Nice passage you have here. It’s hard to disagree too much though I should note that this passage in its entirety could have been applied to 19th century US politics..

Now just my two cents:

Talking about Democracy, It just can’t function without the active participation of people. The functioning of democracy depends to a great extent on its constructive role of its citizens, influenced by values and norms. The use of Democracy to a large extent is conditioned by our values and priorities, and ultimately by our sense of justice. Democracy is a recognition that people should think for themselves, choose and act on the basis of their beliefs. That the citizens are well aware of their rights and responsibilities, act and behave accordingly. To safeguard democracy the people must have a keen sense of independence, involvement, self-respect, and their oneness and solidarity. The reason democracy does not really work in India is because we, the people, pay only lip service to it. Lip service continues to be paid to resolving limitations in democracy, but there is no sense of urgency” Those of us who are educated and well informed have discovered long ago that they cannot expect anything from their government. Most of the times we finish all our duty with a single statement like ‘all politicians are corrupt’, ‘that the system is not working’. We hardly try to look deep into the crux of the matter and try to do something for its betterment. The biggest challenge to Democracy I feel has been the increasing materialistic outlook of people. People these days are becoming more self-centered and self-serving, too much into their own rights and activities rather than the general well being. It has further led to loss of public awareness and civic consciousness. Democracy requires a conscience. When more and more people confine themselves into their own confining interests and concerns, it has become easier for despotism to set in. In India the space to speak truth is increasingly shrinking, capability of seeing things and accepting that differences. Middle class in particular have refrained themselves from an active engagement in the political and religious discourse in the country. Middle class do not even vote, what they do is induce cynicism and apathy in the absence of real power to change. We find our current political process to be a joke and feel our votes count for nothing so why bother? We simply do not bother to vote because we don’t care which bunch of jokers get elevated to honorable status of functioning the country and working towards either for the betterment or impairment of the citizens. Moreover the emergence of fundamentalism arising out of religion, caste and creed. It leads to a discrimination of others on the basis of birth or blood and leads to a penetrating bigotry, fanaticism and truculent treatment of fellow human beings. Again regionalist decentralization has always posed a threat to the effective working of democracy. With numerous regional, sectarian and ideological strains at work, governance has become incidental, an unpleasant chore that has per force to be performed as the byproduct of power getting which is increasingly becoming capricious and slithery. People fail to realize their differences within themselves are often exploited and exacerbated by politicians for their own immediate gains. Because of the lack of public activism, quenching the right to freedom of expression, the ability to stand for what is right, Democracy has become a myth, more of a tool to grab power and power eventually tends to corrupts absolutely. Hence people’s direct or indirect participation in the working of the Democracy, their roles in steering political leaders away from the twin imperilment of apathy and anarchy, provides an important base to the effective functioning of Democracy. Becoming rabble-rousers, and name-callers, choosing sides, accusing others of incompetence when we are not trying to do anything at the first place do not serve any purpose. Unless we people grow into mature political thinkers and put the national interest above the self interest, refrain the political parties being operated by sheer religious nationalism, Democracy can only be a myth. It is the responsibility of each one of us with utmost integrity,dedication and unity that we will work collectively for the better functioning of the democracy and celebrate true spirit of democracy; after all it is a mechanism purely driven by people.

I certainly prefer to keep shut after I have made my case..

samajhne waale samajh gaye hain.. jo na samjhe…best of luck to them.

Good night!

I am not at all being anal about your words, not at all hanging on to every sentence and I doubt very much that anyone going through my responses here could think as much. Certainly no one ought to. I repeat, I did not disagree with you and then agree with Jay. I just inflected my response differently as opposed to repeating the same point. And if you note I have responded to everyone a little differently here. This does not mean I am contradicting myself, just that I am trying to get the whole picture into view (to the best I can). The point is simple: if we suggest that India isn’t a democracy at all for all the various problems we can all agree with then using a somewhat different (though not unrelated set of criteria) we should also be willing to state that the US isn’t a democracy (as indeed many do today and many have at other points in the country’s history, for example the 1890s or the Gilded Age in general). The reason I am establishing this equation is because I think that what the West offers today by way of ‘democracy’ is the model we rely on in such debates. I am not sure if this is entirely ‘kosher’ to the extent that we tend to also abstract then notions of democracy from their very specific problems or let’s say particularities (peculiarities!) in different environments. I could make a case that compared to Sweden the US is not a democracy at all.

