Mahua Moitra's iconic speech in Parliament

Sir, I rise to oppose the Motion and to speak in support of the amendments made by our party. First of all, let me begin by humbly accepting the resounding mandate that this government has got. But, it is the very nature of the overwhelmingness of this mandate, of the totality of this mandate, that makes it necessary for us to be heard today, the voice of dissent to be heard today. Had the mandate been any less, there would have been a natural checks and balances woven into the narrative. That is not the case. The House belongs to the Opposition. So, I stand today to reclaim this inch that has been guaranteed to us.

Let me start by quoting Maulana Azad, whose statue stands tall outside this great hall. He once said of this country that he was fighting to build. He said, “It is India’s historic destiny that many human races and cultures should flow to her, finding a home in a respectable soil, and that many a caravan should find rest here. There are cultures, our languages, our poetry, our literature, our art, the innumerable happenings of our daily life shall bear the stands of our joined endeavour.

This is the ideal that was carved into our Constitution. This is the very Constitution each of us has sworn to protect. But, this Constitution is under threat today. Of course, you may disagree with me. You may say, acche din are here and the sun will never set on this Indian empire that this Government is seeking to build. But, then you are missing the signs. If you only would open your eyes, you would see that there are signs everywhere that this country is torn apart.

In the few minutes that have been allotted to me, let me list out these dangerous signs. The first sign – there is a powerful and continuing nationalism that is being sphered into our national fabric. It is superficial, it is xenophobic, it is narrow. It has a lust to divide. It is not a desire to unite. Citizens are being thrown out of their homes and are being called illegal immigrants. People who have lived in this country for 50 years have to show a piece of paper to prove they are Indians. In a country where ministers cannot produce degrees to show that they graduated from college, you expect disposed poor people to show papers as proof that they belong to this country?

Slogans and symbols are being used to test religion. There is no one slogan, no one symbol that ensure any Indian that they are patriot. There is no one test, Sir. No one test.

Sir, the second sign – there is resounding disdain for human rights that is permeating in every level of governance. There has been a ten-fold increase in the number of hate crimes between 2014 and 2019. This is like the valuation of an e-commerce start-up, Sir. There are forces in this country that are sitting there just pushing this number up. The lynching of citizens in broad daylight is being condoned. From Pehlu Khan in Rajasthan last year to Mr Ansari in Jharkhand yesterday, the list is not stopping.

The third sign – there is an unimaginable subjugation and control of mass media today. Five of the largest news media organizations in India are today either indirectly controlled or indirectly debted to one man in this country. TV channels spent a majority of airtime broadcasting propaganda for the ruling party. Coverage of every Opposition party is cut out. Let the government come out with facts and figures to show ad-spend per media house. What are they spending the money on and which media houses are they blocking out? The Information and Broadcasting Ministry employs over 120 people solely to check the content on TV channels every day to make sure that there is no anti-government news being put out.

Fake news is the norm. This election was not fought on the plank of farmer distress. This election was not fought on unemployment. This election was fought on Whatsapp, on fake news, on manipulating minds. Every piece of news that this government, I repeat, every piece of news that this government have put out, every lie that you put out, you repeat and repeat and then it becomes the truth. This is the Goebbels doctrine.

You talk about naamdar and kaamdar? Let me tell you the Congress party might have put up 36 dynasts since 1999 in parliament but the BJP put up 31. Every time you put out one figure anything that is not the truth, you are destroying the fabric of India. Yesterday the floor leader of the Congress party said that the co-operative movement has been a failure in Bengal and I urge him to check his facts. The one co-operative that he is referring to – Bhagirathi – in Murshidabad is now in profit. Every little misinformation that we put out serves to destroy this country.

The fourth sign is that there is an obsession with national security – identification of enemies. When we were children our mother used to tell us to do this and do that or kala bhoot will come. It is as though all of us in this country today are in fear of some nameless, shameless kala bhoot. There is fear pervading everywhere. The achievements of the army are being usurped in the name of one man. Is this correct? New enemies are being created every day and the irony is that over the last five years terrorist attacks have gone up manifold. There has been a 106 per cent increase in the death of jawans in Kashmir.

The fifth sign is that the government and religion are now intertwined in this country. Do I even need to speak about this? Need I remind you that we have redefined what it means to be a citizen? With the NRC and the Citizenship Amendment Bill we are making sure that there is only one community that is the target of anti-immigration laws. Members of Parliament these days are more interested in the fate of 2.77 acres of land than in the 812 million acres of the rest of India.

Yeh sirf 2.77 acre janmabhhoomi ka mudda nahi hain. Yeh sara desh, 80 crore acres, ko akhand rakhne ka prashna hai.

The sixth sign is the most dangerous. There is complete disdain for intellectuals and the arts. There is a repression of all dissent, funding is being cut for liberal education, scientific temperament which is enshrined in Article 51 of the Constitution. There is Article 51 of the Constitution, which demands a scientific temperament. Everything we are doing is pushing India back to the dark ages. Secondary school textbooks are being manipulated and distorted in order to indoctrinate.You don’t even tolerate questioning, let alone dissent.

I wish to quote the great Hindi poet, Ramdhari Singh Dinkar. I wish to tell you this, that the spirit of dissent is integral to India. You cannot shatter us.

“Haan haan duryodhan baandh mujhe, 

baandhne mujhe toh aaya hai. 

Zanjeer bari kya laya hai? 

Yadi mujhe baandhna chahe man, 

pehle toh baandh anant gagan.

