The ruthless legislature

India has been far from being a welfare state since 1947 even though, that was the actual promise. However post independence India has commited certain inhumaine faults that has plunged the nations history in depths of guilt to which the present Indian administration seems rather ignorant.

One such incident was when we disregarded all International Laws and forcibly annexed the State of Manipur to our Union. Manipur got its independence at the same time along with India and Pakistan. The nation swore to a new Constitution and had their first general elections in 1948 which was four years ahead of India. The Previous ruler Bodhachandra was sworn in as the new Constitutional Head and his own brother was democratically elected the Prime Minister by the voice of the mandate. India had previously promised to safe gaurd Manipur's interest in the fields of defence, but this promise seemed to last for a short while with V.B. Patel realising the startegic importance of Manipur as a border region between India and China. And with this realisation the dirty game began. On one hand India posed as Manipur's best friend and on the other it was initiating plans to wreck the democratic harmony of Manipur from within. Finally when Bodhachandra planned to meet the Governor of Assam in 1949, to settle all disputes his advisors had strongly reccomended against it, but he preferred to deal with faith in his Inidan counterparts which never got its due reciprocation. He was put under house-arrest and later coerced to sign the annexation treaty.

This is how we disgraced the same principles, based on which we fought for two hundred years advocating the right to self determination and sovereignity. It was ironical to see us forget, what we so strongly subscribed to for two hundred years in just two years of achieving independence.

But this was just a start of the tyrany that would soon sweep the life of our fellow Manipuri brothers and sisters. The next thing that the Indian authorities did was passed a legislation known as A.F.S.P.A better known as Armed Forces (Special Power) Act. This Act sought to equip the Army with special powers facilitating the process to crush the insurgency. But how? was the golden question that was never asked. It gave members of the army, power to shoot any suspect without any fear of being prosecuted. It also sought to immune the military from any prosecution even if they break into any housesold at any time of the day and indulge into random searches. Cant talk about the success rate of the Act in crushing the movement but it has surely succeeded in gaurding pervert officials of the state machinery when they rape the women over there.

A few years ago a group of women posed nude on the streets, in front of the Assam Rifles building holding posters that said "Indian Army rape us". A Lady has been on fast for ten years protesting against this gruesome piece of legislation and demanding the repealment of the Act. But that does not seem to be neccessary for the Indian Authorities as long as they can put Sharmila Irom on arrest and forcibly feed her through a pipe up her nostrils.

It is hightime that the Indian Authorities wake up to moral uprightness and repeal this Act which has terrorised the common Manipuri for the last forty years. Their hearts could have easily been won by taking interest in their development and not only their land. It was a wrong move that demands immediate correction otherwise we end up leaving our own constitution futile. This Act violates the principles of right to life guaranteed under Article 21 in inumerable ways.

Today it is a dual between the existence of this Act and the sustenance of the spirit of our Constitution.

Socialism Vs Capitalism

Socialists shout , cry and scream madly when not paid heed to. The entire concept of richness enrages them to the very core. BUT WHY? What is their problem, if others know how to struggle, make money and live lavish? Why are they so jealous? Is it because most of these people hardly witnessed the ways of sophisticated elites of the society from their childhood? I think so. These are people who are devoid of the knowledge as to, how powerful money is when it comes to speaking and influencing. After all most of them are offsprings of middle class mentality that witnessed the mother working hard to manage the chores of daily household while the father struggles all day to earn the bread for the night. At least now we know why they are jealous. It reminds them of their old days. They are afraid that someone else's childhood might repeat the same way. They are horrified visualising the infant growing up and getting slapped by his father because he demanded, that he too wants the same toy gun that his neighbourhood friend possesses, and said "The price does not matter dad. I want it. If he can have it, even i can". The dad frustrated with the knowledge, that poverty does not make much sense to this immature lad decides to slap him and end the issue there.

But does it really end there? Is the child satisfied with the answer? This other day people in my class asked a very basic and legitimate question. "Why should i pay my hard-earned cash for someone else?" But why should you be earning more than what you require to sustain the basics of your life when others are not delivered with the opportunity to earn even that much?

No one asked this for an answer. But why? When people talk about socialism passionately why do they shout? Why are they so pushy? Why do they try to forcefully impose their ideologies on others? Because they think from the heart and not from the brains. And any issue on which you think from your heart makes you emotional. Does the story of the child begging for a toy not make you emotional? Yes, if you are a capitalist even for you the answer to the previous question has to be yes as long as you are a human but you have enough "wisdom" to allow your brain take over.

The easiest way to sideline the concept of Socialism is by portraying China as a flawed model but why doesn't people realise that countries like USA has also been failures as examples of efficient capitalism. On the other hand we even have countries like the United Kingdom and their East India Company which propagated imperialism and introduced their rule by camouflaging it as Capitalism.

When Marx is referred to in this context and people claim that China has administrative flaws and that it is not the socialist idea which Marx invented. Capitalists shout that utopia cannot be achieved but only dreamt off. Taking this argument into consideration all that i would like to say is that, at least Socialism has Utopia for its goal and administrative problems and curtailment of liberty are the maximum side effects that it has. But when it comes to Capitalism the undefined goal whatever it may be cannot be achieved without unequal distribution of the factors of production and the maximum side effects, can be, that while some one gets fine chineese to dine on; the beggar outside the persons house might still be crying for just a bowl of rice. That’s all..........

Yes that’s all socialism asks-A bowl of rice for all and until everybody gets that same Chinese on their plates no Chinese for you too.

Now it is surely a matter of debate whether it is the socialists who are jealous? Or is it the capitalists who are insecure as they really love Chinese for a cuisine?

Saptarshi Banerjee