Death of Ealam Tigers : A Post-mortem

Lankan forces might have killed the Tigers but not their ideology. One cannot deny the fact that, conflict of this magnitude cannot happen without the genuine demands/concerns on both sides. On one hand Sri Lankan Tamils and other minorities had a genuine reason for their struggle, i.e. demand for equality, dignity and decent standards of living. On the other hand democratically elected government at Colombo cannot be a mute spectator for intolerable violence practiced and propagated by LTTE; simply because security of citizen is the first responsibility of government. Lankan crisis is yet another example of class conflict based on language and ethnicity. Unless equality among Lankans is promoted with vigor, there is no reason to believe that another breed of Tigers cannot be born. 

1. Roots of Hatred
Sri Lanka secured independence (1948) from British through peaceful negotiations. No one then would have imagined that a mere disagreement in choosing official language could one day lead to huge humanitarian crisis in the island nation. From 1936 to 1944, Lankan leaders favored English for the official language. However, president J.R. Jayawardene (in 1944) favored Sinhala for official language. Prime minister Bandaranaike's proactive move towards making Sinhala as official language led to the passage of "Sinhala Only Act, 1956", which ultimately sown the seeds of ethnic riots. The civil war is a direct result of the escalation of the confrontational politics that followed.

Since then, Sri Lankan minority communities feel that, they had been discriminated by successive majority Sinhalese governments in Colombo. Many youngsters, with the support of diaspora around the world, formed a group to fight against alleged discrimination against Tamils and other minorities. This was the time when "Sun God" - Velupillai Prabhakaran's Tamil New Tigers (1972) was born, which ultimately led to the formation of Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam in 1976. Since then, [take a look at chronology of events],  several leaders including president Ranasinghe Premadasa, Indian prime minister Rajiv Gandhi and over 80,000 civilians and millitary personnel were killed in the civil war. Peace was contemplated through negotiations but was never achieved. 

2. Tigers dragged their feets
Starting from negotiations at Thimpu, Bhutan in 1985, till 2002's ceasefire agreement, brokered by Norway, LTTE always dragged it's feet over one or other issue.  LTTE rejected an offer from former president Chandrika Kumaratunga, which provided powers of devolution (a federal solution) and attempted to assassinate her in 1999. After ceasefire agreement in 2002, LTTE signaled willingness to discuss a federal solution. But in 2003, it pulled out of talks after six rounds of negotiations, citing inadequate steps taken to rebuild war-hit areas. "By accepting no compromise and by continuing to use tactics such as assassinations of perceived 'enemies of the cause' and violent retribution, the LTTE brought about its own doom. [EPW, May 30, 2009]." 

3. Heightened frustration
Colombo had already lost many of its leaders and thousand of civilians. Assassination of Foreign Minister Lakshman Kadirgamar in February 2005 further escalated it's frustration. In the run-up to the November 2005 presidential election, president Mahinda Rajapaksa promised that he would fight Tigers to the finish. In August 2006, Rajapaksa and his core group made a political resolve to launch a "fight-to-finish" campaign against the Tigers. In the same year, "The LTTE provided the much-needed excuse for the assault when its cadre closed down the Mavil Aru sluice gates in the east, denying water to more than 30,000 civilians. The presidential core team in the campaign included his younger brother and Defence Secretary, Gotabaya Rajapaksa, and the army chief, Lt Gen. Sarath Fonseka, both of whom had scores to settle with the Tigers (Both had survived assassination attacks earlier).... The Defence Secretary and the army chief proved to be a lethal combination for the LTTE [Frontline]." 

4. Fight to finish
"Despite a systematic shelling and bombing campaign that killed thousands of civilians, the Sri Lankan army did not receive anything more than token disapproval or humanitarian appeals from the international community. The Sri Lankan government's ruthless drive to vanquish the "terrorist" LTTE was never halted in the final phase of war by an international community tired of "terror" - a stigma that LTTE carried for its past actions [EPW, May 30, 2009]" On April 26, 2009, LTTE declared a unilateral ceasefire as government forces surround an ever shrinking "no-fire-zone". Colombo rejected the declaration and called it a "joke". On May 18, 2009, V. Prabhakaran, the "Sun God" was finally set. Signalling the end of civil war between Sri Lankan government and LTTE. The vicotry rallies and celebrations due to "Sun God's" death does not hide the enormity of challenges ahead for Rajapaksa and his successors.  

5. Post war Challenges
Immediate post war challenge for Rajapaksa government is rehabilitation of more that 150,000 internally displaced civilians. President Rajapaksa has promised that he would complete the rehabilitation process within six months. Even though it sounds ambitious, it is not impossible if international community steps in and help expedite the process. Though Rajapaksa was successful in his "fight-to-finish" campaign against the Tigers, the roots of the conflict cannot be uprooted so soon. Lankan government must address genuine grievances of the Tamils. Present and future administrations at Colombo must make sincere efforts for the welfare of Tamils and other minorities. "Anything short of a federal setup that grants political rights for the oppressed Tamil population would only lead to a further festering of the deep wounds from years of marginalization and alienation of Tamils."

If Rajapaksa and his successors does not make sincere efforts to promote equality, dignity and decent standards of living for Tamils and other minorities, "the seeds would be sown for another militant organization - one that would have learnt from the past mistakes of theLTTE - espousing complete separation [EPW]."

Why can't our Netas love to debate in parliament than on TV?

Recently, BJP's prime ministarial candidate L K Advani challenged Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to a live TV debate similar to the practice in US. In the era of news hungry media, Advani Vs Manmohan Singh television debate can surely raise voters' eyebrows. More over, television channels are sitting on the edge to host such debates. "Live and exclusive only on your channel", would surely bag more viewers. One of my colleague commenting on this issue humorously said, "Rajdeep Sardesai would be happy to fuel mud slinging between the two by asking obvious controversial questions. Arnab Goswamy would ensure that both leader will quarrel each other openly. And Barkha Dutt would make sure she will gain more publicity than the debate itself!"

India has been contemplating on prime ministerial television debate for quite some time. Though such debates in India might not decide the winnability of a leaders but will definitely put their abilities to test. It would be unfair to say that, "If United States is using such device (TV debate) since the era of Abraham Lincoln, why can't India have it?" The issue must be looked at from two different perspectives. Firstly, the democratic culture in India and US are different. Secondly, the pros and cons of such debates must be appreciated in Indian context.

Difference in democratic culture
In united states the executive (i.e. the president) is neither the member of Congress (i.e. US parliament) nor he is responsible to it. American constitution had denied the president an opportunity to debate in Congress on day to day matters owing to the principle of separation of powers between executive, judiciary and Congress. But he can only address the Congress if required. Thus, in America the president lacks a constitutional platform for regular debate with opposition leaders. Hence, president's public addresses on television or otherwise will have tremendous impact on dynamics of American politics.

However, in India, the position is quite opposite. The prime minister, the de-facto head of state, is not only the member of parliament but also responsible to it for his policies. More over, prime minister is invariably the leader of the house to which he was elected. Our prime minister, like in Britain, has the luxury of constitutional platform for debates on day to day matters with opposition leaders. More over, the debates are broadcasted live on television and the public will have access to archives of parliamentary debates. His appearance on television is largely aimed at reaching a 'section' of masses through the media.

The parliament provides Indian prime minster a bigger platform to defend his policies and also explain to the whole nation about entire gamut of his governance. Also, the opposition leader has sufficient opportunity to criticize the government on it's policies and programs. Thus, in India, parliamentary debates obviate the need for television debates. More over, the questions asked in parliament makes the whole executive excessively cautious and careful. Question hour in parliament is a greatest strength of parliamentary democracy and it's importance can be ignored by the leader only at his peril.

How far our prime minister and leader of opposition make use of the parliamentary platform for debates is another aspect. Fortunately, Our prime ministers in the past, from Pandit Nehru to Vajpayee, took great interest in parliamentary debates and Dr. Manmohan Singh is no different. More over, important discussions, criticism of government in the parliament receives wide publicity in the media, print as well as electronic.

TV debates in Indian context
Despite the constitutional platform for public debates, the role of television media in modern era cannot be underestimated. It has a significant potential to evaluate the leaders. But, in India, there are equally significant hurdles. First and foremost is the language barrier. Unlike in United states, Indians are linguistically diverse. We speak hundreds of languages and constitution itself recognizes 18 of them as official languages. In fact our national language, Hindi, is spoke only by 30% of the population. The debate in one particular language keeps away the people from such debates if they do not know that language. Even if the debates are appropriately translated, they might not draw the same emotions and feelings as in the original language. More over, the debates involving western educated, english speaking leaders will hardly reach 1% of the population through media. For example, Dr.Manmohan Singh's speach in Hindi, may not be understood by majority of Tamilians, Kannadigas and others. Many of us are aware of Shashi Tharoor's unquestionable debating skills (in english). But, how far that skill can fetch him the votes in Malayalam heartland?

