So, the election fever is on again... And everywhere from newspaper to toilet paper, the smiling faces of politicians smile down at us!! And why should they not?? In spite of being the most inefficient Lok Sabha in the history (approx 63% of the allotted time utilised in sitting) they get a 200% pay rise (seriously)!!!
Anyways, setting aside my disdain for politicians as a class (I know I am practicing discrimination, but what the heck!), what really took my goat for a high jump was a tweet today from a friend advertising a particular candidate for a supposedly progressive party. Among the prominent claims to fame for the candidate in question was the fact that she is an adivasi!!!
Now I think I must be seriously duff to not realise what being adivasi has to do with being a good politician ( if there is some such thing!!). Now I being the blockhead ask my friend the same question, and he replies that what matters is her immense courage and conviction in fighting for human rights...
Now I got the second thing that gets my goat... (not the same goat, I had a few goats.... :P)
Human rights activists... They are a fraternity I sometimes loathe more than politicians and terrorists.. COMBINED!!!
How is it so that they never protest about the human rights of the victims of a terror attack, or a mob violence?? Or do they assume that in being victims, they rescinded their rights to be human??!! Maybe their thinking is like that of the people who find girls responsible for gender related crimes!! If you are a victim of a crime, then you deserve to be 'crimed' against!!
However, coming back to the track, I looked around for the lady in question online... Apparently, the state claims that she was a courier between the Naxalites and the industrialists... The lady claims she was an innocent bystander who was framed by the police... If I cannot discard her version, what gives me the right to discard the state version?? Why can we not reserve the judgement?? I guess the police in our country is a much maligned lot (and maybe deservedly so), but the judiciary is still held in some regard. Why can we not let the due process of law take its course and then decide whether she is an angel or Satan's agent??
And whatever be it, fighting for one's own cause was not really in the spirit of fighting for the so calle dnoble objective of human rights, last I checked...
So are we all guilty of either over simplification (like me) or over glorification (like my friend)???
Still thinking...
Anyways, setting aside my disdain for politicians as a class (I know I am practicing discrimination, but what the heck!), what really took my goat for a high jump was a tweet today from a friend advertising a particular candidate for a supposedly progressive party. Among the prominent claims to fame for the candidate in question was the fact that she is an adivasi!!!
Now I think I must be seriously duff to not realise what being adivasi has to do with being a good politician ( if there is some such thing!!). Now I being the blockhead ask my friend the same question, and he replies that what matters is her immense courage and conviction in fighting for human rights...
Now I got the second thing that gets my goat... (not the same goat, I had a few goats.... :P)
Human rights activists... They are a fraternity I sometimes loathe more than politicians and terrorists.. COMBINED!!!
How is it so that they never protest about the human rights of the victims of a terror attack, or a mob violence?? Or do they assume that in being victims, they rescinded their rights to be human??!! Maybe their thinking is like that of the people who find girls responsible for gender related crimes!! If you are a victim of a crime, then you deserve to be 'crimed' against!!
However, coming back to the track, I looked around for the lady in question online... Apparently, the state claims that she was a courier between the Naxalites and the industrialists... The lady claims she was an innocent bystander who was framed by the police... If I cannot discard her version, what gives me the right to discard the state version?? Why can we not reserve the judgement?? I guess the police in our country is a much maligned lot (and maybe deservedly so), but the judiciary is still held in some regard. Why can we not let the due process of law take its course and then decide whether she is an angel or Satan's agent??
And whatever be it, fighting for one's own cause was not really in the spirit of fighting for the so calle dnoble objective of human rights, last I checked...
So are we all guilty of either over simplification (like me) or over glorification (like my friend)???
Still thinking...
No comments:
Post a Comment