Dear fellow country men & women
Vande mataram
INDIAN DEMOCRACY :a genuine case of the blind leading the blind.
We blame the British for their “divide and rule” policy.
Were we not divided even before the British came to India? could they have conquered India
if we were not divided to begin with?
The biggest traitors are our own politicians who play the caste game and weaken the nation, only
to strengthen their own position . they do not realize that if the nation is weak , no matter how
strong they are individually, they will be destroyed.
CITIZENS OR SUBJECT?
I don’t know if there can be anything like feudal democracy.
It seems that there is, therefore, I take a very tolerant view of the
misconduct of our beloved leaders , this is because we live by
the philosophy,
the king can do no wrong,
our political values have plunged so low ,
that it doesn’t take courage to do wrong,
but it takes a lot of courage to do right.
The preamble to the Constitution of India reads as follows.
“ WE, THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a
SOVEREIGN - SOCIALIST – SECULAR - DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC
and to secure to all its citizens:
JUSTICE - social, economic and political;
LIBERTY of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship;
EQUALITY of status and of opportunity;
and to promote among them all
FRATERNITY assuring the dignity of the individual and the unity and integrity of the Nation;
IN OUR CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY this twenty-sixth day of November, 1949,
do HEREBY
ADOPT, ENACT AND GIVE TO OURSELVES THIS CONSTITUTION.
All very predictable stuff, really. We have courts, plurality,
some increases in opportunity, etc. Yes, there are glaring deficiencies too,. The preamble merely
assures us that we have a specific intent, and that the Constitution shall provide the means to
attaining it.
Indeed, the first few articles in the Constitution follow quite naturally from the preamble, listing
who we are (citizenship), where we live (territory), our rights and responsibilities, etc. Later, the
Constitution outlines the nature of our government, the various public offices, the powers vested
in the office-holders, and how those powers are shared. To the casual reader, and with the
hindsight of 50+ years, the entire document appears to be a well-reasoned and detailed
framework for government and social organisation, and rightly so. I have no clash with much
of it, and like many others, I find the intent and diligence of the original framers laudable.
But where has this document brought us? Today,
whereas we have maintained the appearance of representative government, with elections galore,
and promises upon promises to eradicate poverty, remove illiteracy and in short order recreate heaven on earth, in fact India boasts the world's largest number of poor people assembled under one government, in history!
Disparities of income have turned the quest for economic utopia into a joke, religious rivalry has rendered
the secular state of harmonious fraternity notional at best, our criminals aspire to legislate and
our worthy seek nothing so much as to remove themselves from Indian public life. More than
half a century since the eloquent imagination of those early days, there is much promised in the
Constitution that is far from reality.
When JOHN KENNEDY asked WERNER VON BRAUN
what it would take to build a rocket that would carry a man to the moon and return him safely to earth ,
his answer was
simple and direct
“ THE WILL TO DO IT”
President never asked back if it was possible and the rest is in the pages of history.
Namely- why would you,
me ,
or anyone,
want [or need] to overcome such challenges of life
which we face every moment of life , give that some real thought because the answer to that
question , has the power to turn your life around in the snap of your fingers.
But we say , the Constitution is only a piece of paper, and no matter that we may inscribe upon it
glorious truths, reality must nonetheless reflect what we have actually done in pursuing them.
The ideals haven't eroded, us reason, it is that those empowered to promote them bear no
resemblance to the visionary men and women of integrity that the framers thought would be at
the helm. Instead, our leaders have been unqualified disasters, placing their self-interest regularly
ahead of any national good.
Always remember
responsibility without authority is meaningless
but
authority without responsibilty is very very dangerous
Perhaps. And yet, by some combination of luck and will, we have arrived at a time when calls to
reconsider the original document are regularly heard. It is true that many of those attempting this
revision have a political agenda, despite the appointment of several non-partisan people to the
commission now in place to suggest a revised edition. Senior justices appointed by different
governments, experts in constitutional law, and socio-economic geniuses alike find some place in
this experiment, and it is likely that not all of them will permit themselves to be swayed by their
political leanings alone.
The issue before us, really, is two-fold.
One, that the original framework
and its practice have not led to the desired outcomes,
and two, that the longer this remains true,
the more political the process of altering the framework will become.
