By Kumar Ketkar
What will NarendraModi be doing in the last week of May? For better or worse, many of the predictions about the final number of seats to be won in this LokSabha elections have been about the BharatiyaJanata Party. And setting the political analysts, and anyone with a number to pick, on a chase has been BJP president Amit Shah, who has predicted his party will win 350 seats when the results of the ongoing general elections are announced on 23 May.
Even if the BJP does not win as many seats as its leaders predict, many of them, citing several opinion polls, maintain that the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) will reach the majority mark of 273. That means NarendraModi will be taking oath for a second term. Columnists like Meghnad Desai and SurjitBhalla have expressed confidence about Modi’s return – either with a majority for the BJP alone or through coalitions under the NDA.
But quite a few political pundits have begun to say that the BJP-led NDA won’t cross even 200 seats. This means that the BJP spin doctors will have to mobilise about 100 more members to form a “stable” government. That indeed will put the system under huge convulsion and tension. Post-poll alliances are extremely difficult and even dubious.
One can recall how the NDA government led by AtalBihari Vajpayee and Lal Krishna Advani in 1998 and 1999 remained in a limbo for almost a week when J Jayalalitha played truant. There are many mavericks and self-styled masterminds of political skulduggery, like Subramaniam Swami, who can disrupt the process. Swami can raise a red flag by just seeing ArunJaitley in the new firmament.
There are quite a few in the Central Hall or corporate conclaves or Press Clubs who say with considerable confidence that if the BJP alone is just around 200, then despite being the single largest party, Modi won’t return to the Prime Minister’s Office. The party itself will stop him in the tracks.
The reason being, it is said, the RashtriyaSwayamsevakSangh (RSS) and the loyalists to the Sangh do not want Modi and Amit Shah. Indeed, there are many who feel that Raj Thackeray’s “toofan” against Modi-Shah in Maharashtra is backed by support from the top leadership of the Sangh. Thackeray’s Maharashtra NavnirmanSena is not contesting any seat in this LokSabha elections.
People outside of Maharashtra might not be aware of the fantastic whirlwind and highly aggressive campaign that Raj Thackeray had been leading against Modi and Amit Shah, calling the duo a “threat to the nation”. Thackeray has taken a vow to make India “Modi-mukt”. Lakhs and lakhs of people are thronging to his rallies while the social media has been hailing him in a style usually reserved for Rajinikanth.
The BJP-led NDA could have anybody – from Rajnath Singh to NitinGadkari – replace the top two in the party’s rank should the SanghParivar decide to sidelineNarendraModi and Amit Shah. This hypothesis is based on another presumption -that the RSS does not want Modi as he has become larger than life and unbearable to the party. Such speculations do not require evidence or data.
There are others who confidently say that even if BJP gets anywhere between 180 and 200 seats, Modi can manoeuvre the magical figure of 273 by roping in BijuJanata Dal (and meeting any demands of its leader NavinPatnaik, the chief minister of Odisha) and by giving favourable signals to any of YSR Congress’ Jagan Mohan Reddy’s wishes. There are also people who predict like short-term Nostradamus that MayawatiBahujanSamaj Party (BSP) will break its alliance with the Samajwadi Party (SP) to join Modi-led NDA. After all, she had campaigned for Modi in 2002 after the Gujarat pogrom.
There is also a doomsday-like scenario painted by some observers. They say that Modi will just not quit. With the help of the President, the Election Commission, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), a servile media and even the judiciary, Modi will continue to be in charge. Why, he can declare an Emergency or summon the army to help him “govern”.
It is interesting that nobody says Modi will sit on the opposition benches, or be ready to become the leader of the NDA-Opposition. Some do say that he would wait to let parliamentary chaos prevail and create situation for a mid-term LokSabha election.