Sune ko sadhna sakta hai,

woh mujhe kab baandh sakta hai?”

I ask you this, you cannot keep us down.

Number seven, the last sign; there is an erosion of independence in our electoral system. The Election Commission was used to transfer key officials. Rs 60,000 crore was spent in this election; 50 percent by one party, Rs 27,000 crore.

In 2017, the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum put up a poster in its main lobby and it contained a list of all the signs of early fascism. Each of the seven signs I have pointed to you featured in that poster. There is a danger of fascism rising in India. It is incumbent upon all of us to stand up to it. Let us, the Members of this 17th Lok Sabha decide which side of history do we want to be on. Do we want to be upholders of this Constitution or do we want to be its poll bearers?

I do not dispute the resounding mandate that this Government has got but I have the right to disagree with your idea that ‘there was no one before and that there should be no one after you.’

In conclusion, I quote the poet Rahat Indori:

"Jo aaj saahibe masnad hain kal nahin honge 

Kiraaydaar hain jaati makaan thodi hai, 

Sabhi ka khoon shaamil yahan ki mitti me 

Kisi ke baap ka hindustan thodi hai?"

Trinamool Congress MP Ms. Mahua Moitra's 

maiden speech on rising fascism wins cheers

In a Parliament tarnished by heckling, sexist jibes, and blatant misogyny displayed by the old boys’ club, Mahua Moitra just blew their cockiness to smithereens. And the best part is, she did it with so much grace, dignity, and fierceness, that the men, mostly her political rivals, were evidently flummoxed. -- Author and journalist Chandrima Pal

Responsibility is the price for freedom

Freedom exists only within a framework of rules. Freedom is simply an opportunity to find a definition for yourself, a true, authentic individuality, and a joy in making the world around you a little better, a little more beautiful. Excise and enjoy your freedom in true sense. 

• Like so many things in life, freedom is not free. We cannot justifiably have one without the other. The more comprehensive and diversified the social order, the greater the responsibility and the freedom of the individual. 
• Freedom is inseparable from responsibility. If I have the freedom to think, it is my responsibility to think positively. If I have the freedom to speak, it is my responsibility to speak properly and meaningfully. If I have the freedom to act, it is my responsibility to act correctly. I have no right to excise my freedom to breach other’s privacy. 
• If you don't want to take responsibility, you can't have freedom either. If you shun responsibility, you have to accept slavery in some way or other.
• Freedom of choice which means freedom to choose, to act in this way or that way, to do good and evil. Every individual’s freedom is limited by the others. 
• Nothing can satisfy a human need and greed (be it for freedom as well). Extreme freedom results in catastrophe and responsibilities prevent it.
• Those who do not have enough freedom will inevitably crave more of it. 
• Freedom is just not limited to speech, thought, follow a particular religion etc but freedom from fear, anxiety, worry etc are also equally important. Freedom is an amazing thing, but as with most amazing things, too much of it can be more than you bargained for. Especially if you’re not prepared to handle it.
• There is an important dimension to freedom that is often forgotten: freedom of will. 
• Our freedom may be constrained and our choices limited, in the moment when we choose, we experience freedom. 
• True freedom is closely linked to self-control. Only a self-disciplined person can decide to do something and accomplish it. True freedom is the freedom to follow one’s conscience and maintain one’s personal integrity. This is freedom of will. It leads to more of a sense of liberation and fulfillment. 
• The joy of freedom is not only to be able to choose, but to be able to choose well—to choose the right and the good, and be responsible for the outcome rather than blaming.

People like freedom because it gives them a sense of mastery over things and people. They dislike responsibility because it constrains them from satisfying their desires. Every thought, word and deed in our lives shapes our character. We create our own character through the decisions we make.

Read the source article

Religion - Swami Vivekananda Quotes

Swami Vivekananda was religious, but never a superstitious person. 

• All religion is to be based upon morality, and personal purity is superior.
• All religious superstitions are vain imaginations. 
• Beliefs, doctrines, sermons do not make religion.
• Believe in the doctrine, and you are safe.
• Circumstances can never be good or bad. Only the individual man can be good or bad. What is meant by the world being good or bad? Misery and happiness can only belong to the sensuous individual man.
• Despondency is not religion.
• Experience is the best source of knowledge. 
• First bread and then religion.
• Great is the tenacity with which man clings to the senses.
• In religion lies the vitality  of India.
• Intellectual assent and intellectual dissent are not religion.
• It is an insult to a starving people to offer them religion.
• Mere believing in certain theories and doctrines will not help you much. 
• No destruction of religion is necessary to improve the Hindu society.
• One religion cannot suit all.
• Religion is the greatest and healthiest exercise for the human mind.
• Religion requires hard and constant practice.
• Religion is a necessary thing to very few, and to the vast mass of mankind it is a luxury.
• Religion is the retaliation of Spirit as Spirit; not Spirit as matter. Religion is a growth. Each one must experience it himself. 
• Religion has no business to formulate social laws.
• Religion is not in doctrines, in dogmas, nor in intellectual argumentation;
  it is being and becoming, it is realization.
• Religion is manifestation of the Divinity already in man.
• So long as even a single dog in my country is without food,
  my whole religion will be to feed it.
• Talking is not religion.
• The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.
• The goal of all religions is the same, but the language of the teachers differs.
• The greatest religion is to be true to your own nature. 
• The ideal of all religions is attaining of liberty and cessation of misery.
• The man who is frightened into religion has no religion at all.
• The proof of one religion depends on the proof of all the rest.
• The very rich can understand truth much less than the poorer people. The rich man has no time to think of anything beyond his wealth and power, his comforts and indulgences. The rich rarely become religious. Why? Because they think, if they become religious, they will have no more fun in life.
• True religion is entirely transcendental.
• Try to be pure and unselfish— that is the whole of religion.
• We must not only tolerate each others, but positively embrace them, and that truth is the basis of all religions.
• We must not judge of higher things from a low standpoint.
  Everything must be judged by its own standard. 
• You are what you make yourselves. 
• You are religious from the day you begin to see God in men and women.