There is, however, a middle path. Along this journey, we may continue to aspire to the goals
originally laid out, and yet reach towards a more cherished end than we have witnessed so far.
Doing so will mean that we must acknowledge that incremental attempts at change have been
easily subverted in the past, and accept that there is no gain from continuing down that road. The
change that is required must be dramatic, it must be significant and it must represent, despite
that, a compromise which a wide spectrum of political opinion will embrace. All of those
objectives are served well by the simplest of procedures, the mere addition of one sentence to the
existing Constitution, or, alternately by the removal of one line from it.
Articles 36 to 51 outline an important part of the framers' vision, which has subsequently been
discarded by the state, either from economic limitation or by deliberate political choice.
Together, these are known as the Directive Principles of State Policy. And the original sin to
which much of today's decay can be traced, as well as the inspiration for moving forward and
away from today's lamentable state, are both ironically contained in the same article (37) within
the Directive Principles, and it runs as follows.
The provisions contained in this Part [ie, Part IV, the Directive Principles] shall not be
enforceable by any court, but the principles therein laid down are nevertheless fundamental in
the governance of the country and it shall be the duty of the state to apply these principles in
making laws.
The dichotomy of that provision is telling. To understand why, one needs only to look at the
directives in these articles, which run the gamut of a good society. The state shall secure a social
order for the promotion of the welfare of the people (38), the state shall guard against
exploitation of the infirm and weak and promote the distribution of material wealth for the
common good (39), the state shall ensure that employment obtains a living wage (43), and that
children are provided free and compulsory education (45), the state shall guard the natural
environment of the territory (48A), etc. The language of the directive principles reads like a
laundry list that a civil liberties union would compose. It is remarkable, then, that these inspiring
objectives should be circumvented by the provision that the state's duty to obtain these ends shall
not be enforceable by law.
Why? How can that which is "fundamental in the governance of the country" be something that
does not merit this sensible protection? What sort of ideal is one that is immediately disavowed
in compromise? The framers, doubtless, had their reasons. And in some of the articles, these
reasons are indicated. The state has limited economic capacities (it costs a lot of money to
educate 300 million children), and certain social norms may require time to muster the needed
political and social capital (the controversial Article 44, urging the state to enact one law for all
citizens, comes to mind). But these limitations aren't in perpetuity, and the framers knew that
only too well. Universal education, for example, was considered do-able in 10 years' time. And
yet, four of ten Indians are illiterate, with over five times this period behind us.
That is unfortunate, but remediable. Although the state (at various levels) has professed inability
to engineer these directive principles, it repeatedly claims to stand by them. Most political parties
find substantive value in the Constitution, and notwithstanding their differences with parts of it,
are reluctant to call for widespread changes, partly from fear that their pet vote-banks may be
eradicated by new social policy. Also, the incremental changes we have sought in legislation
have not promoted the ends so vigorously proclaimed in the directive principles. We've stumbled
along the way, lost the direction we were exhorted to proceed along, and are for various reasons
wary of altering course substantially.
A one-line fix to the Constitution can alter this, changing the ground rules without substantially
modifying the framework of social organization as envisaged in the Constitution. It will require
no controversial commission to study the merits of new laws for months together, will involve no
charge of being particularly motivated by a specific political goal, and to the degree that all
parties place some faith in constitutional government, it will represent a continuity with the past.
Let the Directive Principles of State Policy have the force of law and be enforceable in the
courts.
If necessary, we can debate a suitable time over which this transition needs to take place, and set
definite and automatic triggers to the process of creating such change. But, fundamentally, the
provisions contained in the directive principles are sound (the Constitution already proclaims the
virtue of these principles) and they merit the full force of the law behind them. Obliging the
government to steer a specific course makes it answerable to the charge it is given. The absence
of accountability remains the single biggest obstacle to positive change in India, and in many
regards, the absence of legal provisions to back the directive principles is responsible.
Every child must go to school, this is not an option that the government may permit or merely
support, but an obligation it must fulfill. In every civilized corner of the world, for example,
children are guaranteed a secondary-level education; in India we are still debating the enactment
of the 83rd Amendment to bring this about, and in doing so admitting that we have neglected the
charge to bring this about 40+ years ago. If we could have sued your state government for not
fulfilling this obligation in the 1960s, a few million more Indians might be literate today, there
may well have been several million fewer of us, and the goal of economic opportunity to all
might be more real. Instead, without the threat of being held to account for failing to meet this
obligation, every successive government has paid lip service to this basic need, with shocks felt
everywhere in society.
