Mourning the Death of 'The City of Ideas'

There was once a city called ‘The City of Ideas’. It was known far and wide for its culture of questioning, debating, discussing, disagreeing, arguing and naturally, generating more and more ideas in the process. It was a city filled with numerous schools, colleges, Universities and Institutions of learning. People from all over the world vied to earn themselves the chance of visiting this city, studying here and staying here.

This thriving culture of dissent made a section of the population utterly uncomfortable. It could-not tolerate this threat to the structure of the society, which the ancients had so carefully designed. The painstakingly formulated rules and regulations that should govern society had to be followed to the hilt, otherwise only chaos would ensue. They watched this atmosphere of free exchange of ideas with horror. However, they did-not sit still. They started building up their strength right at the core, at the organizational level. With sheer discipline they soon built up a huge organization that had its presence right from the ground level, in schools, colleges and Universities, till the top, in the political echelons.

Finally, they became the rulers of the land. All opposition had been completely crushed. They were now not only ruling the city but also the minds and hearts of the majority of the city dwellers. However, there was still a section of the society that was causing mischief. They were the rebels and the dissenters who had the courage to think, critique and question the status-quo. They were refusing to surrender their inalienable right to their minds. All kinds of methods were used to make them fall in line. These dissenters were acting cleverly and carrying out all their activities within the confines of the law of the land. They could not be made to break the rules and laws. But how did it matter? Rules and laws could definitely be changed, to break them. It was done swiftly. With great alacrity. The dissenters were silenced by putting them behind bars, by questioning their claims of being ‘loyal’ and ‘dutiful’ citizens of the nation, by changing the definition of the term ‘patriotism’ overnight and by shifting the goalposts so often that no one could be sure of anything any longer. This strategy worked wonders on the majority, the large group of conformists, who now started worshipping the rulers. But this group of dissenters refused to be sidelined, ignored or silenced so easily. Something had to be done to eradicate the entire phenomenon from the root itself. Something had to be done so that the irritant breed of dissenters completely vanishes from the city, and no new dissenter is ever born in the city.

The final decision was taken and implemented. The death warrant for the culture of dissent, of debates, of disagreements, and of arguments, was signed. The destruction was now complete. This time the attack did-not target the branches, but the entire tree was uprooted. And how was it done? This entire culture of dissent had its birthplace in the system of open and free education that the ‘City of Ideas’ encouraged. It was a system where students were not only prodded to think, to question and to critique but were aggressively forced to do so. The culture of critical thinking was fiercely implemented. This culture, thus, became the natural strike point for the new rulers. They brought in a completely new policy, which ensured that it became impossible for students to get admission into the Institutions of learning. It was all of course completely justified, as the teachers in these hallowed institutions could not be expected to overburden themselves and consequently compromise on the quality of guidance they were providing to their under-studies. Thus, it was decreed that they be allowed only to take in a particular number of under-studies. This number of-course was not based on any logic or rationale or for that matter, any scientific study conducted by experts, but on whims and fancies of the rulers. And so, it was fixed to be so low that for years together, no student could think of taking up research in these institutions. Of-course it did-not matter that the teachers and the students alike, were appalled. They knew it was the death sentence for their respective communities and their cultures, which would now become totally extinct. But this was only a minor irritant, was it not? The larger goal had been successfully accomplished. The status-quo would now be preserved for generations to come. No-one could now rise to question the carefully designed structure of society. No-one could now even dream of being a dissenter. The era of conformists would now last for ages together, till such time that the original culture of the ‘City of ideas’ is completely struck off, even from the world of memories.

 

The Reign of 'Humanity'

I am told it was the best moment of their lives

When my parents saw my pretty little face, they say they forgot all strife

They loved me, adored me I felt I was the most blessed child

They made me feel special, beautiful, strong, dignified, let me have fun, allowed me to get wild

In the world I grew up in, I was only a human

I had a face and a name and was recognized by it, it didn’t matter whether I was a man or a woman

I had a body and a skin that had some color

Whether it was black or white or a shade in between, any consequence it had, to us it never even occurred

So engrossed were we in shaping our minds

Brimming with ideas, discussing, debating, thinking, reasoning, proud of our ‘aha’ moments, hungry to know, hungry to learn, hungry for knowledge, hungry for more and more that we could find

Me and my four buddies, we were on cloud nine that day

All of us together had grabbed that chance, we had finally made our way

To that temple of learning, the best in the world everyone used to say

We had been selected to satisfy our quest for knowledge, we would be interacting with the stalwarts, they were the best of the day

With dreams in our eyes, wanting to drown ourselves in the sea of knowledge we were headed for

With spring in our steps, we galloped ahead, there was no looking back now that we had got what we had aimed for

We landed in the land that housed the most ancient of civilizations, the land that was revered, the land of love, the land of hope, the land that accepted one and all with open arms and thus spread its name in all directions

This land housed the temple of learning

It was going to be our alma-mater for the next four years, it held within itself the answers to all our yearnings

Just a few days into our new world we had been

Walking the streets exploring the land, with all the newness we were just so keen

In our unblemished joy, we had had probably become blind

To those uncomfortable stares that greeted us everywhere from every pair of eyes we could find

We were treading along joyfully, oblivious to the lurking danger

And then it happened….in a jiffy we were on the ground surrounded by angry faces that couldn’t have looked stranger

What happened thereafter still seems like a nightmare that couldn’t be real

We were kicked, we were beaten, we were abused, paraded naked, and then dumped, left to fend for ourselves, with the hurt and pain solely ours to bear

Long after the shock, the physical pain and hurt had subsided

We were still clueless on the crime we had committed and the hatred by which the mob was guided

Not that when we learned of the reasons, we were any better aware

Of the rationale, the logic, the reason of this behavior; Our prized possession, our minds, just refused to hear

That the colour of our skins could have led to such brutality

That it could have triggered such extreme hatred that could wipe away all clarity

The clarity of thoughts, the clarity of conscience, the clarity of minds, and that of the hearts

That keeps one whole, that keeps one human, prevents one from breaking up into a thousand parts

One part worshipping skin colour, the second one caste, the third worshipping religion and the fourth one class

The list doesn’t end here it goes on and on till the time there are countless parts and sub-parts and sub-sub parts that it becomes impossible to count

That Whole, that One, that Complete, that Independent Entity

That used to be called ‘Human’ that proudly stood up tall for nothing but ‘Humanity’

That Whole was lying around broken into hundreds of thousands of parts

It still didn’t deter us enough to lose all faith that our rational minds had taught us would always last

We now knew that the times were tough, that it would not be easy

We would have to struggle hard, would have to pay a price that was far from measly

But the day would dawn when we would witness that world again

That carefree world of ideas, of our debates, our discussions, our dissents, our inventions, a world where only love, respect, dignity, life and the ones called ‘Humans’ would reign

 

 

The Idea of 'Humanity'

“Hindutva rashtra ki sanchetna hai. Is par prahaar mahapralay ko aamantran hai”. This is a statement that figures on the front page of the official website of the new Chief Minister of UP, Yogi Adityanath. I will attempt to unravel and decipher this statement in order to understand its meaning and import better. The first thing that is clear from the above statement, and its appearance on the front page of the official website of the Chief Minister is that this statement reflects the core ideology of the man. Thus, it is clear that he is a firm believer in Hindutva ideology and believes it to be the edifice on which the entire superstructure of the Indian society rests. This ideology essentially wants to establish India as a Hindu nation.