Second problem is, unlike in US, the relatively low level of education in India. Inflation, recession, credit crisis, etc.. may be buzzwords in the news media. How many in our country actually understand the debates on economic situation? How many farmers would understand the effect of credit crisis in Indian market? Many statements (from Dr.Singh's team of economists) filled with economic indicators like inflation rate, CRR, SLR, Repo Rate, etc are still an unsolvable puzzles to many. More over, how many of us actually understand the cryptic legal texts? or at least know the general provisions of related legal acts? The debates full of such information can make no difference to the people.

Thirdly, Indian politics has moved far from unipolar Congress dominated politics to multi polar politics. We speak of third and even fourth front! Growth of regional parties and subsequent growth of opportunism in politics brings down the quality of such debates. It may even create hatred feeling among the people due to open mud slinging. More over, media is even more opportunistic to fuel such mud slinging in TV debates for it's own commercial reasons.

Lastly, there may be other reasons, like various parties have their own spokes persons who regularly debates with their counter parts in other parties on television media. Also, our prime minister may be media shy, but his knowledge, experience and work itself speaks volumes, though Madam Gandhi's influence cannot be denied.

Despite all such barriers, importance of prime ministarial debates cannot be underestimated. They will play an important, if not decisive, role in educating people (at least educated urban section of the population). At this moment, prime ministarial debate, if it happens, will be nothing more than a serious entertainment. But, it will surely be a precursor to it's bigger role in the future.

'Dil Se' kaho, Rahman and Slumdog ki Jai ho!

Rahman has composed music for more than 130 films "but he remained relatively unknown in the United States until the unexpected success of Slumdog Millionaire." Rahman has finally bridged the gap between Indian and western audiences. The finest modern musician has won two Oscars for Best Original Score and Best Song categories. 'Dil Se' kaho, Rahman and Slumdog ki Jai ho!

"Like any good artist, A.R.Rahman is not a traditionalist, he's a revolutionary. He uses all the revolutionary things that come from all over the world in his stuff ... hip-hop beats, electronics .... and there's an incredible inquisitiveness and playfulness in his music.[Hans Zimmer]." "Jai Ho, or Victory to You" is a testimony to this. He has mixed Hindi lyrics and Indian pop melodies with influences from Arabic, Japanese and Spanish music.

"Sheer diversity of his styles: from Swinging brass bands to triumphant anthems; from joyous pop to West-End musicals", Rahman's music from Roja to Slumdog Millionaire has given lightening effect in the hearts of millions. He once said, "I can relate to the film because I take life positively and feel that even after great depression, something good will come out." A profound sense of humility and spirit incarnated in his music has lifted millions from the oblivion of sorrow to the summit of hope, love and possibilities. Themes he created for hundreds of movies have moved the emotions of millions. Not only his music, his journey filled with sheer determination and hard work will continue to inspire generations to come.

"Slumdog Millionaire is the work of an artist at the peak of his powers. India is Boyle’s palette, and Mumbai – that teeming “maximum city,” with 19 million strivers on the make, jostling, scheming, struggling, and killing for success – is his brush. The portrait that emerges has been executed with bold strokes, vivid colors, and striking images [Shashi Tharoor]."

Many "have protested that the film shows Indians as conniving, unprincipled, and ruthless, and that the only compassionate people in the film are a pair of white tourists who give the protagonist some money....If some of the larger-than-expected profits are directed toward the slums where the movie was made, the protestors are quite likely to fade away. What they want, after all, is a share of the glory [Project Syndicate]."

Even if Slumdog Millionaire had not swept the Oscars, it would have stayed in the mind's eye a long time.

Making of the Indian Constitution - a road to Republic Day

There was a time when people expected nothing but oppression from public authorities. Later they expected chiefly to be let alone. Our leaders during the freedom struggle instilled the thoughts of freedom and democracy. As a result, people realized that freedom is a prerequisite for India's political destiny and the destiny must be determined by Indians themselves. It was then the idea of Swaraj (Self Governance) was born and known that "Swaraj" will not be a free gift of the British Parliament.

Until 1857, British rule was characterized by "Centralization, Supremacy of Governor General, British politicians interest in the governance of India and tremendous trade and business opportunities". But, after the "First war of Independence in 1857" and subsequent legislations, British parliamentarians lost interest in Indian affairs and they felt that administration in India is safe in the hands of civil servants and military officers. "The developments after 1857 rebellion were

• towards gradual decentralization,
• dual control over Indian affairs by Secretary of State for India sitting in London and the Governor General in India.
• 'form of concessions' and reactions to political developments in India"

The Indian Councils Acts of 1861, 1892, the three round table conferences (1930-32), the Government of India acts 1909, 1919, 1935 etc... were all aimed at serving Britain's economic interests (and political interests during World War I and II), however socio-economic development of India received little or no attention. Pandit Nehru described '1935 act' as "a machine with strong brakes but no engine!", and "a charter of slavery which deserved to be rejected in it's entirety". Muhammad Ali Jinha called it as "thoroughly rotten, fundamentally bad and totally unacceptable".

Britain did not take too much time to realize that it would be difficult for Allied powers to win the world war II without India's active support in the east. They made series of political efforts due to growing International (allied powers') pressure. Those efforts brought 'concessions and political developments' to mitigate Indian resistance and freedom struggle, they in turn had significant impact on formulation of our constitution.

1. August offer, 1940: Lord Linglithgow, the then Governor General (GG) of India, made some important offers in order to secure India's cooperation in the war efforts. They were,

• Expansion of GG's executive council so that Indians could join the council (Executive council was a body of advisers to GG so that he could perform day to day administration effectively, GG was the final authority on any matters and council had no real powers).
• Setting up of representative body after the war which will draft a constitution for the country.

Congress rejected the offer on two grounds. (i) there was no mention about British withdrawal (ii) It's demand for defence portfolio be given to Indians was not accepted.

2. Cripps Mission, March 1942: Under the growing pressure of allied powers, British govt. dispatched Sir Stafford Cripps to India with a package of proposals. He was a member of British war cabinet and leader of opposition in the house of commons. After meeting with various Indian leaders he made following proposals.

• Elected government in (British) provinces and Indian union comprising British provinces and princely states.
• Indian States (princely states) free to decide whether to join the Indian union and to accept the constitution.
• Impracticability of Idea of Pakistan.

Congress rejected the proposals because right of princely states to not to accept the constitution and 'not to join' the union will jeopardize integrity of the union. Muslim League rejected the proposal because there was no acceptance of their demand for Pakistan.

Jinnah would not be satisfied with anything less than the partition of the country on the basis of two nation (India-Pakistan) theory.

3. Wavell Plan, June 1945: Lord Wavell, the then governor general, summoned both Congress and Muslim League for the negotiations. The Simla Conference was held in June 1945. "It was agreed that Congress and Muslim League should have parity of numbers in the national government (to be formed later). But Jinnah insisted that the Muslim League was the only representative organization of the muslims, and as such, the quota of Muslim members would be nominated by the League alone. Congress did not agree to League's demand and hence Shimla Conference broke up."

4. The Cabinet Mission Plan, 1946: In March 1946, a British Cabinet mission headed by Pathick Lawrence and consisting of Sir Stafford Cripps and A V Alexander arrived in India to resolve the deadlock for future developments. The cabinet mission announced it's plans in May 1946. Main provisions were,

• Impracticability of Pakistan and two nation theory
• Union of India (British India + Princely states).
• Residuary powers (i.e. powers other than those explicitly mentioned in the acts/constitution) to be with provinces and provinces were free to form groups among themselves and they were given the right to revise their continuance in the union.
• Muslims and Sikhs legislators to be elected on quota basis and resolution of communal issues to be decided by majority of the concerned community legislators.
• Formation of Interim government which would take the reigns of future governance of India.

Congress rejected the idea of grouping of the provinces and their right of opting out of the federation and agreed to form the interim government, but league refused to join interim government. Muslim league obviously rejected the plan because it's demand for separate state of Pakistan was not honored. In order to press for their demand for Pakistan, Muslim league launched "Direct Action Day" in august 1946 which set off a chain of communal violences. Later Muslim league agreed to join the interim government to safeguard the interests of Muslims.

5. Attlee's Announcement, February 1947: On 20th February, the British Prime Minister announced that the British would hand over the power to responsible Indian hands by June 1948. Attle clearly stated that in case muslim league were to continue its boycott of the constituent assembly, the British govt would be forced to think of handing over the power to more than one entity (country). Thus it was clear that British envisaged the partition of India along with Independence.