So again I am not disagreeing with all the criticisms. Remember I started out writing that piece (not the first in this sense, and I have also expressed similar views in many contexts over here) which you agreed with. So we are on the same side! Where I part ways with you is on the ‘definitional’ issue. I think that all of these issues do not mean India isn’t a democracy unless we then radically redefine ‘democracy’. And the latter is admissible if that is indeed what one is saying. But then we need that definition. You don’t see street violence by political parties in India but you see 20% of the population controlling 80% of the nation’s wealth. This is hardly the spread in Sweden. So from the latter’s perspective the US is not a democracy. So we can dismiss very many democracies and yet what do we call these systems? We cannot only be thinking of ‘ideals’ when judging societies. Surely there are degrees of ‘imperfection’ all round. This does not stop us from getting enraged at the Thackerays of the world, at being deeply disappointed or depressed with our societies. If you however wish to take it further and say India isn’t a democracy that’s fine of course but I disagree and I cannot be judged inconsistent because I wrote that piece and then disagreed on this one point. I am not closing off the discussion at this point. I just think that most of us simply accept ‘Western democracy’ at face value without being completely alert to the pitfalls and the problematic histories of this model and then use this as a yardstick with which to judge countries like India. I am the least prone to jingoistic arguments but one could even make the case that India is the most ‘remarkable’ democracy in human history.

On the rest again I did not question you on your credentials. I was just puzzled as to why you introduced them. You have every right to do so of course and I was merely exercising my right and telling you that I consider this sort of ‘detail’ to be completely irrelevant. You have launched a formidable argument here for your perspective and I would be as impressed by it whether you had majored in political science, zoology or theater! I am not being churlish here. Perhaps a bit of a purist. A debate simply depends on the case one is laying out. To be blunt about it I consider many historians or economists or political scientists not particularly persuasive even if they clearly know about the fundamentals of their field. So ‘credentials’ are simply not an issue with me. When I used the word ‘judge’ all I meant was (and incidentally I consider this a democratic move on my part!) that why not simply restrict things to what we’re arguing about and how we’re framing those arguments. I am not at all bothered by the info you revealed.

In sum I am just surprised that you found some of the things I’ve said here objectionable. I certainly did not ‘underestimate’ you anywhere.

For a moment, Jay, I thought you were talking about the incumbent administration in US.

So If I had substituted ‘is not a democracy’ with ‘hardly a democracy’, we only masquerade as one( which is exactly what it means) reams in objection could have been avoided? Man this is absurd. Like I mentioned earlier, Satyam you and others ought to have taken the spirit , not the letter of the term in its context..In response to YOUR post, I write this single sentence and it creates an unneeded furore.Do you really hang on to each word in discussions and then go ballistic? It is certainly not advisable. What a waste of time.

“Also I don’t know why you introduced your credentials. I think a debate should be judged on the merits or demerits not based on someone’s resume.
My ‘credentials’ and ‘resume’ are certainly not a few words Satyam.. you underestimate me. This was merely my degree, that too in the 59th comment..so where was the question of judging on merits and demerits? and why ‘judged’ at all? Is the world at large getting so intolerant that just a mention of a degree is not accepted? My single chance to have bragged a little about it, since there is not much else it is worth! Have a heart..

Cool Ilg..Just to update you, the climate in India is such that citizen activism has taken on exponential proportions. So feeling affronted is only natural. We all do something constructive in our own ways everyday..which stem out of ‘opinions’..which further growth, nurture activity and channel energy.