Already crafty calculations and conspiracy theories have begun to float. There are supposedly many Brutus-like characters, who can destabilise the roles of NarendraModi, Amit Shah, Kamal Nath, SharadPawar, Mayawati or even Rahul Gandhi, once redefining of the post-poll alliances begin to take shape.
Apparently, unpredictable and unimaginable alliances spring up confounding the media and politicians themselves. For instance, in 1996, AtalBihari Vajpayee could not continue as the prime minister because he had the support of only three parties -Shiv Sena, Akali Dal and Haryana VikasManch – which wasn’t enough. He could not get the needed numbers despite being his BJP emerging as the single largest party with 161 seats in the general elections.
But the same BJP under Vajpayee managed support of 24 parties just two years later, and the new NDA was born. The hardcore anti-BJP parties like the All India DravidaMunnetraKazghagam (AIADMK) in 1998 and even the DMK in 1999 (after J Jayalalithaa parted ways from the alliance), joined the Vajpayee-led government. Later, Chandrababu Naidu, Mamata Banerjee, Farooq Abdullah as well as the stridently “anti-communal” Lohia school socialist like George Fernandes became members of the Vajpayee government. If AtalBihari Vajpayee can perform that rope trick, why not NarendraModi, goes the argument.
Opinion polls maintain that Modi remains the most popular leader, more than the BJP, and that the Balakot air strikes have made him a “braveheart” nationalist. Even people in rural parts, about whom it is said that government policies and issues of daily life matter more, are believed to be seeing in him a “saviour of the nation”. All of this leads some to say that nationalism and national security has gripped the electorate’s psyche and is the dominating factor in this election.
The detractors, however, say that real issues like, jobs, farmers’ distress, GST and demonetisation-related chaos and collapse of the small and medium industry are more important for the voters than nationalism. At least, I have not seen the nationalist frenzy in the parts I travelled. But who and what can we say about the so-called silent voter?
After all Indira Gandhi and her Congress were routed in 1977 by the Janata Party and then the same Janata Party was demolished by Indira Gandhi in 1980. The BJP could win just two seats in 1985, and yet could win 182 seats in 1998 and 1999. Nobody visualised the defeat of Vajpayee’s “Shining India” government in 2004. And of course very few gave NarendraModi a full majority in 2014.
With this kind of electoral history, who can really say what NarendraModi will be doing in the last week of May?
The author is a former editor and Congress member of RajyaSabha. Views are personal.
Roots of Social Darwinism
By Amir Suhail Wani
August Comte, the forefather of modern sociology divided human history into three stages, “the theological stage, when events of the universe are interpreted in terms of divine powers, the metaphysical stage in which we find no mention of specific Gods (Although external forces are still referred to in order to explain events)and the stage of positivism, where events are explained in terms of common laws deduced from observation and calculation without having recourse to spirit, God or external power’’. Positivist philosophy is a technical term applied by Comte to his view of the world. He believed that human mind should confine itself to actual facts or phenomenon. Comte’s central thrust was to apply scientific methods to the study of society. Positivism, therefore says Patrick “really amounts to this: Science is the final stage of human thought” Comte’s positivism thus amounts to epiphenomenalism, restraining humans to abstain to look behind the phenomenon into their root causes. Such an approach shifted the gaze of man from metaphysical causes to mere physical events.