6. Mountbatten Plan, June 1947: In March 1947 Lord Mountbatten assumed office of the viceroy. He was explicitly sent to India on the mission of expediting British withdrawal and convincing congress about inevitability of partition. He was given extraordinary powers to take decision on the spot to accomplish his mission. His plan, code named Plan Balkan, was a blue print of partition of India into two independent states, India and Pakistan. Muslim League agreed to Mountbatten Plan and Congress held a working committee meeting to decide and it was accepted by overwhelming majority. It must be noted here that, in the meeting, Mahatma Gandhi voted for the partition, though he tried his best to prevent the partition and went on to the extent of suggesting to Mountbatten that a government should be formed under the leadership of Jinnah!

7. India Independence Act, July 1947: British parliament passed the law authorizing the partition and British withdrawal from India. As per the plan, Eastern Bengal, Sylhet district of Assam, Western Punjab, Sind, North Western Frontier Province went to Pakistan and a separate constituent assembly was setup for Pakistan (which was headed by Jinnah).

8. Constituent Assembly of India: The constituent Assembly set up the drafting committee headed by Dr. Ambedkar to come up with the draft constitution. There were other committees facilitated the drafting process.

Committee	Chairman/Member
Union Power Committee	Jawaharlal Nehru
Fundamental Rights Committee	Sardar Patel
Steering Committee	Dr. KM Munshi (Chairman), Gopalswamy Iyengar, Bishwanath Das.
Provintial Constitution Committee	Sardar Patel
Committee on Union Constitution	Jawaharlal Nehru
Examining draft Constitution	Alladi Krishnaswamy Iyer

Draft Constitution of India' was ready by February 1948 and the constituent assembly discussed the draft clause by clause and modified wherever necessary. The second reading of the draft constitution was completed by 17th October 1949. On November 14th, Constituent assembly sat again for the third reading. It was completed on 26th November 1949 and received the signature of the President of the assembly and was declared passed. The provisions relating to citizenship, elections, provisional parliament, temporary and transitional provisions, were given immediate effect, i.e. from November 26, 1949. The rest of the constitution came into force on 26th January, 1950 and this date is referred to in the constitution as the Date of Commencement. It's interesting to note that Nehru was particular about the date i.e. 26th and he insisted on that. Some historians say that he it as a lucky day! Draft Constitution got it's presidential assent on 26th November, and it came into force on 26th Jan 1950 (Nehru's date, 26th!).

The history of making our constitution suggests that Swaraj was not a free gift, it was earned. It was earned from the struggle and sacrifice of our forefathers. Many Pundits around the world doubted the long term functioning of our Constitution. But contrary to that, our constitution stood the test of time. We are the largest democracy in the world and highly respected one too. On the other hand Pakistan has proved over the time that, It's harder for them to run a constitution than to frame one! January 26th is a day the festival of democracy is celebrated. It's a remarkable landmark achieved by our forefathers. The best way to salute them is to exercise our democratic right by casting our votes, by making our vote count!

Wishing you all a wonderful R-Day...

Why our Munna (aka Sanjay Dutt) cannot step into parliament...

Samajwadi Party was quite lucky to have secured the victory of actress Jayaprada in the last election. But, can the star power work again? History might not repeat this time. Amar Singh's whole intention might not be to get Lucknow into SP's kitty, but use Sanjay Dutt as a scapegoat to achieve his party's political ends by making him a 'start campaigner'. Amar Singh knows that Sanjay Dutt  cannot get a suspension order from Supreme court (will tell you why) and even if he manage to get such order, he might not win the election due to the fact that Lucknow is a traditional strong hold of BJP and no one has challenged Atal bihari Vajpayee. Even if BJP's patriarch (Vajpayee) doesn't contest election from Lucknow this year, chances of Sanjay Dutt's win are bleak as many sections of the society in Lucknow are divided over support to Sanjay Dutt.

It is not clear if Vajpayee will contest. There were rumours Shatrughan Sinha might enter the ring if Vajpayee calls it a day. "We want him to contest. Even a child will tell you he just has to fill his nomination papers to win," says BJP leader and Vajpayee's election manager Lalji Tandon. 

The SP has tried to counter Vajpayee's charisma with star power before. Raj Babbar in 1996 and Muzzaffar Ali of Umrao Jaan fame in 1998 challenged him and failed. In recent times, only Congress nominee Karan Singh gave him a decent contest in 1999. Lucknowites are divided on Sanjay Dutt.

"It is strange that the party (SP) which is threatening to withdraw support (to UPA) over terrorism is fielding a person charged under Tada," says former Lucknow University vice-chancellor Roop Rekha Verma. "Where are we taking the standards of politics if we have convicts like Sanjay Dutt against Vajpayee," asks playwright Mudra Rakshas [DNA]

The idea of giving ticket to convicted star like Sanjay Dutt sounds like a death blow to the very foundation of Samajwadi party's socialist democratic ideology. Amar Singh and his party has shown that in today's competitive politics only 'ends' matter, no one gives a damn about means; ethics and morality never to be talked about. Legally, as of now, Sanjay Dutt cannot contest elections since he has already been convicted for a "serious offense" and also served the jail term. He can contest only if he gets a stay order from Supreme Court for his conviction and election commission has to approve his candidacy. If one analyse the intensity of Dutt's offense and the context, it will be quite conspicuous that he won't get a chance to contest elections.

1. Article 8 of Representation of People act says
   
• Clause (3): A person convicted of any offence and sentenced to imprisonment for not less than two years shall be disqualified from the date of such conviction and shall continue to be disqualified for a further period of six years since his release.
  
• So, clearly, Election commission will not entertain Dutt's candidacy unless there is an extraordinary ground provided by supreme court.
  
2. "I see no reason when my brother Sidhu can be allowed to serve the nation why I cannot be allowed to do the same", says Sanjay Dutt. But the fact is Sidhu's case and Dutt's case are completely different and not even comparable.
   
• Sidhu was accused of unintentional murder, but Dutt has been accused of keeping weapons at his house and was convicted by the Supreme Court which upheld the judgment of the trail court. 
• Also, Sanjay Dutt has served sentence and he is barred from contesting.
  
• In Sidhu's case Supreme court "observed that the 1988 Patiala incident happened all of a sudden without pre-meditation and it was not a case where he took advantage of his position as MP in the commission of the crime. The court said he had set "high standards" in public life by vacating the seat after the Punjab and Haryana High Court ruling [The Hindu].
• In case of Sanjay Dutt, his involvement in the 1993 blast, directly or indirectly, is a threat to the national security. In Sanjay Dutt's case, the whole offense was not an accident. This is obvious from the fact that arms and ammunitions were recovered from Dutt's residence.
3. In 2007, Sanjay Dutt narrowly escaped the conviction under TADA act but he was convicted under Arms Act which is slightly lesser crime. It must be noted here that, Representation of People act  disqualifies the person convicted under TADA, for contesting elections. "It was alleged that justice P D Kode discriminated Sanjay Dutt by not convicting him under TADA act. It's well know fact that, Aziz Ahmed Shaikh, a 1993 Mumbai serial bomb blasts convict, had moved the Supreme Court challenging his conviction under the TADA and alleged favour shown by the designated judge to film star Sanjay Dutt [report]" though Mr. Dutt was committed similar offense. So, the questions relating to intensity of Mr. Dutt offense are still not completely answered. We can, for a significant extent, conclude that Supreme court will not be soft on Sanjay Dutt to suspend his six year jail term.

Suppose, in worst case, if Sanjay Dutt gets a chance to contest elections, and if he manages to win (which is most unlikely), then it really doesn't make any difference and after some time, no one gives a damn about his win and "he making any difference to the society", which anyway he is not going to make! Sanjay's Dutt's episode is just a tip of the iceberg. There are already over 120 (alleged) criminals sitting in Parliament and making the laws for innocents! I recommend every one of you to take a look at this document (criminal cases.doc) which tells you the story of widespread criminals in our political system. To give you a glimpse of it, "there are 120 MPs with criminal cases against them out of 543, or 22.1%. Among the major parties, the BJP has 29 MPs with a criminal record, the Indian National Congress (INC) 24, the SP 11, RJD 8, CPM 7, BSP 7, NCP 5 and CPI 2."

We, the people of India, end up electing criminals to make laws for innocents and pass on the blame to those very lawmakers and the government in power. Let's ask not what the Netas have done for us, but what we have done to elect them. Get your voter ID, cast your vote and make it count!

