Social, Political and Philosophical Grey matter revolution

Are We Sending Right People to Parliament?

noreply@blogger.com (Saurabh) — Fri, 27 Apr 2012 21:31:00 +0000

With recent decision by the government to recommend India's shining star cricketer Sachin Tendulkar and veteran Bollywood actress Rekha for nomination as member of Rajya Sabha, age old question is unearthed: Are we sending right people to parliament?

Going by Article 80:

The members to be nominated by the President under sub-clause (a) of clause (1) shall consist of persons having special knowledge or practical experience in respect of such matters as the following, namely:- Literature, science, art and social service.

- Article 80, Clause(3), Constitution of India.

No mention of sport superficially raises questions on Sachin's qualification for the same. Well, arguments are floating around that sports too is an art and Sachin is the most artistic and talented sportsman, bringing joy to millions of fans in India and worldwide (doing Social service? No wonder one sees such argument by the ruling party..:)). It may seem satisfactory to some for his qualification! but the most plausible argument given by the government is:

“By nominating them to Rajya Sabha, the state not only recognizes their merit and confers honor on them, but also enables them to enrich the debates by their expertise and knowledge that they have in different areas.”

- Recognized News Daily.

Above statement raises many concerns again for India's political future. Membership in Rajya Sabha is primarily a huge responsibility and demands dedicated commitment. Honour comes secondary to the responsibilities vested. Undoubtedly Sachin qualifies for any such honor but does he qualify for the responsibilities. Will players or Bollywood stars be able to manage the load of responsibilities associated with it? Moreover Constitution provides numerous elite awards to honor distinguished people. Bharat Ratna, Padma Vibhushan etc. Sachin is well experienced sportsman and inspired many in his career but he is still a newbie for political processes.

A Membership in Rajya sabha entrusts powers, privileges and immunities available to an elected member of Parliament but does he have the acumen to channelize the powers for the people's welfare or will it just lie slumber as another feather in his cap. A person who entered the world of cricket in just 16 years of age and since then hardly had time to come out of the flashing ecosystem of sports will find real hard time in politics. Chances are high to use such precious membership as a trophy which will be displayed and held once and will serve as embellishment further.

Moreover Sachin is still active in cricket! Will he be able to devote sufficient time to parliamentary proceedings? If he does, will he not suffer in his game? I believe this anachronistic decision of his nomination is premature. He should at least be given time to end his career gracefully without any diversions. In the aftermath of his retirement he can roll up his sleeves for political innings of his life with same dedication and attitude.

As a matter of fact we are still young Third World Nation where we need to send more constructive thinkers in the parliament. Such opportunities should be given to people having rich experiences in such fields which can really be utilized in policy making process of our parliament. This opportunity to enable a person to serve the nation constructively has been wasted numerous times before. Many Bollywood stars appeared once or twice in the upper house and never showed up again in 6 years of their tenure. Surprisingly on numerous occasions upper house of parliament has been used by the government as backdoor to the parliament. Defeated candidates of the ruling party were then given a seat in Rajya Sabha and were thus kept active in the government.

Beyond the question of honoring a sportsman or Bollywood stars what concerns us are:

- Is the government looking for new faces to hide their own besmeared faces behind, piggyback these distinguished people for their scams?

- Is the government flashing the mob with such news to divert attention from the core issues?

- Why not award Bharat Ratna to Sachin when a strong consensus is built around it and leave the membership to people whose voices we really need to be heard on the floor of parliament. Certainly people like Prof. Amratya Sen, Anna Hazare, Baba Ramdev, Retired Army Generals, Distinguished journalists who has got amazing experiences in the most relevant matters, can contribute a lot more.

- Last but not the least, Do governments these days have malicious plans of luring famous people only to serve the party as vote cows, to project party's image by using their fame and respect.

Sachin rules our hearts with his cricketing prowess and will continue in many years to come. A gentleman, dedicated and intelligent player and above all a great inspiration to younger generation, Tendulkar may be used to the roaring sound of spectators in packed stadium, but even that might not be enough to prepare him for the noise of Parliament, where he could be heading if Congress has its way.

Sachin has served the nation a lot and lifted the dignity of the game itself and the country. Congress has welcomed Sachin to join the party. Whether choice of heading to parliament is a judicious one or not, time will tell, but he needs to be cautious of any hidden agenda of the experts who may eat up his hard earned success and dignity, cautious of end up being vote cow for Congress. Fingers crossed!!

- Saurabh
"The world suffers a lot. Not because of the violence of bad people, but because of the silence of good people."

Iran-Israel Conflict : India's Balancing Act

noreply@blogger.com (Saurabh) — Mon, 26 Mar 2012 15:52:00 +0000

IN Post Independence era India has emerged as a major stakeholder in the Third-World order of Non Alignment. Non Alignment precipitated due to direct colonial experiences of India and continued to be one of the consistent features of India's foreign policy. No doubt this policy has facilitated India in distancing itself away from the unintended repercussions of being aligned to any specific super power of the then bipolar world, but in the current changed equations of the world order, New Delhi needs to reorient this mammoth pillar of Indian foreign policy.

Ever since Iran has showcased its nuclear might, it has become a hot spot of the middle east turbulence. With this the world order has taken a different posture and Indian diplomats are busy in getting India into a comfortable place. New Delhi now has to play Israel and the West on one hand and Iran on other.

Iran holds a strategic importance for India's ambitions in middle east. Being the second best supplier of oil after Saudi Arabia, Iran has emerged as one of the biggest players to address India's energy needs. Also, India needs access to Afghanistan and central Asia. Expectations of a land route from Pakistan to access middle east markets is certainly bleak, consequent upon its inability to tackle internal security concerns and deficit of mutual trust. Holding huge reserves of oil and natural gas, Central Asia offers a lucrative ground for India to have an early firm feet. This becomes more significant due to presence of formidable competitors like China in our neighborhood. India certainly fears loosing this market to China hands down.

