Saturday, October 26, 2024
Home Blog Page 798

Two best solutions to Kashmir issue

anadimishra
-
0
Two best solutions to Kashmir issue

1) Simple Solution: (which Pakistan may NOT accept)

i) Currently, nearly Half Kashmir is in India. Another half Kashmir is in Pakistan. So, let’s make this current boundary as an International Boundary forever.

ii) Whosoever feel NOT happy in Indian Kashmir can migrate to Pakistani Kashmir. Also, the vice versa: whosoever feel not happy in Pakistani Kashmir can migrate to Indian Kashmir.

iii) All Indian Kashmiri protesters must get deported from Indian Kashmir to Pakistani Kashmir and Pakistani Government must take responsibility of their Rehabilitation in Pakistani Kashmir.

iv) Similarly, all Pakistani Kashmiri protesters must get deported from Pakistani Kashmir to Indian Kashmir and Indian government must take responsibility and arrangements for their rehabilitation.

2) Complex (but could be the BEST Solution) :

India and Pakistan governments must Sign the following 15 points Treaty along with a BIG Condition.

India will handover Kashmir (excluding Jammu and Ladakh) to Pakistan, If and only if Pakistan gives Pakistani citizenship to all Indian Muslims, and rehabilitate them in Pakistan. Similarly, India must give Indian citizenship to all Pakistani Hindus/Sikhs and help them to come India.

Peaceful Exchange of population has to be done  on the basis of religion in 10 years duration, before the transfer of power of Indian Kashmir to Pakistan.

Anybody who is not ready to get exchanged in the other country, can stay in the same country on permanent visa without any Voting Rights & without any government job.

(like NRI  are staying in Dubai, Saudi Arabia and other gulf countries on Visa)

Reason: Suppose today India handover Kashmir, and tomorrow West Bengal becomes Muslim majority province, and after that majority of Bengali Muslims start demanding Freedom for West Bengal, start militancy to get included in Pakistan. (citing 1947’s Jinnah Philosophy: Muslim majority provinces are part of  Pakistan). And then Pakistan comes in their support as well (like it doing in Kashmir’s case), then.

So, to have permanent peace between India and Pakistan, and for mutual progress, exchange of population based on religion has to be done.

The 15 points procedure as per the Treaty

i) First of all, Indian Muslims asked to settle in Pakistan within period of 10 years & all Pakistani Hindus/Sikhs asked to settle in India within a Period of 10 years.

ii) Whole process must take place peacefully in planned way  in time span of 10 years.

iii) In case of any riots/killing of minorities, India is free to break the treaty and will not handover Indian Kashmir to Pakistan. So, peaceful Hindu/Sikh-Muslim exchange must be done.

iv) Both Governments will arrange Trains, Buses & Flight facilities to the people getting exchanged.

v) Pakistan Military will take Hindu/Sikh families to Wagah Border in their security. Similarly, Indian Military will take Muslim families to Wagah Border in their security.

vi) There shall be a UN delegation and human rights watch together with delegation of Ministers of both countries watching this exchange going into other country.

vii) Pakistan will pay fare of all Indian Muslims traveling from India to Pakistan & India will pay fare of all Pakistani Hindus/Sikhs travelling to India.

viii) Citizenship of all Muslims staying in India will be cancelled & they will start staying on permanent visa without voting Rights. Similarly, citizenship of all Hindus/Sikhs staying in Pakistan will be cancelled & they assumed staying on permanent visa without voting rights.

ix) Also, these visa residents will not get any Government job.

Their situation will be like Indians/Pakistanis staying in Gulf Countries on visa.

x) Muslims can acquire Indian citizenship only if they Convert to any Kafir religion (Hinduism/Sikhism/Buddhism/Jainism).

Similarly, Hindus/Sikh can get Pakistani citizenship only if they accept Islam.

xi) If any Muslim gets married to a Hindu, in that case as well, Muslim will not be getting Indian citizenship, and he/she has to stay on permanent visa.

Their children will get Indian citizenship only if they accept any Kafir religion, else they have to stay on visa lifetime without voting rights.

Similarly, Hindus/Sikhs can’t give votes in Pakistani elections and will never get citizenship.

If any Hindu/Sikh gets married to a Muslim, then also  that Hindu/Sikh have to stay in Pakistan on visa, and their children have to follow Islam to get Pakistani citizenship, else they have to stay on visa lifetime without voting rights.

xii) There shall be no exchange of Christians, because Muslims consider Christians as the People of book, so Pakistan supposed to take charge of Pakistani Christians. Similarly, Indians do not have any problem with Indian Christians, as India born religions (Hinduism, Sikhism, Buddhism, Jainism) are broad minded.

xiii) European countries and America can intervene in case of ill-treatment with Christians in Pakistan.

xiv) After 10 years of population exchange, India will hand-over Kashmir area to Pakistan. After that India will be declared as a Kafir Nation with equal rights to all Kafirs (Non-Muslims).

xv) Jammu, Ladakh and Amarnath area will stay in India. & Pakistan has to give an affidavit that it will never support any separatist group in India. Same, will be applicable with India.

Merits:

a) India will finally get 2nd freedom- 2nd Azaadi- From 800 years old Islāmic Imperialism.

b) Terror attacks will stop in India.

c) Hindus can construct Ram Mandir & can occupy full Krishna Janmbhoomi.

d) India & Pakistan will become friends.

e) Trade and tourism will boost between India and Pakistan.