What does a ‘Hindu nation’ actually stand for? In effect, this would mean an official recognition to India being a natural place of abode for all those belonging to the Hindu religion. All the others may be allowed to reside in this nation, provided they accept the principle of India being a ‘Hindu Rashtra’. This would, in turn, mean that the State would no longer remain equidistant from all religions. Any practice sanctioned by the Hindu religion would have to be accepted and respected by each and every citizen of the nation. As an example, cow slaughter could be banned in the nation for the sole reason that the Hindu religion did-not permit it, and each and every citizen would have to abide to by the ban.

Would Hindu nation mean that all the citizens of the nation belonging to any other religion would cease to be Indian citizens? Definitely not. All the citizens of India would still continue to the citizens of the State. However, all the citizens, Hindus and non-Hindus alike, would have to accept that Hinduism was the national religion, that laws and rules that were made to encourage, protect or promote any religious practice of the Hindus would have to be equally obeyed by all as the law of the land and that the State was free to mete out any treatment that it saw fit to other religious denominations. In a Hindu State, if the State made a law that it would henceforth be necessary for all the citizens to practice the Hindu religion, it would have to be followed by one and all, or else they could choose to leave the State. Alternatively, the State could choose to allow everyone the freedom to practice their religion with the caveat that they would respect all the practices of Hindu religion and not come in the way of any such practice or ritual of the religion. In other words, all the non-Hindu religious communities would be at the mercy of the Hindu nation, to be treated as deemed fit by the incumbent powers. Thus, the success of Hindutva ideology may not necessarily lie in mass exodus of non-Hindu religious communities from the nation. The only condition necessary to be fulfilled may be ensuring that the claim of India being a Hindu nation is accepted by all those residing in India, and consequently, any thought or action that is, in the eyes of the State, detrimental to the Hindu religious beliefs, is not performed by any citizen of the nation. In such a situation, the State could, for example, impose beef ban, make Yoga compulsory for all, uplift Bhagvata Gita to the status of the National Scripture etc., and impose fines and punishment in law for not adhering to these strictures, without facing criticism on at least the account of diluting the secular credentials of the nation, because the nation would no longer remain secular (officially).

There would be umpteen difficulties though, if India became a Hindu nation. These would arise out of the complexities associated with the Hindu religion itself, and which were aptly pointed out and elaborated upon by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar in his writings. To begin with, how would one define who is a Hindu and who isn’t? Which scriptures would one choose to follow and adhere to, given the existence of multitudes of them, all with different messages and interpretations of being a Hindu? Which practices would be defined as being the core practices of the religion, and which would be defined to be peripheral and non-mandatory? There would arise many such questions and in all practicality, the interpretation of the ruling power will have to be accepted as the legitimate interpretation and be followed as the law of the land. In such a scenario, the physical presence or absence of the people of non-Hindu religions would not matter. They would be welcome to reside in India so long as they adhered to the law of the Hindu nation. However, if anyone dared to question or raise one’s voice, then the second part of the statement on the front page of the Chief Minister’s website would be the consequence, in his words, ‘mahapralay ko aamantran’.

In the above light, I would like to look at some of the news reports that have been very popular lately, wherein it has been reported that the Chief Minister has been holding a daily ‘darbaar’ since many years. Testimonies of many people from the Muslim religion have been provided, who have testified to the large-heartedness and secular credentials of the man. His one word of recommendation has helped them to solve many of their issues like getting reservations for train journeys, getting a booking for Haj pilgrimage etc. Many have also testified that they have been employed by him since years and have never faced any discrimination whatsoever.

Now, what is it they one can infer from these two seemingly contradictory images of the man? His own statement on the front page of his website declares Hindutva as his core ideology. On the contrary, his actions in his personal, day-to-day life, show him to be a large-hearted, helpful person towards one and all, Hindus and Muslims alike. How do we reconcile these two images of the same man? Is a reconciliation even possible?

Many of my acquaintances, on reading the news reports, have quickly jumped to the conclusion that the image of a Hindutva hardliner, projected by the media, is a purposeful attempt at maligning the man, who is otherwise a man of repute and secular credentials. The news reports have been cited as irrefutable proofs of his innocence and the guilt of the biased media people and pseudo-seculars and intellectuals in trying to tarnish his image. The only reason I beg to differ from this hurriedly arrived at conclusion is that the image of the man in public is not a figment of imagination, but a result of his own public statements, which have never been refuted by him. His website clearly declares his thoughts on Hindutva, and he is known to be very upfront with his views, nowhere trying to cloak or mask them. Why, then, the hurry to ascribe secular credentials to a man who himself is an avowed champion of Hindutva and is proud of it, far from being apologetic? Where does the need arise to try and justify him when he himself does not want to be justified?

Being pro-Hindutva, and at the same time being helpful towards everyone equally, in personal life, might not actually be as contradictory as it seems to be. Pro-Hindutva hardliners know for a fact that the numbers of non-Hindu population is so high in India that they cannot be wished away. That is why various strategies are used to mould the ‘others’ into one’s own idea of rightful existence. Hence, the movements like Shuddhi, ghar wapsi, etc. This may be just another of such strategies. Anyway, harmless and supine members of any religion or community, any number of non-questioning and malleable citizens, let them belong to any religion or caste or creed, are no problem at all for anyone. The problem arises when one starts to question, when one dissents, when one puts forward his/her views, and in such cases the Hindutva ideology is totally non-discrepant. It treats all such cases of dissents with one lens, and brands them all as anti-nationals, irrespective of their caste, creed, colour or religion.

The clash of ideologies here is much deeper. On the one hand is the one for which the Chief Minister openly stands, where one religion and its people are thought of as superior to all of the rest. Majority of the political community and majority of the people of the nation also are staunch supporters of this ideology, some overt and many other covert. This ideology refuses to see the human being behind the cloaks of caste, creed, religion, gender and all such human-made differences. On the other side is the one where a human being is thought of just that, a human being, where there is no requirement of associating a face with a religion, a caste, a region, a gender and all such differences that divide humans. This is the ideology of HUMANITY, and I am its unequivocal supporter.