Moreover with the recent US pledge to withdraw its exhausted troops from Afghanistan, it becomes extremely challenging for New Delhi to improvise ways to address its security concerns. After the US troops withdrawal a dangerous void will be created in Kabul. Pakistan definitely has an upper hand in taking hold of the situation for its vested interests and pose serious threats to India. Already suffering the blows of heavy recess in economy and the domestic uproar over Interventionist foreign policy, West is no more a strong wall for India to solve its cross border security crisis. No doubt Iran is going to be a key facilitator for India to tackle the void left by US soldiers in middle east and secure its borders. India can reap the benefits due to well known animosity of Iran having Shias majority and Pakistan, a Sunni majority state.

On the other hand Israel no doubt holds strategic relationship with India as far as defense cooperation is concerned. In India's tough times Israel has provided it with state of the art and sensitive defense equipment. After the fall of Russia in post cold war era, Israel has been holding top shares in New Delhi's defense deals, competing US. Israel also holds value having the support of the West and Arab states. Any animosity with Israel will definitely harbor frictions between India and the West. Moreover, India must not forget 'A friend in need is a friend indeed'. In Asia given the presence of major Islamic Fundamentalist states and communist China, India's relation with Israel and also with the West becomes extremely crucial. Israel is the most trusted state for India's defense deals. India certainly cannot afford to loose such mutually beneficial cooperation.

Will India continue importing oil against US sanctions and giving passive support to Iran or will get aligned with Israel and the West. India certainly is not in position to take a tough stand without inflicting serious troubles, be it economic or political. Policy of Non Alignment needs a complete overhauling. India should not end the ties with Iran under the West's pressure, given its energy needs, but certainly curtail it and try its best to look for other potential suppliers with the West's help. The fact of being on top in the importer's list of Iran will be the most troublesome irritant in the eyes of West and Israel. India should take the world into confidence that its ties are purely economic with no hidden agenda. After all US has relations with Pakistan, a troubling neighbor for us, why can't India hold a purely economic tie with Iran, a troubling state in the eyes of America. Simply on the apprehension that Iran is developing nuclear weapons that too without any firm evidence, holds no legitimate reason for India to back off from its trade ties.

Whatever be the options but in coming time India has to take a clear and strong political stance. India's old economic formulas can definitely not work with the changed equations of world order any more. Non Alignment must be transformed into strategic autonomy, only to redeem its pledge of not following any state sponsored resolution and sanctions but to have a firm and independent voice. Over the years India has affirmed it's will of maintaining amiable relationships with all the countries without being biased to a particular world order. In distant future this policy will put India's will under test as the world is getting more and more polarized as the days go by.

- Saurabh

"The world suffers a lot. Not because of the violence of bad people,but because of the silence of good people."

Anna Hazare v/s Government: Sense and Nonsense of Interests

noreply@blogger.com (Saurabh) — Mon, 22 Aug 2011 14:51:00 +0000

Man is mortal but ideals are immortal. A man's voice can be suppressed but not his ideals. Ideals generally dont have the material force but when situation demands it becomes radical and subsequently a material force having capacity to overthrow the existing socio-political organization of the state.

The current turmoil within the ruling party was envisaged by Gandhiji way back. Gandhiji who has been revered as 'Political Guru' by Congress, had already lost faith in the Nehru's cabinet. He even proclaimed to dissolve it but his propositions were turned down. He didn't have faith in the British styled Parliamentarian system and wished to establish a direct democracy.

Congress got the rid of Gandhiji but Gandhism still haunts it. Both moderate and extremist revolutionaries fortold that the real independence would come only when the government is dedicated to safegaurd and promote the individual and common interests, society is corruption free and not divided in exploiters and exploited, dominants and dependents. The current social and political situation in India witnesses the resurrection of Gandhian soul by a veteran advocate of Gandhian School of thought, Anna Hazare, A Gandhian by belief, outlook and practice, whose ' Anti Corruption Campaign' is resonating across the nation. Governance in India was already sitting on a pile of explosives which just needed a spark. Common man is suppressed under the burden of exploitation, product of policies of Liberlization, Privatization and Globalization (LPG) mingled with the most severe form of corruption. Money is getting accumulated with certain privileged groups and common man is suffering with rising prices of even basic commodities necessary for his subsistence. Tension was getting accumulated and now the sudden unleash of that force is morally and ideologically violent and can topple the government anytime, a government in which politicians are not concerned with the individual and common interests of the society but are just interested in power and money.

The current revolution will also silent the critics of Gandhian principles. The force and effectiveness of Gandhism is manifested by the Anti corruption campaign. The struggle between the government and the Anna Hazare camp over the righteousness of means to pursue the ends of 'Corruption Free India' clearly demonstrates the ill-intentions of the ruling party. Gandhiji once said," If we take care of our means, end will take care of itself." Our means are based on 'Non violence and truth' whose righteousness is historically approved.

Over and over again government claims the actions of civil society as unconstituional. What ridicules me is that where were these 'strong exponents of constitutionalism who are seeking a strict adherence to the constitutional means', when their fellow ministers, or who knows they themselves, were exploiting the country's wealth and amassing it outside india, the wealth expropriated from common men for common good. They clearly know that passing such a bill will be self destructive for the congress and seems like decorating their own death procession. A peaceful Gandhian out of nowhere, with no political background who just few months back sat on a 'Fast unto death' for a public cause, can connect to the masses in such a holistic manner then why can't the Government, comprised of so called Electives. A common man must be educated for the exigency of such a bill. This will also in one way or other serve the view of Gandhiji of having a Direct Democracy, in which people can interfere in the vice and immoral actions of the Government. Lokpal bill needs to be institutionalized to give a voice to common man, for the quick recognition and redressal of his grievances. In my opinion, only then the true meaning of a democracy will be realized when junta will also have a voice in legislation.