Remarks:

Small Sacrifice has to be done for the wider interest of country. Increasing Muslim population is a threat for the unity and integrity of India.

Whatsoever secular-gang says, but fact is that Muslim majority state can’t be secular. History tells nations where Muslim became majority, they posed danger to existence of original non-Muslim inhabitants of that land.

In current scenario, neither can we ask Muslims to adopt population control methods, nor they will do so.

Whole world was Pagan, until 500 BC. But, in the name of Christianity and Islam, Pagans got killed, converted or forced to flee.

Muslim Radicals are trying to complete Gazwa-e-Hind from last 1000 years. Already they occupied 50% of original Indian land (Afghanistan+Pakistan+Bangladesh+Kashmir). Now, their strategy is to control rest of India by making it a Muslim Majority state.

Indian born religions (Hinduism, Sikhism, Buddhism, Jainism) and Indian refugee religions (Parsi, Bahai) will suffer and will be on the verge of Extinction in a Muslim majority India.

So, for saving the existence of Hinduism, Sikhism, Buddhism, Jainism, Parsi, Bahai; it is necessary to deport Muslims to Pakistan and allow remaining Muslims to live in India on visa with condition that they will adopt population control methods.

Hinduism is not separate from secularism: Here is how

natarajan
-
0
Hinduism is not separate from secularism: Here is how

There is much trepidation among certain section of Indian liberals that we are creeping into the kind of religious intolerance that we see in Pakistan. With BJP at the helm in center, they claim that secularism is under threat. TV channels debate this ad nauseum and what is lost in the noise is an honest and open debate on secularism itself.

The modern concept of secularism is of western origin. In particular it came out of the French revolution in the late 18th century. There was a particular backdrop to that. France as much of European states had two power centers that constantly vied with each other while simultaneously ignoring the need of the people. The two power centers were the Monarchy and Vatican/Church. With “democracy” the monarchy had to take a back seat. The idea of secularism was to keep the church away from the realm of governance so that they would focus on religion and spirituality alone.

This definition of secularism does not readily apply in the Indian context. If you replace Church with Temple, there is no historical basis for separating government with “Temple”. Unlike in Chrisitanity, Hinduism is not an organized religion. Catholic religion is organized like a corporate world with the Pope acting as the CEO. He commands over the entire Catholic church organization with its layers of senior execs and mid-level managers.

Hinduism has no such supreme religious leader. There are a few Shankracharyas but they do not have any influence outside their Matt. Historically too, temple has not played much role in the matter of governance. Individual Brahmins have played the role of advisors to a King, but it was based on their individual merit, rather than as an appointee from say Haridwar, or Tirupati etc. In any case, since India went into Islamic rule and then British rule for over a 1000 year, the temple really had no say in the matter of governance. In summary influence of temple in matter of governance is irrelevant both historically as well as in current situation.

In India, secularism as we know it, was first introduced by Nehru. He had his own romantic idea of secularism that he wanted to overlay on India. Though he was not a historian by any stretch of imagination, he penned “Discovery of India” in which he characterized Harappa civilization as a secular society. It is not clear how he arrived at this conclusion as you do not see presence of multiple religion or strong influence of organized religion in governance during that time. But Nehru went on to imagine this secularism and extended it to the India of 1947. Dr. Ambedkar who was smarter than Nehru refused to buy into Nehru’s interpretation of secularism and refused to incorporate it into the constitution.

While Nehru started this ridiculous idea, his daughter took it to the next level which was to use it for vote-bank politics. Since Indira Gandhi was the underdog when she took over after Shastri’s death, she chose to develop a Muslim vote bank and linked into secularism. Later with the Shah Bano case, Rajiv Gandhi completely changed the meaning of secularism to Muslim appeasement. Sonia Gandhi completed this caricature of secularism by equating it to jihadi appeasement. This explains her extreme anguish over Batla house encounter where hard-core terrorists were killed after an intense gun battle.

While the idea of secularism – be it the French or the Nehruvian definition – may be alien to the Indian context, the idea of mutual respect has always been part of Indian ethos – or more specifically the Hindu ethos. Since ancient times, India has been a land of multiple religion and sects that has co-existed very peacefully. It is not uncommon in a typical Hindu family where father venerates Ganapati, son venerates Hanuman, and mother venerates Durga – that is in the same family we have Shaivik and Vaishanavik followers. You will not find this situation in a Christian family where father and mother are Catholics and Son is a protestant.

In fact even within Catholicism, they might subscribe to only “Methodist” Church and not any other church denomination. Same goes for a Muslim family too – you will not find a Sunni and Shia in the same family. In Hinduism, the different streams of religion are not viewed as antagonistic to each other. Any difference if any, is a matter of intellectual debate rather than a matter of conflict. Infact, a Shaivik person can simultaneously be a Vaishnavik person for an occasion or so. That is why someone who is a Ram-bhakt has no problem visiting Balaji temple in Tirupati.  In fact, he even takes it a step further and occasionally visits a Gurudwara or a Jain temple.

This is the secularism that we practice in India. It is not a gift from France or Nehru. It is who we are and its origin is the Hindu ethos. This Hindu ethos is what we call Hindutva. Thus Hindutva is the basis of Indian secularism.

The Kashmir Game: It’s India’s Turn

youindians
-
0
The Kashmir Game: It’s India’s Turn

Disclaimer: The article refers to the Indian Army, BSF, CRPF and J&K Police as the ‘Indian Security Forces’. I respect the role, responsibility and jurisdiction of each organization in protecting the territorial integrity of India.

