New Bottle in old wine

This was sent out to TOI letters to the Editor but not published

Your Editorial “New Bottle in old wine”

Media and lot of the urbal population have been completely  taken in by the AAP’s avowed brand of honest and ethics  in politics,which in fact is well founded and not without reason.They have only been singing paens in praise of whatever AAP has been doing and turned blind to the retrograde economic path propounded by AAP in its manifesto and now in action.Atleast for once , your paper  has come out to point out the retrograde step taken by AAP in indulging in freebies . Electricity distribution in Delhi was privatized some 10 years back post which the efficiencies have reportedly gone up and in fact Delhi distribution Companies are generating a surplus also ,incidentally Delhi Govt has 49% holding in that. Surplus generated can easiliy be used for investments in infrastructure to have a larger bang for the buck rather than such freebies which have a short term benefit but deprives the community from any long term invetsments and consequent benefits. For all its talk of honesty, I think Kejriwal’s statement that he wants to do good in the 48 hours before the Trust vote is patently unethical and almost amounts to buying votes and laying a foundation for his Lok Sabha elections.Good governance is not all about orice reductions , it is value for money to the community.Free today would deprive the community of benefits tomorrow.AAP’s manifesto and actions so far suggest a revival of marxism, couched in the euphemism of “aam aadmi benefit”. It almost appears axiomatic in public perception that honesty and good governance can be bedfellows of  socialsm and not of  capitalism.

The irony is AAP finds resonance amongst a lot of urbanites , whose improved quality of life owes much to the economic reforms over the last 20 years.AAP has to understand that good governance and capitalism with checks and balances is not bad combination, in fact that would be the best for the country.

Lopsided debates on "Secularism by Secularists and activists

Sent this across to TOI letter to editor , did not expect the same to be published in view of the slightly and perceived rightist tone.
Father Mascarenhas , the principal of Xavier's exhorted students to stay away from Modi ( without referring to the name) on grounds of how lopsided Gujarat model is and how we needed to stay away from non secular forces

Secularism as a concept should  mean respect for people independent of their religious affiliations and respect for other religions too.With BJP and Modi's imminent ascension, there is this heightened and nervous discussion on secularism and how there is need to protect the country from right wing parties, meaning BJP and Modi.

To them I would like to state that NDA with BJP as the lead did govern the country for 5 years and did a good job of the same . There was no heightened communal tensions etc. In all fairness if and when Modi becomes the PM , there is need to give him the mental space and time to get down to business. But for the 2002 riots in Gujarat, things have been peaceful in the last 12 years. Nothing in Gujarat post 2002 suggests , this heightened nervousness amongst the secular people is well founded .The secularists and media personnel have been either openly stating or implying that India could degenerate in to  Hindutva mode and freedom of speech could be a big casualty under Modi and BJP.It appears as if the Secularists and media feel that they would be better off with a corrupt and inefficient Government rather than have a Hindutva party, BJP in power. They project that doomsday is round the corner.

Add to this are the Imams, College principals ( Father Mascarenhas ) and Hindu spiritual people exhorting people  directly or indirectly to vote for Congress or BJP as the case may be.

This excessive discussion on secularism and fear of loss of the nation to fringe elements is doing more harm than good. This competitive secularism is pushing fence sitters to the right side (fundamentalist) side of the debate. The secularists carry so much arrogance and moral superiority that their exhortations have a negative impact rather than any positive impact .

To play the devil's advocate and departing slightly from the topic, I would like to ask Father Mascarenhas and others of his ilk, if he is secular,I presume that he would think that people would have to be respected independent of their religious affiliations and also all religions should be respected. Secularism means that you don't have the arrogance to say that your religion is better than theirs. That being the case, I find it hard to digest as to why conversions from Hindusim to Christianity take place. I have no problem if the same is on one's own volition but if the conversion takes place based on a persuasive speech aided by provision of facilities to the potential converts, can  you call yourself a secular person ?

I respect Christianity and what they have done in uplifting the lives of several people in the country but as people who claim to be secular , Father Mascarenhas and his ilk ,  have a responsibility to continue to do the good work but without taking advantage of the beneficiaries to change their faith.Are they doing so and can they claim to be truly secular ?

I am not casting specific aspersions on Dr Mascarenhas but simply posing a question as to the moral contradiction between definition of secularism and conversions  at ground level not all of which is change based on genuine change of faith .