Read More:

1. Sidhu's conviction stayed (Supreme Court's observations) - The Hindu.
   
2. TADA Court favored Sanjay Dutt.
3. Criminals in Indian Politics, Social Watch Report.
4. Criminals cases statistics document  from From Association for Democratic Reforms. Alternative link.
5. Candidates's Criminal and financial background report submitted by Election commission of Karnataka. Alternative link.
6. SP to field Sanjay Dutt from Lucknow - The Hindu.

The youth of youngisthan celebrates 'National Youth Day'

I called up a friend to wish him on his birthday. The conversation digressed enough to talk about today's youth. He joked, "Today's youth is really going crazy, there was a dude in the temple lighting his cigar from 'Aarti' offered by the priest. Looking at that, I dropped my beer bottle!" Thank god that's just a joke! Such an insane behavior is not tolerated in a country which celebrates National Youth Day!

If you are not aware, Every year since 1984, January 12th is celebrated as National Youth Day in India. "Because, on this day in the year 1863, was born the great philosopher, an inspiration to the youth, the embodiment of Indian culture and intelligence Swamy Vivekananda", whose very name brings lightening spirit in the hearts of many. On declaring Jan 12th as youth day, Government of India felt that, "the philosophy of Swamiji and the ideals for which he lived and worked could be a great source of inspiration for the Indian Youth."

If that inspiration lasts perpetually, the immortal soul of Swamy Vivekananda will remain in peace for ever. That inspiration alone determine the direction of "New India". Because it's quite obvious from the fact that over 50% of Indian population is younger than 25 years [youthportal].

"Is our burgeoning youth a bane or boon? In the early 1980s China was in a position that India finds itself today. And China’s current economic boom is said to be the direct consequence of the large proportion of youth in its population. According to some estimates the current proportion of population under 25 years in India is 51% and the proportion under 35 is about 66%. This predominance of youth in the population is expected to last until 2050. While the average age of an Indian in 2020 is expected to be 29 years, the average age for China is expected to be 37. With 'proper' education, job openings and healthcare, our youth are sure to tip the economy in the right direction [youthportal]."

It's important to pay plenty of attention to the word 'proper' in the above quoted text. The demographic dividend can easily become demographic disaster if we do not pay 'proper' attention to those sectors, namely, education, employment, healthcare, infrastructure building. Swamy Vivekananda has rightly said, "So long as the millions live in hunger and ignorance, I hold every man a traitor who, having been educated at their expense, pays not the least heed to them." If we think that holds true even today, then we are responsible, directly or indirectly, for the millions who are living in hunger and ignorance. The responsibility of arising, awaking to 'change the lives around' is left to us. Whatever we do may be insignificant, but it's important that we do it!

Infy's sabbatical policy: Cost Cutting or Corporate Social Responsibility?

Today, I came across this article about an interesting HR policy of Infosys. "Infosys has issued letters to its employees stating they could opt for a one-year sabbatical to engage themselves in philanthropic activities." According to the company, "while the move may have coincided with the global financial turmoil and slowing growth rates of IT firms, it should be perceived as a pure voluntary act by employees who are prompted by altruistic motives and inspired by the example of its chairman and chief mentor, NR Narayana Murthy."

What will employees get? 50% of their salary during that one year sabbatical + Any payment while working at any NGO or any such organization + Personal satisfaction for helping the needy.

Who is eligible? Any Infosys employee who is on Infosys payroll for two consecutive years.

Why is Infosys doing it? "It's a part of Narayana Murthy's desire to give back to society."

How does it help changing the lives around? According to Infosys, many of their employees quit their job to pursue philanthropic activities. This would give such employees (I hope there are many!) an option to pursue their hobby while still continuing with the jobs, even if they will be paid a small amount by the company. This ultimately brings fresh talent and renewed dynamism in NGOs or any such organization they work for or to any philanthropic activity which employee takes up.

This idea was Narayana Murthy’s dream and has been on the cards for a while. It is the way one can give back to society. But why is Infosys doing especially during economic turbulent times? I digged more into this and found that, Infosys has infact made this policy public way back in December 2006. But, according to this article in The Hindu Business Line, the motives then seems to be different,

"The company has also initiated a pilot project for employees giving them an opportunity to opt for a one-year sabbatical at any point in their careers. This could be used for childcare, eldercare, higher studies or for health reasons" [More here].

So, clearly, in December 2006, the sabbatical policy was employee centric, now it just got bigger and has a social element in it. After almost two years, when employees are in the middle of worst economic crisis, this policy can serve two purposes: Corporate Social Responsibility and Cost Cutting. One cannot blame Infosys for giving new life to this policy. Simply because choice is completely left to employee's discretion and it is voluntary in nature and more importantly they did not chose to issue pink slips without prior notice. More over, it has "Social Responsibility" factor in it. If significantly good number of employees take this opportunity to change the lives around, why not? No matter what kind of financial turmoil we are facing.

"I would like to believe the reason is more to do with the Corporate Social Responsibility element rather than the cost cutting element. But, the timing of the move has coincided with turbulent times. Only time will tell if this was a strange coincidence[src]."

I wish I was in Infosys :)

Congratulations Mr. President-Elect, Yes you can!

Today, Barack Obama, the President-elect, is living the dream of Martin Luther King, Jr. On 28th August 1963 at the Lincoln Memorial, Washington D.C., Martin Luther King delivered one of the most powerful speeches in the history of mankind.

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. I have a dream today!

I have a dream that one day, down in Alabama, with its vicious racists, with its governor having his lips dripping with the words of "interposition" and "nullification" -- one day right there in Alabama little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers. I have a dream today!

His "I have a dream" speech electrified the crowd gathered to protest against racism. "It is regarded, along with Abraham Lincoln's Gettysburg Address and Franklin D. Roosevelt's Infamy Speech, as one of the finest speeches in the history of American oratory [wiki]." Take a look at that famous "I have a dream" speech, full text here.



Forty five years later, Americans finally fulfilled the dream of Martin Luther King. Americans sent a message to the world that they are not just a collection of Red States and blue states, but they are "United States of America". Who else can reflect that message better than Barack Obama, the first African-American president of America,

"It's the answer spoken by young and old, rich and poor, Democrat and Republican, black, white, Latino, Asian, Native American, gay, straight, disabled and not disabled - Americans who sent a message to the world that we have never been a collection of Red States and Blue States: we are, and always will be, the United States of America."

Here is Obama's Victory Speech: "Change Has Come To America", delivered at Grand Park Chicago. Full text of Victory speech here.

Vote won - Trust lost, but there are some good lessons to learn

"I am a Muslim and I am an Indian, and I see no distinction between the two", "The enemies of Indian Muslims are not America or deals like these. The enemies are the same as the enemies of all those who are poor — poverty, hunger, lack of development and the absence of a voice….”, "...jab tak kashmir mein musalman hain, Srinagar aur Amarnath mein aap ki yaatra chalti rahegi (As long as there is a single Muslim in Kashmir, the Srinagar and Amarnath Yatra will never stop)."
I can never forget those sentences for the rest of my life. Omar Abdullah's cogent arguments in recently concluded parliamentary special session reflected his keen mind and an ability to think clearly and logically. He was laconic in his words, his down to earth approach to express his ideas sent chills down my spine.  "During the two-day special session to discuss the trust motion, only Omar Abdullah among the genuinely young pols held his own [churumuri]." Take a look at his inspiring speech.



Two days' significantly high quality debate was completely masked by the high drama of "Cash for Vote". Our media repeatedly shown those disturbing pictures. But very few were able to sense the high quality debate in the parliament. You can find the complete text here, Day-1, Day-2. Of course, there was mud slinging, that's the part and parcel of politics, but there were few leaders like Dr. Manmohan Singh, Pranab Mukherjee, Omar Abdullah, for some extent Rahul Gandhi (he said, "instead of worrying about how the world will impact us, we should start worrying about how we will impact the world."), etc.. who have shown the far reaching vision for the nation. Young parliamentarians sent a very clear message to the nation, "National interest is above the party politics." Lalu Yadav's humorous remarks added special taste in the debate, he was at his proverbial best, take a look.



I feel, some times it's better if the media and public are not quixotic. The myth that 'there is only mud slinging in parliament', is of course, not true. There are some good things, in fact little more than ever before. There are pros and cons, there is no point in dwelling on the bad things in parliament, their is no point in emphasizing them vehemently. There are some things which are unavoidable in most vibrant and dynamic democracy like ours (I don't say that we shouldn't criticize, but we shouldn't loose ourselves in the oblivion of criticism). The media, the public and of course all of us should help our democracy to free from myths and help it develop harmoniously. The idea here is simple, If there are unavoidable (bad) things, learn the lesson, take it (lesson learnt) forward and cherish the good things, rest will be just history.

