SHARMILA BOSE
Phone : 9811915670
Email. : bosesharmila@rediffmail.com
24th February, 2009
The Prime Minister of India
New Delhi.
Kind Attn. : Dr. Man Mohan Singh
Sub : Acknowledgements
Dear Sir,
After concluding my papers on ‘State-Society Relations’, I would like to express my gratitude to the following:
The said research papers are my evaluation and expression of the Society that has State governance after I got involved with the Delhi Police against a social crime that was running in my next door neighbour. Hence, I first want to thank the two main accused Usha & Balli who had challenged me on State inadequacies. Next I would like to express my gratitude to Delhi Police who made my belief in the State-system more concrete. Further I would thank President, Mr. Grover and General Secretary Mr. Bhushan Kumar Kundu, Resident Welfare Association, DDA Flats, Kalkaji, New Delhi for coordinating with me in organizing ‘Janta Darbar’ conducted by Delhi Police.
Secondly, I would like to thank IGNOU for (DCE) in enhancing my writing skill. The opportunity I got through the open education to understand political system (MPS) that has given me an enormous exposure in a general way. I would like to thank Dr. Deba Prasad Nanda, Dissertation Guide for ‘Group Right – Women, Dalits & Tribals’ for giving me in-depth knowledge and supervised my M.A. Dissertation. I would also like to thank Prof. D. Gopal and Dr. Reddy, Faculty of Political Science, IGNOU who took me very seriously and encouraged me in developing my knowledge in the Political Science. My gratitude to the education of IGNOU and to the development of the course studies for encouraging students in every sphere to upgrade the academic aspiration.
Thirdly, I want to thank to the circumstances for more than two years such as, breaking of marriage, structural harassment i.e. disconnection of supply of water & electricity; verbal and physical abuses, survival in sewer drain and sleeping in the passage along with children; and intrusion in chastity have given me an ample exposure to the ‘limitation of individuals and potency of governance’.
Fourth, I would like to thank Ms. Rubina Yasmin, advocate and her associate who has given a factual representation of Legal Aid system which enabled me to highlight to the Chief Justice of India, from where a systematic analysis of state-system took place. I am very grateful to Mr. K.G. Balakrishnan, CJI, who took my analysis very seriously and paved me the way for intruding in the intricacies of the State Governance.
Fifth, I would thank the Judges, Ms. Nivedita Anil Sharma, ADJ (Matrimonial Court), Mr. Sumit Das and Mr. Deepak Dabas, Civil Judge, Tis Hazai Courts, Delhi, who have given a true representation of the Judicial system and made my belief in the Authority and Judicial process more concrete and clarity in understanding Authority & Community relations. I would also thank Ms. Anu Narula, amicus curiae for her contribution that has helped me in understanding the importance of intermediates in Authority & Community relations.
Next, I would thank to the Non-government Organisations, such as Prayas Mr. Amod Kanth (General Secretary) and Mr. Rajib Haldar (Executive Director) and Indian Institute of Human Rights and others, for their support and contribution. I am grateful to the Libraries, Nehru Memorial, IGNOU and National Commission for Human Rights for supporting me for enhancing my knowledge. I am very grateful to all those “great minds” for evaluating my work.
Through this I am expressing my heartfelt gratitude to DCP Ishwar Singh, for being a constant source of inspirations throughout my said research.
Above all, my most sincere gratitude to YOU for considering my Work and given me your most valued time and mind.
Lastly, I thank my father Mr. Bharat Kumar Bose for inducing the “sense of dignity” and my mother Mrs. Asima Bose for making me more “humanistic and inducing the sense of duty” while nurturing me. I also thank my sister Mrs. Shyamali Mitra for appriciating my attributes and pushed me towards enhancing them. I further thank my sister Mrs. Shobha Basu for making me “confronter from escapist”.
I would like to highlight most significant contribution of my children Joy and Aalisha, who have taken all the pains and supported me with their full of enthusiasm even in the worst phase of our life and helped me in creating this Work, without them my existence would have been meaningless. I love them the most.
And top of everything I am very grateful to the GOD for choosing me for this “Work of Sanctity”.
With best regards,
(SHARMILA BOSE)
Sunday, June 28, 2009
Acknowledgements
SHARMILA BOSE
Phone : 9811915670
Email. : bosesharmila@rediffmail.com
24th February, 2009
The Prime Minister of India
New Delhi.
Kind Attn. : Dr. Man Mohan Singh
Sub : Acknowledgements
Dear Sir,
After concluding my papers on ‘State-Society Relations’, I would like to express my gratitude to the following:
The said research papers are my evaluation and expression of the Society that has State governance after I got involved with the Delhi Police against a social crime that was running in my next door neighbour. Hence, I first want to thank the two main accused Usha & Balli who had challenged me on State inadequacies. Next I would like to express my gratitude to Delhi Police who made my belief in the State-system more concrete. Further I would thank President, Mr. Grover and General Secretary Mr. Bhushan Kumar Kundu, Resident Welfare Association, DDA Flats, Kalkaji, New Delhi for coordinating with me in organizing ‘Janta Darbar’ conducted by Delhi Police.
Secondly, I would like to thank IGNOU for (DCE) in enhancing my writing skill. The opportunity I got through the open education to understand political system (MPS) that has given me an enormous exposure in a general way. I would like to thank Dr. Deba Prasad Nanda, Dissertation Guide for ‘Group Right – Women, Dalits & Tribals’ for giving me in-depth knowledge and supervised my M.A. Dissertation. I would also like to thank Prof. D. Gopal and Dr. Reddy, Faculty of Political Science, IGNOU who took me very seriously and encouraged me in developing my knowledge in the Political Science. My gratitude to the education of IGNOU and to the development of the course studies for encouraging students in every sphere to upgrade the academic aspiration.
Thirdly, I want to thank to the circumstances for more than two years such as, breaking of marriage, structural harassment i.e. disconnection of supply of water & electricity; verbal and physical abuses, survival in sewer drain and sleeping in the passage along with children; and intrusion in chastity have given me an ample exposure to the ‘limitation of individuals and potency of governance’.
Fourth, I would like to thank Ms. Rubina Yasmin, advocate and her associate who has given a factual representation of Legal Aid system which enabled me to highlight to the Chief Justice of India, from where a systematic analysis of state-system took place. I am very grateful to Mr. K.G. Balakrishnan, CJI, who took my analysis very seriously and paved me the way for intruding in the intricacies of the State Governance.
Fifth, I would thank the Judges, Ms. Nivedita Anil Sharma, ADJ (Matrimonial Court), Mr. Sumit Das and Mr. Deepak Dabas, Civil Judge, Tis Hazai Courts, Delhi, who have given a true representation of the Judicial system and made my belief in the Authority and Judicial process more concrete and clarity in understanding Authority & Community relations. I would also thank Ms. Anu Narula, amicus curiae for her contribution that has helped me in understanding the importance of intermediates in Authority & Community relations.
Next, I would thank to the Non-government Organisations, such as Prayas Mr. Amod Kanth (General Secretary) and Mr. Rajib Haldar (Executive Director) and Indian Institute of Human Rights and others, for their support and contribution. I am grateful to the Libraries, Nehru Memorial, IGNOU and National Commission for Human Rights for supporting me for enhancing my knowledge. I am very grateful to all those “great minds” for evaluating my work.
Through this I am expressing my heartfelt gratitude to DCP Ishwar Singh, for being a constant source of inspirations throughout my said research.
Above all, my most sincere gratitude to YOU for considering my Work and given me your most valued time and mind.
Lastly, I thank my father Mr. Bharat Kumar Bose for inducing the “sense of dignity” and my mother Mrs. Asima Bose for making me more “humanistic and inducing the sense of duty” while nurturing me. I also thank my sister Mrs. Shyamali Mitra for appriciating my attributes and pushed me towards enhancing them. I further thank my sister Mrs. Shobha Basu for making me “confronter from escapist”.
I would like to highlight most significant contribution of my children Joy and Aalisha, who have taken all the pains and supported me with their full of enthusiasm even in the worst phase of our life and helped me in creating this Work, without them my existence would have been meaningless. I love them the most.
And top of everything I am very grateful to the GOD for choosing me for this “Work of Sanctity”.
With best regards,
(SHARMILA BOSE)
Phone : 9811915670
Email. : bosesharmila@rediffmail.com
24th February, 2009
The Prime Minister of India
New Delhi.
Kind Attn. : Dr. Man Mohan Singh
Sub : Acknowledgements
Dear Sir,
After concluding my papers on ‘State-Society Relations’, I would like to express my gratitude to the following:
The said research papers are my evaluation and expression of the Society that has State governance after I got involved with the Delhi Police against a social crime that was running in my next door neighbour. Hence, I first want to thank the two main accused Usha & Balli who had challenged me on State inadequacies. Next I would like to express my gratitude to Delhi Police who made my belief in the State-system more concrete. Further I would thank President, Mr. Grover and General Secretary Mr. Bhushan Kumar Kundu, Resident Welfare Association, DDA Flats, Kalkaji, New Delhi for coordinating with me in organizing ‘Janta Darbar’ conducted by Delhi Police.
Secondly, I would like to thank IGNOU for (DCE) in enhancing my writing skill. The opportunity I got through the open education to understand political system (MPS) that has given me an enormous exposure in a general way. I would like to thank Dr. Deba Prasad Nanda, Dissertation Guide for ‘Group Right – Women, Dalits & Tribals’ for giving me in-depth knowledge and supervised my M.A. Dissertation. I would also like to thank Prof. D. Gopal and Dr. Reddy, Faculty of Political Science, IGNOU who took me very seriously and encouraged me in developing my knowledge in the Political Science. My gratitude to the education of IGNOU and to the development of the course studies for encouraging students in every sphere to upgrade the academic aspiration.
Thirdly, I want to thank to the circumstances for more than two years such as, breaking of marriage, structural harassment i.e. disconnection of supply of water & electricity; verbal and physical abuses, survival in sewer drain and sleeping in the passage along with children; and intrusion in chastity have given me an ample exposure to the ‘limitation of individuals and potency of governance’.
Fourth, I would like to thank Ms. Rubina Yasmin, advocate and her associate who has given a factual representation of Legal Aid system which enabled me to highlight to the Chief Justice of India, from where a systematic analysis of state-system took place. I am very grateful to Mr. K.G. Balakrishnan, CJI, who took my analysis very seriously and paved me the way for intruding in the intricacies of the State Governance.
Fifth, I would thank the Judges, Ms. Nivedita Anil Sharma, ADJ (Matrimonial Court), Mr. Sumit Das and Mr. Deepak Dabas, Civil Judge, Tis Hazai Courts, Delhi, who have given a true representation of the Judicial system and made my belief in the Authority and Judicial process more concrete and clarity in understanding Authority & Community relations. I would also thank Ms. Anu Narula, amicus curiae for her contribution that has helped me in understanding the importance of intermediates in Authority & Community relations.
