Lingua Franca: Its Irrelevance In An Indian Context

4^th July 2017

St. Louis, MO

I am personally opposed to the efforts of Hindi chauvinists who are out to impose the Hindi language on non-Hindi speaking states. This is partly because I am averse to the idea of imposition of anything. Hindi is, without doubt, the most widely spoken language in India, however it is restricted to northern & central India and is therefore as incomprehensible to many south Indians, as Kannada or Tamil could be to the rest. In the south, each of the four major states has its own language and these languages are dissimilar to each other, and even more to Hindi. The north-east Indians too are opposed to the movement to make Hindi a compulsory language & have been vocal about it.

A peak into the past: Historically in India, the plan to have one common language, specifically the Hindi language, across all the states has come up time and again, but has never worked. Now, I feel that it must not work in the future too and I shall present my arguments why. Europe is a land of several distinct languages and cultures, with each country having its own language. In the process leading up to present day Europe, Europeans have fought among themselves and have polarized based on language, religious beliefs and having common enemies. The historian Ramachandra Guha articulates this well in his speech titled ‘Why India is the most interesting country in the world’. Pakistan attempted to impose Urdu on the Bengali speaking East Pakistan, which was one of the causes that lead to the war in 1971 and consequently the creation of Bangladesh. The Sri Lankan civil war that raged for decades between the Tamils in the north and the Lankan Government, which has been one of the bloodiest civil conflicts in history, started, among other reasons, with the imposition of Sinhala as the only national language there. Thinking on these lines, India is like several European nations operating as one. History teaches us that imposing a single language have only lead to fissures between people who did not share a common tongue.

Gandhi’s views on a national language: Gandhi is frequently quoted, and often misquoted; and, his name has been invoked in this debate too, because he had once said that Hindi must be made a common language of communication in India. I quote from an article in the DNA “Like the way Britishers speak in English and use the same in practice, in the same way, I pray to all of you to provide Hindi the dignity of a national language. By making it as the national language we should fulfil our duty”. However, another quote explains why Gandhi wished to have Hindi as a national language “My humble, but a firm opinion is that unless we do not provide Hindi the national language status and other regional languages their adequate importance, till then all talks of a 'swarajya' are meaningless.” Of course, he had said this with the aim of unifying various groups across the country during the struggle for freedom. It would have been a great idea to have a common language then, but that idea is today out of time and out of place. After all, we did win our independence without having a common language. These suggest why we do not need a lingua franca now. In that same DNA article, there is another quote by Gandhi in which he subtly equates the statuses of national and regional languages- “The national language should be used during court meetings. If it is not done, the people will not understand the political processes properly. The national and regional languages should be definitely promoted in courts.” Gandhi, of course, was a man of constant evolution.

The people who quote Gandhi must not forget the fact that Gandhi himself knew & spoke several languages. He wrote his journals- Indian Opinion, Young India and later Harijan- in English, Hindi, his native Gujarati, and had one translated into others. He had even made serious efforts to learn Tamil, so that he could communicate with large groups of Tamils who lived in South Africa & who were his staunch supporters during his efforts to rescind the notorious Asiatic Act there. One of his trusted lieutenants in South Africa was a Tamil named Thambi Naidoo. So, Gandhi was not parochial, and how one could tie Gandhi to arguments of regional parochialism is beyond me.

