Socialism?? duh

The Supreme Court recently 'dismissed as withdrawn' a petition by an NGO challenging the insertion of the word 'socialist' in the Preamble of the Constitution of India, terming it a mere academic matter. It seems the court used the term 'academic' in the sense of nobody relevant (read political parties) having raised it at this point of time.
Now all we can do is merely speculate the relevance of the term socialism in the Preamble. Ignore the fact that India's largest company, largest bank, largest steel producer etc etc are all state-owned; one could hope that the word would be retained to at least give students a faint glimpse of the time when our national priorities seemed a bit different. But, says the NGO which filed the petition, market reforms mean that expecting political parties to swear to uphold socialism is a mere dichotomy.
Now this implies that a certain vision that animated the use of the word socialism is bankrupt merely because of 20 years of reforms Would such an approach also imply that there should be no ban on child labour simply because we have failed to eradicate it over 63 years? Obviously not. Thus, the point the petition seeks to make is that socialism no longer occupies any place in the 'national consensus'; that we have reached a stage where socialism is no longer one of those goals which we aspire to, despite our innumerable failures to attain it.
The constitution of a country is not a mere rule book. True, it is a site of contestation. But one would hope the contestation is towards a greater aim, a nobler society. Socialism means a lot of things to a lot of people but no one can deny it seeks greater egalitarianism and a greater role for the collective in deciding the future of their labour. That such an aim, no matter the ways to achieve it, would not be part of a constitution seems a very blinkered way of perceiving the future of a county.
On a related note, there has long been a contention that India has lacked a conservative movement on par with those in the west. Two decades after the economic reforms it would seem that what we call civil society, comprising a variety of(though not all) NGOs have emerged as the torch-bearers of conservative ideology. Products of and truly indebted to the LPG wave, favouring the limited role of the state in economic and administrative affairs and against any radical overhaul of the economic and social foundation, they seem to best embody the limited-government principles of the conservative movement. This petition, while insignificant in its own right, is a small pointer to the solid emergence of this movement.

PS. The crowning irony of course, is that legal eagle Fali. S. Nariman, arguing the case for the NGO, cited Ambedkar's opposition to the introduction of socialism. Yes, ignore the rest of that man's voluminous and often beautifully curt writing about a host of issues including caste and pick up that bit about socialism!

Dunces of democracy.

The last lap of the prelude to the 'Dance of Democracy'(the real moves begin on the 16th) ended yesterday and courtesy this last phase, the voting percentages might just about match those of 2004. So that's it then! We live in a happy and fulfilling democracy! Hurrah and three cheers.

Once our hangover subsides, we may also choose to remember that it's been exactly 2 years since Dr. Binayak Sen was imprisoned by the sate of Chattisgarh on the flimsiest of grounds. Over the past two years, the case has crumbled bit by steady bit. And yet, the government or for that matter the judiciary have not only refused to withdraw the case but have even denied a sick man the right to medical treatment of his choice. Nobel laureates and British MPs(a bit rich considering Binyam Mohamed) have appealed for his release. There has been a decent amount of publicity and a lot of protest over the issue(including the now-inescapable facebook group). Despite all this, Dr.Sen is still in jail.

I am not one who would argue that publicity and news outrage should influence the way the government or the judiciary proceeds. However, considering the notoriety the case has earned, doesn't it seem sort of obvious that the government or the judges hearing the case would move in a slightly different manner, like say, with a bit more speed? If the establishment(the only word i can think of now) can allow a sore like this to persist so openly, don't all those words we have been repeating about accountability and the power of the press and other such things ring so hollow? And if this is the case with such a well-known figure, the fate of common-er citizens is well...

I like to believe I am not that naive about the way things happen in India. But I also believe that often, in the midst of the fairly comfortable existence many of us lead, we tend to believe and swallow the lessons we have been taught. We tend to believe it's a free country, a beacon of democracy amidst failed states and that with a lot of effort, anybody can make it good. These beliefs are not articles of faith for us. No one can be that dumb! But sometimes, grudgingly, with a lot of qualifications, we tend to sit back, look at ourselves and think..'You know what? This place isn't that bad after all'.

Perhaps, being 'political' implies taking off the goop that gathers around your eye while you are asleep!

A better way of phrasing it is the way Devina Mehta said it. Devina Mehta, who along with her husband was persecuted only because they were the financiers of Tehelka which had just, then conducted 'Operation West End'. Devina Mehta, who said:

"Now you realize that anybody out there is only there because nobody wants you inside. Any time somebody wants you inside [jail], you can be inside."

A couple of days ago, Iran, as repressive a state as any, released US-Iraninan journalist Roxanna Saberi after she was convicted in a spying case. It could have been due to US pressure or a 100 other reasons. The fact is if Iran can do it, is it really that hard for the Supreme Court of India?? Or do we need a letter from Barack Obama for this as well?




Ps Do read the story of Shankar and Devina Mehta from the excerpts of Madhu Trehan's book 'PRISM ME A LIE TELL ME A TRUTH: TEHELKA AS METAPHOR'. It's one of the most tragic instances of the point I have been trying to make.

Ps 2. Also check out binayaksen.net, a website which is faithfully chronicling the case of Dr. Sen besides emerging as a rallying point for protests and public initiatives in his support.

Ps 3. The previous post I wrote on this issue(in the interests of context)

The curious case of Ajit D-2

Some interesting reading on the case
Lawrence Liang(who has been declared "India's foremost authority on freedom of speech on the Internet", in kafila.org, here and here.(sigh what a bad grammars!)

Dhananjay Nene asks some questions that occurred to me as well when i heard of the issue.
And here is another legal take on it.

And because in times of crisis and protest, we still must not lose our sense of humor, check this site out. You can freely borrow if you wish to heap scorn on the Shiv Sena, Barkha Dutt(who has become the default target for all freedom of speech arguments) or god forbid, the Supreme Court.

ps. NDTV has reported the issue and what a report!! I wonder if they selected their 'best' reporter for that!

The curious case of Ajit D.

Sigh! It's been a long time and finally I have something to write about. After all, it's an issue of survival(hope that sounds apocalyptic enough).

The case of Ajit.D has lit up an Olympic Torch-ful of protest as angry bloggers and some elements in the press are howling(or in the case of The Hindu, soberly reporting) in protest and for good reason too. The Supreme Court following its tradition of oscillating between admirable progressiveness and downright stuck-in-the-mudism has delivered a verdict which is amusing and alarming at the same time. Here's a quasi-legal take on it.

There are a couple of things which confuse me though. First of all, is there no difference between a social networking site and a blog in 'legalese'? If there is and even if there isn't, why has the media and presumably the court(based on the reports I have seen) reported it as an issue facing blogs? I agree that these media are related and often overlap but are not the agreements that form the basis of use of these two media different? For that matter, how is it that orkut itself has not been added as a party to this case? There are innumerable issues here which touch not only concepts of freedom but also the working of websites, especially social networking sites.

Of course this does not imply that the main struggle, which is one against sheer stupidity and shoddy(oops i said the 's' word) judicial processes be ignored but let's hope this does not merely subside into yet another instance of the 'Outrage Industrial Complex' having a field day.

ps. Has NDTV24x7 reported the issue yet? Their website does not seem to have a story on the issue! I can imagine Barkha Dutt smirking
ps.2 Katrina Kaif, I believe, is a gracious woman..else I might be in a pickle