You are on page 1of 10

Since independence we have become the victim of dirty policies of the government.

We all are aware of the fact that corruption is seen everywhere from small time clerks to polititians,commissioners,police etc.Sometimes it is felt so unsafe in the hands of Government as a normal person cannot breathe in the smoke of corruption.The people have become irresponsible,negligent,anti -national and in-human.It seems that most the people who supports corruption is not a human figure.May be the people who have not tasted the bitterness of corruption would not be realising that it has reached its peak.Take an example-The very prudent decision of the Government to charge challans to those people who talk on their cell phones while driving is supressed by the practice of corruption.The police officers very nicely take a bribe and leave the person,so this is how laws are implementing in our country. These instances are making youth unproductive and directionless.Students scoring less marks getting admission easily just because their parents have good amount to spend in the form of bribe.Many people cannot raise their voice because they are not so rich and they know that their voice will be supressed by corruption. One should understand that looting other people's money wont help you to build your own dream house. WE ALL TALK ABOUT CORRUPTION,BUT WHAT IS THE SOLUTION TO THIS KILLING PRACTICE. The only solution according to me is the unity of people.They must realise their mistakes first.Now adays media is playing a very imporrtant role,so a common man can take the help from them and spread the anti-corruption practice. Corruption threatens good governance,sustainable development, national growth and democracy.So save your country do not let it go in the hands of corrupt people,and kill corruption before you go through the bitter taste of it

It is true that corruption is forming a major part in our country. It so happens that although many of the people are aware that giving bribe is against law and taking bribe is also against law, it is not practically followed. It is the people who are encouraging the officials to take bribe. In selection process and all other government works to be done fast, one expects to take bribe. Even the ordinary people have been used to giving bribes and getting their work done faster. Although many vigilance companies are working to clear the corruption, I feel that their efforts are not completely fulfilled. The people should be very supportive in abolising this corruption, only then will there be an end to it. Best regards, Mala.

Author: Dilip Kumar Misra Dear Sweta,

07 Feb 2010

Member Level: Silver

Points : 2

We are unfortunate that the Great people like Mahatma Gandhi, Swami Vivekanand and others are not part of our current generation. Had they been their in these days, the present state of affairs , I am sure, would have been different.People have been forgotten their ideology and ethics.Their is no love, affection and brotherhood among the people.People have been adopting corruption not by choice but by force, as some bad elements in the society for their personal interest started ruining the unity and integrity.Everybody should work together and owns responsibility and to start a movement to fight against the corruption and punish the culprits. Regards, Dilip Kumar Misra

Author: Gyanshankar P. Mishra

07 Feb 2010

Member Level: Gold

Points : 2

Corruption has deep seated roots in the current scenario and you can consider it as one of the side effects of democracy! It is very easy to say that let's fight against corruption but it is very difficult to do so. Why? solely because none amongst us want that our work should be affected , we want to get our tasks done at all costs and do not mind perpetuating corruption in the process. Just a simple quetion- why do people take bribe? answer: because people give bribe!

Author: DR.N.V.SRINIVASA RAO.,M.Sc.,Ph.D

08 Feb 2010

Member Level: Gold

Points : 2

Yes.I 100% agree with the views expressed.India don't need democracy.I say a leader like Sardar Patel has to come and take our the ruling. Use stick and see that justice will be there for all. All present day politicians are selfish and greedy. The majority of present day voters are not having any knowledge about the value of vote. For them one day before of voting getting Rs.500/-,a beer bottle and one packet of biryani is all. This situation is being en cashed by politicians. Hence only a revolution can bring corrupt free society in India. drrao

Author: Dr. Kapileshwar Choudhary Hi Sweta and Dr.Rao

08 Feb 2010

Member Level: Gold

Points : 2

Corruption is the by product of democracy and it can not be root out completely.Undoubtedly politicians are corrupt but Indian people are more corrupt than politician.You have got some power through RTI act but I have doubt members of ISC have used even once.By using it at least 50% of corruption will go automatically.

