[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
Hi Sanjeev

“….have never heard. Check  u'r assumptions about your
own omniscience, sir.”

Ooouchhh…this one bites. :(

Now surprisingly you are  deducing things which were by
no means implied .

“is my or your right to choose a function of our education
level? if so, the entire world shd simply surrender our
choices to the US where 25% of population is college educated.”

How did u come to such a conclusion? Right to choose being
a FUNCTION of edu. level would mean MORE educated
and MORE right to choose or  its inverse(if the function defines
inverse relation ) Did I ever say THAT ? Did I ever talk of any
functions? Or did I ever say that you have no right to  choose
if you are not educated?  Whether or not we are educated you
can surrender you choices to the US- they would decide matters
in their own national interest. Like we should decide in our
national interest.

What I was referring to is very clear and that is –illiteracy, poverty,
lack of an infrastructure for debate and propagation of competing
viewpoints, all these among a whole lot of other such factors do
not make a good comparison with Canada-Quebec case. That
is it.

Additionally I would say  expression of a democratic choice by
an individual in the sense of an informed decision based on scrutiny
of arguments for and against the issue, is  far less likely to take
place in our kind of situation where most do not have access to
information , where we have not been able to  provide even basic
literacy to all our citizens, where more than one –third are forced
to lead a sub –human existence, below the poverty line.
These should be at the centre of our concerns and indeed what are
crying out for attention are  such issues and not esoteric exercises
on  choices, nations and freedoms. Unless of course as I said earlier
If you believe or suspect that

“there are strong grounds for the supposition  that India as a  nation
is willfully, colonially exploiting a national identity. For then in
case it is the democratic duty of everyone to see that the supposedly
‘colonised people’  get  a chance to express their wish.”
Sorry if I am found repeating issues dealt with already but I was away
“But if we  see no strong ground for believing that India has a nation
has hegemonised and is exploiting a people, there is indeed no reason
whatsoever to have any discussions on the matter. For we have seen
that such a provision will create more problems than it can solve. “

you write

“Please have mercy on our poor
Manipuri peasants and come out with more democratic and
non-Army based solutions “

Again you are assuming things in a certain direction and I do not quite
know why. Manipuri peasants do not need an army based solution
They may for all we know, are quite happy as INDIANS
– 'army based solutions' are NEEDED for those who choose to
terrorise with guns and killings. I have nowhere said that such
manipuri peasants as those who have been kept illiterate by a
corrupt and apathetic beaurocracy will necessarily favour secession,
it is just that they will be at  a disadvantaged position  in taking a
decision on whether a separate nation is  a viable or better solution
to their problems.

“Using terror against dissent
is NOT the sign of education.”

What are you suggesting? That the Indian state is using TERROR
against those who are MERELY dissenting. Pls avoid temptations
at glorifying  'terrorism by microscopic minority' as democratic
dissent. Army is deployed in selected areas and after much
deliberations and only where civilian admin. fails to protect  the
right to life and liberty of citizens – and this understandably
happens in situations where militants are trained and armed by
another army or similar setups-police  forces are otherwise
quite capable of dealing with common criminals. But when
organised groups well trained in arms and warfare choose to
disrupt civilian life for whatever reasons or whatever causes- just
how do u deal with it?  Let us please not talk as if  the army is
regularly sent to terrorise peaceful citizens and to  prevent
them from expressing their opinion.Or that the Indian state is
such a brutal state.

A whole lot of very significant objections have been raised
against your proposal. Please take them  into consideration
To me it appears that arguments against the proposal make
a lot of sense.You may of course think differently


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