Thursday, May 28, 2015

Since social activism other than the Hindutva branded NGOs is almost impossible and the voices are muted brutally,NGO people must align with the ninety percent to continue activism! How alarming is the situation? The President of India,the first citizen of India,is not allowed to express his view!

Since social activism other than the Hindutva branded NGOs is almost impossible and the voices are muted brutally,NGO people must align with the ninety percent to continue activism!
How alarming is the situation?
The President of India,the first citizen of India,is not allowed to express his view!
Palash Biswas
In reference to Aruna Roy`s opinion:

One Year of Modi govt: Bure din for social sector

Modi government has damaged the rights-based legislative framework without spelling out what will replace it.

We have discussed about Aruna Roy`s opinion on the performance of Modi Government in reference the role of civil society as RSS got its own NGO network directly linked with PMO as well as RSS headquarter.

In neoliberal age,the so called social sector has been reduced to NGO activism and policy making has been subjected to the opinion of civil society.

Since Aruna Roy had always been very effective in policy making as far as right movement and social sector are concerned.

We have to keep it in mind that RSS has overlapped NGO activism with its Hindutva drive intensified with RSS governance of fascism with an umbrella of free flow of foreign capital as well as foreign interests to make in India Gujarat PPP model in accordance with Hindu Imperialist agenda as it happened never before.

All those concerned should get a breakthrough to make public hearing possible.Let us stand rock solid to accomplish this task.We should make a common platform for us,the Indian people.

At the same time,since the aesthetics of genocide is continuity of economic ethnic cleansing policies of mass destruction,NGO activism is not enough to stop fascism to destroy Nature and Humanity unless a genuine peoples movement is not organised nationwide.

Since social activism other than the Hindutva braded NGOs is almost impossible and the voices are muted brutally,NGO people must align with the ninety percent to continue activism.

How alarming is the situation?

The President of India,the first citizen of India,is not allowed to express his view!

How much freedom of speech should we expect from this RSS governance of cent percent Hindutva?

I am posting Aruna Roy`s opinion published in Indian Express and expect a nationwide debate to sustain democracy in India as social activism,green activism and freedom of expression suprressed with Hindutva muscle power of global Hindutva aligned with zionist global disorder.

Mind you,media reports that India has objected to certain portions of President Pranab Mukherjee's interview with Swedish newspaper Dagens Nyheter. The Swedish paper reported that the authorities in Delhi sent an official letter to DN, expressing their disappointment.

Days ahead of his state visit to Sweden, President Pranab Mukherjee said the Bofors scandal was a media trial but it had not been proven to be a scandal in a court of law.

In an interview to Swedish national daily 'Dagens Nyhetter', Mukherjee was asked if he thought Bofors had been a media trial. The President said, "First of all - it is yet to be to be established that there was a scandal. No Indian court has established it. I was the defence minister of the country long after Bofors, and all my generals certified that this is one of the best guns we are having. Till today, Indian army is using it. The so-called scandal which you talk of, yes, in the media, it was there. There was a media trial. But I'm afraid, let us not be too much carried by publicity."

Asked if the Bofors scam was just a media scandal, he said, "I do not know. I'm not describing it, you're putting that word. Don't put that word. What I am saying is that in media it was publicised. But up to now, no Indian court has given any decisive verdict about the alleged scandal."
On Tuesday, Dagens Nyheter said it received an official letter from the Indian ambassador in Stockholm, Banashri Bose Harrison, where she expressed "disappointment" in the interview. According to the paper, she said that DN neglected to show the President the "courtesy and respect" that he deserved as head of state.

In a telephone conversation with DN prior to the publication of the article, the Indian ambassador made a direct request asking DN to retract sections of the interview mentioning Bofors. She also warned that the planned state visit was at risk of being cancelled, the Swedish paper said.

Then paper, however, refused to edit out that portion. DN's editor-in-chief said Peter Wolodarski said, "I find the ambassador's reaction regretful. It is surprising that someone representing the world's largest democracies is trying to micromanage which questions we should ask a head of state, and which answers should be published.

The Bofors scandal was a $285 million contract between the Indian government and Swedish arms company Bofors, signed for supply of 155mm howitzer field guns in 1986. Subsequently, Swedish Radio alleged that Bofors paid illegal commissions to top Indian politicians and key defence officials to seal the deal. The scandal contributed to the defeat of Rajiv Gandhi in elections three years later.

Now,please read:

One Year of Modi govt: Bure din for social sector

Modi government has damaged the rights-based legislative framework without spelling out what will replace it.

- See more at:
Written by Aruna Roy , Nikhil Dey | Published on:May 28, 2015 12:00 am

No one in the last two decades has come to power with greater euphoria than the Narendra Modi sarkar. It has taken less than a year for that euphoria to recede and change to disappointment. There are sufficient reasons for this change. The celebrations of the first year in office of this government are in sharp contrast to the plight of the common person.