Language, functional or emotional? Indians from all parts have coexisted and lived in different parts, even if they spoke a different language not native to that place. When needed, we have learnt each other’s languages too. In my personal experience, I have had friends who amazed me by speaking good Kannada, despite it not being their mother tongue. Several, including me, have been trained in Hindi and can read, write and speak the language. But, my stand is that, learning a language must be a choice and not an order. To me it is like wearing clothes or eating food of one’s choice. It is not a stand against any language, but against the imposition of it. It is incumbent on us to not just protect and preserve our language, but to simultaneously allow other languages to flourish. The feeling of threat to one’s regional language is unfounded, as long as one feels secure about speaking, writing and reading one’s own tongue, even while one communicates in various other languages. If a Hindi chauvinist feels that Hindi is threatened, then imagine how threatened a Kannadiga or a Keralite or an Assamese might be for his/ her language, which have fewer speakers, fewer authors and fewer dramas/cinemas coming out than Hindi. I strongly agree and believe that language has a dual role of being ‘functional’ and ‘emotional’. Emotional when we use our native tongue & functional when we use another language to only communicate. So, while some may criticize an auto rickshaw driver in Bangalore for speaking in Hindi with his customers, I have been fine with it because he simultaneously plays the latest Kannada soundtracks on his stereo and yells hello to a fellow auto driver in Kannada, his native tongue. He simply uses another language as a means to make business, as should anyone else who chooses to. Imposition is therefore unnecessary.

Possible approach to a solution: Schedule 8 of the Indian Constitution recognizes twenty-two official regional languages in India, excluding English. So, what language should we use on boards, buses, metro trains, milestones, post offices? We can have huge boards with all twenty-two on them, across all the states. That is the fairest solution, but clearly not the most viable. So, it is best to have the regional language of that State on them because it is understood by the majority living in that state. But, we must oblige and accommodate people from other states who speak other languages and this begs a different solution. Thus, we have to include one more language that is either the second most widely spoken after the state’s language, or agree to have a common language English, whose numbers and letters are understood and are acceptable to many across all states of India. The main goal must be to accommodate all linguistic groups to go about their business anywhere in India. My larger point however is that, solutions can be innovated, and thus there is no reason to give diktats to learn one common language. It is now safe to agree that having Hindi script on milestones in Tamil Nadu is as preposterous as having milestones with Telugu script in Punjab or Tamil in West Bengal. But, if the chauvinists insist their demands, then they must be prepared for a resounding ‘No’ from the non-Hindi speaking states.

We as Indians must take pride in our multi-lingual culture. The scholarship of Indian thinkers and authors has found more audience and has had more impact when they have used multiple languages in their writings.  Ram Guha’s essay titled ‘The Rise and Fall of the Bilingual Intellectual’ in the Economic and Political Weekly discusses this. Here are a few excerpts that I had found most interesting from that essay-

About Tagore he writes- “Tagore understood that while love and humiliation at the personal or familial level were best expressed in the mother tongue, impersonal questions of reason and justice had sometimes to be communicated in a language read by more people and over a greater geopolitical space than Bengali.”

On Hindi’s legendary author Premchand- “Perhaps the most striking instance of this bilingualism concerns the crafting of Premchand’s Godan. This work, published in 1936, is considered the very archetype of the modern Hindi novel, yet the author first outlined the plot in English!”

An interesting one was this- “Rajaji’s contemporary V. D. Savarkar also wrote books in English, as well as plays and polemical tracts in Marathi.”

I quoted these specific lines to also defend my position on the use of English. But that is another matter. How can we justify that learning a common language would do us any good, when one of the first songs that kids all over India learn in schools is a composition in Bengali- our national anthem?

To sum up: I want to conclude this essay with a personal observation. These days, in the evenings, I’ve been watching the 80s Indian TV show ‘Malgudi Days’ on YouTube. I had never seen it before. The series is beautifully shot in quaint Indian towns and it takes you back in time. It reminds me of simpler times, of home, of family bonds, of friends and it also makes me think of the human mind & emotions. However, there is another element to this show that makes it apt to be mentioned here. This TV show is based on novels & short stories written in the English language by a south Indian author R.K. Narayan, whose mother tongue was Tamil, but he was fluent in Kannada having studied and lived in Mysore. The cartoons and caricatures for the book and the show are done by the author’s equally famous brother R.K. Laxman. The director of the show is the late Shankar Nag, a genius filmmaker and a flamboyant Kannada movie star. The cast includes many actors, Kannada and Marathi theatre artists, including Shankar’s brother and another famous Kannada actor Ananth Nag and, the playwright and Jnanpith awardee Girish Karnad, who is good at Konkani, Kannada & Hindi. The pleasant music scores are rendered by L. Vaidynathan, a Tamil. But, the whole series was shot in Hindi and was aired on Doordarshan, a pan India TV channel. This, to me, is the real India.