Instinctively Id like to say

humblogger ab yeh safar kat jaayega
raaste mein jee na ab ghabrayega

So we limp along with this ‘thodidsi democracy’and hope for Utopia..jahaan gham bhi na ho aansoo bhi na ho bas pyar hi payar palle..ik aise gagan ke talle.

One has decide to set a wrong right, in what one experiences directly.It may end up just being a drop in the ocean overall but ..why devalue the importance of a single drop that would finally lead to the sea of immense possibilities. the energy put forward by a single thought can mobilise , attract and propel a wave..

Nonetheless

jhuke yeh sar to sirf sajde mein
bas us jahaan ki talash hai

jahaan insaan ho insaaniyat basse
bas us jahaan ki talash hai

bandagi rahe sabka mazhab
bas us jahaan ki talash hai

yateem na bane baccha koi
bas us jahaan ki talash hai.

( Just made this up for you Rocky )

Satyam

“Jay: Yes unfortunately India often does not behave like a democracy. It fails completely the sorts of tests we expect and get from the contemporary West in so many ways.”

How different is my statement from Jays? yet you agree with one and disagree with another? I object your honor..I’d rather you read into the spirit of what was meant rather than go into semantics.

As for the rest of your comments.. frankly Satyam, it goes bumper..at least a foot and a half above. And if I may just slip this in edgeways, I think I am fairly intelligent considering I topped Mumbai in Political science and Constitutional History ( England, India). But believe me the course syllabus was easier to imbibe. I guess it catered to average minded students like us..

ILG.. Umm ..since I dont have a clue about your real identity, does your name by nay chance carry a ‘ Thackeray’? Reason being, the tone and intention to gag seems strongly familiar..Recently another woman Jaya Bachchan was asked to ‘better leave your (her) views unexpressed. “And yet you blow the bugle of being an advocate of democracy? I found your comment unduly provocative, with an element of ad hominem confrontation, especially in light of the fact that there was absolutely no response elicited to the issue at hand.

I find it demeaning and pompous to ennumerate what I may have done for my country. I live here and live as a true Indian citizen, fighting for my rights, but loving my country passionately enough to have never wanted to leave it despite numerous opportunities.

Nobody is going to gag me, stifle my opinion, bludgeon me into silence. If you think lowly of my remarks or others on this thread, ILG you are free to skip our comments. But it is rather confrontational to post such obviously rude comments on a public forum.

I was interested in a discussion , and mentioned it clearly thus

Ilg

Several points to be made but let me begin with the basics.

There is no universal definition of the term Democracy.It differs on various counts..e.g Britains democratic institutions bear little or no resemblance to the US and neither with India. Therefore it is erroneous to judge democratic principles in comparative terms.

The simplest, most rudimentary and fair assessment if at all that is the purpose of this discussion is to bring on an analogy between conditions as they exist today and the tenets set in our Indian Preamble, Directive Principles, Fundamental Rights and the spirit of the constitution and use that as the spring board… which imo has taken a severe beating, even with this incident.

“The very fact that the Thackerays exist and survive are a result of this.

Dear Ilg they dont just exist and survive, they thrive while the rest of us less equals, grovel and shovel.

Further, how about listing exactly what comes under the rather widely connoted umbrella term of ‘pitfalls and perils’. I suspect what I may feel blasphemous in the context of infringement of personal liberties may just be a pitfall… which would bring us to a stalemate. So let us take it from there..if you wish.”

Unquote.

If your response to this has been the above comments.. then I have nothing further to add. You may carry on aggressively counter responding..its a free world. I will exercise my right to be silent.

Ravi, I’d agree with you on this point. I suspect ILG was being polemical there and probably did not have you in mind. His statements there were probably more ‘universal’ than they needed to be.