Selfishness is the chief sin, thinking of ourselves first. The unselfish man says, 'I will be last, I do not care to go to heaven, I will even go to hell if by doing so I can help my brothers.' This unselfishness is the test of religion. He who has more of this unselfishness is more spiritual and nearer to Shiva.

मातृदेबो भब पितृदेबो भब, दरिद्रतृदेबो भब, मूर्खतृदेबो भब

The poor, the illiterate, the ignorant, the afflicted -- let these be your God. 

Know that services to these alone is the highest religion ... Swami Vivekananda

Religion - Jiddu Krishnamurti

Jiddu Krishnamurti was one of the most remarkable and interesting thinkers of the 20th century. Born in 1895 was made head of the international elite organization known as the Order of the Star. In 1929 he completely dumbfounded his followers “I have now decided to disband the Order. You can form other organizations and expect someone else. With that I am not concerned, nor with creating new cages, new decorations for those cages. My only concern is to set men absolutely, unconditionally free.”

• Truth is the understanding of what is from moment to moment without the burden or the residue of the past moment.
• You think according to your capacity, to your energy, your experience and knowledge; another thinks differently according to his experience and conditioning. This is a fact, indisputable and actual.
• Belief is a danger which must be totally avoided if one is to see the truth of what is.
• We should have a rational doubt, skepticism, because doubt cleanses the mind, it freshens the mind, it breaks down the old habits, the old conclusions, the arcane concepts. 
• To enquire very deeply into the nature of religion there must be total freedom, freedom from all orthodoxy, tradition, rituals, faith, symbols. That requires a deep sense of doubt, doubt of everything that man has put together through thought what he calls religion.
• To doubt requires sensitivity. If you doubt everything, then it becomes rather stupid. But to doubt with a light hand, with a quick mind, with subtlety, then that doubt brings about clarity, energy.
• If you look to a priest for your guidance as a teacher, he will become your destroyer or exploiter. If you accept whatever I am saying, I will also become your priest; therefore I will become your exploiter.
• To be in self-contradiction is to live in conflict and sorrow. The whole fabric of the self is the result of contradictory interests and values. When the inner contradiction becomes unbearable  we turn to organized religion, with its dogmas and rituals.
• Your ideals, your gods, your religions: they are the creation of the desire for escape into comfort. 
• Organized religion does produce a number of positive effects. Primarily there is the psychological solace that comes to the individual believer. No teacher has established these organized, exploiting religions. You yourselves, out of your insecurity, out of your confusion, out of your lack of comprehension, have created religions as your guides.
• We give significance, meaning, to a life that has no meaning, the way we live, and the significance, the meaning is what we call religion. Religion as the experience of some authority may bind a few people together but it will breed inevitably antagonism; the experience of another is not true, however great the experiencer may be.
• Religion, organized belief, has carefully maintained, cultivated the sense that you must toe the line, that you must not sin, that you must not commit ugly things.
• Without religion there is no culture, for religion is the unifying factor.
• Religion is merely mumbling words, going to the temple, or practicing a discipline – which is all repetitive, copying, imitative, habit forming. And what happens to your mind and to your heart when you are merely imitative? Only dullness, emptiness.
• As you ruthlessly seek economic security, out of which is born a morality suited for that purpose, so you have created religions all over the world. This morality, this discipline, is really based on egotism and the ruthless search for individual security.
• In the pursuit of gain you lose sight of the present. You don’t fully understand the immediate experience. Intrinsically, in that incompleteness of experience, in that memory, the ego has its roots. However much it may grow, expand, it will always retain the centre of selfishness.
• Religions, with their beliefs, dogmas and creeds, have become tremendous barriers between human beings, dividing man against man, limiting him and destroying his intelligence.
• Religion with its beliefs, its disciplines, its enticements, its hopes, its punishments, forces you towards righteous behaviour, towards brotherliness, towards love. Where there is belief, where there is a following of an ideal, there cannot be complete living.
• Our whole system of thought and action and living is based on individual aggrandizement and growth at the expense of others. That is a fact and so long as that fact in the world exists there must be suffering, there must be exploitation, there must be the division of classes; and no forms of religion can bring about peace, because they are the very creation of human cravings, they are the means of exploitation.
• You all want to be somebody in the state, which is based on possessiveness, possessions; and that has become moral, true, good, perfectly religious. It is the same thing. Now we call that morality.
• Religion is the false result of a false cause, and merely a means of escape from conflict. The more you develop and strengthen the sectarian divisions of religion, the less true brotherhood there will be; and the more you strengthen nationalism, the less will be the unity of man.
• We will have misery and tribulation so long as religion is organized to be part of the State. It helps to condone organized force as policy of the State; and so encourages oppression, ignorance and intolerance. 
• Organized religions have nothing to do with the sayings of the great teachers. The teachers have said do not kill, love your neighbor, but religions of vested interest encourage and support the slaughter of humanity. By encouraging nationalism, supporting a special class, with all its organized belief, religion participates in the killing of man. Religions throughout the world not only exploit through fear, but also separate man from man. Such organized religions cannot in any way aid man in the realization of truth.