Time and again the slogan was raised that “All knowledge that is factual is connected with experiences, in such a way that verification or direct or indirect confirmation is possible”. Such a view had long lasting ramifications on almost all subjects of human interest and it provided a new matrix for the re-synthesis of human thought. One of the most important emergent consequences of this doctrine was the mechanical interpretation of life. The first step in this direction was taken by Charles Darwin, who posited that all living species evolved from a single cell that emerged on the earth 3.8 million years ago. Organic evolutionists believe that the study of animal life shows higher and lower species exist, which range from unicellular to multicellular organisms. When these observations are linked with the fossils preserved in different layers of earth’s crust, it is revealed (to evolutionists) that higher forms of life have actually emerged from the lower forms. Thus it deems man as the decedent of apes, which apart from its biological aspects has some serious philosophical consequences. We shall not go into the details of evolution, neither its acceptance nor rejection; however, we shall see that how it has led to the downfall of human values and created a podium for what can be called as the descent of man68.But the spontaneous origin of life governed by laws of probability is something which no rational being can accept. Thus Prof. Leslie Orgel, an evolutionist of repute from the University of San Diego confesses in 1994 issue of Scientific American magazine confesses that:-
“It is extremely improbable that proteins and nucleic acids both of which are structurally complex arose spontaneously in the same place at the same time. Yet it also seems impossible to have one without the other. And so, at first glance, one might have to conclude that life could never, in fact, have originated by chemical means.
The philosophical ramifications of the theory of evolution are still far reaching. We can approach it in two directions, either as an ascent of man or as the descent of man, the former being positive approach while the latter being negative Darwinian approach. For, to say that man emerged from lower forms of life implies a rhetoric degeneration of the pedestal that man occupies. It can also be said that man is the climax of process of evolution and occupies the highest place in the hierarchy of creation. Even if it is assumed, for time being that the theory of evolution has some credibility, even then it has no scope either to deny the existence of creator nor to demote man from his pedestal. In former case, can be argued that if evolution is correct then the God works like this and evolution is one among his many means to bring existence out of naught. In argument to second statement, it can be exampled that the origin of things hardly matters when it comes to its real ends. As an example, stars are created out of miniscule and unworthy atoms of hydrogen and helium, but when it comes to their purposive nature, the stars lit the entire universe. It is pertinent to quote Allama lqbal in this regard, who said:-
“The fact that the higher emerges out of the lower does not rob the higher of its worth and dignity. It is not the origin of a thing that matters, it is the capacity, the significance and the final reach of the emergent that matter- indeed the evolution of life shows that though in the beginning, the mental is dominated by the physical, the mental, as it grows in power, tends to dominate the physical and may eventually rise to a position of complete independence”
There are other versions of evolution like that of spiritual evolution, cosmic evolution, which believes that evolution means the adoption of life to the energy patterns of universe or in other words to harmonize oneself with the laws of nature. In Islamic lexicon, this is termed as “Submitting to Shariah or divine law”. It also believes that things have to have some causes before they start assuming phenomenal form and since man strives for higher values these values must exist. Thus this evolution doesn’t stop at man, but takes entire cosmos into its fold, while simultaneously striving towards never ending vistas. The second part of this vision deals with the evolution of universe tracing back its origin to big bang and investigating its time evolution through different cosmic time scales’. There is also another version of evolution called creative evolution, to which we will come after a while. Thus on the whole we have seen that the evolutionary picture of man, as interpreted by Darwinists reduces man to an amoral biped with no sense of higher values. Such an interpretation of Evolution has often brought it into strong clash with the religion and the doctrine has been refuted, not merely on dogmatic but on sound rational basis.
The formulation of the theory of evolution was a turning point in the evolution of human thought. The way, this theory was interpreted removed God from the cosmic screen. Thus Julian Huxley, in his book Religion without revelation remarked that “Newton showed that God did not control the movement of the planets. Laplace in his famous aphorism affirmed that astronomy had no need of God hypothesis; Darwin and Pasteur between them did the same for biology”. Such interpretations paved the ground for materialists and deprived humans of the spiritual element which had been an inspiring factor in evolution of civilizations. This materialistic doctrine took different forms in different sectors of life. In physical sciences it came to be concluded that the universal phenomenon are governed by strict and immutable laws of physics, with no intervention of creator. In biology, as shown above it was precluded that life emerged from De novo without the intervention of creator. So much of determinism, it was concluded that even the realms of human free will are subject to laws of mechanics (Laplace). This was the picture of philosophy and the framework of human understanding that existed in and prior to 1860.