And so it is with other aspects of our lives. Every working person must make a living wage.
Every citizen is entitled to equal justice under a uniform set of laws. Every person performing a
certain job is entitled to equal pay without discrimination. I didn't dream these up in a fit of
political scheming. Sixty four years ago, the framers of the Constitution found these notions to be
sufficiently dignified that they directed the state to function in pursuit of them, permitting only that
a finite and small period of time may be necessary to give them the force of law. That time has
long since passed, both by the measure they themselves instituted (ten years) and by the
yardstick of merely looking around us to witness the horror of our failure to reach the desired
ends.
Honest respect for the Constitution demands that its ideals be enshrined in the laws of the land.
Republic Day must be more than the might of our armed forces on display, and more than a
fleeting celebration of diversity in our culture. Let's make a common-sense fix to the
Constitution -- the document that marks this annual event -- which construes a real nation with
shared destinies in law, and is built with public policy that is universal. Let the Directive
Principles of State Policy be more than a set of ideals to which we profess homage. Instead, let
them have the force of law, and be enforceable in the courts.
In the life of a nation, sixty four years is a long enough time for introspection and reflection to take stock,what are our achievements and in which direction are we headed?
Money todayhas become the sole measure of success. We live in a dog-eat-dog world.
Where we are selfishly occupied with our own selves.
Do we care about our culture and nation anymore?
Aren’t we leaving behind apoor legacy?
THESE VERSES WRITTEN BY THE POET IQBAL ISSUED A TIMELY WARNING:
VATAN KI FIKAR KAR NADAN
MUSIBAT AANE WALI HAI
TERI BARBADIYON KE MASHWARE HAIN
AASMANO MEIN
NA SAMJHOGE TO MIT JAOGE,
AEI HINDUSTAN WALO,
TUMHARI DASTAN TAQ BHI
NA HOGI DASTANO MEIN.
Today, in INDIA
A concerned citizen feels helpless and lost,
He doesn’t know where to start
He wants to do something
But doesn’t know what
He needs direction and finds none
He is angry,
Yet scared.
The biggest delimma an honest citizen faces is that of survival with the current social values,he cannot become a part of the system,neither can he beat it,nor accept it .
Hope and trust is what empower us to take calculated risks which are so essential for the
development of a society . without a strong civil society, political and economic structures would
fail. Business cannot thrive when there is no trust between producers and consumers, employers
and employees. Families and communities fail because of a lack of support from one another.
Neighborhoods fail because of the lack of fellow –feeling. Civil societies rest on moral
relationships and mutual respect. Our people have been deprived of their basic constitutional and
fundamental rights. They feel helpless when faced with inadequate judicial recourse. Have the
common mans dreams turned into nightmares?
Is this india’s tryst with destiny that was proclaimed with much fanfare, sixty four years ago?
A state, where a citizen is scared of his own government officials,the police and the judiciary, is known as a TERRORIST STATE
Such state turn their citizens into subjects and torment them
Is this not breach of trust
But the bigger question for all of us for last 64 yrs
WHO WILL BELL THE CAT ?
If we wish to be free, we must fight
Shall we gather strenght by irresolution and inaction?
Is life so dear
Or peace so sweet
As to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?
Forbid it almighty GOD!
I know not what course others may take ,but as as for as me,
Either give liberty to enjoy my constitutional rights or throw me away out of the country.
As a matter of fact this fraudulant social values / system / corruption has ruined me & entire nation
As we never opposed to this legacy.
Almost 80-90% of the wealth of the nation is in the control of say 5-10% of the population. The majority of the population hardly has access to any wealth and live in abject poverty.
One of the biggest factors is 'Corruption.' It is the cancer eating into the vitals of the society. It has permeated into all facets of life, affecting the poor and voiceless. Today, the common man with no money or muscle power, cannot think of getting any thing done in the developing world, without having to pay bribe.
Global institutions such as World Bank, IMF, and UN must enjoy legitimacy from their member countries and the international community.
They must be responsive, with the interests of all members, especially the smaller and poorer, being taken into account. The governance of these institutions must be flexible, must respond to new challenges, national priorities and specific circumstances.
