EDUCATION AND POLITICS - POLES APART

It has been a queer enigma every time I have sat down to think about it. I am certain that its not only me, but almost every educated individual who has thought about it, felt strongly about it, wanted to take action about it and then gradually forgotten about it; ofcourse barring a few who have taken steps to change the situation, but have either miserably failed to create an impact or have just lost thier significance in works which are never highlighted in the media and fail to grab public attention. The crux is that, we as "educated" individuals, have got all the time to crib about situations, but have rarely found ways to change them.



I tend to remember a very intriguing line somewhere a long time back. It said that "All men desire peace, but very few desire those things that really bring peace". So true as it is, I find myself in a very similar state right now. The question I raise here is that "Why Politics and Education always seem to be running a race in completely opposite directions?"



Why the hell do we, I again quote, "educated" individuals, always run away from politics? We always want the government to behave the way we want it to, but if we just introspect a bit, what have we at all done to make sure that the governmets atleast hear what we need and want out of them. Do we really expect them to come to our doorsteps and ask things? I know they make promises which they never fulfill, but how many times have we punished them for not doing so?



Are we so helpless that we cant do anything? Or is it just our lethargy that has created so much of inertia that we fail to move a bit - even when the cities are taken hostage and the girls are raped under open sun? Are we all really waiting for things to happen to us before we realize that it is our onus to take action and set things right.



Why are the educated individuals so averse of even touching politics and taking the reins in our own hands? Most of the times you question an "educated" citizen about his involvement in politics, you would perhaps hear, "Main seedha saadha aadmi hoon, politics ke khel mein mera kya kaam?" ... Yeah?... So true, I know damn too much to enter politics, it is meant for criminals and illiterates. It really pinches me when I compare the backgrounds of our politicans with those of America or UK. Our politicians have histories of crimes, and an education they cant even prove they have. And at the same time, countries are being run by law scholars from Harvard and Rhodes scholars - the real intellectual lot. And then we crib of all the problems. Shame on us, shame on India's educated, who knows only rights, not duties; who knows only how to demand, not give. Let's rise together, let's pledge to be a part of the system - take your first step, Come together on a common platform..

NEED YOUNG LEADERS FOR YOUNG INDIA

What has happened to our politicians? Why are they - be it Ashoj Gehlot of Congress from Rajathan or Yeddiyurappa of BJP in Karnataka - so out of touch with the Indian people? It's so evident now that there is a huge divide between these old bunch of politicians and the new India.

When the whole country was demanding the blood of spineless politicians in the aftermath of Mumbai attacks, several questions were asked about our politicians. We finally agreed these breed have come from amongst us and so they should be given a chance. The nation went ahead and cast votes in the state elections and voted to power the same old breed. And now,instead of focusing on serious issues such as providing food, health and education support to the economically weaker class or building infrastructure or routing out corruption from the system (or atleast they themselves pledge to be less corrupt) or increasing the security of common people, these bunch have set out to moral police the Indian youth. No these politicians have come from a different generation and it's high time the nation routes out these outdated politicians.

Today all these politicians are unfit to rule, making personal attacks on each other.
They have no development plans for poor or any development agenda for our country. We are so unfortunate and our hands are tied. There is not even a single party, which has national character, values and love for their country. Their only love is power grabbing,by hook or crook'

Pre-poll and post-poll alliances is a mockery of the so called “ Democracy “ in India. Parties choose candidates on the basis of caste, religion and money power. Where are we heading to ? We certainly did not want this kind of democracy which gives blanket permission to make hate speeches and targeting each other on personal grounds. Do we have to import leaders from abroad or take an Obama franchise to rule India ? These politicians are certainly not fit to vote. It is a disgrace to vote for such thugs, power brokers ( Alliances ) and I feel deeply depressed to see them live on TV with no agenda and issues to solve the problems of our country. Today our country is a hotch-potch country, a KICHRI rather. Whom should we vote for ? Which party or candidate deserves our vote ? NONE


We are a nation of youngsters as majority of Indian population is below the age of 28 or so. In this 'Youngistan' (as some advt calls it), we need politicians who understand that generation. We need polticians who can contribute to that generation. We need polticians who can make a strong India out of these youngsters. The right, left or centre - all parties still strive on some 100 year old ideologies and beliefs. Political parties in developed have adopted new strategies to deal with new generation. In UK Labour party called itself New Labour to usher in a new administration. Barack Obama presented change and hope as keywords to bring in youth to electoral politics.