The 'Hidden' is Revealed

Yogi Adityanath is the new Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh. As unbelievable as this might sound, this is a fact that cannot be wished away. Yogi Adityanath has been quite in the news owing to the multitude of statements he has made time and again, clearly announcing his religious preferences and his attitude towards other religious communities and the people of those communities. Most of these statements were so vitriolic and indefensible that many of the members of the core Hindutva ideology groups also had a tough time justifying these statements. The only justification that was heralded was that he was only one of the fringe elements and was far removed from the mainstream ruling party and its development agenda. It was also explained that the ruling party and the current Prime Minister had only growth and development of the nation on their minds (which had been a non-starter due to decades of mis-rule and corruption by the pseudo-seculars) and such ‘fringe elements’ were only to be ignored. It was also pointed out that anyone reading more into the unwillingness of the Prime Minister and the members of the ‘mainstream ruling party’ in severely castigating the now Chief Minister designate of UP, was only trying to unnecessarily exaggerate and blow things out of proportion.

The process has now begun. The path for movement of ‘fringe’ (if ever there was any) towards ‘mainstream’ has been laid down, that too, in concrete. The ‘fringe’ has been blessed, invited and welcomed into its fold by the ‘mainstream’. All the false, imaginary and artificial lines that separated the two have finally been erased purposefully. The ‘mainstream’ supporters of the ruling party and the ideology it stands for are rejoicing. The supporters at the ‘fringe’ have now suddenly been exposed. All the nuanced arguments of their thought process that they had laboriously built-up in their minds to justify to themselves and the world that the ‘mainstream’ and the ‘fringe’ was a water-tight separation, two parallel worlds that could never meet, have fallen completely flat. The ‘mainstream’ that they had so painstakingly created in their minds has finally become bold enough to throw away the cloak of neutrality and non-partisanship that it had worn till date. It has become bold enough to own up to its real agenda. The ‘hidden’ has come out in the open.

The real difficulty for the ‘fringe’ supporters now begins. Their much-beloved ‘mainstream’ party has announced its chosen path, leaving them with only two choices. One is that they too openly own up to their ‘hidden’ prejudices and biases, to their own ‘hidden’ Hindutva agenda, come out clean and then support their beloved party honestly, for what it stands and for what they stand. The second is, which they will be forced to choose, if they really were only pro-development and had no further hidden agendas, that they openly denounce this step of their beloved party and change course. This would require a courage of conviction and the dawning of an understanding that economic aspects cannot be separated from the social and the political. That no step can be seen completely in isolation from the other and judged on its own merit. That they would have to accept either the entire package or reject the whole of it.

However, what I have witnessed these past two-three days is a third path that these supporters have devised for themselves. Of continuing to persist in trying to save the false world they have built for themselves. Of putting forward arguments that are non-starters in the first place. So, it is argued now that a person deserves to be given one chance at least before writing him off, that bigger responsibilities are bound to make a person more responsible in his thoughts and actions, that the chosen one is much better and much more deserving than the alternatives, that a sweeping majority has already demonstrated the strength of peoples’ faith in the ruling dispensation and hence challenging its decision only confirms the case of ‘the grapes are sour’. Some go so far as to question one’s right of forming an opinion against a ‘Constitutional authority’ (whatever that is supposed to mean), and declaring that holding these doubts irrevocably proves one to be anti-national.

What really is it that this group of people is trying to argue? There can be only two possibilities. The first is that they are actually in favour of the complete agenda of the ruling dispensation, but overtly want to maintain that they are only pro-development and not pro-Hindutva. In this case, it is just a matter of time before they will clearly have to come out in the open, looking at the growing brazenness of their chosen party. The second is that they genuinely believe in the arguments that they are putting forward. That bigger responsibilities generally induce a sense of responsibility in an individual, and that everyone needs to be given a chance before writing them off. In this case, I have nothing more to say to them, only that, it is time that they wake up from their wishful thinking. The writing is on the wall and it is written in bold and clear letters, without an iota of doubt. And the truth, in this case too, is stranger and much more worrisome, than fiction.

Women - to be celebrated on a day?

I don’t want you to celebrate my existence on a particular day

I want you to understand that before being a woman I am a human, just as you

I don’t want you to offer me to stand ahead of you in a queue

I want you to let me stand on my own, just as you

I don’t want you to compliment me on my beauty, my style, my dress or my shoes

I want you to understand that I might also have an equally beautiful mind, and this in no way should threaten you

I don’t want you to extol my patience as my biggest virtue

I want you to understand that being impatient is as much a birthright for me as it is for you

I don’t crave your accolades for the excellent upbringing of our child

I want you to understand that motherhood is as much a joy and responsibility for me as fatherhood is for you

I don’t want you to look askance at me if I choose to not marry and live my life on my own terms

I want you to understand that marriage is as much a choice for me as it is for you

I don’t want you to take vows of protecting my dignity and my honour

I want you to create a world where the need for taking such vows no longer remains for you

I don’t want you to grant me equal status, and wear it as a sign of your virtue

I want you to understand that it is human beings who are natural creations, divided by us into me and you

I don’t want any special treatment on any day of any month of any year

I just want to live in a world where no ‘him’ feels the need to bestow special treatment on any ‘her’, and the world belongs to ‘us’, neither to me nor to you

 

The blind race towards self-destruction

Much has been commented on the Gurmehar Kaur issue. The young girl has been trolled and abused by many. Others have stood by her and appreciated her courage. The issue has occupied center stage in media (print and visual), on facebook, whatsapp groups, among politicians, celebrities and the entire nation. The crux of the views expressed by Gurmehar was that the act of war was a destructive act (a big revelation as if), that this destructive act was responsible for her father’s death, that she was opposed to use of violence (and any group that used it) in order to stifle expression of opinions contrary to one’s own and that she had understood the futility of harboring hatred towards a specific nation or community through personal experience and struggle within herself, and had since come to value peace over war and love over hatred. What is rankling my mind, after listening to the din of voices crying hoarse in order to be heard, is the issues (or non-issues) that dominate popular debates, the extent of polarization these debates can create, the level which one can attain in trying to defend one’s point of view and the role of mass media in determining the direction of a discourse.

India is a developing nation and is a part of a world which is dealing with numerous crisis situations. There are multitudinous issues that require immediate attention, which if not given, can lead to dire irreversible consequences. Visible and real climate change seems to me the foremost among these issues, which poses an existential threat to the entire world community. Depleting natural resources and increasing population is bound to result into a fierce competition among humankind, for their ownership. All this, because humankind accepted that survival of the fittest was the only theory by which one could exist, that blind competition was the only way possible by which society could be made to function effectively, that nature, earth and its resources were unlimited and at humankind’s disposal to be utilized at free will. The mantra was to aim for maximum material growth and unbridled power to rule over the world. In this mad race, everyone forgot to stop and think that even a maximum needs to have a concrete definition, that the resources are actually not non-extinguishable, that in proving one to be the fittest, one also stands the risk of being left alone in a vast universe of death and destruction, with not a soul surviving to even congratulate one on attaining the status of the ‘fittest’.