A scathing report from the Independent Evaluation Office (IEO) of IMF highlights the lack of transparency and accountability in IMF. The IEO measured governance along four dimensions – effectiveness, efficiency, accountability and voice – and against three standards – the
Fund's own governing documents, other international organisations, and private & public-sector corporations. The report finds accountability and voice are the weakest features of the Fund's governance and these weaknesses entail risks to the Fund's legitimacy, which in turn has a bearing on its effectiveness.
If this is the situation with global institutions, we can well imagine what would be the situation with national and regional institutions.
No wonder they abound in corruption of all sorts and get away with it. Then, how do we get over this corruption mania? One sure way would be
to plug all the leakages in the system. This cannot be done without active support of the governments and its citizens.
An initiative started by eminent personalties , headed by old veteran leader Anna Hazare may become instrumental if we common people of india support them to fight back with corruption.
Always renmember
Every generation has to choose & protect his freedom , no GANDHI/BHAGAT SINGH will come back on planet earth to protect you from your own government
Its upto you to stand & fight back.
This is a once-in-a-millenium opportunity for humanity -- 2011 is so powerfully lucky, that if you have the right tools, you can ride its luck straight into the months to come!
Why is the number 11 considered such a powerful force? You probably know that it's been considered a special number for centuries in cultures much too divergent to be a mere coincidence. In fact this number appears throughout history as a magical source of power.
The spiritual meaning of the number 11 brings us to the very height of vibrational frequencies...it is considered a Master number and possesses the qualities of intuition, patience, honesty, sensitivity, and spirituality, and is also idealistic. It is the number of the Light within us all. It represents new beginnings.
Recently on 2 nd April 2011 , we all have seen how a big country like INDIA can be united for single reason may be world cup 20011. We did it humanity has seen it.
Now its turn to unite for one another cause , which is related with the life of each & every citizen of this country.
Lets join hand together on 5th april to showcase our unity to the government
Er.LASTMAN OF INDIA
City-coordinator
india against corruption
FARRUKHABAD U.P
MO: 9453538312
lastmanofindia@gmail.com
Vande mataram
INDIAN DEMOCRACY :a genuine case of the blind leading the blind.
We blame the British for their “divide and rule” policy.
Were we not divided even before the British came to India? could they have conquered India
if we were not divided to begin with?
The biggest traitors are our own politicians who play the caste game and weaken the nation, only
to strengthen their own position . they do not realize that if the nation is weak , no matter how
strong they are individually, they will be destroyed.
CITIZENS OR SUBJECT?
I don’t know if there can be anything like feudal democracy.
It seems that there is, therefore, I take a very tolerant view of the
misconduct of our beloved leaders , this is because we live by
the philosophy,
the king can do no wrong,
our political values have plunged so low ,
that it doesn’t take courage to do wrong,
but it takes a lot of courage to do right.
The preamble to the Constitution of India reads as follows.
“ WE, THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a
SOVEREIGN - SOCIALIST – SECULAR - DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC
and to secure to all its citizens:
JUSTICE - social, economic and political;
LIBERTY of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship;
EQUALITY of status and of opportunity;
and to promote among them all
FRATERNITY assuring the dignity of the individual and the unity and integrity of the Nation;
IN OUR CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY this twenty-sixth day of November, 1949,
do HEREBY
ADOPT, ENACT AND GIVE TO OURSELVES THIS CONSTITUTION.
All very predictable stuff, really. We have courts, plurality,
some increases in opportunity, etc. Yes, there are glaring deficiencies too,. The preamble merely
assures us that we have a specific intent, and that the Constitution shall provide the means to
attaining it.
Indeed, the first few articles in the Constitution follow quite naturally from the preamble, listing
who we are (citizenship), where we live (territory), our rights and responsibilities, etc. Later, the
Constitution outlines the nature of our government, the various public offices, the powers vested
in the office-holders, and how those powers are shared. To the casual reader, and with the
hindsight of 50+ years, the entire document appears to be a well-reasoned and detailed
framework for government and social organisation, and rightly so. I have no clash with much
of it, and like many others, I find the intent and diligence of the original framers laudable.