We still have 70+ year old people running most of the parties. These power hungry people from Nehruvian era still think India just attained independence. Most of them do not know the underlying power the new generation holds. Instead of supporting and developing new generations, these bunch of political weeds try and suppress their freedom. Wake up Young India, wake up. Ask these political parties to give us youthful leaders who can lead us to take on the world and become an economic super power and a proud nation.

CRIMINAL AND TAINTED CANDIDATES

This week’s shoe-chucking incident has, albeit in an unseemly fashion, highlighted the issue of political parties fielding candidates linked to communal riots, as well as the inability to deliver justice to the victims of such riots.

In this case, it was sheer political cynicism on the part of the Congress to renominate Jagdish Tytler and Sajjan Kumar, accused of involvement in the anti-Sikh riots of 1984, as Lok Sabha candidates in Delhi. The party should, legal technicalities notwithstanding, drop the duo. Such a move would help in defining the necessary exclusion of communally-tainted persons from mainstream political life.

By the time of writing this article, both Tytler and Sajjan Kumar have been removed by Madame Sonia Gandhi, out of sheer vote bank compulsion but not out of sincerity to give punishment to the above guilty. Both will still remain unpunished for ever.


But then, the nomination itself underscores the ritualised acceptance of communalisation in India. And indeed, for some, the very means of political mobilisation. Communal riots, thus, are often seen as periodic, and expected, consequences of such a polity, and consequently, despite extant pertinent laws, the perpetrators almost always manage to go scot free. And it is this political acceptance, even encouragement, of such violence that has translated into official apathy towards punishing the guilty. The dismal record of our investigative and legal apparatus on that count is, therefore, hardly a surprise.

This institutional failure can hardly be remedied except by envisioning law-enforcement agencies as truly independent of political influence, which in turn can only be firmly established if political practice moves away from competitive identity management. Given some form of such independence, as the Supreme Court appointed Special Investigative Team probing the Gujarat riots of 2002 is displaying, the law can catch up with even high-level leaders behind such massacres.

In fact, the arrest of Maya Kodnani, BJP leader and former minister in Narendra Modi’s regime, for her role in a riot, is the first time a minister-level person has been arrested for communal violence. And perhaps of even greater import was the remark of Justice D H Waghela of the Gujarat High Court on the case, who compared religious fanatics involved in mass murders to terrorists. That, given the horrors of a communal riot, is a description that should define the legal consequences, and be a step towards prevention and justice.

WHY A GOOD HINDU IS POLITICALLY INCORRECT IN SECULAR INDIA ?

American Presidents while taking oath of office, always refer to God, the Bible and Christian values in their opening speech to the nation. Their no address is complete without referring to their religion.

They sound almost like a scripture teachers in one of our convent schools. The American media notices it, even comments upon it. But no one ever suggests that the President sounds like a fundamentalist. A good Christian, perhaps. But a fundamentalist, heavens no!

Now imagine if someone like Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee were to talk so much about Ram or Hindutva in his inaugural address, or flaunt his Hindu education and background the way American Presidents do about their Christian upbringing, can you think of the outrage it would have provoked?

Everyone, including our media, would have flayed him for stoking the fires of Hindu fundamentalism. As it is, the world press keeps referring to the BJP-led NDA as spearheading Hindu fundamentalism.

In other words, being a good Christian is politically correct in free America but being a good Hindu is politically incorrect in secular India. Why? Why is the American President not slandered as a bigot when he speaks about God, the Bible and Christian values while the Indian prime minister is called a Hindu zealot when he refers to Ram or Hindutva?