Next, I would thank to the Non-government Organisations, such as Prayas Mr. Amod Kanth (General Secretary) and Mr. Rajib Haldar (Executive Director) and Indian Institute of Human Rights and others, for their support and contribution. I am grateful to the Libraries, Nehru Memorial, IGNOU and National Commission for Human Rights for supporting me for enhancing my knowledge. I am very grateful to all those “great minds” for evaluating my work.
Through this I am expressing my heartfelt gratitude to DCP Ishwar Singh, for being a constant source of inspirations throughout my said research.
Above all, my most sincere gratitude to YOU for considering my Work and given me your most valued time and mind.
Lastly, I thank my father Mr. Bharat Kumar Bose for inducing the “sense of dignity” and my mother Mrs. Asima Bose for making me more “humanistic and inducing the sense of duty” while nurturing me. I also thank my sister Mrs. Shyamali Mitra for appriciating my attributes and pushed me towards enhancing them. I further thank my sister Mrs. Shobha Basu for making me “confronter from escapist”.
I would like to highlight most significant contribution of my children Joy and Aalisha, who have taken all the pains and supported me with their full of enthusiasm even in the worst phase of our life and helped me in creating this Work, without them my existence would have been meaningless. I love them the most.
And top of everything I am very grateful to the GOD for choosing me for this “Work of Sanctity”.
With best regards,
(SHARMILA BOSE)
ON SUBMISSION
SHARMILA BOSE
Phone : 98 119 15670
Email : bosesharmila@rediffmail.com
24th February, 2009
The Prime Minister of India
New Delhi.
Kind Attn. : Dr. Manmohan Singh
Sub : ‘On Submission’
Dear Sir,
‘On Submission’ is my concluding paper on State-Society relation, in which I am evaluating the entitlements of the community and the parameter of the governance. For this, first I will discuss the criteria of citizenship, secondly the framework of the representation and finally, the harmonious governance of the law, power and faith towards common good within the dejure regime.
Man(Human being) is born free and attains its natural rights by nature is a doctrine of all political philosophies. But the man was bounded with himself with his sets of requirement i.e. food, shelter and sex. Since a man is not complete in himself and hence dependent. The interdependency creates community. To attain his sustainability man has to contribute to the community so that he can claim his survival. This contribution authenticates its membership in the community. Hence man has to earn his community membership. Community is micro and Society is macro. The membership in the society that has state governance is called Citizenship. It is not natural. It has to attain. By not just mere born in the said sovereign but it is acquired.
I view citizenship is not guaranteed. Man is born free, but the State or the Society has bond. To be a part of a society or state, man has to surrender its absolute freedom and hence become interdependent. This interdependency is known as duty. The eligibility of the citizenship is on the criteria of duty. Once this criterion is met, then he can claim the rights from the State as citizen. Similarly, statehood is also not absolute; it is further bonded with duties. The duty of state is the rights of citizen. The state that overlooks its duties under-qualifies as statehood.
How to attain citizenship? Citizenship should be given on criterion and on renewable basis. This will bind the people within the parameter of law. This will strengthened internal security and check anti-national elements. This will enhance the sovereignty of the law. Paying tax should be basic criteria since it indicate submission to the law and hence recognize the statehood.
The second aspect is representation. Political representation in present time lacks accountability. The province representation has given many erroneous results such as irredentism, separatism, self-determination and autonomy crises i.e. influenced by caste, language, religion and ideology. Hence, became tools for mass mobilization to attain power. This has fragmented the legislative body and created identity crises. Since, the representation is territorial, so the abuses such as money and muscles become major influence to attain power than credibility. When muscles and money become tool to retain political aspiration, then the corruption and criminalization becomes the characteristics of the politics.
The territorial political representation lack general accountability to the whole country except for its own territory. They also lack the ability (knowledge) of governance. Governance needs structural knowledge whereas, territorial representation is mass mobilization. Due to multiple party systems, the mass-mobilization gets segmented. This led to a coalition government. The differences in ideology lead to crises in policy making and its implementation. Hence, the territorial representation has given many flaws than virtues.
In my view another form of representation that can substitute the flaws of territorial representation, i.e. structural representation. The four major structures i.e. cultivators /workers (grass root), economy, bureaucracy (administration) and scholars (judiciary, academics and religion/culture); a broad description and need intricate studies. The said structural representation has no territory and hence will have credibility for the governance. This will have no party system and will lead to direct democracy. The executive of the structures (four) should have veto power. This will check the subjugation of any community or structure.
The said structural representation is not absolute and hence a parallel to territorial representation. The territorial representation will check the absolutism of structural representation and structural representation will control the flaws and inadequacies of territorial representation. When there will be Structural representation, the judicial activism will automatically reduce. Further this will bring the legislation in the parameter of dejure regime. The success in leadership in the Railways’ governance (structural) and the failure of the same leadership in the territorial governance seconds my analysis that the ‘flaw in the design of the representations than in representatives’.
The bicameral of the parliament will have the two forms of representation. The structural representation will be responsible for making laws and implementing policies, whereas the territorial representation will be in the liaison with the community. Both will have the popular will. (This is an abstract work and need a thorough analysis). Both should have equal powers. This will further act as check and balance to each other and also a complementary to each other as well. This will further curtail multiple party systems.
In this system, there will be a limited scope for pressure groups for strikes, bandhs or cultural hooliganism etc. How the structural representation will curtail them? All the crises such as strike or bandhs arise from pressure groups such as medico professional, law professionals, truckers, farmers, teachers etc. No community comes out for strike or bandh, rather they are the victims of the strikes and bandhs. The said strikes occur due to negligence in the adherence of the requirement for the said group by the government. If there is a structural representation, the said crisis can be taken care of their own sustainability. Since there will be a veto power with the legislative executives there will be an overall consideration for any legislation.
On Submission is an approach towards a congenial relation between Society and State. Due to lack of accountability, the state system is shattered and the society is wavered. The State and the Society have no mutual trust or its dependability. This mistrust has created many anti-human elements to pave its way and influence the governance. This has further shortened the state control. This led to a bigger space for power and faith.
The governance of power and faith are legible since society has diversified governance. The people do not relate with the law get shelter with the power and those people who are not equipped with the law or power seek the governance of faith. All are the institutions of the nature, i.e. law, power and faith. The institution of faith is as powerful as the institution of power and as well the institution of law but nothing can be substituted. These virtues are not contradictory to each other, rather interdependent. Faith acts as catalyst to emotions (power) and reason (law).
Faith (religions/culture) enhances human values/morals and thus becomes a platform to the submission to reason (law). It will be very difficult for reason (law) to govern emotions (power) without faith (religion/culture) and hence become catalyst for these two virtues. Further, faith checks the absolutism of reason (law). The superiority of reason (law) checks the blindness (flaws) of the faith. That is why there is an existence of faith ever since the evolution of human society. Reason and emotions are always in conflict, but it is faith that binds them together. Just the way man (reason) and woman (emotions) bind in the marriage (social contract) in the holy rituals (faith) in every community. Lack of faith will never make these two virtues meet in a same point just like the differences between ‘Gandhi and Dr. Ambedkar’ or ‘Gandhi and Tagore’. If there would have been catalyst of faith in their virtues, then we would have had better India in 60 years of independence. During that period faith became a political entitlement and hence remained a big flaw in acquiring sovereignty.
The significance of the submission is to check the absolutism of any virtue. The governance is always based on reason (wisdom) and to make the governance generous, the virtue of emotion (power) is very essential. Faith (culture/religion) binds them. Sovereignty of law on all these virtues i.e. law, power and faith is based on tax (tribute) that will enhance the submission and recognize the state-hood. This is the macro citizenship.
With best regards,
(SHARMILA BOSE)
Phone : 98 119 15670
Email : bosesharmila@rediffmail.com
24th February, 2009
The Prime Minister of India
New Delhi.
Kind Attn. : Dr. Manmohan Singh
Sub : ‘On Submission’
Dear Sir,
‘On Submission’ is my concluding paper on State-Society relation, in which I am evaluating the entitlements of the community and the parameter of the governance. For this, first I will discuss the criteria of citizenship, secondly the framework of the representation and finally, the harmonious governance of the law, power and faith towards common good within the dejure regime.
Man(Human being) is born free and attains its natural rights by nature is a doctrine of all political philosophies. But the man was bounded with himself with his sets of requirement i.e. food, shelter and sex. Since a man is not complete in himself and hence dependent. The interdependency creates community. To attain his sustainability man has to contribute to the community so that he can claim his survival. This contribution authenticates its membership in the community. Hence man has to earn his community membership. Community is micro and Society is macro. The membership in the society that has state governance is called Citizenship. It is not natural. It has to attain. By not just mere born in the said sovereign but it is acquired.
I view citizenship is not guaranteed. Man is born free, but the State or the Society has bond. To be a part of a society or state, man has to surrender its absolute freedom and hence become interdependent. This interdependency is known as duty. The eligibility of the citizenship is on the criteria of duty. Once this criterion is met, then he can claim the rights from the State as citizen. Similarly, statehood is also not absolute; it is further bonded with duties. The duty of state is the rights of citizen. The state that overlooks its duties under-qualifies as statehood.
How to attain citizenship? Citizenship should be given on criterion and on renewable basis. This will bind the people within the parameter of law. This will strengthened internal security and check anti-national elements. This will enhance the sovereignty of the law. Paying tax should be basic criteria since it indicate submission to the law and hence recognize the statehood.
The second aspect is representation. Political representation in present time lacks accountability. The province representation has given many erroneous results such as irredentism, separatism, self-determination and autonomy crises i.e. influenced by caste, language, religion and ideology. Hence, became tools for mass mobilization to attain power. This has fragmented the legislative body and created identity crises. Since, the representation is territorial, so the abuses such as money and muscles become major influence to attain power than credibility. When muscles and money become tool to retain political aspiration, then the corruption and criminalization becomes the characteristics of the politics.
The territorial political representation lack general accountability to the whole country except for its own territory. They also lack the ability (knowledge) of governance. Governance needs structural knowledge whereas, territorial representation is mass mobilization. Due to multiple party systems, the mass-mobilization gets segmented. This led to a coalition government. The differences in ideology lead to crises in policy making and its implementation. Hence, the territorial representation has given many flaws than virtues.
In my view another form of representation that can substitute the flaws of territorial representation, i.e. structural representation. The four major structures i.e. cultivators /workers (grass root), economy, bureaucracy (administration) and scholars (judiciary, academics and religion/culture); a broad description and need intricate studies. The said structural representation has no territory and hence will have credibility for the governance. This will have no party system and will lead to direct democracy. The executive of the structures (four) should have veto power. This will check the subjugation of any community or structure.