I don’t disagree ILG. I brought that up because I feel these are often the standards people have in mind, consciously or not. Which is why I think it is crucial to remember the ‘history’ of democracy in the West. Moreover it is as important to also not forget the excesses of present day Western democracies. finally I think that given India’s scale and given the enormous complexity of problems prevalent in the country in just about every walk of life the achievement of Indian democracy for all its imperfections is still nothing short of a miracle, specially when we compare it with other countries with loosely similar fundamentals.

Of course there is another rather interesting and admittedly radical perspective that one could bring to bear on this. India is a country where the ’state’ does not have a monopoly on ‘violence’ (power). The very opposite is true for each of the leading Western democracies. Why is this important? Because Western democracies on their road to present day ’stability’ have ironed out all kinds of political difference in very many violent ways. There has been a march towards the more progressive but it has also been accompanied at points by excessive ‘blood-letting’. What we see in India is always enough of the latter precisely because the state does not have that kind of monopoly of violence. There are theorists who would argue that this kind of ‘messiness’ for all its excess offers certain avenues for democracy that the West has perhaps foreclosed a long time ago.

I will also say (and this isn’t a knock on anyone here) but within certain classes the lack of perceived ‘order’ (as they define it) in the system is often held to be a huge problem and almost one surpassing any other.

But let me provide one example that I find heartening for my own ideological purposes. The right has been ascendant in India since the 80s. But it is not today where it once was. Or rather in a national sense the right already seems to be post-peak. For the BJP ’sweeping’ the heartland is already a thing of the past. What rode the BJP to power once upon a time also made it possible for lower caste parties to become more ascendant. Democracy either way. Both groups received ‘representation’ in a way which was perhaps not evident before. The lower caste phenomenon in effect canceled out the right wing movements with many important constituencies. The BJP seemed to be comfortably entrenched more recently with the ‘India Shining’ slogan. But what happened? There was a left oriented revolt against it at the pools precisely because those supposed economic benefits had not really percolated to many parts of the populations. Again this was democracy at work. One can multiply these examples.

It is the attendant violence that many find hard to reconcile with. And I find this entirely understandable. I do however think that notions of democracy less institutionalized than those in the contemporary West (and hence less co-opted) might always have to leave a space open for such violence. We can’t simply vote on all kinds of conflict that democracy either has to deal with or often engenders. These political, social, economic forces are often massive enough and therefore often cause enough friction for there to be violence at regular intervals. I don’t find this desirable but I perhaps find it comprehensible.

We can rue what the Thackerays did recently a great deal without necessarily confusing this kind of violence with other kinds that operates at many different levels in India. We would also do well to remember that a lot of what was perceived as ‘less violent’ in the past was achieved by really suppressing a great deal of people and their aspirations. It’s that old ‘metro’ canard about places like UP. The idea that there’s too much “lawlessness”. But pogroms over the last two decades in Indian history have taken place in Delhi and Bombay and suchlike, not in UP! What people are often reacting to is ‘class’. This is why the most ridiculed Indian politicians always have one thing in common — they are lower down on the scale of ‘class’!

The reason people like me point the things out is because we are passionate about the country, otherwise what the hell are we doing thousands of miles away debating about our country and following each and everything that is going on in the country.

The things are pointed out because, these are things that need to change for the better so as to make India better and to see that every one gets the same opportunity and are entitled to the minimum things that they are entitiled to in a democracy. These things are not pointed out because we want to nitpick or put down India.

Yes, we are sitting somewhere and not doing anything but that does not mean that we cannot say what is wrong or what is right and what needs to change etc etc.

And I do think the ‘common man’ is affected. You are subjected to racial profiling at airports, if you’re black the racial profiling has always been a feature of life. If you’re black you mysteriously end up in prison more often and for longer than whites. So on and so forth. It’s not India but why should we lower the bar? If this is the world’s leading democracy it should have higher standards.