An awesme experience it is to watch the millions of peaceful protesters, marching across the streets. This revoltuion will surely be counted as the most revered ones at the global scale after the Jayprakash Naraian's in the post independence era. When Indira Gandhi was found guilty of violating electoral laws by the Allahabad High Court, Narayan called for Indira to resign, and advocated a program of social transformation which he termed Sampoorna kraanti (Total Revolution). Instead she proclaimed a national Emergency on the midnight of June 25, 1975, immediately after Narayan had called for the PM's resignation and had asked the military and the police to disregard unconstitutional and immoral orders; JP, opposition leaders, and dissenting members of her own party were arrested on that day. Jayaprakash Narayan attracted a gathering of 100,000 people at the Ramlila Ground and thunderously recited Rashtrakavi Ramdhari Singh 'Dinkar's wonderfully evocative poetry: Singhasan Khaali Karo Ke Janata Aaati Hai.

Today the situation is much more favourable to unearth the atrocities of the goverment. More educated Intelligensia, Middle class, revolutionized mass media has all become prime instruments to support such campaigns. More surprising is that intelligentsia within the government are not able to realize that gone are those days when corruption was executed under the nose of the common man due to lack of education and institutions. Now the situation has changed. Contemporary situation in India has radically changed. 'Aam Adami' knows his rights, his ends and means to achieve them. Government is busy in finding a way to somehow coerce the present revolution but easily discernible is the upcoming of such revolutions in near future over and again. Who knows the more violent ones!!

When Anna hazare was protesting for the RTI against the BJP and Shivsena they addressed Anna as 'Talibani Gandhian' and congress backed Anna. Now when he is protesting against congress, BJP is supporting. Country's youth is now fed up of watching this ball game between political parties. They say that its only the right of electives to propose a bill. Is this the vision of democracy our visionary founding forefathers had, when they contemplated a shining India deriving authority from people; The vision that in our democracy Junta's role comes into limelight only during elections? Once elections are over we need to shut up and see the game of political parties, supporting and accusing each other? Now the ball is in our court. so come out of your shells and protest wherever you can, in whatever peaceful way you can, for the sake of the corruption you faced in any walk of life, at any age, I'm sure which you must have had. Come forward at least for the sake of your duty to the country we live in. Make sure the non violence character of our revolt. Peaceful protest has always been an ornament of our motherland and will always be. Don't besmear it with the bloodshed.

We are at war, a war of position against the political hegemony imposed by ruling party due to its parilamentarian majority. Famous Italian political Philosopher Antonio Gramsci's theory of a War of Position and a War of Manoeuvre against the cultural hegemony can be realized. An oppressed and exploited common man increases class consciousness, teach revolutionary theory and historical analysis, and thus propitiate further revolutionary organisation among the social classes. Leaders like Anna Hazare, Baba Ramdev has waged a war of position by raising the consciousness of common citizens of the state against the exploitation of corruption. On winning the war of position, leaders would then have the necessary social power and popular support to begin the political manoeuvre revolutionary warfare. We are at war of position and government should realize not to let it transform into war of manoeuvre.

Time has come when other supporters of this noble cause like Baba ramdev and others should call upon all their supporters to seize the capital peacefully by instrumenting civil disobedience. Alongwith Non Violence, instrument of civil disobedience should be put into action. Bureaucrats, Police and other steel framework of the government, should stop executing the immoral orders and stop the functioning of the government. All the film stars and other cultural figures should come forward to support such campaign by arousing the patriotism. A time when many middle east countries are paralyzed with the revoultionary insurgency and bloodshed, our peaceful revolution has taught the world again the way to protest. Let's show the world that this is Gandhiji's land. If we can fill the stadiums in thousands to watch an IPL match, can't we take a day off and support this revolution. If we can come on the streets with unprecedented exuberance to celebrate India's victory in world cup then why cant we come forward for such a noble campaign. Wold cup is over and all its effects are gone with the days but our future depends on this revolution. My strong conviction is we have got a vent by Anna Hazare's "Anti Corruption Campaign" to relase our frustration built over a long period of time. Let's make the Anna's voice stronger," Pass the Janlokpal bill or QUIT."

So far we have just interpreted and criticized the multi dimensional corruption pervaded in all walks of our political structure, now the point is to change it. Its now or never. We have waited for many decades. Do you want to wait for another 60 years hoping for a Messiah? Choice is yours.

- Saurabh

"The world suffers a lot. Not because of the violence of bad people, but because of the silence of good people."

Our Farmers: Shout to Silence

noreply@blogger.com (Saurabh) — Fri, 13 May 2011 18:20:00 +0000

India is one of the oldest civilizations that exists on earth, was abound with the vast alluvial fertile plains on which world's oldest and most advanced civilizations of that time saw their peaks and downfalls. The main source of economy and income of the people of ancient India was agriculture. Even today the fertile plains, rivers and water bodies and a favorable climate provides a wonderful scope for agricultural produce in the country. India was 'The Golden Bird'. Our conventional wisdom of agriculture dates back to thousands of years when the first plants were cultivated. Right from the ancient civilizations of India like Indus Valley, the Aryan civilization, Mauryan Empire, Gupta Empire, Muslim rulers and most other dynasties India's economy largely rested upon agricultural produce. Such a mighty agricultural economy started deteriorating once we started strategic trade relations with the outsiders and allowed them to exploit our weak social and political structure. The advent of British, French , Portugese and many others on indian soil started the economic breakdown. Many revolts, Peasant and civil uprisings happened but never culminated in long term and everlasting reforms.