But where has this document brought us? Today,
whereas we have maintained the appearance of representative government, with elections galore,
and promises upon promises to eradicate poverty, remove illiteracy and in short order recreate heaven on earth, in fact India boasts the world's largest number of poor people assembled under one government, in history!
Disparities of income have turned the quest for economic utopia into a joke, religious rivalry has rendered
the secular state of harmonious fraternity notional at best, our criminals aspire to legislate and
our worthy seek nothing so much as to remove themselves from Indian public life. More than
half a century since the eloquent imagination of those early days, there is much promised in the
Constitution that is far from reality.
When JOHN KENNEDY asked WERNER VON BRAUN
what it would take to build a rocket that would carry a man to the moon and return him safely to earth ,
his answer was
simple and direct
“ THE WILL TO DO IT”
President never asked back if it was possible and the rest is in the pages of history.
Namely- why would you,
me ,
or anyone,
want [or need] to overcome such challenges of life
which we face every moment of life , give that some real thought because the answer to that
question , has the power to turn your life around in the snap of your fingers.
But we say , the Constitution is only a piece of paper, and no matter that we may inscribe upon it
glorious truths, reality must nonetheless reflect what we have actually done in pursuing them.
The ideals haven't eroded, us reason, it is that those empowered to promote them bear no
resemblance to the visionary men and women of integrity that the framers thought would be at
the helm. Instead, our leaders have been unqualified disasters, placing their self-interest regularly
ahead of any national good.
Always remember
responsibility without authority is meaningless
but
authority without responsibilty is very very dangerous
Perhaps. And yet, by some combination of luck and will, we have arrived at a time when calls to
reconsider the original document are regularly heard. It is true that many of those attempting this
revision have a political agenda, despite the appointment of several non-partisan people to the
commission now in place to suggest a revised edition. Senior justices appointed by different
governments, experts in constitutional law, and socio-economic geniuses alike find some place in
this experiment, and it is likely that not all of them will permit themselves to be swayed by their
political leanings alone.
The issue before us, really, is two-fold.
One, that the original framework
and its practice have not led to the desired outcomes,
and two, that the longer this remains true,
the more political the process of altering the framework will become.
There is, however, a middle path. Along this journey, we may continue to aspire to the goals
originally laid out, and yet reach towards a more cherished end than we have witnessed so far.
Doing so will mean that we must acknowledge that incremental attempts at change have been
easily subverted in the past, and accept that there is no gain from continuing down that road. The
change that is required must be dramatic, it must be significant and it must represent, despite
that, a compromise which a wide spectrum of political opinion will embrace. All of those
objectives are served well by the simplest of procedures, the mere addition of one sentence to the
existing Constitution, or, alternately by the removal of one line from it.
Articles 36 to 51 outline an important part of the framers' vision, which has subsequently been
discarded by the state, either from economic limitation or by deliberate political choice.
Together, these are known as the Directive Principles of State Policy. And the original sin to
which much of today's decay can be traced, as well as the inspiration for moving forward and
away from today's lamentable state, are both ironically contained in the same article (37) within
the Directive Principles, and it runs as follows.
The provisions contained in this Part [ie, Part IV, the Directive Principles] shall not be
enforceable by any court, but the principles therein laid down are nevertheless fundamental in
the governance of the country and it shall be the duty of the state to apply these principles in
making laws.
The dichotomy of that provision is telling. To understand why, one needs only to look at the
directives in these articles, which run the gamut of a good society. The state shall secure a social
order for the promotion of the welfare of the people (38), the state shall guard against
exploitation of the infirm and weak and promote the distribution of material wealth for the
common good (39), the state shall ensure that employment obtains a living wage (43), and that
children are provided free and compulsory education (45), the state shall guard the natural
environment of the territory (48A), etc. The language of the directive principles reads like a
laundry list that a civil liberties union would compose. It is remarkable, then, that these inspiring
objectives should be circumvented by the provision that the state's duty to obtain these ends shall
not be enforceable by law.
Why? How can that which is "fundamental in the governance of the country" be something that
does not merit this sensible protection? What sort of ideal is one that is immediately disavowed
in compromise? The framers, doubtless, had their reasons. And in some of the articles, these
reasons are indicated. The state has limited economic capacities (it costs a lot of money to
educate 300 million children), and certain social norms may require time to muster the needed
political and social capital (the controversial Article 44, urging the state to enact one law for all
citizens, comes to mind). But these limitations aren't in perpetuity, and the framers knew that
only too well. Universal education, for example, was considered do-able in 10 years' time. And
yet, four of ten Indians are illiterate, with over five times this period behind us.