The said structural representation is not absolute and hence a parallel to territorial representation. The territorial representation will check the absolutism of structural representation and structural representation will control the flaws and inadequacies of territorial representation. When there will be Structural representation, the judicial activism will automatically reduce. Further this will bring the legislation in the parameter of dejure regime. The success in leadership in the Railways’ governance (structural) and the failure of the same leadership in the territorial governance seconds my analysis that the ‘flaw in the design of the representations than in representatives’.
The bicameral of the parliament will have the two forms of representation. The structural representation will be responsible for making laws and implementing policies, whereas the territorial representation will be in the liaison with the community. Both will have the popular will. (This is an abstract work and need a thorough analysis). Both should have equal powers. This will further act as check and balance to each other and also a complementary to each other as well. This will further curtail multiple party systems.
In this system, there will be a limited scope for pressure groups for strikes, bandhs or cultural hooliganism etc. How the structural representation will curtail them? All the crises such as strike or bandhs arise from pressure groups such as medico professional, law professionals, truckers, farmers, teachers etc. No community comes out for strike or bandh, rather they are the victims of the strikes and bandhs. The said strikes occur due to negligence in the adherence of the requirement for the said group by the government. If there is a structural representation, the said crisis can be taken care of their own sustainability. Since there will be a veto power with the legislative executives there will be an overall consideration for any legislation.
On Submission is an approach towards a congenial relation between Society and State. Due to lack of accountability, the state system is shattered and the society is wavered. The State and the Society have no mutual trust or its dependability. This mistrust has created many anti-human elements to pave its way and influence the governance. This has further shortened the state control. This led to a bigger space for power and faith.
The governance of power and faith are legible since society has diversified governance. The people do not relate with the law get shelter with the power and those people who are not equipped with the law or power seek the governance of faith. All are the institutions of the nature, i.e. law, power and faith. The institution of faith is as powerful as the institution of power and as well the institution of law but nothing can be substituted. These virtues are not contradictory to each other, rather interdependent. Faith acts as catalyst to emotions (power) and reason (law).
Faith (religions/culture) enhances human values/morals and thus becomes a platform to the submission to reason (law). It will be very difficult for reason (law) to govern emotions (power) without faith (religion/culture) and hence become catalyst for these two virtues. Further, faith checks the absolutism of reason (law). The superiority of reason (law) checks the blindness (flaws) of the faith. That is why there is an existence of faith ever since the evolution of human society. Reason and emotions are always in conflict, but it is faith that binds them together. Just the way man (reason) and woman (emotions) bind in the marriage (social contract) in the holy rituals (faith) in every community. Lack of faith will never make these two virtues meet in a same point just like the differences between ‘Gandhi and Dr. Ambedkar’ or ‘Gandhi and Tagore’. If there would have been catalyst of faith in their virtues, then we would have had better India in 60 years of independence. During that period faith became a political entitlement and hence remained a big flaw in acquiring sovereignty.
The significance of the submission is to check the absolutism of any virtue. The governance is always based on reason (wisdom) and to make the governance generous, the virtue of emotion (power) is very essential. Faith (culture/religion) binds them. Sovereignty of law on all these virtues i.e. law, power and faith is based on tax (tribute) that will enhance the submission and recognize the state-hood. This is the macro citizenship.
With best regards,
(SHARMILA BOSE)
ON SUBMISSION
SHARMILA BOSE
Phone : 98 119 15670
Email : bosesharmila@rediffmail.com
24th February, 2009
The Prime Minister of India
New Delhi.
Kind Attn. : Dr. Manmohan Singh
Sub : ‘On Submission’
Dear Sir,
‘On Submission’ is my concluding paper on State-Society relation, in which I am evaluating the entitlements of the community and the parameter of the governance. For this, first I will discuss the criteria of citizenship, secondly the framework of the representation and finally, the harmonious governance of the law, power and faith towards common good within the dejure regime.
Man(Human being) is born free and attains its natural rights by nature is a doctrine of all political philosophies. But the man was bounded with himself with his sets of requirement i.e. food, shelter and sex. Since a man is not complete in himself and hence dependent. The interdependency creates community. To attain his sustainability man has to contribute to the community so that he can claim his survival. This contribution authenticates its membership in the community. Hence man has to earn his community membership. Community is micro and Society is macro. The membership in the society that has state governance is called Citizenship. It is not natural. It has to attain. By not just mere born in the said sovereign but it is acquired.
I view citizenship is not guaranteed. Man is born free, but the State or the Society has bond. To be a part of a society or state, man has to surrender its absolute freedom and hence become interdependent. This interdependency is known as duty. The eligibility of the citizenship is on the criteria of duty. Once this criterion is met, then he can claim the rights from the State as citizen. Similarly, statehood is also not absolute; it is further bonded with duties. The duty of state is the rights of citizen. The state that overlooks its duties under-qualifies as statehood.
How to attain citizenship? Citizenship should be given on criterion and on renewable basis. This will bind the people within the parameter of law. This will strengthened internal security and check anti-national elements. This will enhance the sovereignty of the law. Paying tax should be basic criteria since it indicate submission to the law and hence recognize the statehood.
The second aspect is representation. Political representation in present time lacks accountability. The province representation has given many erroneous results such as irredentism, separatism, self-determination and autonomy crises i.e. influenced by caste, language, religion and ideology. Hence, became tools for mass mobilization to attain power. This has fragmented the legislative body and created identity crises. Since, the representation is territorial, so the abuses such as money and muscles become major influence to attain power than credibility. When muscles and money become tool to retain political aspiration, then the corruption and criminalization becomes the characteristics of the politics.
The territorial political representation lack general accountability to the whole country except for its own territory. They also lack the ability (knowledge) of governance. Governance needs structural knowledge whereas, territorial representation is mass mobilization. Due to multiple party systems, the mass-mobilization gets segmented. This led to a coalition government. The differences in ideology lead to crises in policy making and its implementation. Hence, the territorial representation has given many flaws than virtues.
In my view another form of representation that can substitute the flaws of territorial representation, i.e. structural representation. The four major structures i.e. cultivators /workers (grass root), economy, bureaucracy (administration) and scholars (judiciary, academics and religion/culture); a broad description and need intricate studies. The said structural representation has no territory and hence will have credibility for the governance. This will have no party system and will lead to direct democracy. The executive of the structures (four) should have veto power. This will check the subjugation of any community or structure.
The said structural representation is not absolute and hence a parallel to territorial representation. The territorial representation will check the absolutism of structural representation and structural representation will control the flaws and inadequacies of territorial representation. When there will be Structural representation, the judicial activism will automatically reduce. Further this will bring the legislation in the parameter of dejure regime. The success in leadership in the Railways’ governance (structural) and the failure of the same leadership in the territorial governance seconds my analysis that the ‘flaw in the design of the representations than in representatives’.
The bicameral of the parliament will have the two forms of representation. The structural representation will be responsible for making laws and implementing policies, whereas the territorial representation will be in the liaison with the community. Both will have the popular will. (This is an abstract work and need a thorough analysis). Both should have equal powers. This will further act as check and balance to each other and also a complementary to each other as well. This will further curtail multiple party systems.
In this system, there will be a limited scope for pressure groups for strikes, bandhs or cultural hooliganism etc. How the structural representation will curtail them? All the crises such as strike or bandhs arise from pressure groups such as medico professional, law professionals, truckers, farmers, teachers etc. No community comes out for strike or bandh, rather they are the victims of the strikes and bandhs. The said strikes occur due to negligence in the adherence of the requirement for the said group by the government. If there is a structural representation, the said crisis can be taken care of their own sustainability. Since there will be a veto power with the legislative executives there will be an overall consideration for any legislation.
On Submission is an approach towards a congenial relation between Society and State. Due to lack of accountability, the state system is shattered and the society is wavered. The State and the Society have no mutual trust or its dependability. This mistrust has created many anti-human elements to pave its way and influence the governance. This has further shortened the state control. This led to a bigger space for power and faith.
The governance of power and faith are legible since society has diversified governance. The people do not relate with the law get shelter with the power and those people who are not equipped with the law or power seek the governance of faith. All are the institutions of the nature, i.e. law, power and faith. The institution of faith is as powerful as the institution of power and as well the institution of law but nothing can be substituted. These virtues are not contradictory to each other, rather interdependent. Faith acts as catalyst to emotions (power) and reason (law).
Faith (religions/culture) enhances human values/morals and thus becomes a platform to the submission to reason (law). It will be very difficult for reason (law) to govern emotions (power) without faith (religion/culture) and hence become catalyst for these two virtues. Further, faith checks the absolutism of reason (law). The superiority of reason (law) checks the blindness (flaws) of the faith. That is why there is an existence of faith ever since the evolution of human society. Reason and emotions are always in conflict, but it is faith that binds them together. Just the way man (reason) and woman (emotions) bind in the marriage (social contract) in the holy rituals (faith) in every community. Lack of faith will never make these two virtues meet in a same point just like the differences between ‘Gandhi and Dr. Ambedkar’ or ‘Gandhi and Tagore’. If there would have been catalyst of faith in their virtues, then we would have had better India in 60 years of independence. During that period faith became a political entitlement and hence remained a big flaw in acquiring sovereignty.
The significance of the submission is to check the absolutism of any virtue. The governance is always based on reason (wisdom) and to make the governance generous, the virtue of emotion (power) is very essential. Faith (culture/religion) binds them. Sovereignty of law on all these virtues i.e. law, power and faith is based on tax (tribute) that will enhance the submission and recognize the state-hood. This is the macro citizenship.
With best regards,
(SHARMILA BOSE)
Phone : 98 119 15670
Email : bosesharmila@rediffmail.com
24th February, 2009
The Prime Minister of India
New Delhi.
Kind Attn. : Dr. Manmohan Singh
Sub : ‘On Submission’
Dear Sir,
‘On Submission’ is my concluding paper on State-Society relation, in which I am evaluating the entitlements of the community and the parameter of the governance. For this, first I will discuss the criteria of citizenship, secondly the framework of the representation and finally, the harmonious governance of the law, power and faith towards common good within the dejure regime.
Man(Human being) is born free and attains its natural rights by nature is a doctrine of all political philosophies. But the man was bounded with himself with his sets of requirement i.e. food, shelter and sex. Since a man is not complete in himself and hence dependent. The interdependency creates community. To attain his sustainability man has to contribute to the community so that he can claim his survival. This contribution authenticates its membership in the community. Hence man has to earn his community membership. Community is micro and Society is macro. The membership in the society that has state governance is called Citizenship. It is not natural. It has to attain. By not just mere born in the said sovereign but it is acquired.
