' was not explicitly mentioned in the constitution.
Here again let us divert a little from the topic.
Do you know that the 'Right to Property' was a fundamental right in our Constitution. However, by the 44th amendment act in 1978, Morarji Desai govt. omitted it. The decision was challenged in the revered Supreme Court, which ruled in favour of the govt., as it was not a 'basic feature' of the Constitution.
The Supreme Court had ruled earlier that any legislation which violates the basic feature or basic structure of the Constitution is illegal and ,hence, can be declared void (Kesavanand Bharti v Union of India, 1973).
It is here that inserting the word "secular" makes sense. This explicitly made secularism a basic feature of the constitution,which until that point was implicit. So far so good.
Now, cut to the present scenario.What we see is politicisation of "secularism". Well just think a little.
Does secularism imply that terrorists who have been convicted and sentenced to death by the esteemed SC be shown leniency because they belong to 'minority' community. Conspirators of the Parliament attack have not been punished yet; rather a clemency appeal has been filed for them. Is it secularism? No, it is the worst kind of politics.
Country has lost several of its illustrious sons because they sacrificed for us-citizens of India. But what are we doing? We are letting petty politicians make fools out of us on the name of religion.
Does secularism imply that some people hurt the religious sentiments of "majority"? No, not at all.
Does secularism mean that "minority" follow its own law.Sikhs, Buddhists, Parsis, Jain and, Jews are even lesser in numbers.They are real minorities.How come they follow common law, but the community which comprises officially 15% of the population cannot? Why can't there be a uniform civil code for every citizen? Is it secularism? No,it is hypocracy.Their votes are imp and so.
The secularism as advocated by new age and self-declared secular leaders is a farce and a sham.Criminals like Mukhtar Ansari and Atiq Ahmed have been winning in polls and proclaiming that they have been victimized because they are from minority! Guys, they are blood lusting criminals.Wake up and come out of this 'Persecution complex'.
Another interesting phenomenon which is at work in India is that of "reverse communalism" which is confused by new age "intellectuals" as SECULARISM! So today we have these people who are highly educated, belonging to "creative - fields" who take pride in saying things against their own religion and misconstruing it as secularism! The truth is as much as their diatribe might contain truth, it is not the only truth. For a "religion" which actually is a culture,a way of life existing since 10000 yrs, will contain philosophy and practices and culture and heritages which are often anti-thesis of one another. So why can't these people focus on the conflicting ideologies that exist within Hinduism...Simply to project themseves as "Seculars", so that they can associate with powers that be, so that they can run their NGOs, so that they can enter the chatrooms of media, so that they can get their 15 mins of fame, so that they can politicise what they themselves say should not be politicised!
There is a saying - " Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." So, do I need to say that the shame is on us, not on these cons. The onus is on us to not let their devious plans succeed. Let us vote on issues like development, social security, employment etc. Together we can make a difference. After all we are the Hoi Polloi.
I am not saying that communalism and hatred should be tolerated. No, not at all. Communalism is bad...there is no doubt about it. But pseudo-secularism is also as bad as communalism. But,let us not get divided and become fools. Let us be united.
Well the Preamble of Indian constitution declares India to be a secular state. The ideal of 'secular state' was enshrined in the constitution professing numerous faiths in the country and for the unity and the fraternity of India.
The word 'secular' was inserted into the Preamble specifically by the 42nd amendment act in 1976. Secularism is, thus, a basic feature of the constitution.
'Secular State' means that the state protects all religions equally and does not itself uphold any religion as the 'state religion'.The question of secularism is not of sentiments but of law.
Secularism is one of the hallmarks of Indian democracy, and as an Indian I am proud, that we are a secular nation. Secularism basically tells about the tolerance of the society towards other religions and acceptance of multi-ethnicity.
Anyways, let us come back to the constitution and secularism. India was already home to people from diverse religious backgrounds - Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Buddhists, Parsis, Jains and Christians etc.. before independence. The members of the drafting committee of the constitution were smart enough to take care that India's multi-cultural fabric be secured. So the fundamental rights included the right to practice one's religion and also mentioned that no religious discrimination be made between people. The articles through 25 to 28 establish the impartiality of the Constitution towards any religion. Yet, the word 'secularism' was not explicitly mentioned in the constitution.
Here again let us divert a little from the topic.
Do you know that the 'Right to Property' was a fundamental right in our Constitution. However, by the 44th amendment act in 1978, Morarji Desai govt. omitted it. The decision was challenged in the revered Supreme Court, which ruled in favour of the govt., as it was not a 'basic feature' of the Constitution.
The Supreme Court had ruled earlier that any legislation which violates the basic feature or basic structure of the Constitution is illegal and ,hence, can be declared void (Kesavanand Bharti v Union of India, 1973).
It is here that inserting the word "secular" makes sense. This explicitly made secularism a basic feature of the constitution,which until that point was implicit. So far so good.
Now, cut to the present scenario.What we see is politicisation of "secularism". Well just think a little.
Does secularism imply that terrorists who have been convicted and sentenced to death by the esteemed SC be shown leniency because they belong to 'minority' community. Conspirators of the Parliament attack have not been punished yet; rather a clemency appeal has been filed for them. Is it secularism? No, it is the worst kind of politics.
