[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: On Tolerance vs. Mob-Rule

Administrative Note:

Week's Agenda: Social Conditions

  Minimum Wage
  Rules regarding Safety of Personnel at work to be made clear
  Introduction of Social Security Net
  Introduction of identity card
  Removal of Age discrimination at work
  Creating conditions so that reservations will no longer be necessary

     Hold on, Prof Roy!  Not so quick a foreclosure to the point:
     there are any people who are fanatical or intolerant in power, is a 
     different question from whether I am prepared to name them in the 
     context of an IP debate!
     IP is about policy, and I don't think this is the right place to 
     discuss the positions or personalities of individuals.
     My point about the Babri Masjid, Sikhs, Christians, etc. was not
     some of these matters are not sub-judice.  It was that there has
     NO CONDEMNATION of these by the government, to the extent at least 
     that these were illegal acts.  What is sub-judice is whether 
     particular individuals might or might not be responsible (as I 
     understand the nature of the court cases).  That is a completely 
     separate matter from the fact that illegal acts  such as the 
     demolition of the mosque, the killing of Sikhs and the
     of Christians etc. took place and are taking place.
     And there is actually an increase in such incidents because a
     kind of intolerant culture has been created and is still being 
     fostered by the active or passive collusion of those in power in 
     several states and of course in the centre.
     Professor Prabhu Guptara
     Director, Organisational and Executive Development
     Wolfsberg Executive Development Centre
     (a subsidiary of UBS AG)
     CH-8272 Ermatingen
     Tel: + 41.71.663.5605
     Fax: +41.71.663.5590
e-mail: prabhu.guptara@ubs.com

______________________________ Reply Separator
Subject: Re: On Tolerance vs. Mob-Rule
Author:  sroy (sroy@vgsom.iitkgp.ernet.in) at nyuxuu
Date:    05.10.98 19:43

Dear Ms.  Ko,
I was responding to Prof.  Guptara more than to yourself, and my 
apologies if
the emphasis failed to come through.  It ought to be obvious that all 
intolerance is to be condemned, since without (almost) absolute freedom 
inquiry and expression, the progess of knowledge in any field is 
impossible.  I
hope you may find my terms of tolerance/intolerance more accurate than 
"fanaticism" which has I think a somewhat technical origin in theology.
Prof.  Guptara has not identified any "religious fanatics" in political 
power in
India today, so as far as I am concerned that too closes itself as an 
The examples he gives of the Babri Masjid, and terrorism against the 
Sikhs after
Indira Gandhi's death etc.  are, if I am not mistaken, sub judice in 
India, and
let us all hope that justice will take its course.  Perhaps we ought not 
forget that our country is very much a functioning democracy with the 
Rule of
Law prevalent (though of course imperfectly, here as elsewhere).
I do think mob-rule is the real danger, not religious beliefs of one 
sort or
another.  Mob-rule allows individuals to escape accountability, and so 
the working of the Rule of Law.  It is not peculiar to India or the 
countries in any way, and can and does happen everywhere.
Subroto Roy

This is a posting to India_Policy Discussion list:  debate@indiapolicy.org
Rules, Procedures, Archives:            http://www.indiapolicy.org/debate/