This is a muddled and fallacious arguments about a subject critically important for India at this stage (“Why I’d be happy if the word ‘secular’ was removed from India’s Constitution”).
The writer dismisses the inclusion of secularism in the Constitution, not on its merits, but because it was done during the Emergency. Having dismissed it on this illogical basis, he proceeds to cite – superfluously – examples of other countries.
That the writer would be “happy if the word ‘secular was removed from India’s Constitution” may not be such an important issue, but the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and Hindutva supporters would be overjoyed. – Vir Narain
I for one like to see an Indian government that eschews religion completely from its actions. The government should not participate in any public functions pertaining to any religion, even their own, in an official capacity. Religion should not be a field in any government form. – R Venkat
The author axes the secular foundation of India by citing foreign contexts as supporting arguments. He uses the liberalism magic-wand to protect individual rights to religion in India. Tomorrow, someone will want to stretch this argument to replace the word “secular” with “Hindu”, forgetting the multi-religious reality of our nation, in keeping with the destructive waves that churn votes out of religious polarisation. When a fundamental right enshrined in the Constitution is looked down upon by the majority, liberalism allowing religious freedom is the most misleading argument. – Titus Thangaraj
It is irrelevant whether the word “secular” remains in our Constitution. Just as the inclusion was based on political compulsions, any measures initiated, however well meant, will also be tarred with the same brush. The word secular means non-discrimination on grounds of religion and equal rights and status to all citizens. A liberal democracy presupposes that it is secular. The word secular loses all meaning when selectivity or bias creeps into the deeds, actions or utterances of a government, organisation or individual. It’s past its sell-by date.
The word pseudo-secular, disdainfully tossed aside by the author, is not a figment of someone’s imagination. A pseudo-secular is one who wears secularism or liberalism on one sleeve and selective criticism or bias on the other. Unfortunately, such people are not past their sell-by date. – P Raghavendra
Does the author of this article realise that he is indirectly accepting that Manmohan Singh was merely doing Sonia Gandhi’s bidding and had hardly any role to play (“A champion of India’s poor: Sonia Gandhi’s most valuable, and least acknowledged, contribution”)? Secondly, introducing a scheme is of hardly any use if the poor follow-through means that the intended beneficiaries remain deprived. – Nivedita Pingle
I admired Scroll.in for its fearless and mostly objective even though selective reporting and presentations. But this article gives weight to the allegation that this platform is pro-Congress. It is disappointing.
No political leader so far can claim to have been the champion of the poor in India. To call Sonia a champion of the poor in India is akin to making a sweeping statement.
There have been some pro-poor steps taken from time to time, but the quest for power has diluted each such step. I will think twice before reading an article on Scroll.in now. – Jasmeet Tandon
Mridula Chari’s article was a fascinating read (“Why lakhs of Indians celebrate the British victory over the Maratha Peshwas every New Year”). I had no idea about caste equation during Peshwa rule, but was vaguely aware of the inclusive role of Shivaji. The symbolism of the (predominantly) Mahar army defeating Peshwas’ numerically superior forces must be truly strong for Dalits. The problem is, the way it has been reported is bad history.
The details of the battle are fascinating and anyone who fought on the Company’s side would naturally be proud. The Mahars are perfectly justified in celebrating the battle, specially due to the indignities heaped on them by the Brahminical Peshwas. Military prowess does give rise to self-esteem and pride among oppressed communities.
Today there is a massive onslaught on history by the rabid Right in this country. Pseudo-science and myth making has become the order of the day. Those who fight this cocktail of religious fascism and crony capitalism must be careful not to indulge in myth-making themselves. – Santanu Mukhopadhyay
Currying no favours
As the article suggests, the so-called curry market in the UK is staffed with cheap immigrant labour which has, in the last few decades, helped propel the curry as a British staple (“No more chicken tikka masala? Britain’s beloved curry houses are dying out after Brexit”). At the same time, the curry-fication of Indian food in the UK has stripped it of its nuanced identity. Given the immigration crackdown as fallout of Brexit, a bulk of the curries will be served as they are mostly done now – straight from a bottle with a little cream on top. The bottle of spicy sauce will probably be imported from the one or more of UK’s former colonies. It is the mid-level restaurants that are more likely to suffer. Having met a large number of Britons who refer to a biryani as a “curry”, it seems that majority of the patrons probably won’t be able to tell the difference anyway. – Tiksha Kaul
India is very weak in the digital field. We need to set up a body to help those who are illiterate or unfamiliar with technology before pushing through digitalisation (“25,800 cases of online banking fraud reported in 2017, IT minister tells Parliament”). The plan needs to be put on hold before the we are ready for it, as socially and in terms of infrastructure. – Dilip Maniar
Change is inevitable and the proposed National Medical Commission Bill has been criticised as well as welcomed as a probable improvement from the previous system (“Bill aiming to reform India’s medical education regulator will also boost privatisation of colleges”). What’s important is that technocrats (medical professionals of standing and with experience in administration of medical education and healthcare) should be nominated for inclusion. Further, the agenda and modalities should be specific to the actual requirements and with realistic projections and outcomes. – ME Yeolekar
Medicine is not a vote-generating tool but a science that saves lives. Do not kill it with half-baked knowledge. There is corruptions at every level, the government must deal with that first before altering the healthcare itself. – Srila
It is not a sanction to quackery but it is just a helping hand to our country in the field of health (“Bridge course provision in National Medical Commission Bill will ‘sanction quackery’, says IMA”). The health sector is increasingly becoming a business. AYUSH practictioners are not quacks. They are knowledgeable doctors who are lacking opportunities. The opposition to this provision of the bill is a case of jealousy and insecurity. – Priya Chauhan
This is a brilliantly written piece (“The magic of mutual respect: A rare jugalbandi between Siddheshwari Devi and Rasoolan Bai”). Aneesh Pradhan, being a tabla player himself, has lived every moment of the song and used the right words to explain the chemistry between the two singers. – Sivapriya Krishnan
When Jayalalithaa was acquitted, when Salman Khan was acquitted, was there any doubt that Raja and company would not be acquitted (“If there was no 2G scam, why did the Supreme Court cancel 122 spectrum licences in 2012?”)? – Vinaya KL
Respond to this article with a post
Share your perspective on this article with a post on ScrollStack, and send it to your followers.