• Probably one of the few religions in the world that has not shed blood is Buddhism and perhaps after it Hinduism.
• An inner revolution is necessary so as to bring about right relationship between human beings; every other form of revolution brings about more misery. The question is how to bring about right relationship between man and man – not through force, not with bayonets, not through organized religions, not through ideologies – for these have all failed. So how is that revolution, that right relationship to take place?
• Religion is the search for truth, which is of no country, which is of no organized belief, which does not lie in any temple, church, or mosque. Religion is allowing truth to come into being. Religion is the understanding of the thinker and the thought, which means the understanding of action in relationship. Religion is not the worship of some idea, however gratifying, however traditional it is. Religion is understanding the beauty, the depth, the extensive significance of action in relationship. 
• Religion is the understanding of the thinker, not merely to be caught in a dogma of uncovering of the beauty of life, of existence, of truth. Religion is a total denial of everything which the mind has invented for its own security.
• Religion is not the acceptance of some dogma, tradition, or so-called sacred book. Religion is the inquiry to find the unknown. Religion is the urge, the intense pursuit of the sacred, if there is anything sacred, that is beyond the measure of time, it is not to be found within the field of the known.
• There is nothing sacred in the temples, in the mosques, in the churches. They are all the inventions of thought. So, when you discard all that, is there something sacred, that is nameless, timeless, something that is the outcome of great beauty and total order which begins in our daily life. When there is silence, there is immense, timeless space; then only is there a possibility of coming upon that which is the eternal, sacred.
• Where there is this emptiness and space there is vast energy. And that energy is sacred.
• We are brought up in the belief of God, thought is influenced, a habit is formed, from generation to generation. Both belief and non-belief in God prevent the understanding of God.
• God, Truth, or whatever you may choose to call reality, cannot be described. That which can be described is not the real. Memory is the residue of incomplete experiences; therefore, truth, or God, or what you will, is the unknown and it cannot be formulated.
• The function of education is to bring about a release of energy in the pursuit of goodness, truth, or God, which in turn makes the individual a true human being and therefore the right kind of citizen.
• In belief of God, there is great security, but that God, you have invented it. So you are seeking security in an illusion which you think is real and that gives you a great sense of security; that means you are neurotic in a belief which is your own invention.
• The moment I say there is God, the thinking about it is within the field of thought. The man who has not thought at all, to him there is no God.
• And where there is the ending of fear, there is no god. You understand? It is out of our fear, out of our desire, we invent the gods. When a man for him, in whom there is no fear, completely no fear, then he is totally a different human being and he needs no god.
• There must be complete freedom, and in that freedom there is a great, tremendous energy because there is an emptiness – not nothingness, emptiness. In that there is that which is beyond all time. This is meditation. This is religion.
• Meditation is the understanding of the whole of life, both external and inward, the understanding of your daily life, your relationships, freeing yourself from fear, and questioning what is the self, the ‘me’.
• The conflict in relationship creates the world in which we live every day – the misery, the poverty, the ugliness of existence. Life is a constant challenge, and when the response is inadequate, there is conflict; but to respond immediately to the challenge adequately, brings about a completeness. Therefore it is important to understand oneself, not in abstraction, but in actuality, in everyday existence.
• Religion is love; You can love, be compassionate, only in the present, in the immediate. We mean by religion absolute freedom, freedom from fear, freedom from conflict, freedom from problems, freedom from sorrow so that a mind, a brain that is completely free, it’s only then there is that quality of love and compassion. 
• Religion is a way of life: that is whole, that is not fragmentary, in which there is no conflict, contradiction of opposing desires, opposing ideas and demands, a total non-fragmentary life, a whole life, a total mind, a whole mind which doesn’t think one thing and do another, doesn’t say one thing and act contrary to what has been said.
• The real function of religion is to transform man totally, so that he lives in complete harmony, which means complete order and therefore righteous behavior. That is the total meaning of a religious mind.
• One religion is not going to conquer the rest of the world. They want to – the Hindus want it, the Christians. And the mechanical world is not going to bring about a new society, a new culture, only religion has always done it – not the present religion. So there needs to be a religion, of not faith, not belief, not rituals, not authority.
• The problem with reform is that it is merely a ‘redecoration of the walls of the prison.’  Then what shall the earnest man do? The relationship which has created this appalling society in which there are immensely rich people, and those who have absolutely nothing, both inwardly and outwardly – then what is he to do?

Truth is a pathless land. Man cannot come to it through any organization, through any creed, through any dogma, priest or ritual, nor through any philosophic knowledge or psychological technique. He has to find it through the mirror of relationship, through the understanding of the contents of his own mind, through observation and not through intellectual analysis or introspective dissection ... Jiddu Krishnamurti

రాజకీయ రంగస్థలం!