The callousness of the government is most noticeable in its attitude to social sector issues. It does not seem to realise that rights-based legislation were not a UPA creation, but a reflection of the aspirations of millions of Indians struggling to procure the most basic entitlements. In its desire to establish itself by discarding past achievements, the current government is making a cardinal mistake. Nothing could be more symptomatic of this narrow partisan approach than the prime minister's statement on the MGNREGA in Parliament. It is shocking that the PM could promise to build a programme only to establish its monumental failure. This statement sent a strong message down the line to discredit and mismanage the programme. It is a failure not only of leadership but of vision and governance. The PM's rhetoric sounds hollow even to his own party. The Madhya Pradesh chief minister has publicly stated that the MGNREGA is one of the best programmes in independent India.

Rights-based legislation like the forest rights act, right to food, right to education and right to information, passed in the last 10 years, did not merely provide economic and social entitlements to the poor. They were an attempt by India's poorest citizens to claim delivery of basic services and ensure accountability. The people's right to participate to ensure delivery and to monitor these programmes arose from numerous failures. Rights-based legislation are an attempt by people to demand a share of governance. The demand for transparency, the right to question, audit development programmes and their implementation, arose from this. This framework is being undermined through budget cuts and the attempt to replace rights with cash transfers, which are much more in a paradigm of doles and handouts. Bank accounts without money and spurious promises through contributory pension and insurance schemes cannot replace the crippling of existing programmes. Even as earlier programmes and laws are ridiculed, there is no vision or direction for what is to replace them.

There is, in fact, no roadmap this government has to offer for the social sector. If this government felt that the earlier legislation were a complete failure, it should have issued a white paper on the shortcomings and provided a blueprint for howthese would be overcome. This would at least have provided the people of this country an idea of what they could expect and where they could hold the government to account. Much of rural India has found itself reeling under a loss of social sector entitlements and scrambling to save whatever resources it has. In the farming community, many might not be personally affected by the land acquisition ordinance, but most are affected by market-driven policies on minimum support prices and inefficiencies in the provision of fertilisers, irrigation, etc. The obstinacy of the government in repeatedly reimposing the ordinance has only confirmed the rural sector's fears that these are the days of "company raj" and "bure din". The government has probably begun to realise that the MGNREGA is one of the less expensive ways to provide basic support, especially in times of distress. But the PM's earlier message has been internalised by the system to such an extent that even the PMO's later assurance to extend support for the MGNREGA has not been able to change things on the ground. People are still unable to get work. What could be a more decisive example of poor governance? The attack on participatory governance has been even more surprising. While there was a stated ideological bias against social sector entitlements, the rhetoric on transparency, accountability, anti-corruption and improved efficiency seemed unequivocal. However, by repeated and deliberate acts of omission and commission, this government has made sure that a carefully constructed transparency framework has been comprehensively undermined. The accountability laws waiting to be implemented and passed have been pushed into amendments and committees. The non-appointment of the chief information commissioner and three other commissioners cannot be justified on any legitimate ground. Despite repeated protests, the government has brazened it out to undermine the credibility of the information commission. The whistleblower protection and Lokpal laws were passed with great difficulty. They have been weakened through proposed amendments and further delayed by sending them to standing committees. The grievance redressal law (a kind of RTI part II) would have ensured accountability of all government servants and been crucial to ensuring efficiency and service delivery. Instead, institutions more responsive in engaging with the people have been replaced by exclusive structures. The argument of efficiency remains a myth as the entire system functions with extraordinary centralisation, opacity and lack of public accountability. The fact that this is a "Modi sarkar" and not the "NDA or BJP sarkar" is proclaimed repeatedly and deliberately. It is testimony to the undemocratic nature of the government's current internal politics. Critics gave the BJP credit for its (comparative) internal democracy. The ruling party is now defined in the feudal mould of a single ruler, rather than a party that functions collectively and democratically. The chaiwalla image has been replaced by that of a sartorially conscious leader with a designer suit. All decisions are taken by the PM, and he is constantly travelling abroad. This has led to a dysfunctional single-leader system where questions of the people do not et answered and find no platform. Finally, the attack on activists, NGOs and other dissenters on development politics is unwise and deeply damaging to our democratic framework. People committed to the welfare of marginalised communities and the environment find themselves branded as "anti-national", with a completely warped sense of what true national interest is. We can only hope that the people will assert their rights and demand that promises be kept and that we will see a more inclusive and plural India. The writers are with the Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan. Roy was a member of the UPA's National Advisory Council until May 2013 - See more at:

No comments: