(This is part of a series of articles called #ManifestoMusings, based on the manifestos of the Bharatiya Janata Party and Indian National Congress for the Indian General Elections 2019)

The Indian General Election season is here!

Will it be ‘Abki baar (phir) Modi sarkaar’ (‘this time (again) it is time for a Modi government’) or ‘Jaat par na pat par, mohar lagega haath par’ (‘neither based on caste nor on creed, my vote will be on the hand’; the hand is the symbol of the Indian National Congress)? Will India finally vote for a regime mainly on development issues or are we still some way off from such a scenario? How important will caste dynamics be? Will communal and sectarian politics play a role?

These are all questions that shall matter immensely as the country gears up for the General Election 2019, beginning from 11 April 2019.

The manifestos for Indian General Election 2019 of the major Indian national parties: Bharatiya Janata Party and the Indian National Congress, have now been released. Both parties have looked into various aspects of life and society in their respective manifestos, right from the economy and jobs to foreign affairs and defense. While one focuses on its leader (the BJP’s with the focus being on Narendra Modi), the other seems to focus on people, in general. One talks of resolutions (‘Sankalp‘) while the other talks of its ability to deliver (the Indian National Congress).

As the country gears up to vote, I would like to look at the key points that are covered (or not covered) in the manifestos, in a series of articles called #ManifestoMusings. This first article is looking at infrastructure building plans and projects suggested by the two parties. The importance of infrastructure building cannot be highlighted enough. Be it power, roadways, buildings, lines of communication, rail-lines or waterways, infrastructure is crucial for the smooth functioning of the nation. India’s road to growth that is sustainable and comes with a manufacturing sector that is competitive has to be with reliable and robust infrastructure across the country.

India currently invests capital worth about 35% of its GDP in infrastructure. However, as per government estimates, India still needs more than ₹1 crore crores in infrastructure investments over the next ten years to bridge the infrastructure deficit! On top of this, one needs more capital for future growth with a tried-and-tested ‘multiplier effect’ of infrastructure investments on economic growth (and GDP) across the various sectors.

As both parties pitch their manifestos for claiming power in 2019, let us see what the two parties have to say on this.

Is The Congress Going Back To The Basics?

The Indian National Congress begins its infra-pitch (understandably) by highlighting that ‘flawed design, inefficient execution, insufficient capacity and poor maintenance of infrastructure have dragged India’s growth rate down‘. Not wanting to sound unfairly harsh but most of the years since India’s independence in 1947 has seen a Congress government in the center, and so I wonder if that statement, in itself, is not a self-indictment. To counter this problem,

Congress promises to address these deficiencies with a combination of planning, technology, quality and accountability.

The Congress has travelled a long way since the inception of the Republic, often at the helm of matters. British economist Barbara Ward once wrote that ‘the Indian record in both infrastructure and industry is one of substantial advance on a broad front, (…) like the big push needed to achieve sustained growth.’ Even though the GDP of India did not grow immensely (also because there had been near zero-percent growth in the first half of the twentieth century) but the basics of economics and infrastructure investment done right gave the country a near 4% economic growth until around the Indo-China war in 1962.

As much as the Congress worked on this front last time they were in power, there remains a lot more left to be done. And the INC gets down to it, by going back to the basics. It begins with the arteries of the country, when it comes to trade and movement of individuals, in a manner of speaking: the roadways and railways. It looks at not only maintaining the existing infrastructure relating to these two areas but also building infrastructure wherever lacking or required. It promises to increase the total length of national highways, with a focus on quality, accountability, maintenance and design. The Congress also talks of massively modernising ‘all outdated railway infrastructure’. Both road and railways construction is open to private capital and capacity being involved, along with an emphasis on the Public-Private-Partnership (PPP) model.

It is interesting that in the very next section in its infra-pitch, the Congress arguably tries to correct the one thing that cost the INC the elections last time: natural resources and spectrum allocation. A number of scams and scandals rocked the Congress’ boat to the extent of nearly sinking it in 2014. In 2019, the INC says that:

Congress promises to review, re-formulate and implement the policy on spectrum and on exploration and extraction of natural resources. The policy will address issues of allocation, capital investment, enhanced production, transparency, efficiency, risk-reward concerns, environmental sustainability, inter-generational equity, accountability, competition and appropriate sectoral regulation.

There still is a lot to be done on this front that the Congress does not talk about. Water is a major natural resource that needs efficient usage. City water distribution systems need to be improved (possibly with latest technology like digital technology with flowmeters), which can also give some additional water revenues. Interception and treatment of sewerage water for reuse before it enters water bodies is also an area that needs work. When it comes to coal, pre-processing, combustion as well as modernization of coal plants are important areas where infrastructure needs to improved, and where digital technology deployment could improve results.

The same goes for oil and gas industries in the country. The Congress does seek to look into clean energy and promises to encourage the increased use of green energy over fossil fuels, but does not quite lay out the details on how it seeks to do so. The party also has a dedicated promise to substituting LPG in homes by electricity and solar energy, in the long term. Big promises that can help immensely, but only time will tell if these have substance in them.

Power is an area that is of utmost importance in India, in industry, civilian habitation and elsewhere. The BJP has been trying to project its electrification drive as a major poll pitch. The INC tries to dent this one area that the BJP has made a key issue: electrification of houses, particularly in rural India, by saying that the Congress promises “to enhance availability of, and access to, electricity in rural areas by encouraging investment in off-grid renewable power generation with ownership and revenues vesting in local bodies”. The Congress talks of electrifying every village and every home ‘in the true sense’, whatever that means.

As per government sources, 5,61,613 villages were electrified till 31 October 2013, which was a little more than 90% of the villages! Given that many of the villages that the BJP government claims to have electrified have less than the minimum 10% electricity required to call it truly ‘electrified’, the Congress can use this pitch effectively if it can present the arguments and a case for the same. The other big elephant in the room is quality assurance. Under the rural electrification scheme, the cost for providing free electricity connection to a household that is Below-the-Poverty-Line (BPL) is ₹3,000, though it has been noted that this cost is seen to be inadequate and lower than required for good quality and proper implementation of the scheme. This is where the Congress can step in and possibly even rope in its much-quoted PPP model.

When it comes to infrastructure related to rural development, the Congress looks into other areas as well, saying that “in order to fill the gaps in sector-specific schemes as well correct any unintended bias”, they would like to empower Panchayats and municipalities to themselves design and implement their own infrastructure projects, along with promising to create a ‘non-lapsable Rural Infrastructure Fund’ to provide grants and loans to such projects. The reason I find this a bit ludicrous is because there already exists a Rural Infrastructure Development Fund that was created by the Government of India within the National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD) in 1995-96, with a cumulative allocation of ₹3,20,500 crore, including ₹18,500 crore under Bharat Nirman. Unless the Congress has short-term memory loss regarding this fund created by their own government (though their historical disregard for non-Gandhi PMs from their party like P.V. Narasimha Rao is well known), the party needs to stop building castles in the air where ramparts have long been standing.

Not to forget, how can one talk of rural development in a Congress manifesto and not talk of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA)? The Congress talks of launch MGNREGA 3.0 in 2019 to ‘address issues of water security, soil quality and similar issues that aggravate farmers’ distress’. They propose to increase the guaranteed days of employment to 150 days in blocks and districts where 100 days employment guarantee has been achieved. This is a bit too ambitious since government data shows that less than 15% of eligible families have got 100 days of work in a year since 2006!

While the INC also talks of using MGNREGA labour in new areas such as the Waterbodies Restoration Mission and the Wasteland Regeneration Mission, what I find strange and a tad bit disturbing is that they talk of using the MGNREGA funds to also build public assets such as classrooms and health centres. I do not see what is new or different in this since public assets development is already given a high priority. The Congress goes on to assure that its will connect all habitation with a population of 250 with a road under the Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana, besides working on broadband connectivity and the National Drinking Water Mission.

What I find commendable is the commitment to passing the Right to Homestead Act that has been languishing in the government corridors since 2013. The NDA government agreed to discuss people’s right to homestead land in June 2018 last I read about it and there has not been much thereafter. The Act will provide a homestead for every household that doesn’t own land or a home.

When it comes to urban development and urban policy, the Congress promises to formulate a comprehensive plan for urbanisation after consulting with various stakeholders. The consultation will be on topics such as governance (including mayors directly elected by the people, which I personally do not feel is a great idea for being imposed across the country, as also put forth by Mathew Idiculla in this article, and multi-disciplinary teams to do urban planning and implement municipal works), housing, climate change and pollution, transportation systems and disaster management.

Much like the BJP’s smart city plan, the INC seeks to build new towns and cities as well as satellite towns across the country. Moreover, the plan to devolve power and functions to the local bodies is good thought financial devolution may need stringent checks and balances in place for it to not become a model for the corruption seen in places like the Bombay Municipal Corporation. The Congress also talks of promising the Right to Housing for the urban poor and building night shelters for the homeless. They also talk of ensuring basic amenities to slum dwellers. I ask them: what is so different in this, either in design or implementation, from the Deendayal Antyodaya Yojana-National Urban Livelihoods Mission (DAY-NULM)?

The BJP Bandwagon: Bharatmala, Jal Jivan Mission And More

The best way to describe what the BJP has broadly done is to hear from their own introductory blurb in their infra-pitch, where it highlight its strong performance on the infrastructure building front and the problems created by the Congress rule before 2014,

In the 10 years of UPA rule, policy paralysis and corruption had derailed infrastructural development. The last five years, under the leadership of Prime Minister Modi, infrastructural roll out has been put back on track. For the first time, India has started marching and is being seen on the path of global standards in infrastructure and civic amenities. The speed of constructing rural roads has doubled and 90% of rural road connectivity has been achieved.

Furthermore, India has become a net exporter of electricity and has achieved maximum production of coal and maximum distribution of LED bulbs. There has been an unprecedented rise in the port capacity and the speed of setting up new rail lines, gauge conversion, and electrification of railway tracks has doubled. We have invested at an unprecedented level in building infrastructure in the last five years. This includes massive budgetary allocation for railways, highways, village roads and other health as well as educational infrastructure. We have also started and matured into a new technology driven platform called PRAGATI (Pro-active Governance and Timely Implementation). Through this, mechanism, we are de-bottlenecking major projects on a regular basis through video conference with offcials across the country.

Not only does the BJP speak of cutting edge technology and infrastructure building such as seeking to connect every Gram Panchayat with high speed optical fibre network by 2022 in its manifesto, but much like the INC, the BJP also has a dedicated section on basic infrastructure, particularly roadways and railways. For roadways, the BJP puts forth the specific target of constructing 60,000 km of National Highways in the next five years, in continuation of `constructing roads at an unprecedented pace’.

The BJP seeks to double the length of National Highways by 2022 and complete the first phase of the Bharatmala project, besides seeking to launch Bharatmala 2.0, to `support the states to develop state road networks connecting the interior regions to the main roads and to effectively leverage the economic potential and market opportunities of the concerned regions’. The referenced Bharatmala project is a centrally-sponsored and funded roadways project for building roads for more than 83,500 km by the Indian government at a staggering investment of ₹5.35 lakh crore, making it the single largest outlay for a government road construction scheme.

The project will build highways Gujarat and Rajasthan, moving north to Haryana and Punjab, then covering the states of Uttarakhand, Himachal Pradesh and Jammu and Kashmir and some portions of Bihar and Uttar Pradesh, before finally moving to West Bengal, Sikkim, Assam, Arunachal Pradesh, Mizoram and Manipur. Bharatmala is slated to connect 550 district headquarters to minimum 4-lane highway by raising the number of corridors to 50 and moving 80% freight traffic to national highways. On roadways, the BJP goes on to say that it would like to bring in new technology and ways of road construction, maintenance and operation. To make matters even more cutting-edge, the BJP promises to work on trying to make India a world leader in e-mobility. As per the party, ₹10,000 crores have already been allocated for launching a programme to promote vehicles operated on clean energy and batteries. They promise to keep up this work to ensure `expansion of this new mobility experience’.

When it comes to railways, the BJP says it shall continue to work on making the experience of travelling on railways safe, satisfying and clean, with development of infrastructure for the same. This includes their poll promise of electrification of all railway tracks, equipping all main railways stations with WiFi and ensuring the conversion of all viable rail tracks to broad gauge by 2022.  Recently, RailTel (a Mini-Ratna PSU of the Indian Railways) provided high-speed WiFi at 985 stations with their own funds and at 415 other stations by associating with Google as the technology partner for Radio Access.

In the last five years, all unmanned level crossing (UMLCs) on broad gauge lines were eliminated, CCTV coverage at stations as well as trains have been improved, a new ticketing website with better features has been released, handheld POS machines have been introduced for ticketing and food billing to ensure transparency and over 1.8 lakh bio-toilets have been installed in trains. All these achievements make one positive of the promises the BJP makes. The BJP also speaks of expanding the connectivity of, and experience in, high speed, new trains such as Vande Bharat Express across the country in the next five years, along with completing the dedicated freight corridor project by 2022.

Not to be left behind, air travel and coastal development are also poll issues for the BJP. The BJP also promises to double the number of airports from 101 as it stands, in the next five years. Another area it looks at is coastal development, on which it says that it will double the country’s port capacity in the next five years. Looking at the comprehensive development of the coastal areas, it talks of development of cities, transportation and industrialization in the coastal areas. It talks of upgrading the infrastructure for connecting the coastal areas with their hinterlands to ensure efficient and smooth transportation. Speaking of a comprehensive, integrated plan for water transportation infrastructure, the BJP not only talks of developing inland waterways but also focus on the potential of coastal development for tourism, transportation and welfare of the coastal communities under the recently launched Sagarmala programme.

Moving on to the key area of infrastructure related to energy and electrification, the BJP says that it made a commitment in 2014 to provide 24×7 electricity to all and the country has moved in leaps and bounds in that direction. As mentioned previously, this claim is a bit beyond the reality in many parts of the country but the country seems to be heading in the right direction. Even though the BJP government is far from electrifying every home as it had envisioned, it has come a long way by bringing electricity connections to 23.9 million households across 25 states, as per the government’s Press Information Bureau. It is true that exemplary work has been done in boosting the generation of electricity (though there is still a lot to be done on this front) and ‘in laying down of transmission lines and in putting up the nationwide transmission grid’.

With India now apparently becoming a net exporter of electricity, the BJP seeks to now direct its attention at ensuring that a right mix of energy is used for a cleaner environment, supplying quality electricity to all and making state electricity bodies efficient and financially sound. When it comes to the first point, the BJP highlights that India has `achieved cumulative installed renewable energy capacity of 76.87 GW as on February, 2019′ and is `on track to achieve our goal of 175 GW by 2022′. The BJP seeks to continue efforts in this direction and invite other countries to become members of the International Solar Alliance. Last but not the least,

Human beings need water above all else (arguably). As a result, infrastructure for harnessing and using water resources is extremely important. The BJP looks into this with the first major point being the formation of a Ministry of Water that shall unify `the water management functions to approach the issue of water management holistically and ensure better coordination of efforts’. To highlight the existing, India already has a Ministry of Water Resource, River Development and Ganga Rejuvenation (MOWR). The planned Ministry of Water will also be taking forward the river-linking project conceptualized by Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayee, to ‘ensure a solution to the problems of drinking water and irrigation’. Even though I am highly cautious about the river-water linking project, due to ecological reasons, the BJP seems to be going in the direction of dedicated efforts to make India have enough water in every household, across the country. Besides wanting to launch a ‘Jal Jivan Mission’ with a special programme named ‘Nal se Jal’ to `ensure piped water for every household by 2024′, the BJP also seeks to ‘ensure sustainability of water supply through special focus on conservation of rural water bodies and ground water recharge’.

Last but definitely not the least, going by the principle of ‘cleanliness is next to godliness‘, the BJP plans to continue its ‘Swachh Bharat Abhiyaan‘. They seek to take the mission to a new level through ‘sustainable Solid Waste Management in every village’. Through the mission, the BJP seeks to ensure disposal of all liquid waste through ’emphasis on faecal sludge management and reuse of waste water in rural, peri-urban and unsewered areas’. One of the key areas of neglect in India on this front has been open defecation and lack of toilets (remember the movie Toilet: Ek Prem Katha?). The BJP seeks to ensure that all habitations attain what they call an ‘open defecation free status’ and that those that already have attained this should be able to sustain this change.

In Conclusion

The largest democratic exercise comes with the largest dilemmas on whom to elect as the next Prime Minister of India. Narendra Modi or Rahul Gandhi. Both the parties have come out with well-made manifestos that cover a whole range of topics. In this analysis I have tried to be as impartial as possible in my assessment when it comes to the poll pitches for infrastructure. I believe that while the BJP has an exciting vision and the necessary gumption to bring meaningful change, the Congress wants to get its basics right though it could do more with novelty in the ideas proposed. Both parties have their strengths and weaknesses, like any other party. I would like my readers to decide after going through the manifestos and my series #ManifestoMusings, of which this is the first article. Mandate 2019 is a massive decision for the fate of the country, and as responsible citizens of the country, it is our duty to take an informed and well-thought-out position.

Every vote counts, every voice is important.

These are exciting times and I look forward to seeing another chapter being inked into the history of modern India on 23 May 2019 when a new government shall take office in India.

Jai Hind!

The post An Assessment Of BJP And INC’s Poll Pitches For Infrastructure appeared first and originally on Youth Ki Awaaz and is a copyright of the same. Please do not republish.

Note: This is the second article in a series of articles called #ManifestoMusings, based on the manifestos of the Bharatiya Janata Party and Indian National Congress for the Indian General Elections 2019)

The Indian General Election season is here!

Will it be ‘Abki baar phir Modi sarkaar (this time it is time for Modi government again)’ or ‘Jaat par na pat par, mohar lagega haath par (neither based on caste nor on creed, my vote will be on the hand)’; the hand is the symbol of the Indian National Congress. Will India finally vote for a regime mainly on development issues or are we still some way off from such a scenario? How important will caste dynamics be? Will communal and sectarian politics play a role?