Peasants have been fighting for their legitimate rights since time immemorial across the globe. Indian peasantry started seeing its dark ages during colonial empire. The Hope that Indian pesantry will once again enter into its golden age after the independence is gradually fading away. It's a shame on the face of an Agrarian and so called democratic country with around 60% of people directly or indirectly depending upon Agriculture that lack of proper policies and failure in their proper implementation by the goverment, exploitation by middlemen have been leading a series of suicides committed by peasants across india. Since past 16 years, on an average 47 farmer/peasant suicides occur every day. According to a survey around all the 70 million of our farmers are being exploited by middlemen direclty or indirectly. These middlemen usurp most of the profit earned by a farmer. The lack of proper storage has forced the farmer to sell his product to the middleman at low cost. As the products perish soon, the farmer sells it at the offered price.

Recently BBC news highlighted the pitiable plight of cotton farmers in western states. My heart was engulfed with grief when i heard the story of such a victim lady whose husband and brother-in-law both committed suicide leaving behind two widows and four children under the same roof. In western states' suicide cases, half the widows are between the ages of 19 and 25 and have two to three children. In states like UP, West Bengal, Andhra Pradesh Goverment, Beurocrats and middlemen have left the farmers to their fate. More than 17,500 farmers a year killed themselves between 2002 and 2006, according to experts who have analyzed government statistics. More than 2.50 lac farmers have committed suicide in India in last 10 years. As per a report of 'The Hindu', On average, one farmer committed suicide in every 32 minutes between 1997 and 2005. From 2005 this average is one suicide in every 30 minutes. Consequently these suicides bleak the future of their kith and kins, therefore millions of children and widows are left to starve. Few years back in Jhansi i saw another story of a farmer family where two children were eating a thirty two days old peice of bread after softening it by water. There was nobody to earn and feed the children as their father already committed suicide or say smothered under the heavy loans. Other farmers showed the cheques issued to them as compensation worth Rs 20 and odd. Are Government and Beurocrats making a mockery of democracy. When the questions come to them, instead of taking the onus they point fingers at each other till media itself gets bored of telecasting the same news over and over again.

Farmers sorry plight in india is so old and being incessantly clamoured about that seems our government and we all have made ourselves accustomed to it. Every day dozens of farmers are committing suicide and Mr. Pawar who is heading agriculture ministry, in a live television interview said that “100,000 farmers' suicide per year is a normal thing that we have been seeing for a number of years”. Its really tragic to see that the so called backbone of our country is paralyzed. He was more concerned with the extravaganza of world cricket and not with the plight of the farmers. The policies of privatisation and globalisation may have worked for our industries but have always wreaked havoc on our farmers. Industrial hegemony is suffocating our farmers to death.

The influence of our current prejudiced policies and ignorance will surely render India totally dependent on western capitalist countries to meet the demands of food grain. Those countries are giving very high subsidies to their farmers but refraining the developing country's farmers for the same. Recently India announced a $500 million aid to Afghanistan. My conviction is, look inward at our own home problems. Its ridiculous fixing the tiles on others roof whilst at home ours is leaking. Our farmers are truly in deep crisis.

A government-owned bank will give you loan at six per cent interest rate if you are buying a Mercedes but if a poor farmer wants to buy a tractor, it charges him Fifteen per cent!. Sixty-seventy per cent of India's population is living on less than Rs. 20 a day, cost of just a drink for us. Its really unfortunate seeing government showering land and crores upon indian cricket players after the world cup. People jumped, screamed, had gallons of beer and no wonder that to very near of our celebrations, in villages our farmers committed suicide.

The rosy pictures of GDP growth rate and per capita income which are being used by the governments for their propaganda of election campaign cannot reform the indian agrarian crisis. We must understand that government's intervention in salvaging this crisis should never be a one time scheme. It has to be a sustained policy. Boisterous cacophony in Parliament in the name of policies will not help. Recently in Noida farmers were pushed to their limit of tolerance when they were not paid the legitimate compensation after the acquisition of their fertile land which was later sold to builders at very high rates. They went berserk and clashes with government was inevitable. Well Noida uprising is neither the first one nor the last. In a Democratic India where the government propagandize the slogan of "JAI JAWAN JAI KISAAN", where government is chosen by its very own people on a free will basis, still the hands who were meant to drag the chisel plough and feed the millions are hurling weapons and fighting for their rights. Farmers turned belligerent by force and not by choice. Conditions are worst to this extent that after seeing the plight of farmers in Noida a prominent leader of ruling party couldn't help saying " I'm ashamed to be an Indian ".

Famous American author Bill Brayson once said, " There are only three things that can kill a farmer: lightning, rolling over in a tractor, and old age". But when our farmers are unable to hold the burden of privatisation and industrial hegemony i would like to add few more words: "There are only three things that can kill a farmer: lightning, rolling over in a tractor, and old age unless circumstances lead him to take his own life."

I cannot resist to share the story of a Roman emperor 'Nero':

Centuries ago, there was a Roman emperor, called Nero. He was a strong ruler and also very fond of parties, art, poetry, drinking and a life full of pleasures. Once he decided to organise a grand party and invited all poets, writers, dancers, painters, artists, intellectuals and thinkers of society. Everybody was having a great time eating, drinking, laughing, and socialising. The party was at its peak when it started getting dark. Nero wanted the party to go on. So he ordered and got all the arrested criminals, who were in his jails, around the garden and put them on fire! Burnt them alive, so that there was enough light for the guests to keep on enjoying! The guests had a gala time though they knew the cost of their enjoyment. Now, what kind of conscience those guests had? Tacitus, continuing his above quote, goes on to say of the Christians that:

Besides being put to death they were made to serve as objects of amusement; they were covered with wild beasts' skins and torn to death by dogs. Some were crucified, others set on fire to serve to illuminate the night when daylight failed, fastened on crosses, and when daylight failed, covered by inflammable matter, were set on fire to serve as torches during the night. Or tied to stakes in Nero's gardens while he drove around in his chariot, naked, indulging himself in his midnight revels, gloating over the dying agonies of his victims. The Roman Christians, accused by Nero of setting the city on fire, were massacred in a spectacular fashion on the Vatican Hill.