I view citizenship is not guaranteed. Man is born free, but the State or the Society has bond. To be a part of a society or state, man has to surrender its absolute freedom and hence become interdependent. This interdependency is known as duty. The eligibility of the citizenship is on the criteria of duty. Once this criterion is met, then he can claim the rights from the State as citizen. Similarly, statehood is also not absolute; it is further bonded with duties. The duty of state is the rights of citizen. The state that overlooks its duties under-qualifies as statehood.
How to attain citizenship? Citizenship should be given on criterion and on renewable basis. This will bind the people within the parameter of law. This will strengthened internal security and check anti-national elements. This will enhance the sovereignty of the law. Paying tax should be basic criteria since it indicate submission to the law and hence recognize the statehood.
The second aspect is representation. Political representation in present time lacks accountability. The province representation has given many erroneous results such as irredentism, separatism, self-determination and autonomy crises i.e. influenced by caste, language, religion and ideology. Hence, became tools for mass mobilization to attain power. This has fragmented the legislative body and created identity crises. Since, the representation is territorial, so the abuses such as money and muscles become major influence to attain power than credibility. When muscles and money become tool to retain political aspiration, then the corruption and criminalization becomes the characteristics of the politics.
The territorial political representation lack general accountability to the whole country except for its own territory. They also lack the ability (knowledge) of governance. Governance needs structural knowledge whereas, territorial representation is mass mobilization. Due to multiple party systems, the mass-mobilization gets segmented. This led to a coalition government. The differences in ideology lead to crises in policy making and its implementation. Hence, the territorial representation has given many flaws than virtues.
In my view another form of representation that can substitute the flaws of territorial representation, i.e. structural representation. The four major structures i.e. cultivators /workers (grass root), economy, bureaucracy (administration) and scholars (judiciary, academics and religion/culture); a broad description and need intricate studies. The said structural representation has no territory and hence will have credibility for the governance. This will have no party system and will lead to direct democracy. The executive of the structures (four) should have veto power. This will check the subjugation of any community or structure.
The said structural representation is not absolute and hence a parallel to territorial representation. The territorial representation will check the absolutism of structural representation and structural representation will control the flaws and inadequacies of territorial representation. When there will be Structural representation, the judicial activism will automatically reduce. Further this will bring the legislation in the parameter of dejure regime. The success in leadership in the Railways’ governance (structural) and the failure of the same leadership in the territorial governance seconds my analysis that the ‘flaw in the design of the representations than in representatives’.
The bicameral of the parliament will have the two forms of representation. The structural representation will be responsible for making laws and implementing policies, whereas the territorial representation will be in the liaison with the community. Both will have the popular will. (This is an abstract work and need a thorough analysis). Both should have equal powers. This will further act as check and balance to each other and also a complementary to each other as well. This will further curtail multiple party systems.
In this system, there will be a limited scope for pressure groups for strikes, bandhs or cultural hooliganism etc. How the structural representation will curtail them? All the crises such as strike or bandhs arise from pressure groups such as medico professional, law professionals, truckers, farmers, teachers etc. No community comes out for strike or bandh, rather they are the victims of the strikes and bandhs. The said strikes occur due to negligence in the adherence of the requirement for the said group by the government. If there is a structural representation, the said crisis can be taken care of their own sustainability. Since there will be a veto power with the legislative executives there will be an overall consideration for any legislation.
On Submission is an approach towards a congenial relation between Society and State. Due to lack of accountability, the state system is shattered and the society is wavered. The State and the Society have no mutual trust or its dependability. This mistrust has created many anti-human elements to pave its way and influence the governance. This has further shortened the state control. This led to a bigger space for power and faith.
The governance of power and faith are legible since society has diversified governance. The people do not relate with the law get shelter with the power and those people who are not equipped with the law or power seek the governance of faith. All are the institutions of the nature, i.e. law, power and faith. The institution of faith is as powerful as the institution of power and as well the institution of law but nothing can be substituted. These virtues are not contradictory to each other, rather interdependent. Faith acts as catalyst to emotions (power) and reason (law).
Faith (religions/culture) enhances human values/morals and thus becomes a platform to the submission to reason (law). It will be very difficult for reason (law) to govern emotions (power) without faith (religion/culture) and hence become catalyst for these two virtues. Further, faith checks the absolutism of reason (law). The superiority of reason (law) checks the blindness (flaws) of the faith. That is why there is an existence of faith ever since the evolution of human society. Reason and emotions are always in conflict, but it is faith that binds them together. Just the way man (reason) and woman (emotions) bind in the marriage (social contract) in the holy rituals (faith) in every community. Lack of faith will never make these two virtues meet in a same point just like the differences between ‘Gandhi and Dr. Ambedkar’ or ‘Gandhi and Tagore’. If there would have been catalyst of faith in their virtues, then we would have had better India in 60 years of independence. During that period faith became a political entitlement and hence remained a big flaw in acquiring sovereignty.
The significance of the submission is to check the absolutism of any virtue. The governance is always based on reason (wisdom) and to make the governance generous, the virtue of emotion (power) is very essential. Faith (culture/religion) binds them. Sovereignty of law on all these virtues i.e. law, power and faith is based on tax (tribute) that will enhance the submission and recognize the state-hood. This is the macro citizenship.
With best regards,
(SHARMILA BOSE)
Multiculturalism and Identity Crisis
SHARMILA BOSE
1868/14, Govind Puri Extn.
Kalkaji,
New Delhi – 110 019
Ph – 9811915670
Email. : bosesharmila@rediffmail.com
5th February, 2009
The Prime Minister of India,
New Delhi.
Kind Attn. : Dr. Manmohan Singh
Sub : Multiculturalism and identity crises
Sir,
I hope you are keeping fine. This is further to my papers on State-Society relations I am giving my views on multiculturalism and identity crises.
As, I view the society is an extension of human body and the governance is based on the human virtues i.e. emotion, reason and faith. Understanding ‘terrorism’ will be incomplete without enhancing the significance of culture in cultivating the social character.
Culture is not an entitlement of the society rather it is a manifestation of human character that nurtures the society. Since the human kind is heterogeneous in nature so there is an existence of multiple culture. Culture and religion have the similar base. Religion is a bigger form of culture. Religion is a fabric that binds the society together to give a specific identity. Culture is the base that relates to that identity. Culture is micro and religion if macro.
We, India, being the plural society, various cultures have nurtured us ever since its existence. Many sustained and many perished. The adoption of culture or the assimilation of cultures signifies that there is no absolutism in the strength of any culture that signifies its permanence.
Protection of culture in the form of rights is blurred in understanding the importance of culture. ‘Right’ is a political entity. When any claim is considered to preserve a specific culture or cultures signifies weakness in the culture itself. Any culture that is not able to enhance the human character perishes gradually and no political claim can preserve it since culture nurture human behaviour and it has a natural existence but not governed, and if the State restricts any culture to flourish, under-qualifies as statehood.
The next aspect of this discourse is castes in Hindu culture. There are various explanations on ‘caste hierarchy’, which I feel has a limitation in understanding of Hindu civilization. ‘Human evolution’ has not been considered while interpreting the existence of Caste in Indian society.
Historically, I see Caste as an evolution of the society and it was based on the structure of society that led to state. The four structures i.e. Shudra, Vaishya, Kshatriya and Brahmin. In the historical doctrine it has the placing of feet, thigh, arm and head. If we analyse the evolution of the society, the first were the cultivators (Shudra) who were self-sufficient. Gradually, the increase on interdependence created exchange of goods (by batter system). This exchange of goods further enhanced to the coinage system which were termed as trade (Vaishya). When there is exchange of goods and creation of purchasing power i.e. monetary system led to accumulation of wealth. Accumulation of wealth created insecurity and hence a community that rose as protector (Kshatriya) of the wealth. When power protects accumulation of wealth leads to subjugation and exploitation of the grass-root people, i.e. cultivator/creators (Shudra). Subjugation and exploitation leads to deterioration of the society. When there is a fall in the society, some people who come up to give directions and elevate morals and values are known as scholars (Brahmins). These four pillars are extremely essential for the structure of Indian society, since it is the land of cultivators and the land of spirit i.e Shudra and Brahmin. Economy (Vaishya) and Administration (Kshatriya) are the support pillars.
Non-existence of educational/training institution, the legacy of knowledge was transformed from generation to generation that led to character of inheritance in structures. The exploitation (an academic vocabalary) of a particular caste structure needs to be studied more elaborately. More emphasis is given on the exploitation by the feudal lords (kshatriya) in the society. I view this otherwise. The exploitation of human essence is done for the maximizing the profits and the said are achieved in trading. The only way to earn maximum profits was by devaluing human labour. The said concept was benefited to the group called Vaishya (traders). Traders were the intermediates to feudal lords and the cultivators/artisans (Shudra). Feudal Lords could not exploit the cultivators since they were the work force of the land and could be the victims of the revolts. Whereas, the traders had a clear escape and hold no responsibilities. Feudal Lords were getting only the share of the profits (royalty) that was further used for administration of the society.
The guilt earned by the exploitation done for the maximizing profits by the traders to the society were further washed up by performing rituals that were undertaken by Brahmins (intellects). Since, intellect is the attribute that could not be inherited, led to the deterioration in the Brahmin structure and hence became the tools of trader (Vaishya) and further became catalyst towards the exploitation of one section of the society.
The groups Shudra, Kshatriya and Brahmins inherited the attributes cultivator/creators, warriors and intellect. But the community of traders manipulated these attributes for their sustainability. As they remained undercover they were never in the lime light as exploiters. Traders did not possess attributes, their survival was based on speculation, manipulation and appropriation. This led them to be insecured and hence lived in a closed community and followed the rituals religiously. The said group’s interaction among the other groups were mainly formal i.e. transaction. This group further created a gap amongst the rest of the three communities and hence became separate identity. The survival of Brahmins by the donations on religious act performed by these traders led them to create a social stratification where the cultivators / artisan did have a neglected placing. Also the Kshatriyas were happy with the royalties from the said group and were not very responsible towards the grass-root people, i.e. Shudra.
During the freedom struggle, Indian nationalists realized the destitution of Shudra. Post Independence gave them an identity of ‘dalit’ along with the ‘preferential law’ (reservation) to upgrade the destitute of the said group. The ‘preferential law’ was given to them with a view that they should not be neglected by the rest of the groups as they were the victims historically. The said law has given them enormously exposure in the society by way of identity and protection of their identity, i.e. the identity that they have inherited historically. But the question is whether this identity has strengthened the said structure or just became a tool for further exploitation.