Kaveeta Kaul: Again let’s take the extreme Hitler example. Why did not German law work when Hitler did whatever he wanted? The Nazis were the Thackerays to the nth power. And one can keep multiplying the examples. Again I repeat my earlier point. The ‘law’ is always helpless before ‘politics’. Let’s take the US example once again — after 9/11 hundreds of people were ‘detained’ in the US and most of these simply disappeared into a black hole? What happened to the ‘law’? And Guantanamo? Those prisoners are more or less in permanent limbo? Where is ‘law’ (US or International)? Why does this happen? Because we understand ‘law’ a bit too romantically. A ‘law’ is only as powerful as the politics that guarantees it. When the police conspired with the Sena in Bombay or the Modi govt in Gujarat to instigate pogroms what happened to the ‘law’? What can the ‘law’ do when the very people who are supposed to uphold it serve the interests of politics?

So my argument is that every democracy in the world can be dismissed on the same grounds that India can. Plus we need a sense of history as well. I cannot forget that the US enslaved a race of people, committed genocide on another to get to its position as a superpower. We cannot just look at the US ‘today’ (leaving aside the fact that there’s plenty that’s objectionable even ‘today’) but also at the history that made the ‘today’ possible and there’s lots of violence here.

I am not at all indifferent to the violence the Indian state has unleashed. There are examples aplenty all over the land. But I think that to deny it the label ‘democracy’ in a definitional sense might be going too far. Now I have great respect and admiration for your (and Ravi’s and whoever else’s) humanistic concerns in this sense and the alertness you bring to these issues. I share your outrage and deep disappointment with the way things are. I just cannot go as far as you do though I understand where you’re coming from.

I prefer water

The Kite Runner- I was very moved by the Character of Ameer’s Baba he is like a typical Indian Male.

Agree to that.

Dil naaummiid to nahiin, naakaam hii to hai
lambii hai gam kii shaam, magar shaam hii to hai

ye safar bahut hai Kathin magar
nA udaas ho mere humblogger

1) ye sitam kii raat hai Dhalane ko
hai andheraa gam kaa pighalane ko
zaraa der is mein lage agar, nA udaas ho mere humblogger

2) nahiin rahanevaalii ye mushkilen
ye hain agale mod pe manzile
merii baat kaa tuu yakiin kar, nA udaas ho mere humblogger

3) kabhii Dhund legaa ye kaaravaan
vo nai zamiin nayaa aasamaan
jise Dhundtee hai terii najar, nA udaas ho mere humblogger

Shows what can really go wrong to a perfectly sound country once it is in the hands of Commies and then Terrorists.
Very sad.

That is very true, look what happened during the Emergency- all trains ran on time , or how the BJP goverment forced Tehlka to close shop.

But I will take India’s Democracy any day over China’s Commie Rule or the Rouge State That Pakistan is.

“What the Thackerays have indulged in in this recent incident and earlier was more or less ‘criminal’ activity. But the system was not equipped to ’stop’ it”

Of course the system was equipped to stop it.. and it did. The operative word is ‘ political will’which was missing.Till such time democracy was held ransom. Then all it took was reportedly one call by Margaret Alva AICC spokesperson to CM Deshmukh, and the agitation was called off.. but not before humbling AB.

My father often used to cringe when he heard the term ‘thodisi bewafaii’. According to him bewafaii is bewafaii.. you cannot quantify it.. with thodisi. Reason I quote this..either we have a full, fair, functional democracy, based on the principles painstakingly laid by our founding fathers or else we are limping along deluding ourselves of living in freedom, till the powers that be dont somehow cast their vengeful gaze on us and remind subtly ‘ hum raja hain aur tum runk’ as AB described his relation with the Gandhi family.

Ravi ( blushes)you are too kind, Sir.

In my opinion as long as the majoirty of the common people are not affected I am fine, in the US in your day to day life what are you affected by? In India you are affected at every point on your day to day life and we just accept it as part of the normal routine and just continue with it, but for how long? That needs to change.

Every time you post something and it could be any topic , it is really a pleasure to read for me and I am 100% sure it would be for the majority of the folks here.

I echo your thoughts Mam.