What has all of the above to do with Gurmehar Kaur? Nothing. Except that all the minds that are at work in inventing reasons to denounce her and all the minds that are at work (including mine) in trying their best to protect and support her, have loads of actual, real, concrete issues that have the capacity to destroy mankind, to work their minds on. There is no dearth of problems that are threatening humankind. Then why is it that we choose to blow out of proportion and spend days and months on issues that are actually non-issues? If a girl expresses her views against the horrors of war, against the futility of hatred, against the use of violence as a threat to silence voices, then what is it that makes one so insecure as to come all guns blazing against her, so disproportionate, as to scare her out of her wits? The seeds of hatred that are being sown, watered and carefully nurtured will reap only more hatred. Not a single soul will ever benefit out of this, be it the ones sowing these seeds, the ones quietly watching them grow, or the ones trying to nip them in the bud.

Today there is Gurmehar Kaur, tomorrow there will be someone else who will become an easy target for the entire nation to show their debating skills, the matchless arguments that they can garner. The media will have a field day and will use all tools at their disposal to finish at the top of the TRP race. In a course of a few days or months, things will fizzle out and one Gurmehar Kaur will be replaced by some other, for the entire cycle to be repeated again. In all this entertainment drama, there will be no thought spared for the individual for whom this entire experience will be a life-changing one, who, probably, will struggle to emerge from the impact of it, who, probably, will be a changed individual thenceforth. Not a thought will be spared to ruminate on the depths to which humankind is day-by-day stooping. Nobody will stop and think, take stock of the situation, try to make amends, because all will be pre-occupied with thinking of the next witty comment they can make, of the ways in which they can make their fellows trip and fall and race ahead themselves, of the numerous ways in which they can prove their superiority over others. The only thing that will be forgotten in this hullaballoo is that a blind and mad race can only lead to more madness and blindness and nothing more than that.

कुछ बात उन "गैरों" की

वो कहते हैं जिस सरज़मीं की नींव ही नफ़रतों पर टिकी है उसके वजूद को नापाक कहना ही सच्चा है

हम तो ये ही सोचते रह गए कि उन नफ़रतों के लिए अपनी भी ज़िम्मेदारी से उन्हों ने इतनी आसानी से मुंह फ़ेरा कैसे है

वो कहते हैं कि हमसे मुसलसल जंग-ए-ऐलान करना ही उस क़ौम का मक़सद है

हम तो ये ही सोचते रह गए कि करोड़ों इंसान जाने एक ही मक़सद से ज़िंदा कैसे हैं

वो कहते हैं कि मुसलमान लफ़्ज़ से ही हमें एक गैरियत का एहसास होना लाज़मी है

हम तो ये ही सोचते रह गए कि हर मुसलमान जो हमें मिला इतनी अपनाइयत से मिला क्यूँ है

वो कहते हैं कि अकबर हो या औरंगज़ेब या कि तेमूर ही हो सब एक थे कुचला उन्होने हमें सदियों तक है

हम तो ये ही सोचते रह गए कि जो अपने बताए जाते हैं उनसे इतना दर्द और खौफ़ का एहसास मिला क्यूँ है

वो कहते हैं कि इतनी तेज़ी से बढ़ रहे हैं वो कि दूर नहीं वो दिन जब इस सरज़मीं फिर उनका ही राज होगा

हम तो ये ही सोचते रह गए कि उनकी तो सुकून भरी ज़िंदगी की छोटी सी ख्वाइश भी एक दुआ भर है

वो कहते हैं कि अमन की चाहत तो हमें भी है पर चैन वो कभी लेने ही नहीं देते

हम तो ये ही सोचते रह गए कि चैन-ओ-अमन की दरकार करने वालों के दिलों में नफ़रतों का घरौंदा जाने बसा क्यूँ है..... नफ़रतों का घरौंदा जाने बसा क्यूँ है.....

 

Education: Towards Utilitarianism, away from Egalitarianism

This year’s budget has once again been lackluster in terms of allocations made to the Education sector. The Kothari Commission recommendation of an allocation of 6% of GDP has remained far from realization, with the allocation hovering in the range of 3-4% every year. Within the education sector also, elementary education is the most fund-deprived and neglected sector. The priorities of the State being made amply clear, year after year and government after government, my purpose here is, however, to discuss the kind of education that is thought desirable to be imparted, who makes these decisions and the impact of these policy decisions on the general populace.

The term ‘education’ has various definitions attached to itself. I will highlight two of them here (Taken from Dictionary.com). The first one defines education as, “the act or process of imparting or acquiring general knowledge, developing the powers of reasoning and judgment, and generally of preparing oneself or others intellectually for mature life”. The second definition defines education as, “the act or process of imparting or acquiring particular knowledge or skills, as for a profession”. Both these definitions focus on two entirely different aspects of the importance of education in our lives, its importance for utilitarian purposes, for earning our living, and secondly, its importance for being able to lead an intellectually mature life, for being able to develop into reasonable human beings, who can think, reflect and reason and decide the right and wrong for themselves and to act according to these.

When India attained its independence in 1947, it comprised of a majority of non-literate population. According to the 1951 census, the literacy rate in India was 18.33% (Wikipedia). Due to a huge number of illiterate population, the entire effort came to be directed at ensuring that more and more population of the country was able to attain literacy as fast as possible. Thus, providing access to all became a core concern of the policy makers in the initial years of independence. The literacy rate, according to the 2011 census, is 74.04% (Wikipedia). “The working definition of literacy in the Indian census since 1991 is as follows: Literacy rate: The total percentage of the population of an area at a particular time aged seven years or above who can read and write with understanding” (Wikipedia). Thus, literacy rates deal with only the superficial aspect of the broad term education, i.e., being able to read and write with understanding. Education, on the other hand, as defined previously, is much broader. India, being a third-world, relatively poor nation, with increasing population, has still not been able to achieve 100% literacy rates for its population. Hence, the focus has somehow never been able to completely shift from looking at quality more than quantity. In trying to ensure that all its population is able to at least develop the basic skills of reading and writing, the larger and more important aspect of what kind of education should be imparted to the population, has somehow always remained at the back-burner. Although, there have been National Curricular Frameworks, which have provided guidelines for development of curricula that has been thought desirable for the population, yet, there has been a lack of efforts in terms of measuring/looking at the output/outcome in terms of quality. Most of the assessments and analysis of the education system has been in terms of the quantitative and basic aspects like to what level are children able to read and write, the enrolment ratios, the percentage of out of school children etc. There have been limited efforts that have focused on what kind of education is desirable for the population, and more importantly whenever such frameworks have been laid down, the assessment of whether the desired goals and aims are being actually met or not.

