After what seemed like small game of ping pong, it is now official that Maharashtra education minister Mr.Vikhe Patil will have it his way - the 90:10 rule if officially in effect. According to this rule, students who have completed their 10th standard under state boards would have 90% reservation of seats in junior colleges while those who have studied under ICSE, CBSE, or any other board would have only 10% reservation.
Firstly the rationale for this decision should be questioned. Mr. Patil says "If they want admission in our colleges, let them study in our schools". This is a violation of democratic rights in my view. If your schools have the high standards, why would anyone choose to study in other schools, Mr.Patil? If making the state schools popular is the aim, the Government is at least expected to follow the pull system - make schools more attractive to students/parents - rather than the push system - force students/parents to opt for state schools.
Secondly, numbers say that this decision will not really affect the actual admissions much as the number of students from other boards applying for junior colleges is less than 10%. This means that the only effect would be that some students will not get the colleges of their choice. This again indicates that this is rule has been passed more to make a political point rather than to bring any changes into effect.
Thirdly, why has this rule been forced all of a sudden? Why was a sunset period of 3 years at least not given before enforcing this so that students/parents would have the option of shifting their children to state schools so that they can get admissions in the colleges of their choice? This rule cannot be anything but a bolt from the blue for all students who have just passed out from schools of other boards. Is this not injustice to them? They are being punished for a something that has just been declared as wrong!
Political moves like this are nothing but populist moves that are irrational at the base but are still enforced simply because they enjoy the support of the majority. Mr.Minister, everything that the majority says is not always right, sometimes the leader is required to show more intelligence than the people he leads!
Friday, 19 June 2009
Thursday, 18 June 2009
Was Shiney raped?
Shiney Ahuja, a well known bollywood actor, has been accused of raping a domestic help. His wife has come out vehemently denying all the charges on Shiney and claiming that Shiney was the one who was raped. Sounds filmy? Ofcourse it does.
A wife coming out in support of her husband accussed of rape charges is probably not so common, but the argument is - it was consensual sex, probably the guy was raped, etc. Given that the wife was not present when this rape occured, it is evident that this is Shiney speaking through his wife.
Well, this looks like a classic case of a criminal defending himself, first claiming that he had consensual sex with the victim and then having his family members throw out the idea that maybe he was raped. Prima facie both statements look completely contradictory. Since Shiney has himself claimed of consensual sex, he being the victim of rape is out of question - that ends the chapter of his wife's arguments.
It cannot be denied that this is a frame up. In bollywood style, someone could have hatched this plot against the man knowing that popularity is the bread and butter of film actors. Once they have lost that, probably even street dogs will not bark at them! It is very much possible that someone took advantage of the weakness of this man and got him into this fuss.
In either case, we should not jump to conclusions and possibly devastate the life of a person whose entire career depends on what the people think of him. Let the law take its own course, although we know this is not going to be fast enough. The accussed being a celebrity (and implicityly - powerful), this case definitely deserves a more stringent watch, but it does not warrant for the media to deliver judgements. I guess it is the public who has to act intelligently here.
As for his wife, I must say this - Mrs.Ahuja, what he describes as consensual sex is posed as a possible rape on him by your comments. The effects of this are that people appreciate you for the love and affection you are demonstrating for your husband, but they also raise an eyebrow over the man who claims to have willingly slept with another woman, but does not let his wife know if this.
The Trump Card
Rahul Gandhi, once seen as a young boy forced into the limelight because of his family heritage, seems to be turning into an astute politician. I personally think that soon he would be a politician who always has a trick or two up his sleeve. When he denied any post in the Government during the rule of UPA 1, it really seemed that he was not ready and needed time to get his bearings right.
But a denial of a post in the UPA 2 seems more like a bluff laid out deftly on the table. Amid the raucous of "Rahul for PM", a swift move to back Manmohan for PM appeared to be a well thought of strategy, where the party goals took priority over personal goals. Everyone knew that the clean image of Manmohan was an upper hand compared to the zeal of the youth represented by Rahul. He (or whoever the actual planner at Congress is) has shown a brilliant foresight in sticking to the mandate and pubilcly displaying the "Party first" attitude, allowing Rahul to instantly command the respect of the average party worker - the most important followers to have on ones side.
The future also seems pretty rosy to me, if the UPA 2 does not screw up big time, a UPA 3 is on its way in the next term. This time riding on the wave of "Rahul for PM". The mammoth task for Rahul would be to capture the imagination of the country by then and demonstrate that he can deliver the future for India that is as green as his father had promised. If the deft hands presented on the table while maintaining the perfect poker face over the past 5 years are anything to go by, we are definitely going to have a young PM, and that too very soon. This I believe, is the trump card the Congress wants to play for the UPA 3 regime, and let me warn you - this one would not be a bluff.
But a denial of a post in the UPA 2 seems more like a bluff laid out deftly on the table. Amid the raucous of "Rahul for PM", a swift move to back Manmohan for PM appeared to be a well thought of strategy, where the party goals took priority over personal goals. Everyone knew that the clean image of Manmohan was an upper hand compared to the zeal of the youth represented by Rahul. He (or whoever the actual planner at Congress is) has shown a brilliant foresight in sticking to the mandate and pubilcly displaying the "Party first" attitude, allowing Rahul to instantly command the respect of the average party worker - the most important followers to have on ones side.
