The former top cop of Haryana is a criminal. His political masters who rewarded him after knowing of his criminal acts are equally criminal. The justice system that took so long to punish him and required a heroic effort from Aradhana - an eye witness, is abominable. The police who filed a lesser charge of molestation - thereby aiding a criminal are criminal. The judges who gave him 6 month sentence and a bail are criminal.
Anybody who is part of the above system earning their living from tax payer money should ask themselves - why do we exist? Of what use is a judiciary that does not provide justice. Of what use is police that cannot police. Of what use is a government that cannot govern.
Why should we call ourselves Indian when being Indian also means that we have not given justice to the Girhotra family? Every Indian should hang his head in shame
Sunday, December 27, 2009
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Delhi 6
I just watched the movie Delhi 6 and I am left wondering how much of contradictions can an Indian actually bear in his/her heart. It think the movie is a reflection of the utter chaos of thoughts, feelings and attitudes of what it means to be Indian.
Are Indians loving and open-hearted people? Or, are we prejudiced and narrow? Are we enlightened, or are we pretenders? Is there any reason to be proud of our nationality or should we hang our heads in shame? Or, can't we simply decide who we want to be? Do we swing from one extreme to another depending on the mood of the day? Do we value life or we despise it? Do we breed love or hate?
Is there an actual theme in the movie about being Indian or is the movie about the absence of a theme of being Indian? Is this movie a masterpiece or is it a confused expression of Mehra's Indian identity or both?
Yet, time marches on... This country has existed for eternity, at least, in the minds of its citizens. It will probably exist for ever. The country that produced both Gandhi and Godse.
May be through this pathless meandering, the director has stumbled on the truth - "Nationality cannot be a meaningful identity". Any attempt to truly assume that, would lead to utter chaos in one's soul. Yet, the human soul yearns for an identity in the form of a nation to which one belongs.
Are Indians loving and open-hearted people? Or, are we prejudiced and narrow? Are we enlightened, or are we pretenders? Is there any reason to be proud of our nationality or should we hang our heads in shame? Or, can't we simply decide who we want to be? Do we swing from one extreme to another depending on the mood of the day? Do we value life or we despise it? Do we breed love or hate?
Is there an actual theme in the movie about being Indian or is the movie about the absence of a theme of being Indian? Is this movie a masterpiece or is it a confused expression of Mehra's Indian identity or both?
Yet, time marches on... This country has existed for eternity, at least, in the minds of its citizens. It will probably exist for ever. The country that produced both Gandhi and Godse.
May be through this pathless meandering, the director has stumbled on the truth - "Nationality cannot be a meaningful identity". Any attempt to truly assume that, would lead to utter chaos in one's soul. Yet, the human soul yearns for an identity in the form of a nation to which one belongs.
Sunday, December 13, 2009
Religious Conversion
There is a lot of debate in India about whether conversions from Hinduism to Islam or Christianity are justified. These debates have been acrimonious with the various Hindu groups clamouring for a total ban on conversions. This has even degenerated to violence and frankly I am shocked by the views of even some people, whom I consider moderates, on this subject. What is going on here?
Talking about religious conversions in India or even in other developing countries, cannot be done in isolation. This needs to be considered in the economic context that is the backdrop for many such issues. If a person who is economically well - to - do, considers conversion, thinking that Islam or Christianity offers a better path for his spiritual growth, there is no argument here. He/She is free to convert. Denying this right to that person would be a sin in Hinduism as this person suffers without being able to practice the path of his choice.
However, most of religious conversions are not like the above in India. Poverty stricken Hindu people are converted after being lured with economic opportunities or at least a square meal on the day of conversion by Christian Churches and Muslim mosques. The Hindu community is outraged by this and the Hindu leaders are clamouring of government intervention here to ban these type of conversions. What are these Hindu leaders hoping to achieve?
These leaders are doing more damage to Hinduism by criticizing these conversions than by being indifferent about it or trying to solve the problems of the poor Hindu. How is that? The poor Hindu looks at these conversions as a means to feed his family, get a job, get education...The Hindu religious leaders have done little to alleviate these problems. Instead, they are denying the Hindu, these means, and keeps him in his current state of poverty causing endless suffering. This is a sin even by Hinduism's own standards.
If the Hindu religious leaders offered the same opportunities to the poor Hindu, would there be any conversions? If they even tried to convert poor Muslims and Christians to Hinduism by offering them a square meal, that would at least give the poor people a chance to feed themselves in the name of religious conversions.
Instead of all of these, there is a cocktail of political, economic and religious arguments, even among moderates and this has vitiated the atmosphere.
Truth Be Told.
Talking about religious conversions in India or even in other developing countries, cannot be done in isolation. This needs to be considered in the economic context that is the backdrop for many such issues. If a person who is economically well - to - do, considers conversion, thinking that Islam or Christianity offers a better path for his spiritual growth, there is no argument here. He/She is free to convert. Denying this right to that person would be a sin in Hinduism as this person suffers without being able to practice the path of his choice.
However, most of religious conversions are not like the above in India. Poverty stricken Hindu people are converted after being lured with economic opportunities or at least a square meal on the day of conversion by Christian Churches and Muslim mosques. The Hindu community is outraged by this and the Hindu leaders are clamouring of government intervention here to ban these type of conversions. What are these Hindu leaders hoping to achieve?
These leaders are doing more damage to Hinduism by criticizing these conversions than by being indifferent about it or trying to solve the problems of the poor Hindu. How is that? The poor Hindu looks at these conversions as a means to feed his family, get a job, get education...The Hindu religious leaders have done little to alleviate these problems. Instead, they are denying the Hindu, these means, and keeps him in his current state of poverty causing endless suffering. This is a sin even by Hinduism's own standards.
If the Hindu religious leaders offered the same opportunities to the poor Hindu, would there be any conversions? If they even tried to convert poor Muslims and Christians to Hinduism by offering them a square meal, that would at least give the poor people a chance to feed themselves in the name of religious conversions.
Instead of all of these, there is a cocktail of political, economic and religious arguments, even among moderates and this has vitiated the atmosphere.
Truth Be Told.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)