From an analysis of the Indigenous Education system prevailing in India before the colonial take-over of the education system, Brahminical hegemony emerges as the dominant theme. This was characterized by emphasis on oral learning, memorization, a limited curriculum, absence of women education and education for the lower castes, especially Harijans, lack of teacher training, Brahminical dominance among teachers and a dominance of higher castes among students.

The British presence in India began with the coming of the East India Company in 1600, as a trading company. After an initial period of familiarization with the Indian setting, the policy of Britishers shifted from one of accommodation of Indian culture, to that of imposing their own ideas and superiority. The culmination of this policy was the adoption of ‘Macaulay’s Minute’, by the then Governor General William Bentinck, in 1835.

The analysis of colonial discourse reveals many similarities with the indigenous Brahminical tradition in terms of perpetuation of the theme of moral uplift of the masses, perpetuation of rote memorization and absence of a spirit of enquiry, lack of encouragement to alternative teaching methodologies, standardized and centrally imposed curriculum and a perpetuation of a class divide based on the educational attainments. Mass education could still not become a reality and women’s education also lagged behind.

 

Indian education system, post-independence, has been modelled on the education system proposed by Macaulay in his ‘Macaulay’s Minute’. It has thus promoted rote learning and memorization rather than conceptual thinking, holistic understanding and logical reasoning.

 

The National Curricular Framework, 2005 has been the latest of the curricular documents. It has attempted to lay down the broad aims of education and the kind of curricula that is thought desirable to achieve those aims. In my opinion, it has been a path breaking document in terms of defining the aims of education. It has broken away from the traditional dominant perspective that has been visible in the Indian education system. NCF, 2005 redefined and radicalized the aims of Education and placed tremendous emphasis on “Education for Peace” (Position Paper by National Focus Group on Education for Peace, 2006). The National Focus Group on ‘Education for Peace’ proposes the concept of peace as the all-powerful aim towards which the education system should be geared. It explains ‘Education for Peace’ as, “Education for peace is holistic. It embraces the physical, emotional, intellectual, and social growth of children within a framework of human values. Recognizing peace as holistic carries two major implications for education for peace. (a) Peace involves all aspects and dimensions of human existence in an inter-dependent way. Only those who are at peace with themselves can be at peace with others and develop the sensitivity it takes to be just and caring towards nature. Spiritual and psychological peace is neither stable nor viable without social, economic, and ecological peace. (b) Peace implies reciprocity. Values like love, freedom, and peace can be had only by giving them to others. Peace for oneself that excludes peace for others is a dangerous illusion. Education for Peace, hence, has a two-fold purpose: (a) to empower individuals to choose the path of peace rather than the path of violence; and (b) to enabling them to be peacemakers rather than the consumers of peace. Education for peace is, in this sense, an essential component of holistic basic education that aims at the comprehensive development of persons” (Position Paper by National Focus Group on Education for Peace, 2006). Such an education will enable an individual to think, reflect and reason, to decide the right and wrong for himself and herself and to act according to these. It would also imply a tolerance for the opinions and viewpoints of others, an ability to ‘agree to disagree’, to be able to live in peace and harmony within diversity of opinions. It would imply developing an ability of self-introspection and an ability to engage with diverse ideas, in the process also subjecting one’s own ideas and opinions to test. It also implies the development of an ability to recognize an individual’s liberty over his/her own thoughts and actions, as long as they do-not affect others. The recognition of this ability would enable an individual to be able to live in harmony with diverging and even conflicting viewpoints, without feeling the need to force one’s own opinions on others. However, the liberty to hold opinions needs to be accompanied with a responsibility, that of subjecting those opinions to the rigor and turmoil of being debated and discussed, lest they turn into static entities. This is the spirit that needs to be developed and inculcated through creating an atmosphere of engagement, discussions, constant generation of new ideas and refinement of the existing ones. Schools and teachers have an indispensable role to play in this, along with families and the society.

 

In my view, the above aims are the ones that need to be reinforced through our education system, for it to be meaningful in any manner. Even if we succeed to ensure 100% literacy rates, complete access and nil dropout rates, still if the content of what is being delivered to students is lacking, it will be a total waste of all the efforts put in.

 

However, what is thought of as essential to be imparted vide the education system depends to a large extent on the political dispensation and its ideology. Education is the most potent tool in the hands of any political dispensation, with the help of which it can propagate its ideology and mold the future of the nation in a manner it desires. The current political dispensation is leaving no stone unturned in making full use of this tool. The New Policy on Education is already in the pipeline. It is being touted as a policy that, once formulated, will be the result of a holistic consultative process. However, the framework for the consultation process has already been provided by the Central government, and is hosted on the website of Ministry of Human Resource and Development. Thirteen themes that have been listed down for discussions and feedback. The first theme is titled “Ensuring Learning Outcomes in Elementary Education”. The entire focus in this theme is on the need to develop basic language and numeracy skills in schools, improving reading, writing abilities etc. of children. Elementary education refers to the first eight years of schooling of a child. The entire discourse of elementary education is, in most of the discussions, limited to only how basic skills can be developed in children. When it comes to the theme of higher and secondary education, the focus is entirely on skill development, ICT, improving Science and Math education, use of PPP model etc. The overarching aim of education that has been fore fronted by the present dispensation is the utilitarian aim with focus on skill development, ICT etc. The aim of education to establish a just and humane society, which was emphasized by NCF, 2005, has been relegated to the background. This is no surprise though, and is completely in line with the ideology of this political dispensation, which has made it amply clear as well. The idea of a just and humane society, as per the current dispensation, is a society that believes in jingoistic patriotism, Hindutva nationalism, caste superiority, religious bigotry and so on and so forth. The proposed National Education Policy is a step in the direction of reflecting this political ideology in the school curriculum. Certain steps have already been taken in this direction, for example, the Rajasthan state government, has recently decided to distort and twist historical facts themselves, as a result of which, in the new history that children will now learn, Akbar, an outsider Muslim ruler, was defeated in the Battle of Haldighati, and the Indian/Hindu pride was upheld against the Muslim alien.