There has been no peace with Pakistan until now. There will be no peace in the foreseeable future. There will be only strategies and counter strategies. If India retaliates aggressively against cross border violations and cancels talks, Pakistan will cultivate its proxies – Terrorists and Stone Pelters AKA Over Ground Workers (OGW) – to twist India’s arm. Now it’s India’s Turn to counter Pakistan.

Recently, Goa CM and former Defense Minister Manohar Parrikar was quoted by the media as saying, “It is not easy to resolve the Kashmir issue. There is a need for a long-term policy to resolve the Kashmir issue.”

Three policies of the BJP government have resulted in the stone pelting farce in the Kashmir Valley

  • Kashmir is a bilateral issue between Pakistan and India. No third party, especially Hurriyat Conference, can participate in the same.
  • Talks and Terrorism cannot go together. Pakistan must stop cross border violations and terrorism before any talks can take place. Any talks till then will be only on Terrorism.  
  • The Indian Security Forces will be given a free hand to deal with Cross Border violations by the Pakistan Army.

Both Pakistan and Hurriyat have retaliated by funding stone pelting mobs for the following reasons:

  • Pressure India to talk to Pakistan
  • Pressure India to recognize Hurriyat as a legitimate party to the Kashmir issue
  • Pakistan cannot take on India one-on-one in a conference room or in a battlefield

It was great to see India take a stand and cancel talks with Pakistan over the participation of the Hurriyat. It was also music to our ears when the Indian Security Forces retaliated like never before against Pakistan Army’s cross border violations. And the icing on the cake or perhaps the whole cake, two words – SURGICAL STRIKES.

But more recently, the Indian Security Forces has been seen only carrying out encounters or tackling OGW of the Terrorists.

I propose the single addendum to the above policies to retaliate against Pakistan and the Hurriyat:

  • The Indian Security Forces will force the Pakistan army to engage directly with it

The Indian Security Forces must retaliate against Pakistan at the slightest provocation. The LOC should heat up if India’s territorial integrity is being questioned.

By forcing the Pakistan army to engage directly with the Indian Security Forces, four objectives are achieved:

  1. Pakistan will also suffer the consequences: Till now, terrorists and OGW have suffered the consequences. Pakistan Army’s brilliant ‘jihad’ strategy avoids a confrontation with the powerful Indian Security Forces. ‘Jihad’ is also low cost as it comprises anyone with a gun or a stone. ‘Jihad’ also allows Pakistan to enter into territories of other countries to wage war. But what if, for example:
  • The Indian Security Forces blew up 5 Pakistan army posts across the border in retaliation for the video showing OGW heckling, kicking and slapping our security forces.
  • The Indian Security Forces blew up 15 Pakistan army posts in retaliation for the OGW disrupting the Kashmir by polls.
  • The Indian Security Forces blew up x Pakistan army posts in retaliation for y
  • Other provocations include ‘misguided youth’ holding Pakistan and ISIS flags, terrorists threatening locals and policemen, etc

2. Establish a connection between Pakistan, Hurriyat, Terrorists and OGW: For example:

  • During an encounter, the Indian Security Forces should always attack on two fronts: Encounter site and LOC. The LOC will be lit up until the encounter is completed or the terrorists surrender.
  • When facing a stone pelting mob, the Indian Security Forces will use restraint. It will also  fire at Pakistan army posts at the LOC. Similarly, the LOC will be lit up until the stone pelting mob disperses or surrenders.
  • This dual attack will establish India’s position that Pakistan is fomenting terror in the region and creating unrest in the valley.

3. Indian Security Forces will have a smaller Bull’s Eye: The Indian Security Forces is not only a target of Pakistan. The Aman Ki Asha gang in both countries which include Politicians, Media and JNU types also attack or try to shackle our Jawans. Pakistan is using OGW to provoke the Indian Security Forces to retaliate. A few blinded or dead OGW will bear fruit for Pakistan at International forums or for our Aman Ki Asha gang here in Indian Media studios. But if the Indian Security Forces focus more on the LOC and less on terrorists and OGW during encounters or stone pelting dramas, the enemy’s plan will fall apart.

4. The World will be forced to sit up and listen to India: The World must also answer for the dangerous game it is playing by arming a rogue country like Pakistan or supporting her in International forums. Until now, India has retrained herself to avoid any escalation between the two ‘nuclear armed rivals.’ A rival should be a worthy opponent which Pakistan is not. But if India starts to heat up the LOC, engaging the Pakistan army at every little provocation, the World will take notice. India can then force the World to sit next to India instead of ‘mediate’ between Pakistan and India.

Pakistan will remind India that it is not weak and will retaliate against India’s aggression. Peaceniks in both countries will highlight the heavy human cost to military conflict and that only dialogue will bring peace between the two countries. Both Pakistan and Peaceniks will bring in the ‘nuclear’ angle. We saw the nuclear destruction Pakistan caused after the surgical strikes.

Human cost is inevitable until India can build International consensus that Pakistan is the Terror Factory of the World and needs to be shackled. India alone declaring Pakistan a Terror State will have little consequence because it does not affect the proxies from pelting stones or killing our Jawans . It is an option but will not not necessarily lead to other countries declaring the same. Remember – Kashmir is a Bilateral issue.