These are all questions that shall matter immensely as the country gears up for the General Elections 2019, beginning from 11 April 2019.

The manifestos for Indian General Elections 2019 of the major Indian national parties: Bharatiya Janata Party and the Indian National Congress have now been released. Both parties have looked into various aspects of life and society in their respective manifestos, right from the economy and jobs to foreign affairs and defence. While one focuses on its leader (the BJP’s with the focus being on Narendra Modi), the other seems to focus on people, in general. One talks of resolutions (‘Sankalp‘) while the other talks of its ability to deliver (the Indian National Congress).

As the country gears up to vote, I would like to look at the key points that are covered (or not covered) in the manifestos, in a series of articles called #ManifestoMusings. This second article is looking at employment generation plans and projects suggested by the two parties. The manifestos for Indian General Elections 2019 of the major Indian national parties: Bharatiya Janata Party and the Indian National Congress, have now been released. Both parties have looked into various aspects of life and society in their respective manifestos, right from the economy and jobs to foreign affairs and defence. The election promises to be a mix of people, communities, ideologies, parties, concerns, interests and life, across the country, which shall come alive as the country chooses who it wants as its leader for the next five years. India has more than 50% of its population below the age of 25 and more than 65% below the age of 35. As a result, appealing to the youth of the country is of utmost importance. Having them turn out and vote is vital for the sustenance of a healthy democratic culture and environment in the country. One of the most crucial aspects of the manifestos that matter to them would be jobs and employment prospects.

As both parties pitch their manifestos for claiming power in 2019, let us see what the two parties have to say on this on this.

Champion Sectors, 10% EWS Quota and Entrepreneurship

Jobs, as per many, could be the undoing for the BJP in this election. India’s population pressure is such that last year 19 million people apparently applied for 63,000 vacancies in the Indian railways while two lakh applicants (including doctors and engineers) applied for 1,137 vacancies for police constables in Mumbai! There are too many people in the pool for too few jobs. For any economy and country to be working for its people, especially its youth, job creation is important and that is where many feel the BJP has not done enough. Modi pledged to create one crore jobs if brought to power in 2014. Modi and his government may have implemented major reforms in the economy, but there are still deep-seated problems in the system.

Some say demonetisation and the roll-out of GST, particularly and mainly in the way it was implemented, has encumbered the system further. However, in all fairness, the system and its faults are not the way they are due to Modi and the BJP government alone. They are not even due to the previous government under Dr. Manmohan Singh, though the economic recession of 2008 and the corruption scandals may have created some dents. It is a long-standing problem due to limited resources and a large population coupled with some flaws in the way successive governments have dealt with this problem.

On the other end of the spectrum, the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) published a report recently that said 13.5 million jobs were created every year, on average, over the past five years, and the signs are looking positive for the economy and for employment generation. The top sectors, when it came to job-generation were hospitality and tourism, textiles and apparel, and metal products, in that order, while Maharashtra, Gujarat and Telangana were the best job-creating states.

Without either negating or accepting either end of the spectrum (yet) as the final judgement (or indictment) of the government, let me present what the BJP has to say about this area, in terms of poll promises for 2019

We will create new opportunities of employment by providing more support to the 22 major ‘Champion Sectors’ identified as the main drivers of Indian economy. We will optimally leverage the untapped employment-generation of potential of sectors such as defence and pharmaceuticals to take advantage of the opportunities available in domestic and foreign markets.

For starters, a natural question would be: what are these champion sectors? After some research and fact-finding, I came across a Press Information Bureau (PIB) press release that highlighted what champion sectors meant:

These include Information Technology & Information Technology enabled Services (IT & ITeS), Tourism and Hospitality Services, Medical Value Travel, Transport and Logistics Services, Accounting and Finance Services, Audio Visual Services, Legal Services, Communication Services, Construction and Related Engineering Services, Environmental Services, Financial Services and Education Services.

The BJP promises to take forward its aim of developing India into a ‘knowledge-based, skill-supported and technology-driven society’. It looks at how networks and clustering within the economy could help create jobs:

We understand that clustering and network effects are important in order to build competitiveness in cutting edge industries. Therefore, we will invest in creating clusters/networks that can take on the world’s best. Public procurement and government incentives will be used actively to build up these clusters and encourage job creation.

The BJP seeks to push for increased public and private investment to increase job creation and employment prospects. The party seeks to build infrastructure and improve the quality of life in terms of amenities and services. This itself will create jobs for the masses in the country, which the party wants to tap into. The BJP has recently promised to invest $1.4 trillion by 2024 for building infrastructure, be it highways, airports or railways. It has promised to spend another $350 million in rural India, to facilitate doubling of farm incomes by 2022, by building silos and warehouses and on schemes such as the interest-free credit cards of up to $1,400 for those repay their loans promptly. All of these investments and measures will boost the construction industry that is a major employer in the country. This will also give a fillip to the associated industries such as cement, power, steel, transportation and mining. The CII report also said that the job creation in the MSME sector had grown by 14% from 2014-18.

One of the greatest moves in a country that has been beset with poverty and lack of development coupled with reservation based only on social identities and not for economically weaker sections belonging to the general category was the creation of a 10% quota for economically weaker sections of society. BJP in its manifesto has ensured that economically weaker sections of the society who belong to the non-reserved category are represented and have access to government jobs and higher education through the 10% reservation.

The Constitution (124 Amendment) Act, 2019 that made this a constitutional clause was passed by the President back in January 2019. In all fairness and the same spirit, the BJP seeks to continue implementing the law ensuring that the reservation and representation of SCs, STs, and OBCs in the job market. The BJP manifesto also has a section on employment opportunities for tribal communities, while highlighting that the BJP has continuously protected and promoted the interest of forest dwellers particularly the tribal communities, by endeavouring to provide basic amenities, such as roadways, communication-channels and housing, to people living in remote corners of the country, and the party shall continue to do so. The party seeks to establish 50,000 Van Dhan Vikas Kendras in the tribal areas of the country to enable the primary processing and value addition for forest produce and to supplement tribal income.

A major section of BJP’s Sankalp Patra promises on job creation relates to entrepreneurship and startups, and the whole idea of transforming ‘job-seekers’ to ‘job-givers’. The BJP seeks to launch a new scheme to provide collateral-free credit up to ₹50 lakh for entrepreneurs, and promises to guarantee 50% of the loan amount for female entrepreneurs and 25% of the loan amount for male entrepreneurs. It is heartening to see that Modi wishes to set-up a new ‘Entrepreneurial Northeast’ scheme to provide financial support to micro, small and medium industries and for employment generation in the Northeastern state. This definitely is long-needed but obviously also plays to the gallery, considering the number of seats the North-east can get the BJP in this election (courtesy: Hemanta Biswa Sarma and Co.). The BJP also promises to expand the Pradhan Mantri Mudra Yojana for budding entrepreneurs to take the number of beneficiaries of Mudra loans up to 30 crore, and to also promote and encourage Startups through the creation of a ‘Seed Startup Fund’ of ₹20,000 crore.

Service-Based Jobs, MSMEs and Apprenticeships

The Congress’ concerted push on the jobs front may have had an eerie deja-vu moment for Modi, had he not been on the other end of the deal this time. Modi came to power in 2014 on the promise of changing the realities when it came to employment. The INC begins its first major manifesto-section with a description of rising unemployment and the words

Today, unemployment is touching a 45-year high of 6.1 per cent according to the government’s own figures. The Centre for Monitoring Indian Economy puts the number at 7.2 per cent. At the end of this February, 3.1 crore people were actively looking for jobs. Data indicates that total employment has declined, the labour participation rate has declined.

Besides a general pledge to give the highest priority to protecting existing jobs and creating new jobs, the INC promises to create a new Ministry of Industry, Services and Employment. I was personally not sure how this would differ from the existing Ministry of Labour and Employment, and would, therefore, would love to have more information on this front. The INC goes on to promise that it will fill all the 4 lakh vacancies as on 1 April 2019 in the Central Government, Central Public Sector Enterprises, Judiciary and Parliament before the end of March 2020. It mentions the possibility of a bit of subtle arm-twisting of the state governments by saying

As a condition for devolution of funds to the healthcare and education sectors and to Panchayats and Municipalities Congress will request State Governments to fill all vacancies, estimated at 20 lakh, in the 2 sectors and in local bodies.

So much for decentralization and federalism!

The Congress goes on to promise the abolition of application fees for government examinations and government posts, and to expand the health and education sectors significantly to create jobs associated with these sectors. They also seek to work with state governments to look into effective payment (including pending arrears) and support for para-state workers such as Anganwadi workers, ASHA workers, rozgarsahayaks, preraks, and anudeshaks.

The INC goes on to highlight the importance of the manufacturing sector and the possibility of creating jobs in the same. The party seeks to trigger growth of Mini, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs), which account for 90% of employment outside agriculture as per the party, and the manufacturing sector in general by providing world-class infrastructure in industrial hubs and cluster towns. This will not only expand existing unit but also create new ones. Speaking of enterprises, not to be left behind on the entrepreneurship front, the Congress says that it wants to create an Enterprise Support Agency that shall help entrepreneurs with business support, counselling, help with access to technology, incubation of business proposals, funding, market participation and creation of products and services. The party also promises to `regulatory forbearance for Micro and Small Enterprises’ and freedom from ‘Inspector Raj’ until they stabilise, as they put it. This would mean that such enterprises are exempt from all laws and regulations, other than the tax laws and Minimum Wages Act, for three years from the date of starting the business. Congress also wants to promote what it calls `mass entrepreneurship’ and ‘support entrepreneurs to replicate tried and tested models of businesses in order to meet the growing demand for such goods and services’. The Congress also wants to reward businesses that create new jobs by lowering direct tax rates and lowering the demand for an amount to the CSR fund.

One interesting area that the INC covers is that of incentivising employment of women. The Congress promises to give fiscal incentives to businesses that employ a certain percentage of women (strangely unspecified though). This is particularly important since, as per a study, increasing women’s labour force participation by 10% could add $700 billion to India’s GDP by 2025 which translates to a 1.4% rise! In a world where Women earn 62% of what their male colleagues earn for performing the same work, as per the Global Gender Gap Report by the World Bank Forum, it is only right to have incentivisation for increased women employment in India.

Congress seeks to look at increasing exports and developing the tourism sector for job creation within the country, by promising ‘an adequately capitalised Tourism Development Bank to provide low-cost, long-term funds for investment in tourism-related businesses’. The manifesto also looks at how the repair and restoration of water bodies (under the ‘Water Bodies Restoration Mission’) and the regeneration and afforestation of wasteland and degraded land (under the ‘Wasteland Regeneration Mission’) can create (a purported 1 crore) jobs for the youth. Besides this, there is a push for fairness and support to apprentices within businesses and to equip youth to capitalize on opportunities relating to `jobs that will emerge with the advent of new technologies’.

In Conclusion

The largest democratic exercise comes with the largest dilemmas on whom to elect as the next Prime Minister of India. Narendra Modi or Rahul Gandhi. Both the parties have come out with well-made manifestos that cover a whole range of topics. In this analysis, I have tried to be as impartial as possible in my assessment when it comes to the poll pitches for employment. In this case, the BJP comes out as more balanced and set to continue on the path it has set itself in the last five years while Congress proposes an overhaul of the system on various fronts. Both parties have their strengths and weaknesses, like any other party. I would like my readers to decide after going through the manifestos and my series #ManifestoMusings, of which this is the second article. Mandate 2019 is a massive decision for the fate of the country, and as responsible citizens of the country, it is our duty to take an informed and well-thought-out position.

Every vote counts, every voice is important.

These are exciting times and I look forward to seeing another chapter being inked into the history of modern India on 23 May 2019 when a new government shall take office in India.

Jai Hind!

The post Job-Packed Or Gobsmacked: On Employment In The 2019 Manifestos appeared first and originally on Youth Ki Awaaz and is a copyright of the same. Please do not republish.

India is having its first national election in five years.

Partisanship in India is no better than in the United States. Probably much worse. Political party choices polarize families, friends, and whole communities, and every election season can be a very divisive time.

No wonder then that the US’ nearly 4.5 million Indian-Americans watch India’s elections with sharp eyes.

A recent episode on Indian-American Muslim comedian Hasan Minhaj’s show illustrated the nature of the diaspora’s interest in Indian politics. In a promo, he reveals his topic to Indian couples sitting at home. They are horrified: “Indian elections are a definite no-no.”

“Democracy is for people with power, people with muscle power and money power,” says one man. “It’s not for you and me.”

“There will be an accident,” says one woman. “You will be burnt to death. Be gone.”

“You cannot talk about Narendra Modi,” warns another woman.

Indeed, unless it’s something positive, then talking about Indian Prime Minister Modi can get people into real hot water. Last year in India, for instance, a high school teacher was arrested for writing on Facebook that voting for Modi is like “garlanding a dog”.

Talking about Modi in the US, meanwhile, is very controversial. The issue splits the Indian-American diaspora. One side believes in Modi and is devoted to advancing his vision for India. The other side believes Modi is a fascist leader with blood on his hands.

Nothing widens the divide more than the religious angle. Only about half of the Indian-American diaspora is Hindu. The other half is a diverse mix of Buddhist, Christian, Dalit, Muslim, Sikh, and so forth — or non-religious. Modi’s party is a religious nationalist party and he identifies as a ‘Hindutvavadi’ (supporter of Hindutva). The ideology teaches that all Indians are Hindus and non-Hindus are foreign to India.

Beyond differences of opinion, the diaspora is also split in how it is involved in the Indian election.

Those who oppose Modi often follow elections in India with great interest, and maybe even talk or write about them, but do little beyond. Those who support Modi organize rallies, training camps, and campaign events — in America. While one side alleges that Modi staged a pogrom, thousands of volunteers from the other side return to India to physically canvass for his political party.

Perhaps another reason that talking about Indian elections is controversial is because the Indian diaspora’s surpassing interest in the issue often slips into direct involvement — even to the point of serving as boots on the ground in India.

The opposition party, the Indian National Congress (INC), is just as guilty as Modi’s party, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), of attempting to organize direct involvement of Indian emigrants in Indian elections. Yet they cannot hold a candle to the success of the BJP in harnessing the diaspora. The Overseas Friends of BJP (OFBJP) provides the organizational structure underlying that success.

The OFBJP was launched in America in April 1992 to counter negative press.

Eight months later, in December, a BJP-organized crowd of 150,000 tore down a mosque in India. Their fervor was stoked by speeches from BJP elected officials and even the party president, who demanded that the government build a Hindu temple there instead. Razing the mosque provoked nationwide riots in which an estimated 2,000 Muslims were killed. In response, the opposition-controlled central government temporarily banned the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), a paramilitary involved in the violence.

The BJP, which was created by the RSS in 1980, responded to the scandal by establishing a strong international presence of trained party activists. Internationally, the OFBJP eventually expanded to nearly 40 chapters. In America, their membership is largely composed of U.S. citizens.

The OFBJP-US says its goal is to project a ‘positive and correct image of India’ in the West and ‘correct any distortions’ in media coverage. They work hand-in-glove with BJP leadership back in India. For years leading up to Modi’s 2014 election, OFBJP chief Vijay Jolly toured the U.S. to speak at diaspora rallies and meet American politicians.

“We need to touch base with as many among the diaspora as possible and to indoctrinate them with the BJP ideology,” Jolly says. Speaking in 2015, after the BJP won in India, he urged the OFBJP to be ‘expansionist’. He has since been replaced by Vijay Chauthaiwale as head of the BJP’s Foreign Affairs Cell.

Considering its 2014 levels, any expansion of the OFBJP-US would make its reach and potential for influence truly colossal.

Nationwide, it boasts 18 chapters in 13 states. In 2014, it reportedly had 4,000 members. It has an elected National Executive Committee of 10 people and a nearly 40-person National Council.

In 2013, over 1,000 people turned up to watch Modi deliver a live, televised address to the OFBJP-U.S.’s annual convention in Florida. When the BJP won India’s state elections in December 2013, the group organized victory parties around the country. In Houston, Texas, over 300 people showed up.

Then the OFBJP-US swung into high gear.

They had a three-pronged strategy. Organize phone-banks for Indian-Americans to call back to India and tell people to vote for the BJP. Finance a Modi victory fund. Travel back to India to put boots on the ground to campaign for the BJP directly. Like a sleeper cell waiting for orders, the group sprung into action in January 2014.

In Houston alone, a diaspora media outlet reports that 700 people “worked round the clock to motivate voters in India”. The key organizer was Ramesh Bhutada, who also happens to be Vice-President of the American chapter of India’s RSS paramilitary. Nationwide, then OFBJP-US President Chandrakant Patel said that thousands of activists were making 200 calls or more per day.

How much money OFBJP members actually donated to Modi’s victory fund is a difficult thing to determine. Yet the mass mobilization of U.S.-based BJP backers who went to India to canvass for Modi was widely reported.

By March 2014, Chandrakant Patel was personally leading a team of over 1,000 OFBJB-US operatives. Aside from promoting the party, some of them reportedly even ran polling booths. They remained in the country for the duration of the phased, month-long voting process.

Their hard work paid off. Modi was announced as the new Prime Minister on May 12. Over the ensuing weeks, the OFBJP-US hosted victory parties throughout America. One event in Atlanta, Georgia drew a crowd of 700. Others also drew hundreds.

Because of his human rights record, Modi was barred from visiting the U.S. in 2005. As the newly-elected executive of India, however, he was now free to travel. He soon made plans to do so.

To herald Modi’s arrival, Foreign Affairs Cell head Vijay Jolly again began touring the U.S. In September 2014, just four months after he was elected, Prime Minister Modi spoke to a crowd of nearly 20,000 in New York City. It was a publicity bonanza which enthused BJP backers all around America. For instance, diaspora media reports that Vijay Pallod, who campaigned for Modi in India, flew from Texas just to attend.