 

Another way in which this dispensation is trying to impact the minds of the young in schools is through the hidden curriculum. Post NCF, 2005, the NCERT textbooks that have been published are revolutionary in nature. There are certain other organizations as well that are working towards providing a meaningful learning experience for children. However, the teaching-learning of students is not limited to the stated curriculum itself. The hidden curriculum plays even a greater role in molding the minds of the young. To completely utilize the space of hidden curriculum, the present dispensation is leaving no stones unturned. I visited certain municipal schools in Mumbai, for a field study of mine, wherein I wanted to elicit from them their understanding of the term ‘patriotism’. These Municipal schools in Maharashtra are also taught a supplementary curriculum, called ‘Sangati’, for three years, (Classes V-VII), brought out by the Avehi Abacus Organization. This is an integrated curriculum, comprising of six kits, and aims to provide links between different subjects taught at school, help children integrate all that they learn in school and outside, build children’s self-confidence and develop skills of observation, analysis, articulation and decision-making, and provide a perspective based on values that emphasize interdependence and the need to live together in harmony. Equality, sensitivity, celebration of diversity, concern for the environment, and respect for work and the dignity of labour are some of the fundamental values that are emphasized throughout the Sangati series (this is the stated aim of the organization, which can be found at their website). Through this curriculum students are being exposed to pretty mature understanding of various issues like caste, religion, democracy, patriotism etc. However, during my field study I found that the actual impact of this curriculum was muted as compared to its potential impact. This, according to me, was firstly because of the interface between curriculum and students, i.e., teachers, who have been trained to teach the dominant perspective, and find it difficult to deal with their own prejudices and biases that are continuously fed in a society that rewards conformity to dominant viewpoints. Secondly, hidden curriculum played a major role, in the impact of the curriculum being muted. For instance, all the municipal schools had been instructed to celebrate Independence Day in a particular manner, wherein they were instructed to conduct various programs/competitions like patriotic songs singing, painting, declamations, speeches etc. (related to ‘patriotism’/’nationalism’) and send a proof of the same (photos/videos etc.) to the concerned officials. The schools were busy doing this work even till the twenty third of the month of August (the last day to submit their reports and proofs). Such forced celebrations of Independence Day in certain particular manners obviously left no room for imagination for the students to think about the meaning of the term ‘Independence’, or what else could be done on this day etc. Such directives purposely shifted focus towards jingoistic and loud and slogan chanting patriotism, rather than allowing the children to actually understand and internalize the meaning of patriotism, which could also mean, for instance, striving to do one’s best in every situation, living in peace and harmony with others, trying to build a just and humane society etc.

With the intentions of the political dispensation sufficiently clear, it is only a matter of time however, when the entire discourse would have been completely tilted more and more away from justice, egalitarianism and humanity. That day, however dreaded and dreadful, does-not seem very far. Considering the bleak scenario, it becomes an urgent duty of all who are concerned to at least try and de-accelerate the process of deterioration of the societal mindset and continuously provide and highlight alternate and more accommodative and just ways of thinking and acting.

 

 

 

IGP Kalluri asked to proceed on leave: A necessity, not a virtue

IGP Kalluri, the man alleged to have committed untold atrocities on clueless tribal people in Bastar, and the scores of human rights activists who have tried to intervene time and again in order to demand at least a semblance of justice for these innocent people, (who have been mercilessly mass-murdered, raped, beaten ruthlessly, maimed etc.) has been very graciously asked by the government to proceed on ‘medical leave’. This, after the activist Bela Bhatia was openly threatened and forced to leave Bastar, and the NHRC took notice and put the government and IGP Kalluri in the dock. This is not the only incident though, where the man has been accused of hounding human rights activists. In the recent past, there have been a series of incidents where any human right activist who has tried to stand up for the people of Bastar, has been either abused and hounded out of the state, and in some cases, even slapped with a murder case, by the State actors themselves, under the able leadership of IGP Kalluri.

It is pertinent to understand here that any action or inaction by the police force under Kalluri’s leadership has to be read as the action and inaction of the State as well. The declared agenda of Kalluri against the tribal population of Bastar, and any human rights activists trying to represent the concerns of that tribal population, could not have been practiced so blatantly without the implicit and tacit support of the State. It is in fact the best indicator of the State policy. Keeping in line with this very policy, Kalluri has been asked to proceed on leave. There has been no requirement felt by the State to suspend the man and at the least institute an enquiry against him. Instead, he has been rewarded with a gracious period of long leave, on medical grounds (where none existed), after which he can be quietly asked to re-join service at some other place and the horrific crimes committed by him during his tenure at Bastar, can be easily forgotten about.

In all this hogwash, where should one look even for a ray of hope for justice, even if delayed, for the innocent tribal population that has faced wrath at the hands of the State itself, the State which is constitutionally and legally bound to protect them? How will justice be delivered to those who dared and keep daring to stand up to this State repression, incidentally forced to step in because the State chooses not to do its job? This whole ‘proceed on leave’ drama is just another wily step by the State to wriggle out of the mess it has created for itself.

The big question, however, still remains unanswered. The Constitution and the legal-justice system emanating out of it has divided the State into three organs, the Executive, the Legislature and the Judiciary. The Legislature is responsible for passing laws and ensuring their compliance. The Executive is responsible for implementing these laws and maintaining law and order in the State. It is responsible and answerable to the Legislature. The Judiciary is responsible for administering justice to the common man when their rights are trampled upon by the State or the non-state actors. All these three organs are collectively responsible to the Constitution, and finally to the people of the nation, as it is “We, the people” who have given ourselves this Constitution. Now, if this very State and the humungous system created (at least theoretically) by the people and for the people, turns against those very people, to whom should the people turn to? Why is it that justice should have to be demanded and struggled for and snatched from the system, by few individuals and groups who care? Human rights, as the term itself indicates, are rights that every human being has, just by virtue of being a human. Why is it then that there is a need for a special category of people called the ‘’human rights activists”, fighting incessantly (against the State itself) for these basic minimum human rights to be guaranteed to the people?

The proceeding on leave by Kalluri may be a brief respite for the harassed people of Bastar, however, in effect it is only a tactical move by the State, a move out of compulsion. The State should not be allowed to get away with trying to mask a necessity as a virtue.

The Culture of Impunity

It is unnerving to even think about the culture of impunity that is taking deep roots all around us. It has not happened overnight but has slowly strengthened itself, step by step, one incident after the next, and has gained enough in size to threaten the very essence of a nation priding itself on its distinct cultural identity. What are these incidents that I am referring to here? I will try to list some here, the list of course not being exhaustive.

The first set of incidents that I would like to talk about here is the exponential rise in casual and stray religiously intolerant remarks by sitting MPs and MLAs of the ruling dispensation themselves. The tacit encouragement to such unworthy and unacceptable behavior by the senior leadership, especially the Prime Minister of the nation, by an avowed silence on the matter, did-not help matters much. The mob lynching of Mohammad Akhlaq for allegedly storing and consuming beef was a result of this culture of impunity, carefully promoted bit by bit. To rub salt on the wounds of the Akhlaq family, the irreversible secular credentials of the nation and the ‘rule of law’ in place (at least on paper), one of the murderers of Mohammad Akhlaq was given a martyr’s treatment after his death, his family being duly compensated.

