Emergency At Midnight

The Congress has been prone to autocratic means of governance. This has been the perennial allegation of the opposition. On Saturday night, the agenda setters of the Congress proved that the opponents of Congress' way of life are right on their money. Amidst high drama over the issue of black money and corruption, which saw a gandhian earlier and a yog guru now flexing muscle with the Congress-led government, the protagonists of emergency like rule cut loose on a Sanyasi's Satyagrah (however impractical or ill-timed it may be). Baba Ramdev and hundreds of his supporters and followers were treated with an iron hand when they expect it least to visit them. Some five thousand armed men of Delhi Police and the Rapid Action Force unleashed mayhem on the people who had gathered at the Ramlila Ground in New Delhi ostensibly to pressurize the government to act tough against all those who plunder or contribute in the plunder of national wealth in the form of black money, particularly that stashed in supposedly huge amount in the foreign banks. The armed men used lathis, tear shells, fire and bullets against people whose leaders asked them to remain peaceful till last and these policemen who obviously acted at the instruction of the Union Home Ministry did not serve any warning to the gathering of a huge mass. The Baba and his supporters were evicted from the Ramlila Ground at midnight as the home ministry decided to extern the yog guru who was, as per official denfence theory, purportedly inciting people against a democratically elected government at centre. Men and women were beaten black and blue without any distinction or discrimination. I guess this is the face of rule of law under emergency. This was emergency at midnight.

The official defence, as propounded by the parallel mouthpiece of the Congress party, Digvijay Singh says that Ramdev had become a threat to peace and harmony in Delhi, that he is a habitual cheater, that he has been a tax evader, that he harbours a political ambition, that he had a communal agenda during his so-called hunger strike in the national capital, that his claim for medical miracle is a farce, that he has preached absurd things in the name of reviving the techniques of yoga, that he used unethical means, as one pointed out two years ago by CPI-M leader Brinda Karat, that he has held captive his own master Baba Shankardev and is a threat to his life, that he is mumbug, who agreed to call off his hunger strike during talks with the representatives of the government and later told his followers a different version altogether, that he secured permission for a yog shivir at Ramlila Ground, which was later converted into the place of political agenda setting, that he was being managed by the RSS and the BJP, that his sinister programme at Ramlila Ground was totally sponsored, conspired and implemented by the saffron brigade with RSS and VHP being the fountainhead and that a thug like Ramdev got the treatment that he deserved for cheating, misleading and misguiding the entire nation. But, at this point of time, can the parallel mouthpiece of the ruling party answer a simple question? That, had he or his party or the government not known all the tenets of Ramdev's mischief as propounded by Digvijay Singh himself when four senior ministers of the union cabinet were sent to prostrate before the man who was evicted at midnight from the Ramlila Ground on Saturday? If the government or the party or Mr Digvijay Singh himself knew about the deeds of Ramdev, why the ruling dispensation laid before a half-naked man with a 'distorted intent'? Why till as late as on Saturday evening the union ministers held a press conference to say that the government had agreed to all the demands of Baba Ramdev? Did the government not cheat the very people who elected it, if the defence theory as propounded early Sunday morning and hinted at a couple of days before by Digvijay Singh? Can the government prostrate before a person who threatens to lead some one percent of population to an agitation against the government?

Now, suppose this. Suppose, Baba Ramdev had agreed to call off the fast-- when government wanted him to do so with all the secret deals in place that were made public on Saturday by Kapil Sibal, who left press briefing midway to get 'an instruction from someone higher up' only to return and hint at what unfolded later in the night-- would the parallel mouthpiece of the congress party held on to his views as he did? Simply put, did the government indulge in secret dealings with a man who was a cheater in all his forms? Can anyone by this defence of the congress or the government? I leave this question here itself.

But, what happened in New Delhi on Saturday night defies all the logic that governs a civil society like ours. Five thousand armed men run amok at a camp attended by peaceful demonstrators. Police set the dais on fire, damaged the tent and beat up people! My question is what the people were doing there? Did they demand an overthrow of the government like what happened in Egypt? Repression of this sort is not acceptable. Ramdev has a right to express his views and interact with people his wishes to. And, his supporters have the same right. The government, it seems, tried to make amends what the congress party afterthought was a mistake committed by sending four ministers to placate a sanyasi with impractical demands for this government. But, surely the method adopted by the government at the behest of the party gives a signal that a voice of discomfort will be silence by whatever means possible. This is an alarming situation.