After 2014, the OFBJP-US continued to organize rallies, stage protests, and host tours by BJP elected officials from India, expand its membership, and train its activists.

The new OFBJP-US President, Krishna Reddy Anugula, estimates the group has a loose network of up to 300,000 Indian-Americans. They began mobilizing months ago in preparation for when polls open in India on April 11, 2019. Coordinated phone-banking is underway, activists are making hundreds of phone calls each, and putting in hours a day after work to support the Indian political party from America.

Anugula says that thousands of Indian-American operatives will travel to India to work until the phased elections end.

While these teams permeate India, trained activists in the U.S. are making a stir.

In February, after a local youth bombed a military convoy in Kashmir, the BJP blamed Pakistan and began agitating for war. As tensions soared between the two nuclear-armed powers, the OFBJP organized protests in at least six U.S. states to demand that India attack Pakistan. Signs said things such as “world hates Pakistan”.

They also began hosting Chai pe Charcha (Chat Over Tea) events. Chai pe Charchas have occurred in Washington, New York, Virginia, Michigan, Texas, and many other locations. One in Chicago on March 3 featured Sunil Deodhar, a BJP national secretary.

From America, they have also heeded the call of India’s Prime Minister.

Terming himself a ‘chowkidar’ (watchman), Modi declared in March, “Your chowkidar is standing firm and serving the nation.” He called on everyone working for India to say “Main Bhi Chowkidar” (I am a watchman). Obediently answering Modi, activists attending Chai pe Charcha events began publicly pledging to work for his re-election.

Most recently, at the end of March, over 400 activists gathered in California’s Silicon Valley for a conference featuring Kailash Vijayvargiya, a BJP national general secretary.

Thus, the OFBJP’s operational approach seems to follow this model. Embrace the political party line. Emigrate. Take up U.S. citizenship, which requires renouncing Indian citizenship. Spread the mother country’s party line to project a “positive” image in the adopted homeland. Cultivate diaspora interest in the party. Return to India — as U.S. citizens — to campaign for that party and instruct Indian citizens who to vote for.

Thus, every election season, the BJP harnesses the help of people who are dedicated to keeping the BJP in power in India despite having abandoned life in India themselves.

Elections in India conclude on May 19. Until then, the OFBJP promises to grow only more heavily involved. The impact of thousands of American boots on the ground in India remains to be seen.

It appears, however, that Indian-Americans organized by the BJP have already played a huge role in influencing Indian elections and are working to expand that role.

Perhaps that influence — some might call it interference — is one reason why, as Hasan Minhaj discovered, the topic of India’s 2019 General Election is no laughing matter for the Indian-American diaspora.

The post How India’s Ruling Party Mobilises Indian-Americans To Win Elections appeared first and originally on Youth Ki Awaaz and is a copyright of the same. Please do not republish.

In the recently concluded, the biggest, the most well organised Kumbh Mela ever; I got to be up close with the modern-day Hindutva brigade, and it was a lesson in Hinduism my parents never gave me.

I am a Hindu, a Brahmin at that, but being born in a family that always treated Hinduism more like a bunch of philosophies that were discussed and debated rather than an ‘ism’ a religion, I never felt like I was bound to any religion, ever. Going to a temple was optional, god, after all, was everywhere and in all of us- religious festivals were more about having fun with family and friends, god after all wanted us to be happy and make others happy- the temple in my house was home to all gods, Christ, Allah, Guru Nanak, they were all at power with Krishan and Shiv Ji, being a god after all was no one’s monopoly. It was this that I loved most about me being born in a Hindu family; I did not have to fight any regressive ideologies, there was no one talking about punishing homosexuality or adulterers, there was no part of the religion/ideology that was out of bounds for being questioned. And there was no such thing as a – good or a bad Hindu; there were liberated Hindus and the ones still stuck in the never-ending cycle of life and death.

In February this year, I was quite surprised to be invited at the Kumbh by the ‘Ganga Mahasabha’. Like most Indians, I too fantasised about going to the grand Kumbh Mela one day, being from a Hindu family only added to the desire. And here I was being invited for a talk to what was being called the most well organised Kumbh ever. The fact that I was to talk about my book ‘Pornistan’ and the impact pornography is having on India, made the whole thing almost too good to be true.

The Kumbh surpassed my expectations in how breath-taking and well organised it was. The colours, the positive energy, the overwhelming display of belief and faith, the dip in the chilled Ganga, the beautifully lit banks at night, and of course the opportunity to sit beside a Naga Baba and smoke some of the blessed green stuff, it was a dream come true.

At the Ganga Maha Sabha though, I was given a lesson on the trending philosophies of Hinduism. The Sabha was full of young and old men and women, who were well educated, smart and well spoken. They were articulating their thoughts on the subject extremely well, they were all on point with the current politics, and they all had strong views on a vision for India’s future.

The group had many long-time RSS workers, several prominent BJP members and some saffron wearing religious gurus. Through various talks and long private discussions with the members, I received the following lessons on being a Hindu that my parents had never given me:

‘Gautama the Buddha the one who made us soft’

True Hindu life was being lived a long, long time ago. Before Gautam Buddha came and corrupted the whole landscape with his softness. Before Buddha, that is about two thousand and six hundred years back, we Hindus were following the Gita as a way of life, and we were doing great, fighting invaders, having prosperous lives and all that other good stuff. “I hate Gautam Buddha” one animated speak shouted and a round of applause followed.

‘Ram Mandir is a done deal, and it is only the start’

The Mughal invaders had conquered big chunks of the Indian subcontinent, this I knew, it is a fact. What I did not know is, that building a ram mandir where once Babri Masjid was, should be a non-negotiable truth for Hindus and that my fellow Hindus have already started talking about the other potential sites where temples need to be rebuilt. The idea is to make the country look like a Hindu Rashtra again. The demolition of Babri Masjid is only the start!

‘Now is the time for us Hindus to unite and fight back. Brains and strength, both must be used’

Between light banter about the weather and things to see in Kumbh, the need for Hindus to unite and ‘fight’ kept coming up. We were losing our way; we had been oppressed and misrepresented for thousands of years, now was the time for the start of Hindu glory.

‘BJP/Modi don’t matter all that much’

What was possibly the most significant learning for me during those days with the Hindutva group was the lack of sycophancy for Modi or even BJP for that matter. Sure, they supported them both, but only because they were the only option, for the Hindutva brigade. In an ideal world, one of them said ‘Both the single largest parties in the country will be Hindutva parties. A lot like Mumbai, where two major parties BJP and Shiv Sena are both Hindutva parties.”

‘Taking over the Indian intellectual space’

“The current bunch of Indian intellectuals, visionaries, are obsolete. It’s time for Hindutva to spread to all spheres of modern India.” The fact that we humans are struggling to make sense of the exponentially changing world we live in was not lost on them. In fact, one of their primary goals for organising the event was to start building a forum through which Hindu philosophies can be spread amongst the youth of the country. Hinduism can and should guide the future course of India, is what everyone there agreed upon.

I have never felt the need to go to a temple and ring the dong for blessings. But being from a Hindu family, where discussions about Karma, Moksha, the cycle of life and death were common, I have felt less flustered when faced with the constantly changing world around me. I have been more open to different thoughts and opinions; I have been more open to the ideas of spirituality and the practice of meditation. I have resisted the urge to judge others and have felt the need to critically examine my own life and my own actions, which is what my parents taught me was at the core of the Hindu way of life.

If true Hinduism is everything I learnt at the Ganga Mahasabha, if I need to stop seeing the good in all religions, if I need to hate Buddha and Islam and all westerners and if I need to passionately want temples to be rebuilt where they once might have been, then I don’t want to be a Hindu. Then everything that I saw as good about being a Hindu disappears and being a Hindu starts looking exactly like being from any other dogmatic religion/belief system on the planet. I choose to follow what my parents taught me and I choose to oppose everything this new Hindutva brigade stands for.

Jai Hind

The post ‘Ram Mandir Is A Done Deal’: Lessons On Being A Hindu At The Kumbh Mela appeared first and originally on Youth Ki Awaaz and is a copyright of the same. Please do not republish.

At a time when religious polarization is threatening to derail democratic discourse, generations of Muslim families taking care of Kolkata’s last three standing Jewish synagogues – are serving as a sobering example of what communal harmony stands for.

For decades now, Beth El, Neveh Shalome and Magen David synagogues have been taken care of by four Muslim men from Orissa whose ancestors also worked at the same job.

I first got to know about it from Masood Hussain, the caretaker of Naveh Shalom, the oldest synagogue in the city – on a chance visit. Hidden behind rows of shops littered across narrow lanes, its faded yellow facade barely visible, I stood awkwardly outside the Neveh Shalome, until Hussain welcomed me in.

On meeting him, my first question to him was an obvious one, perhaps even a little silly. “Why do you work at a Jewish Synagogue?” I asked. “Why not?” he replied, “It is an honour to take care of someone else’s God.”

Hussain has been working at the Synagogue since 2014. He is the son-in-law of Rabul Khan, who is the third generation caretaker of the Magen David, one of the largest synagogues in Asia.

Beth El is taken care of by Khalil for more than 50 years now, Khalil’s two sons – Siraj and Anwar- have also decided to follow in their father’s footsteps.

“So many people express surprise that we work here. But the truth is, generations of my family have grown up inside these synagogues,” Hussain tells me.

Their job is to clean and maintain the synagogues. They stay in quarters allotted to them at the synagogue compound, and take care of the synagogues 24/7.

“The key (to the synagogue) stays with us. For generations, the Jews have kept faith in us, and we have never broken their faith. It’s almost like a blood relation between us,” Hussain says.

In Kolkata, Jews first arrived from Baghdad more than 200 years ago and established themselves as successful businessmen. When India gained independence – uncertain of their economic future due to talk of socialism and nationalization in the country – a few from the community started leaving. Others quickly followed as the Jewish community was family centred and tight-knit, leading to rapid movement of people, in the 1940s, ’50s and ’60s that ultimately led to destabilization of the entire community.

Once home to over 3000 Jews, Kolkata now has only about 23 members left. And while no Saturday prayer meets happen in these mosques, a few from the community occasionally visit the place. The synagogues were all built in the 1800s, but restored to their old beauty only in the last few years.

According to Jael Silliman, a Jewish resident of Kolkata who has put together a digital archive of the Jewish community in the city, there are several reasons for why Jewish families employed Muslims to take care of the synagogues.

“If you look closely, both Jews and Muslims have a common history because of the origins of our religions. In Kolkata particularly, Jewish families hired Muslim cooks since they came closest to the practices we follow. Like us, they ate only Halal meat. Our food habits too are actually very similar, so when we arrived in India, it was a natural choice that we wanted them to take care of our religious places,” she says.

“The synagogue is God’s home and so is the mosque. We don’t make a distinction between the two,” Hussain tells me.

Masood Hussain is clearly is a man of two religions – one that he practises and the other he is helping preserve.

The post How Generations Of Muslim Families Are Helping Preserve Kolkata’s Last Jewish Synagogues appeared first and originally on Youth Ki Awaaz and is a copyright of the same. Please do not republish.

Warning: This piece is about CBSE.
Second Warning: This is about a course to be introduced in CBSE schools. So, it can turn as horrible as the CBSE syllabus at some points.

I was going to elaborate on another issue that I have been planning to write on for a long time now. In the process of articulating the challenge of good training facing the youth today, I stumbled upon a news piece that transported me to the year of tenth boards of my life.

After the Board results were out, we began the academic ritual of stream selection. Our batch had been termed one of the finest batches ever. And so, to take that ‘legacy’ (euphemism for burden-of-good-performance) forward, most of us opted for Science Stream. Having attained what the Indian middle class calls the ‘Science take-able’ threshold of 90+, I was all set to join the coveted PCM with Comp. Sci. stream. It changed my life for the next two years.

I underwent a transformation that most other students of my group did. While I was jubilant on the idea of having become a ‘senior’, I was still making efforts at comprehending what was it that I had gotten myself into. While my chats and gossips had matured, I was still trying to come to terms with what the textbooks had wanted to communicate with me. In other words, Science stream was a disaster. I cursed myself every moment for having taken up a subject that only those with a genuine interest in becoming Engineers could study.

And oh, let me be very clear here. I was a confident ‘prospective’ engineer when 11th began, but a discouraged and hopeless one when I passed out of school. Back then, I blamed myself for the complete complete u-turn that my learning graph had taken after tenth. But when I look back today, I realise I was not the sole culprit. I realized that apart from the incomprehensible textbooks that had been designed for us, CBSE’s general approach towards Science education was totally flawed. And that is exactly what I wish to write about today.

Recently, CBSE announced that it will be introducing Artificial Intelligence at the level of 8th, 9th and 10th standard. At the very outset, I would like to congratulate the board for at least having thought about it at this juncture. This indicates that CBSE is indeed concerned about keeping their students in pace with the current times. AI is a field that is fast growing. It is literally in every sphere of our lives and will be amplified in its presence in the future.

So, a CBSE kid gaining acumen in the field would add to her overall personality.

Umm. May be not. And this is where my Science-story could give some evidence drawing insights from which, I must highlight the three major issues that I have to voice:

1. Mission Impossible: The Transition

The way you are taught things till tenth changes drastically during the final years of school. After explaining ‘Photosynthesis’ and a rote-learnt formula of ‘Snells Law’, you are suddenly expected to master the formula of Projectile Motion, its derivation, its explanation, etc etc. You are unable to tell which one is worse: Your learning graph or the movie direction of Jaani Dushman:Ek Anokhi Kahani: Awful is the word.

2. The Disguised Hierarchy

Hierarchy which none pays heed to. It is a known fact that coaching classes take precedence over school attendance for students. Many students commence their ‘dream IIT’ journey and appear in school only for the sake of either minimum attendance or the term examinations. Gradually, these coaching products, kind of, become the top-notch who score good not just at the coaching exams but also at the school ones. As a non-coaching student, I was often left wondering where their high scores came from. Moreover, the attention of the teachers went mostly to them whom they considered the face of the class. The declining marks of the other half of the class did not bother them. Naturally, neither the school nor the administration was concerned.

3. The Absolutely Incomprehensible Content

CBSE schools teach via NCERT textbooks. NCERT has the repute of giving the best books for forming basics and learning for competitive exams. Except, I ask, HOW? How as in just H.O.W.?

NCERT books have just no compatibility with the curriculum ever. As a ‘Central’ Board of Education, CBSE should focus on how to make things readable even for a beginner. But that is exactly what it fails to do. Apart from the total lack of a detailed explanation, NCERT books for Science expect you to know ‘many’ things in advance. And worse, if you have unfriendly teachers who throw the random ‘others can do it, why cant you’, you are left with nowhere to go. The content delivery in Science books is horrible beyond imagination. The text content and questions at the chapter-end are also greatly divergent at times which only adds to the misery of those who wish to self-study without any help of coaching or help classes.

CBSE has close to 20k+ schools in the country and each year many students pass out with its tag. It has a huge impact. Having said that, I must mention that I am totally worried about the quality of this impact. A major reason the CBSE marks rise so high every year is the rote-learning approach. You cannot expect to have a question even in the textbook, let alone in the examinations, that actually test your mental abilities. They only do your memorization skills. While such skills are absolutely important (Facts DO need to be memorized for any further analysis), the ability to deduce something of them is rarely tested.

People may oppose me on this, but the CBSE curriculum does not implement things in the right order. What the Board must realise is mere introduction of a course is not indicative of accelerated learning – a well-planned implementation might be. For example, in the case of getting AI incorporated in the syllabus, can the Board ensure that all the prerequisites to AI will be provided to the young minds in their initial years of school? Will the course introduced at that level be holistic enough for ALL students across the wide continuum of learning capabilities to grasp? Who will draft the textbooks? Would they be able to write as if they were actually sitting with the child to teach?

AI is not just about technology or conventional Science. It is a culmination of various sciences for pursuing which – knowledge of fields like linguistics, cognitive science, grammar, and many more is required. Will the Board plan to include all of this in its curriculum? In the ‘holier than thou’ approach, the curriculum refuses to go inter-disciplinary. As a person working in the field, I can say with great confirmation that the requirement of the current and upcoming decade in the field is to be greatly interdisciplinary. Moreover, such an approach must be advanced in stages, not be thrown on the face of students all of a sudden. However, given the disappointing background of my story, I am less sure that will happen.

I wish to see the day when NCERT or the prescribed textbooks take ample care of the kid’s concept clarity and no reference books are needed. I wish the board recognised that a major chunk of learners get so over shadowed by high scorers that they gradually gain invisibility, are rarely heeded and that many of them are unable to transition from low to high because they trust the system to the extent that they do not enrol in coaching classes (only to be disappointed later). Also, because they have already lost hopes of making a career in that field, they consider joining guidance classes a waste of time.

A multitude of talent is lost in the process. ‘Work where your passion lies’ is amazing, but have the authorities ever cared to nurture a potential passion? What if I told you that many passionate hearts are systematically coerced into believing that they were not meant for that field ever – that a prospective Engineer or Doctor or Architect was told to become something else because the syllabus seemed incomprehensible to her. I wish CBSE saw that courses are no guarantee of comprehension and that it must work vigorously on improving the style of communicating ideas to the students.

I do not want the same to happen to a prospective AI-scientist. AI must not become the new academic tyrant. It must become a friend. If nurtured well in the initial years, the skills could help craft a wonderful mind of the future. With good implementation and student-friendly books, this can always become a possibility. And with great hopes, I do wish to see it happen one day.

Cheers!

The post The Curious (Read Frustrating) Case Of A CBSE Student appeared first and originally on Youth Ki Awaaz and is a copyright of the same. Please do not republish.

The other day, we were reading The Lady of Shalott in our 19th-century poetry class when the discussion progressed to the allegorical meaning of the poem. It was important to understand the Victorian perception of art and it’s meaning to actually analyse the hidden meaning behind Tennyson’s poem. Though, it can be interpreted in several meanings owing to the excellent level of symbolism that the poet masters but it got me thinking about one of the less important meanings.