The mockery made out of the whole incident of Rohith Vemula’s tragic and untimely death, and the treatment being meted out to his surviving mother even today, is out in the open for everyone to see. Again, the Prime Minister of the nation publicly honoured the Vice-Chancellor of the University involved in the entire incident, making the present dispensation’s motives and priorities amply clear.

As if religion and caste were not basis enough for oppression, the excesses committed and being committed on the tribals of Chhatisgarh, especially Bastar, are so unimaginable that it is difficult to even mention them. The sordid tales of rapes, murders, abductions and so on and so forth of these people have become so routine that they have even lost the power to horrify us. Another practice has become routine in Bastar, of late, the illegal threats, arrests and detentions of any and every human right activist who has the courage to stand up for these innocents. It is the State versus the human rights crusaders. When the State itself starts committing excesses, breaking all rules and laws blatantly and openly, then ‘Rule of Law’ turns into a sham, an English phrase of three words that means nothing but all the same is used very often to mean something that is an irrevocable principle for the existence of the State. Numerous rules and laws can also be invented and created by the State to defend all its actions resulting in undue excesses and unmatched suffering for the ordinary, and equally, even the existing rules and laws cease to exist when ordinary men and women dare to question peacefully and legitimately the illegal actions of the State.

The intellectual fraternity, digressing from the dominant perspective and standing up to the bullying of the State has again and again been snubbed in no unclear terms. FTII students protesting peacefully against the dilution of their alma-mater’s legacy of excellence, by the appointment of a mediocre (to say the least) individual to head the institution were worn down by an undue and disgraceful use by the State, of its power. The JNU fraternity, students, faculty, ex-faculty, their sympathizers, all were and are continuously targeted. A JNU student remains missing, vanished into thin air to date, and no one seems to be bothered in the least.

 

Talking of protests, Kashmir has been witness to the worst form of State repression since decades. The impunity with which the civilian population was dealt with in recent times though, blinding many civilians through the use of pellets, and feeling righteous about the same, forces one to shrink with a sense of horror, a deep horror at one’s vulnerability at the hands of a powerful State, adamant on wearing that power as a badge of honour. The multitude of atrocities committed by the State under the complete and unquestioned protection of AFSPA and such absolute laws, do-not even surface that frequently in discussions even, so routinized have they become. Unable to make the deaf State hear her plea for sixteen long years, Irom Sharmila finally decided to break her hunger strike, fully well understanding the futility of her struggle.

The redefinition of ‘patriotism’ is a stated agenda that the present dispensation has embarked on. So patriotism now means standing in attention position whenever you hear your national anthem being played, standing in long queues for withdrawing your own hard-earned money, to the limits that have been fixed for you (through an illegal Executive Order, because fixing of any limits on withdrawal of money from one’s own account does not have any backing in law), indecently celebrating acts of destruction (surgical strikes) as if these were festive, rather than extremely sad and unfortunate occasions, trolling celebrities for voicing their anxieties, or for naming their kids as they wish, demonstrating outrage against those very Pakistani artistes whom one adored and worshipped till the previous day and declaring everyone not agreeing with the status-quo as an anti-national, not fit to be called an Indian national.

The most disruptive action of the State was carried out with the most impunity, with blatant disregard to any established rules, laws or procedures, in a totally autocratic manner, the best part being that it was disguised and projected as the most virtuous act possible. Millions and billions were taken in by the false narrative, many not for long, when the charade started unravelling. However, the State continues to co-opt the 125 crore population of the nation in its most disruptive and autocratic act, and continues to project the demonetization exercise as an act for the people, with complete support of the people. The culture of impunity is so strong that even a cursory need to maintain at least a semblance of democracy is not felt.

Why is it that this culture of impunity has become so entrenched? Why are we the people allowing ourselves to be led down a path where a conscious attempt is being made to fabricate a false fear of the ‘other’? Why suddenly a culture that prided itself on being like a sponge, absorbing the best of all, co-existing peacefully with all, feels the need of creating binaries out of every situation? So Mughals, all of a sudden, become the hateful outsiders who ruined our civilization, Pakistani artistes become the nationals of an ‘enemy’ country, fit only to be condemned, all the tribal population of Bastar and their sympathizers become Maoist supporters, out to destroy the country from within, the Kashmiris, the eternal outsiders, become even more responsible for their own fate, by wanting to have normal lives for themselves and all of us who do-not agree with the status quo, become the anti-nationals, unworthy of being called Indians, fit to be abused, who should be eternally grateful for not being shorn off their citizenship and being allowed to continue to exist as equal (really?) citizens of this nation, as a proof of its utmost tolerant spirit. What is it that we are insecure of? Have we lost all faith in the values of humanity? Do we really believe all the world to be a horrifying place, so that we need to protect ourselves by delegitimizing and derecognizing the ‘other’, whosoever that ‘other’ might be? I don’t have the answer to any of these questions, but the culture of impunity must stop before it takes the form of a Frankenstein’s monster and engulfs all humanity in its throes.

 

The Fascination with Ram Rajya

In his recent speech in a rally at Faizabad, PM Modi stated, “…When people asked Mahatma Gandhi how good governance should be, he would reply in one word, a welfare state should be like Ram Rajya…”. This fascination with equating ‘good governance’ with ‘Ram Rajya’ is not new, so much so that the two are almost used interchangeably. It would be worthwhile to dig a little deep into this ‘Ram Rajya – Good Governance’ equation. I am interested in examining the following aspects of the PM’s statement, namely, the origin and meaning of the term ‘good governance’, ‘the meaning of the term ‘Ram Rajya’, the justification, or otherwise, of equating the two terms and the current PM’s invocation of Ram Rajya, Good Governance as well as Mahatma Gandhi in the same sentence.

The concept of ‘Good Governance’ found a formal mention in the 1992 World Bank Report titled “Governance and Development”. The term was defined as “the manner in which power is exercised in the management of a country’s economic and social resources for development’. This concept has been variously used and interpreted by various national, international and regional organizations and institutions. Some of the key elements that have been present in most of the interpretations are accountability, transparency, rule of law, appropriate legal and judicial frameworks and participation. This is not an exhaustive list, but a list of certain elements that find a mention most frequently when good governance is talked about.