I Want Some More

15^th May, 2017

West Lafayette, IN

I was watching a film called ‘The Life of David Gale’. The story revolves around a college professor, who is actively engaged in a campaign to end capital punishment. Amidst his alcohol troubles and activism, he loses his family, his job, respect of his peers and students, and lastly is charged with murder of a fellow activist, for which he is, ironically, given the capital punishment. Of course, that’s only part of the whole plot. What interested me more was a two-minute scene in the movie in which David Gale delivers a lecture to his class on Lacan’s idea of fantasy. I quote the exact words used in that scene hereunder.

‘Fantasies have to be unrealistic because the moment, the second that you get what you seek, you don't, you can't want it anymore. In order to continue to exist, desire must have its objects perpetually absent. It's not the "it" that you want, it's the fantasy of "it." So, desire supports crazy fantasies. This is what Pascal means when he says that we are only truly happy when daydreaming about future happiness. Or why we say the hunt is sweeter than the kill. Or be careful what you wish for. Not because you'll get it, but because you're doomed not to want it once you do. So the lesson of Lacan is, living by your wants will never make you happy. What it means to be fully human is to strive to live by ideas and ideals and not to measure your life by what you've attained in terms of your desires but those small moments of integrity, compassion, rationality, even self-sacrifice. Because in the end, the only way that we can measure the significance of our own lives is by valuing the lives of others.’

Man is a selfish animal. He has a hierarchy of needs, which he spends his life trying to achieve one after another. I am sure I will too. But sometimes I do wonder if I must start to think beyond my pleasures. Not all can live impersonal lives or dedicate their lives to ideas and ideals, or to fight for causes, although the argument above suggests the opposite to be a more guaranteed means to happiness. Desires keep us excited and so do the thoughts of them getting accomplished. To what extent then must one think about one’s own desires? The conflict is between pursuing personal goals and committing to more impersonal ones. To live for oneself, while simultaneously living for others. The moment I focus more on the personal wants, the lesser I will contribute beyond me. In this era of instant gratification, focus is on fulfilling one’s desires faster than before. However, instant gratification has not necessarily made us contended, but, to the contrary, it has made us more self-centered and is gradually driving us to be less happy than the generations that preceded us. We may be plunging ourselves into sadness by our own creation. And while I am acutely aware that for the health of society, and myself, I need to look beyond my personal wants, and that to be happy I must attempt at what Lacan suggests, I am equally aware that I am falling short.

There is no moral to this piece.

Water, Water Nowhere

6^th September, 2016

West Lafayette, IN

The Cauvery water dispute between Karnataka & Tamil Nadu is not new and is similar to water sharing problems between many other states in the country. Although morality demands states to share water with each other, the reluctance of successive governments, farmers’ unions and other groups to do so is not completely unjustifiable, because Karnataka itself does not have enough water for its people. But, solely blaming poor rains is absurd. In case of Cauvery, unplanned mushrooming of Bangalore city, is in my opinion, the major cause for the current scarcity of water. The water consumption of Bangalore has overshot nominal levels, creating a scarcity for farmers in the Mysore- Mandya belt. The legal right over the water by Tamil Nadu and its subsequent release will now only add to the vows and create a strain on the entire region.

This time, following the court ruling, we can envisage the taps in Bangalore to go dry. One may blame the Tamil Nadu Govt for ingratiating with the Central Govt for overruling Karnataka’s appeals in Supreme Court, one may also allege the lawyer representing Karnataka Govt of cosying with Tamil Nadu, however, one must also acknowledge poor urban planning of Bangalore City, greed and most of all lackadaisical attitude of Bangaloreans which has brought us to this pathetic state. We must acknowledge that the major chunk of the problem is of our own creation.