After all, what are we looking for in our leaders? Denial of religion? Atheism? Is atheism synonymous with secularism? Or is secularism the ability to pursue your own faith with conviction and respect the right of others to do the same?

We are back to semantics here and this is the real difference between secularism as propagated by Mahatma Gandhi and secularism as it has been practised by his political heirs led by Jawaharlal Nehru.

Gandhi saw it as the co-existence of all religions and urged everyone to follow his own faith with even greater conviction while Nehru, a self-professed agnostic, saw it as the gradual erosion of the role of religion in a modern society.

So, while Gandhi pleaded for more faith, better understanding and a bigger role for religion in creating a truly secular state, Nehru idolised the blossoming of the scientific temper, which he believed would eventually diminish if not entirely wipe out the role of religion in our political culture. It achieved precisely the opposite.

American Presidents are not in the least embarrassed by their faith. In fact, they see it as their strength. They see it as the strength of their nation. So they drop all pretences, all hypocrisy and speak out openly for what they think is the solution to most of America's problems, as well as the world's. Faith. Religious faith, in their case, Christianity. But, for others, whatever their faith is.

It is not religion that exacerbates conflict; it is the absence of religion. When we stop being good Hindus or good Muslims or good Christians, that is when we pick up weapons against each other to fight wars in the name of religion.

All conflict is actually secular. People may raise the banner of faith but they are actually covering up the real reasons for the conflict which are sometimes political and, more often, plain criminal.

American conferences are a unique experience and what impresses most is political America's fierce commitment to its faith. Of course Christianity is there, centrestage. But it was there as a symbol of America's faith in all religions and their right to coexist.

In one of conferences, the other side were the prime ministers of the Slovak Republic, Albania and Greenland. On the next table, the presidents of Croatia and Serbia and the governor of the Cayman Islands. Next to him, the home minister of the Tibetan government in exile, and his wife, the Dalai Lama's sister were on the adjoining table. It was a sangam of all faiths. Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Jews, Buddhists. They were all there, praying for a better, stronger, more compassionate world.

Luckily we, in India, have a strong judiciary that refuses to yield ground to over-ambitious political leaders. We have a democracy that is stubborn, brave, uncompromising.

Maybe it is time to reject cant and hypocrisy, shed this sham of political correctness. Let us, as a nation, admit to ourselves that there is absolutely nothing to be ashamed of when we speak of our religion, our faith.

A good Hindu is no less than a good Christian or a good Muslim and it is time we acknowledged this simple, inescapable fact in a nation that has been the crucible of faith for centuries.

In this acknowledgement lies our future. As Hindus, as Indians. As a nation on the move.

There is, there can be nothing endearing about faithlessness.

SOMETHING WRONG WITH DEMOCRACY IN INDIA !

"Democracy is good. I say this because other systems are worse."

-Jawaharlal Nehru

The list of casualties of India’s enviable democratic system include, ironically some “non negotiable” cornerstones of democracy: idealism, integrity, egalitarianism, justice and, of course, governance. However, even more vexing is the widely prevalent lack of common sense; very often, we hear (with a hint of derision) that common sense is not so common in ‘common’ people! Will this continue to be the mantra for the upwardly mobile Generation X in India?

The root of all that is wrong with our democracy, however, appears to be the negative approach of citizens towards voting – “Bad officials are elected by good citizens who do not vote”. Voting has today become a trade and the “VOTE” a highly tradable commodity. Very often elections are reduced to a sham wherein the highest bidder (those who offer the most rewarding inducements and rewards) emerges victorious, sans merit, competency or interest. Indeed, most voters are simply apathetic because the factor that tilts the fate of elections is the ubiquitous “vote banks”, which is explicitly manipulated by the political parties. For example, Party X secures the votes of minorities, while Party Y’s support base comes from the urban middle class – this preference is often made for short-term contentment and lacks any larger vision or commitment.