Author: manisha pande

08 Feb 2010

Member Level: Silver

Points : 2

We all always talk and discuss about corruption.As the corruption is the root cause of many problems in India,we have to think about remedy on corruption.We can easily narrate many reasons for increasing corruption.I think the most important reason for corruption is lack of patriotism. We all think about ourself,then about famely then community then friends then village/city then state and if got time then about nation.Actually it should be in reverse order.Our every activity should be for the sake of nation.We even not performing our right of vote properly.Only 50% Indians are using voting power.It is not possible to elect able M.P./MLA without voting. All these things are the examples of lack of patriotism.

Author: Dr. Kapileshwar Choudhary Hi Manisha

08 Feb 2010

Member Level: Gold

Points : 1

It is correct only 50% voter using voting power but you have to vote only among the available candidate. Thanks.

Author: smitha

09 Feb 2010

Member Level: Gold

Points : 2

Corruption has become an indispensable part of our society. We cannot even dream of removing it from our nation. Is it a part of our culture? We might have been corrupt even before independence. Now materialism is given undue importance. So money accumulated by any means is considered a virtue. Even corruption is admired by a lot of youngsters. This is an evil which will affect not only our present, but also our future. When it comes to securing money, we never think about the society. It is the selfish, narrow minded attitude that paves way for corruption. Only campaigns on an active basis, for a prolonged period with the participation of the common man and the media can bring about little bit of changes.

Author: ASHWANI KUMAR Hi Manisha

13 Feb 2010

Member Level: Silver

Points : 2

It is correct only 50% voter using voting power but you have to vote only among the available candidate. Thanks. Corruption has become an indispensable part of our society. We cannot even dream of removing it from our nation. Is it a part of our culture? We might have been corrupt even before independence. Now materialism is given undue importance. So money accumulated by any means is considered a virtue. Even corruption is admired by a lot of youngsters. This is an evil which will affect not only our present, but also our future. When it comes to securing money, we never think about the society. It is the selfish, narrow minded attitude that paves way for corruption. Only campaigns on an active basis, for a prolonged period with the participation of the common man and the media can bring about little bit of changes.

Author: Abdul Razzaq Dear Friend

13 Feb 2010

Member Level: Gold

Points : 1

You described correctly.Corruption is very danegourus forour Contry. Due to just of this corruption India is going back. Police is on first position in corruption.

Author: fyyazkamal

14 Feb 2010

Member Level: Gold

Points : 2

Corruption like a cnacer grabing our country .every noke and corner of every department is suffering and slowly making the whole system corrupt in our country .

Who is Responsible for "cORRUPTION". ? the answer is We ourselves .since we are encouraging them and promoting this in our society . WE only blames corruption but we are giving our selves for our work in govt office and official . Stop giving corruption them and ask them and make them realise thier duty .

Author: Siddhartha Bandyopadhyay Production of Space.

31 May 2011

Member Level: Bronze

Points : 1

Most of the communities in India (such as Bengali), are succumbed in 'Culture of Poverty'(a theory introduced by an American anthropologist Oscar Lewis), irrespective of class or economic strata, lives in pavement or apartment. Nobody is at all ashamed of the deep-rooted corruption, decaying general quality of life, worst Politico-administrative system, weak mother language, continuous absorption of common space (mental as well as physical, both). We are becoming fathers & mothers only by self-procreation, mindlessly & blindfold. Simply depriving their(the children) fundamental rights of a decent, caring society, fearless & dignified living. Do not ever look for any other positive alternative behaviour (values) to perform human way of parenthood, i.e. deliberately co-parenting of those children those are born out of ignorance, real poverty. All of us are being driven only by the very animal instinct. If the Bengali people ever be able to bring that genuine freedom (from vicious cycle of 'poverty') in their own life/attitude, involve themselves in 'Production of Space'(Henri Lefebvre), at least initiate a movement by heart, decent & dedicated Politics will definitely come up. - Siddhartha Bandyopadhyay, 16/4, Girish Banerjee Lane, Howrah-711101, India.