రాజకీయమంటేనే అరాచకీయం. ఆ అరాచకీయాన్ని అద్భుతమైన ఆదర్శాల పేరు చెప్పి మరింత అపసవ్యంగా ఆవిష్కరించి, వికారంగా తీర్చిదిద్దేవాడు నాయకుడు. ఎన్నికల గాడిపొయ్యి మీద డేకీసాలో రాజకీయాన్ని పోసి, సీట్లతో మంటపెట్టి, ఓట్లతో కలబెట్టి, హామీల పోపు పెట్టి, కులమనే వెల్లుల్లిని ఫుల్లుగా దట్టించి, మతమనే మసాలాను ఘాటుగా పట్టించి, బాగా ఉడకనిచ్చి వేడివేడిగా వడ్డిస్తే ఉంటుంది చూశారూ ఆ మజా.. అధికారం నషాళానికి అర అంగుళం దూరంలో ఆగి కనిపిస్తుంది. దాంతోపాటు పక్కన నంజుకోవడానికి పచ్చ నోట్లు, పుంజుకోవడానికి పచ్చటి సీసాలు ఉంటే సొర్గం మన ముందట తడబడుతూ నిలబడ్డట్టే! ఐదేళ్లకోసారి పండక్కి మాత్రమే దొరికే ఈ స్పెషల్‌డిష్‌ తినేవాడికి ఇంపు. చూసేవాడికి కంపు!

రాజకీయాన్ని వండడం అంత తేలికేం కాదు. ఏమీ తెలియనట్టే కుట్రలు పన్నగలిగిన అమాయకత్వం... పైకి తెచ్చిన వాడినే వెన్నుపోటు పొడవగల అకుంఠిత విధేయత... జాతికి జరిగే నష్టాన్ని కూడా పట్టించుకోనంత నిస్వార్థపరత... దేశం నాశనమైపోయినా లెక్కచేయనంత దేశభక్తి... అనునిత్యం అతికినట్టు అబద్ధాలు చెప్పగలిగే నిజాయతీ... నిన్న సాయంవేళ ఇచ్చిన మాటను ఇవాళ పొద్దున్నే మరచిపోగలిగేంత జ్ఞాపకశక్తి... సిగ్గులేకుండా ఆత్మస్తుతి పరనింద చేయగల నిష్పాక్షికత... ధనికుల కోసం మాత్రమే ఆలోచించేంత దారిద్య్ర నిబద్ధత... బేవార్సు విధానాలకు భేషుగ్గా భాష్యం చెప్పగల సైద్ధాంతిక చతురత.. కుర్చీ కోసం ఇటు నుంచి ఎటైనా దుంకగల అ–చంచలత... ఇవన్నీ ఉన్నవాడే రాజకీయాన్ని రుచిగా వండి వార్చగలడు!!

కుల రహిత సమాజం కోసం కులతత్వాన్ని పెంచి పోషించగలిగే మహా నిబద్ధత... మతాతీత దేశం కోసం మారణహోమాన్ని రెచ్చగొట్టగలిగే లౌకికత ఉండడం అదనపు అర్హత. భూమి తనచుట్టూ తాను భ్రమణం చేస్తూ, సూర్యుడి చుట్టూ పరిభ్రమణం చేస్తుందట. కానీ మన నాయకుల ఫలితమా అని భారతదేశం కులం చుట్టూ భ్రమిస్తూ, మతం చుట్టూ పరిభ్రమిస్తోంది. కాలం గడిచేకొద్దీ కులం– మతం కాలగతిలో కలసిపోవడానికి బదులు కల్లోలమే సృష్టిస్తున్నాయి.

ఓట్ల కోసం, సీట్లకోసం నేతలు ఇప్పటిదాకా ప్రజలను కులాలు, మతాలు వారీగా మాత్రమే చీల్చారు. కులాలను, మతాలను కూడా చీల్చేయడం ఇప్పుడు మొదలైంది.

హిందువుల్ని కులాలుగా విడగొట్టి, ముస్లింలను మతంగా కొల్లగొట్టి, లౌక్యంగా గెలవడం నేర్చుకున్నాయి లౌకికవాద పార్టీలు. హిందువుల్ని మతంతో ఏకం చేసి, ముస్లిముల్లో సున్నీ, షియా, తలాఖ్‌ల తకరారు పెట్టి ‘అమిత’ చాతుర్యం చూపారు బీజేపీ వారు. దీనికి దీటుగా, పోటీగా ఇప్పుడు ఏకంగా హిందూ మతాన్నే ముక్కచెక్కలు చేయడానికి లెక్కలేశారు కాంగ్రెస్‌వారు.

ఓట్లొస్తే చాలు, సీట్లొస్తే చాలు, కుర్చీలో దర్జాగా కొలువుదీరితే చాలు! కాకి వాలిన కారులో కూర్చోవడమే నచ్చని పరమ హేతువాది... మూఢ నమ్మకాలకు వ్యతిరేకంగా చట్టం చేసి కూడా, మంత్రించిన నిమ్మకాయ చేతిలో ఉంటే తప్ప ప్రచారం చేయలేని నిష్ఠా గరిష్ఠుడు... దేవుడిని కొలిచే మఠాధిపతులను తప్ప దేవుళ్లను నమ్మని నాస్తిక శిఖామణి ఇప్పుడు.. మోడీని పడగొట్టేందుకు తొడగొడుతున్న దేశ రాజకీయ యోధులకు ఆదర్శప్రాయుడు! కర్ణాటకను గేమ్‌ ఛేంజర్‌గా భావిస్తూ, సిద్దూ [సిధ్ధరామయ్య] ప్రయోగాన్ని, ఫలితాన్ని చూసి అదే మార్గంలో పయనించాలని దేశంలోని నేతలంతా తహతహలాడుతున్నారు! భశుం!!