Whenever i come across the sad plight of our farmers and government being silent and giving false hopes only thought that bothers me is, Is our government, clearly not competent enough in reforming our farmers' conditions and prevent them from committing suicides, different than Nero himself? and We, the middle and elite class, young, well earning, mall hopping, 'First day first show' movie crazy, IPL-watching and celebrating-junta are Nero's guests watching the gala of burning farmers!

- Saurabh
"The world suffers a lot. Not because of the violence of bad people, but because of the silence of good people."

A New Deadly War Game of Terror Unleashed in Middle East

noreply@blogger.com (Saurabh) — Tue, 03 May 2011 19:14:00 +0000

In past few decades Newspapers and broadcast media are fraught with the upsurge in middle east. The Storm of terror is hurling in Gulf countries around the axis of United States. Most noticeable fact is the involvement of US in almost every single political activity of Asia. A new war game of Interventionism has been launched to deal with the rest of the world in a way that best secures and advances its proper national interests. This seems quite preposterous to me as founding fathers of America pledged to establish the peace and commerce between nations and were against involvement in political and military alliances, so called Noninterventionism.

Nonintervention simply means America does not interfere militarily, financially, or covertly in the internal affairs of other nations.

In the words of George Washington

"It is our true policy to steer clear of entangling alliances with any portion of the foreign world."

Seems USA has comfortably ignored and defied the basic principles of their foreign policy laid down by the veterans. Monroe Doctrine which was one of the most formidable principles of their foreign policy clearly asserted that the United States would neither interfere with existing European colonies nor meddle in the internal concerns of European countries. The Doctrine was issued at a time when many Latin American countries were on the verge of becoming independent from the Spanish Empire. The United States, reflecting concerns raised by Great Britain, ultimately hoped to avoid having any European power take over Spain's colonies.'America for the Americans', a clear message to the world of political hegemony and indisputable right of unilateral intervention over the American continent.

But today America has emerged as the destiny maker for many middle east and other Asian countries and has brought innumerable casualities. Right after the World War II there was a tremendous amount of political conflicts, proxy wars, social-economical-scientific competitions between the United States and its allies and the Communist world-primarily Soviet Union and its allies popularly knows as Cold War.

Prior to 1980, Teheran was one of Washington's most allied allies, a heavily armed outpost that practised repression against its own people, looted the oil wealth of the country, and helped in the projection of American power in the Persian Gulf and West Asia. During the Presidency of Ronald Reagan, United States supported the Saddam Hussein regime in Iraq in its aggression against Iran and the 1990s saw the erection of a range of sanctions aimed at stifling the Iranian oil industry and USA's persuasion for a regime change. The nuclear issue of Iran had brought Washington to the verge of war but later lack of options compelled President Bush to participate in multilateral negotiations with Iran.

President George W. Bush himself established the link between Iraq and terrorism by stressing the need to deny sanctuary to terrorists anywhere in the world and pointing to the totalitarian threat posed by state sponsors of terrorism with potential access to weapons of mass destruction. He also declared that it was the stated policy of his government to have regime change in Iraq. It is increasingly regarded as having failed campaign in Iraq to bring about either democratic changes or security for the Persian Gulf region. Numerous countries are challenging, if not directly violating, the sanctions regime, and international support has largely eroded. Consequently widespread opposition has spread in the Middle East—across the region at the street level and increasingly at the governmental level as well.

In US led NATO strikes (claimed to be an attempt to assassinate the Libyan leader) Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi survived but it killed his youngest son and three of his grandchildren.The strike came hours after Gaddafi called for a ceasefire in the civil war and The Libyan government gave its consent for a political resolution to the conflict. Clearly leaders are being targeted and this strengthens the regime change policy of USA. Besides this USA is actively involved in an upsurge against the regime of President Hosni Mubarak in Egypt. America is also aggressively making other countries like Pakistan its military non NATO ally and is pressuring the government to sign a defense logistic agreement with it. America wants that its air force and navy use others airports and other facilities and also use their military in fighting their war in the region. Such unrestricted interventions and alliances have posed serious threats to the sovereignty of nations affected. Negotiations and alliances must be unconditional and every nation has full right to take their decisions to join an alliance or say in enriching themselves with nuclear energy. Every country has right to decide on their internal affairs and political system through democratic dialogue away from an outside threat.

Seemingly USA is omnipresent targeting the political unrest in the rest of the world and has turned notorious for engineering “regime change” in countries that do not act at its behest. They claim to bring justice to the innocent victims but countless men, women and children have lost their lives in US and allies led operations and in the aftermath not even some semblance of normalcy is observed. No doubt USA has led some operations which were directly or indirectly for the common good but waging war and heaving casualties cannot justify their acts claimed to be humanitarian.