I see the poem as a deliberate yet ambiguous critique of the notion of art and females artists (poetesses, writers, authors) in the Victorian era. Art was supposed to be ‘dispassionate’ to cater to a certain kind of universality and timelessness. Victorian society wanted art to remain objective without the infringement of any kind of ideologies. It was as if you were reporting an event without your personal ideologies and bias, thoroughly objective and exactly as you see it. Art was supposed to be like journalism.

But, that is not exactly the major point behind writing this narrative. Like I said, the poem got me thinking and I realised that two centuries later, society thinks in the same way.

We have unbiased and emotionless art but biased and emotional media.

In a society where novels like The Subtle Art Of Not Giving A F**k and How To Win Friends And Influence People are bestsellers and Jane Eyre or The Great Gatsby are ‘ancient classics,’ what can one actually expect from people? Where did we go wrong when the former novels are considered art but the latter are merely emotional stuff?

Where did we go wrong when the media was continuously shouting for a war with Pakistan even though the consequences would be devastating? Where did the sensibility go? Oh, and with the election season coming up, either you are pro-Modi or you are anti-Modi (read anti-national).

My research on the ethics of media for a drama piece taught me that media is considered as the fourth pillar of democracy which shows all sides of a story. Where did we go wrong when a certain set of people only follow a particular media portal for its ideology and the others follow the opposite ideology? What happened to an unbiased piece? What happened to showing both positives and negatives, so that the viewers and readers decide for their own?

It is as if a fact is purchased by different media groups as per their requirements and in a way that their pieces satisfy the needs of their customer base. The company then uses the 10% of the bought fact and adds to it 90% of a secret formula to create a consumption-worthy news article. This is then served to us readers who directly borrow the ideology from the news piece and vomit it out on the internet. Facebook becomes a major platform for all this nonsense.

Honestly, it has been so long since I found an unbiased article/report on Facebook or the internet. As someone who writes, I feel it becomes our utmost important concern to provide a balanced piece. An article that doesn’t omit one side of the story based on either a conservative or a liberal point of view (media bias by omission), or an article that doesn’t use phrases like “experts believe,” “observers say,” and “most people believe” without referencing hyperlinks. This funnily reminds me of that famous Hindi idiom, “chaar log kya kahenge samaaj mein?” translating to, “what will people say?”

I really want to meet these four people, the experts, the observers and that crowd of people who believe your story. Either make me meet them or give me their certified statements. I won’t settle for any less.

On top of that, I am tired of people highlighting either the left or the right. As a reader, I would definitely enjoy opinions and actualities from both ideologies on a certain event or issue. I would definitely like my news just like my coffee, hot, fresh and balanced in flavour.

Stop believing that a particular ideology is always right, no pun intended, I swear. The world is complex, people are complex, the actions and motives behind them are complex. So, how can you expect the truth to be simple and one-sided?

I like my road map with directions of right and left marked clearly but I would really appreciate if my news is served without the bias. It is important to realise that the media is the fourth pillar of democracy and thus, is for the people, by the people and of the people. It shall thus, remain for the people and not for a particular political or monetary support.

Featured image for representative purpose only.
Featured image source: carol mitchell/Flickr.

The post “I Want My News The Way I Take My Coffee: Hot, Fresh And Balanced in Flavour” appeared first and originally on Youth Ki Awaaz and is a copyright of the same. Please do not republish.

‘Jobs’ is arguably the most debated four letter word. While the Indian economy has grown at a steady pace of over seven percent a year, the same cannot be said about employment generation in the country.

That we need to create more jobs is something all political parties largely agree on, even though they bicker about the data surrounding it. Where we also all agree is the fact that in the next 6 years, millions of people (over 20 crores to be exact!) will be in ‘bad jobs’ or even without them, if this crisis is not addressed. A larger job crisis is arriving, and we aren’t ready for it.

This imminent crisis, however, masks a connected crisis that affects anyone who depends on a salary, but that conversation often gets lost in the dry statistics and heated political rhetoric around jobs: the wage crisis.

Or in other words, the fact that most of us, and actually millions more make peanuts – not enough to make ends meet.

Paychecks Hardly Grow In India: Some Numbers

Yes, you heard that right. Most of us are actually not paid in proportion to the work that we put in. What’s more, this is not a new problem, or one that has been created by a single government.

In our country, low monthly incomes are a norm – pervasive across all states, and as a consequence, wage inequality remains high. Wage growth actually significantly trails economic growth in the country, if you carefully look through economic data of the country over the course of the last two decades.

While India’s GDP grew by four times between 1993-94 to 2011-12, real wages only doubled, according to ILO’s Living Wage Report. The sluggish growth has also translated to a rise in inequality and widened the economic divide between rural and urban India. To put that in perspective, in 2011–12, the average wage in India was about ₹247 per day, and the average wage of casual workers was an estimated ₹143 per day.

What makes matters worse is that it is the young and the educated who are at the receiving end of this. According to the State of Working India Report 2019, nearly 50 lakh people have lost their jobs between 2016 to 2018, post demonetization.

“India’s unemployed are mostly the higher educated and the young. Among urban women, graduates are 10 percent of the working age population but 34 per cent of the unemployed. The age group 20-24 years is hugely over-represented among the unemployed. Among urban men, for example, this age group accounts for 13.5 per cent of the working age population but 60 percent of the unemployed,” the report says.

If you believe that only a few people at the top are getting huge paychecks, think again. Because data suggests that we aren’t creating too many high paying jobs either. And even though labour productivity has risen in India, growth in remuneration has remained slow.

On average, 82% of male and 92% of female workers currently earn less than ₹10,000 a month, highlighting India’s drastic income inequality.

It’s Not Just HR Who Is To Blame

So, what is the reason behind India’s job and wage challenge? It is actually an intricate equation that requires balancing talent, skilling, bargaining power and geographic diversity, says Goutam Das, in Jobonomics, a book that tries to make sense of India’s impending job crisis.

“Skilling, sometimes, multi-skilling at all levels is the most effective way to fight the wage crisis and the coming job crisis -the crucial prefix before talent can be matched with demand. If the skilling anomaly isn’t corrected, job seekers will end up in the bad job trap. Skills spawn productivity, and productivity brings with it higher pay,” he writes.

In India, however, there is a caveat to this. The theory of higher productivity leading to better salaries can get twisted here because at any given time, there are always more workers who are qualified for any given job. When there are fewer jobs and more people, salaries automatically become the casualty.

Add that to the fact that the bargaining power of workers in India generally tends to be low, and that collective bargaining power of labour market institutions has been on a decline and it gets worse.

Wage changes are also a result of changes in the way of production. Over the course of the last few years, production has become more capital intensive or less dependent on labour in nearly every manufacturing industry in the organised and unorganised sectors. This is true, if to a lesser extent, for agriculture and services as well.

While technical know-how and increased use of machinery is a change that needs to be welcomed since it translates to increased productivity, in labour surplus economies like India, the enhanced productivity does not automatically translate to higher wages for employees.

Going into the future too, economists think that this trend will continue in India, as company owners will likely pocket any gains or benefits arising because of increased employee productivity, instead of passing them onto employees.

Any guesses what’s going to be the first casualty of this unstated policy? Your Increment.

The post The Real Reason Why You Will Not Get The Salary Hike You Want appeared first and originally on Youth Ki Awaaz and is a copyright of the same. Please do not republish.

I have often thought about the field of astrology.

How does one chart out a career in astrology? There aren’t any courses or exams – how does one know if they have a knack for it? I have finally found the answer.

Kalank, the latest release from Dharma Productions – is the entrance test for budding astrologers. They should be made to watch the film, and predict what is coming next. The film’s script is so predictable, that if you can’t guess the ending, the pundit should give you a ladoo and say, “Beta, B.Com kar lena.”

*

There are good films – that transport you and make you feel things. There are bad films – that make you laugh inadvertently. Then there are films like Kalank – the latest bullet point in Manish Malhotra’s impressive CV – that are simply lazy. They take themselves too seriously that there is no fourth wall to bang your head against.

Set in pre-partition India, it tells the story of a girl who is married off into a rich man’s family because the bahu is dying of cancer. “Mera pyar bikau nahi hai (My love is not for sale),” she says. And in the matter of one song, agrees to the marriage. Her husband is Aditya Roy Kapoor, and after the trauma of Aashiqui 2, is a stiff, sad man still in love with his ailing wife. His wife is Sonakshi Sinha who contracted a terminal illness in Lootera. To save time and effort, both the actors carry forward the same expressions.

Alia Bhatt is now in a loveless marriage and steps out of the palatial house and meets Zafar – a young Muslim man with an affinity for Set Wet Cool Hold Hair Gel. What follows is a love triangle so predictable, it could have been written by Pythagoras.

The story is based in Husnabad – which is an anagram for ‘A Husband’. Alia Bhatt has a husband, but she needs a ‘husnband‘, and is hence drawn to Zafar. Zafar is Stud Boy, who sleeps with the local women and fights CGI bulls on weekday matches for the Muslim Wrestling Federation.

Bas. Aur kya?

Pyar. Mohabbat. Ishq. Wafaa. Wafers. Dard. Pyaas. What follows is a three-hour Jashn-e-Rekhta that you hadn’t paid for. To bring in an authentic feel of pre-partition Pakistan, the writers pick words straight from Rapidex Learn Urdu in 3 Hours. The characters spout words like Aadab, Shadaab, Rooh Afza, Alif Laila for no reason whatsoever. Nobody in the films speaks normally to each other – they are playing Close Up Antakshari. Every line in the film is a dialogue. For eg.

“Hey! Where are you going?”

“Main uss makaam pe jaa raha hoon, jahaan aab-o-daana miley.”

“What will you have there?”

“Tashreef rakhenge. Chai peeyenge. Sutte ke dhuan mein khud ko jalayenge.” 

If the dialogues don’t make you apply for a gun license, there are the costumes. Shot on such an opulent scale, the film makes you wonder if India colonised Britain. Madhuri Dixit plays a generic Kathak-dancing sad woman who had her heart broken in Devdas. Her residence is supposed to be a brothel but looks like the childhood fantasy of Sanjay Leela Bhansali.

We are often told that Indian audiences like escapist cinema. But I have often asked myself – how escapist are we talking about here? That we need to see people with gelled hair and cities replace light bulbs with designer torches?

The film will obviously earn 500 crores and Jeff Bezos will jack off to it, but I’m shocked how most Indian reviewers are calling it a good film with arresting performances. The performances are the weakest aspect of the movie. If you gave these sets and budget to Nawazuddin Siddiqui, he would send you home a different person.

Varun Dhawan essentially does two kinds of movies – one where he shows his abs, and the other where he acts. The two categories are mutually exclusive and Kalank belongs firmly in the first category.

Alia Bhatt who is effective in most films, doesn’t seem like herself. It’s like somebody used Polyjuice Potion on her during the shoot of Raazi, and masqueraded as her on Kalank. Sanjay Dutt is wrapped in an expensive shawl, but he treats it like an Invisibility Cloak, walking around the sets without being noticed.

The other thing that bugs me about recent films is the use of Madhuri Dixit. I get it – she’s a great dancer. But do we have to make her dance in every film? In her introduction song, she is dancing. In the next scene, she is dancing out of happiness. In another, she breaks down in pain – and runs to her house and starts dancing! When Mithun and Mandakini were dancing to Dance Dance Dance Dance is Life, they were referring to Madhuri Dixit in Kalank.

It is only Kunal Khemmu who bothers earning his paycheque – the rest are participating in the annual play of The Karan Johar School of Filmmaking. An hour into the film, you don’t give a fuck anymore. It’s like watching National Geographic late in the night – you know the tiger is chasing the deer, but you don’t give a shit because you’re not connected to either tiger or deer.

Kalank is such a terrible, shallow depiction of Indian history, it will make even Shashi Tharoor go ‘What the fornication!’.

The post Kalank: A Love Triangle So Predictable, It Could Have Been Written By Pythagoras appeared first and originally on Youth Ki Awaaz and is a copyright of the same. Please do not republish.

भारतीय राजनीति में महिलाएं हमेशा से ही पुरुषों की टार्गेट बनती आयी हैं। हालिया उदाहरण जया प्रदा, प्रियंका गॉंधी और सोनिया गॉंधी हैं।इसमें बड़ा विवाद जया प्रदा को लेकर है। वैसे विरोधी पार्टियां हमेशा से एक-दूसरे पर कीचड़ उछालती रही हैं लेकिन हाल में कॉंग्रेसी प्रवक्ता प्रियंका चतुर्वेदी ने अपनी ही पार्टी में महिलाओं के सम्मान का मुद्दा उठाकर और इस वजह से पार्टी छोड़ने के उनके निर्णय ने हमें इस विषय पर गंभीरता से सोचने के लिए विवश कर दिया है।

प्रियंका ने अपने एक ट्वीट में कहा,

काफी दुखी हूं कि अपना खून-पसीना बहाने वालों से ज़्यादा कॉंग्रेस में गुंडों को तरजीह मिल रही है। मैंने पार्टी के लिए गालियां और पत्थर खाये हैं लेकिन इसके बावजूद पार्टी में रहनेवाले नेताओं ने मुझे ही धमकियां दी। जो लोग धमकियां दे रहे थे, वे बच गये हैं। उनका बिना किसी कार्रवाई के बच जाना दुर्भाग्यपूर्ण है।

Deeply saddened that lumpen goons get prefence in @incindia over those who have given their sweat&blood. Having faced brickbats&abuse across board for the party but yet those who threatened me within the party getting away with not even a rap on their knuckles is unfortunate. https://t.co/CrVo1NAvz2

— Priyanka Chaturvedi (@priyankac19) April 17, 2019

गौरतलब है कि पिछले दिनों राफेल मामले पर आयोजित एक संवाददाता सम्मेलन के दौरान प्रियंका चतुर्वेदी के साथ उनकी ही पार्टी के कुछ कार्यकर्ताओं ने बदसलूकी की। पहले तो उनकी शिकायत पर कार्यकर्ताओं को पार्टी से बाहर का रास्ता दिखा दिया गया लेकिन अब दोबारा से उनपर हुई अनुशासनात्मक कार्रवाई को निरस्त करते हुए उन्हें पार्टी में शामिल कर लिया गया है।

कितने कमाल की बात है ना कि एक तरफ तो हमारे जनप्रतिनिधि महिलाओं को सदन में 33 फीसदी आरक्षण देने की बात कहते हैं और दूसरी तरफ, चुनावी रैलियों में की गयी राजनीतिक बयानबाज़ी में महिलाओं को निशाना बनाया जाता रहा है। पिछले कुछ समय से उत्तर प्रदेश की रामपुर सीट से सपा प्रत्याशी आज़म खान द्वारा अपनी प्रतिद्वंद्वी भाजपा उम्मीदवार जया प्रदा के खिलाफ कथित रूप से बेहद व्यक्तिगत अभद्र टिप्पणी किये जाने को लेकर बवाल मचा है।

दूसरी ओर, हिमाचल प्रदेश के भाजपा प्रदेश अध्यक्ष सतपाल सिंह सत्ती ने राहुल गॉंधी के खिलाफ अभद्र भाषा का प्रयोग करते हुए उन्हें परोक्ष रूप से गाली दे डाली। जैसे-जैसे देश का चुनावी पारा ऊपर चढ़ता जा रहा है, नेताओं के बयानों का ग्राफ नीचे गिरता जा रहा है।

पूर्व में भी महिलाओं पर आपत्तिजनक टिप्पणी के मामले देखे गए हैं-

हालांकि यह पहली बार नहीं है, जब किसी नेता द्वारा महिलाओं को लेकर अभद्र टिप्पणी की गयी हो। पूर्व में भी कई ऐसे मामले देखने-सुनने को मिले हैं। पहनावे, रूप-रंग या बर्ताव को लेकर आम महिलाओं सहित महिला राजनेताओं पर पुरुष नेताओं द्वारा अश्लील, अभद्र और अमर्यादित टिप्पणयां की गयी हैं। उनके काम को पारिवारिक कर्तव्य और वंशवादी राजनीति के विस्तार के रूप में देखा जाता है। सवाल है कि आखिर महिलाओं को लेकर ऐसी अभद्र टिप्पणियां करने का मकसद क्या है? क्यों किसी का अपमान करने के लिए उसके घर की मां-बहनों को टारगेट बनाया जाता है?

समय, साल और सत्ता बदल जाती है। उनके साथ इनमें से कई औरतों के नाम भी बदल जाते हैं पर मानसिकता वही रहती है और बयानबाज़ी के ओछेपन का स्तर बढ़ता ही जाता है। कई अन्य स्तरों पर बदलावों के दौर से गुज़रती राजनीति आज राष्ट्रहित का धर्म नहीं, बल्कि शक्ति प्रदर्शन का खेल बनकर रह गया है लेकिन इसमें औरतों से आज भी यही अपेक्षा की जाती है कि वे वैसी ही रहें, जैसी कई वर्षों पहले थीं।

फिल्म, टीवी, खेल, रजवाड़ों आदि किसी भी क्षेत्र से क्यों ना आएं, वे सिर पर पल्लू रखें, अपने पति, पिता, ससुर या बेटों की मनमर्ज़ी से अपने निर्णय लें, उनके प्रति वफादारी दिखाएं, समझदारी नहीं।

ऐसी स्थिति में महिला उत्थान की बातें कितनी बेमानी सी लगती है ना। राजनेताओं के बीच संवाद का गिरता यह स्तर लोकतंत्र पर एक गहरी चोट है। आखिर देश की राजनीति कब महिलाओं का उचित सम्मान करना सीखेगी?