They killed him on this day, but not his ideas

"....Very soon the final battle will begin. Its outcome will be decisive. We took part in the struggle and we are proud of having done so...." His vision of seeing freedom a reality did come true, but he was not around to see that. Even today, his very name gives a lightening effect in the hearts of millions! 23rd March, 1931 was the day when an inspiring revolutionary became Shaheed, but his ideas keep inspiring the millions.

Dear friends, join me in a well deserved salute to the legend, Shaheed Bhagat Singh.

[image source]

Related articles posted earlier.
1. Bhagat Singh and The Choice
2. ಭಗತ್ ಸಿಂಗ್: ದಾರಿ ಆವುದಯ್ಯ ವೈಕುಂಠಕೆ?

Adieu to the revolutionary

On February 19, 2008, five days before his mandate expired, Fidel Castro announced he would neither seek nor accept a new term as either president or commander-in-chief. No one in the history of politics has ever said, "neither seek nor accept presidency", before. Castro was a communist visionary and one of the greatest heroes in the Cuban history. He deserves a special adieu from India for his role in Non-Aligned Movement.

During the 1983 NAM summit in New Delhi (Prime Minister Indira Gandhi's period), Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat was most upset for being asked to address the opening plenary session after the address of the leader of Jordanian delegation and was rejecting to attend subsequent (afternoon) session. Mr. Castro came to know about this and asked Mr. Yasser Arafat if he was a friend of Indira Gandhi. Mr. Arafat Said, "Friend, friend, she is my elder sister and I will do anything for her." Mr. Castro said, "Then behave like a younger brother and attend the afternoon session." Yasser Arafat drama was over in two minutes. Mr. Arafat did as he was told![The Hindu, 22nd Feb, 2008]. Such was the charisma and character of Fidel Castro.

The world will remember Mr. Castro, not only for his Communist legacy, Cuban Revolution, Cuban Missile Crisis and changing the lives of millions in Cuba, but also for surviving 638 (yeah, six hundred and thirty eight) assassination attempts by Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). Still, CIA says, "We only have to be successful once!" They have tried all possible methods to kill the impeccable revolutionary, Fidel Castro, 'from exploding cigars to femmes fatales; a radio station rigged with noxious gas to a poison syringe posing as an innocuous ballpoint pen'. He is still the worst nightmare of America and the CIA. He once said, "If surviving assassination attempts were an Olympic event, I would win the gold medal." Here is the list.

Presidency	No of Attempts to kill Fidel Castro
Eisenhower	38
John F. Kennedy	42
Lyndon B. Johnson	72
Richard Nixon's	172
Jimmy Carter	74
Ronald Reagan	197
George H. W. Bush	16
Bill Clinton	21
George W. Bush	6
TOTAL	638

Some of these assassination plots are depicted in a documentary entitled 638 Ways to Kill Castro. The documentary even suggests that John F. Kennedy asked the creator of James Bond, Ian Fleming, for his advice on how to oust Castro. Take a look at the trailer.



In 1952, at the age of 26, he planned to run for a parliamentary seat. However, Gen. Fulgencio Batista overthrew the Cuban government and canceled the election. Castro first challenged the Batista regime in court, but in 1953 organized an unsuccessful rebel force. Castro was arrested, tried and put in jail until 1955. He next went to Mexico to organize a new force, one that became known as the 26 of July Movement. In 1956 this group launched its attack, again meeting a bloody defeat. Castro and his followers next began a guerrilla war against the corrupt and by now very unpopular Batista regime. They quickly built a large following, also thanks to an effective propaganda campaign. On January 1, 1959, at the age of just 32, Castro triumphantly took power[source] and ruled Cuba for 49 (forty nine) years. He is the longest serving president of any state in the world.

Though he was criticized for his Human Rights record (thousands of political opponents to the Castro regime have been killed, primarily during the first decade of his leadership), Castro portrays opposition to the Cuban government as illegitimate, and the result of an ongoing conspiracy fostered by Cuban exiles with ties to the United States or the CIA. Several political pundits accused Castro for Cuban Missile Crisis and his subsequent allegedly dictatorial character of his rule. Nevertheless, Cubans love Castro for his bravery in Cuban revolution and his role in transforming the lives of millions of Cubans.

Castro once said, "....I know that there will be a conspiracy to bury me in oblivion. But my voice will not be stifled – it will rise from my breast even when I feel most alone, and my heart will give it all the fire that callous cowards deny it... Condemn me. It does not matter. History will absolve me..."

I am sure, history has absolved him. He has retired from the active politics, but not away from the world. Hopefully CIA will stop plotting Castro's assassination attempts. May he live many more years in peace. Good bye, Mr. Castro, and thanks for teaching the world a great lesson of revolution!

Dr. Devi Shetty - The King of Hearts

Life can be celebrated to the fullest only when we have enough happiness packed in our heart. We come to this planet without even knowing that god has sent us here with tremendous love and affection packed in our mother's heart. "The joy and celebration of our parents had no bounds when we came here to start our journey[...], they were on top of the world!" Not all of us are lucky enough to come here without any disabilities. There are people who have come to this planet without an ability to see, to hear, to speak, to walk, and there are few who have started this journey of life with a hole in their heart. As soon as they started turning blue in color [because of hole in the heart], their parents "were devastated and could not understand why they were being punished in this way. They had no choice but to accept the inevitable reality and decided to give the best possible medical care." One can imagine the face of a mother who hand over a 10 day old child to the operation theatre nurse. She must have thought that she is is handing over the most precious gift of god. There comes a heart surgeon who completes the love triangle between the father and mother with the blue baby at the centre![....] Dr. Devi Shetty, well known for forming thousands of such love triangles and saving thousands of blue babies and children with heart disease.

What if parents cannot afford the surgery to their blue baby? Who is going to save their precious gift of god? Unfortunately, "Money" is the answer, but for some people, Dr. Devi Shetty is the only answer. India produces largest number of children in the world and obviously it produces largest no of children with heart diseases. The whole of US produces twenty two thousand children with heart disease where as India produces three hundred thousand children with heart disease! India requires 2.5 million heart surgeries a year but India does only 60,000 heart surgeries a year.

Madayya, a little boy from a village in Chamarajanagar district of Karnataka was carrying a hole in his heart for five years! His father begged the doctors in a government hospital to save his son but insufficient infrastructure in government hospital brought him down. Though Bangalore is just 185km from Chamarajanagar, for Madayya's father, it is world away. But it did not stop him from speaking to a savior. He spoke to Dr. Devi Shetty through Telemedicine center set up by Dr. Shetty in the nearest government hospital. Dr. Shetty's team took personal interest to rescue the child and Madayya was immediately brought to Narayana Hrudayalaya, Bangalore, Dr. Shetty's "temple" to save heart patients. Madayya was treated free of cost and today he is celebrating his life just like you and me![Click here for complete story] Helping the poor with compassion is the biggest thing for Dr. Devi Shetty. He believe that if a solution is not affordable, then it is not a solution. He has a vision of providing every Indian child with a same medical care as to a child in America!

Dr. Shetty says, “If I am given a choice I would like to treat only poor patients. But unfortunately the economic reality does not allow me to do that." He is the man who charged the rich more and served the poor free of cost. "Technology gives the rich what they already have but it gives the poor what they can never dream of having. Poor people in isolation are weak but together they are very strong." This simple thought gave birth to the novel idea, "Yeshasvini Micro Health Insurance", a joint venture between ISRO, Narayana Hrudayalaya and Karnataka State Co-operation Dept. In the first 20 months of 'Yeshasvini', 85,000 farmers had free medical treatment, 22,000 farmers had free surgeries, 1400 farmers had heart surgeries; all for just five rupees per month!!! Dr. Shetty also founded "Arogya Raksha Yojana", a joint venture of Narayana Hrudayalaya, Biocon and ICICI to provide free OPD consultation, cashless surgical facility, diagnostics at discounted rates.

Dr. Devi Shetty has not only envisioned the health care system in India, he has also set up the world class state of the art health care facilities at Narayana health city. The health city also houses a center for neurosciences, a children's hospital, a cancer research centre and general hospital. Patient inflow to Narayana health city is not only from within India, but also from neighboring countries like Pakistan, Bangaldesh. He has a rare distinction of treating Mother Teresa. He has won many awards and recognitions but what makes him really great is, his "Compassionate character." In my opinion Mother Teresa was the first person who identified this character when she said (to Dr. Shetty), "Now I know why you are here. To relieve the agony of children with heart disease, God sent you to this world to fix it."

Dear Friends, today, 30th September 2007, is "The World Heart Day", Lets celebrate the success of Dr. Devi Prasad Shetty - The King of Hearts.