When asked if the WikiLeaks would damage American relations with other countries, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates noted that "governments deal with the United States because it's in their interest, not because they like us, not because they trust us, and not because they believe we can keep secrets." Well here lies the key. Apart from deliberate interventions there is one more thing that drives USA into others interests, Invitation. Every regime should bear this in mind that an outsider can never understand the value of your people's life and property if you can not, can never feel the pulse of the nation if you cannot. If you cannot take care of your own people somebody else will. All the territories should resolve their issues by engaing in bilateral talks involving only those who has geopolitical significance for the issue, instead of looking for a response from Washington as vested interests will always be there. Dependency on so called super powers like United states or others should be curtailed. Nothing gives a right to wage a war unless a direct threat has been given. Promising peace by waging war seems contradictory.

Moreover It is time for USA to reevaluate the interventionist foreign policy. It is time to understand the obvious casualties that results from being involved time and time again into intractable and endless Middle East conflicts, whether in Iraq, Iran, Syria, Somalia, Lebanon, Afghanistan or Palestine. It is definitely time to ask yourselves whether further American lives and tax dollars should be lost trying to remake the Middle East in your image. It is time to analyze:

The clear and present threat to U.S. security interests to justify going to war.
Should the U.S., as historically a "benign power", move toward a paradigm shift to pre-emptive war without the elaboration of an international strategic context and policy?
What are the consequences and implications of the U.S. going it alone if there is little international support for military action?
Will a military attack in which a regime's survival is at stake result in the use of chemical and biological weapons against U.S. military and/or neighboring states?

World has suffered a lot because of the colonisation policy of Britain secured by cultural hegemony, this time political hegemony of the west is raising its ugly head. If "America is for Americans" then the same principle applies to others as well. Let them decide their fate themselves. United States’ theory of preemptive wars, so as to “adapt to new threats” needs to be discouraged. USA and its allies seek after political and military control of the world. Stress is building engulfing sheer force having the potential to wage the great confrontation in the Arab World and Central Asia in distant future – a confrontation that will detonate in local,regional or even global wars, which will witness changing regimes, perhaps also the borders of some countries and above all cause a great loss to humanity.

- Saurabh

"The world suffers a lot. Not because of the violence of bad people, but because of the silence of good people."

Gandhi v/s Godse: Conflicting Nationalism

noreply@blogger.com (Saurabh) — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 10:41:00 +0000

Recently i happened to read a book on Nathuram Godse, yes the assassin of one of the greatest apostle of truth and non violence 'Mahatma Gandhi'.
Almost 60 and odd years after that mournful event ghost of Godse refuses to go away and still emerges out time and again to haunt a nation which can still feel the warmth of its struggle for independence but still unsure how to cope with its history.

In the cold wee hours of 15 November 1949, Godse and his co-conspirator Narayan apte were executed. Clutching a map of undivided India in one hand and the bhagwa dhwaj (saffron flag) in another, 38-year-old Nathuram Godse and 37-year-old Narayan Apte walked to the gallows chanting in unison a Sanskrit invocation to the motherland. Godse died instantly, but Apte's end was more painful, he had to be hanged a second time. A few hours later, their bodies were cremated outside the prison walls. Immediately afterwards, the whole area was ploughed and planted with grass so that no one could identify the spot and build a shrine.

Nathuram was the Editor of a Marathi newspaper - Hindu Rashtra and a well-known member of the Hindu Mahasabha. He had written scathing editorials denouncing Gandhiji and the Congress party. On 8 November 1948, he was allowed his day in the sun when he rose to make his statement. Reading quietly from a typed manuscript, he sought to explain why he had killed Gandhiji. His thesis covered ninety-pages, and he was on his feet for five hours. Godse's statement should be quoted extensively, for it provides an insight into his personality.

In this thesis Nathuram vehemently condemned Gandhiji for his monopoly over congress. He accused Gandhiji claiming that "He was, paradoxical, as it may appear, a violent pacifist who brought untold calamities on the country in the name of truth and non-violence, while Rana Pratap, Shivaji and the Guru will remain enshrined in the hearts of their countrymen forever for the freedom they brought to them. ....he failed in his paternal duty in as much he has acted very treacherously to the nation by his consenting to the partitioning of it. I stoutly maintain that Gandhi has failed in his duty. He has proved to be the Father of Pakistan. His inner-voice, his spiritual power, his doctrine of non-violence of which so much is made of, all crumbled against Jinnah's iron will and proved to be powerless."(Sources: “Why Gandhi Assassinated” by Gopal Godse)

Nathuram's ideology of armed struggle for freedom was not suited to the mass of india in that era. There was a total lack of political consciousness. Workers and Peasants,the backbone of any struggle, had to liberate themselves not only from the grip of British Imperialism but also from the landlords and capitalists. India was neither united nor politically awake.

Gandhiji knew that the real power to revolt lies in the workers and peasants of this country. An Armed Revolt could have never been successful in india. In 19th century India was a 'Nation in Making'. Gandhiji did a brilliant work in politicizing and uniting indian people without which independence would have been a far cry.
Moreover great Martyrs like Bhagat singh and Ram Prasad Bismil were also convinced at the end that Armed struggle, revolutionary terrorism and individual vendetta could not gain us anything. Gnadhiji had faith in his non-violent Satyagraha and in the capacity of the indian people to adopt it.

After the introduction of swarijsts and other left wings like Communists and Socialist there was always a possibility of Congress to get split into pieces but He saved congress on many occasions by avoiding an impending split and made all his fellows in congress to remain united even though they differed in their views and style of politics.Had a split occured Moderates would have been pacified by mere constitutional reforms and extremists would have been repressed with violent measures. Any further political awakening would have been crushed. An entire generation of leaders would have been beheaded like what happened after 'Gadhar revolt' and 'Kuka Revolt'. Thus Gandhiji was the only person who could have pacified all the disagreement and conflict in views of fellow leaders and kept them all united. It was some of the basic features of his political style and ultimate leadership,especially when dealing with co-workers.That is why leaders of all groups fully accepted the essentiality of Gandhiji's leadership in which Nathuram perceived fascism, a radical and authoritarian nationalist political ideology, self-conceit and irresponsibility.