Accountability, has been used variously to mean the responsibility of the Government, various institutions and the public servants and employees for their actions, towards the public, from which they derive their authority. Talking in context of one of the most recent and major decisions of the current regime, it has definitely not shied away from taking responsibility for the overnight demonetization of Rs. 500 and Rs. 1000 currency notes. It has presented this exercise with utmost pride, conveniently coopting the 125 crore population of the nation, making it seem as if this was some sort of a national fight against all the possible vices of corruption, terrorism, black money and what not. Some ‘minor’ details have however been overlooked in the process. The government has not bothered to hold itself accountable for the death of between a hundred and a hundred fifty people, the closing down of small businesses, the loss of thousands of jobs, the innumerable difficulties faced by the poorest sections of the society due to cash crunch and the nationwide dissatisfaction and unrest among the people towards the entire exercise. The Government has also failed to hold itself accountable for the daily shifting goalposts, the justification for this exercise sometimes being fighting black money, at other times fighting terrorism, then removal of counterfeit currency, then a push towards digital transactions and so on and so forth. The Government has failed to hold itself accountable for undermining the authority of independent autonomous institutions and acting like a dictatorship in the garb of democracy. The Government has failed to hold itself accountable for misguiding and misleading the public and the complete failure of this totally disruptive exercise. So much for accountability.

Transparency, the next element that is a prerequisite for good governance, has been the forte of this government. The entire demonetization exercise was carried out overnight, without even the stakeholders being in the know, let alone the general public. Further, the Government has very transparently followed the agenda of promoting symbolic nationalism, destroying dissent and dissenters, upholding the ‘’Hindu Rashtra”, coopting historical personalities like Gandhi and Ambedkar, one turned into a crusader for cleanliness (Swatch Bharat Abhiyaan), and the other a crusader for digitalization (BHIM App).

Laws, rules and ‘rule of law’ – these terms have been interpreted and re-interpreted to suit the situation and the person. FTII students, Rohith Vemula and his mother, human rights activists fighting for the tribals of Chhattisgarh, Priya Pillai, Nandini Sundar, Mohammad Akhlaq, JNU fraternity, and so on and so forth have had a taste of the Rule of law of the land. In fact, every common man has had a taste of the constantly changing ‘rules and laws’ of the land with respect to demonetization. Every citizen has been sufficiently guided about the rules that govern the modes of showing respect to the National Anthem.

The legal and judicial frameworks have been so strengthened that voicing one’s opinion against the dominant perspective and going against it has become the most serious crime, requiring forceful detentions, refusal to grant bails, years and years spent in jails etc. while causing death of innocents (provided they are ordinary non-influential people, or in some cases, deer), being involved in communally motivated crimes, etc., are not even seen as crimes.

Lastly, participation, which is the hallmark of a vibrant democracy, is in the most strengthened position, because 125 crore Indians are coopted into every decision that one man takes, speech after speech it is made clear that everything that is being done is in the name of those 125 crores, for those 125 crores and with full support of those 125 crores. Autocracy had never before been masked so completely with democracy.

Having discussed ‘Good governance’ and its implementation in the current political regime, it would be useful to turn our attention to ‘Ram Rajya’. What is the reason for such fascination with this term? The term ‘Ram Rajya’ refers to the rule under King Ram of Ayodhya. With our propensity to adduce historicity to mythology, Ram Rajya is talked of as if it was a historical kingdom, existing at some point in history. This, however, is itself a myth, as no concrete historical proof of the existence of any such kingdom has yet been found. On the contrary, we have had in our history, numerous great kings and kingdoms whose administrative competence and other abilities have been recognized and lauded. Yet, these kingdoms have not been made synonymous with ‘Good governance’. Secondly, setting aside the ‘God’ status adduced to Ram for a moment, can and should Ram Rajya be called an ideal state, something worth emulation? Not going into other details of how this kingdom was organized and how it functioned, I would like to point out just one aspect, the treatment that was meted to Queen Sita by the King as well as the citizens of Ayodhya. Can a state in which women are treated in such a disgraceful manner, be called an ideal state? Should it be called so? King Ram justified his actions on the pretext of fulfilling peoples’ wishes. If this was the true meaning of democracy according to King Ram, then why did he not bow down to peoples’ wishes when they were exhorting him to become the King rather than proceeding towards forest, when he was exiled by his father for fourteen years? King Ram, till the very end, stated that re-exiling Queen Sita was in deference of peoples’ wishes, despite him being fully aware of his wife’s chastity. Was it not his duty as a king to protect someone whom he knew was innocent? Can an ideal state justify punishing the innocent in deference to the majority? Is this what the Rule of Law states?

Coming finally to the Modi-Good Governance-Ram Rajya-Mahatma Gandhi combination. How justified PM Modi is in talking about Good Governance is amply clear from his track record of Good Governance as stated above. Equating Ram Rajya with Good Governance is highly questionable to say the least. Taking refuge behind Mahatma Gandhi in invoking Ram Rajya is again a replay of the old tactic of the present regime, of trying to coopt yesteryears leaders for its own petty gains. Even otherwise, Mahatma Gandhi’s stamp of approval on ‘Ram Rajya’ as an ideal state to vouch for cannot be absolute. Even the beliefs and utterances of the great need to be opened up and questioned, if and when such need arises. Lastly, even if the PM truly believes in striving for Ram Rajya, the actions of the current regime, in practicing total autocracy, despite protests by millions, are in complete contrast to those of King Ram, in his practice of blind and unhindered ‘democracy’ (as he believed it to be).

Haraamkhor (Film)

It was a lonely place where she had called him to meet. The place had to be lonely as they wanted to maintain anonymity to the world. Anonymous because they were respectable in the society and to maintain that identity they had chosen a lonely place where all their wrongs will be blown with the wind. And he did come because his hunger and satisfaction knew no boundaries. And as they met, the wind turned violent and the sun hid itself under the clouds. Slowly, he pulled her closed to himself and looked her in her eyes. The hunger in his eyes was so frightening that she surrendered herself in his arms transitioning into a state of complete satisfaction. It was as if, she had got what she expected and was now sure to feel it. And he hugged and kissed her, thrashed her completely in act of a savaging attack on the 15 year old minor girl. She had to be a part of this act because she had reached the age of adolescence and wanted to feel everything that can be labelled as “adult”. And he, a 35 year old adult had to do this because he knew she was vulnerable and would surrender to him. During this act of utter disgrace, the word “INTERMISSION” appears on the screen…

The lights were switched ON and I felt like vomiting. The film takes you to a very uncomfortable zone and who else other than Nawazuddin Siddiqui can do justice with this kind of role? Shweta Tripathi was equally phenomenal and did complete justice to her role. It was especially difficult for her because she being a 30 year old female played a character half her age. Before the movie started, I tried to avoid using the word "Haraamkhor", but during the movie, I must have used this word at least 10 times.

There were schools kids who add some light to this dark movie but in summary, the film handled the subject very delicately and did not cross over to obscenity. I felt the movie was somewhat dark for me but I also think that it had to be like that to pass on the message. After all, we do live in a dark world and the film just shows the reality!! The realities have a tendency to be darker than they seem!!!