Today 11 cabinet and 2 state ministers took the oath in Rajasthan.
And this event introduced India with new "Rabri" of Rajasthan-- Mrs Golma devi, one who never knew how read or write.
Can anyone guess where our country is heading to?
If such people are made to sit on power chair whom do you think will take the decision on behalf of them?
I don't doubt anyone's personal intellect because dhirbhai amabani and many other great businessman and leaders were not too educated but brought revolution in the complete world but in today's scenario what do people want from their leaders : that they should just put a thumb empression on the 100 crore deal or could be easily fooled by their own P.A (personal assistant) or seceratory by manipulating the work!
Beacuse people like her would take ages even to pass an old dead deal from her table if once told to use their own mind!
I think at least a bar should be raised by the government that people who are not graduate cannot qualify for any of the political post.
I think these measures are necessary if we want our government to work properly and actively.
After seeing all this happening today in rajasthan I thought that we ourselves are at fault, we can't blame anyone for any reason.
-We are the ones who properly do not utilise our own voting power.
-We are the ones who usually crib about the system but never turn out to make a miniscual effort to clean it!
-We are the ones who blindly vote for the person on the basis of head or tail outcome of the coin without actually analyzing who is capable enough to handle things properly.
But anyhow in the end I would like to say one thing to Mrs golma devi --- Welcome to the political family :)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
.JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)
13 comments:
I sincerely beg to differ with you at this point. First of all I share and fully appreciate your concerns about incompetent people heading the top positions is not going to help the cause of the country.
Having said so, I want to ask you, what is your criterion of deciding whether the person concerned is competent or not? Merely by the degree that he/she may flout?
Do you know how the administration of our country works? Here I will like to assure you that our affairs are being handled by the most competent people of the world: The Great Indian Bureaucracy, despite all its shortcomings.
Political leaders are from the common men, they have a charisma attached with them, they only can connect with the real people of the country, they can identify with their cause. In all they give vision and words to the aspirations of the common masses and take a final decision on the state of affairs.
Enter the bureaucracy. Their job is to put the vision of the leader into tangible action plan. To patch up any holes in the vision, to take corrective actions and oversee that their plans once approved are properly executed.
It is the bureaucrats who run the show and that's why our constitution has shielded them away from the prying eyes of the public, while the politician has to go to get a fresh mandate after every 5 years.
Coming to your comment of "Rabri" of Rajasthan, I feel that we young people boast of ourselves as being modern, scientific and logical in our approach, but we rarely are. Scientific temperament says that one cannot reject any hypothesis until or unless proven false by large number of experiments by a wider community.
As far as Rabri is concerned, I happened to meet her personally last year, when we had organized "Barsana Mahotsav" in Barsana on the ocassion of Radha Astami. Lalu was our chief guest. He along with Rabri and one of his son and daughter came. I was taking care of their dinner. Believe me, my perception about them has changed forever. They were so down to earth and so humble, that I was dumbstruck by their humility. The sanskaar that Rabri and Lalu have given to their children are really inspirational. And this is where, they are able to connect with the common masses at large.
I give you one other experience of mine. 9th July, 2005, we had organized a "Bhajan Sandhya" in Sai Auditorium, Delhi. We had invited all top bureaucrats above the ranks of Joint Secretaries of all ministries. Again I was involved with their hospitality. Barring a few persons, the arrogance level in the atmosphere was suffocating. Since I was the host, I had to keep my cool, but their attitude has left a very bad impression upon me.
Anyways, I am not advocating the politicians or criticizing the bureaucrats, simply these are my experiences and my opinions.
I see the greatness of Indian Democratic system when "Rabri Devis" and now "Golma Devis" reach to the top positions of power. Its truly inspirational for us, that we too can aspire for it.
@Vaniki: I sincerely agree with you.