• The city knows nothing of rain water harvesting or ground water recharging and no strong initiatives have been launched to make them mandatory. 
• Indiscriminate exploitation of groundwater by property developers has left the ground water table dry in most parts.  
• Known once upon a time for its lakes, Bangalore now has only a handful of lakes left, with its water unusable and the lake area aesthetically unclean for anything else, and we can now see high rise apartment complexes on dried up lakes.
• Use of potable water by its people for car cleaning, gardening and other such mindless uses have no logical backing.

  

You may be thinking of other such (and maybe better) points, I am sure.

Bangalore must start developing alternate water sources for its sustenance right now. If we continue to grow without paying heed to sustenance, we will be the first city to crumble under the pressures of nature. The beautiful city is already stripped off its tree cover for which it was once famously known, the air pollution levels are dangerously high, the roads are perennially in bad shape, the traffic congestion and garbage handling are no joking matter. But if the city goes dry on water, then it will top all the list of vows. Our ‘swalpa adjust maadkoli’ attitude may make us bear with anything else, but definitely not water scarcity. Its time and Bangalore must mobilize right now.

The same may be the case with other cities, towns, villages in my country. Sustainable development is needed at all levels, no doubt. But, I am a Bangalorean and I am pained by this metamorphosis having gone wrong. 

A Textbook Case

18^th March, 2016

Chennai, TN 

Today, there was an article which said that the Rajasthan Government has decided to change the educational curriculum in its schools, so that ‘no one like Kanhaiya Kumar is born’. I could not help let out a chuckle when I read this, for the reason is absurd and unfounded. I have always believed that textbooks require a serious relook, not because the students are learning the wrong (or right) content, like the minister feels, but because they are anachronic. Also, poor content coupled with flawed teaching methodologies, giving the teacher room to impose his/ her view have created a pool of ‘wrongly informed’ students. 

The subject minister wants to include biographies of freedom fighters in the textbooks (most of the names in the articles were Hindu), which is good, as long as the biographies are archival research materials and not sensational stories or folklore. The notes and speeches of the historical figures need to be used in text books. The students must be encouraged to form their own conclusions and impressions after reading the textbooks, rather than being imposed with a certain ideology.

I heard Kanhaiya Kumar’s speech on YouTube a few days after his release and I can without a doubt say that he is a skilled orator who can create sensation and although he churned out hollow points that evening, the super charged atmosphere around him, following his release from prison, gave him an exaggerated importance. Well, nothing wrong in that. However, I noted a curious point that he made. He said that it was difficult for poor to even contemplate to take courses in Science and Technology (or something to that effect). Now, this is what universities, ministers and other concerned must pay heed to.

An essay written by Ramachandra Guha titled ‘Pluralism in the Indian University’ delineates how Indian Universities must find other avenues to raise funds for their functioning, thus freeing themselves from the clutches of the Government. Universities must explore industry tie- ups, alumni, and other donations to raise funds. Affordability of courses must be given prime importance, so one can pursue the course of his/ her choice and not be compelled to undertake studies because they cannot afford to. The speech of Kanhaiya Kumar can be viewed typical of a leftist union leader- fearless & sensational, but underlying it was a despondency that comes with financial hardships.

Chapters in school textbooks can be tampered with by each successive government to suit their party’s ideology, but they must realise that it is this tampering that creates Kanhaiya Kumars, who are glorified by one ideology while maligned by another. What schools must rather do is create students who can respect other ideologies, while being firmly rooted to their own, and this cannot happen if we set biased curriculum, which will only create hatred between two differing ideologists.  

What is also noteworthy is the restricted ability of the governments to tamper with the History textbooks alone. I earnestly ask them to ‘improve’ the Math curriculum as well, and even Chemistry perhaps.

Infusing patriotism need not be through slogans alone

14^th March, 2016

Chennai, TN

A note:

Assaduddin Owaisi, the leader of the AIMIM party from the Andhra region said today that he will not say any slogans to hail mother India, at any cost. This was in reply to the call made by RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat to urge the younger generation to chant such slogans to arouse patriotism.