The philosophy was further reinforced by Karl Marx, via his famous doctrines of capitalism and Marxism. It is said of Marx that he gave to history what Darwin gave to biology. Marx claimed that he had discovered the laws of social evolution which govern our present, past and future of our social dynamics as the laws of physics govern the overall history of physical phenomenon. In other words, he established social and physical sciences on same stand. As the laws of physical universe are immutable to any human intervention, so are the laws of social evolution unchangeable and follow a definite course on their own, without any active participation of man. Further he professed that all social phenomenon are a consequence of class conflict. As Manifesto of the communist party puts it, “The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles .
Freeman and slave, patrician and plebeian, lord and serf, guild-master and journeyman, in a word oppressor and oppressed, stood in constant opposition to one another, carried on an uninterrupted, now hidden, now open fight, a fight that each time ended, either in a revolutionary reconstruction of society at large, or in the common ruin of the contending classes.” Apart from his views on social history or economic system, which remain a subject of controversy, Marx presented a picture of man that deserves special mention. Marx referred to humans as Gattungswesen, translated as “species essence” By this Marx meant that humans are capable of making or shaping their own nature to a great extent. As Erich Fromm notes “For Marx’s philosophy, which has found its most articulate expression in the Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts, the central issue is that of the existence of the real individual man, who is what he does, and whose “nature” unfolds and reveals itself in history. But in contrast to Kierkegaard and others, Marx sees man in his full concreteness as a member of a given society and of a given class, aided in his development by society, and at the same times its captive. The full realization of man’s humanity and his emancipation from the social forces that imprison him is bound up, for Marx, with the recognition of these forces, and with social change based on this recognition.
(The author is a freelance columnist with bachelors in Electrical Engineering and a student of comparative studies with special interests in Iqbaliyat & mystic thought. He contributes a weekly column for this newspaper that appears every Monday. He can be reached at: email@example.com)
BY Shabbir Aariz
Respect is more valuable than praise and we are told ‘respect others and you will be respected’. Not bad but because of this, one is likely to become obsessed with pleasing everyone else, ignoring one’s own self for having been guided to a thinking that any importance if accorded to one’s own self, is something wrong to do. But everything in your life depends on how you treat yourself as the self-respect is at the root of everything that you will ever do, how you treat yourself and allow everyone else to treat you and it is always important not put yourself last.
Self-respect is neither to be confused with an inflated ego or self-esteem or over confidence. One can have little self-respect while acting with self esteem by conducting himself in the manner that makes him very successful. If one has a bad day, one falls an easy prey to blame, guilt, depression, despair and stress and with that the self-esteem also is at a risk of disappearance that once had inflated one’s ego, given also the feeling of being very special and important. Respecting oneself is not all about that. Respecting one’s own self is nothing to do with being conceited or self centered and egoist….. in fact it does the quite opposite. Self-respect is all about discovering one’s worth and having its deep sense and showing the worthiness of giving and receiving love and respect. It is a belief about one’s own worth and value. One needs to admit and acknowledge to oneself that one deserves not to be treated poorly but with respect and have the courage to stand up for oneself while being treated in a manner that is less than what one really deserves. It is an ability to adjust one’s life after knowing one’s worth on one’s own terms and isolating people treating one poorly. It is being able to never saying ‘yes’ while wanting to say ‘no’ and letting others know the same. It never makes a person bad but respectable and strong. It has to do with feelings people experience that come from their sense of worthiness or unworthiness. It is about having the ability to put a halt to any attempt that is aimed at taking one for granted.
When one learns to love oneself and treat others with respect that gives one an amazing inner satisfaction. It is not ego which would mean only to respect yourself. Self-respect means to be able to sacrificing personal interest for greater good. In one’s relationship with anyone, respect is an important quality and there is no exception when it comes to one’s relationship to oneself. It is about having a sense of honor and dignity about yourself, your choices, decisions and your life. It is about treating others well and knowing that by doing so, others will treat you well in return. It keeps us on track in our lives. It is really interesting to teach others how to treat us.
