As hashtags like #MeTooUrbanNaxal trend on social media to protest the arrest of five activists by the Maharashtra Police, many argue that similar outrage...
Front Page
The aftermath of the Karnataka elections continues to unfold. The CM candidate of the JD(S)-Congress coalition, H.D. Kumaraswamy, says he will prove his...
Oli has been selling dreams of trans-Himalayan railways, piped gas to every kitchen, metro rail and sending a Nepali on the moon as possible benefits of participating in China’s OBOR.
India’s policy on Myanmar has been to deal with its Generals and maintain a distance from the country’s insurgent groups and political struggles. This will have to change.
Finance ministry says the proposed revamp will focus on structural reforms, rate rationalisation & ease of living, & will be deliberated upon in the coming weeks.
The project is meant to be a ‘protective shield that will keep expanding’, the PM said. It is on the lines of the ‘Golden Dome’ announced by Trump, it is learnt.
Now that both IAF and PAF have made formal claims of having shot down the other’s aircraft in the 87-hour war in May, we can ask a larger question: do such numbers really matter?
1. There are activists with Leftist leanings who claim to work for ordinary people. Recent arrests of left leaning activists have raised some basic issues with regard to rights of the activists belonging with Leftist leanings. 2. Citizens like me, who are not attached to a particular political party, wish that welfare of people, and particularly of population below poverty line, should be sole objective (and focus) of all government policies and programmes. But what we often see is that public money to be spent on programmers for the poor is often siphoned off by bureaucracy and politicians through corrupt methods. If the activists raise voice against such corruption can they be accused of illegal acts and arrested? Of course, answer to such questions is not easy as it appears to be. 3. It is worth noting that although objective of all the Marxist political outfits, whether banned or not banned, is to work for welfare of the oppressed people, not all of them use peaceful means to carry on their activities. Further, it is also a fact that Marxist groups, activities of some of whom are being investigated, appear not to believe in democracy. They often indulge in violent political activities. Therefore question is this: why should they be allowed to do that? 4. In context of recent arrest of so-called Urban Naxals, we must debate role of political and religious organizations and groups who resort to violence and who are anti-democracy.
The fact that UPA did something does not make it right, in these polarised times. A distinction must continue to be made between someone who resorts to violence, guns down security personnel, lays land mines along routes where their vehicles are expected to move, and people who, out of intellectual conviction – Ms Arundhati Roy, for example – speak up for the rights of the underprivileged. Adivasis are among those who have often picked up the tab for India’s “ development “. Recall the tenure of Bastar IGP S R P Kalluri to get a sense of how things are on the ground.
1. There are activists with Leftist leanings who claim to work for ordinary people. Recent arrests of left leaning activists have raised some basic issues with regard to rights of the activists belonging with Leftist leanings. 2. Citizens like me, who are not attached to a particular political party, wish that welfare of people, and particularly of population below poverty line, should be sole objective (and focus) of all government policies and programmes. But what we often see is that public money to be spent on programmers for the poor is often siphoned off by bureaucracy and politicians through corrupt methods. If the activists raise voice against such corruption can they be accused of illegal acts and arrested? Of course, answer to such questions is not easy as it appears to be. 3. It is worth noting that although objective of all the Marxist political outfits, whether banned or not banned, is to work for welfare of the oppressed people, not all of them use peaceful means to carry on their activities. Further, it is also a fact that Marxist groups, activities of some of whom are being investigated, appear not to believe in democracy. They often indulge in violent political activities. Therefore question is this: why should they be allowed to do that? 4. In context of recent arrest of so-called Urban Naxals, we must debate role of political and religious organizations and groups who resort to violence and who are anti-democracy.
The fact that UPA did something does not make it right, in these polarised times. A distinction must continue to be made between someone who resorts to violence, guns down security personnel, lays land mines along routes where their vehicles are expected to move, and people who, out of intellectual conviction – Ms Arundhati Roy, for example – speak up for the rights of the underprivileged. Adivasis are among those who have often picked up the tab for India’s “ development “. Recall the tenure of Bastar IGP S R P Kalluri to get a sense of how things are on the ground.