It is natural for the RSS chief to chant slogans to hail mother India and this is a fact that many would acknowledge. But what we must also acknowledge is that Mr. Owaisi is free not to chant such slogans. One can be a patriot of India without chanting any slogans. Being a good citizen is epitome, for actions matter and not the words that we utter and soon forget. Reaffirming patriotism does not necessarily mean saying Bharat Mata ki Jai or similar slogans, although one may choose to say so if one prefers that. Mr. Owaisi is right when he says that the Constitution of India, which governs us all and treats all the Indians alike, does not require anyone to make such slogans.

However, it would be great if Mr. Owaisi could understand that it is natural for the RSS to chant such slogans and acknowledge that they are as free to chant what they want as he is free to not to (provided they are within the rule of law). The RSS is also working within the Constitution and the RSS chief’s comments were not an imposition or a diktat but a mere suggestion.

If Mr. Owaisi could, instead of rebutting to what Mr. Bhagawat said, propose a better way to infuse patriotism among the youth, without chanting slogans that have Hindu connotations such as Bharat Mata, Hind or Mataram, then I am sure that it would do a world of good to the Indians.

J&K, university protests and a shaky government

23^rd February, 2016

Chennai, Tamil Nadu

  

A note on Jammu and Kashmir: My home state has not seen as much violence and/ or bloodshed as the Kashmiris have. The troubles that mar the northernmost state gradually abate in magnitude as we head southwards. But, each time we read about an attack on the Kashmiris by militants or insurgents, and each time an Indian soldier lays down his life to protect them and all of India we are deeply pained, even though we are miles away and safe from the bullets and shells that massacre the Kashmiris. We may not feel the pain they face in the physical sense, but our minds are deeply affected by them.

We are all well aware how J&K came to be a part of India. The circumstances which prevailed during the formation of India prompted the ruler of J&K to accede to the Dominion of India, in order to protect his state from the invaders who had come from across the border. However, autonomy of J&K was ensured by the Indian Government in the instrument of accession and it continues to be effective to this day to a great degree, despite a lot of water having flown under the bridge since its accession. The UN later declared that the decision on whether J&K should be a part of India or it neighbour Pakistan would be arrived at via plebiscite, which is a democratic means to self- determination.

Today, the noise, the frequent protests, terror attacks and many unconstitutional/ unlawful events are transpiring because some elements believe that the Indian Government is blocking plebiscite in J&K. I recently attended a talk by a Kashmiri, who has lived there most of his life and governed the state as its Chief Minister and his version of this issue was to the contrary. Omar Abdullah explained in simple words why a plebiscite is difficult now (and how it was never made possible earlier). The preconditions laid down by the UN to conduct a plebiscite were- one, withdrawal of Pakistani forces and Pakistani nationals from J&K and two, subsequent withdrawal of Indian forces from J&K. These were the conditions to be met for the plebiscite to be conducted. Although India accepted to these preconditions, Pakistan did not. The presence of Pakistani forces (military and non- military) continued, thus ruling out the abatement of Indian troops on ground.

Even today, insurgents and militants from across the borders are still on the soil of J&K. The withdrawal or even reduction of Indian army cannot happen with the presence of these elements. Four wars have been fought between the two countries over J&K and large numbers of Indian soldiers have become martyrs in these wars and they continue to lay down their lives in so many attacks that continue to occur even to this day. Wars and terror attacks have altered the dynamics between the two nations, including the practicality of implementing a plebiscite, among others issues. So, this calls for a relook into the terms of the referendum, from what was laid down earlier by the UN.

Also, J&K state was populated predominantly by a certain community, but large numbers of people from other communities were also living and continue to live there. If the people choose to merge with Pakistan, say, then there will be a reprisal of the effects of partition (if not of the same magnitude) where the majority community will be forced to drive out the rest, purely because the laws of Pakistan forbid practice of other faiths on its soil. If J&K continues to remain with India, then these other communities can continue to live and carry out their lives alongside the majority community, as India is a secular state. Now, the plight of so many members of so many different communities must be factored into while deciding the way forward. In the event of a plebiscite, the district to south of J&K may want to join Pakistan, while a north-western districts may want to continue with India, making it a geographical impossibility and a complex mix and match situation to arrive at a final settlement, leading to further discontentment and even violence (god forbid).

