Indian politicians never think positive. But if you see their actions you will find lot of positive thinking in the form of benefitting themselves.
I am very happy that Indian politicians are not lagging behind in the area of honouring themselves. Mulayam Singh has taken a lead in hounouring those politicians who were arrested during emergency. Congress should immediately honour those politicians who supported emergency.
Politicians should also honour criminal politicians and political criminals as they have, from time to time, provided logistic support to their parties in the hour of need. These great people have eliminated any difference between a criminal and a politician. An important step in the direction of creating a groupless society.
Tuesday, June 27, 2006
Monday, June 19, 2006
Wipe out opponents - not good English Smt. Sonia!!
Smt. Sonia Gandhi has asked her party workers to wipe out opponents. I was a bit shocked when I read this headline in TOI. A thought process started. With what mindset a person will use this language? Smt. Sonia has made this statement in connection with state assembly polls in UP, slated early next year.
Is election a battle which can be won only when all opponents are wiped out? Is winning an election is the end of the battle, the ultimate aim of a person or a political party? My answers to all such questions is a big NO. Election is not a battle. It is a process thorough which people elect their representatives. It is nothing more than a process. After he election, these peoples' representatives are required to privide good governance on the affairs of our country. Good governance is a governance which is effective, efficient and transparent. In such governing the principle of 'all-inclusive' is adopted. No body is excluded.
Then how the chairperson of a political party has talked in terms of wiping out the opponents? It is a negative mindset which looks upon the people as mere voters and subjects and not as people who have elected them their representatives. Smt. Sonia's statement is in a very bad taste. It instigates party workers to treat elections as a battle which has to be won and to win it all opponents are to be wiped out. It is certainly not good English. She could have said it in a better way by using some good words.
Is election a battle which can be won only when all opponents are wiped out? Is winning an election is the end of the battle, the ultimate aim of a person or a political party? My answers to all such questions is a big NO. Election is not a battle. It is a process thorough which people elect their representatives. It is nothing more than a process. After he election, these peoples' representatives are required to privide good governance on the affairs of our country. Good governance is a governance which is effective, efficient and transparent. In such governing the principle of 'all-inclusive' is adopted. No body is excluded.
Then how the chairperson of a political party has talked in terms of wiping out the opponents? It is a negative mindset which looks upon the people as mere voters and subjects and not as people who have elected them their representatives. Smt. Sonia's statement is in a very bad taste. It instigates party workers to treat elections as a battle which has to be won and to win it all opponents are to be wiped out. It is certainly not good English. She could have said it in a better way by using some good words.
Rule or Govern Mr. Vajpayee!!
Mr. Atal Bihari Vajpayee has asked his partymen to learn from left how to get re-elected. The purpose of re-election for him is to rule. In this context he said, "People praised our work but did not renew their mandate to rule."
I don't agree with you Mr. Vajpayee that the purpose of getting elected and then re-elected is to rule. First, getting re-elected is not the end but means to achieve the end, which is providing good governance. Second, people elect their representatives and not their rulers. Third, people want their representatives to collectively govern the affairs of the nation in an effective, efficient and transparent manner.
The art to getting re-elected is not aping the left but providing better governance. The unfortunate part here is that majority of people and parties, left or right or middle, ask people to cast a negative vote against their opponent. If you think that BJP asked for a positive vote then I would say that it was asked in a negative manner. This negative aspect of BJP electioneering had hurt the people in some manner and result was the defeat of BJP.
It is further unfortunate that BJP has not been able to draw right lessons from its defeat. With this negative mindset, Mr. Bajpayee, BJP will never get re-elected.
I don't agree with you Mr. Vajpayee that the purpose of getting elected and then re-elected is to rule. First, getting re-elected is not the end but means to achieve the end, which is providing good governance. Second, people elect their representatives and not their rulers. Third, people want their representatives to collectively govern the affairs of the nation in an effective, efficient and transparent manner.
The art to getting re-elected is not aping the left but providing better governance. The unfortunate part here is that majority of people and parties, left or right or middle, ask people to cast a negative vote against their opponent. If you think that BJP asked for a positive vote then I would say that it was asked in a negative manner. This negative aspect of BJP electioneering had hurt the people in some manner and result was the defeat of BJP.
It is further unfortunate that BJP has not been able to draw right lessons from its defeat. With this negative mindset, Mr. Bajpayee, BJP will never get re-elected.
Tuesday, June 06, 2006
Unethical tax regime
Taxes are required to develop and govern a country. But imposing taxes with a negative mind set to somehow fill up state coffers is unethical. This is what UPA government at center had been doing after coming to power. FM and his team has been working overtime to find new ways to cut honest tax payers' pocket. More and more innovative scheme are being implemented to increase the discomfort factor for individual tax payers. Adding insult to injury, it continues to call the new complex form for filing IT returns as 'saral'.
Through this form the government is intruding into the households of people. Now individuals will have to provide extensive information on monthly expenses. To balance the income and expenditure a housewife will need extensive training in accountancy.
What this government is up to - steep fuel price rise, OBC quota, 'saral' made 'complex'? Why government is being vindictive on the society and the people? Is this the governance with a human face? Kyon 'aam aadmi ki sarkar' ban rahi hai 'aam aadmi ki dushman'?
Through this form the government is intruding into the households of people. Now individuals will have to provide extensive information on monthly expenses. To balance the income and expenditure a housewife will need extensive training in accountancy.
What this government is up to - steep fuel price rise, OBC quota, 'saral' made 'complex'? Why government is being vindictive on the society and the people? Is this the governance with a human face? Kyon 'aam aadmi ki sarkar' ban rahi hai 'aam aadmi ki dushman'?
Thursday, June 01, 2006
Profit Bill is not fine Mr. PM
PM has told the President that Profit Bill is fine. I do not know what was President's reaction to this but I say that this bill is not fine. It is an unethical decision and how an unethical decision can be fine.
It is a decision taken by those who were affected by the existing law. They were violating the law of the land and when confronted with this grave violation they misused the power and changed the law. THIS MAKES IT UNEHICAL.
The law has been made effective with retrospective effect therby legalizing all criminal violations. THIS MAKES IT UNETHICAL.
Parliament and its members (who have forgetten that they are peoples' representatives) are seen as role models by the people. Such unethical behaviour of their representatives has embarassed the people.
I feel ashamed of the MP elected from my constituency.
It is a decision taken by those who were affected by the existing law. They were violating the law of the land and when confronted with this grave violation they misused the power and changed the law. THIS MAKES IT UNEHICAL.
The law has been made effective with retrospective effect therby legalizing all criminal violations. THIS MAKES IT UNETHICAL.
Parliament and its members (who have forgetten that they are peoples' representatives) are seen as role models by the people. Such unethical behaviour of their representatives has embarassed the people.
I feel ashamed of the MP elected from my constituency.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)