The said ‘preferential law’ towards dalits gave them an opportunity to come in the main stream for education and employments in different sectors. There is an ample protection when it comes to dignity of the said group (at least constitutionally). But what went wrong the role and the attributes of the said structure remained unrecognized and uncorrected. The dignity of the said group cannot be attained unless the structure is well build. This led to a creation of Naxalism which is a biggest threat to the country than ‘terrorism’.
We have (globally recognized) strong economy (vaishya), strong administration (kshatriya) and scholars (Brahmins), but smashed cultivators/creators (shudra), which led to a limping growth of the society even though we are absolutely equipped.
Whereas, in Islam, the community called Muslims have a different stand. Muslim is an egalitarian society, since they do not have structure. They are traders by legacy and they are governed by religion i.e. Islam. (Any community that is governed by faith is closed and narrow) Since they are traders, for their protection they have equipped military. They have no bond with the Land and hence they are Community bond. This community has no Shudras or Brahmins. This structure is standing on two pillars, and hence the growth is inappropriate. Brahmins are too essential in harmonizing the community. This community creates a balance in the structure and hence cannot be overlooked. Shudra are the base of the society. Unless the base is strong the structure will not be durable. Hence, I see Muslims a structure which has no base and no roof
.
I view caste as a structure that has base (Shudra), walls (Vaishya & Kshatriya) and a roof (Brahmins). All four are equally essential and see no hierarchy in this. If the state focus on the governance of economy, then we will have non-colonized scholars, equipped administration and this will further strengthened the grass-root people i.e. cultivators. Shudra and Brahmins are very essential in the human society, i.e. base and roof. Any society, where there is non-existence of these two groups or either will lead to deterioration and hence will be Muslims (culturally, politically and socially).
Another major academic discourse is the question of private property or unequal distribution of wealth or accumulation of wealth in small section of the society. The two major thoughts Liberals & Marxists have given significant arguments to justify their strands where one advocates for private property as an incentive / motivation to efforts and other claim as an abuse of the community property. But both of these thoughts did not discuss the ‘curse of inheritance’.
Inheritance is a phenomenon, which has created individualism and communalism that led to identity crisis. Inheritance leads to accumulation of wealth for the successors. Inequality in the attribute leads to unequal distribution of wealth. Motivation of acquiring private properties further paved the way for subjugation and exploitation that is further responsible for the collapse of human society.
What will happen if we erode the phenomena of ‘inheritance’? We cannot inherit attributes, but can only acquire through dedication. These attributes get rewards/ incentive by way of wealth. If the wealth is the reward and incentive to one’s attribute, then how can we ‘will’ those rewards or incentive to our successors? When the private property is the essence of ‘individualism’ (liberals), then how it can justify ‘inheritance’?
Historically, land grants given to warriors or scholars as incentive against their contribution in the war or intellect. But what went wrong, the said became ‘inherited’ by the kin without earning. This led to ‘birth right’, which has no significance in the ‘nature’s law’. Wealth is common property and has no significance to the ‘birth right’. Inheritance creates dynasty and dynasty is not permanent. Anything that is dynastic is prone to invasion and collapse since attributes are not inherited, it is individual’s assets. Inheritance creates province boundaries and these boundaries further create identity. When boundaries became dynastic, then it leads to identity crisis. Anything that is dynastic, whether state governance, political parties or corporate, is bound to deteriorate. This is further relevance to the individual inheritance as well. All the family conflicts arise from inheritance crisis.
If inheritance will erode, how the society will be. The rewards/incentive earned by the community will not be a legacy. It will be only an incentive to individual efforts. Secondly, it does not erode the provision of private property that Liberals are quite worried about. Thirdly, since the wealth is not inherited by the private successors, the said wealth will be utilized for the community for the well being and by this the community will grow sustainable, without exploitation, hence resolves Marxist’s concern. This will also resolve the Naxal crisis. Eroding ‘inheritance right’ will create a return path for the transition of our country’s enormous wealth that is being drained in the private account of few individuals in the foreign bank in the foreign land.
Erosion of inheritance will erode two world crises. I can see that this will lead to a Utopian society.
With best regards and with you a GOOD HEALTH,
(SHARMILA BOSE)
(In my concluding paper ‘On Submission’, I will look for a way out how the political representation should work to the best of the abilities of the representative so that it can be used for the good governance and how the virtues of the society i.e. reason (law), emotions (power) and faith (spiritualism) can bring the social harmony within the frame of ‘dejure’.)
1868/14, Govind Puri Extn.
Kalkaji,
New Delhi – 110 019
Ph – 9811915670
Email. : bosesharmila@rediffmail.com
5th February, 2009
The Prime Minister of India,
New Delhi.
Kind Attn. : Dr. Manmohan Singh
Sub : Multiculturalism and identity crises
Sir,
I hope you are keeping fine. This is further to my papers on State-Society relations I am giving my views on multiculturalism and identity crises.
As, I view the society is an extension of human body and the governance is based on the human virtues i.e. emotion, reason and faith. Understanding ‘terrorism’ will be incomplete without enhancing the significance of culture in cultivating the social character.
Culture is not an entitlement of the society rather it is a manifestation of human character that nurtures the society. Since the human kind is heterogeneous in nature so there is an existence of multiple culture. Culture and religion have the similar base. Religion is a bigger form of culture. Religion is a fabric that binds the society together to give a specific identity. Culture is the base that relates to that identity. Culture is micro and religion if macro.
We, India, being the plural society, various cultures have nurtured us ever since its existence. Many sustained and many perished. The adoption of culture or the assimilation of cultures signifies that there is no absolutism in the strength of any culture that signifies its permanence.
Protection of culture in the form of rights is blurred in understanding the importance of culture. ‘Right’ is a political entity. When any claim is considered to preserve a specific culture or cultures signifies weakness in the culture itself. Any culture that is not able to enhance the human character perishes gradually and no political claim can preserve it since culture nurture human behaviour and it has a natural existence but not governed, and if the State restricts any culture to flourish, under-qualifies as statehood.
The next aspect of this discourse is castes in Hindu culture. There are various explanations on ‘caste hierarchy’, which I feel has a limitation in understanding of Hindu civilization. ‘Human evolution’ has not been considered while interpreting the existence of Caste in Indian society.
Historically, I see Caste as an evolution of the society and it was based on the structure of society that led to state. The four structures i.e. Shudra, Vaishya, Kshatriya and Brahmin. In the historical doctrine it has the placing of feet, thigh, arm and head. If we analyse the evolution of the society, the first were the cultivators (Shudra) who were self-sufficient. Gradually, the increase on interdependence created exchange of goods (by batter system). This exchange of goods further enhanced to the coinage system which were termed as trade (Vaishya). When there is exchange of goods and creation of purchasing power i.e. monetary system led to accumulation of wealth. Accumulation of wealth created insecurity and hence a community that rose as protector (Kshatriya) of the wealth. When power protects accumulation of wealth leads to subjugation and exploitation of the grass-root people, i.e. cultivator/creators (Shudra). Subjugation and exploitation leads to deterioration of the society. When there is a fall in the society, some people who come up to give directions and elevate morals and values are known as scholars (Brahmins). These four pillars are extremely essential for the structure of Indian society, since it is the land of cultivators and the land of spirit i.e Shudra and Brahmin. Economy (Vaishya) and Administration (Kshatriya) are the support pillars.
Non-existence of educational/training institution, the legacy of knowledge was transformed from generation to generation that led to character of inheritance in structures. The exploitation (an academic vocabalary) of a particular caste structure needs to be studied more elaborately. More emphasis is given on the exploitation by the feudal lords (kshatriya) in the society. I view this otherwise. The exploitation of human essence is done for the maximizing the profits and the said are achieved in trading. The only way to earn maximum profits was by devaluing human labour. The said concept was benefited to the group called Vaishya (traders). Traders were the intermediates to feudal lords and the cultivators/artisans (Shudra). Feudal Lords could not exploit the cultivators since they were the work force of the land and could be the victims of the revolts. Whereas, the traders had a clear escape and hold no responsibilities. Feudal Lords were getting only the share of the profits (royalty) that was further used for administration of the society.
The guilt earned by the exploitation done for the maximizing profits by the traders to the society were further washed up by performing rituals that were undertaken by Brahmins (intellects). Since, intellect is the attribute that could not be inherited, led to the deterioration in the Brahmin structure and hence became the tools of trader (Vaishya) and further became catalyst towards the exploitation of one section of the society.
The groups Shudra, Kshatriya and Brahmins inherited the attributes cultivator/creators, warriors and intellect. But the community of traders manipulated these attributes for their sustainability. As they remained undercover they were never in the lime light as exploiters. Traders did not possess attributes, their survival was based on speculation, manipulation and appropriation. This led them to be insecured and hence lived in a closed community and followed the rituals religiously. The said group’s interaction among the other groups were mainly formal i.e. transaction. This group further created a gap amongst the rest of the three communities and hence became separate identity. The survival of Brahmins by the donations on religious act performed by these traders led them to create a social stratification where the cultivators / artisan did have a neglected placing. Also the Kshatriyas were happy with the royalties from the said group and were not very responsible towards the grass-root people, i.e. Shudra.
During the freedom struggle, Indian nationalists realized the destitution of Shudra. Post Independence gave them an identity of ‘dalit’ along with the ‘preferential law’ (reservation) to upgrade the destitute of the said group. The ‘preferential law’ was given to them with a view that they should not be neglected by the rest of the groups as they were the victims historically. The said law has given them enormously exposure in the society by way of identity and protection of their identity, i.e. the identity that they have inherited historically. But the question is whether this identity has strengthened the said structure or just became a tool for further exploitation.
The said ‘preferential law’ towards dalits gave them an opportunity to come in the main stream for education and employments in different sectors. There is an ample protection when it comes to dignity of the said group (at least constitutionally). But what went wrong the role and the attributes of the said structure remained unrecognized and uncorrected. The dignity of the said group cannot be attained unless the structure is well build. This led to a creation of Naxalism which is a biggest threat to the country than ‘terrorism’.
We have (globally recognized) strong economy (vaishya), strong administration (kshatriya) and scholars (Brahmins), but smashed cultivators/creators (shudra), which led to a limping growth of the society even though we are absolutely equipped.
Whereas, in Islam, the community called Muslims have a different stand. Muslim is an egalitarian society, since they do not have structure. They are traders by legacy and they are governed by religion i.e. Islam. (Any community that is governed by faith is closed and narrow) Since they are traders, for their protection they have equipped military. They have no bond with the Land and hence they are Community bond. This community has no Shudras or Brahmins. This structure is standing on two pillars, and hence the growth is inappropriate. Brahmins are too essential in harmonizing the community. This community creates a balance in the structure and hence cannot be overlooked. Shudra are the base of the society. Unless the base is strong the structure will not be durable. Hence, I see Muslims a structure which has no base and no roof
.