See also:
1. A LETTER TO 4000 CHILDREN WITH A SCAR ON THE CHEST
2. Dr. Devi Prasad Shetty : A Doctor Par Excellence
3. Best personalities of Bangalore, Dr Devi Shetty.
4. Power point presentation

Bhagat Singh and The Choice

Couple of weeks back when i wrote "Poverty Talk - A new fashion", one of my friend commented, "...bottom line is that everyone is selfish and self-centered. we love just ourselves; god bless....[Click here to see all comments]." In my view, his comments are very strong; they reflect the feelings of people who keep on saying, "dude, be practical". I struggled to satisfy him with my answer, but desi style of replying to his comments could have been better, "ज़िंदगी जीने के सिर्फ दो ही तरीके होते है। एक, जो हो रहा है होने दो, बरदाश्त करते जाओ। या फिर जिम्मेदारी उठाओ उसे बदलने की। [There are only two ways to lead your life - Either, let things happen in their own way, keep tolerating it. Or, take responsibility to change it.]"[Rang De Basanti]. We can see two diametrically opposite perceptions of one's own life. One is being "practical" and another being (not so practical or) "exceptional". I tried to understand both the view points with the human angle, with compassion, with acceptance, but i found it extremely difficult to justify any of the choices. Every individual's perceptions and priorities define his/her choice. If one's priority is, for example, to earn money, obviously he tends to find a "practical" way of life; if the priority is to help others, apparently he/she finds a way that may end up to be "exceptional".

Given a choice which one do you accept? "practical" or "Exceptional"? Lets look at the "practical" point of view. Allow me to put it in this way, "The world you perceive is drastically simplified model of the real world. No matter how much we try to fight against the evil, the evil prevails. So why bother about the change? One person cannot change the mindset of billion people, we just have one life, lets just live our life to the fullest, that doesn't even affect the way this world moves on." Does this sound true? If you think it does, hold on, may be thats just your perception. Look at the flip side, the "Exceptional" way, We keep on dwelling on the myth that we cannot change the lives around, If we cannot change ourselves, then there is a little chance that we can change the nation either. Lets make the beginning by changing ourselves. Throwing the waste in dust bin rather than throwing it on foot path could be the beginning. When Jemshetji Tata decided to manufacture steel in India, the British steel manufacturers refused to help him and ridiculed him saying that if Indians would make steel, Britishers would eat it! But Tatas made a beginning in 1907 by setting up Tata Steel. Today, Tatas and Mittals are dictating the world steel market! Shaheed Bhagat Singh made a revolutionary beginning in Indian independence movement by deciding to end his life. What was the price? Death, martyrdom; result? Freedom of a nation! Why was freedom so important to Bhagat Singh? Where did he get all the courage to say that "..by crushing one man, the nation cannot be crushed..?", by sacrificing his life, how could he "make the deaf hear?" Well, He just made a right choice(not to be "practical")! which in turn made him "exceptional".

Did Bhagat Singh try to justify his "Exceptional" path? In a letter to Sukhdev, Bhagat Singh said, "...I cannot help arguing once again my case in the matter under discussion [revolutionary nationalism rather than being a typical Gandhian]. Again I do emphasize that I am full of ambition and hope and of full charm of life. But I can renounce all at the time of need, and that is the real sacrifice...[Click here to see the full text]." For those who questioned his ideas, he said, "..very soon the final battle will begin. Its outcome will be decisive. We (Bhagat Singh, Rajguru and Sukhdev) took part in the struggle and we are proud of having done so..[in a letter to jail superintendent, few days before his execution ]." His martyrdom ignited the spirit of freedom movement. His vision of seeing freedom a reality did come true, but he was not around to see that. Even today, his very name gives a lightening effect in the hearts of millions!

We must have lost him, but his ideas, his passionate struggle for freedom, his fearless attitude are immortal . In the leaflet he threw in the Central Assembly on 8th April 1929, he stated that, "It is easy to kill individuals but you cannot kill the ideas. Great empires crumbled while the ideas survived"[...], such is the power of thought! You think of something strongly, things fall on place to see that thought a reality! "Every morning when we wake up, we have two choices, either to be in a good mood or to be in a bad mood, lets choose to be in a good mood. Each time something bad happens, we can choose to be a victim or we can choose to learn from it, lets choose to learn from it. Each time some one comes to us complaining about everything and says we cannot change the lives around, we again have two choices; either choose to be "practical" or choose to point out the positive side of changing the lives around; lets choose to point out the positive side of changing the lives around!"[...] Only that choice can pay the true tribute to "The Legend", Bhagat Singh.

Dear friends, 27th September 2007 is 100th birth anniversary of Shaheed Bhagat Singh [September 27, 1907–March 23, 1931, Some historians say that 28th September is the actual birthday, but 27th September is widely accepted]. Lets celebrate his birth centenary with pure and intense spirit and by making a right beginning!

ಭಗತ್ ಸಿಂಗ್: ದಾರಿ ಆವುದಯ್ಯ ವೈಕುಂಠಕೆ?

ಕೆಲವು ದಿನಗಳ ಹಿಂದೆ "Poverty Talk - A new fashion" ಅಂತ ಒಂದು ಲೇಖನ ಬರೆದಿದ್ದೆ. ಅದನ್ನು ಓದಿ ನನ್ನ ಗೆಳೆಯನೊಬ್ಬ, ".. ಜೀವನದಲ್ಲಿ ಯಾರೂ ಮತ್ತೊಬ್ಬರನ್ನು ಸಹಾನುಭೂತಿಯಿಂದ ನೋಡುವುದೇ ಇಲ್ಲ, ಎಲ್ಲರಿಗೂ ತಮ್ಮದೇ ಚಿಂತೆ, ಎಲ್ಲರೂ ಸ್ವಾರ್ಥಿಗಳು! life ಅಲ್ಲಿ practical ಆಗಿ ಇರಬೇಕು[...]" ಎಂದಿದ್ದ. ಅವನಿಗೆ ಸರಿಯಾದ ಉತ್ತರ ಕೊಡಲು ತಿಣುಕಾಡಿದೆ. "ಬದುಕಲು ಎರಡೇ ದಾರಿಗಳಿವೆ; ಒಂದು ಆದದ್ದಾಯಿತೆಂದು ತೆಪ್ಪಗಿರೋದು, ಇನ್ನೋಂದು, ಆಗಿರೋದನ್ನು ಜವಾಬ್ದಾರಿಯಿಂದ ತಿದ್ದಿ, ಹೊಸ ಬದಲಾವಣೆಯನ್ನು ತರುವುದು. " ಎಂದು Rang de Basanti ಸಿನಿಮಾದಲ್ಲಿ ಅಮೀರ ಖಾನ್ ಹೇಳೊ ಹಾಗೆ ಹೇಳಿದ್ದರೆ ಚನ್ನಾಗಿತ್ತೋ ಏನೋ. ಅವನ ಅಭಿಪ್ರಾಯ ಹೊಸದೇನಲ್ಲ, ದಿನಬೆಳಗಾದರೆ ಒಬ್ಬರಿಲ್ಲ ಒಬ್ಬರು ಹೇಳುವುದು ಅದನ್ನೆ. ಅವನ ಪ್ರತಿಕ್ರಿಯೆಯಲ್ಲಿ ಸತ್ವ ಇದೆ ಅನಿಸುತ್ತೆ. ಅಲ್ಲಿ ಎರಡು ತದ್ವಿರುದ್ಧವಾದ ದೃಷ್ಟಿಕೋನಗಳಿವ. ಒಂದು ನಮ್ಮ ಸುತ್ತ ಮುತ್ತ ಏನೇ ಆದರೂ ನಮ್ಮಷ್ಟಕ್ಕೆ ನಾವು (practical ಆಗಿ) ಇರುವುದು, ಇನ್ನೊಂದು, ಬದಲಾವಣೆಗಾಗಿ ಶ್ರಮಿಸವುದು (Exceptional). "practical" ಆಗಿ ಇರಬೇಕು ಎಂಬ ಮಾತನ್ನು ಮಾನವೀಯತೆಯ ದೃಷ್ಟಿಯಿಂದ, ಸಹಾನುಭೂತಿಯಿಂದ ಅರ್ಥಮಾಡಿಕೊಳ್ಳಲು ಪ್ರಯತ್ನಿಸಿದೆ. ಪ್ರತಿಯೊಬ್ಬ ಮನಷ್ಯನ ಜೀವನದಲ್ಲಿ ಅವನದೇ ಆದ ಕೆಲವು ಆದ್ಯತೆಗಳಿವೆ. ಅವರವರ ಆದ್ಯತೆಗೆ ತಕ್ಕಂತೆ ಅವರು ವರ್ತಿಸುವುದು ಅತೀ ಸಹಜ. ಉದಾಹರಣೆಗೆ, ಒಬ್ಬ ವ್ಯಕ್ತಿಯ ಆದ್ಯತೆ ಹಣ ಗಳಿಸುವುದೇ ಆದರೆ ಅವನ ದಾರಿ "practical" ಆಗಿರುವುದು ಸರ್ವೇ ಸಾಮಾನ್ಯ. ಆದರೆ ಅವನ ಆದ್ಯತೆ ನಮ್ಮ ಸುತ್ತ ಮುತ್ತ ಇರುವ ಸಮಾಜವನ್ನು ಅತ್ಯುನ್ನತ ಮಟ್ಟಕ್ಕೆ ಕೊಂಡ್ಯೊಯ್ಯುವುದಾದರೆ, ಸಹಜವಾಗಿ ಅವನ ದಾರಿ "Exceptional" ಆಗಿರುತ್ತದೆ.