Present day politics in India is so overtly besmirched by our netas that the thinking man or most educated citizens in India do not want to risk applying his or her mind in an effort to vote, let alone establishing changes in the society, because he believes it is a dead cause and any attempt is but an exercise in futility.

Such is the bane of our existence in this country, prisoner or warden, leftist or rightist, owner or slave, man or superman; we have resigned our fate as guinea pigs in this experiment in democracy and self-rule. What happened to the belief that we could right what was wrong, that as individuals we were capable of heroic thoughts and actions?

But this could all change - if you decide to change it. It is really quite simple; people look at wine differently after spending quality time in France. All good changes start when we revolutionize our perception. We urge every Indian to control the disparagement of the system, exercise their denigrating attitude, and view India as their new canvas. Realize and celebrate the true potential of your dream for this country for there is definitely hope.

The populace is now entitled to review valuable details on the candidates standing for elections; information can now be accessed from the Election Commission websites. This right to information will enable us to make a deliberate choice while voting, and to appraise the candidates based on the information such as their criminal antecedents, assets and liabilities and educational qualifications – this will resuscitate the dogma of “determined votes”. The parties can no more obfuscate their agenda.

The initiative that PAC started in 1996, to inspire educated choices for local elections, has been an aid for citizenry to make deliberate decisions. It was to be trampled by cynicism at its inception, but today it is a force with which people can device their nationwide dream. Along with this the new initiative “Vote Bengaluru” is once again the vehicle on which people can practice their power of choice, use their voice. Vote Bengaluru – an agenda to improve the voting system, to cleanse the voters’ list, motivate voters, encourage independent candidates, is a platform from which we can only soar up high.

Awake from your indolence, the fate of the future generation and “India Tomorrow” rests on your shoulders. Dispense of your frivolous blame game and pull up your socks, because if you believe that politics does not affect you or your family, you are WRONG. It does! The truth is it decides the taxes you pay, your entitlements, even the price of the rations you pick up from the market,because it is the politicians who decide on the policies, they who represent your cause for concerns, they who process your criticisms and comments and decide whether it needs to see the light of day or not. Because the decisions taken decades ago by our politicians still affect us, therefore, your actions today decide your tomorrow. The problem that exists in our electoral system, the corruption in our society, and child labour will continue to exist unless you do something about it. Make a choice, read the newspapers, use the Internet, educate the others, make the right decision for your future - this is your story – make it matter!

The difference between thoughtful participation and apathy is that of the living and the dead.

UPDATE: I have received an update from my friend, who notified me about the issue of "Negative Vote or Right Not to Vote"

Below is the email he sent to me :

Dear Vaneet,

I would like you to be aware of section 49-O of the electoral rules which is nothing but the voters right to REJECT ALL CANDIDATES IF NECESSARY. I am copy-pasting the relevant portions of the above said rules, that is, section 49-O for your perusal and needful. I suggest that the mass media should be involved and newspaper and T.V. advertisements and coverage must be given to the right which we electors have to REJECT ALL CANDIDATES.
Kindly go through the following:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/49-O

http://lawmin.nic.in/ld/subord/cer1.htm

http://ndtv.com/mb/messagethread.asp?TopicId=19973&tablename=Custom

49-O is one of the sections of The Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961, which governs elections in India. It covers the procedures to be followed when a valid voter decides not to cast his vote, and decides to record this fact. In recent times, the urban educated electorate has not turned out in large numbers in Indian elections. This has been attributed to disillusionment with the system, and a perceived paucity of good candidates. In some cases, voters with valid identification documents have been turned away because impersonators had already cast their votes. Recording one's vote under Section 49-O is a choice that a voter can exercise to prevent electoral fraud, and misuse of his vote.

Since the ballot paper/EVM contains only the list of candidates, a voter cannot record his vote under Section 49-O directly. He must inform the presiding officer at the election booth. This violates the secrecy of the ballot.

Some recent articles suggest that in case the number of votes recorded under Section 49-O is greater than the maximum number of votes polled in favour of any of the candidates, a repoll is held. This is not explicitly mentioned in any of the sections of The Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961.