A Final Word – Various ‘Rules’, Bilateral Agreements or International Laws will have to be reviewed before considering the above. Aman Ki Asha gang will surely remind India to set higher moral standards. But I am certain that our enemies are bound by no such restrictions. It is time to unshackle the beast so that the World understands India’s position that Pakistan is the Terror Factory of the World and that only India is pulverizing the real threat to World peace and stability. And more importantly – It’s India’s Turn to give it back. 

Will Dr Kumar Vishwas stand by his friend Sonu Nigam?

NR Nigam
-
0
Will Dr Kumar Vishwas stand by his friend Sonu Nigam?

AAP leader and poet Dr Kumar Vishwas is very different from other popular AAP leaders. Twice this year he has gone against the grain and expressed views which were out of sync with other AAP leaders and official party line. First he posted a YouTube video taking on film maker Sanjay Leela Bhansali for portraying Rani Padmawati romancing Alauddin Khilji. In the same video, he also urged youth to learn about India’s glorious heritage by visiting places of historical importance rather than going abroad on vacations. In another video uploaded earlier this week, he talked about importance of keeping national interest above petty politics. Both videos were received very well by people and went viral.

Shortly after posting the second video, when Dr Kumar Vishwas was busy acknowledging high acclaims from viewers, another controversy was brewing. On 17th April morning, in a series of tweets Singer Sonu Nigam complained about the noise of loudspeakers coming from religious places. Sonu Nigam started with giving the example of early morning Azaans and went on to make the similar complaint about Gurudwaras and temples also. But the liberal group specifically picked up the reference to Azaan and went on overdrive to troll him. Even a fatwa was issued by a Maulvi for shaving his head.

Why is Kumar Vishwas important here? Let me take you back to April 2015 when AAP had formed government in Delhi and were on the rise. In an AAP rally a farmer Gajender Singh was threatening to commit suicide and while doing so he accidentally lost his balance and got killed. Zee News published a video which hinted as if it was pre-planned stunt. The video seemed poorly doctored and implied as if Dr Vishwas was jokingly asking people around-‘Latak Gaya?’ (Has he hanged himself?)

Sonu Nigam took a stand on media hit job and expressed his support for Dr Vishwas by posting following tweet.

https://twitter.com/sonunigam/status/592425915356839936

After this tweet, news came that Zee news banned Sonu Nigam and replaced him from its future albums. Dr Kumar Vishwas lost no time in applauding courage shown by Sonu Nigam and tweeted with hashtag #IStandWithSonuNigam He even challenged ‘Freedom of Expression’ warriors to come out.

A similar script is playing today but with some twist. Sonu Nigam is being attacked by liberals and fundamentalists for raising a brave issue but Dr Vishwas is not there to support his courageous friend. Forget support, Dr Vishwas even posted a sly tweet on the topic implying people are wasting our time discussing issues like ‘Azaan’ etc.

Meanwhile Sonu Nigam fought the trolls (with most RW supporting him) and gave back to them not bowing down and even outwitted the Maulvi who declared fatwa. Only after that Dr Kumar Vishwas posted some tweet which were about specific event of Sonu Nigam shaving off his head. But we are yet to see anything on the core issue from Dr Vishwas. Isn’t it the time for Dr Vishwas to stand by same Sonu Nigam who stood by him? Knowing that Dr Vishwas often dares to go against the party line, we are still hopeful that he will not desert a good and courageous friend.

By the way Sonu Nigam hasnt changed. He is the same courageous man who took a stand for Vishwas 2 years back. He is the same man who spoke up against noise and litter during Ganapati Visarjan 3 years back.

Reform the UPSC Civil Service Exam format

Sahil Jain
-
0
Reform the UPSC Civil Service Exam format

Everybody knows about the utility of Civil Services in running a country. An able, efficient and modern civil service force is the new requirement of our times. However, all the adjectives mentioned here are grossly missing in our system. The situation has come to such an extent that government itself is suspending many All-India Services officers in ‘public interest’. This should have, and I guess already has, rung alarm bells for its complete revamp. We are already very late in this regard. The administrative system, along with the recruitment process, should have been revised right after liberalisation of the economy in 1991. As it did not happen, we are now witnessing its deleterious effects in the form of delayed projects, cost overruns, corruption, abuse of power, nepotism, lack of innovation and so on.

Coming directly to the recruitment process, the Government of India formed a committee in August, 2015 for revising the entire pattern of this exam. Unlike numerous previous committees that the government formed, whose recommendations were either ignored or implemented poorly, this one headed by Mr.B.S.Baswan was unique given its composition and wide-ranging Terms Of Reference. It seemed like the government was committed to ‘modernise’ the outdated pattern. Even after receiving the recommendations on August, 2016, the government has not done anything with it till now. Numerous RTI’s have been filed with DoPT, asking it to either make the contents of the report public or say when will it implement the same.

Aspirants who prepare for the exam have been protesting for a long time demanding ‘compensatory attempts’ to appear in the examination once again. Point to be noted here is that one reason, among many,  the government formed this committee was because the previous pattern was discriminatory against Humanities background students and clearly favoured those with technical backgrounds. Other reasons include non-transparency, arbitrary evaluation, delay in completion of exam, lack of technology utilisation in the conduct of exam and a host of other issues raised by the aspirants. Students with non-technical background could not qualify for the exam, and in the process lost their attempts one after the other (DoPT, until 2013 provided 4 attempts to write the exam, now it provides 6, that too after protests).

The silence of the government on this committee’s report has confused many, because aspirants were anticipating some changes in this year’s exam. Such silence raises only two concerns:either the government is not doing anything on the report or is planning something big, maybe an overall administrative reform given the way numerous civil servants have been fired recently. Elections could have prevented the government from taking a decision in this regard. However, only time will tell what actually happens to the report.