I view caste as a structure that has base (Shudra), walls (Vaishya & Kshatriya) and a roof (Brahmins). All four are equally essential and see no hierarchy in this. If the state focus on the governance of economy, then we will have non-colonized scholars, equipped administration and this will further strengthened the grass-root people i.e. cultivators. Shudra and Brahmins are very essential in the human society, i.e. base and roof. Any society, where there is non-existence of these two groups or either will lead to deterioration and hence will be Muslims (culturally, politically and socially).
Another major academic discourse is the question of private property or unequal distribution of wealth or accumulation of wealth in small section of the society. The two major thoughts Liberals & Marxists have given significant arguments to justify their strands where one advocates for private property as an incentive / motivation to efforts and other claim as an abuse of the community property. But both of these thoughts did not discuss the ‘curse of inheritance’.
Inheritance is a phenomenon, which has created individualism and communalism that led to identity crisis. Inheritance leads to accumulation of wealth for the successors. Inequality in the attribute leads to unequal distribution of wealth. Motivation of acquiring private properties further paved the way for subjugation and exploitation that is further responsible for the collapse of human society.
What will happen if we erode the phenomena of ‘inheritance’? We cannot inherit attributes, but can only acquire through dedication. These attributes get rewards/ incentive by way of wealth. If the wealth is the reward and incentive to one’s attribute, then how can we ‘will’ those rewards or incentive to our successors? When the private property is the essence of ‘individualism’ (liberals), then how it can justify ‘inheritance’?
Historically, land grants given to warriors or scholars as incentive against their contribution in the war or intellect. But what went wrong, the said became ‘inherited’ by the kin without earning. This led to ‘birth right’, which has no significance in the ‘nature’s law’. Wealth is common property and has no significance to the ‘birth right’. Inheritance creates dynasty and dynasty is not permanent. Anything that is dynastic is prone to invasion and collapse since attributes are not inherited, it is individual’s assets. Inheritance creates province boundaries and these boundaries further create identity. When boundaries became dynastic, then it leads to identity crisis. Anything that is dynastic, whether state governance, political parties or corporate, is bound to deteriorate. This is further relevance to the individual inheritance as well. All the family conflicts arise from inheritance crisis.
If inheritance will erode, how the society will be. The rewards/incentive earned by the community will not be a legacy. It will be only an incentive to individual efforts. Secondly, it does not erode the provision of private property that Liberals are quite worried about. Thirdly, since the wealth is not inherited by the private successors, the said wealth will be utilized for the community for the well being and by this the community will grow sustainable, without exploitation, hence resolves Marxist’s concern. This will also resolve the Naxal crisis. Eroding ‘inheritance right’ will create a return path for the transition of our country’s enormous wealth that is being drained in the private account of few individuals in the foreign bank in the foreign land.
Erosion of inheritance will erode two world crises. I can see that this will lead to a Utopian society.
With best regards and with you a GOOD HEALTH,
(SHARMILA BOSE)
(In my concluding paper ‘On Submission’, I will look for a way out how the political representation should work to the best of the abilities of the representative so that it can be used for the good governance and how the virtues of the society i.e. reason (law), emotions (power) and faith (spiritualism) can bring the social harmony within the frame of ‘dejure’.)
Defining Terrorism
SHARMILA BOSE
Phone – 9811915670
Email.: bosesharmila@rediffmail.com
9th December, 2008
The Prime Minister of India
New Delhi
Kind Attn. : Dr. Manmohan Singh
Sub : Defining ‘Terrorism’
Dear Sir,
This is in continuation to my various write-ups on different socio-political issues, as committed I am giving my thoughts on the said subject.
While explaining ‘Democracy’ I had analysed two major regimes of human society, i.e. regime of power and regime of law. Terrorism is a tool to impose power. Power signifies subjugation and it is realized by force or massacre. So, instead of explaining terrorism, I would like to classify terrorism.
1. Terrorism as religio-economical polity
2. Terrorism in domestic strategy
3. Terrorism in foreign policy
Terrorism is often linked with a religion in the present world. Islam holds the allegations as a religion related to massacre. But claiming this, which has some basis footing, needs to be understood historically. The history of Islam comes with the prosperous Meccan Trade in the Arabian region. Monopoly in the trade route and prosperous with the trade and the pilgrimage of Meccans ‘Ka’ba’, made other clan members of the said region to accommodate themselves with their religious bounding to have ‘smooth trading’. Meccan in return took toll tax towards usage of the route and submission to their belief against which they gave them the protection for safety. The said trading activates led to enhancement of free trade or laissez-faire.
The laissez-faire created economical differentiation. Many clans started perishing due to the heavy competition and those clans who were enriched became irresponsible, lavish and selfish towards their responsibilities. Prophet Mohammad was amongst those clans that deteriorated due to laissez-faire and free trade market. Realising the cause of deterioration, Prophet Mohammad declared himself as a messenger of the God Allah and tried to accumulate people under the umbrella of Allah to fight against rich and lavish traders of Mecca. The accumulated clans were termed as Muslim. Aallah became the source of law and the fabric that bound Muslim and Allah was given a brand ‘Islam’. Defeating the powerful and equipped clan of Mecca by a small group of Muslim under the leadership of Prophet Mohammad indicates that the mission of egalitarian society have been paved. The governance of Muslims became the law of Islam. Hence Islam was the community of Traders. Why Islam is egalitarian? Because, Muslim, the clan members were not cultivator but only trader. Where there is cultivation or production there is always a division of labour or structural hierarchy.
While analyzing the features of the traders I find that the community of traders are the closed community. It is similar, the way we have Baniya community in India. They are confined to themselves and they are not comfortable in associating with other communities but for the trading. If we analyse the two communities i.e. Muslims and Baniyas of India, we will find their social structure (conservation) are the same.
Traders are basically expansionist by nature, since their existence is through procurement and selling and finding new avenues. The rise of colonial expansion when the Arabs captured the trade route of Europe, the European countries looked and explored towards Asian markets.
Traders have a very strong community bond. This bond is not because of love and affection towards their clan members, rather it is because they are very unsecured by nature. Sense of instability push for violence and further crave for power. The security crises come in a community when they have nothing to cultivate, produce or create. In other words, those who cultivate, produce or create are progressive in nature and hence are liberals. Whereas, the community who are traders as market, brokers and speculators and are only focused on profits, are closed and communal. Their survival is only possible on the survival of their community. For example, the advocacy of Hindutva and the communal ideology is backed by the traders’ community. The Muslims who are non-traders are not communal. (My next paper will evaluate in ‘multiculturalism and identity crises’ that why the community called Muslims are the victims of the ‘generalisation in tune of terrorism’. This will also include why the Hinduism is known as caste hierarchy, and it will also discuss why the ‘reservation policy’ could not benefit to the segment it has addressed to.)
Hence I visualize terrorism is an intra-community conflict. The blasts in the retail markets like Sarojini Nagar Market, Karol Bagh and others in the eve of Diwali seconds my analysis of Intra-community violence. I preview it as conflicts between Markets and Malls where the community get victimized and terrorized, since the community is the ultimate buyer. Attack on World Trade Centre in USA signifies conflict in trade communities.
Historically, nomadic communities were the traders and hence they were conquerors. Either they plundered the wealth or the created their dynasty. Presently, the evolution of society made the nomadic community focused on trade monitoring. The terrorist groups such as LeT or SIMI in the domestic scenario are only the groups that are defacto military to capture, mobilize and control the market. This was done in a similar way when Portuguese, French or British traders approached South Asian countries for the search of market, they used military for the sustainability of their trade in the continent. The two World Wars were the consequence of the intra-traders conflict. Earlier Arabs (ancient and medieval period) had control on the market. The blocking of European trade route by Arabs let Europeans trades to invade the South Asian market. After the two Great Wars, the USA and USSR created market for the sale of weapons. That was termed as Cold War. After the Cold War and disintegration of USSR, USA became hegemony in the world trade.
The laissez-faire or liberalism-privatisation-globalization has paved the way of exploring new market in the post Cold War period. This is countered by the Arab societies and hence paved the way in the form of jihad in the World scenario in the name of Islam. Why it is jihad termed as massacre, because it is war against inequality of division of resources and economy. Where one segment of the world is progressing high and others are destitute and hunger. When ever there will be an unequal growth, there will be jihad is the philosophy of the Arabian society.
Chemical weapons, modern ammunitions, suicide attackers, high jacking are the technique, tools, strategies and patterns of trade control. Today trade is not selling or buying of goods or services (they are rather termed as ‘import-export’ and ‘outsourcing’ respectively), rather trade is termed as speculation, manipulation and appropriation of the Market and terrorism is a tool to realized and control the trade. Hence, I define terrorism is an ‘artificial calamity’ created by the ungoverned economy.
After defining terrorism as religo-economical polity, I get into the domestic strategy towards classifying the terrorism. The nomadic troops like SIMI, Indian Mujahuudin and so on are only tools of defacto regime. They are mainly used for the purpose of political conflicts amongst different political clans for the political benefits. They are the contractual military who are used for the political and economical gains. Bombs, firing and massacre are the strategy and tools of the battle. These nomadic groups are diversifying in other sectors as well.
The third classification of the terrorism is the foreign policy. India is surrounded by the countries that have weak economy. These neighbouring countries are often become tools of the major power towards the weakening the regional power. Hence India gets victimized either on fake currency or the human trafficking such as prostitution. The invasion in the family system by the prostitutes of neighbouring countries lead to break-up and shattering of the families that leads to weak society. Weak society leads to weak country. Fake currency circulation leads to economical disturbance. I term these as passive terrorism. There are two approaches towards it, one, to share your growth with yours neighbours or to have a separatist policy.
Why India is vulnerable to terrorism, because, India is not a country but a civilization. The said civilization stood united in diversity since ages. The society with numerous languages, culture, tradition, religions could survive only because it is not a country but a civilization. The enriched cultures of the civilization allow every sector to grow sustainable. That is why since the ancient time, India has been the home of all the culture and deepened their roots historically. Secular is not an ideology, but a way of existence in a civilized community. There is no space for communalism in the creative, intellectual and spiritual community like India. Such a rich civilization needs to be governed by the law not power. In such governance, Community should have direct access to the Authority, i.e. ‘direct democracy’. Whether, it is trade or indigenous governance or international relation only rule of law, i.e. dejure governance is the only solution towards combating terrorism.
With best regards,
Yours faithfully,
(SHARMILA BOSE)
Phone – 9811915670
Email.: bosesharmila@rediffmail.com
9th December, 2008
The Prime Minister of India
New Delhi
Kind Attn. : Dr. Manmohan Singh
Sub : Defining ‘Terrorism’
Dear Sir,
This is in continuation to my various write-ups on different socio-political issues, as committed I am giving my thoughts on the said subject.