It has to be viewed differently than self esteem which is the feeling of knowing we can conduct ourselves well out there in the world. We can be good at our job and know that our families are thriving due to our leadership. Outwardly we are successful in at least some of the ways our society defines success. But it is very possible to experience self esteem without any self-respect. It is that deeper, inner feeling about ourselves. Self esteem is earned undoubtedly by proving ourselves that we can achieve positive results in our various life tasks. Self-respect is also earned……. It is an inside job that nobody can do for us. It can neither be bought nor can another person bestow it upon us. It is not until we truly love and respect ourselves, that we can begin to believe that we are worthy of another person’s love and respect. It is the most important thing we either have it or don’t have, because it forms the keystone of how we treat ourselves and how we allow others to treat us. The only thing we can change already resides within us—such as our preferences, our attitudes towards ourselves and life in general—-we can come out of our feelings of ‘victim’ by acknowledging that we do actually have enough control over many aspects of our lives. No one can make you feel badly about yourself without your permission. Don’t say yes while you want to say no and if you do so, you teach others to take you for granted and treat you poorly. With this faith and conviction, you are neither arrogant, nor an egoist or selfish but a giver of love, care, compassion and respect because you equally want to amass all that in return.
(A leading lawyer and eminent poet, author contributes a weekly column. He can be reached at: firstname.lastname@example.org)
Women in our society
By Irshad Ahmed Bhat & Zahid Sultan Magray
“One is not born, but rather becomes, a women”.
Simone De Beauvoir.
Discrimination against women and girls is a pervasive and long running phenomenon that characterizes society at large. Beyond economic figures and financial abstractions a particularly heinous manifestation of toxic patriarchal society is violence against women; rape is undoubtedly one such horrible crime.
Rape happens everywhere: it happens inside homes, families, in education institutions, in neighbourhood, in police stations, in towns, villages and its incidence is increasing in India after every passing day. In fact, in India, rape is fourth most common crime against women. Gender equality performance of India like other south Asian countries is dismal. World economic forum Global Gender Gap report 2018 ranked India at 142 out of 149 countries on economic participation and opportunity gap.
Protest whether in physical or virtual space against such crimes is important because it shakes the conscience of society, brings people close to change, makes them feel part of the change. And there is certainly good chance that widely held wave of protests in wake of three year old Sumbal minor ‘ s rape case will lead to some expected results after widespread Outrage. But what is need is to ask ourselves; why did rape of female child, college going daughters, girls at working places or married mother’s occur cutting across age differences? It is important to protest but it is not something that occurs by itself. It is a part of continuing & embedded violence in society that targets women on daily basis that needs to be looked upon. Selective sex abortions, female infanticide , male child preference , dowry related case , workplace sexual harassment , physical violence, physiological violence , intimate partner violence , sexual violence and structural violence against women are what makes such crimes a normalcy. It is this culture that leads to such violence against women & pervasive sexism.
Modern women still encounter widespread gender inequality and often internalise conservative attitudes towards women’s social role. Society at large is stagnating under the veneer of modernity which further internalised these behaviours among women. Famous feminist Simon de Beauvoir said, “one is not born, but rather becomes, a women”. She was referring to the notion of social construction of a person as a women. In the second sex, De Beauvoir sketches a kind of existential history of a women’s life. A story of a women’s attitudes her body and bodily functions changes over years, and of how society influences this attitude. Here De Beauvoir raises the core question of female embodiment; are the supposed disadvantages of the female body actual disadvantages which exist objectively in all societies, or are they merely judged to be disadvantaged by our society? Paul Sartre observed that whatever we perceive, including other people, is rendered as an “object” to our gaze and is defined by us. De Beauvoir takes up this idea of Paul Sartre and applies it to men’s perception of women. The very concept of women, argues De Beauvoir, is a male concept. Women is always, ‘other’ because male is the ‘seer’: he is subject and she is the object. The meaning of what it is to be a women is given by man. This timelessness observation is all relevant and holds good in our society without an iota of doubt.