India has always acknowledged the autonomy of J&K. Although there are difficulties in implementing the UN resolution of the 40s, for reason(s) mentioned above, a relook can never be ruled out. A mutual acceptance of any solution that is explored by both countries alone can remove a stalemate and make positive progress towards a solution. Reaching a common ground by both the nations is vital. The Governments of both these nations have always endeavoured for this and today, the renewal of talks by various agencies and ministries of the Government are giving a renewed confidence.

Blocking infiltration of militants into J&K and other parts of India, curbing funding for terror activities perpetrated on the Indian soil, understanding the needs of the people of J&K, exploring multiple options for a peaceful solution and zeroing in on the most beneficial option is the way forward. Now, I am no expert on this issue, and there may be other factors that may be require a serious look. I am confident that there are people on both sides of the border who are best equipped to solve the problem.

Protests in Jawaharlal Nehru University: Now, while the Governments of the two nations are in discussion, with the Pakistani premier asking his countrymen to refrain from damaging the ongoing peace process, while the Indian ministers are trying hard to reach out to their counterparts in every conventional and unconventional way and while many separatist groups have decided to keep faith in these efforts,  there continues to be discontentment among people from J&K, probably over the pace at which the whole affair is progressing and also at the constant ups and downs that have become characteristic to it. It is thus natural for them to raise slogans in protest, to vent their displeasure. Protests help appeals, which are usually unheard or ignored, to fall into the ears of those concerned. This may be why the students at JNU began such a protest, so as to make their demands for Kashmir’s independence be heard. But, in their protest, they used a route which hurt the sentiments of many others. Some students of JNU decided to orchestrate their displeasure by invoking the name of a certain Kashmiri who was declared a terrorist by the Indian courts of law and sentenced to death by it. The slogans that were shouted on that day at JNU glorified this terrorist and told (although some may prefer the word ‘threatened’) India that many similar men will emerge from each household in Kashmir to fight for its cause and they vow to disintegrate India.

I do not want to get into the humanity and/or human rights aspects of a death sentence, as I have even lesser authority on that subject. I am confident that there are well read people who are doing something about that in a constitutional manner. The fact of the matter is that the terrorist and his associates were part of an attack in 2001 on the Parliament of India. People were killed in the attack and lives of many (including some of our elected representatives) were under threat. Although, it is natural for Kashmiris to view the terrorist and his associates as heroes, due to their position on liberating J&K, they must however take into consideration the unconstitutional methods that were employed in the due process and how a billion other Indians may react to it.

In my opinion a fight for the right to self-determination and the future of J&K, do not require invoking names of certain people (especially those deemed terrorists by Law). If nothing else, it’s a sensitive subject that must be handled with caution, lest is hurt someone else’s sentiments. If the Kashmiris really want their voices to be heard and their demands be met, they must try and avoid making such remarks which prove counter-productive to their cause. The students can take a more democratic route and affiliate with parties which are fighting for the cause already. The Hurriyat Conference is already doing that and it has serious people who are taking lawful steps to air their demands. Although they are deemed separatists, the Indian state has acknowledged their position and is actively engaging with them for a peaceful solution. The major political parties in J&K have people in them who are serious about this issue and endeavour to cautiously balance the interests of the people and the violence that is perpetrated in their land.