The future also seems pretty rosy to me, if the UPA 2 does not screw up big time, a UPA 3 is on its way in the next term. This time riding on the wave of "Rahul for PM". The mammoth task for Rahul would be to capture the imagination of the country by then and demonstrate that he can deliver the future for India that is as green as his father had promised. If the deft hands presented on the table while maintaining the perfect poker face over the past 5 years are anything to go by, we are definitely going to have a young PM, and that too very soon. This I believe, is the trump card the Congress wants to play for the UPA 3 regime, and let me warn you - this one would not be a bluff.
Wednesday, 17 June 2009
Quality commentators - one of the things that my country is desperately short of
Our country is desperately short of commentators on all the areas that a developing nation should worry about - governance, law and order, economics, finance, etc. Most of the commentators on these topics i.e. those belonging to the media, generally lack a deep expertise in a field and hence, the public should be wary of their opinions.
The need for quality commentators can be felt most when critical issues arise that work towards making or breaking the Government. Let us consider the case when recently India faced the monster of Inflation which kept rising steadily to over 11%. In general, an Inflation over 4% signals a trouble for the Government. The UPA very wisely refrained from making any quick fix solutions to the economy that would cost us dear in the long term. But, the media and the opposition found fault in this approach. Most economists expressed that the Government was right, but there were 100 "Government is wrong" reports for every 1 "Government is right" report, simply because reporters outnumber the established commentators on economy by a huge margin.
If one were to browse some of the media reports, especially on channels like AAJ TAK, INDIA TV, etc. one would have been shocked at the apathy of the Government towards the aam aadmi. I sympathize with people who spend time watching such channels and I can't stop wondering how these channels get away with this. The impact of such channels, sadly, is to estrange the common man from the real economics of the issue and rationale behind the inaction of the Government, and this is just an example.
Non-expert reports find a way to the common man only because there is a lack of sound commentators on the subject. If thousands of Kiran Bedi's were available for comment on any and every act of the law enforcing agencies, would any newspaper/TV channel care to publish the thought of a reporter who is not an expert in the field? If every ex-Finance Minister of India (alive ofcourse) would comment on the quality of the budget presented, wouldn't the country stand to get a more balanced view?
If the real experts came out and discussed the 123 agreement in front of the common man, translating it into terms he can understand, the opposition does not have a chance to simply brandish it as anti-India and sway the minds of the common man. If sound commentators on good governance are in plenty, they can criticize the Government for each mistake and applaud it for each goal it scores. This would be of better use to the common man rather than an opposition party or a media reporter whose sole task is to criticize the Government, irrespective of a goal missed or a goal scored.
The point is not to take the word of these experts on face value, the point is that experts tend to explain the rationale behind their thoughts using the premise of sound logic, which can be easily proved or disproved. An expert worth his salt, will not risk his reputation to criticize something he does not believe in. Such an expert should consider playing the role of a commentator as a service to the society.
Until the time my country churns out enough commentators, each one of us should at least try and build a habit of questioning any and every comment made by any and everyone - i.e. test the logical basis of each argument before deciding anything. Remember, these decision help shape your opinion about people and Governments, and eventually these opinions go a long way in choosing the people who will rule us!
I dream of a day when no reporter would have the freedom to comment on areas in which he does not hold expertise - simply because an expert will just be a blog away for anyone who wants to know the truth!
The need for quality commentators can be felt most when critical issues arise that work towards making or breaking the Government. Let us consider the case when recently India faced the monster of Inflation which kept rising steadily to over 11%. In general, an Inflation over 4% signals a trouble for the Government. The UPA very wisely refrained from making any quick fix solutions to the economy that would cost us dear in the long term. But, the media and the opposition found fault in this approach. Most economists expressed that the Government was right, but there were 100 "Government is wrong" reports for every 1 "Government is right" report, simply because reporters outnumber the established commentators on economy by a huge margin.
If one were to browse some of the media reports, especially on channels like AAJ TAK, INDIA TV, etc. one would have been shocked at the apathy of the Government towards the aam aadmi. I sympathize with people who spend time watching such channels and I can't stop wondering how these channels get away with this. The impact of such channels, sadly, is to estrange the common man from the real economics of the issue and rationale behind the inaction of the Government, and this is just an example.
Non-expert reports find a way to the common man only because there is a lack of sound commentators on the subject. If thousands of Kiran Bedi's were available for comment on any and every act of the law enforcing agencies, would any newspaper/TV channel care to publish the thought of a reporter who is not an expert in the field? If every ex-Finance Minister of India (alive ofcourse) would comment on the quality of the budget presented, wouldn't the country stand to get a more balanced view?
If the real experts came out and discussed the 123 agreement in front of the common man, translating it into terms he can understand, the opposition does not have a chance to simply brandish it as anti-India and sway the minds of the common man. If sound commentators on good governance are in plenty, they can criticize the Government for each mistake and applaud it for each goal it scores. This would be of better use to the common man rather than an opposition party or a media reporter whose sole task is to criticize the Government, irrespective of a goal missed or a goal scored.
The point is not to take the word of these experts on face value, the point is that experts tend to explain the rationale behind their thoughts using the premise of sound logic, which can be easily proved or disproved. An expert worth his salt, will not risk his reputation to criticize something he does not believe in. Such an expert should consider playing the role of a commentator as a service to the society.
Until the time my country churns out enough commentators, each one of us should at least try and build a habit of questioning any and every comment made by any and everyone - i.e. test the logical basis of each argument before deciding anything. Remember, these decision help shape your opinion about people and Governments, and eventually these opinions go a long way in choosing the people who will rule us!
I dream of a day when no reporter would have the freedom to comment on areas in which he does not hold expertise - simply because an expert will just be a blog away for anyone who wants to know the truth!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)