Though we may classify all the movements launched by Gandhiji as failures that brought untold disaster as put by Nathuram instead of freedom, but the success or failure of a political movement is not always to be measured in terms of its achievement of stated objectives. But if success or failure are to be measured in terms of the deepening of national consciousness,the evolution and testing of new methods of struggle then the movements certainly contributed their share to the india's struggle for freedom.

Nathuram Godse in his last speech tried to degrade Mahatma Gandhi by saying him a dictator and someone who forced his thinking on masses but what he himself did? He made up his mind on certain own explained principles and killed mahatma. On one side he condemned Mahatma Gandhi's efforts to maintain communal harmony and at the same time he is pleading for a united India. Was it possible to have a united India with the kind of Ideologies Nathuram had? Of-course to patronize one section of the society and neglect the other can not be accepted but no one has a right to kill some great leader on some debatable issues.

Many people condemn Mahatma's way of struggle but every great leader has many debatable issues. Still Gandhiji had done a lot for india and truly deserves the honour of 'Father of Nation'.

When Godse's associate Madanlal Pahwa, a refugee from Punjab, threw a bomb at his prayer meeting a few days before the assassination, Gandhiji implored forgiveness and understanding. For thousands years we were ruled and exploited by outsiders because we lacked unity. Gandhiji united this country and centralized the power vested in indians especially peasants, and workers. He gave a voice to india and created a central force which uprooted the British Imperial empire. In his absence from the indian polity i believe india was not matured enough to get the freedom and the same was believed by other global leaders as well.

Last lines of Godse were "I have no doubt that honest writers of history will weigh my act and find the true value thereof someday in future." But what i see in Nathuram is an extreme and fanatic communalist whose views were based on hatred, fear, psychosis and irrationality which he falsely proclaimed as patriotism. His act will always be condemned and can never gain any historians sympathy. Communalism has brought many catastrophes to our country, took away millions of lives and even 'Father of Nation' fell prey to this while fighting against it.

Nathuram might have some valid points against discrimination of Hindus by government but his act was totally wrong and unacceptable. Even his views regarding pure Hindi as national language have no relevance in today’s contest while Hindi as Hinusthani is getting better acceptance all over the India in which the words and phrases of other languages are included.

Godse saw only one aspect of his suffering or his Hindus suffering. He had to understand the things in broder perspective. He holds Gandhiji responsible for such a massacre. Godse did not understand the people(both Hindus and Muslims) who liked Gandhiji, were responsible for such a mayhem. People who justify Godse's act of violence to serve Hindu community also justify the violence erupted like a wildfire after the partition because every person involved in riots had their legitimate reason like Godse, a reason of narroewdness lacking the haumanity. Godse too has some points like Gandhiji was involved in Muslim appeasment. My strong conviction is Gandhiji tried to appease Muslims but he did not try to hurt the sentiments of Hindus. Circumstances went out of hand. Gandhiji's non-violence got a hit during partition because humanity failed. Again it is because of the people like Godse it happened even though he could be corect in his logic.

I also do not agree completely with Gandhiji's ideologies which were inspired by the sanskrit phrase 'Ahimsa Paramo Dharma' but i also accept the next phrase 'Dharma Himsa Tathaiva cha'(Non-violence is the ultimate dharma. So too is violence in service of Dharma.). I revere non violent freedom fighters but also revere equally the great revolutionaries who sacrificed their lives for their motherland. No doubt that our freedom fighters who wanted to get freedom by violent means had a great role in the freedom struggle but the roles of leaders like Mahatma Gandhi, Nehru etc. can not be downgraded.

Jawaharlal Nehru rightly addressed the nation through radio after the assassination:
“Friends and comrades, the light has gone out of our lives, and there is darkness everywhere, and I do not quite know what to tell you or how to say it. Our beloved leader, Bapu as we called him, the father of the nation, is no more. Perhaps I am wrong to say that; nevertheless, we will not see him again, as we have seen him for these many years, we will not run to him for advice or seek solace from him, and that is a terrible blow, not only for me, but for millions and millions in this country.”

It is understandable that Godse didn't understand Gandhiji because of the prevailing circumstances and was led by extreme communal ideologies, but it is unfortunate that educated people like us still debate over the righteousness of a person who killed Truth, Peace and Unity and became the emblem of communalism which has plagued the country even now.
Let's free ourselves from the ghost of Godse forever and revere our great leaders instead of stirring fanatic and irrational communalism.

- Saurabh

"The world suffers a lot. Not because of the violence of bad people, but because of the silence of good people."

Logic v/s Faith

noreply@blogger.com (Saurabh) — Thu, 21 Apr 2011 21:11:00 +0000

There is amazing amount of confusion how logic relates to faith. This question often arises when we challenge the conception of GOD.
Logic is the study of the principles of reasoning, principles governing the validity of arguments basically your intellect whereas faith is a confidence or trust in trustworthiness of a conception, in simple words what you feel at heart which is beyond rationality.
I always believed there are two kinds of people, those who believe in GOD (Theists) and those who do not (Atheist), but then i observed the third kind which surprisingly holds the majority, those who believe in GOD but live as if they do not. They usually vacillate dallying with the superiority of either faith or logic and take the lead in the battle of wits.

Question is, does the existence of one challenge the other, does the one subordinate the other, does the one presuppose the other, which one is greater. Lets ponder on this.

Logic and faith both are powerful enough to bring catastrophes or harmony in the world. Both are two different worlds, quite exclusive to each other. Being humans we are equipped with the rational power and obviously rationalized things are weighed more than the things which are founded only on faith. So which is greater? Well Still tough to decide!!!