చివరాఖరు: గోరఖ్‌పూర్‌ ఎన్నికల్లో బీజేపీ ఓడిపోయిన తర్వాత, పార్లమెంటు సెంట్రల్‌హాల్లో ప్రతిపక్ష ఎంపీలంతా, మోదీ నిరాదరణకు గురైన బీజేపీ అగ్రనేత మురళీమనోహర్‌ జోషికి శుభాకాంక్షలు చెప్పడం మొదలుపెట్టారట. ఆయన కూడా మందహాసంతో వాటిని స్వీకరించారట. ఇదంతా చూస్తున్న మంత్రి ధర్మేంద్ర ప్రధాన్‌... జోషి వద్దకు వచ్చి ‘మీరిలా చేయడం ఏమీ బాగాలేదు. తప్పుడు సంకేతాలు వెళతాయి’ అన్నారట. ‘నేను ఎప్పుడేం చేయాలో చెప్పేంత వాడివయ్యావా నువ్వు’ అని గద్దించారట జోషి. మోదీ మీద విపక్షీయులకే కాదు; స్వపక్షీయులకూ ఎంత కోపం ఉందో ఇంతకుమించి చెప్పాలా?

Read the source article

The Struggle for Equality in India

By Myron Weiner 
Article in July 1962 issue of Foreign Affairs

Read the original article

The principle of equality is having a revolutionary effect on life in contemporary India. The impact is more dramatic there than elsewhere because perhaps no other major society in recent history has known inequalities so gross or so long preserved. In the traditional civilizations of Islam and China, the ideal if not always the practice of equality had an honorable and often commanding place in the culture. But in India the notion that men should remain in the same occupation and station of life as their forefathers was enshrined in religious precepts and social custom. While life was not as immobile as theory prescribed, and from time to time revolts against the dominance of particular social classes occurred, the idea of social equality never became as widespread in Hinduism as it did in other great traditions.

Even today, the visitor to India-whether from Europe or the Far East-is struck by the gross inequalities, not merely in material standards, but more profoundly in the attitudes of men toward each other. To be kissed on the foot by a beggar or by a supplicant for a job is, for one sensitive to the dignity of man, among the most degrading human acts imaginable. The stooped back, the outstretched hands of the groveling poor are in contrast with the stern and commanding voice and the fine carriage of the rich, the mighty and the highborn. Yet very recently the principle of equality has flowered in Indian life, and it is the changes that this has brought and its effects on other aspects of India's efforts at modernization that I shall try to describe here.

II

Remote roots of what social equality exists can be found in medieval Islam as it affected the subcontinent, and in the development of bakti or devotional tradition in medieval Hinduism, which sought to stress the notion of equality before God. But the concept became really influential with the appearance of anti-caste movements in the nineteenth century. The influence of Christianity and the rise of nationalism both contributed in their own way to its growth, as did the impact of socialist ideas among young nationalists in the 1920s and 1930s. But it is not our purpose to enter into any detailed historical examination of how the notion of an equalitarian society came to be accepted by the leaders of the Indian nationalist movement. Suffice it to say here that those who held it took power in 1947 and began to exercise the authority of the state to make it a reality.

With virtually no debate, the principle of political equality was enshrined in the constitution when all adults, literate or illiterate, were given the right to vote. The initial effect was the further extension and intensification of party political organization, especially in rural areas. The governing Congress Party, which enjoyed the legacy of the nationalist movement with its relatively well established mass base, clearly won the race-but not without unexpected results. Congress politicians, like those of other political parties, discovered that voters were moved more readily by appeals to their caste, religion, tribe and language than by appeals based on broad public policy. With a skill that would do credit to a New York or Chicago politician, Indian party leaders shrewdly sought "balanced" tickets. Lower castes, which are large, soon clamored for more seats in municipal bodies, state legislative assemblies and Parliament, as well as for more posts in the party organization. Century-old rivalries among communities burst forth. Local politicians made their own constituents aware of the benefits to be obtained from government and awakened them to the power which they could obtain as a result of universal adult suffrage.

Thus linguistic, caste and tribal organizations have multiplied, and throughout the country particularistic loyalties have been intensified. This was demonstrated in the general elections for Parliament and the state assemblies last February. Except in the much publicized North Bombay constituency, election issues rarely involved ideology or public policy. On the contrary, the electorate tended to vote in accordance with traditional loyalties; issues, such as they were, tended to be parochial.

Another related consequence of universal adult suffrage is that social classes which had hitherto been politically dormant have now come to play an increasingly important role in local politics. In many of the urban areas especially, the respectable, high-caste, prosperous and well educated leaders who guided the party in the past have been replaced by a less educated, status-hungry class of shopkeepers and minor clerks. Their drive for position and prestige has often led to bitter struggles for control of the local Congress Party organization, and especially for the position of local party president; for it is he, with the district collector and other high officials and respected citizens, who welcomes visiting ministers from the state and central government to the city. In the eyes of a lower middle- class politician, the post is a coveted one and it is no wonder that the struggle for this office has shattered many urban Congress Party organizations. Though many other factors have contributed, it is not surprising that the Congress Party has lost municipal elections in many cities in recent years, including Madras, Delhi, Madurai and Coimbatore. But regardless of who wins, municipal governments are increasingly falling under the control of men of lower social status.

In the rural areas, however, power is still in the hands of large landowners, prosperous rural businessmen and, in general, men of comparatively high social status, caste and education. But even here it is becoming difficult to generalize, for there is a growing struggle by the more populous lower classes to get control of the Congress Party organization and-particularly during the last few years-the newly constituted village and district councils.