How so-called liberals are no better than trolls

D. Sathyanarayanan
-
0
How so-called liberals are no better than trolls

In Snyder v. Phelps, 562 U.S. 443 (2011), the Supreme Court of US ruled that WestBoro Church had a right to abuse a family of a U.S. Marine Lance Corporal Matthew A. Snyder who died in action in Iraq because his parents happen to be Gay. The Question was whether someone had a right to intentionally inflict somebody an emotional distress under the rights given by First Amendment. The protesters had issues with the increasing tolerance towards homosexuality in the US. They raised slogans like “you are going to hell”, “God Hates you”, “Fag Troops” etc.,

To me this is an extreme form of application of Profanity in expressing political dissent against a norm which one thinks that in his opinion is wrong or inappropriate. For a similar case in India one would be convicted for inciting violence under Indian laws. Since the liberals have this uncanny habit of falling back to US to justify their shenanigans against their political opponents, I have just quoted the example of Westboro Church.

In the recently concluded US Presidential Elections Republican Candidate and the Current President Trump was called with all kinds of names by the liberal brigade. Robert de Niro described Trump as “he is a punk”, “he is a dog”, “he is a pig”, “he is a con”, “he is a bullshit artist”, “a moth”, “he is an idiot” “I want to punch him in the face” and the list goes on. I am not even going to the question of whether it is right or wrong, but I am only saying that Profanity is inevitable in expressing dissent.

When you have an extreme dislike or hatred towards an idea, person or a political party it is natural for you to resort to profanity to express your dissent. And especially if it is used against someone who is a habitual user of the very profanity against his/her opponents he/she shall have no right to question or complain about its usage on him/her.

Rajdeep Sardesai – a TV Anchor called went to cover PM. Narendra Modi’s visit to US in 2014-2015, had punched a Modi’s supporter in the face and called him an Asshole. Even an erudite person like Mr. Sardesai thought that it is appropriate to use profanity to express his dissent.

Profanity has different contexts. Corruption is a form of profanity. Peddling lies in the name of scholarship and journalism is profanity. Pimping and prostitution in the name of Journalism too is profanity. One should listen to Radia Tapes, the enlightened conversation between two prostitutes if you are looking for a definition of Prostitution.

Freedom of Expression is a two-way street; it is not the property of pampered brats in English media. Dignity and decency is only for dignified and decent. For decades, the compromised & sold out journalists through their mega phones peddled lies as truth and the news consumer had taken them at its face value.

It is only since recently these consumers are asking some questions because they think that they too have a mega phone (Social Media) and they can question about what is being fed to them as news. Now, the prostitutes & pimps are labeling those asking questions as Trolls is a cruel joke. It is time for them to swallow their own shit.

Gautam Gambhir controversy: Freedom of expression- A one way traffic

Kachra Seth
-
0
Gautam Gambhir controversy: Freedom of expression- A one way traffic

Recently, a video showing “misguided” Kashmiri youth slapping and kicking a CRPF soldier generated a lot of outrage online. Every Indian Nationalist was brimming with extreme rage. See, how I emphasized on the word Nationalist. There is a reason behind it.

Firstly, I am not one of the extremists who randomly throws ‘Anti-National’ tags at people. But, sometimes their twisted logics, convoluted answers and selective outrage makes me question their nationalist credentials or rather completely deny its existence. They are so engrossed in spreading their propaganda that they will stoop down to any level of irrationality. And, somebody please educate them about the difference between dissent and sedition. They keep on mixing these two.

So, when Gautam Gambhir laid his sight on this video, even he, obviously couldn’t stop his rage. He tweeted a very stern message to ‘Anti-nationals’.

However, the “liberal” section of media fraternity was kind of offended by this tweet. Since, this message was directed at one’s, whom they very fondly sympathize with and call merely “misguided” youths, their reaction was understandable. However, their logic and stance has never been.

The likes of Sagarika Ghose & Rana Ayyub thrashed Gautam Gambhir’s tweet and advocated that Gautam Gambhir be booked for sedition for his interpretation of National Flag. This is the same gang which raised their voices when Kanhaiya kumar and Umar khalid were being booked for sedition. It looks like that, “Bharat ke tukde honge hazaar” is just dissent for them but giving one’s interpretation of National Flag is grossly unacceptable to them. Either that, or they just want to muzzle down any voice that hinders their propaganda.

Even, Rajdeep Sardesai of ‘2002’ fame “forgot” to condemn the attack on CRPF but was quick to condemn the retaliation act of Army. If this does not expose their hypocrisy, I don’t know what will.

These left-leaning liberal gang all ganged up on Gautam Gambhir and demanded, he be booked for sedition and sent to jail. However, this is the same gang which applauded Gautam Gambhir when he advocated freedom of speech for Gurmehar kaur. They went all aggressively persuasive to “restore” her freedom of speech. Gautam Gambhir was on that side of debate that time: The saviours of freedom of speech. Isn’t it too much irony that Gautam Gambhir, an avid supporter of freedom of speech has himself been denied his right to freedom of speech by the same lobby? Isn’t it ironical that Gautam Gambhir who fought against “trollers” for Gurmehar Kaur is himself extensively trolled by liberals now? Isn’t it too much hypocrisy? Isn’t it too much saddening? Isn’t it too much alarming? Isn’t it too dogmatic? Isn’t too implausible?

