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


Postings not related to the writing of the Manifesto or policy chapters
are likely to be summarily rejected. Thanks for your understanding. IPI
I don't think that secession can be clearly defined by
anyone. Please don't get carried away reading textbooks
which say that the right to secede is the same as
protecting the rights of even the smallest minority.
This is not true at all. Let me ask you - why 5% of
an area? Why not .01%? Is it because that you don't
mind opressing .01%? And why is it based on area?
Why not religion/caste/language? We can carve out
a separate area like we did for Pakistan. Why 2/3rd
majority? Why not 3/4th or 9/10th? The point is that
it is impossible to define anything in this regard
unless you force me to accept your definition as the
correct one. At the bottom of it all, any democracy
is based on some rigid rules which you CANNOT change.
You have to accept some amount of rigidity at some
level. For example, in the US the structure of states
cannot be altered. Do you say that it is a draconian
rule? There is no choice.
To frame our policy itself, having accepted these
rules, we should set our priorities right.

FAIRNESS AND JUSTICE within the country should be #2.
Other things like international law etc. should
come only after these two.

It doesn't mean that we compromise on justice each
and every time. Compromising on justice itself can
be construed as something against national interest
except in extremely rare cases.
The concept od secession itself is flawed unless you
accept that even individuals can secede and take the
help of say, Chinese Army.


This is the National Debate on System Reform.       debate@indiapolicy.org
Rules, Procedures, Archives:            http://www.indiapolicy.org/debate/