राजनीति पर परंपराओं का बोझ है हावी

प्रियंका गॉंधी के सक्रिय राजनीति में कदम रखने के बाद बीजेपी सांसद हरीश द्विवेदी ने उनके पहनावे पर कमेंट करते हुए कहा था,

प्रियंका दिल्ली में रहती हैं, तो जींस और टॉप पहनती हैं और जब क्षेत्र में आती हैं, तो साड़ी और सिंदूर लगाकर आती हैं।

दरअसल, भारतीय राजनीति पर हमेशा से ही परंपराओं का बोझ हावी रहा है। उस पर से भी बात जहां महिलाओं की आती है, तब तो कहीं से भी चूक होने की अपेक्षा ही नहीं की जाती। आज़ादी के 70 वर्ष बाद भी हमारी भारतीय संस्कृति में साड़ी पहननेवाली, लंबे बालों वाली, सिर झुकाकर चलनेवाली, धीरे बोलने वाली, मंद-मंद मुस्कुराने वाली, अपने पिता या पति की आज्ञा मानने वाली महिलाओं को ही ‘सुशील’, ‘संस्कारी’ और ‘चरित्रशील’ महिला माना जाता है।

जींस-पैट पहनते ही लोग उसे शक की निगाहों से देखने लगते हैं। उस पर से अगर वह अपने हक के लिए आवाज़ उठाने लगे, अपनी मर्ज़ी से ज़िन्दगी जीने लगे और अपने साथ हो रहे गलत को ‘गलत’ कहने लगे, तब तो लोगों को उसका कैरेक्टर सर्टिफिकेट जारी करने में भी देर नहीं लगती। इसी वजह से महिला राजनीतिज्ञों से भी यह अपेक्षा की जाती है कि वे हमेशा ‘संस्कारी महिला’ के इस आवरण में लिपटी रहें। वह भी आखिर इस देश का प्रतिनिधित्व करने जो निकली हैं।

राजनीति में महिलाएं अब भी हैं शो पीस

भारत की सक्रिय राजनीति को भले ही सीता और सावित्री चाहिए लेकिन चुनाव प्रचार के दौरान या फिर पार्टी टिकट देते समय उनके शो पीस इमेज को ही कंसीडर किया जाता है। इसके ताज़ातरीन उदाहरण में हेमा मालिनी, जया प्रदा, जया भादुड़ी, नगमा, रिमी सेन, इशा कोपिक्कर, उर्मिला मांतोडकर आदि हैं।

ये सारी महिलाएं भले ही बॉलीवुड की चर्चित या ग्लैमरस अदाकारा रही हों, बाकी राजनीति की समझ इन्हें कितनी है और ये उसे कितनी गंभीरता से लेती हैं, इसके बारे में आये दिन खबरों और अखबारों में पढ़ने-देखने को मिलता रहता है।

उदाहरण के तौर पर, फिल्म अभिनेत्री रेखा को वर्ष 2012 में राज्य सभा सांसद नामित किया गया था लेकिन अपने पूरे कार्यकाल के दौरान उन्होंने मात्र दो बार ही संसद में अपनी उपस्थिति दर्ज करवायी। ऐसे खूबसूरत चेहरों को पार्टी टिकट दिये जाने का बस एक ही कारण होता है और वह है, उनकी ग्लैमरस इमेज को भुनाना और उनके नाम पर वोट बटोरना।

दूसरी ओर, ऐसे चेहरों को भी आसानी से टिकट मिल जाता है, जो या तो किसी अपराधी और दबंग परिवार से ताल्लुक रखती हैं या फिर किसी पूर्व सांसद या विधायक की पत्नी अथवा बेटी हैं, जो जीतने के बावजूद ‘कठपुतली सरकार’ चलाने पर मजबूर होती हैं।

पार्टियां कहती हैं कि राष्ट्रीय राजनीति में महिलाएं आना ही नहीं चाहतीं लेकिन लगभग हर चुनावों में हम देखते हैं कि कई निर्दलीय महिला प्रत्याशी भी चुनावों में उतरती हैं और उनमें से कई जीतती भी हैं, तो भी उन्हें किसी पार्टी द्वारा सपोर्ट क्यों नहीं मिलता? राजनीति में महिलाओं की सबसे बेहतर स्थिति पश्चिम बंगाल में देखने को मिलती है, जहां की मुख्यमंत्री ममता बनर्जी ने तृणमूल कांग्रेस से करीब 30 फीसदी महिलाओं को लोकसभा चुनाव में प्रत्याशी बनाया है।

विरोध के बावजूद रही हैं कामयाब

देश के राजनीतिक परिदृश्य में शुरू से महिलाओं की मौजूदगी कम बेशक रही है लेकिन तमाम विरोधों के बावजूद महिलाओं में राजनीतिक चेतना का विकास तेज़ी से हो रहा है। उन्हें जब, जहां और जिस तरह से भी मौका मिले हैं, उन्होंने राजनीति के निचले पायदान से लेकर ऊपरी पायदान तक अपनी काबिलियत की छाप छोड़ी है।

देश की महिलाओं ने राष्ट्रपति, प्रधानमंत्री, मुख्यमंत्री, लोकसभा में विपक्ष की नेता और लोकसभा अध्यक्ष के साथ-साथ अन्य कई महत्वपूर्ण राजनीतिक पदों को सुशोभित किया है।

धीरे-धीरे ही सही पर तमाम विरोधों के बावजूद राजनीति में महिलाओं की भागीदारी बढ़ रही है लेकिन अभी भी उनकी संख्या को संतोषजनक नहीं कहा जा सकता है। संयुक्त राष्ट्र की एक रिपोर्ट के मुताबिक भारत जैसे देशों में यदि महिलाओं की भागीदारी इसी तरह से कम रही तो लिंग असंतुलन को पाटने में 50 वर्ष से अधिक लगेंगे। ऐसे में उनकी भागीदारी को बढ़ाने और निर्णय प्रक्रिया में उन्हें शामिल करने के लिए व्यापक स्तर पर अभियान चलाये जाने की ज़रूरत है।

The post प्रियंका चतुर्वेदी ने महिला सम्मान के मुद्दे पर कॉंग्रेस छोड़ा appeared first and originally on Youth Ki Awaaz and is a copyright of the same. Please do not republish.

The year 2014 was not only a so-called “political revolution” in the history of modern India, but was also a theatrical benchmark of sponsored chaos. The electoral outcome in May 2014 came with an unseen cost (Hindu Nationalism), which led to systematic deflation of media freedom and freedom of expression. The impact of this process has credibly affected the libertarian attitude of journalism houses.

Hindu Nationalism is a euphemism for Saffron Terror, reflecting the socio-political thought of the upper caste and economic statism of the current government led by BJP.

The current status of the media freedom enjoyed by the Democratic Republic of India is internationally ranked at 138, just one rank above the Islamic Republic of Pakistan (139), out of 180 nations, as compiled by the RWB (Reporters without Borders). Since 2002, on the global level, RWB measures media freedom enjoyed by the journalists on the following parameters: a) level of pluralism, b) media independence environment, c) self-censorship, d) transparency, e) legal framework, and f) quality of the infrastructure that supports the production of news and information.

Before the rise of Hindu Nationalism in 2014, India ranked at 136. The former so-called secular government (before 2014) was not so good in enriching the quality of media freedom either. In today’s epoch, it is commonly understood that the growth of Hindu Nationalism has systematically led to another debacle and assault on media freedom of the journalists. The current government has proactively failed in scorning, diminishing and condemning the existence and emergence of ‘spiral of silence’ in the public sphere, especially the media.

Prolusion

The strength of democracy is dependent upon abundant [unregulated and unchecked] production of [responsible and accountable] liberties. Without the freedom to think, speak and act, democracy generates ‘road to serfdom’ in its system. There is a thin line between democracy and dictatorship, and it all depends upon the quantity and volume of statism in the social system of an economy. In this context, the Indian economy is experiencing a bizarre and unusual attitude among the pillars of so-called democracy. This article does not favour the present status of nationalism; the nationalism trickled down is empirically showing how the cultural marriage between the spirit of nationalism and axioms of Hindutva is turning our liberties upside-down.

As long as this trend is tolerated, obeyed, promoted and undebated or unquestioned, in the current epoch, the political fraternity is likely to push down the ranking of India’s free speech from 138^th to 139^th by the next year? In the last two years (2015-2017), India’s global rank on free speech index – as measured by RWB (Reporters Without Borders) platform – has fallen from 136^th to 138^th. This downsizing is not a good manifestation of media governance, constituted by the aptitude and attitude of the current government. Nationalism (aka Jingoism) has found its solace in Hindutva since 2014, also understood as ‘Hindu Nationalism’, has motivated people to fear the government and not vice-versa.

“Pakistan Zindabad, haan?” I can’t tell what got me scared more, his bigotry or ignorance… I wanted to tell him that I am not one of those who shouted the stupid slogans in JNU; am a journalist here to cover the proceedings.” — Akshay Deshmane, a journalist with The Economic Times, assaulted by ‘nationalist’ lawyers in Patiala House court last year.

Nationalism is legitimate and sensible as long as the government fears the people. There is no coherence in embracing nationalism; ‘sense of belongingness’ is a voluntary spirit by nature. To compel people to act in a defined way debauches the feature of nationalism and ‘freedom to choose/act’, in the first place. The cultural alteration of the said spirit by the machinery of Hindu Nationalism reminds me about the rise of Nazism in Germany. The utility of judgmental terms like ‘anti-national’, ‘urban Naxal’ and beef-eater is in rampant stage against the ones who disagree, disobey or dissuade with the present policies, character and narratives of the current government. Journalists, who ask or raise right questions or post uncomfortable facts, in today’s post-truth century, are trolled [on social media] or intimidated with the legal repercussions by the cultural activists of this government.

Secularism (secessionism) between nationalism and Hindutva is essential before Indian economy compels our liberties to walk the saffronized path of Orwellian Dystopia. It is widely known that Sangh Parivar (“organizational family of RSS, BJP, VHP and Bajrang Dal”) has its roots in last-cum-present century confrontation between colonial Europeans and Indians who yearned for a national identity of their own. They are actively propagating for something on the model of a Western blood-and-soil nationality, with especially Hindutva characteristics, with which to stand against their foreign rulers, both British (Christian) and the Islamic dynasties that preceded them. This family’s 20th-century godfather could be a so-called ‘atheist’ named Vinayak Savarkar, who wrote a pamphlet called “Hindutva: Who is a Hindu?” in 1928.

“Things have nonetheless deteriorated on Mr. Modi’s watch. This government is particularly ruthless about cutting off access to reporters it deems unfriendly. The BJP also appears to at least tacitly encourage social-media lynch mobs that go after any journalist seen to be stepping out of line. No other major political party appoints trolls to responsible positions.” – Sadanand Dhume, writer and columnist, wrote this in The Wall Street Journal, in July 2017

A U.S. Congressional report (September 2018) has claimed, as it warned that social media platforms provide “both tacit and overt sanction” for rising incidents of “majoritarian violence” in India, that Hindu nationalism has been a rising political force in India in recent decades, “eroding” its secular nature.

In its report, the Congressional Research Service (CRS) — an independent and bipartisan research wing of U.S. Congress — mentioned specific areas of alleged religiously-motivated repression and violence including cow protection vigilantism and perceived assaults on freedom of expression. The report, titled ‘India: Religious Freedom Issues‘, said: “Religious freedom is explicitly protected under its Constitution. Hindus account for a vast majority (nearly four-fifths) of the country’s populace. Hindu nationalism has been a rising political force in recent decades, by many accounts eroding India’s secular nature and leading to new assaults on the country’s religious freedom.” Taking a cue from this report, few journalists who have not compromised with the statism of the current government have faced insults, sexual harassment, right-wing trollers and last-but-not-least the killings.

As it was seen, in February 2018, finance minister Arun Jaitley drew a sharp rebuke from liberal onlookers and critics of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) when he argued that freedom of expression should be subordinate to upholding the sovereignty of the nation. He has failed to draw a thin line in comprehending that sovereignty of the nation is not above the constitution of Hindu Nationalism. In this regard, India Freedom Report (2017), published by media watchdog The Hoot, spoke of “an overall sense of shrinking liberty not experienced in recent years”. It counted 54 reported attacks on journalists, at least three cases of television news channels being banned, 45 internet shutdowns and 45 sedition cases against individuals and groups between January 2016 and April 2017.

“India is going through an aggressive variant of McCarthyism against the media,” said Prannoy Roy, co-founder of NDTV, India’s first private news channel.

Reuters, in its news report on 8^th April 2018, had reported how Indian journalists are intimidated and ostracized if they criticize Prime Minister Modi and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). “At least three senior editors have left their jobs at various influential media outlets in the past six months after publishing reports that angered the government or supporters of Modi’s Hindu nationalist BJP, according to colleagues,” Reuters reported.

To add fuel to the fire; the first quarter of 2018, according to The Hoot report, “has seen three killings and 13 attacks on journalists, defamation cases that came to trial, a sedition case against a journalist and a clear push by both state and central government and the judiciary, through regulatory policy as well as judicial orders, to curb free speech”. Besides, it said that there were also around 50 instances of censorship, and more than 20 instances of suspension of Internet services, as well as the takedown of online content.

The investigative report on “state of media freedom” from January 1 to April 30, 2018, reveals that a range of actors, from politicians, businesspersons, members of Hindu right-wing organisations, the police and paramilitary forces, government agencies like the film certification board, the Union Information and Broadcasting Ministry, different state governments, lawyers and even media organisations, have acted to protect the sanctity of Hindu Nationalism at the cost of freedom of expression.

Spiral of Silence (SOS)

Originally proposed by German political scientist Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann in 1974, Spiral of silence is the term meant to refer to the tendencies of people to remain silent when they feel that their views are in opposition to the majority view on a subject. The theory posits that they remain silent for a few reasons:

1. Fear of isolation when the group or public realizes that the individual has a divergent opinion from the status quo, and,
2. Fear of reprisal or more extreme isolation, in the sense that voicing said opinion might lead to a negative consequence beyond that of mere isolation (loss of a job, status, etc.)

Hindu Nationalism has almost produced this SOS feature in the Indian ecosystem of media. Directly or indirectly, it has created or reinforced when someone in the perceived opinion majority speaks out confidently in support of the majority opinion, hence the minority begins to be more and more distanced from a place where they are comfortable to voice their opinion and begin to experience the aforementioned fears.

As it is evidently known that the health of Hindu Nationalism is sustain-ably dependent upon the uncritical distribution of SOS in the system, especially the journalism sector. From assaulting the views of dissent to religious polarization, freedom of speech has become a costlier and unaffordable factor in today’s regime.

Examples of SOS include:

In the conflict-ridden state of Chhattisgarh, the state police arrested four journalists within the span of one year alleging they were Maoists and working against the state.

In Tamil Nadu, news publications have seen over 200 cases of defamation against them in 5 years, especially under the late chief minister J. Jayalalitha’s government.

In October 2016, Kashmir Reader, a Srinagar-based English daily was banned by the government.

In Delhi, an attempt was made to take NDTV India (the Hindi news channel of NDTV or New Delhi Television) off-air for a day for ‘irresponsibly’ covering the attacks on an army base in Pathankot.

Politicians have been accused of promoting a culture that prevents questioning of public institutions, particularly steps taken in the name of national security. Minister of State for Home Affairs, Kiren Rijiju went as far as saying that people should stop asking questions: “First of all we should stop this habit of raising doubt, questioning the authorities and the police,” Rijiju told journalists. “This is not a good culture.” He was responding to questions being raised around circumstances in which Madhya Pradesh police shot dead eight under-trials who escaped from a central jail.

The targets of a wave of threats that began on 14 September include Deeksha Sharma, a journalist with the news website The Quint, who received several messages threatening her with rape and murder after she called out a rap video as misogynist. One of these messages, written in Hindi and sent to her by WhatsApp on 17 September, referred to Gauri Lankesh, a woman journalist who was brutally murdered on 5 September. “Why was Gauri Lankesh killed?” the message said. “Because she was a journalist (…) because Gauri used to write against the Modi government (…) She was anti-nationalist and anti-Hindu. Now, if anyone in this country dares to write anything against Modi or his party, they will not be spared. They will be eliminated.” Abhay Kumar, a journalist with the Asian News International news agency, received a similarly threatening message the same day from a phone number that has been unreachable ever since. It attacked all those who criticize Modi’s Hindu nationalist party, Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), and its paramilitary wing, the RSS. At least two of Sharma’s fellow journalists at The Quint received death threats from 17th to 20th September in 2017.

Mohammad Ali, The Hindu newspaper’s correspondent in Uttar Pradesh, received threatening calls from two different numbers on September 20.

Debobrat Ghose, a reporter for the Firstpost website, received the same threatening message three times from different numbers on 21 September. The same thing happened to NDTV’s Sonal Mehrotra Kapoor.

The interviews conducted by RSF suggest that this is not an exhaustive list of journalists who have received death threats. “This wave of threats is indicative of a climate that no longer allows the use of press freedom in India,” said Daniel Bastard, the head of RSF’s Asia-Pacific desk. “Since Narendra Modi became prime minister in 2014, journalists have repeatedly been the targets of threatening campaigns orchestrated by nationalists, campaigns that can lead to death, as we saw last month. The government must demonstrate its support for the targeted journalists and clearly condemn the hate messages they are receiving.”

Gauri Lankesh was the first of two journalists to be murdered in 2017. The second was Shantanu Bohwmick, who was beaten to death while covering a nationalist demonstration on 20 September. As journalist Swati Chaturvedi revealed in a recent book, the BJP has for the past three years been developing an army of millions of trolls called ‘yoddhas‘ (warriors) by Modi. Their job is to use social networks to attack journalists on the BJP hit list, calling for them to be raped or murdered. Instead of condemning these messages, PM Modi follows the trolls on Twitter and even received some of them at his official residence.

Kishorechandra Wangkhem, a journalist from Manipur, was arrested under the National Security Act for speaking against BJP on his personal social media account. The draconian National Security Act allows the administration to detain people merely under the presumption that they could do something detrimental to national security. It also denies them access to a lawyer or a hearing before a court of law. Later on, he was charged under sedition. He was released a few days back.