That is unfortunate, but remediable. Although the state (at various levels) has professed inability
to engineer these directive principles, it repeatedly claims to stand by them. Most political parties
find substantive value in the Constitution, and notwithstanding their differences with parts of it,
are reluctant to call for widespread changes, partly from fear that their pet vote-banks may be
eradicated by new social policy. Also, the incremental changes we have sought in legislation
have not promoted the ends so vigorously proclaimed in the directive principles. We've stumbled
along the way, lost the direction we were exhorted to proceed along, and are for various reasons
wary of altering course substantially.
A one-line fix to the Constitution can alter this, changing the ground rules without substantially
modifying the framework of social organization as envisaged in the Constitution. It will require
no controversial commission to study the merits of new laws for months together, will involve no
charge of being particularly motivated by a specific political goal, and to the degree that all
parties place some faith in constitutional government, it will represent a continuity with the past.
Let the Directive Principles of State Policy have the force of law and be enforceable in the
courts.
If necessary, we can debate a suitable time over which this transition needs to take place, and set
definite and automatic triggers to the process of creating such change. But, fundamentally, the
provisions contained in the directive principles are sound (the Constitution already proclaims the
virtue of these principles) and they merit the full force of the law behind them. Obliging the
government to steer a specific course makes it answerable to the charge it is given. The absence
of accountability remains the single biggest obstacle to positive change in India, and in many
regards, the absence of legal provisions to back the directive principles is responsible.
Every child must go to school, this is not an option that the government may permit or merely
support, but an obligation it must fulfill. In every civilized corner of the world, for example,
children are guaranteed a secondary-level education; in India we are still debating the enactment
of the 83rd Amendment to bring this about, and in doing so admitting that we have neglected the
charge to bring this about 40+ years ago. If we could have sued your state government for not
fulfilling this obligation in the 1960s, a few million more Indians might be literate today, there
may well have been several million fewer of us, and the goal of economic opportunity to all
might be more real. Instead, without the threat of being held to account for failing to meet this
obligation, every successive government has paid lip service to this basic need, with shocks felt
everywhere in society.
And so it is with other aspects of our lives. Every working person must make a living wage.
Every citizen is entitled to equal justice under a uniform set of laws. Every person performing a
certain job is entitled to equal pay without discrimination. I didn't dream these up in a fit of
political scheming. Sixty four years ago, the framers of the Constitution found these notions to be
sufficiently dignified that they directed the state to function in pursuit of them, permitting only that
a finite and small period of time may be necessary to give them the force of law. That time has
long since passed, both by the measure they themselves instituted (ten years) and by the
yardstick of merely looking around us to witness the horror of our failure to reach the desired
ends.
Honest respect for the Constitution demands that its ideals be enshrined in the laws of the land.
Republic Day must be more than the might of our armed forces on display, and more than a
fleeting celebration of diversity in our culture. Let's make a common-sense fix to the
Constitution -- the document that marks this annual event -- which construes a real nation with
shared destinies in law, and is built with public policy that is universal. Let the Directive
Principles of State Policy be more than a set of ideals to which we profess homage. Instead, let
them have the force of law, and be enforceable in the courts.
In the life of a nation, sixty four years is a long enough time for introspection and reflection to take stock,what are our achievements and in which direction are we headed?
Money todayhas become the sole measure of success. We live in a dog-eat-dog world.
Where we are selfishly occupied with our own selves.
Do we care about our culture and nation anymore?
Aren’t we leaving behind apoor legacy?
THESE VERSES WRITTEN BY THE POET IQBAL ISSUED A TIMELY WARNING:
VATAN KI FIKAR KAR NADAN
MUSIBAT AANE WALI HAI
TERI BARBADIYON KE MASHWARE HAIN
AASMANO MEIN
NA SAMJHOGE TO MIT JAOGE,
AEI HINDUSTAN WALO,
TUMHARI DASTAN TAQ BHI
NA HOGI DASTANO MEIN.