For many Chinese bachelors, no deed means no dates

I found this news-piece while reading Indian Express(dated 17-04-2011). I want to share it with those who don't read IE but somehow follow my blog...


IN THE realm of eligible bachelors, Wang Lin has a lot to recommend him. A 28-year-old college educated insurance salesman, Wang has a flawless set of white teeth, a tolerable karaoke voice and a three-year-old Nissan with furry blue seat covers.
But by the exacting standards of single Chinese women, it seems, Wang lacks the bankable attribute of real property. Given that even a cramped, two-bedroom apartment on the dusty fringe of the capital sells for about $150,000, Wang's $900-a-month salary means he may forever be condemned to the ranks of the renting.

Last year, he said, this deficiency prompted a high-end dating agency to reject his application.
"Sometimes I wonder if I will ever find a wife," said Wang, who lives with his parents, who remind him of his single status with nagging regularity.

There have been many undesirable repercussions of China's unrelenting real estate boom, which has driven prices up by 140 per cent nationwide since 2007, and by as much as 800 per cent in Beijing over the past eight years.

Working-class buyers have been frozen out of the market while an estimated 65 million apartments across the country bought as speculative investments sit empty.

The collateral damage to urban young professionals, especially men, who increasingly find themselves lovelorn and despairing as a growing number of

women hold out for a mate with a deed, is largely overlooked.
More than 70 per cent of single women in a recent survey said they would tie the knot only with a prospective husband who owned a home. 50 per cent said financial considerations ranked above all else, with good morals and personality falling beneath the top three requirements. (Not surprisingly, 54 per cent of single men ranked beauty first, according to the report, which surveyed 32,000 people and was jointly issued by the Chinese Research Association of Marriage and Family and the All-China Women's Federation.) Given the nation's gender imbalance, an outgrowth of a cultural preference for boys and China's stringent family-planning policies, as many as 24 million men could be perpetual bachelors by 2020, according to the report.

Yang Xuning, 29, a sportswriter, said much of the pressure comes from parents who feel taunted by the wealth around them.

He recalls his first meeting with his girlfriend's parents, when he was asked about his salary and his nesting plans. "I tried to reason with her mother, explaining that it's not practical to buy something at this stage in our lives but she wouldn't hear it," he said.

He stood his ground, she stood hers, and a few months later, Yang's girlfriend called it quits.

"Many girls see marriage as a way of changing their status without hard work," he said bitterly.

Many women are unapologetic about their priorities, citing the age-old tradition in which men provided a home for their brides, even if that home came with a mother-in-law.

Gao Yanan, a 27-year-old accountant with a fondness for RayBans and Zara pantsuits, said the matter was not up for debate. "It's the guy's responsibility to tell a girl right away whether he owns an apartment," she said. "It gives her a chance not to fall in love."

With such women on the prowl, even men who do have their own homes have come up with techniques to weed out the inordinately materialistic.

Liu Binbin, 30, an editor at a publishing house in Beijing, said he often arrived at first dates by bus, even though he owned a car.
"If they ask me questions like `Do you live with your parents?' I know what they're after," he said.

Sindhustan: Lokpal: Anna Bashing

Sindhustan: Lokpal: Anna Bashing

Lokpal: Anna Bashing

I don't why some people are after Anna Hazare's life for mustering courage to stand up against corruption. He is not demanding something unusual. And, his demands are not traversing the sanctity of parliamentary democracy, a basic feature of our Constitution. Nowhere in the Constitution is written that a bill can only be conceptualised and formulated by the members of parliament. The essence of our legislative procedure is that a law can not come into existence until and unless it passes the test of parliament. And, by demanding an audience and participation in formulation of a bill is no crime in our country and is not unconstitutional as per our democratic tenets. So, why a plethora of columnists has indulged in Anna bashing? Let the experiment complete its course. Only then, we may be able to judge. Till then, don't jump guns, please. This experiment may open many a mind in this youthful democracy.