Country has lost several of its illustrious sons because they sacrificed for us-citizens of India. But what are we doing? We are letting petty politicians make fools out of us on the name of religion.
Does secularism imply that some people hurt the religious sentiments of "majority"? No, not at all.
Does secularism mean that "minority" follow its own law.Sikhs, Buddhists, Parsis, Jain and, Jews are even lesser in numbers.They are real minorities.How come they follow common law, but the community which comprises officially 15% of the population cannot? Why can't there be a uniform civil code for every citizen? Is it secularism? No,it is hypocracy.Their votes are imp and so.
The secularism as advocated by new age and self-declared secular leaders is a farce and a sham.Criminals like Mukhtar Ansari and Atiq Ahmed have been winning in polls and proclaiming that they have been victimized because they are from minority! Guys, they are blood lusting criminals.Wake up and come out of this 'Persecution complex'.
Another interesting phenomenon which is at work in India is that of "reverse communalism" which is confused by new age "intellectuals" as SECULARISM! So today we have these people who are highly educated, belonging to "creative - fields" who take pride in saying things against their own religion and misconstruing it as secularism! The truth is as much as their diatribe might contain truth, it is not the only truth. For a "religion" which actually is a culture,a way of life existing since 10000 yrs, will contain philosophy and practices and culture and heritages which are often anti-thesis of one another. So why can't these people focus on the conflicting ideologies that exist within Hinduism...Simply to project themseves as "Seculars", so that they can associate with powers that be, so that they can run their NGOs, so that they can enter the chatrooms of media, so that they can get their 15 mins of fame, so that they can politicise what they themselves say should not be politicised!
There is a saying - " Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." So, do I need to say that the shame is on us, not on these cons. The onus is on us to not let their devious plans succeed. Let us vote on issues like development, social security, employment etc. Together we can make a difference. After all we are the Hoi Polloi.
I am not saying that communalism and hatred should be tolerated. No, not at all. Communalism is bad...there is no doubt about it. But pseudo-secularism is also as bad as communalism. But,let us not get divided and become fools. Let us be united.
Friday, March 5, 2010
Politics of "Artistic Freedom"
MF Hussain is so "hurt"...it z a "shame" on Indians that he has been forced into an exile...his "artistic liberty" is being "violated". After all our constitution provides for fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression!
But wait, what about Salman Rushdie?
Oh no! what have I done...talking of that person! my God! it is a sin...I might be hurting the religious sentiments of some people...talking about his artistic liberty doesn't make sense.
And talking of that silly catoonist who made a cartoon of...god save me...there might be some "fatwa" waiting to be announced on my head even before I can pronounce the word "fatwa". That cartoonist how did he even think of this "artistic liberty"...no he should not have done this...
Why couldn't Hussain condemn all this, or for that matter why could not even these people who are making such a hue and cry today to bring back hussain condemn such violation of artistic freedom?
I guess that does not bring votes to these political parties (read Congress et al).
And these 'jhola-chhap' pseudo-intellectuals will not be getting media coverage for all that....or perhaps thay feared a fatwa coming their way!
It has become very easy and very fashionable, especially within India to degrade Hindu mythology and hurt their religious sentiments...it brings rewards also...you become an intellectual, you get to be known as sensitive and working towards empowerment of others....poor is the fate of those who oppose all this...they are labelled as "feudals","communal","rightists" and "fascists"...
So I guess I qualify to be called all of this...
I am not any of these....I have friends from other communities and other religion too...i eat with them...live with them...but I have my culture and I can't take this lying down...I don't know about others...
still, perhaps I don't deserve any artistic freedom... and nor does Salman Rushdie...Hey you silly Danish cartoonist! you don't even think about it...
But wait, what about Salman Rushdie?
Oh no! what have I done...talking of that person! my God! it is a sin...I might be hurting the religious sentiments of some people...talking about his artistic liberty doesn't make sense.
And talking of that silly catoonist who made a cartoon of...god save me...there might be some "fatwa" waiting to be announced on my head even before I can pronounce the word "fatwa". That cartoonist how did he even think of this "artistic liberty"...no he should not have done this...
Why couldn't Hussain condemn all this, or for that matter why could not even these people who are making such a hue and cry today to bring back hussain condemn such violation of artistic freedom?
I guess that does not bring votes to these political parties (read Congress et al).
And these 'jhola-chhap' pseudo-intellectuals will not be getting media coverage for all that....or perhaps thay feared a fatwa coming their way!
It has become very easy and very fashionable, especially within India to degrade Hindu mythology and hurt their religious sentiments...it brings rewards also...you become an intellectual, you get to be known as sensitive and working towards empowerment of others....poor is the fate of those who oppose all this...they are labelled as "feudals","communal","rightists" and "fascists"...
So I guess I qualify to be called all of this...
I am not any of these....I have friends from other communities and other religion too...i eat with them...live with them...but I have my culture and I can't take this lying down...I don't know about others...
still, perhaps I don't deserve any artistic freedom... and nor does Salman Rushdie...Hey you silly Danish cartoonist! you don't even think about it...