Anna Hazare, Democracy and Politics: A Response to Shuddhabrata Sengupta


APRIL 10, 2011

tags: Anna Hazare, corruption, Jan Lokpal Bill, UPA government by Aditya Nigam

In an earlier post, (hits to which have broken all records on Kafila), Shuddhabrata Sengupta has raised some extremely important points in the context of the media-simulated coverage and celebrations around the Anna Hazare movement. I agree with the central argument made by Shuddha which is about the authoritarian, indeed totalitarian implications of the proposed Jan Lokpal Bill (though, as many commentators to the post have pointed out, the Bill really remains to be drafted and passed in parliament). I have no doubt whatsoever that any demand that simply seeks a law of the sort that has been raised by the movement (even in the

proposed form), is completely counterproductive. Indeed, it is naive. Matters like corruption or communalism cannot simply be legislated out of existence through tougher laws. Inevitably, they will lead us up to China type situations where you will end up demanding summary trials and executions. Even in the best of cases, a law and state-dependent mode of addressing such problems, adds to the powers of a corrupt bureaucracy. I also agree with his (and Bobby Kunhus) criticisms of some aspects of what they have both chosen to designate as mass hysteria of sorts I certainly do not agree with this description but that need not detain us here. I am interested in something else here and that has to do with the way the movement has struck a chord among unprecedentedly large numbers of people mainly middle class people I am sure, but the support for it is not just confined to them. In fact, on the third day of the dharna at Jantar Mantar I received an excited call from a CPM leader who works among the peasants in villages of northern India in the Kisan Sabha, about the response to the movement he had encountered in his constituency. I doubt that this was a support simulated either by the government or by the electronic media. On 30th January this year, when many of us were participating in a largish demonstration in Delhi demanding the release of Binayak Sen, precisely on that day a huge demonstration was held on this issue of the Jan Lokpal Bill. The fact that all the usual suspects like us were there at the Binayak Sen demonstration, meant that there were innumerable others, not the usual suspects, who were there at this other rally. Yes, some people could have been in both places, but by and large, the presence at the two rallies was very different. And there was no media-simulated mass hysteria at that point. If Arnab Goswami and Times Now (and other TV channels) have now picked up the issue, that can be read as trying to appropriate a movement that was gathering strength independently of them. (By the way, it is also instructive to see the anger of the demonstrators at India Gate against Barkha Dutt in the video posted by Anirban in a comment on Shuddhas post.) And if one looks at the cast of characters who have been associated with the mobilization, there are many (including Anna Hazare himself) who have been working

tirelessly in villages and towns across the country. And while I hold no brief for Anna Hazare or the others, to reduce the entire movement to a media-simulated, anti-political middle class urge is to completely misread the signs. What is disturbing in Shuddhas post is the attribution of a kind of conspiracy where, apparently, UPA government and the electronic media have been complicit in orchestrating this movement. I think this claim not only does not stand up to any actual scrutiny of facts on the ground but is, on the contrary, based on the mode of reasoning that is a staple of political rhetoric:
We have been here before. Indira Gandhis early years were full of radical and populist posturing, and the mould that Anna Hazare fills is not necessarily the one that JP occupied (despite the commentary that repeatedly invokes JP). Perhaps we should be reminded of the man who was fondly spoken of as Sarkari Sant Vinoba Bhave. Bhave lent his considerable moral stature to the defence of the Internal Emergency (which, of course, dressed itself up in the colour of anti-corruption, anti-black marketeering rhetoric, to neutralize the anti-corruption thrust of the disaffection against Indira Gandhis regime).