While explaining ‘Democracy’ I had analysed two major regimes of human society, i.e. regime of power and regime of law. Terrorism is a tool to impose power. Power signifies subjugation and it is realized by force or massacre. So, instead of explaining terrorism, I would like to classify terrorism.
1. Terrorism as religio-economical polity
2. Terrorism in domestic strategy
3. Terrorism in foreign policy
Terrorism is often linked with a religion in the present world. Islam holds the allegations as a religion related to massacre. But claiming this, which has some basis footing, needs to be understood historically. The history of Islam comes with the prosperous Meccan Trade in the Arabian region. Monopoly in the trade route and prosperous with the trade and the pilgrimage of Meccans ‘Ka’ba’, made other clan members of the said region to accommodate themselves with their religious bounding to have ‘smooth trading’. Meccan in return took toll tax towards usage of the route and submission to their belief against which they gave them the protection for safety. The said trading activates led to enhancement of free trade or laissez-faire.
The laissez-faire created economical differentiation. Many clans started perishing due to the heavy competition and those clans who were enriched became irresponsible, lavish and selfish towards their responsibilities. Prophet Mohammad was amongst those clans that deteriorated due to laissez-faire and free trade market. Realising the cause of deterioration, Prophet Mohammad declared himself as a messenger of the God Allah and tried to accumulate people under the umbrella of Allah to fight against rich and lavish traders of Mecca. The accumulated clans were termed as Muslim. Aallah became the source of law and the fabric that bound Muslim and Allah was given a brand ‘Islam’. Defeating the powerful and equipped clan of Mecca by a small group of Muslim under the leadership of Prophet Mohammad indicates that the mission of egalitarian society have been paved. The governance of Muslims became the law of Islam. Hence Islam was the community of Traders. Why Islam is egalitarian? Because, Muslim, the clan members were not cultivator but only trader. Where there is cultivation or production there is always a division of labour or structural hierarchy.
While analyzing the features of the traders I find that the community of traders are the closed community. It is similar, the way we have Baniya community in India. They are confined to themselves and they are not comfortable in associating with other communities but for the trading. If we analyse the two communities i.e. Muslims and Baniyas of India, we will find their social structure (conservation) are the same.
Traders are basically expansionist by nature, since their existence is through procurement and selling and finding new avenues. The rise of colonial expansion when the Arabs captured the trade route of Europe, the European countries looked and explored towards Asian markets.
Traders have a very strong community bond. This bond is not because of love and affection towards their clan members, rather it is because they are very unsecured by nature. Sense of instability push for violence and further crave for power. The security crises come in a community when they have nothing to cultivate, produce or create. In other words, those who cultivate, produce or create are progressive in nature and hence are liberals. Whereas, the community who are traders as market, brokers and speculators and are only focused on profits, are closed and communal. Their survival is only possible on the survival of their community. For example, the advocacy of Hindutva and the communal ideology is backed by the traders’ community. The Muslims who are non-traders are not communal. (My next paper will evaluate in ‘multiculturalism and identity crises’ that why the community called Muslims are the victims of the ‘generalisation in tune of terrorism’. This will also include why the Hinduism is known as caste hierarchy, and it will also discuss why the ‘reservation policy’ could not benefit to the segment it has addressed to.)
Hence I visualize terrorism is an intra-community conflict. The blasts in the retail markets like Sarojini Nagar Market, Karol Bagh and others in the eve of Diwali seconds my analysis of Intra-community violence. I preview it as conflicts between Markets and Malls where the community get victimized and terrorized, since the community is the ultimate buyer. Attack on World Trade Centre in USA signifies conflict in trade communities.
Historically, nomadic communities were the traders and hence they were conquerors. Either they plundered the wealth or the created their dynasty. Presently, the evolution of society made the nomadic community focused on trade monitoring. The terrorist groups such as LeT or SIMI in the domestic scenario are only the groups that are defacto military to capture, mobilize and control the market. This was done in a similar way when Portuguese, French or British traders approached South Asian countries for the search of market, they used military for the sustainability of their trade in the continent. The two World Wars were the consequence of the intra-traders conflict. Earlier Arabs (ancient and medieval period) had control on the market. The blocking of European trade route by Arabs let Europeans trades to invade the South Asian market. After the two Great Wars, the USA and USSR created market for the sale of weapons. That was termed as Cold War. After the Cold War and disintegration of USSR, USA became hegemony in the world trade.
The laissez-faire or liberalism-privatisation-globalization has paved the way of exploring new market in the post Cold War period. This is countered by the Arab societies and hence paved the way in the form of jihad in the World scenario in the name of Islam. Why it is jihad termed as massacre, because it is war against inequality of division of resources and economy. Where one segment of the world is progressing high and others are destitute and hunger. When ever there will be an unequal growth, there will be jihad is the philosophy of the Arabian society.
Chemical weapons, modern ammunitions, suicide attackers, high jacking are the technique, tools, strategies and patterns of trade control. Today trade is not selling or buying of goods or services (they are rather termed as ‘import-export’ and ‘outsourcing’ respectively), rather trade is termed as speculation, manipulation and appropriation of the Market and terrorism is a tool to realized and control the trade. Hence, I define terrorism is an ‘artificial calamity’ created by the ungoverned economy.
After defining terrorism as religo-economical polity, I get into the domestic strategy towards classifying the terrorism. The nomadic troops like SIMI, Indian Mujahuudin and so on are only tools of defacto regime. They are mainly used for the purpose of political conflicts amongst different political clans for the political benefits. They are the contractual military who are used for the political and economical gains. Bombs, firing and massacre are the strategy and tools of the battle. These nomadic groups are diversifying in other sectors as well.
The third classification of the terrorism is the foreign policy. India is surrounded by the countries that have weak economy. These neighbouring countries are often become tools of the major power towards the weakening the regional power. Hence India gets victimized either on fake currency or the human trafficking such as prostitution. The invasion in the family system by the prostitutes of neighbouring countries lead to break-up and shattering of the families that leads to weak society. Weak society leads to weak country. Fake currency circulation leads to economical disturbance. I term these as passive terrorism. There are two approaches towards it, one, to share your growth with yours neighbours or to have a separatist policy.
Why India is vulnerable to terrorism, because, India is not a country but a civilization. The said civilization stood united in diversity since ages. The society with numerous languages, culture, tradition, religions could survive only because it is not a country but a civilization. The enriched cultures of the civilization allow every sector to grow sustainable. That is why since the ancient time, India has been the home of all the culture and deepened their roots historically. Secular is not an ideology, but a way of existence in a civilized community. There is no space for communalism in the creative, intellectual and spiritual community like India. Such a rich civilization needs to be governed by the law not power. In such governance, Community should have direct access to the Authority, i.e. ‘direct democracy’. Whether, it is trade or indigenous governance or international relation only rule of law, i.e. dejure governance is the only solution towards combating terrorism.
With best regards,
Yours faithfully,
(SHARMILA BOSE)
Defining Terrorism
SHARMILA BOSE
Phone – 9811915670
Email.: bosesharmila@rediffmail.com
9th December, 2008
The Prime Minister of India
New Delhi
Kind Attn. : Dr. Manmohan Singh
Sub : Defining ‘Terrorism’
Dear Sir,
This is in continuation to my various write-ups on different socio-political issues, as committed I am giving my thoughts on the said subject.
While explaining ‘Democracy’ I had analysed two major regimes of human society, i.e. regime of power and regime of law. Terrorism is a tool to impose power. Power signifies subjugation and it is realized by force or massacre. So, instead of explaining terrorism, I would like to classify terrorism.
1. Terrorism as religio-economical polity
2. Terrorism in domestic strategy
3. Terrorism in foreign policy
Terrorism is often linked with a religion in the present world. Islam holds the allegations as a religion related to massacre. But claiming this, which has some basis footing, needs to be understood historically. The history of Islam comes with the prosperous Meccan Trade in the Arabian region. Monopoly in the trade route and prosperous with the trade and the pilgrimage of Meccans ‘Ka’ba’, made other clan members of the said region to accommodate themselves with their religious bounding to have ‘smooth trading’. Meccan in return took toll tax towards usage of the route and submission to their belief against which they gave them the protection for safety. The said trading activates led to enhancement of free trade or laissez-faire.
The laissez-faire created economical differentiation. Many clans started perishing due to the heavy competition and those clans who were enriched became irresponsible, lavish and selfish towards their responsibilities. Prophet Mohammad was amongst those clans that deteriorated due to laissez-faire and free trade market. Realising the cause of deterioration, Prophet Mohammad declared himself as a messenger of the God Allah and tried to accumulate people under the umbrella of Allah to fight against rich and lavish traders of Mecca. The accumulated clans were termed as Muslim. Aallah became the source of law and the fabric that bound Muslim and Allah was given a brand ‘Islam’. Defeating the powerful and equipped clan of Mecca by a small group of Muslim under the leadership of Prophet Mohammad indicates that the mission of egalitarian society have been paved. The governance of Muslims became the law of Islam. Hence Islam was the community of Traders. Why Islam is egalitarian? Because, Muslim, the clan members were not cultivator but only trader. Where there is cultivation or production there is always a division of labour or structural hierarchy.
While analyzing the features of the traders I find that the community of traders are the closed community. It is similar, the way we have Baniya community in India. They are confined to themselves and they are not comfortable in associating with other communities but for the trading. If we analyse the two communities i.e. Muslims and Baniyas of India, we will find their social structure (conservation) are the same.
Traders are basically expansionist by nature, since their existence is through procurement and selling and finding new avenues. The rise of colonial expansion when the Arabs captured the trade route of Europe, the European countries looked and explored towards Asian markets.
Traders have a very strong community bond. This bond is not because of love and affection towards their clan members, rather it is because they are very unsecured by nature. Sense of instability push for violence and further crave for power. The security crises come in a community when they have nothing to cultivate, produce or create. In other words, those who cultivate, produce or create are progressive in nature and hence are liberals. Whereas, the community who are traders as market, brokers and speculators and are only focused on profits, are closed and communal. Their survival is only possible on the survival of their community. For example, the advocacy of Hindutva and the communal ideology is backed by the traders’ community. The Muslims who are non-traders are not communal. (My next paper will evaluate in ‘multiculturalism and identity crises’ that why the community called Muslims are the victims of the ‘generalisation in tune of terrorism’. This will also include why the Hinduism is known as caste hierarchy, and it will also discuss why the ‘reservation policy’ could not benefit to the segment it has addressed to.)
Hence I visualize terrorism is an intra-community conflict. The blasts in the retail markets like Sarojini Nagar Market, Karol Bagh and others in the eve of Diwali seconds my analysis of Intra-community violence. I preview it as conflicts between Markets and Malls where the community get victimized and terrorized, since the community is the ultimate buyer. Attack on World Trade Centre in USA signifies conflict in trade communities.