In JNU, as a consequence of the sloganeering and the events that followed, the police arrested the student leader and now a case is pending against him in court, which I am sure it will reach its logical and fair conclusion. The arrest was called unlawful by the students of JNU and the whole question of anti- nationalism and what actually is nationalism arose. Today, the students who raised the slogans, which the police feel were seditious, are contemplating to surrender before court. I always felt that union leaders were gutsier and did not cry foul when courted arrest, well…

Protests in Hyderabad Central University: The other incident that has hogged so much of media space is the suicide of a student of the Hyderabad University and how his death is linked to him being from a lower class and to a certain MP whose letter to the union HRD ministry and the subsequent replies to it. This student had a case pending against him in connection to assaulting an ABVP activist on the University campus. The court of law upheld the case and the judicial proceedings were underway at the time of his death. As a consequence, he was expelled from the university and the hostel, although he continued to protest on the campus. His suicide and the circumstances surrounding it are being investigated by police and the courts, and I hope justice is delivered and the matter is brought to its conclusion fast, if not for anything else, to bring relief to an aggrieved mother who has lost her son. But the facts remain grim; this student had done the exact same thing as those students of JNU, when he empathised with the hanging of yet another convict, associated with terror attacks in Mumbai in 1993 which killed many and subsequently was sentenced to death by the court of law. The ABVP among others had raised objections to this. Now, the supporters of the hanging have as much right as the dissenters of it to air their views. Imagine if this student had lived and was proved innocent of his charges by the court. He could’ve fought a legitimate battle thereafter.

The case of one student from HCU sympathising with the hanging of a convict and another case where the students of JNU want to protest for a cause by invoking the name of another terrorist has a similarity- in each case the convicts were declared as convicts not by the ruling of a Government, but by the court of Law after thorough investigation, after several appeals to higher courts and pleading clemency. This is the very Law which provides us with the Right to freedom of speech and expression (subject to reasonable restrictions), the very law that they seek recourse under in the event of murders, robberies and among so many others crimes and the very law under which they seek bail and protection. So, if these students have the audacity to question the court of Law, then I really wonder what other institution they respect. I can understand dissent against Government, but is the dissent against a court judgement justified? I am sure the human rights violation card will be invoked here, but why does human rights have to be remembered only when terrorists are being sentenced to death. Should not the students and all human rights activists instead call for a systematic relook and a research into the concept of death sentence through constitutional routes? After all our constitution is organic and has metamorphosed since its ratification, thus providing room for change. 

The timing of these incidents is astonishing. First, I do not see merit in the suicide case of the HCU student being brought to mainstream news. Politicising a death, which is being investigated and from which no conclusions have been drawn yet and creating an atmosphere to pit one caste against the rest is in itself improper, and in this case unfounded. Second, it is suspicious how JNU’s Kashmir struggle and the subsequent slogans are being raised only on anniversaries of dead terrorists. Should not their struggle for J&K’s liberation be continuous? I wonder what would’ve been the fate of the freedom movement of India if our forefathers had decided to fight for freedom only on birth and death anniversaries of select dear departed.

  

Why the protests? From the turn of events, I feel that a smear campaign is afoot against the incumbent Government by forces which are unable to come to terms with the victory of this Government. But let me ask them- Why did you/ me (or your/ my country) vote such a Government to power? So, are you (me) wrong? Are the people of your (my) country wrong in voting such a Government to power? If we cannot digest the fact that the Government in power is in power, then we need to bear with them till the next general elections. That’s the hard truth in a democracy, the democracy that each of us are proud about and appears to have taken for granted. This seems too much like a smear campaign against the Government with the sole goal to block the Budget session of Parliament starting today. First, it was the Lalit Modi issue, to which the Minister of External Affairs was wrongly linked to and for which the Parliament session was blocked, with the Opposition running away (walking out) from debate and discussion. Next, it was the DDCA row against the Minister of Finance, where again the opposition had no legs to stand on and the matters, including the defamation suit filed by the minister, are now in court. This time I am sure it will be the HCU and JNU issues that will be used to stall proceedings of the Parliament.

Would any Government, left or right, have remained a silent spectator when such slogans are being raised? I ask a counter question. Should any Government, left or right in its leanings, take no action if such a speech or sloganeering is made? Will the same people who are protesting against the Government today, be happy if this or any other Government had left the students to go ahead with their sloganeering against the nation? Haven’t we complained enough between 2004 and 2014 because the Government and its leaders were too quiet on major issues that burned our nation then? It’s time to introspect on whether what we protest for is just or not? The matters are clearly political. These incidents have been capitalised (or were hatched to be capitalised?) in order to disrupt the upcoming Parliament session.