"ದಾರಿ ಆವುದಯ್ಯ ವೈಕುಂಠಕೆ?" "practical" ಅಥವ "Exceptional"? "practical" ದೃಷ್ಟಿಯಿಂದ ನೋಡಿದರೆ ಒಮ್ಮೊಮ್ಮೆ ಹೀಗೆನಿಸಲೂ ಬಹುದು, "ನಾವು ಊಹಿಸಿಕೊಂಡಿರುವ ಜಗತ್ತು, ನೈಜವಾದ ಜಗತ್ತಿಗಿಂತ ಎಷ್ಟೋ ಚಿಕ್ಕದು. ಅನ್ಯಾಯದ ವಿರುದ್ಢ ಎಷ್ಟೇ ತಿಣುಕಾಡಿದರು, ಕೊನೆಗೆ ಗೆಲ್ಲುವುದು ಅನ್ಯಾಯವೇ. ನನ್ನೊಬ್ಬನಿಂದ ಏನಾಗುತ್ತದೆ? ಶತಕೋಟಿ ಭಾರತೀಯರ ದೃಷ್ಟಿಕೋನ ಬದಲಿಸುವುದು ಒಬ್ಬನಿಂದಾಗದು. ನಮಗಿರುವುದು ಒಂದೇ ಒಂದು ಜೀವನ, ಅದನ್ನಾದರೂ ಸಂತೃಪ್ತಿಯಿಂದ ಕಳೆದರೆ ಸಾಕು, ಸಮಾಜಕ್ಕೆ ಏನಾದರೇನು?" ಈ ದೃಷ್ಟಿಕೋನ ನಿಮಗೆ ಸರಿ ಇರಬಹುದು ಅಂತ ಅನಿಸಿದರೆ, ಒಂದು ಕ್ಷಣ ವಿಚಾರಿಸಿ ನೋಡಿ, ಅದು ಕೇವಲ ನಿಮ್ಮ ಮನೋಭಾವನೆ ಮಾತ್ರ! "Exceptional" ದೃಷ್ಟಿಯಿಂದ ನೋಡಿದರೆ ಹೀಗನಿಸಬಹುದು, "ಸಮಾಜದಲ್ಲಿ ಆಗಬಾರದೇನಾದರು ಆಗಿ ಹೋದರೆ, ಸಮಾಜವೇ ಹೀಗೆ, ನಮ್ಮಿಂದೇನಾಗುತ್ತದೆ ಎನ್ನುವುದಕ್ಕಿಂತ ನಮ್ಮಿಂದಾಗುವುದರಲ್ಲಿ ಸ್ವಲ್ಪವನ್ನಾದರೂ ಮಾಡಬಹುದಲ್ಲ? ಅದಿರಲಿ, ಜಗತ್ತನ್ನೇ ಬದಲಿಸಬೇಕೆಂಬ ಹುಚ್ಚಿಗಿಂತ ನಮ್ಮನ್ನು ನಾವಾದರೂ ಬದಲಿಸಿಕೊಳ್ಳಬಹುದಲ್ಲ? ನಾವೆಲ್ಲರೂ ಬದಲಾದರೆ ನಾವಿರುವ ಸಮಾಜ ಬದಲಾದಂತಲ್ಲವೆ? ಅದಕ್ಕೆ ಬೇಕಾಗಿರುವುದು ಒಂದು "ಪ್ರಾರಂಭ" ಮಾತ್ರ. ಮನೆಯಲ್ಲಿನ ಕಸವನ್ನು ರಸ್ತೆಯ ಮೇಲೆ ಎಸೆಯದೆ, ಕಸದ ಗುಂಡಿಯಲ್ಲಿ ಹಾಕುವುದೂ ಒಂದು ಉತ್ತಮ ಪ್ರಾರಂಭವಾಗಬಹುದು! ಹಿಂದೊಮ್ಮೆ ಜೆಮ್ಶೆಟ್ಜಿ ಟಾಟಾ ಭಾರತಲ್ಲೇ ಉಕ್ಕನ್ನು ತಯಾರಿಸಬೇಕೆಂಬ ಮಹಾದಸೆ ಮುಂದಿಟ್ಟಾಗ, ಬ್ರಿಟೀಷರು, "ಒಂದು ವೇಳೆ ಭಾರತೀಯರು ಉಕ್ಕನ್ನು ತಯಾರಿಸಿದರೆ, ಬ್ರಿಟೀಷರು ಅದನ್ನು ತಿನ್ನಬಹುದು!" ಎಂದು ಚೇಷ್ಟೆ ಮಾಡಿದರು. ಆದರೆ ಇವತ್ತು, ಟಾಟಾ ಮತ್ತು ಮಿತ್ತಲ್ ಉಕ್ಕಿನ ಸಂಸ್ಥೆಗಳು ಜಗತ್ತಿನ ಉಕ್ಕಿನ ಮಾರುಕಟ್ಟೆಯನ್ನು ತಮ್ಮ ಮುಷ್ಟಿಯಲ್ಲಿ ಹಿಡಿದಾಡಿಸುತ್ತಿಲ್ಲವೇ? ಟಾಟಾ ಮಾಡಿದ ಒಂದು "ಪ್ರಾರಂಭ" ಭಾರತೀಯರಿಗೆಲ್ಲ ಹೆಮ್ಮೆಯ ಸಂಗತಿ. ಅದಲ್ಲದೆ, ತಮ್ಮ ಜೀವನವನ್ನೇ ಬಲಿ ಕೊಟ್ಟು, ಕ್ರಾಂತಿಕಾರಿ ರಾಷ್ಟ್ರೀಯತೆಯ ಭಾವನೆಗಳ ಬೀಜವನ್ನು ಸಹಸ್ರಾರು ಯುವಕರಲ್ಲಿ ಬಿತ್ತಿ, ಭಗತ್ ಸಿಂಗ್ ಮಾಡಿದ "ಪ್ರಾರಂಭ" ಹೃದಯ ಕಲಕುವಂತಾಗಿದ್ದರೂ, ಅದು ನಮ್ಮೆಲ್ಲರಿಗೂ ಹೆಮ್ಮೆಯ ಸಂಗತಿ. ಭಗತ್ ಸಿಂಗ್ ರಂತಹ ಹುತಾತ್ಮರಿಗೆ ಸ್ವಾತಂತ್ರ್ಯದ ಮಹೋನ್ನತ ಕನಸು ಏಕಿತ್ತು? "ಕೇವಲ ಒಬ್ಬನನ್ನು ಗಲ್ಲಿಗೇರಿಸಿದರೆ, ಇಡೀ ದೇಶವನ್ನು ಕೊಂದಂತಾಗುವುದೇ?" ಎನ್ನುವ ಧೈರ್ಯ ಎಲ್ಲಿಂದ ಬಂತು? ಸಂಸತ್ತಿನಲ್ಲಿದ್ದ "ಕಿವುಡರನ್ನು" ಕೇಳುವಂತೆ ಮಾಡುವ ಶಕ್ತಿ ಭಗತ್ ಸಿಂಗ್ ಅವರಿಗೆ ಎಲ್ಲಿಂದ ದಕ್ಕಿತು? ಉತ್ತರ ಇಷ್ಟೇ, ಅವರು ಆರಿಸಿಕೊಂಡ ದಾರಿ "Exceptional" ಆಗಿತ್ತು.