@Gaurav: I sincerely beg to differ your point of view. I have following points to make:
1. Ones behavior does not have any connection with ones education. Its your upbringing that decides your character (Being humble, being arrogant etc.). Also it depends on person as well.
2. It's not the greatness of Indian Democratic system. Its the greatness of Indian Political system that Rabri Devis or Golma Devis come to such political power.
If you remember when Lalu was in jail, because of fodder scam, she became CM. And the same case is Golma Devi as she is the wife of BJP leader who represents Meena community.
3. See the point is, one or two experience will not decide anything. You should not and you could not generalize things. You can find n number of politician that happen to be DON and became politician to come in main stream and you can find n number of humble and honest bureaucrats.
If you want anything more to say you are most welcome :)
firstly I would like to say that more the the number of people will result in as many different opinion.
@Gaurav- As you said that bureaucrats are the ones who initiates the work or the action plan of the minister, but you can't ever assume that these bureaucrats will not at all have the touch of corruption. Moreover having several years of experience in the political field it becomes easy for them to bewilder their very own minister and things become like a piece of cake for them when the minister is like "Mrs Golma devi" because people like her have a very compact domain whose range does not moves out of the kitchen or house infact!
Moreover in order to execute a plan or in order to pass a bill even the bureaucratic society would need the "signature" of their very own minister!
Moreover talking about education, I think education plays a very important role... it helps in building the person mentally and take and understand things in a better perspective.
Moreover talking about the attitude of the person(humble nature of rabri devi and their complete family) as ravi said it comes from the upbringing and what have you perceived from your ancestors.
And as you said "I feel that we young people boast of ourselves as being modern, scientific and logical in our approach, but we rarely are"
I do agree that people around you might have shown that kind of attitude but what I think is that they see the things in their own perspective. Being modern is not a bad thing but being modern in a logical way would be preferred.
And the question raised by you ..."I want to ask you, what is your criterion of deciding whether the person concerned is competent or not? Merely by the degree that he/she may flout?"
I would like to say again that education is important infact it is one of the basic need of the society and of the developing country. But experience about a particular field, be it political or be it any other is also important.
I guess people like golma devi who don't know how to read even a newspaper and who have never even faced the real paper work and the bureaucratic league should not be allowed to hold such a big position, the reason being when it comes to take up decisions she would surely lookup to her secretory or to her P.A (the same corrupt bureaucrats) or to her husband(the Baagi neta of BJP) and then what would happen will be clear to everyone
dear friends
i really appreciate your concerns and do share most of them with you. Our main focus in this discussion is "education" and to some extent "experience". I tried to find out what these words actually mean. Here are few meanings:
Education:
• the activities of educating or instructing; activities that impart knowledge or skill; "he received no formal education"; "our instruction was ...
• knowledge acquired by learning and instruction; "it was clear that he had a very broad education"
• the gradual process of acquiring knowledge; "education is a preparation for life"; "a girl's education was less important than a boy's"
• the profession of teaching (especially at a school or college or university)
• the result of good upbringing (especially knowledge of correct social behavior); "a woman of breeding and refinement"
• Department of Education: the United States federal department that administers all federal programs dealing with education (including federal aid to educational institutions and students); created 1979
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
Education encompasses both the teaching and learning of knowledge, proper conduct, and technical competency. It thus focuses on the cultivation of skills, trades or professions, as well as mental, moral & aesthetic development.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education
Experience:
Experience as a general concept comprises knowledge of or skill in or observation of some thing or some event gained through involvement in or exposure to that thing or event. The history of the word experience aligns it closely with the concept of experiment.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experience
Having said so, I would like to point out on what is written in a comment in the box of NCERT’s Class 9th Book “Democratic Politics” Chapter 4, Page 64, is titled as “Educational Qualifications for Candidates” and it says, “Why is there no educational qualification for holding such an important position when some kind of educational qualification is needed for any other job in the country?