All in all, examining all the facades of left liberal media, it can be concluded that freedom of speech is an entitlement exclusive to specific lobby and they also hold the right to defend anything irrational or polemic under the garb of freedom of speech. They also have the right to bring freedom of speech in any debate as per their convenience & our negligence.

Dictatorship cannot be imposed in the name of Gandhism

ankurchandra
-
0
Dictatorship cannot be imposed in the name of Gandhism

No law ever made by British, during their colonial rule of India, was as draconian as Nitish Kumar’s Bihar prohibition law. Kumar talks about upholding Gandhian principles. Non-violence is the most important of Gandhian principles. Non-violence essentially means not imposing anything on the other through the use of force. Gandhiji therefore was against use of any type of force against the British government. One can argue that Gandhi in his writings in the 1920s and 1930s argued for imposition of strict prohibition in India. But what Gandhi argued in 1920s cannot be imposed on Indians in 2017 in the name of Gandhism.

Gandhi also was against large scale industrialization and protection of small-scale industries. After independence the Indian government followed this economic policy of Gandhi. Hundreds of sectors were reserved for the small-scale industries. The result was that large scale of operations could not be achieved in these sectors. In the absence of large scale operations, efficiency and productivity could not be increased. Wages of those working in these sectors remained low because of low efficiency & productivity. It was in 1991 that India finally realized the huge negative impact of this Gandhian policy on the working class. The policy was ultimately given up by the Indian government. Since then the efficiency, productivity and wages of laborers employed in these sectors have steadily gone up.

Gandhi was against Gandhism

Gandhi is not alive today. If he were; he might have changed his views on many things, including prohibition. One of the things that make Gandhi great is his remarkable ability to change his positions and conclusions in the face of new facts. He was against creating an –ism in the form of Gandhism. He wrote, “There is no such thing as Gandhism. I am against creating any sect or creed in the name of Gandhism. The opinions that I have formed today are not final. I may change them tomorrow.”

A citizen should have the right to disagree with Gandhi

The great Bhimrao Ambedkar often disagreed with many views of Gandhi. Indian citizens should have the right and freedom to disagree with Gandhian principles. Those who follow Gandhian principles have no right to impose their views on those who disagree with Gandhian principles. Imposition is the essential tenet of non-violence, which was the most important belief of Gandhi. Gandhi is respected and admired world over not for his views on technology or prohibition. He is admired for his views on non-violence.

Kumar’s prohibition law is the most blatant use of force to impose prohibition of alcohol on the people of Bihar. If Kumar really believes in Gandhian values then he should immediately end prohibition of alcohol in Bihar and repeal the draconian law. If he feels that alcohol is not good for people of his state then he can follow a non-violent approach of trying to convince the alcohol drinkers of his state to give up alcohol. He can do this through extensive government sponsored social awareness campaigns about the harmful effects of alcohol. If people voluntarily give up alcohol (just like British voluntary gave up their rule because of Gandhi’s sustained non-violent movement) because of these campaigns, alcohol shops in the state would voluntarily shut down in the face of inadequate demand. That is the non-violent Gandhian way to go; Kumar sadly has opted for the violent, non-Gandhian, ISIS-like way to prohibit alcohol.

Economic consequences of prohibition

India’s unemployment rate is currently at 9.2% – among the highest in the world. According to data from India Spend, Bihar’s unemployment rate at 17.8%, is higher than the national average. The biggest challenge before the country is to provide employment to its young population. According to data from Ministry of Labor, 1 million people join India’s labor force every month. With increased automation and use of technology in manufacturing, job growth in manufacturing sector has gone down. In such a scenario the restaurant & bar industry is a big source of employment for India’s young population. This is a labor intensive sector where the use of human beings cannot easily be replaced by technology or robots.

Bihar and some other state governments are trying to curb this industry in the name of controlling (or prohibiting) consumption of alcohol. Bars are restaurants where alcohol is served. A major problem in India is that many, who are employed, are in low-paying jobs. Bars provide relatively better-paying jobs because those waiting on tables in these bars get supplementary income from the tips given by customers. So controlling the number of bars is equivalent to limiting some well-paying jobs for the poor.

The state government of Delhi abruptly stopped giving new licenses to bars in the excise year that just ended on 31st March, 2017. It gave the reason that there were enough bars and alcohol shops to meet the existing demand. This reason is baseless. There is no way the government can assess the demand for alcohol. This baseless reason implies that the Delhi government will give new licenses only when there is shortage of alcohol. Demand and supply assessments should be left to the forces of the market. If the supply of alcohol is more than its demand in Delhi then some bars and liquor shops will automatically shut down. This decision also benefits those bars and liquor shops that already have licenses. It reeks of bias towards existing players. It serves to reduce competition in the market and hurt consumers. A newly opened bar in a posh market of Delhi with millions in investment lies idle because the Delhi government has refused to give it license to serve alcohol. The newly hired employees have been laid off until the place manages to get a license.

Delhi government also said that another reason because of which it decided to not issue new licenses in the year is that many resident welfare associations in the city complained that liquor shops in their neighborhoods create law & order problem. There is no evidence that having a liquor shop or bar in a neighborhood creates any law & order problem. Some of the localities in Delhi with highest densities of liquor shops or bars (Khan Market, Defense Colony etc) are among the most peaceful neighborhoods of the city. What creates real law & order problem is when people are left unemployed. Unemployed people tend to resort to crimes like kidnapping, stealing etc. Crime went down in many parts of India as more jobs were created after the economic liberalization of 1991. Middle class people also do not want the poor to live near their homes. Just because a few resident welfare associations demand something, it cannot be valid reason to cater to that demand.

