I have full respect for Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, but I feel his real philosophy or thinking has not been taken into consideration (“Eye in the sky: Is India at risk of becoming a nation of big statues and small minds?”). I do not think such a selfless person would have approved such waste of money on his statue. Further, if a certain politician was defeated in polls for overspending on statues, how is this party or person any different? The worst part is that there could now be a competition between states to erect bigger statues. Even if they are financed with loans from foreign countries, the recovery would be through the taxpayers.
Building free world-class schools, colleges and hospitals in the name of these personalities would have been a better way to pay homage than such statues. – Prabhu Desai
I disagree with Girish Shahane’s views. If he thinks the platform is ugly, he is free to clean it up. And not to be rude but India is going to send a manned mission to the moon soon. He thinks the nation is small-minded, but he has the smallest mind of them all. A few people’s remarks on the Statue of Unity and its visibility from space does not show that the whole nation is flawed. – Balaji Sreenivasan
The author seems to have exhibited a narrow-minded approach. It is objectionable to make a remark like “big statues and small minds”. What about such statues in other countries? Would he comment similarly on them? Is exhibiting a nationalistic approach by remembering a great leader like Patel a crime? He is misusing the freedom of the press through such comments. – Nagaraju Ramini
The Chief Justice of India’s hurt over the disclosures is understandable (“CBI row: Supreme Court unhappy about ‘leak’ of Alok Verma’s reply to CVC, adjourns hearing”). Any one who loves the country and wants to preserve institutions like the CBI will hold their head in shame over the allegations and counter allegations by top officers of the agency. While the CJI yearns to preserve the image of India’s premier investigation agency, there is no evidence to suggest that the officers of CBI themselves have any urge to save the institution.
Any discerning reader can see that the government and its institutions often function in a way that is antithetical to the purpose for which they exist. CBI exists to investigate crimes with far-reaching ramifications, but now finds itself involved in a case with far-reaching ramifications. It is going to be a great challenge even for the finest judicial minds to figure out who is right and wrong in the CBI imbroglio. Large-scale manipulation seems to have been done by men of great official stature to serve their self interests and that of their political and corporate bosses, leading to the current situation.
Such immoral manipulations should not be allowed to be covered up. So the crisis in CBI calls for full disclosure of facts. Men in responsible positions do not always carry out their tasks with probity and integrity. So the right option is to allow or engineer the skeletons in the cupboard of CBI and similar institutions to tumble out in full public view. – P Vijayachandran
Scroll.in is an excellent publication and one I love to scroll on my handset (“The Readers’ Editor writes: Scroll.in readers must take ownership of the office that reports to them”). It has a very well-chosen news lineup, honest views, comments and a freshness. The concept of reader’s editor is unique too. I am a doctor. I love reading Scroll.in and love commenting too whenever possible. Scroll.in gives its readers a sense of belonging. Wish there was a Scroll.in for every public space. – Chhanda Basu Mullick
My heartiest congratulations to Kalpana Sharma for being appointed as the next reader’s editor. I hope that she will constantly engage herself with the readers and the editorial team of Scroll.in. I also expect that she would always provide deserving space to the dissenting voices of this publication’s readers. – Rehan Ansar
It is remarkable how evidence is destroyed or withdrawn to perpetrate what the politicians decide (“Amit Shah benefitted politically from Sohrabuddin case, alleges former investigating officer”)! The Indian police have lost credibility. Police officers collude with politicians. There is no bar on people with a criminal background from contesting elections. Fake encounters are games for police and politicians, in which innocent people are killed. – Paul Dhanasekaran
The author’s selective reporting on the Sabarimala issue is crossing all norms of decency and professional ethics (“Kerala BJP is facing a credibility crisis on Sabarimala – and it’s of the party’s own making”). The people of Kerala know very well that the mess created in Sabarimala can be attributed to only one party, and that is the Communist Party of India (Marxist). Instead of trying to resolve the issue in an amicable manner with the stakeholders, they have adopted a confrontational approach. The stark truth is that people of Kerala have scant respect for Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan after he betrayed the believers by filing an affidavit that did not reflect the aspirations of the devotees. We don’t trust the Left Democratic Front government anymore. – Gourishankar Panicker
Brahmanical patriarchy debate
The fact that Ambedkar said something doesn’t make it true (“A call to ‘smash Brahmanical patriarchy’ is not hate speech – it’s progressive, anti-caste politics”). Caste oppression today is perpetrated not by Brahmins but by other upper castes. The example of the Vaniyar-Dalit marriage that the author cites is a case in point. Vaniyars are not Brahmins. This being the case, the use of “Brahmanical Patriarchy” associates patriarchy with Brahmins exclusively and is therefore pejorative and offensive. To dismiss Brahmins’ fury by citing Ambedkar to the effect that Brahmins are different from Brahmanism is to add insult to injury. It tarnishes an entire community by insinuating that Brahmins practice patriarchy while other castes do not. – Ramamurthy Sankar