Thinking logic alone can gain faith of somebody is like convincing someone that something is beautiful. Lets consider a situation that you visited Rajasthan and actually liked the barren sand dunes in the deserts. Would logic convince your friend that the deserts are beautiful. certainly not. We all love our parents but have your parents ever tried to make you believe how much they love you by logic and reasoning? You just feel the affection of your loved ones and have faith in the same.
Some of the most beautiful things of the world like Love, Care, Beauty and even GOD transcend logic. No one can even think of attempting a logical proof of all this, If one does he will be far from understanding them. These things are perceived by something more than our minds. Can someone claim that watching travel documentaries brings the same excitement as by actually going somewhere and doing some adventure. Accepting the superiority of logic over faith is like making someone taste the sweets by explanations and logic.

Logic even sometimes makes apriori assumptions and tells us to take certain things on faith. We say 'testability is truth' but its again based on faith. Irony is, Its an untestable assumption that testable is true. When Einstein gave his Relativity Theory and claimed that an object travelling with the speed of light will have an infinite mass, many people agreed and hailed him but again this involves a little bit of faith. Faith on him, faith on mathematics. As there is no possible way to detect a case which can prove this.

As per Holy Bible:
"Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what he has done has been done through God."

Fear from truth causes unbelievers to use their intellect in rejecting it. It seems reasoning for doing evil is the consequence and not the cause.

For those who only like to think rationally, existence of GOD, Love, Care and Beauty can never be logically proven to someone who doesn't want to believe it. You cannot get at a clear conception of God by speculation, or by thinking about Him or about what He is in Himself. Lay hold of the clue of His acts, and it leads you straight into His heart. They say GOD exists only in the brains of Humans, I say HE exists in the hearts. Ultimate choices should not only be of mind alone but also of heart. In the world of faith your deepest emotions are your compass to let you navigate through it and consequently these convictions don't need the base of logic .
Well both have their own system of reasoning but In brief logic can not stand without the support of faith instead Faith accompanied by Logic holds universal acceptance.

- Saurabh

"The world suffers a lot. Not because of the violence of bad people,but because of the silence of good people."

EVIL v/s GOD

noreply@blogger.com (Saurabh) — Fri, 15 Apr 2011 18:51:00 +0000

In the philosophy of religion and theology, the coexistence of GOD and evil has gnawed many great thinkers. A chronic philosophical dilemma is to reconcile the existence of evil with the idea of an omnipotent, omnibenevolent and omniscient deity.

They say existence of such a GOD is incompatible with the existence of evil outright. I say God's creation of persons with morally significant free will corroborates HIS diligence.True free will cant exit without the possibility of evil, that suffering is necessary for spiritual growth of Humans.

Time and again tycoons of theology have attempted to draw a parallel between evil and GOD.An example of many such attempts as follows

If an all-powerful and perfectly good god exists, then evil does not.
There is evil in the world.
Therefore, an all-powerful and perfectly good god does not exist.

Later philosophers also added some alluring refinements:

God exists.
God is omnipotent, omniscient, and perfectly good.
A perfectly good being would want to prevent all evils.
An omniscient being knows every way in which evils can come into existence.
An omnipotent being, who knows every way in which an evil can come into existence, has the power to prevent that evil from coming into existence.
A being who knows every way in which an evil can come into existence, who is able to prevent that evil from coming into existence, and who wants to do so, would prevent the existence of that evil.
If there exists an omnipotent, omniscient, and perfectly good being, then no evil exists.
Evil exists (logical contradiction).

They try to show that an assumed hypothesis leads to a logical contradiction so our hypothesis of GOD's existence is erroneous.
  This seems preposterous to me as i reckon GOD and Evil are compatible. This can be best explained in great scientist and philosopher Albert Einstein's words: "Evil does not exist, or at least it does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God. It is just like darkness and cold, a word that man has created to describe the absence of God." How beautifully he explained God did not create evil. Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God's love present in his heart. It's like the cold that comes when there is no heat, or the darkness that comes when there is no light.".
I have a strong conviction that God has taken utmost care in defining the norms of this world. Free will which is the ultimate privilege to make choices free from any constraints has been bestowed upon us. In a simple analogy, like a mother gives freedom to her child to make choices.
  We can conceive a parallel world in which an omnipotent and omniscient God exists and He corrected this abuse of evil by HIS creatures only and consequently free will is absent. A metal beam becomes a straw of grass when used as weapon and air refuses to carry your sound waves if it doesn't contain truth. Air stops to receive any foreign element in it which pollutes it. Seemingly this hypothetical world seems to me prefect but when i fancy myself to be a resident of such a world i feel a suffocation there. God would seem a traitor to me making us to move at the stroke of HIS fingers and obnoxiously enjoying the game. One can never feel the prestige of taking birth and realize the worth of this life. Such a toy world has no value. God would never be so Great in my eyes as HE is now by giving me the "free will".
  Irony is that the coexistence of free will and evil satisfies the conception of compatibilism. Evil is caused by original sin which in turn is caused by free will. Free will could exist without the degree of evil seen in this world and can be accomplished by inducing humans to make more and more just and moral decisions and circumventing the woeful deeds and having faith in the supremacy of insuperable GOD.
  This world and this birth as humans is a gift to us by the almighty. The ultimate honor to the free will bestowed upon us is to be righteous accepting the almighty's supremacy and treating all your brothers equal as "Children of GOD". Lets Honor HIM by being morally strong , incorruptible, invidious to none, pure, just and noble and make HIM feel that HE made no mistake creating this world or at least by giving us FREE WILL.

- Saurabh

"The world suffers a lot. Not because of the violence of bad people,but because of the silence of good people."