The travesty of civilization under Modi government is that the cultural development under the constitution of Hindu Nationalism is equating Modi with the sovereignty of India, otherwise, why would activists and journalists face “sedition charges” for refuting or criticizing BJP government of Hindu nationalism?

Ratiocination

I have received ‘feedback’ in my professional (academic) life for my views on Modi government, Hindu Nationalism and Saffron Economics, from the respective course coordinators of a renowned media as well as a management institute based in Mumbai, in September 2018. Read my story here.

This trend is logically unacceptable or contemporarily unsurprising if one happens to be a staunch supporter of critical consciousness, freedom to think and personal liberty. Other than pauperisation of media freedom, academic freedom is also in grave danger.

Ceteris Paribus; if media freedom is legislated as per the whims and discretion of the cultural policies of any government (not just the present one in power) then it is a tragedy of our civilization to offend and condescend our natural right to think, speak and act. Modernization of any civilization is incomplete without limiting the government interventionism in our social system. Media freedom, please note that, is not only about freedom enjoyed by the journalists. It also encompasses the liberties enshrined on the choices of citizen journalists; social media account holders or general audience. Any act that we consensually do, with intent to transmit information or message to the decoders, is an act of journalism. Communication is the most important necessity in our lives. If it is free from the unconstitutional shackles of cultural machinery (Hindu Nationalism) and ‘draconian’ press laws, mankind in India would be able to uplift itself from the statism of mastery-slavery agencies.

Before the media personnel endeavour to liberate people from the matrix of ‘false’ information, the burden of proof is also on the media system to stay libertarian against any cultural or legal challenges. If their organisational commerce is simply about displaying and enforcing the views of the current government on the audience or layman individuals, it is ‘not journalism’ but ‘propaganda’ (public relation stunt) out there. Intimidating or expropriating media freedom also has a cyclical effect on other genres of liberties.

“Do not tread on anyone” – Christopher Gadsden, US Revolutionary, in 1775

The post Impact Of Hindu Nationalism On Media Freedom And Freedom Of Speech appeared first and originally on Youth Ki Awaaz and is a copyright of the same. Please do not republish.

This Indian election marks a celebration of democracy that begins as soon as the election dates are announced. Usually, when there are elections scheduled, political parties improve governance institutions and develop infrastructure in order to satisfy the vote bank and garner public confidence.

This particular election season, it is different. The essence of a formidable opposition is lost behind the facade of false media propaganda. Especially at a time when India ranks 138th in the World Press Freedom Index. Several decisions taken by the government including, but not limited to, the A-SAT launch and the attempted pre-emptive attack on terror bases in and around Pakistan, have all been magnanimously misconstrued by the public because of their representation in media.

Secondly, the role of identity-based politics has seen increasing growth in recent years, especially with the rise of Narendra Modi in power. His ability to bring together religion and the political structure of our nation is unparalleled. There could not have been another person who could possibly, with this much vigour, change the shape of the Indian polity from a loose secular model envisaging upon a journey of internationalism and expansion of diplomatic interests to a pre-colonial model of ‘segregate and scene-create’ similar to the policies as espoused by Lord Curzon during the reign of the British East India Company. The common mass cannot see effort from the government to provide any retreat from such communal tensions that unseeingly keep growing with the passage of time. I argue, if Modi does get re-elected this time, India may just become a nation for the Hindus, by the Hindus and with the Hindus, as also stated by the youngest BJP candidate Tejasvi Surya, who is contesting from Bangalore South; depriving the major chunk of minority faiths the very essence of religious freedom our comprehensive Indian Constitution provides us with under Articles 25-28. 

In the entire Kashmir disposition, the sheer lack of political will to find a sustainable settlement and form a government is a mere amalgamation of the cultural shocks the region and its inhabitants have been facing over the ages and our governments’ failed attempt and strong-arming the public. Sometimes, with the use of violent unconventional shelling techniques and legislation that direct the proverbial middle finger to any and every human right obligation we are granted as, as a responsible citizen of this proud glorious nation.

The communal objectives of our government are showcased in broad daylight through the unfortunate use of inhumane violence, sometimes sexual abuse and torture. These cases of lynchings are unfortunately far too common in today’s emerging India, and definitely cannot be ignored. The historical antecedents of communal riots sparking off from mob unrests taking the shape of an outright civil war or at least a prolonged period of distraught and disharmony have been replaced in modern times, by these segregated cases of mob lynchings. The essence of it has however continued to remain one of the deterministic examples of the communal disharmony within India. The media, behind the veil of silence, allows these hard truths about our government to pass off on as rational mis-happenings that we the people aren’t empowered enough to deal with. The very Preamble of our Constitution itself calls us secular, but we cannot hold a single dialogue on religion and communalism without the imagery of a cow being dragged in or a passing reference to the metaphysically misconstrued ‘Mandir’. 

In today’s India, it is one thing to be a farmer – fighting for survival every day without a guarantee of a meal for the next day; and another, to be a member of Parliament from Maharastra, Gopal Shetty, and believe it is in fashion for farmers to commit suicide due to their gross economic deprivation. I mean, you’d want to believe that the government and the law will represent both such individuals with equal eyes. But, it is far from the truth. While individuals like Gopal Shetty will continue contesting elections, our voices will continue to remain insignificant as we call out the perpetrators. To further this discontent, our government is also upholding critical information about the rate of such farmer suicides, and deaths related to agriculture in general. How low can the government go? Will we still let thew grow roots into our democracy until they require chemical pesticides to be uprooted?

There also exists another conjecture the existing political paradigm in India, that India needs a remarkable shift in. The very fact that our government does not have any definite educational criteria for he who represents us at the helm of democratic affairs. A literal chaiwala could be our Prime Minister and no one would notice. People would label him a chowdikaar once in a while and everyone would just sit and nod to his security advice. Don’t get me wrong, I am not saying it is but, it is what it is. Should we not outrage? 

In other words, we represent the Indian Prime Minister synonymously with Narendra Damodardas Modi. I argue, we should not. The Indian Prime Minister is not Modi. Although, Modi may be for some the ideal Indian Prime Minister. Modi is who he is, to us, because his actions and his persona has been glorified to us in any form of content we consume. It is our perception of the Prime Minister that has granted him his unsaid legitimacy from any form of public accountability. I mean, he hasn’t even held a single press conference in the nation after he came to power, has he? So let us just agree the next time we read that BJP is in fact the party to field the most number of criminally charged as political representatives of our will, granting them access to authority and the resources of our nation. Because the first step to disrupt the status quo one needs to acknowledge that the status quo needs to changed. In this case, the status quo is in shackles of conservatism and excess historical baggage of the long lost Indian heritage and it is urging to break free and fly into the waves of tomorrow, breathe in the future, walk in arms with its like.

The image of Modi as the ideal Indian Prime Minister has been brought back from the old mythical age of saffron-clad Hindu sages, with its own weapons of mass destruction in- Hindu nationalism and political adventurism. What is worse is that he had his own warriors who helped him drive his chariot into this helm of democracy, a new age world where chariots can be decimated by unseeable agents from remote locales. He has successfully managed to bring back populism into Indian politics with his strong affluent oratory, affectionate personality traits, similar to the Nehruvian ages but, with little relevant effect, also similar to the Nehruvian era itself. Modi has taken his opportunism to another level with the alleged politicisation of the armed forces to score brownie points over an already lackadaisical opposition lead by the Congress under the ‘[f]able’ leadership of Rahul Gandhi.

Modi, Sir, the Army is the ‘Indian’ Armed Forces and not your own. You have been given a position of responsibility as the Commander of our Armed Forces by virtue of the elections we chose you through. If we the people can vote you to power, we can take you off from it too. The army is the Indian Army and will always remain independent of the politics of a party no matter which colour clad the leader of it might wear. This effect, however, has not been the result of an overnight cause but, rather a long and sustained period of corrupt hegemonic policies undertaken by the previous governments. And, now with a month to go, with the same question to answer, if we choose to: Mother, should we trust the government? Most of us will not and choose to remain nonchalant.

This election, vote only after very close scrutiny of your local contestants irrespective of what colours they might dawn. This election, do not vote for a Prime Minister, vote for a government, #VoteforIndia.

The post This Election, Do Not Vote For A Prime Minister, Vote For A Government appeared first and originally on Youth Ki Awaaz and is a copyright of the same. Please do not republish.

In July 2018, Ranbir Kapoor stated in an interview, “I don’t make any political statements because I don’t follow politics. Politics makes no difference in my life. I’m not at the brunt of anything. I live a luxurious life. I don’t have water or housing problems. I don’t have any issues, so who am I to comment on politics?”

Well, good for him but not everyone lives a luxurious life in this country.

Many people around us claim to be apolitical. If you ask them about their views on politics, you’ll hear statements which are synonymous to, “I don’t like politics”,  “Indian politics is a mess, don’t want to be a part of it” or “Why should I care?”. But the moment they cross a dirty street they will complain about the garbage on the road, they see a beggar and they will question the existence of poverty, they hear about violence and they will tweet, condemning it, sitting in their comfortable homes, where there is fresh water 24×7, there is electricity  throughout the year and all the amenities  that one can think of.

But no, they are not political, they do not like politics.

Being political is not a trend, it is not “mainstream”, it is extremely important.

Being political does not mean that you have to be pro-government or anti-government, being political just requires you to take a stand, whatever it may be, take a stand, there are real issues that require people to talk about it, to have an opinion.

If in the 1900s, Bhagat Singh, Rajguru, Sukhdev and many more like them would have declared themselves to be apolitical on the pretext of politics being messy and the system skewed, then today we would not be having the privilege of calling ourselves apolitical when we are asked for opinions on national matters.

Being apolitical is a privilege, specifically a class privilege. Not everyone has this privilege, the privilege of being disengaged, the privilege of being lackadaisical. An urban poor will never say that he is not political, nor will you hear a rural person say so because unlike Ranbir Kapoor and others like him around us, they are at the brunt of things and also have water and housing problems. 

But is being truly apolitical possible?

Politics is not just about partisan politics.

Yes, voting for a party (or not) is definitely a political act and an act of responsibility, after the 2014 elections there has been a major political awakening in India but it should not take an election or a socio-economic tremor to wake people up from their so-called ‘apolitical trance’.

Every choice you make is political, whether you call yourself apolitical or not. The mode of transport you use is a political choice you are making; public transports, construction of roads are municipality/government initiatives, buying a house is a political choice; your house might be standing on a deforested land or might have led to displacement of communities, marriage is a political choice; whether it is an inter-caste marriage, an interracial one or the same gender one, anything out of the norm, faces immense backlash and bias, the political atmosphere around you determines who you marry, it is an outcome of systemic oppression or upliftment of certain sections and so is something as self-indulgent as shopping in a mall; almost all industries have political linkages so you are indirectly financially endorsing them. People tend to think of their choices in a small and narrow ecosystem which just consists of them and their close ones in a small bubble. But you are a part of a larger system where the services you avail are indeed an outcome of a political arrangement, they have not appeared magically out of anywhere.

Given that every single decision of yours is inevitably political and has political consequences, is calling oneself apolitical logical at all?

You may not be on the roads, sitting for dharnas and protesting against any kind of injustice but you are a political being, born into a system where every act of yours political. You are either actively political or passively but being apolitical is not a choice nor is it a possibility.

In such a situation is it not better to take advantage of the political person within you to actively speak out, to engage, to learn and most importantly have an opinion?

It is not a proletariat characteristic to be political, it is a human one. The elite may not be at the core of issues or at the brunt of things but living in a fool’s paradise of apoliticism and still making political choices unconsciously has an impact on the political society one lives in and that is something to be taken care of.

If nothing, then we owe it to the men and women who sacrificed their lives fighting for this country in a hope that the youth would carry their legacy, that each one would be political, fearlessly and unapologetically, that each would take a stand and fight for what one believes in for the country.

“Ab bhi jiska khoon na khaula,

Woh khoon nahi paani hai,

Jo desh ke kaam na aaye woh bekaar jawani hai”

– Chandrashekhar Azad

The post Every Choice You Make Is Political, Whether You Call Yourself Apolitical Or Not appeared first and originally on Youth Ki Awaaz and is a copyright of the same. Please do not republish.

The Ministry of Environment and Forests (MOEF) in March 2010, keeping in view the ecological significance of the Western Ghats and the possible impact of climate change, constituted a 14-member Western Ghats Ecology Expert Panel (WGEEP) to initiate the process of demarcating ecologically sensitive areas (ESAs) in the Western Ghats region. Chaired by revered ecologist Madhav Gadgil, a key mandate of the panel was to assess the current status of the ecology of the Western Ghats region, demarcate the areas that are to be labelled as ecologically sensitive under the Environment Protection Act, 1986, and make recommendations for the conservation, protection and rejuvenation of the region.

The panel submitted its final report in 2011 and it concluded that the entire Western Ghats region be designated as an Ecologically Sensitive Area (ESA). Within the ESA, it demarcated the regions into three levels of ecological sensitivity—Ecologically Sensitive Zone (ESZ) 1, 2 and 3 (ESZ1, ESZ2 and ESZ3). The Panel proposed regulatory norms and promotional activities fine-tuned for the particular ESZs.

This report when published, met with a great deal of criticism, especially and mainly from powerful lobbies, catholic priests, lucrative business interests of those engaged in the quarry, construction, mining industries etc. Politically motivated rumours fed fears to thousands of farmers that they would be stripped off of their lands and displaced, and their daily lives would be affected.

In 2012, the then environment Minister Jayanthi Natarajan constituted a High Level working committee under Kasturirangan to “examine” the Gadgil committee report in a “holistic and multidisciplinary fashion…” and more subtly to provide a diluted version of the Gadgil report.

The High Level working group headed by Kasturirangan did away with the graded approach in terms of ecological sensitivity and classified the Ghats region as comprising cultural and natural landscapes. The natural landscape was about 60,000 sq. km or 37 percent of the Western Ghats region and as per the committee, represented “a more or less continuous band of natural vegetation”, “with very high or high biological richness, low fragmentation and low population density.” It was only this natural landscape comprising 37% that the committee identified as ESA. The ESA identified by the Kasturirangan committee thus covered 37% of the Western Ghats or about 60, 000 sq. km. Later, the Environment Ministry issued a draft notification, demarcating an area of 56, 285 sq.km in the Western Ghats as ESA. This was less than 59,940 sq.km recommended by the Kasturirangan committee.

Anthropocentric Values

If I were to question you about what obligations do you have concerning the natural environment and you would simply answer that we, as human beings, will perish if we do not constraint our actions towards nature, then this ethic is considered to be ‘Anthropocentric’. An anthropocentric outlook is one which regards humanity as the centre of existence. A simple example would be refraining from hunting a particular breed of fish to extinction as none would be available for our consumption in the future. Hence, hunting must be stopped as interests of our fellow humans and ours are at stake.

The fundamental anthropocentric assumption is that only human beings can have direct moral value and that we can value other natural things only in relation to human purposes and goals. It is a belief that value is human centered and that all other beings are means to human ends.

Given the focus on human values and interests, anthropocentrism is widely considered as a key cause of environmental destruction.

In the present case, adopting recommendations of Kasturirangan committee and not Gadgil panel can certainly be seen as a decision guided by anthropocentric motivations. Privileging our own welfare and promoting interests of our species at the expense of the interests or well-being of other species or the environment, this by its very definition is the anthropocentric ethic.

However, I wish to argue that while we humans are the visible agents of environmental destruction, referring our behaviour as ‘anthropocentric’ conceals the seldom admitted fact that we cannot talk about the whole of humanity in such generalised terms.

It is implausible to say that those doing harm to the environment are being ‘Human centered’.

Inequality among humans is an important factor to remember when considering the biodiversity loss. I feel it is unfair to criticise human kind in general for practices carried out by a limited number of people, when many others may in fact oppose them. Blaming anthropocentrism for environmental degradation in every case would mean putting blame for biodiversity loss on all humanity, rather than the over exploitative elites.

In this case, demarcation of a portion of the Ghats region and not the entire region as ESA should not be seen as an anthropocentric problem since it involves only certain groups of people, mainly powerful lobbies, people who stand to lose their sand mining and quarrying industries, businesses that would suffer from restrictions on transport, infrastructure and wind energy projects, businessmen who would lose their businesses because of a complete ban on new polluting industries etc. These activities are carried out not in the interest of the overall welfare of the entire population of the Ghats, but to further the interests of some quite narrowly defined groups. Such activities are in fact condemned by a majority of other humans who see the practice as not serving the human interest in general. Anthropocentrism, by its very definition is a conduct which appeals to human welfare and not of a group consisting of wealthy elites.

The cases of hunting down a species to extinction, destruction of forests, banning industries in sensitive ecological zones cannot be appropriately seen as ‘anthropocentric’ because they involve not the whole human kind, but only a fraction of those who derive economic benefits from ecological destruction. Such activities can never be in the interest of human kind. Benefits of such activities are not intended for humans generally.

What we usually see around is Development by Exclusion hand in hand with Conservation by Exclusion. Despite the 73rd and 74th Amendments to the Constitution that have devolved powers of making decisions relating to development to Panchayat Raj Institutions and Nagarpalikas, all development decisions are thrust upon the people and they have no say in the final policy decisions which will affect them the most.

However, the tone of the Gadgil report was a benign one. Largely misunderstood, what they had really proposed was development by inclusion. Gadgil committee realised that the present system of governance of the environment should be changed and that people’s participation is vital to achieving environment and people friendly development. The soul of Gadgil report was that the Gram Sabhas or the local people themselves would take the final decision on the kind of development that should be permitted in any ecologically sensitive area.