• Educational Qualifications are not relevant to all kinds of jobs. The relevant qualification for selection to the Indian Cricket team for example, is not the attainment of educational degrees but the ability to play cricket well. Similarly the relevant qualification for being an MLA or an MP is the ability to understand people’s concerns, interest and to represent their interests. Whether they can do so or not is examined by lakhs of examiners – their voters – after every five years.
• Even if education was relevant, it should be left to the people to decide how much importance they give to educational qualifications.
• In our country putting an educational qualification would go against the spirit of democracy for yet another reason. It would mean depriving a majority of the country’s citizens the right to contest elections. If, for example, a graduate degree like B.A., B.Com or B.Sc was made compulsory for candidates, more than 90% of the citizens will become ineligible to contest elections.
@ravi
your opinion:
"Ones behavior does not have any connection with ones education. Its your upbringing that decides your character (Being humble, being arrogant etc.). Also it depends on person as well." is very well taken.
and
"See the point is, one or two experience will not decide anything. You should not and you could not generalize things."
very true comment and I would reiterate it to reemphasize my point we cannot make any generalizations.
I am really unaware of any scam coming to highlights during Rabri Devi's rule. The same murmurs about law and order problems in Bihar are still heard under Nitesh Kumar's rule as well.
@vaniki
your comment "I guess people like golma devi who don't know how to read even a newspaper and who have never even faced the real paper work and the bureaucratic league should not be allowed to hold such a big position, the reason being when it comes to take up decisions she would surely lookup to her secretory or to her P.A (the same corrupt bureaucrats) or to her husband(the Baagi neta of BJP) and then what would happen will be clear to everyone"
completely agreed. But will this happen with only the "Illiterate" Golma Devi? Are educated ministers and MLAs, MPs not susceptible to corruption and inefficiency?
Most recent example of an inefficient yet highly educated minister with immaculate mannerisms was our ex Home Minister, Mr. Shivraj Patil.
Another one of the most highly qualified ministers of our Country, Mr. Natwar Singh, is leading his life in wilderness after being expelled from congress for an international scam.
@ravi
i am not here for an argument or debate. So really I have nothing to say anything more
regards
@Gaurav:-
1. You write hell lot of lengthy replies. I don't know how much free time do you have.
2. I was telling how Rabri Devi became CM. Read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fodder_scam(Section : End of Laloo's chief ministership).Indian politics is always like that. No one wants to loose power. Same is the case with Golma devi. Vaniki was trying to make the same point.
3. Honesty does not come from education. It comes from your upbringing. It comes from how you have handled your morality.
4. Education is not just about learning facts and not telling everyone that you are aware of the fact. Anyone can google and find n number of meanings of education. I am just posting two links here:-
http://www.wisdomquotes.com/cat_education.html
http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/eduquote.htm
5. The gradual process of acquiring knowledge; "education is a preparation for life"; "a girl's education was less important than a boy's". How do you defend your statement that girls' education is of less important than boys?
6. I totally agree with you that leading people doesn't require any professional education. But don't you think if our leaders are educated then they are more able to take right decisions. Do you know that most of the US presidents are from Howard and Yale passouts? Why is it so?
7. I like to write in points.
8. After writing so many things you were saying that you had nothing to say more. It is not an argument. It is a discussion.
@ ravi
I will write a very brief reply to your personal comment over my free time.
I had once read Sidney Sheldon's "Fears of Midnight" novel. I liked its villain 'Demiris' (i don't know the exact spelling of his name) one habit very much. He used to reach his office by 6 in the morning and had built a huge business empire.
I am trying to follow that habit, though am still not able to reach my office so early.
The lines above so far were for the argument part of this interaction. If its really a discussion, I will revert back soon.
regards
@Gaurav:-
Again you proved the same thing [:)].
I will rephrase it one more time. If you are doing something just do it. (Dhindhora peetane ki jaroorat nahi hoti hai :D)
This is for the argument part of it.
I am still in for discussion.