This passage is then followed up by a reference to the regime sponsored mass mobilization of the cultural revolution in China. Suggestions like these are taken to new heights in Bobby Kunhus post when he says:
The timing also seems to be impeccable for reasons apart from TRP. India Inc. was facing a credibility crisis and the crisis had managed to drag the office of the most iconic representative of the lot Dr. Manmohan Singh into every dreadful business. And then every representative of India Inc. seemed to be at the receiving end of the crisis corporate houses to media icons. From Kashmir to Tamil Nadu Manipur to Chattisgarh people in the margins seemed to be mobilizing themselves trying to take their fights into their own hands. Mere cricket was not enough. A more serious national diversion was required a diversion that would also help in subverting the multiple simmering discourses on democracy.

What is the evidence for any of these claims? Give me any event, and I can guarantee you that I will cook up a conspiracy scenario (of the kind that Shuddha and Bobby do) with circumstantial evidence of this nature. Our discomfort at certain kinds of mobilization cannot and must not become a reason for us to pass off that discomfort in rhetorical claims about the mobilization. It is interesting that Shuddha and Bobby Kunhu posit this movement as one that is directedagainst democracy, in terms almost identical to those of Pratap Bhanu Mehta. Mehta argues:

But the claim that the people are not represented by elected representatives, but are represented by their selfappointed guardians is disturbing. In a democracy, one ought to freely express views. But anyone who claims to be the authentic voice of the people is treading on very thin ice indeed. It is a form of Jacobinism that is intoxicated with its own certainties about the people. It is not willing to subject itself to an accountability, least of all to the only mechanism we know of designating representatives: elections.

This can be said of any movement and any popular struggle; indeed, Mehta has made it his vocation to argue for liberal, procedural democracy every time there is a mass movement. From Mehtas point of view and from the point of view of the powers-that-be this is a perfect argument for their intention is absolutely clear. They do not want the boat rocked under any circumstances. Every form of dissent must be tamed and brought within the ambit of the rotting structure of the parliamentary system, under whose sign every single act of fleecing of the people has taken place Suresh Kalmadi, Sheila Dikshit, the Bellary brothers, the heroes of the 2G spectrum scam (and of course the Nira Radia folk!). We have been silent witnesses to the political system - to which Mehta sings paeans and whose virtues Shuddha seems to have suddenly discovered lying prostrate before the marauders and looters of public money. Now, I understand where Pratap Mehta is coming from but Shuddha, when you say the following, I am stumped:
Finally, if, as a society, we were serious about combating the political nexus that sustains corruption we would be thinking seriously about extending the provisions of the Right to Information Act to the areas where it can not currently operate national security and defence; we would also think seriously about electoral reform about proportional representation, about smaller constituencies, about strengthening local representative bodies, about the provision of uniform public funding for candidates and about the right to recall elected representatives. These are serious questions.

Electoral reform! And who will contest the elections, dear Shuddha? The same lot who from the Right to Centre to Left have now distinguished themselves by their service to corporate capital and their fleecing of the public exchequer? Here you almost begin to sound like a bourgeois policy-maker (or political theorist) advising saner and more responsible methods. I am also surprised that you find the threat to democracy coming from a movement that makes its demands to the government and the parliament, and makes them in the most peaceful, non-violent manner possible! After all, it is the parliament and the political parties that will have to draft the Bill (or

give the draft the final shape) and pass it in parliament. What can be more democratic than that? For even the people behind the current draft of the bill know that this cannot but go through a period of negotiation, scrutiny and democratic debate, if the Bill has to become law. I think it is also important to underline that for many years now, in India at least, issues have been posed outside the domains where formal politics takes place. Think of all the important issues that have been raised over the last two decades: the question of land acquisition, mass displacement of populations, nuclear energy, communalism and the anti-communal struggles, Right to Information, Forests Rights Actnone of these issues, have either been raised or even debated in parliament except under mass pressure. Was there even a squeak from the worthies of Left and Right who populate the parliament and legislatures, each time the height of the Sardar Sarovar dam was raised? Was there a squeak when innumerable villages and towns like Harsud and Tehri, drowned for the sake of the luxurious consumption of the metropolitan middle classes? So, your sudden faith in the system and its democracy, and your claim that only those who contest elections can be really representative of the people, really surprises me. The current movement, to me, is only a sign of the fact that there is no faith any longer in any of the institutions of parliamentary democracy among large sectors of the Indian population. Increasingly, their issues emerge through those whom you and Mehta dismiss as the self-appointed representatives of the masses. Indeed, I fear that if movements of this kind are also dismissed, and with the political class long out of reckoning, there is really no other option that the large masses of people will be left with except to support non-democratic Maoist-type outfits. I cannot help recalling here the long debate on Maoism that we had on Kafila where I had, among others, argued about the efficacy of democratic struggles in stalling many an SEZ project. Not one of those struggles Shuddha, had the prior permission of the state and its certification of being