In late 1959 two states, Andhra and Rajasthan, inaugurated what is known in India as panchayati raj, or democratic decentralization. Under this program, a three-tiered system of local government was established and is now being extended throughout India. At one level is the village panchayat, an elected council with enlarged powers of central government. At a second level is a samiti usually constituting the heads of village panchayats from an area of about 60,000 people (the number varies from state to state). At the third level there is a zilla parishad or district council made up of the samiti presidents. The area of the samiti coincides with the administrative units of the government-sponsored community development program, which was established during the First Five Year Plan to develop the country's rural areas. And the parishad has as its major responsibility the coördination of all development activities within the entire district, an area encompassing more than a million people. The samiti and the parishad thus constitute units not only of local self-government but also of rural development, with substantial budgets for primary and secondary schools, medical dispensaries, road construction, well digging and agricultural development, including minor irrigation works.

From the very beginning, these organizations of local government have been largely controlled by the high-caste landowners who dominate the countryside. But gradually, the numerically superior lower castes have become more active and in some areas they have gained control of the village panchayats, and even occasionally the samitis. While the spread of political participation may be desirable, it often means that power is taken by those who have had no experience in managing governmental bodies.

We can illustrate the consequences of this development by describing a village near Baroda in an area from which many of India's nationalist leaders (including Sardar Patel, India's first Home Minister) have come. In this region, the landowning patidars are the dominant caste in control of the Congress Party organization, local government bodies, credit institutions and coöperatives. As in most of the villages in this area the baraiyas, a caste of landless laborers and tenants, are the largest single caste. In 1951 a popularly elected panchayat was created and the dominant patidars won. But as a result of a controversy within the panchayat, the patidars resigned, leaving a handful of baraiyas in control. Once in power, they developed enough self-confidence to wish to retain control, and in subsequent elections they were successful.

Under baraiya control, the panchayat has been lenient in collecting taxes from the baraiya community while continuing to make collections from the patidars. When a new water works was established in the village, the panchayat at first refused to provide connections to the homes of patidars. The panchayat also meets infrequently, passes resolutions without discussions and is generally badly run. And within the local coöperative a conflict has developed between the landless baraiyas, eager to use the coöperative to purchase and store food grains at low prices, and the landowning patidars who want the coöperative to invest its limited funds in the purchase of cheap manures.

The growing participation of the baraiyas in the political life of this area can be further illustrated by the role they played in the February elections to the state assembly. In order to oppose the patidars effectively, the baraiyas joined the newly formed Swatantra (Freedom) Party, The result was that Swatantra candidates won in a number of constituencies in which the baraiyas are numerically large.

Elsewhere, the rise of lower castes into the panchayats and samitis is frequently accompanied by favoritism toward a particular community, a marked rise in the inefficiency of local government and an increase in corruption. These side effects of universal adult suffrage, as well as the intensification of class and caste conflict which we have noted, are widely decried by many educated Indians. The crass struggle for office seems to be far from the ideal of British democracy which the Indian intelligentsia holds dear. As a result, many intellectuals wish that they might call a halt to processes which they helped to set in motion. The cry grows for indirect elections, for outlawing political appeals to caste and religion, and for limiting tenure in a public office to a period of no more than ten years. One measure already taken by some states to reduce local conflicts is to award a bounty to villages which elect members of panchayats unanimously.

III

The application of equalitarian principles to education is also a matter of concern to many Indians. In an effort to improve the economic position of backward communities, state governments have passed legislation reserving a specified proportion of openings in the colleges and universities for particular castes declared by the government to be backward. For these same groups, a percentage-often a large percentage-of government jobs is also set aside. The principle of equality of opportunity, it is held, cannot be applied, because Brahmins and other high castes-by virtue of their head- start in education-would then be in a preferred position in obtaining both admission to college and, thereafter, one of the limited and coveted posts in the Civil Service.

The inevitable consequence of such a quota system, however, has been a marked decrease in standards. Examination marks for college admission and for securing government jobs have been lowered for the backward communities. High-caste leaders now argue, with some force, that the principle of appointment by merit has been almost eliminated. Since so many advantages accrue to a backward caste, there is great pressure on state governments to enlarge the list, and in some states as much as half the population has been declared backward. Many Indians point out that these policies have served to intensify caste loyalties and organization, but not necessarily to equalize the position of individuals, since many high castes have economically backward individuals and many low castes have wealthy families. If the lot of backward peoples is to be improved, it is argued, then the test of economic backwardness should be applied to individuals rather than entire communities.

The conflict between the goals of equalizing the position of individuals in society and of improving or at least maintaining educational standards has become most dramatically apparent with the enormous increase in higher education. State ministers of education have had to choose between mass education and high standards, no matter how much they may have hoped for both. Whereas there were 250,000 students in colleges and universities at the time of independence, the number is now rapidly approaching the million mark in less than 15 years. And since the First Five Year Plan was started in 1951, the number of colleges has been increased from 542 to over 1,000. Some of the older colleges such as St. Stephen's in Delhi, St. Xavier's in Bombay and the Presidency Colleges in Calcutta and Madras are still good- though one can start an argument with any educated Indian by asking whether they are as good as they used to be. But clearly the newer colleges and universities are, with a few notable exceptions, inferior.