ಭಗತ್ ಸಿಂಗ್ ಕ್ರಾಂತಿಕಾರಿಯಾಗಿದ್ದರೂ, ತಮ್ಮ ವಿಚಾರಗಳನ್ನು ಯಾವತ್ತಾದರು ಸಮರ್ಥಿಸಿಕೊಂಡಿದ್ದರೇ? ಹೌದು. ಸುಖದೇವ್ ಅವರಿಗೆ ಬರೆದ ಪತ್ರದಲ್ಲಿ, "ನನ್ನ ಕ್ರಾಂತಿಕಾರಿ ವಿಚಾರಗಳನ್ನು ಸಮರ್ಥಿಸಿಕೊಳ್ಳದೇ ಇರಲು ನನ್ನಿಂದಾಗದು. ನಾನು ಕ್ರಾಂತಿಯ ಮಹತ್ವಾಕಾಂಕ್ಷೆಗಳಿಂದ ತುಂಬಿ ಹೋಗಿದ್ದೇನೆ. ಸ್ವಾತಂತ್ರ್ಯ ಸಮರದ ಆಕರ್ಷಣೆ ನನ್ನ ವಿಚಾರಧಾರೆಗಳನ್ನು ಉಕ್ಕಿ ಹರಿಸುತ್ತಿವೆ. ನನ್ನ ಜೀವನದ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ನನಗೆ ಭರವಸೆಯಿದೆ, ಪ್ರೀತಿಯಿದೆ, ಸಹಾನಭೂತಿಯಿದೆ, ಆದರೆ ಸ್ವಾತಂತ್ರ್ಯಕ್ಕಾಗಿ ಎಲ್ಲವನ್ನು ತ್ಯಾಗ ಮಾಡುವ ವಜ್ರದಂತಹ ಕಠೋರವಾದ ಮನಸ್ಸೂ ನನ್ನಲ್ಲಿದೆ!" ಜೈಲಿನ ಅಧಿಕಾರಿಗೆ ಬರೆದ ಪತ್ರದಲ್ಲಿ, "...ಇನ್ನೇನು ಸ್ವಾತಂತ್ರ್ಯ ಹೋರಾಟದ ಕೊನೆಯ ಸಮರ ಪ್ರಾರಂಭವಾಗುತ್ತದೆ. ಆ ಸಮರ ನಿರ್ಣಯಕಾರಿಯಾಗಿರುತ್ತದೆ. ಕ್ರಾಂತಿಕಾರಿ ಸಮರದಲ್ಲಿ ಪಾಲ್ಗೊಂಡು ವಿಧಿವಶವಾದರೂ ನಾವೇ(ಭಗತ್ ಸಿಂಗ್, ಸುಖದೇವ್, ರಾಜಗುರು) ಧನ್ಯರು!" ಭಗತ್ ಸಿಂಗ್ ಅವರು ಮಾಡಿದ ಆ ತ್ಯಾಗ, ಸ್ವಾತಂತ್ರ್ಯ ಹೋರಾಟದ ಜ್ಯೋತಿಯನ್ನು ಬೆಳಗಿಸಿತು. ಸ್ವಾತಂತ್ರ್ಯದ ಕನಸು ನನಸಾದರೂ ಅದನ್ನು ನೋಡಿ ಆನಂದಿಸಲು ಭಗತ್ ಸಿಂಗ್ ಇವತ್ತು ನಮ್ಮ ಮುಂದಿಲ್ಲ. ಇವತ್ತಿಗೂ ಅವರ ಹೆಸರನ್ನು ನೆನೆಸಿಕೊಂಡರೆ ಸಾಕು, ಹೃದಯದಲ್ಲಿ ಮಿಂಚು ಓಡಾಡಿದ ಅನುಭವವಾಗುತ್ತದೆ!

ಭಗತ್ ಸಿಂಗ್ ಅವರನ್ನು ನಾವು ಕಳೆದುಕೊಂಡಿರಬಹುದು, ಆದರೆ ಅವರ ಕ್ರಾಂತಿಕಾರಿ, ಸಮಾಜವಾದಿ, ಪ್ರಜಾಪ್ರಭುತ್ವದ ವಿಚಾರಗಳು ಇಂದಿಗೂ ನಮಗೆ ದಾರಿದೀಪಗಳು. ಆಗಸ್ಟ್ ೮, ೧೯೨೯ ರಂದು, ಸಂಸತ್ ಸಭೆಯಲ್ಲಿ ಬಾಂಬಿನ ಜೊತೆ ಎಸೆದ ಕಾಗದಗಳಲ್ಲಿ, "ಒಬ್ಬ ವ್ಯಕ್ತಿಯನ್ನು ಕೊಲ್ಲುವುದು ಸುಲಭವಾಗಿರಬಹುದು, ಆದರೆ ಅವನ ವಿಚಾರಗಳನ್ನು ಕೊಲ್ಲುವುದು ಅಸಾಧ್ಯ. ಅನೇಕ ಸಾಮ್ರಾಜ್ಯಗಳು ಹೇಳಹೆಸರಿಲ್ಲದಂತೆ ಮಾಯವಾದವು, ಆದರೆ ವಿಚಾರಗಳು ಎಂದೆಂದಿಗೂ ಅಮರ[...]" ಎಂದು ಬರೆದಿತ್ತು. ಕಲ್ಪನೆ ಅಥವ ವಿಚಾರದ ಶಕ್ತಿಯೇ ಅಂಥದ್ದು. ಸಾಧನೆಯ ಕಲ್ಪನೆ/ವಿಚಾರ ಮನಸ್ಸಿನಲ್ಲಿದ್ದು, ನಮ್ಮ ಮನೋವೃತ್ತಿ(mood ಅನ್ನಬಹುದೇ?) ಸಮತೋಲನದಲ್ಲಿಟ್ಟುಕೊಂಡರಾಯಿತು, ಅದಕ್ಕೆ ಬೇಕಾಗುವ ಎಲ್ಲ ಸಾಮಾಗ್ರಿಗಳನ್ನು ಸಹಜವಾಗಿಯೇ ಪಡೆದುಕೊಳ್ಳಬಹುದು. ಆದರೆ ಎಲ್ಲಕ್ಕಿಂತ ಮುಖ್ಯವಾಗಿ ಬೇಕಾಗಿರುವುದು ಒಂದು "ಪ್ರಾರಂಭ" ಮಾತ್ರ. ಬದುಕು ನಿರ್ಧಾರಗಳ ಮಹಾಪೂರ. ಜೀವನದ ಪ್ರತಿಯೊಂದು ಘಟ್ಟದಲ್ಲಿ ನಾವು ಕೆಲವು ನಿರ್ಧಾರಗಳನ್ನು ತೆಗೆದುಕೊಳ್ಳಲೇ ಬೇಕು. ಅದು ಒಳ್ಳೆಯದಾಗಿರಬಹುದು, ಕೆಟ್ಟದ್ದಾಗಿರಬಹುದು. ಜೀವನದಲ್ಲಿ "practical" ಆಗಿ ಇರಬೇಕೋ, "Exceptional" ಆಗಿ ಇರಬೇಕೋ ಎನ್ನುವ ನಿರ್ಧಾರ ನಿಮ್ಮ ಕೈಯಲ್ಲಿದೆ. ಒಂದು ವೇಳೆ ಅದು "Exceptional" ಆಗಿರದೇ ಇದ್ದರೂ, ಆ ಎರಡು ದಾರಿಗಳ ಮಧ್ಯ ಇರುವ ಸಮತೋಲನ (balanced middle path) ಕಾಪಾಡಿಕೊಂಡರೆ ಸಾಕು, ನಮ್ಮಿಂದ ಮತ್ತೊಬ್ಬರಿಗೆ ಸ್ವಲ್ಪವಾದರೂ ಸಹಾಯವಾದೀತು.

ಸ್ನೇಹಿತರೆ, ೨೭ನೇ ಸೆಪ್ಟೆಂಬರ್ ೨೦೦೭, ಭಗತ್ ಸಿಂಗ್ ಅವರ ಜನ್ಮಶತಮಾನೋತ್ಸವ! ದೇಶದೆಲ್ಲೆಡೆ ಜನ್ಮಶತಮಾನೋತ್ಸವದ ತಯಾರಿ ಭರದಿಂದ ಸಾಗುತ್ತಿರುವುದು ಸಂತೋಷದ ವಿಷಯ. ನಾವೂ ಸಂಭ್ರಮಿಸೋಣ, ಒಂದು ಹೊಸ "ಪ್ರಾರಂಭದೊಂದಿಗೆ!"

ಭಗತ್ ಸಿಂಗ್ ಅವರ ಬದುಕಿನ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಇನ್ನಷ್ಟು Links:
1. ದಟ್ಸ್ ಕನ್ನಡದಲ್ಲಿ ಭಗತ್ ಸಿಂಗ್ ಅವರ ಬಗ್ಗೆ
2. ವಿಕಿಪೀದಿಯದಲ್ಲಿ ಭಗತ್ ಸಿಂಗ್ ಅವರ ಬಗ್ಗೆ
3. kannada.webdunia.com ದಲ್ಲಿ
4. ಕಲರವ ಬ್ಲಾಗ್ ನಲ್ಲಿ