led by a legitimate elected representative of the people. They were democratic struggles nevertheless, at least in my sense of the term. Mass movements throw up their own leadership, and sometimes the pulse of the masses is sensed by a charismatic leader. To delegitimize this phenomenon by claiming the formal electoral process as the only reflection of democracy is to limit democracy to its most formal liberal procedural version. I think we need to remember that the Right to Information Act itself, is a product of a movement which has indeed gone far beyond the confines of a purely liberal provision and has invited some of the most violent reprisals from those whose corrupt practices it affects. People have been killed often with the connivance of political parties and their leaders for using the provisions of the RTI. These people have no other recourse but work with self-appointed leaders usually a term deployed by power for those who have not received the official stamp of approval by the state.

Anna's decision to float political party evokes mixed response


Asian News International(General News|Newswire) Published On: 2012-08-03

New Delhi, Aug. 3 -- The proposal of veteran social activist Anna Hazare to float a political party has evoked mixed response across the country. BJP spokesperson Shahnawaz Hussain said that India's democratic setup was very supportive of any individual or collective foray into electoral politics. "Even those who do not form political parties are free to contest polls. Nobody can stop a person from contesting, even if that person has been denied a party ticket. If (Hazare and his aides) want to enter politics, it is their decision, and their own views on the matter are more important," Hussain said. Former lawmaker and journalist, Shahid Siddiqui welcomed Hazare's decision to launch a political party and said political clout is needed to fight corruption effectively. "I welcome this announcement and I think you cannot do away with corruption only by having a Lokpal or going on fast. If corruption has to be fought, political corruption has to be fought. Political alternative has to be given. I believe that unless we are able to remove corruption from our political atmosphere, from political parties, we will not be able to cleanse our economy, our politics and our society," said Siddiqui.

Meanwhile, Communist Party of India (CPI) leader Atul Anjan said that the idea to float a political party is a welcome step but Hazare and his associates have to reckon with a good number of ground realities. "If some people decide it on urge of some people that they are ready to form a political party, I have no objection. The question is this. The political party will stand with whom? In this present situation one should understand that corruption is the by-product of capitalists who formed the government. And one has to fight corruption, nepotism, sectarianism-also narrow sectarianism-communalism and casteism; these are also eating away our democratic process and so that has become a big challenge," said Anjan. Asserting that power should rest with the people in a true democracy, Hazare yesterday reiterated that there is nothing wrong in forming a political party. "In a true democracy, power should be in the hands of the people. The power must be given to the public. Village land, village water belongs to the village. There is a government in Delhi, but in the village, we are the government. Village has the right over coal, water in the village," he said. Hazare He, asked his supporters said to dislodge that those he leaders, himself who don't would give in to people's enter demand. politics.

however,

not

"I will not get into politics. I will fight from the outside. You have to think who goes into a party. Do they have a good character? Such people only should be given a ticket. If you want to change the nation, form a party. But see who is going into that party. How will you monitor them? You have to think about that," said Hazare. "The people who ask for your votes, whether they are right or wrong, should be monitored," he added. The 75-year-old social activist also reiterated that the government is not serious on bringing a strong anti-graft bill to combat rampant corruption in the country. The government, however, hit back at Team Anna, saying they must contest elections to rove its claim of representing the will of the people.