-Though I completely agree with the several definations of education given by you but when we talk about the present scenerio i.e a person heading as the minister of a particualr dept in that case I think education completely comprises of the knowledge related to that field ..
-Hre the person in charge should have the complete knowledge of the related field (as per the ideal govt ) so that he/she could be able to take correct decision
- Now as per the statement ""a girl's education was less important than a boy's" " I completely disagree with this particular fact as this statement reflects the shalow mindedness of the person,who still beleievs in the discrimination of society on the basis of sex
-My point is that educatoin is one of the most important factor which helps in building up the ideal character of a person!
-As you said that you read a book and wanted to adopt the habit of one character only because you read something and you perceived something from it. Although it wasn't necessary for you to read it bt still you thought it would help you in building your efficieny towards your work!
In the same way eduaction helps a to build up a real person!
-Moreover it is totally upto the people of India to select their own representative and social linkage of a person cannot be comapred from ones educational background as I think an educated person can also have the same intensity of the social network as otherpeople have
-I have one more point that is --their should be 2 laws made or developed for a person to conduct or take part in any election 1) He should be atleast a graduate or should be a 12th pass person (at least know how to read and write)
the reason being that he wpould be able to increase his communication level with people and would also develop an analytical thinking
2) He should not hold any criminal record or no judicial activity should be going against him, as this would result in building up a criminal free and educated society and hence will remove the notion that politics is a dirty game and all players(almost all) are criminals!
Have to differ with you here Vaniki, specially on the point of minimum education to qualify for minister. We have had great ministers in past who are non-graduate(Shekhawat from same state was CM and went on to become Vice-President though he was only high-school educated). What is required to rise is a great political acumen, maturity of thoughts, leadership, not a stamped degree. Pakistan has a similiar rule as you propose(even to become a member of parliament, they require a graduate degree!), I don't think it has done them any good.
Now, I do not claim that education does not do any good to skills of a human, it does and tremendously so. That is why, you will see, most(but not all) our ministers, prime ministers are not only graduates but post graduates. (Even people like Laloo percieved to be uneducated has University level education to his credit). What I mean is, educated people have an edge over uneducated ones anyway, but lets not restrict the uneducated ones to show their wisdom, acumen, leadership or willingness to serve. Just as you gave example of Dhirubhai, in corporate world also, most corporates cheifs are educated, but in the end the one with right enterpenurship acumen rises to top. We have no right, to ask a person, not to try enterpenuership because he is illlitrate. Free market, right! Similiarly, free democracy!
Another point. US has no such restriction. Still, you'll see all presidents(till as far back as I can see) have been Ivy League MBA's(I may be wrong, but I see this trend going back till Eisenhower, who was but then, WW II heroic general). Indian PM's, though educated, none of them have been from 'elite' institutes in India(Indira was an Oxanian, thats all from elite).
Reason, as I analyze it, is lack of opportunity, and lack of appreciation of political acumen within our educational system.
While that is bad, it will be worse, if we stop such opportunity deprived people, from using their skills for public service(whether ministers actually serve or not, is a different question but that is what we expect them to do).
NOTE: While you may hold your opinion about Mrs. Golma, my objection is only to the generalization to any uneducated person. I have no knowledge on Mrs. Golma in particular, I won't comment about her.
Correction to my post - missed that Manmohan Singh is also belong to elite educated.
Well sir I totally appreciate your point esp the one "Free democracy".
but what I also wanted to convey through this post was that instead of appointing any proficient guy over the position they chose Mrs golma devi(a full fledged housewife of ex minister) so that the power of chair remain in hands of the family.
I agree that many great men in India have not even completed their graduate bt have still outshown their capabilities.
On the hand If you talk about Mr shekhawat I would like to tell you that at the start of his career he was arrested in some bribing case when he was a fourth or third class officer and after that he entered into politics.
I think we agree in principle then. I am really happy to see youth becoming more and more politically concious. Keep posting!
Post a Comment