The centrally sponsored University Grants Commission has cautioned state governments against precipitous mushrooming of colleges, against increasing admissions without a commensurate increase in teachers, and against hastily switching to more easily understood regional languages when adequate teaching materials are not available. But the political pressures at the state level have been enormous, and the number of students demanding entrance into college is probably still increasing more rapidly than new openings are being made available.

IV

The application of the principle of equality has probably slowed the pace of economic growth in some areas, quickened it in others. In the halls of Parliament and at dinner parties in Delhi, the most acrimonious subject for discussion is the matter of locating industries. The issue became dramatic in 1958, when the central government decided to build a refinery in the state of Bihar to refine the newly discovered oil of Assam. The Assamese launched a militant protest and the Indian Government finally agreed to build the refinery in Assam, and a second one later in Bihar. Two principles were involved. On the one hand, it was obviously desirable to develop industries in the most economic location. On the other, the Planning Commission has committed itself to the principle of giving special attention to the less developed areas of the country in an effort to equalize standards of living. The poorer areas like Assam have clamored for and received a larger share of public investment than they would have obtained if exclusively economic criteria had been applied. Similarly, the government has recently agreed to build a fertilizer plant in every state in India irrespective of economic costs and benefits.

The Third Five Year Plan explicitly states that "balanced development of different parts of the country, extension of the benefits of economic progress to the less developed regions and widespread diffusion of industry are among the major aims of planned development." But the report goes on to admit that "as resources are limited, frequently advantage lies in concentrating them at those points within the economy at which the returns are likely to be favourable." The planners have taken the position that the primary concern should be to increase national income and that "once a minimum in terms of national income and growth in different sectors is reached . . . it becomes possible to provide in many directions for a larger scale of development in the less developed regions." But in practice, the location of many factories within the public sector has been determined more by the persuasiveness of particular ministers in the central government and of chief ministers in the various states than by economic and technical considerations.

In agriculture, too, the political pressure for equalization in development has often been more effective than the arguments of agricultural economists. At the beginning of the First Five Year Plan a community development program was established as the instrument for rural development. Community development blocks were created and assigned agricultural, educational and social welfare officers who collectively were concerned with the all-around development of the villages within their blocks. Those who initially developed the program argued that the quality of the extension officers would be a critical factor in the success of the program, and that therefore the expansion of the program to encompass all of the country's villages should occur slowly. But this note of caution was effectively dismissed by those who argued that in the shortest possible time all villages should enjoy the advantages of the program. Within a brief nine years the program was extended to reach 370,000 villages, and by October 1963 it is expected that all of India's approximately half-million villages will be included in the program. Consequently, the quality of the development officers is understandably not as high as the planners had hoped, nor has the program fulfilled expectations.

In 1960 the Government of India agreed that an alternative method had to be found to increase the country's present rate of agricultural growth. This was estimated to be 17 percent in the first plan, and 16 percent in the second, which meant that over the past decade the growth rate in agriculture amounted to 3.3 percent annually compared to a population rise of about 2.1 percent per year-an increase of some 77,000,000 souls from 1951 to 1961. The Government decided to concentrate its agricultural experts and additional financial and administrative resources in seven selected districts where a combination of soils, availability of water and other resources was likely to bring the maximum increase in productivity. No sooner had the seven districts been selected than intense pressure was applied on the central government by states which had been overlooked. Recently the central government agreed to expand the program to include a district in every state.

While in some respects the application of the concept of equality in the development program has slowed the rate of growth, in other respects it has quickened the country's development. The beneficial effects are seen primarily in the private sector. As a result of the decision by state governments to give priority to the backward classes, many of the best- educated Indians, who used to enter the Civil Service as a matter of course, are now going into private business. Indeed, many social classes have taken to entrepreneurial activities for the first time on a large scale. The general effect of providing special benefits to lower castes has been to increase their self-awareness and arouse their expectations. As these classes increase their local political influence-an inevitable consequence of universal adult suffrage-they have also become more skilled at getting the licenses and permits from the government necessary to open shops, engage in the export-import trade and start small-scale industries. One can point to many communities now in private business which were not previously so engaged, at least at the present scale-the Nadars in Madras, Sikhs in the Punjab, Patidars in Gujarat and Marathas in Maharashtra.

V

It would be misleading to assume that all policy moves in the direction of greater equality in India. The social, political and economic gulf between those who have land and those who are landless is a vast one. The political equality permitted by "democratic decentralization" has helped to bridge that gap, but the sheer weight of economic inequalities in many areas makes it difficult for the poor to assert their claims. In most states land- reform legislation has been passed, but it is widely agreed that the landlords have evaded much of the legislation imposing ceilings on land by the simple expedient of distributing titles to other members of their family. None the less, two factors are at work which may serve to increase the power of the landless even when they do not obtain land. One is the growth of the powers of local government and the introduction of universal adult suffrage in local elections. And the second is the creation of compulsory primary education which is likely to be nearly universal throughout India by the end of the Third Five Year Plan in 1966.

India is now in the process of changing from a relatively rigid, hierarchical social system to a mass society in which the great psychological, social and economic gulfs between human beings are reduced. To achieve this objective Indians have been forced to make hard choices, for the goal of an equalitarian society often conflicts with other values which Indians cherish. But how committed the leadership is to this goal is indicated by the price which they have often, though uncomfortably, been willing to pay-an increase in particularistic loyalties, a diminution in educational standards and perhaps even a decrease in the rate of economic growth. How hard the doctrine of equality should be pushed and how heavy a price with respect to other values should be paid are obviously issues which each society must weigh for itself.