Anna Declares War On Corruption

Can a law, howsoever comprehensive it may be, weed out corruption from any society? Answer can not be an affirmative one. Corruption is not an island in itself which can be attacked by the force of law. It has been a way of life, like religion. Don't frown. The comparison may look an erroneous one but it is not. Religion in our country has been an individual way of life governed by a set of social, moral and ethical rules. And, corruption is very much part of our daily conduct, which is regulated by religion, both institutionalised and free. So, comparison between corruption and religion is a valid one. Corruption is a way of life and has been a reality of human kind throughout the history. The civilisational history of human existence tells us that corrupt practices can not be put to an end, it can only be moderated, channelled and curbed to a manageable level.

Anna Hazare launching a brave movement by undertaking fast onto death notwithstanding, the fight against corruption can not end or begin with the fulfilment of his demands. His demands are rather simplistic given the magnitude of the problem. He wants government to pass the Jan Lokpal Bill as drafted by social activists closely working with him. This bill proposes to make ministers, officials and other public authority accountable for any corrupt practice, if and when they indulge in it. It also says that the Lokpal must not require approval from any authority to initiate legal proceeding against a public functionary, who has delved into corruption. These demands are not only simple, rather extremely simplistic and thus can only complicate the matter in the long run. This law even if it is passed... provided there is a change of heart at the highest level of government... it won't serve its purpose and can not either weed out corruption or act as a deterrent to the practice.

Corruption has its roots in our thought process-- a result of our values, education, sensitivity, tradition, poverty, lust, ideals or an absence of one or all of them. So, Anna Hazare declaring a war on corruption may not go a long way in fighting corruption itself, but it can do one thing for sure, that is, to educate the masses of the fallout of corruption. Many more Annas will be required to do a social reformation that might bring corruption at a manageable or minimal level in decades or centuries to come. Or, who knows the fight against corruption may turn out to be an eternal fight between the good and the evil. But, Anna Hazare deserves huge applaud for his conviction at the age of 72, for his relentless fight against social malaise and for the hope that he harbours that one day the nation will be free of corrupt practices!

Telangana Report Is Political

The 5-member Srikrishna Committee report on the question of a separate statehood for Telangana has come out on the expected lines. There are no suprises in the list of options recommended by the panel headed for Justice Srikrishna. Of the six options, the least favourable, as suggested by the panel itself, is maintaining a status quo. I think, maintaining status quo will again throw the entire region into clashes, arson and bloodshed. The panel has fuelled at the same time the aspirations of Rayalaseema region by giving them some fodder to give a shape to their agitation (that has not begun yet) for a demanding a separate political identity.

The five intelligent men also gave the people of Rayalaseema an option to either go with Telangana or with Andhra and be part of Rayala-Telangana or Seemaandhra! This is the most baffling option to me. It reminds me of the British design that gave some 562 princely states of united India an option to go either with Pakistan or join the union of India in 1947, when most of the states naturally thought themselves a part of the country; thereby giving them an option to go separate and nourish their narrow political aspirations, if any. The wise men should have thought otherwise this time around.

To me, the question before the panel was whether a separate state of Telangan will fulfill the needs and aspirations of people living in the resource rich region. The problem of Telangana is the problem of all those, who demanded or are demanding a separate state for themselves. But, instead of focusing on people and the depravity that they have suffered under the present political set up, the committee seems to have acted with an aim to satisfy the political groups that have been nourishing their own ambitions as they have failed to capture power in united Andhra Pradesh.

This does not augur good for the people who have genuine hope with attached to the creation of Telangana. They may well be on the path of their brethren in Uttarakhan, Jharkhand and neighbouring Chhattisgarh, where people are still deprived even after ten years of the creation of states they fought for. The Committee led by a former supreme court justice should have focussed on these issues to expose the detrimental political designs of the rulers or potential rulers. Rather, it has supplied various groups six bags of political fodder to masticate. It has also created confusion among the protagonists of separate Telangana as to what to do? Which option to go for?

To sum up, the Srikrishna committee has not delivered what was expected of it. It seems to have dealt with the political tug of war both in New Delhi and Hyderabad.

Ayodhya Verdict

A court of law is a living body. The Allahabad High Court has proved it. It showed that it had a soul, a mind and heart to feel and sense things and it acted as if it wanted to guide the present generation and ones to come. It worked on the principle of peace co-existence. It was mindful of the reality of India, Hindustan. Don't be legal, be judicious as the high court was. You can not have an isolated Hindu or an isolated Muslim.