Constitution cannot be used as an excuse to impose blanket prohibitions and bans

Politicians take the excuse of directive principles of state policy given in the constitution when they want to impose prohibition. The Constitution clearly states that directive principles of state policy do not have mandatorily to be followed. The Constitution makers were of the view that the constitution needs to be amended with changing times and realities. That is why they gave the provision of constitutional amendment. If they did not want the constitution to be changed ever, they would not have given the provision of constitutional amendment.

Retired Supreme Court Judge, Justice Markandey Katju, argues that if the constitution makers wanted prohibition on alcohol, they would have prohibited alcohol right away in the Constitution. They would not have written in constitution, “That the state should endeavor to bring about prohibition of consumption of intoxicating drinks and drugs that are harmful to the health.” By using the term “endeavor” the Constitution makers imply that the State should not encourage consumption of intoxicating drinks, Katju says. By imposing heavy taxes on alcohol, Indian federal & state governments are already discouraging consumption of alcohol.

A government cannot take employment of people without first providing alternative and equally well-paying employment

The decision of Bihar government to prohibit alcohol has left thousands, who worked in liquor shops or bars, unemployed overnight. In a state where jobs are already so few in number, the government of Bihar should have first provided alternative and equally well-paying jobs before implementing the prohibition decision.

Right to livelihood is a part of right to live. Right to life is a fundamental right guaranteed in the constitution. The governments of Bihar, Delhi etc are violating a fundamental right in the name of upholding a directive principle of state policy. Recently, one of the grounds on which the Supreme Court turned down the dance bar ban in Mumbai is that it violated the right to livelihood of bar dancers. Politicians in India are showing a tendency of repeatedly violating the right to livelihood of citizens.

Setback to tourism

Tourism is an industry that generates maximum amount of employment. Limiting bars or prohibiting the consumption of alcohol has a very bad effect on tourism at a place. This can be seen from the case of Kerala. Kerala implemented a restricted prohibition policy in 2013. Since then growth rate in tourism has come down in each year. India should learn from Thailand. By giving a boost to tourism through liberal social policies, Thailand has managed to bring down its unemployment to less than .5% – among the lowest in the world.

World over economists are of the view that prohibiting intoxicants and narcotic substances leads to mafia and criminal gangs controlling the prohibited business. That is why the movement for legalizing narcotic substances is gaining ground. By prohibiting or curbing alcohol consumption, state governments in India are paving way for increased criminalization and future law & order problems.

Prohibition may be Nitish Kumar’s strategic masterstroke

Some may argue that Nitish Kumar’s intentions behind prohibition law are good. One can remind these people Joseph Schumpeter’s words: “The road to totalitarian tyranny is paved with good intentions.”

On a closer look, however, one can see that the intent behind Kumar’s new-found passion for prohibition may not be so altruistic after all. It may be more political. Nitish eagerly wants to become the Prime Minister of India. He tried for the PM post in 2014 but could not survive the Modi wave then. After Akhilesh Yadav’s loss to BJP in UP, Nitish expects to become the PM candidate of a coalition of all non-NDA parties in 2019; a coalition, like the one, in 2016 Bihar elections. Now Nitish may find it difficult to challenge Modi on development record. So his strategic gambit may be prohibition of alcohol.

After imposing prohibition in Bihar, he is asking BJP ruled states to impose prohibition. Two BJP CMs, Shivraj Singh and Raman Singh, have already fallen in Nitish’s trap. Nitish knows that the biggest supporter of BJP is the educated, urban middle class. This class wants no curtailment of individual freedom, like the freedom to decide what to drink or eat or wear. BJP will alienate its huge middle class vote base by taking a pro-prohibition. Most of the voters of this class will then get discouraged by BJP and they may not go out to vote in 2019 elections in full numbers. A major reason why BJP has done so well in the recent elections is that the urban middle class voter went out to vote for it in large numbers. Nitish wants to erode this advantage of BJP. The pro-prohibition stand will also slow down the expansion momentum in states of South and North-East that BJP has gained recently.

He aims to consolidate anti-BJP votes by making a grand coalition of opposition parties; and he wants to dissipate and divide BJP’s solid middle class vote base by making it take a pro- prohibition stand. By making prohibition an issue, Nitish will also take attention from all talk of economic development, in 2019.  He has successfully managed to do so in Bihar. Nobody any more talks about development in Bihar; all talk is about prohibition.

In recent UP elections BJP alliance got 42% of the votes, SP 22% of the votes , BSP 22% and Congress 6% . The sum of the percentage of votes polled by SP, BSP and Congress is greater than that polled by BJP led NDA alliance in UP. Nitish’s winning formula is that with his grand alliance and BJP scaring away its middle class voters through prohibition, his becoming PM in 2019 looks almost a certainty.

I am a Kashmiri Pandit and why I don’t want to go back to Kashmir now

Rakesh Roshan Bhat
-
0
I am a Kashmiri Pandit and why I don’t want to go back to Kashmir now

I am a Kashmiri Pandit and I don’t want to go back to Kashmir now. To hell with Kashmir and to hell with those who turned it into hell. Yes, I am saying this after yearning, praying and hoping for 30 years in forced exile that God will pave way for our return one day. But I don’t want to now, even if God tells me so.