I can agree with most of what you’ve said but these conditions I would submit are just about internal to most democracies at some point or the other. For example I often decry a similar rise of fascism in the US. The examples of Western Europe in this sense are also all too familiar. Show me a democracy and I’ll show you an experiment with fascism.

I stand by every word of that piece but it wasn’t my intention to suggest that India had ceased to be a democracy but that democratic space was seriously in retreat if the likes of the Thackerays were allowed to prosper (as they have been). But such a discussion once again assumes a democracy.

In any democracy the progressive forces are always battling it out with more conservative and reactionary elements. Sometimes one is ascendant, sometimes the other. Since the 80s the right has more or less defined things. By the way this itself is considered a more ‘democratic’ situation by many voters who felt alienated from mainstream Congress politics all these decades. This is as one would say the aporia with every democracy. What if people vote for fascists? The Thackerays have their support base. This is why I have often stressed on the purely ‘legal’ aspects of these situations. What the Thackerays have indulged in in this recent incident and earlier was more or less ‘criminal’ activity. But the system was not equipped to ’stop’ it much as the system completely failed when pogroms took place at different points. ‘Law’ always loses in a fight with ‘politics’! Often, ironically enough, because the latter operates in a more democratic space!

Several points to be made but let me begin with the basics.

There is no universal definition of the term Democracy.It differs on various counts..e.g Britains democratic institutions bear little or no resemblance to the US and neither with India. Therefore it is erroneous to judge democratic principles in comparative terms.

The simplest, most rudimentary and fair assessment if at all that is the purpose of this discussion is to bring on an analogy between conditions as they exist today and the tenets set in our Indian Preamble, Directive Principles, Fundamental Rights and the spirit of the constitution and use that as the spring board… which imo has taken a severe beating, even with this incident.

“The very fact that the Thackerays exist and survive are a result of this.

Dear Ilg they dont just exist and survive, they thrive while the rest of us less equals, grovel and shovel.

Further, how about listing exactly what comes under the rather widely connoted umbrella term of ‘pitfalls and perils’. I suspect what I may feel blasphemous in the context of infringement of personal liberties may just be a pitfall… which would bring us to a stalemate. So let us take it from there..if you wish.

Et tu Satyam? The most forceful of your statements was

“One wonders what Independence Day celebrations every year are about if the most basic freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution of the land cannot be defended against such naked displays of street power. Is the idea of India only something that can be celebrated in jingoistic songs, comformist movies and compromised talent shows? If the ‘Constitution’ or ‘law’ or the ‘judiciary’ are not backed up by adequate ‘force’ these remain merely words and completely impotent.”

In fact my response to you was to do with the above crie de coeur and you have turned bewafaa..dal badlu much like our netas ..ah ah not expected from you.

RKS.. you raise an important point of the direction we seem to be taking. Oligarchy seems closer to our present system than any other.

Rocky

“The people of India have shown the door to three of the most poweful Prime Ministers- Indira Gandhi, Rajeev Gandhi and Vajpayee.

You and I are not in a position to decide just how manoevured and manipulated were conditions.. It may not have been a populist vote any more than a political subterfuge.

Cheers! Enjoy your beer.

Very well said, But ILG has a point too in that The people of India have shown the door to three of the most poweful Prim Ministers- Indira Gandhi, Rajeev Gandhi and Vajpayee.

The biggest prolem is that No politcian is ever prosecuted or goes to Jail, unlike in the US where even the daughter of the President can get a speeding Ticket and Governers Like Ryan of IL are serving their time in the Jail for corruption.

Democracy Index – India 35

Freedom in the World (report)

Economic Freedom of the World – India 69

Reporters Without Borders – India 120

Agree and Disagree. My POV is similar to Kaveetaa. It doesn’t matter where we stand in political spectrum of Democracy (+ve) and Dictatorship/fascism (-Ve). It is the direction we are going. IMO we are moving in wrong direction with ever increasing non-democratic values. Pakistan may be at wrong end of the spectrum but they can move in right direction wrt democracy/freedom/liberty.