V.S.Vajiyan, a member of the Gadgil committee said “The basic idea is ecological protection and to identify ESAs in such a way that local communities, tribal people and farmers would stand to gain from it.” Gadgil report also suggested constitution of a separate body for management of ESAs, instead of bureaucratic set-up. Their idea was establishment of democratic decision making bodies at the local level to identify the ESAs.

However, there were no such recommendations or measures in the Kasturirangan’s report. It continued with its top-to-bottom approach excluding all the locals from the decision taking process. Gadgil himself criticised the approach of Kasturirangan panel, claiming that the report “shockingly dismisses our constitutionally guaranteed democratic devolution of decision-making powers, remarking that local communities can have no role in economic decisions.” 

If one were to follow an ‘anthropocentric’ ethic approach, then one would invariably choose Gadgil report over Kasturirangan report, as only the former truly tried to achieve what anthropocentrism demands for most – protection of environment for the benefit of human kind. Criticising a report which encourages participation of local people in decision making, condemns corrupt practices, and destroys mining, quarrying and allied industries is far from being anthropocentric.

Conclusion

The core of the problem is the character and origin of the ‘human’ around which this particular thinking may be centered. Does it equally embody all human capacities and needs, or a particular subset of these?

While criticising anthropocentrism as the major cause of damage to the ecological fabric of the world, we should remember that the world is driven by dramatic inequalities, and different segments of humanity have vastly different impacts on the environment. Burden of conservation has never been shared equitably across the world.

Proposed Solution

“Everything starts with man and his ability to think. All values, all concepts are derived from man” – Rene Descartes

We have a potential to ultimately reach a solution, but our current development paradigm is not even close to anything like sustainability. In fact our development is increasingly reducing the scope of sustainability. In a society where attitudes towards environment have not yet changed, there will always be an opposition ready to exploit any unconceivable opportunity. Sustainable Development requires significant changes to our philosophical and religious attitudes.

We must stop living like rulers. We must start living like tenants of the earth.

The post From Gadgil To Kasturirangan Report: An Anthropocentric Perspective appeared first and originally on Youth Ki Awaaz and is a copyright of the same. Please do not republish.

Once again, the NIRF rankings for the year 2019 are out. This time, the government has also begun the special ARIIA (Atal Ranking of Institutions on Innovation Achievements) award. With already so many of these coronations in the play – Visitor’s award, NIRF ranks, Eminence Status, let alone a host of private organizations and media houses which too rank and grade universities and colleges, it’s really a good question to ask what more the ‘Atal Innovative’ tag does.

Coincidentally, it’s also admission season. Every one of these awards suddenly became crucial for the top echelon of colleges. However, considering a few of these, it’s important to take a step back and actually ask ourselves some important questions – why is it that despite everything said and done, several of these names pop up when we talk of campus sexism and excesses on students? Does student welfare (in a true, non-patronizing sense) matter to the policy makers? For how long can our campuses get away with sexism?

Take for instance a few of the following:

1) Miranda House, Delhi University

While the NIRF ranks are another feather in the cap for one of the oldest colleges in DU’s campus, it’s worth knowing that, over the last one year, there have been several run-ins amongst students and authorities over a few trivial issues. The first was the extension of hostel curfews, which as a sort of compromise was zeroed down to 9:00 p.m.

The students alleged that most of the demands and of course the moral policing stayed intact despite the ‘negotiation.’ Similar protests broke out against several other colleges including top shots as St. Stephens and Hindu.

2) Anna University

While Anna University is one of the oldest colleges in India, producing alumni the likes of whom have served the country and brought fame to India even at the global stage. It’s shocking how sexist and damaging some rules of the college’s affiliated to it remain. This includes hostel curfews for women ranging from 6:00 p.m. – 8:00 p.m. (if not even earlier), in a state when for most of the year it’s not even dark by 7:00 p.m. Restrictions on outings which are considered as ‘privileges’ granted to women, rather than a basic right.

Moral policing which often results in separate staircases, seating arrangements, lifts, amongst others for girls so that no scope of even a light chat is available with male counterparts to some ridiculous ideas which include running a rope or rod partitioning a bus into two halves for designated genders.

3) Aligarh Muslim University

The first time the university came under fire was when its former VC made loose comments when asked to extend curfew and library time for women. Students have alleged through a lot of rules are not followed religiously, they nevertheless exist.

3) National Institute Of Technology(s)

While IITs to a large extent remain liberal powerhouses, NITs are often left with administrators who wear sexism proudly on their sleeves. Recently, NIT Agartala protested against the curfew rules which includes restricting freedom of women inside the campus both on weekdays and weekends and the compulsory hostel curfew at 6:00 p.m., while administrators agreed to raise the curfew to 7:00 p.m., it’s surprising how sexist modern premier institutes are.

Similar gag orders on female students exist in various other NITs, especially in the South – such as Trichy, Calicut and Karnataka.

NIT Kurukshetra recently was in news for an order which warned women to ‘not loiter’ after 6:00 p.m.

4) SRM University

While the President has awarded this university the runner’s up position in the newly constituted ARIIA award, it’s shocking how a legitimate protest against sexual harassment was treated here.

Instead of assuring students about a follow up, the wardens made comments shaming the complainant for being a north Indian and dressing inappropriately. When the protests turned out of hand, several other details like locking up female students in hostels by 6:30 p.m., and the indifferent attitude of the administration were revealed.

The implications can be seen as a drop in the number of applicants for its entrance exam. Maybe this will force the university to change its attitude. Several of the truths that came out resulted in a lot of backlash especially from engineering aspirants outside the traditional southern base of the country.

5) VIT Vellore

While awarding the institution for its innovative approaches, it would’ve been worth asking if whistling, barricading, slut shaming, morally policing inside the campus and restricting movement outside and in general, and allegedly restricting career growth options for women, while having rules fit for the Victorian era if not earlier can amount to being ‘innovative.’

What’s worse are the gag orders on any protest, or on speaking out against alleged incidents of harassment and even deaths. While it markets itself as student-friendly, the reality is far from it.

Too bad the NIRF couldn’t factor these in due to no one tweeting and hashtagging it.

Like SRM, after boasting a record of nearly 2.25 lakh applicants for its entrance exam few years ago, the resulting negative word of mouth from its former alumni (most have written about their experiences on sites such as Quora, YKA, Facebook, etc.) and the power of social media platforms have led to a drop in applicants.

Rules used to sell the campus to protective and conservative parents no longer sell, especially outside Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh, which can be seen in the drop in applicants. Especially considering the ironies such as inviting calling freedom of speech activists and women who’ve broken glass ceilings in various fields. to speak at the VIT campus.

The Way Ahead

It’s worth asking NIRF to come clean on a lot of issues. While the UGC and AICTE have several enactments which call for global exposure and liberation of minds of students, it’s clear that in such environments the results are counterproductive.

For a lot of colleges, especially in the south, including the liberal arts colleges such as Christ University or colleges even in the state of Kerala (where a recent HC judgment may be a turning point) rules pertaining to end gender discrimination and stone age gender segregation aren’t enforced. Students are at the mercy of administrators. These rules often lead to the reinforcing of evils like honour killings!

Few fundamental questions about whether universities can get away with blatant sexism and oppression remain. Or can it be that student welfare isn’t worth factoring in?

Or the even more dangerous idea that the NIRF conducts no background check? Maybe it’s research is left to a few dozen tweets about propaganda.

While few positive steps such as Pinjra Tod protests, Punjab University relaxing its rules and the Kerala HC judgment have come about, broadly speaking the situation is as grim as ever.

Featured image for representative purpose only.
Featured image source: Aligarh Muslim University/Facebook.

The post Your College May Have A Great NIRF Ranking, But Is It Free From Sexism And Moral Policing? appeared first and originally on Youth Ki Awaaz and is a copyright of the same. Please do not republish.

The year was 2000. Durga Puja. A crowd was milling around an electronics store in south Kolkata, where a TV was playing live footage of the ICC Knockout semifinal match between India and Australia. I was on my night out with some of my cousins, and we were attracted to the TV like flies to flame.

Zaheer Khan was one of the new kids on the block, and he had just delivered the perfect inswinging yorker to bowl Steve “Tugga” Waugh. It was a sight that filled my teenage heart with pride, that an Indian fast bowler could perform such a feat. Amid high fives with my cousins, I heard these words being uttered, “Pakistan theke tule niye esche mone hoi” (“I think they have poached him from Pakistan”). I laughed a silly laugh at the comment, but it soured my mood for the rest of the evening. India won the match, but I had lost my pride.

Fast forward to 2019. A lady we know paid us a visit a few days ago. She was fretting over which new school to admit her eleven-year-old daughter in, as seats in good schools are scant, and time is running out. She lives in Kolkata with her daughter, while her husband works in North Bengal. She recounted her experience of searching for schools where her husband lives. The gist: “Some of the schools were okay. But you know…. too many Muslims there.”

This is in presence of her daughter, all of eleven years old. I find this comment objectionable, but choose not to confront her. Eventually, she managed to find a “good” school in south Kolkata for her daughter, who is happy enough to have been admitted there. “Problem” solved. I am happy for the little girl and her mother. But not with myself.

Time for another festival of democracy. It’s that one time we get to choose, whether or not we are not allowed to choose our life partners (or what we eat). So what’s on the menu? “Vote for BJP if you want Muslims destroyed,” bellows yet another provincial bigot, high on majoritarian hubris. “The population of Muslims is increasing,” he barks on.

Maneka Gandhi, a Union Minister, tells Muslims she will not work for them if they don’t vote for her. When the Prime Minister of India makes a barely veiled nuclear threat against Pakistan, appealing to the very popular “destroy Pakistan” sentiment among the Hindutva ranks and files, can we expect any better from his minions?

In the Hindutva hate universe, all things Muslim are Pakistan, and all things Pakistan are representative of The Enemy. Never mind the fact that many Indians have family on the other side of the border. Never mind that Geeta was rescued, protected and returned to India by an NGO run by Abdul Edhi, who was a devout Muslim. In this universe, therefore, “destroy Pakistan” is equivalent to “destroy Muslims”.

Hate speech and ‘tough talk’ seem to be the currencies that the ruling party is betting its reelection chances on. This kind of hate speech, without a doubt, falls afoul of the model code of conduct that ought to govern all electioneering activity, come poll season. Rule 3 under “General Conduct” clearly mentions that “there shall be no appeal to caste or communal feelings for securing votes”. However, this rule has been violated plenty of times in the 2019 season already.

The Election Commission seems to have picked up a peculiar sloth amidst all this. The Commission has had to be reminded by the Supreme Court that it does have powers to punish violators of the Code. But the real question is, even if the EC acted tough and curbed all kinds of hate speech and other Code violations, would there be much of a change in attitudes on the ground?

Attitudes of the majority community, i.e. Hindus towards the minority communities, especially Muslims (yep, the perennial bugbear) are worth examining as we deal with an unprecedented amount of hate directed towards them this election season. There is a (mis)perception among Indians that Muslims form almost a third of our population, when the true figure is probably around a sixth.

The 2011 census data say that Muslims form around 14% of the population. While the percentage of Muslims in India’s population is rising overall, the growth has been very slow, from around 13.5% in 2001 to 14% in 2011. But the tendency of the majority to grossly overestimate the population of the minority – and thus overestimate “threats” posed by them – predates this minuscule decadal growth rate.

It is not limited to the Indian society alone. A case study can be made of the USA, where white people are expected to form less than half the population in a generation. This has led to concerns among some American whites that they will be discriminated against, as they will no longer remain the majority. This kind of thinking is predicated upon the wider belief that minorities necessarily present a threat to the majority.

The same kind of thinking applies to the majority community in India, and this thinking itself has its history in the old-but-kept-fresh wounds of the partition. Which is why ‘loyalties’ of Muslims in India are often questioned by those most ‘scared’ of them. It is assumed that Muslims really owe their allegiance to Pakistan because that’s where they were supposed to go after partition. But how can one know when the overwhelming majority of Muslims says they are loyal to India? This space of the frightening “unknown” is exactly where Hindutva ideology has its appeal.

Another idea that is often peddled by the Hindutva brigade is that of “Muslim appeasement”. Let us examine that as well. A 2013 survey by the NSSO suggests that Muslims are the poorest religious community in India, spending only Rs 32.66 a day on an average, which is less than Rs 1,000 a month at 2013 price levels. This article provides a sobering analysis of how Indian Muslims are trapped in a vicious circle of poverty.

Let’s take education levels as an example. The number of illiterate people is highest among Muslims (190 per 1,000), followed by Hindus (84), Sikhs (79) and Christians (57). The number of persons (over 15 years) who have obtained just primary or middle school education among Muslims is 257 and 198 (per 1,000 persons), respectively. Also, the number of Muslim males of 5-14 years in urban areas attending educational institutions is 869 per 1,000 persons, which is the least among all religious groups.

A 2014 survey by the NSSO estimated the average course fee for technical courses at government institutions to be around Rs 26,000, which is very difficult for most Muslims to afford, given their average spending levels and given there is no real helping hand from the government. The Ranganath Misra Committee recommendations (2009) for reservation of 10% of seats in government educational institutions and jobs are yet to be properly implemented anywhere, at State or Central level. Remember that the percentage of Muslims in India is 14%. So even the recommended numbers are less than proportional as far as the Muslim population is concerned.

Less education will typically mean greater joblessness. And this is exactly what the data bear out. Labour Force Participation Rate (LFPR), which is the proportion of a population working or looking for work, for Muslims in the urban areas is the least among all religious groups, 342 per 1000, or 34.2%. Further, among urban males, the number of Muslims employed in regular jobs is only 288 per 1,000 employed persons, while the corresponding figure among urban Muslim females is merely 249, which is by far the lowest among all communities.

Besides, data suggest that Muslims are overrepresented among prisoners and among law enforcement officials in India. All this is not even considering the spate of religious violence that has consumed lives, livelihoods and dignities of Muslims in the last 5 years. So, one has to ask, where exactly is this “appeasement” of Muslims that we hear of?

Hateful rhetoric and deliberate lies and misrepresentation have consequences. Nazia Erum’s book “Mothering a Muslim” lays out in detail how Islamophobia has seeped down to children in schools considered to be some of the best in India, and how Muslim children, especially ones who are poor, are semi-ghettoized in these schools; how parents demand that their children not be forced to sit with Muslim children in classes, and how Muslim children are being physically attacked in addition to being subjected to verbal abuse on a regular basis.

Some parents, like the lady I referred to earlier, choose to entirely avoid schools which might have Muslim students. Outside of schools, acts of cow-based mob violence against Muslims and their lynching are now proudly shared by perpetrators on social media. All this has reached fever pitch in the anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant and the dog whistle “anti-Pakistan” rhetoric that the hustings this season have become awash with. Hatred is becoming increasingly normalized. There is an epidemic of “othering”. Many seem to think that if the party currently in power is voted out, everything will be hunky dory. But recently an Opposition government in the State of MP invoked the National Security Act against alleged cow smugglers. Clearly, Hindutva has started setting terms in Indian politics. Where does this stop? It’s not just the voters in us, but the social, supposedly secular animals in us, that decide.

The post In The Hindutva Hate Universe, All Things Muslim Are Pakistan appeared first and originally on Youth Ki Awaaz and is a copyright of the same. Please do not republish.

Promises of gender equality or women empowerment have been one of the most heated premises of the ongoing parliamentary elections. Different political parties have promised various schemes for the same. The most familiar of the myriad promises being made is passing the Women’s Reservation Bill (2008) in the Lok Sabha which will ensure 33% reservation for women in parliament as well as in the state legislative assemblies. The Congress manifesto claims that they will ensure this reservation if they come to power in 2019. The Bharatiya Janata Party also claims the same in their manifesto.

However, this is not the first time political parties have claimed to strive for passing this bill. The Congress stated this resolution in the UPA II manifesto as well, though it failed to keep its promise. The BJP too promised this in their 2014 manifesto, which remained as a promise and never saw the day of light. The issue again cropped up in the run up to this year’s election.

It is baffling to know that the Women’s Reservation Bill (WRB) is the longest pending legislations in Parliament. There has never been a bill in the history of Indian parliament that has been put forth so many times. There are also instances when a sitting MP once had snatched and torn the paper. It has been ten years since the Bill was drafted and yet, over the years an overwhelmingly male parliament has failed to enact the legislation that aims to boost the number of women in the Lower House.

As a result, out of the 543 MPs in the last adjourned Lok Sabha, only 62 were women.

The second wave of feminism gave the widely known outcry ‘personal is political’ which means that women’s oppression and subjugation in the supposedly insular domestic sphere is not to be studied in isolation. The public and domestic domains are not separate, they are overlapping.  Public policies, debates, programmes influence our personal and domestic lives and what is done in the domestic sphere follows into the public arena.

Also, it is only by understanding and analyzing the oppression in our personal lives that we can move towards an understanding of our marginalization in the public and political sphere as well. Thus, there is an ardent need to validate personal experiences and subjective feelings. It is actually a part of a well defined structured system of oppressive gender hierarchy.

This structured hierarchy confirms total control of women’s labor both in the private and the public sphere. In what Sylvia Walby calls the ‘patriarchal mode of production,’ men benefit materially from patriarchy, they derive concrete economic gains from the subordination of women. Maybe this is precisely the reason why women representation is being vehemently opposed by nearly all political parties. Because, men control women’s productivity both within the household and in the paid work sphere. Within the household women are supposed to provide round the clock service to the members, throughout their lives, which is obviously unpaid. Thus, women’s labor is being expropriated by the male dominated private sphere.

The endless and repetitive labor put in by women is not considered work at all and thus huge amount of work is labelled ‘unproductive’ and hence remains unpaid. Precisely this is the vicious exploitative circle which engulfs women’s lives and gives rise to their systemic oppression.

Marking of women’s labor as unproductive, thus unpaid and confining it into the spheres of domesticity does one more crucial thing – the paid labor market is left only to the male. Full authority is bestowed upon them to gather profit from the public sphere and to control the mobility of the other gender. The Women’s Reservation Bill challenges this whole notion of segregation of spheres according to gender. It makes a probability for women to enter into uncharted territories for them which are generally masculine. The WRB invariably means more and more women in positions of power and decision-making which actively influences public life and thus a threat to the stable status quo.