Historically, nomadic communities were the traders and hence they were conquerors. Either they plundered the wealth or the created their dynasty. Presently, the evolution of society made the nomadic community focused on trade monitoring. The terrorist groups such as LeT or SIMI in the domestic scenario are only the groups that are defacto military to capture, mobilize and control the market. This was done in a similar way when Portuguese, French or British traders approached South Asian countries for the search of market, they used military for the sustainability of their trade in the continent. The two World Wars were the consequence of the intra-traders conflict. Earlier Arabs (ancient and medieval period) had control on the market. The blocking of European trade route by Arabs let Europeans trades to invade the South Asian market. After the two Great Wars, the USA and USSR created market for the sale of weapons. That was termed as Cold War. After the Cold War and disintegration of USSR, USA became hegemony in the world trade.
The laissez-faire or liberalism-privatisation-globalization has paved the way of exploring new market in the post Cold War period. This is countered by the Arab societies and hence paved the way in the form of jihad in the World scenario in the name of Islam. Why it is jihad termed as massacre, because it is war against inequality of division of resources and economy. Where one segment of the world is progressing high and others are destitute and hunger. When ever there will be an unequal growth, there will be jihad is the philosophy of the Arabian society.
Chemical weapons, modern ammunitions, suicide attackers, high jacking are the technique, tools, strategies and patterns of trade control. Today trade is not selling or buying of goods or services (they are rather termed as ‘import-export’ and ‘outsourcing’ respectively), rather trade is termed as speculation, manipulation and appropriation of the Market and terrorism is a tool to realized and control the trade. Hence, I define terrorism is an ‘artificial calamity’ created by the ungoverned economy.
After defining terrorism as religo-economical polity, I get into the domestic strategy towards classifying the terrorism. The nomadic troops like SIMI, Indian Mujahuudin and so on are only tools of defacto regime. They are mainly used for the purpose of political conflicts amongst different political clans for the political benefits. They are the contractual military who are used for the political and economical gains. Bombs, firing and massacre are the strategy and tools of the battle. These nomadic groups are diversifying in other sectors as well.
The third classification of the terrorism is the foreign policy. India is surrounded by the countries that have weak economy. These neighbouring countries are often become tools of the major power towards the weakening the regional power. Hence India gets victimized either on fake currency or the human trafficking such as prostitution. The invasion in the family system by the prostitutes of neighbouring countries lead to break-up and shattering of the families that leads to weak society. Weak society leads to weak country. Fake currency circulation leads to economical disturbance. I term these as passive terrorism. There are two approaches towards it, one, to share your growth with yours neighbours or to have a separatist policy.
Why India is vulnerable to terrorism, because, India is not a country but a civilization. The said civilization stood united in diversity since ages. The society with numerous languages, culture, tradition, religions could survive only because it is not a country but a civilization. The enriched cultures of the civilization allow every sector to grow sustainable. That is why since the ancient time, India has been the home of all the culture and deepened their roots historically. Secular is not an ideology, but a way of existence in a civilized community. There is no space for communalism in the creative, intellectual and spiritual community like India. Such a rich civilization needs to be governed by the law not power. In such governance, Community should have direct access to the Authority, i.e. ‘direct democracy’. Whether, it is trade or indigenous governance or international relation only rule of law, i.e. dejure governance is the only solution towards combating terrorism.
With best regards,
Yours faithfully,
(SHARMILA BOSE)
Phone – 9811915670
Email.: bosesharmila@rediffmail.com
9th December, 2008
The Prime Minister of India
New Delhi
Kind Attn. : Dr. Manmohan Singh
Sub : Defining ‘Terrorism’
Dear Sir,
This is in continuation to my various write-ups on different socio-political issues, as committed I am giving my thoughts on the said subject.
While explaining ‘Democracy’ I had analysed two major regimes of human society, i.e. regime of power and regime of law. Terrorism is a tool to impose power. Power signifies subjugation and it is realized by force or massacre. So, instead of explaining terrorism, I would like to classify terrorism.
1. Terrorism as religio-economical polity
2. Terrorism in domestic strategy
3. Terrorism in foreign policy
Terrorism is often linked with a religion in the present world. Islam holds the allegations as a religion related to massacre. But claiming this, which has some basis footing, needs to be understood historically. The history of Islam comes with the prosperous Meccan Trade in the Arabian region. Monopoly in the trade route and prosperous with the trade and the pilgrimage of Meccans ‘Ka’ba’, made other clan members of the said region to accommodate themselves with their religious bounding to have ‘smooth trading’. Meccan in return took toll tax towards usage of the route and submission to their belief against which they gave them the protection for safety. The said trading activates led to enhancement of free trade or laissez-faire.
The laissez-faire created economical differentiation. Many clans started perishing due to the heavy competition and those clans who were enriched became irresponsible, lavish and selfish towards their responsibilities. Prophet Mohammad was amongst those clans that deteriorated due to laissez-faire and free trade market. Realising the cause of deterioration, Prophet Mohammad declared himself as a messenger of the God Allah and tried to accumulate people under the umbrella of Allah to fight against rich and lavish traders of Mecca. The accumulated clans were termed as Muslim. Aallah became the source of law and the fabric that bound Muslim and Allah was given a brand ‘Islam’. Defeating the powerful and equipped clan of Mecca by a small group of Muslim under the leadership of Prophet Mohammad indicates that the mission of egalitarian society have been paved. The governance of Muslims became the law of Islam. Hence Islam was the community of Traders. Why Islam is egalitarian? Because, Muslim, the clan members were not cultivator but only trader. Where there is cultivation or production there is always a division of labour or structural hierarchy.
While analyzing the features of the traders I find that the community of traders are the closed community. It is similar, the way we have Baniya community in India. They are confined to themselves and they are not comfortable in associating with other communities but for the trading. If we analyse the two communities i.e. Muslims and Baniyas of India, we will find their social structure (conservation) are the same.
Traders are basically expansionist by nature, since their existence is through procurement and selling and finding new avenues. The rise of colonial expansion when the Arabs captured the trade route of Europe, the European countries looked and explored towards Asian markets.
Traders have a very strong community bond. This bond is not because of love and affection towards their clan members, rather it is because they are very unsecured by nature. Sense of instability push for violence and further crave for power. The security crises come in a community when they have nothing to cultivate, produce or create. In other words, those who cultivate, produce or create are progressive in nature and hence are liberals. Whereas, the community who are traders as market, brokers and speculators and are only focused on profits, are closed and communal. Their survival is only possible on the survival of their community. For example, the advocacy of Hindutva and the communal ideology is backed by the traders’ community. The Muslims who are non-traders are not communal. (My next paper will evaluate in ‘multiculturalism and identity crises’ that why the community called Muslims are the victims of the ‘generalisation in tune of terrorism’. This will also include why the Hinduism is known as caste hierarchy, and it will also discuss why the ‘reservation policy’ could not benefit to the segment it has addressed to.)
Hence I visualize terrorism is an intra-community conflict. The blasts in the retail markets like Sarojini Nagar Market, Karol Bagh and others in the eve of Diwali seconds my analysis of Intra-community violence. I preview it as conflicts between Markets and Malls where the community get victimized and terrorized, since the community is the ultimate buyer. Attack on World Trade Centre in USA signifies conflict in trade communities.
Historically, nomadic communities were the traders and hence they were conquerors. Either they plundered the wealth or the created their dynasty. Presently, the evolution of society made the nomadic community focused on trade monitoring. The terrorist groups such as LeT or SIMI in the domestic scenario are only the groups that are defacto military to capture, mobilize and control the market. This was done in a similar way when Portuguese, French or British traders approached South Asian countries for the search of market, they used military for the sustainability of their trade in the continent. The two World Wars were the consequence of the intra-traders conflict. Earlier Arabs (ancient and medieval period) had control on the market. The blocking of European trade route by Arabs let Europeans trades to invade the South Asian market. After the two Great Wars, the USA and USSR created market for the sale of weapons. That was termed as Cold War. After the Cold War and disintegration of USSR, USA became hegemony in the world trade.
The laissez-faire or liberalism-privatisation-globalization has paved the way of exploring new market in the post Cold War period. This is countered by the Arab societies and hence paved the way in the form of jihad in the World scenario in the name of Islam. Why it is jihad termed as massacre, because it is war against inequality of division of resources and economy. Where one segment of the world is progressing high and others are destitute and hunger. When ever there will be an unequal growth, there will be jihad is the philosophy of the Arabian society.
Chemical weapons, modern ammunitions, suicide attackers, high jacking are the technique, tools, strategies and patterns of trade control. Today trade is not selling or buying of goods or services (they are rather termed as ‘import-export’ and ‘outsourcing’ respectively), rather trade is termed as speculation, manipulation and appropriation of the Market and terrorism is a tool to realized and control the trade. Hence, I define terrorism is an ‘artificial calamity’ created by the ungoverned economy.
After defining terrorism as religo-economical polity, I get into the domestic strategy towards classifying the terrorism. The nomadic troops like SIMI, Indian Mujahuudin and so on are only tools of defacto regime. They are mainly used for the purpose of political conflicts amongst different political clans for the political benefits. They are the contractual military who are used for the political and economical gains. Bombs, firing and massacre are the strategy and tools of the battle. These nomadic groups are diversifying in other sectors as well.
The third classification of the terrorism is the foreign policy. India is surrounded by the countries that have weak economy. These neighbouring countries are often become tools of the major power towards the weakening the regional power. Hence India gets victimized either on fake currency or the human trafficking such as prostitution. The invasion in the family system by the prostitutes of neighbouring countries lead to break-up and shattering of the families that leads to weak society. Weak society leads to weak country. Fake currency circulation leads to economical disturbance. I term these as passive terrorism. There are two approaches towards it, one, to share your growth with yours neighbours or to have a separatist policy.
Why India is vulnerable to terrorism, because, India is not a country but a civilization. The said civilization stood united in diversity since ages. The society with numerous languages, culture, tradition, religions could survive only because it is not a country but a civilization. The enriched cultures of the civilization allow every sector to grow sustainable. That is why since the ancient time, India has been the home of all the culture and deepened their roots historically. Secular is not an ideology, but a way of existence in a civilized community. There is no space for communalism in the creative, intellectual and spiritual community like India. Such a rich civilization needs to be governed by the law not power. In such governance, Community should have direct access to the Authority, i.e. ‘direct democracy’. Whether, it is trade or indigenous governance or international relation only rule of law, i.e. dejure governance is the only solution towards combating terrorism.
With best regards,
Yours faithfully,
(SHARMILA BOSE)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)