Resultantly, if God forbid the leader who convincingly managed to lie his way to the elected seat, does win elections, he now has to bear the albatross round his neck of then playing to the gallery for the rest of his term and keep harping on the same tune.

Let us not forget that every politician barring none is potent/latent dictator in the making. Lord Actons ” Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely’ more applicable in India than elsewhere, propels into truism and before he knows it he is caught in a one way street. Not that he was an embodiment of nationalist/philanthropic/ ideas in the first place. But the greed for votes and succumbing to ‘will of the masses’ is an opium too strong to resist or decline.

Sooner than later the politician transforms into a caricature of himself, too chicken to step out and attempt something radical for fear of being rejected. Let me illustrate with a rather.. erm.. filmi example. Arshad warsi as Circuit has according to me reached the zenith of his career. the audience will not accept him in another role no matter how well assayed it may be. He is now a prisoner of his own act. All he will be henceforth is ‘Circuit’.

Most politicians are doomed to the same fate. They are merely playing to the gallery. If the common mass did not go into orgasmic thrills every time Raj Thackeray sounded the ‘marathi manoos bugle’ he would have discarded it for a Italian guitar long back. sadly he has the unconditional backing of politicians who want to create a new Age Bal in addition to the average gullible, naive citizen. So ‘have -backing-will-terrorise’ becomes the mantra that dictates every move.

Raj Thackeray is by no means an unintelligent man… yet the desire to power is overpowering!!

Bingo, even from far away here, with little knowings of the ins and outs this is exactly what it seems like.
And I don’t place the blame at the hands of the common person, to me it seems a major issue with the people up top.

The way I saw it on my brief travels, the common person is the same everywhere, whether it was Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Karnataka or Goa. Maybe skin colour changes, religion changes, food changes but common person is same. At ground levels I did encounter any such issues – maybe I was lucky or I just went to the right places. It seems to me the people at the top are relentless in creating such divide or “using” it as political tool. They extenuate the issue and bring in into the public domain and the media is such a sell-out that they create more and more hype around it. This then probably manifests itself further down the system and creates an air of resentment in some people. It is surely the responsibility of the state – the people at the top to create an environment for peaceful discussion.

This whole Jaya episode – surely a reasonable “response” to it (if one had an issue with it) is something along the lines of “We would like Jaya to explain what was meant by the comment…” or something along those lines – give the opportunity for a response. Instead you have bans hit, media overhype, apologies demanded, a whole lot of embarrassment for a lot of people and everyone getting involved. A national discussion, probably a lot of propoganda and resentment being built and then it is closed a few days later with a couple of apologies – but the sting LASTS. And questions still remain…was the apology sincere? Was it for the film to release?

Maybe one expects a bit too much – afterall its probably true that India has the most complex structure of people then any country in the world. Religions, language, colour all abound – boundaries clearly defined it is a tough ask for it to operate like any normal democracy. But it stands no chance with some of these people at top. Because they only seem interested in is bringing religion, language etc into politics.

Very well said.

You see we arent really a democracy..just masquerade as one. Perhaps the only aspect which is functional, is the process of voting. Here too ironically, people vote in our Great Indian Democracy to bring Dictators into power!!

A pleasure to read.

My personal favorite line (maybe because of the very writer-ly stroke it embodies, at least, to my mind): “Change all the names, the names of fountains and the names of cities, change all the names, change history.”

for some reason I’ve found it very hard to access Bachchan’s blog since yesterday.. I was in fact only able to do so at one point..all day today it hasn’t worked..

“Bring em’ on” vs. “Do Tell”

With the nomination of one Sarah Palin, presidential politics is no longer a battle of economic policies and national security; it’s a Saturday night brawl between the Rednecks and the Elites.

On the left, we have the smugly smiling, smarter-than-thou, Ivy Leaguers. On the right, we have the gun-clinging, God-toting, cowboys.
Make that cowgirls.

http://www.realclearpolitics.c.....own_a.html

I am going to say RDBish line “We need to be proactive”