Looking at the videos that have surfaced in the past few days, It looks like Kashmiri Muslims have turned into Zombies. All their brains are capable of doing now is to pick up and throw stones. They have lost all the power of reason. I remember a saying I had heard in childhood. It said, “Kashmiri Muslims have their brains in their knees”. I think the DNA mutation has pushed it further below.

And, Pakistan should take a bow. Their Kashmir policy strategists should be complimented for the successful implementation of their plan. They persisted with it for 30 years and it is bearing very tangible results now. When they started in late 80’s, they picked up the traditional methods of insurgency. They trained Kashmiri Muslim youth in Pakistan and geared them up for an armed struggle. India was successful to some extent to bring that in control in a decade or so. Make no mistake; it was only because of Indian army and not due to any political interventions.

Kashmiri Muslims were also fatigued and had seen the futility of it all. They had started concentrating on their livelihoods and tourism was picking up. But then the very agile thinking strategists on the other side changed the strategy. Armed struggle had not given them legitimacy internationally. They introduced Intifada in Kashmir and see how well they have implemented it. They now have power to bring everything to stand still. This was not possible with guns. People would carry on with their work, even if there was a shoot-out in some area. But today, they are holding everyone to ransom and our forces are bearing the brunt on the ground.

And, what did India do all this while? Slept over it!

And, why? Because our incompetent, lethargic, corrupt and self centered politicians never had a strategy to counter Pakistan. They didn’t even have a strategy to deal with the stooges of Pakistan in Kashmir. Pakistan carried a consistent policy for Kashmir across governments and political parties, even at the time of military rule. But, in India, there were contradicting views and plans all throughout. Every tall political figure and every political party experimented in their own stupid way. This includes everyone; Rajiv Gandhi, Vajpayee, Man Mohan Singh at center and Sayeed’s and Abdullah’s in Kashmir; BJP and Congress at center and NC, PDP in Kashmir. Shame! Shame! Shame!

When we left our homes and hearths, we were hoping that the great Indian nation would be able to set everything right in a matter of a few months or a couple of years. It is now around 30 years and still counting.

These mainstream political parties (national and regional) and their leaders have failed all Kashmiris big time. They have turned Muslims into Zombies and Pandits into Nomads.

It is the people who make a place Hell or Heaven. Kashmir is no more Heaven on earth. It is for a reason that people today would prefer to visit places with lesser natural beauty than Kashmir. And, the reason is the native people of that place. This Kashmir is not the Kashmir of my childhood, the memories of which I carried all throughout. It is a hell and I don’t want to go back to hell.

I always prayed for our return. I will now pray for the destruction of everyone responsible for turning it into hell, irrespective of whether the person is from that side or this side

Rakesh Roshan Bhat (RRB)

An open letter to the CEO of Snapchat

Anjali Sharma
-
0
An open letter to the CEO of Snapchat

Dear Mr. CEO,

Apparently, you think India is a poor country, and Indians are poor. I won’t give you precedents on how we are anything but, because there have been numerous articles on that already ever since your alleged statements made the news. Of course, you being a busy person- busy because there haven’t been any statement from you since those allegations, yet- you don’t need to go through the redundant process of reading all those articles. Start with Snapchat App Store reviews. When you’re done, go ahead and read Snapchat’s Play Store reviews. And while you’re at it, please excuse our French, we Indians are known for taking things a tad bit too far, but hey we’re poor, right?

I won’t ask you to apologize either. Partly, because you will do it anyway. First you will deny it, and then you will apologize “nonetheless” for hurting the feelings of the people of India. Then, you will throw in a few demonstrative, cuddly statements like how you are “proud” of your Indian users, and how “majestic” India is. I am also sure you will be forgiven soon. I mean, if United can get away with it in its own country, you can definitely get away with an apology in a foreign country. Scratch that. A poor foreign country.

You may then try to emphasize how these were just allegations made by a disgruntled former employee. And an allegation should be treated just that – an allegation. In fact, that was my first reaction too, that it’s just an allegation. But then came the silence. Silence louder than any sound. And then it occurred to me- there might actually be some truth to it after all. Now, now, Mr. CEO, I may be poor but I know these statements came at the beginning of this week. Much before the Easter holiday long weekend began.

Here’s what I am curious about though. What I really want to know is, are the people working for Snapchat of the same opinion as your’s, that is, India is a poor country worthless for an app like Snapchat? If not, should they be working for you? Rather, should you still be the CEO despite the lack of connect between you and your employees?

If, however, your employees too endorse your views- and I won’t be surprised if they do – here’s what you should do:

  • Block the app’s availability in India ASAP. There should be no way we poor creatures be allowed to download your app.
  • Disclose the number of Snapchat accounts active in India.
  • Disclose the amount of profit Snapchat earned by advertising in India.
  • Donate money equal to that profit earned for the welfare of poor in India. Hey, you wouldn’t want poor people’s money, no?
  • Take a vow to never have any business interests in India in the future.
  • Lastly, Mr. CEO, travel. Please, travel. Visit places. Go tour the world. Expand your horizons. If there’s someone who needs it the most, it’s you.
    Have an enlightened trip.

Sincerely,

Anjali Sharma

P.S.: Notice how I didn’t care to search for your full name, and just addressed you plainly as Mr. CEO? Yeah, that was deliberate.

1...797798799...890Page 798 of 890

Contact: [email protected]

About us

User generated chapter of OpIndia. Selected articles submitted here are published at main English or Hindi websites of OpIndia.

ऑपइंडिया

OpIndia

© OpIndia.com