An analysis of the main institutions in society shows that nearly all economic, political, religious, social and cultural institutions are patriarchal and are by and large controlled by men. Namely, the family, religion, media, law, educational institutions, army, and definitely the state are the pillars of a patriarchal system and structure. The concept of state has a hyper masculine connotation to it.

In the name of national security, the state can make use of violence, flex its muscle power and supercede the human rights of its citizens. This inherent so-called ‘masculine’ traits of the state has kept it out of the ambit of women for the longest time in history. Women are national treasures, they are to be kept in the vaults, never to be used as active agents in nation-building. This institutional set-up, as we know it today, when contextualised in history, reveals a deeply gendered and patriarchal structural setting within which sovereign states exist.

The state as an institution is highly masculine and in turn territorial, and also that human security and welfare is subsumed under territorial integrity, women are structurally excluded from this institution. But, just as gender roles are being routinely deconstructed outside these institutions, they must be done within too. We need women in positions of power, in decision making roles, in politically supreme positions. Almost all political institutions in society, at all levels, are male dominated, from village panchayats to parliament. In South Asia, this discrimination is even more stark and in-your-face.

Even when some women do assume important political positions, they do so, at least initially, because of their association with some strong male political personalities, and they function within the structures and principles laid down by men. They are mainly a result of political lineage, and have very little to do with actually opening up opportunities for women to enter into the political arena. This is the reason why women’s reservation is the need of the hour.

We need women politicians and ministers to bring up issues concerning women in the parliament and engage in active participation for their upliftment. All women living in this gendered world have lived experiences of being victims of structured aggression, and we all have a shared memory of trauma. The ‘personal is political’ idea basically implies is that only those sections of people who experience certain oppression personally can explain the politics around it.

These groups of people, in question, are often marginalized and not let to speak. They are spoken on behalf of. Women no longer want to be represented on behalf of, we want to represent ourselves. The entire second wave was predicated on women speaking about their oppressive experiences. If these gendered experiences are indeed political then it is only right that they voice their experiences that shape and get shaped by political structures.

But, hegemonic masculinity is heavier to move than Oedipus’ rock. Whoever comes to power, our gendered experiences signals that the WRB will be very very difficult to pass in the Lok Sabha. The history of mankind has shown that whoever benefits from the structured power dynamics, they will never ever let the oppressed dismantle it. Thus, a long battle awaits in front where women can finally represent themselves.

One of the main arguments against this Bill is that reserving a constituency for women would mean all men in the constituency lose out on the opportunity to represent it. It would essentially amount to denying someone their democratic right on the basis of gender. This argument lacks basic humanitarian approach.

When a section of society has been historically oppressed, ostracised and denied their basic human rights on account of gender, it is only imperative that retribution must be based on gender too. We must find out the cause of oppression, and then try to subvert the menace according to the cause. Where gender is the only reason for denying women representation, gender becomes the only tool to fight it. Also, the woman has to win from that constituency and become a member of parliament, she cannot be a MP just because of her gender. Thus in the words of activist Dr Ranjana Kumari, “it is a matter of right, and not a matter of favour.“

Since the passing of the WRB is still a distant dream, another effective way to increase women parliamentarians is to field more women candidates for contesting. The Trinamool Congress was one of the first political parties to announce their candidate list, and in a remarkable occurrence they have nominated 41% women in 17 of their 42 parliamentary seats.

In neighbouring Odisha, the Biju Janata Dal too has nominated women in a third of their seats. When more women are given candidature, automatically representation in parliament will be much higher. Maybe in the future more parties will be inspired to increase the number of women candidates. We hope this is just the beginning of a new era where this hegemony of political power will be dismantled.

The Women’s Reservation Bill is imperative for a more egalitarian and gender-just society, though we know that we have to walk many more miles before we dream of it. As a community who had to organise mass movements to ensure their political suffrage, we know that battle scars are just the predecessor of a new dawn. A new dawn, where states will not focus on territorial capture, but on the wellbeing of its citizens.

Featured image for representative purpose only.
Featured image source: Arun Sharma/Hindustan Times via Getty Images.

The post Explained: Why The Women’s Reservation Bill Is A Crucial Tool For Gender Justice appeared first and originally on Youth Ki Awaaz and is a copyright of the same. Please do not republish.

Her Reproductive Rights

Her Productive Rights

The post Are We Turning A Blind Eye To State-Sponsored Patriarchy? appeared first and originally on Youth Ki Awaaz and is a copyright of the same. Please do not republish.

The partition of the Indian subcontinent in 1947 into Hindustan and Pakistan, led to one of the most brutal migrations known to the face of the earth. Muslims in India were forced to move to West and East Pakistan, while the Hindus on the other side of the divide came to India. This blatant violation of freedom of choice led to the uprooting of more than fifteen million people, and about one to two million people lost their lives.

The Muslims population makes up approximately 14% of the Indian population. Back in 1947, this population had the option to move to Pakistan and live with their own community. They were the ones who, by choice, did not leave their motherland, they did not accept Jinnah’s invitation; they chose to stay. Our grandfathers and great grandfathers, honest to the Indian soil, couldn’t move away. People moved due to various reasons, but their one single reason was the love and respect they bore in their hearts for their native land, the land they had been calling their own.

I, Syed Mohammad Tahir Hussain, belong to that 14% of the population. Today, it feels like I belong to this percentage more than I belong to India. Today, I have to constantly advocate for the love and respect I have in my heart for my country, which is no different than the love and respect my great grandfather carried in his heart. I am made to wear my nationalism on my sleeve, and I am made to feel that if I am a Muslim, I am not Indian enough.

After spending 12 years in the comfortable blanket that is the school life, I shifted from Delhi to Ambala for my graduation. Day one and a professor asked me to go out of the class because she couldn’t tolerate a Muslim student in her class. “You’re a Muslim, get out of my class”, she said in a full classroom. Though my classmates stood for me, raised their voices against the professor, I could still very safely say that my comfortable blanket was swiftly snatched away from me on the very first day of college.

And the harsh weather hasn’t left my side since, moreover, I’ve gotten used to it. I regularly receive hate messages and death threats. People message me and call me a spy from the other country, or ask me to go back to Pakistan. Being a Muslim in India has become a struggle in itself, more to say, things have worsened since the elections of 2014. Coming from the minority Muslim population, an uncanny sense of threat has now embedded in my bones.

I am forced to think of the regular activities which a normal person carries out through the day. For instance, eating non-vegetarian food or carrying it in my tiffin. In a matter of seconds, the meat can be assumed to be that of a holy cow, and in a matter of minutes, I may be mob lynched to death.

I happen to live away from my family. If I get busy and forget to make a call even for a single day, nobody sleeps in peace back at home. During the time of the Pulwama attacks, everyone wanted me back home.  Juggling between work and home like this, life becomes difficult and unmanageable.

When I think about our Prime Minister, Mr. Narendra Modi, a train of events flash before me: Bombers of the Hyderabad Mecca Masjid blast, Ajmer blasts, Malegaon blast, or Samjhauta Express blast; all terrorists getting bails, Gujarat riots, demolition of Babri Masjid, the court ruling in favour of Captain Purohit.

Mr. Amit Shah is still free and a sitting MP in Rajya Sabha after all the allegations against him, especially with regards to the Muslim community. All of these combine to evoke hesitation and even fear among Muslims.
We learn by asking questions, we achieve by asking questions. Today critical questioning is the need of the hour, especially the system which controls and influences us. But for people like me, asking even the most crucial questions or speaking of opinions is like playing with fire or skating on thin ice. Even before one can realise, they may already be labeled as traitors, an anti-nationalists, or a Pakistani. The constant fear of being attacked and being vigilant gets extremely exhausting and suffocating.

Till date, there is not a single state that employs Muslims in the proportion to their share in the state’s population. There are efforts by the government to chuck out the Mughal history from school’s syllabus; names of places which sound minutely Islamic are being changed, and ministers of the ruling party openly talk about creating a Hindu state.

Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, Mr. Adityanath Yogi, after renaming Allahabad to Prayagraj, actively reiterates about changing names of Taj Mahal and Azamgarh to Ram Mahal and Aryamgarh respectively.

Our community is treated like we’re a tumour in the body of India. The only question that further rises is, are we malignant or benign? A malignant tumour is treated by its altogether extraction, while a benign tumour is just kept under surveillance.

The choices don’t make sense because it is a wrong question. The right thing to do will be to question our democracy and secularism. The right question is to differentiate between self-defence and terrorism.

Islamophobia affects me and my family, it affects every other Indian because we all live under the same democracy. Such prejudices and hatred affect the health of our democracy, the very foundation of a free society. We live in a society which ridiculously affiliates the colour green, the moon or a goat to Islam and the colour saffron, the sun, or a cow to Hinduism.

I am a proud Indian. There shouldn’t be any need for me to prove my nationalism, for it is the reality. A big reason why I chose to be a social worker was that I always wanted to work for the people of my country. A political party cannot be the nation; people like you and me, we are the nation and always will be. I wanted to work on ground level for these ordinary people with extraordinary struggles because these are the people who make my nation, the nation I love with every part of my being. Working for their growth and welfare will facilitate the same for the state. And that is the goal I am here with, and always will be.

But there is always a question in my mind that is, why do we Muslims have to prove our nationalism? Are we not Indians? 

The post I Have Been Made To Feel That If I Am A Muslim, I Am Not Indian Enough appeared first and originally on Youth Ki Awaaz and is a copyright of the same. Please do not republish.

It was 10:00 pm. Phones were taken out and Ubers booked. I decided to take the auto –  a choice I made in the moment, since my house was less than a 15-minute ride away. It was, maybe the energy I’d gathered through the workshop’s sensible discourse, that also reaffirmed a sense of confidence in myself more than the world.

“Fixated one moment, repulsed the next. Distracted one moment, in rage the next. In case this sounds familiar to you and you have found yourself wondering – “How can I develop inner integrity that keeps me resilient in a volatile world?” – then this workshop is for you!”

It was these very words that made me head to a session titled: Unbecoming: A Path To Inner Peace In An Imperfect World, on the eve of April 20. What awaited me was a warm, all-women gathering huddled in the discourse, sharing their stories of strength and composure as women who dare to become the responsible cogs of this society, fighting odds and mostly for our lives. The popular but untrue adage, which tells the world that only a woman is another woman’s enemy is untrue. In today’s hostile reality, only a woman can be a woman’s strength. With my inner strength filled to the brim, I bid farewell to my sisters in the workshop.

As I exited the venue, an aged autowallah was passing by. The man agreed to the drop and I decided to get on. He was an old man with a gentle air around him. I was planning on looking up the reading material that was discussed in the workshop when I noticed a car trying to match my auto’s speed. It didn’t take much time for the fear to reappear.

As we crossed Kalkaji, the white hatchback with dark windows started to match its pace with the auto rickshaw, following us. It then lined itself next to my auto; the man at the driver’s seat rolled down his window and started gesturing towards me to come inside his car.

He looked certain of what he was asking for. He was assertive in his manner and seemed well rehearsed with this kind of behavior. The way he looked at me – it appeared that he was commanding me to just step out of the auto and into his car.

I wondered at that moment – that after that wonderful session, all those reaffirmations of strength, all it took was a predatory man to reduce me to a walking piece of flesh being demanded to step into his car. At that moment, far from an independent woman who was trying to make a living, I was a helpless person trying to survive. Hell, even the cotton dress I was wearing felt like a bad idea!

The auto wallah was an old chap who for a second looked at me through his rearview mirror and in the next one, looked at the car driver. The guy in the car was confident, the auto wallah had absolute fear in his eyes. Stranded between the two men, an all-pervasive dread began to take over me.

In a matter of minutes, the car sped ahead of my auto rickshaw and began to move ahead of my vehicle. At this point, as perhaps all women who commute at night do sometimes when faced with a similar situation, I called my friend and focused on memorizing the car’s make and number. Huddled in and trying to maintain my calm while scared out of my wits, I could only hear the noise of band baaja, and not my friend… I figured he was attending a wedding. In a matter of minutes, I felt reduced to a victim, scared for her life.

The car now began to match its pace with my auto rickshaw once again. The man on the driver’s seat began to gesture to me once again. I was on the verge of panic by this time as more thoughts started streaming in and I decided to look away from him. I didn’t know how many men were in that car or what his or their intentions were. He had this nonchalant way of asking me through gestures to leave my auto then and there and get down.

Tired of feeling scared, I decided to call 100 at exactly 10:10 PM. After a long dial tone, a lady answered. In a state of panic, I gave her as many details as I could. White color. Hatchback car. Tinted glass. I’m on this route. On my way home. From CR Park. The Kalkaji>Kailash Colony>Lajpat Nagar route. The car number is so and so.

By this point, I had memorized the car number but couldn’t see the car anymore. I somehow also made it home and now began to wait for the cops to respond. I expected the police to attend to the matter and catch the perpetrator using all the details I had provided. I thought that they might send the PCR van. I thought they might come over to my house to check if I was safe. Or, they might call me to gather more information. But none of this happened. I couldn’t shake what had just transpired – or the fact that in a matter of minutes, I had changed from a woman who was coming back feeling all resilient from a women’s group gathering to a someone who got scared for her life and now felt very vulnerable.

The cops called. After more than an hour. Once. Twice. Thrice. Three men with varying degrees of ignorance couldn’t make calls to their traffic check posts to spot the car whose number I had shared. The third call at 11:37 pm was the worst one. The complacent cop called me and asked in a laidback manner, “Did you call 100?”

Exasperatedly, I said, “Yes!”

“What happened?”

“Really? You tell me, what happened? Have you found the car? The owner?”

What followed after that was harrowing, to say the least. This constable told me that it was not possible to find the car as I did not give them all the details. He said that since their RTO office is shut, they cannot find the car. After further inquiry and pressurizing him to act upon the matter, he asked me my name and my address in a threatening manner. After repeated inquiry, this constable hung up on me (attached call recording with this constable). No PCR van was sent, no calls were made to check whether I was safe. I kept tweeting about it and tagged Delhi Police in all my posts, but there was no response.

Standing in my balcony, staring at my phone at this moment, I began to realize how easy it was for those men to simply abduct me that night. I also wondered how many women must be getting abducted and raped at that very moment because of the cops like the ones I had spoken to who could not do their job. Grievance redressal needed grief, but what I had at that point was rage and a feeling of betrayal from a system that was supposedly in place to keep citizens like me safe. I also began to question what was the point of 100 and why to rely on it when it did nothing to help me that night.

Being a journalist, I decided to walk the talk and get the FIR filed the next day. More than myself, this was about something bigger, beyond the media activism and political stunts to glorify the cause of our empowerment. All it takes is a moment for an animal on the road to reduce us to a pile of flesh, and, a so-called system ‘in place’ to make us feel helpless.

The entire night nobody from the police followed up to check whether I was safe. The next morning, I went to the police station with rage in my heart and was relieved to see a slightly empathetic woman constable. I told her my entire story, some leftover tears still flowing and my anger bubbling up. The constable who took my last call was called. The male constable was scolded by the lady police officer. He was told to apologize to me for his behavior but he kept staring at my complaint letter.

He sat in the chair without any feeling of remorse or apology. I looked at the lady police officer and realized he was not even scared of her. It had been five minutes and he kept staring at my complaint letter with a stone face and a lack of interest. He turned the page of the letter and was now staring at my house address. Earlier male constables used to threaten you by staring at your breasts in a lecherous manner or by asking you uncomfortable questions, but now they stare at your house address. If you have told them that you live independently, you would know that it is not going to be easy.

It has been four days since the incident took place. It has changed the way I look at myself in a country which does not bother to hold itself accountable for what it does to its women on a daily basis. There is a problem with the way India has institutionally signaled to women that we do not matter as much as men do. It reminds us that men hold the power.

As a woman, you may be on the top of the career ladder, but men will have the ability to grope, catcall, eve-tease, stare, molest, harass and even rape you on a daily basis. You may be a senior at work, but the junior male officer will not listen to your orders. You’ll meet uninterested constables and senior male police officers who will make you feel as if they are doing you a favor by doing their job on a Sunday. You’ll meet uninterested male colleagues and male friends who will tell you, “It is up to you if you want to file the complaint but is it worth fighting this case?” or “You should just be feeling grateful that you are safe and sound and nothing happened that night.”

My family and friends have been very supportive and encouraging even to help me file the complaint against the perpetrator and against the male constable. They have stood by me and helped me take it forward. But I wonder how many women have the privilege to do so. A lot of women drop out of college as a result of such experiences. Men hinder women and their ability to participate in the workforce in multiple ways. I am deeply bothered by how this does not affect anybody.

I do not yet know what will happen to my investigation, and that even if my harasser is found, he will understand just how vulnerability can make a woman feel and how can it kill her spirit and confidence to even step out. I do not know if the male constable will be able to become an empathetic human being once he is fired from his job.

However, I do know that the source of real values is not in exterior things but in the heart; that is what makes the charm of the world we inhabit. Therefore, I will chase away this structure called patriarchy merely by being present with my dreams, desires, pleasures, emotions, inventions. For this very reason, I filed my complaint.

I refuse the heavy sleep in which humanity sinks. If we don’t report instances of sexual violence and abuse, we ourselves make it the new norm. If we continue to let male police officers show the worst of themselves in their positions of power, then probably we deserve that treatment and have played an equal role in emboldening their intentions to crush the spirits of millions of young women. Now is not the time, rest up. I am also working on my mind and body and can’t wait to use the force of my soul and my energy to employ total commitment to crushing these systems which have been continuing to crush us since time immemorial.

The post How I Took On My Sexual Harasser, Only To Be Failed By The System appeared first and originally on Youth Ki Awaaz and is a copyright of the same. Please do not republish.