Today, in INDIA
A concerned citizen feels helpless and lost,
He doesn’t know where to start
He wants to do something
But doesn’t know what
He needs direction and finds none
He is angry,
Yet scared.
The biggest delimma an honest citizen faces is that of survival with the current social values,he cannot become a part of the system,neither can he beat it,nor accept it .
Hope and trust is what empower us to take calculated risks which are so essential for the
development of a society . without a strong civil society, political and economic structures would
fail. Business cannot thrive when there is no trust between producers and consumers, employers
and employees. Families and communities fail because of a lack of support from one another.
Neighborhoods fail because of the lack of fellow –feeling. Civil societies rest on moral
relationships and mutual respect. Our people have been deprived of their basic constitutional and
fundamental rights. They feel helpless when faced with inadequate judicial recourse. Have the
common mans dreams turned into nightmares?
Is this india’s tryst with destiny that was proclaimed with much fanfare, sixty four years ago?
A state, where a citizen is scared of his own government officials,the police and the judiciary, is known as a TERRORIST STATE
Such state turn their citizens into subjects and torment them
Is this not breach of trust
But the bigger question for all of us for last 64 yrs
WHO WILL BELL THE CAT ?
If we wish to be free, we must fight
Shall we gather strenght by irresolution and inaction?
Is life so dear
Or peace so sweet
As to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?
Forbid it almighty GOD!
I know not what course others may take ,but as as for as me,
Either give liberty to enjoy my constitutional rights or throw me away out of the country.
As a matter of fact this fraudulant social values / system / corruption has ruined me & entire nation
As we never opposed to this legacy.
Almost 80-90% of the wealth of the nation is in the control of say 5-10% of the population. The majority of the population hardly has access to any wealth and live in abject poverty.
One of the biggest factors is 'Corruption.' It is the cancer eating into the vitals of the society. It has permeated into all facets of life, affecting the poor and voiceless. Today, the common man with no money or muscle power, cannot think of getting any thing done in the developing world, without having to pay bribe.
Global institutions such as World Bank, IMF, and UN must enjoy legitimacy from their member countries and the international community.
They must be responsive, with the interests of all members, especially the smaller and poorer, being taken into account. The governance of these institutions must be flexible, must respond to new challenges, national priorities and specific circumstances.
A scathing report from the Independent Evaluation Office (IEO) of IMF highlights the lack of transparency and accountability in IMF. The IEO measured governance along four dimensions – effectiveness, efficiency, accountability and voice – and against three standards – the
Fund's own governing documents, other international organisations, and private & public-sector corporations. The report finds accountability and voice are the weakest features of the Fund's governance and these weaknesses entail risks to the Fund's legitimacy, which in turn has a bearing on its effectiveness.
If this is the situation with global institutions, we can well imagine what would be the situation with national and regional institutions.
No wonder they abound in corruption of all sorts and get away with it. Then, how do we get over this corruption mania? One sure way would be
to plug all the leakages in the system. This cannot be done without active support of the governments and its citizens.
An initiative started by eminent personalties , headed by old veteran leader Anna Hazare may become instrumental if we common people of india support them to fight back with corruption.
Always renmember
Every generation has to choose & protect his freedom , no GANDHI/BHAGAT SINGH will come back on planet earth to protect you from your own government
Its upto you to stand & fight back.
This is a once-in-a-millenium opportunity for humanity -- 2011 is so powerfully lucky, that if you have the right tools, you can ride its luck straight into the months to come!
Why is the number 11 considered such a powerful force? You probably know that it's been considered a special number for centuries in cultures much too divergent to be a mere coincidence. In fact this number appears throughout history as a magical source of power.
The spiritual meaning of the number 11 brings us to the very height of vibrational frequencies...it is considered a Master number and possesses the qualities of intuition, patience, honesty, sensitivity, and spirituality, and is also idealistic. It is the number of the Light within us all. It represents new beginnings.
Recently on 2 nd April 2011 , we all have seen how a big country like INDIA can be united for single reason may be world cup 20011. We did it humanity has seen it.
Now its turn to unite for one another cause , which is related with the life of each & every citizen of this country.
Lets join hand together on 5th april to showcase our unity to the government
Er.LASTMAN OF INDIA
City-coordinator
india against corruption
FARRUKHABAD U.P
MO: 9453538312
lastmanofindia@gmail.com