Just like how people in my country have fear of not being heard, represented and a now the fear of not having the freedom of speaking what they want to, I too have a fear- a fear where development of my country is stalled by opposition parties under false pretexts and as a consequence of which the poor get poorer, working class gets poorer and we all dive into an age of darkness, economically and socially speaking. Our demands from the Government must be for reforms and not for what is already guaranteed under the constitution. If we feel our civil liberties and fundamental rights are violated and/ or that we have been deprived of them, then we have a solid judiciary in place from where we can get the recourse.

In conclusion I feel that the bitter and scathing attacks on Government by various forces are a pretext to hinder growth, growth which we have not seen in many years and which we hope and pray becomes a reality. The Government too has faltered in handling these situations in a diplomacy that it demands and has lost precious time in the parliament, falling victim to the opposition’s rants, however well-grounded or unfounded they may be. Allegations and protests can go on, but their repercussions on the people of India at large must be thought about. We must be thankful for having a judiciary in place which is largely independent in its actions and however slow it is in its functioning, history says that it is fair in the end. Negative propaganda may win opposition elections in the future, but what else can it do?

Tyre Trouble

It all started when I convinced my dad to buy me a bicycle, that shiny blue one. The usage was restricted at first although I slowly began to use it and ventured beyond my street to those around the block. It happened only after the first few rides- the tyre went flat. Somehow, the blame was on me for what had happened and only after much beseeching did I finally manage to get it fixed the first time. I was more careful how I rode thereafter; I avoided potholed roads and only took the less potholed ones, filled air to the tyres more frequently, kept the cycle in shade. As time passed, I slowly braved to bicycle to school. But, one day as I cycled up that road, I had to stop half way puffing and panting- punctured tyre again. This time I decided to let it be for a while and rested the bike against the coconut tree in my home. After several fixes, re-fixes, replacing tubes and what not, I gave up. I just thought it was a problem with the bicycle itself and blamed it for all the trouble; after all it was ominously named as ‘Devil’ (by the company, not me). 

Many repairs were funded by my parents out of pity, but the tyres just would not stop flattening out, and it became more and more difficult to ask for help when repairs became more and more frequent. By the end of high school I had given up cycling altogether as it was more pushing than peddling, and began walking to school and jogging back home. My bicycle had found a more permanent place inside my room. A few years into college, I began experimenting with my mom’s scooter. I had just got my learner’s license and mom agreed to let me use the vehicle. Since the scoter was not named Devil, I assumed the tyre trouble would be non- existent or at least lesser. I could not have assumed worse. To save costs, I ended up removing tyres myself, lugging it to the shop and then refitting it after repairs. I greased my hands a lot with that scooter.

Last year, I took an auto in Mumbai. The driver, an elderly kaka, navigated very efficiently through the morning traffic in the city, giving me confidence that I’d reach on time, in spite of having started late. It was not until a fellow auto driver yelled and notified kaka of the flat rear left tyre, did I realise what could possibly be the hard truth- It was I who caused the tyre trouble. Poor kaka. The jinx just would not wear off. My dad’s scooter, usually hassle free, was just what I needed one day, but I could only go as far as the tyre shop down the Bull Temple road. Maybe I had to consider modes of transport that have no tyres, like boats or bullock carts. The work doesn’t allow me to take the aircraft much, thank God for that.

Although it is still uncertain whether it is me who causes tyres to go flat on vehicles I sit in, there may be other, more probable causes. Bad roads, for instance. The mending of roads may have been slowed down by our corporations so that the innumerable puncture repair shops don’t run out of business. A tyre puncture for you means money for someone else. The impact on the tyres and the tyre’s wear and tear, both due to poor roads, are mainly what cause flat tyres. So, it may not be me after all. The next time you see me lugging myself on the streets, you may stop and ask for a lift.

(There is no moral to this story.)