Similarly, Masculinity is also related to the notion of becoming a man in a sexists, misogynist world. It is a stereotype or social construct. Not all men are violent or aggressive .it is the pursuit of power that public consciousness is being moulded to uphold the notion of destructive, brutal or aggressive aspect of manhood. The industrialization has also created a havoc by bringing into the cult of exploitation, exclusion and stratification while creating straight Jacket role for being a man or women through inflexible sexual racial division of labour. Vulgar depiction of male dominance and focus on male privileges & entitlements is creating a culture of misogyny.
Addressing a crime like rape needed a comprehensive holistic approach to maintain and support gender equality at interpersonal, family, society, country or at global level by combating domestic violence against women, ensuring progressive institutional & legal procedures, imparting Education on gender equity from primary to university level in collaboration with religious community, structural reforms to end bias towards women. A vibrant grassroots women’s network is needed to push policy makers and communities to step up actions on gender equality, to ensure accountability on legislation addressing violence against women. Similarly, In Muslim society, The Quranic command for ensuring women right and their protection, fair and equal treatment needs to be rejuvenated and emphasized, and Muslim mainstream scholarship must address such pressing issues
What makes judiciary in India hesitant to intrude by criminalising marital rape or rapes in general, it is here that structure of caste, and culture and sexuality inhabit women’s freedom with fatal consequences. To seek justice (Punitive) for rape victims in such a culture is little more than melodrama. More importantly, the real task is to shift attitudes towards sexual violence, not just to victims’ post-facto but more importantly to accept that rapists are a product of a society to which we all as a society are responsible in one or other way.
It is about a society, how it creates, perpetuates and sustains the mind-set that leads to rape like crimes and how such privileges intensify this centuries old violence. Women do not choose to think about their bodies and bodily processes negatively. Rather they are being forced to do so as a result of being embedded in a toxic patriarchal society. And half of the descendants of Eva are deprived and marginalized by rest male fellows of their legitimate share.
(Feedback at: email@example.com)
Grenade lobbed at police station Shopian
Shopian, May 20 : Suspected militants on Monday evening lobbed a grenade towards police station Shopian. An official told that the...
Pellet victims protest, demand ban on use of pellet guns
A group of pellet victims, who were injured during law and order situations in the Kashmir Valley over the past...
NAAC grants A+ accreditation to Kashmir University
Srinagar, May 20: After bagging 53rd rank in NIRF 2019 and 51st in QS India University Rankings 2019, the University of Kashmir added yet another feather...
Man killed over land dispute in Reasi district; 5 arrested
Jammu, May 20: A 64-year-old man was killed by five people over a land dispute in Jammu and Kashmir’s Reasi...
Curfew relaxed in Bhaderwah town
Bhaderwah:Curfew was relaxed in the entire Bhaderwah town for the first time on Monday since its imposition last week following...
First surgical strike was carried out in Sept 2016: Lt Gen Ranbir Singh
Srinagar: Commanding-in-Chief of the Indian Army’s Northern Command, Lieutenant General Ranbir Singh on Monday confirmed that the first surgical strike...
Wahab Riaz, Mohammad Amir, Asif Ali included in Pakistan World Cup squad
Pakistan have sprung a surprise by bringing back pacers Mohammad Amir and Wahab Riaz to the ODI fold for the...
VIDEO | Dead Body of 29 year old missing teacher recovered in Bandipora
Bandipora, May 20: Dead Body of a missing government teacher was recovered on Monday from Laharwapora gath near Wullar Lake...
Nocturnal clashes rock Budgam village
Budgam, May 20 : Nocturnal clashes erupted in Central Kashmir’s Daharmuna Budgam district after government forces raided the village in...