commentary on today's power failure in Northern india

नौकरी-शुदा  और  पेशेवार लोगो की हमेशा से यह कमी जानी गयी है की रोज़-मर्रा के जीवन संघर्ष में लिप्त यह वर्ग कला , साहित्य जैसे अतरिक्त-समय वाले विषयों पर शोध पूर्ण ज्ञान नहीं प्राप्त कर पाते / प्राचीन रोमन काल में ऐसे वर्ग को प्लेबियन (Plebeian)  (अर्थात "सर्व -साधारण ") नाम से पुकारा गया था, जो की दास व  गुलाम बन्ने के लिए ही उचित माने जाते थे / उच्च पत्रिचियन (Patrician ) वर्ग (अर्थात कुल-वान ) ही सत्ता का भोग करते थे और Plebeian पर शाशन करते थे /  राजनीती की कला में सिर्फ patrician ही माहिर होते थे / Plebeian, यानी निचले तपके के लोग , आज के professional और service class  के सामान है / राजनीति से परे , अपना week-end मनाने में मशगूल / राष्ट्र के चिंतायों से परे/ विधि-विधान  राजनेति कला-विज्ञानं, लोक-प्रशाशन के विषयों से अनजान / Plebeian को विधि-विधान  अथवा क़ानून से सम्बंधित ज्ञान नहीं होता था  और वह अक्सर कर के नियम अनजाने में तोड़ बैठते थे , मगर उनको उनको नियन उलंघन की सज़ा हमेश दी जाती थी / राष्ट्रीय व सामाजिक चिंताओं से उन्हें अलग रखने  के लिए ही Gladiator का तमाशा प्रारंभ किया गया, और अधिक जटिल समस्यों में मुद्दे को कला-सांगत कर के पेश कर दिया जाता था, जिस से की तकनिकी बिंदु लिप्त हो जाये, Plebeian वर्ग में मत-विभाजन हो जाये और वह Patricians वर्ग पर एक साथ मिल कर दबाव न बना सकें / 

माजूदा काल में इस के उद्दहरण है की आज के हुए विद्युत्-निश्प्रदीपर्ण (power black out ) उत्तर प्रदेश ज़िम्मेदार था की नहीं ? उत्तर प्रदेश ने हिस्से से अधिक विद्युत् लिया था की नहीं ? CERN ने तकनिकी प्रमाण दे कर इलज़ाम लगाये है, मगर उतर प्रदेश ने महज़ एक वैधानिक नकार (legal denial ) किया है, तकनीकी पहलू कोई मजबूत नहीं दिया है / मगर Plebeian  जनता में मत-विभाजन के लिए यह काफी है / मुलायम सिंह, मायावती के पास आये से अधिक सम्पति है की नहीं, सीबीआई ने केस तोह दर्ज किया था, मगर इन्होने हमेशा यह कह कर इलज़ाम नकार दिया ही इलज़ाम राजनैतिक साज़िश से प्रेरित है / वैज्ञानिक सत्य का खुलासा तो हो ही नहीं सकता क्यों की सभी जांच संथाएं किस्सी न किस्से अन्य राजनैतिक पार्टी के अंतर्गत कार्य कर रही होंगी जो भी केंद्र में सर्कार चला रही होगी / बस, plebeian वर्ग में मत-विभाजन के लिए सत्य को स्थापित न होने देना काफी है -- एक plebeian-वर्ग कोर्ट में जब तक प्रमाणित नहीं हो जाता तब तक स्वीकार नहीं करेगा, और दूसरा plebeian-वर्ग लक्षणों के आधार पर भी अपने निर्णय देने को तैयार होगा, प्रमाणों की स्थापन के बगैर  !

इल्जामों को अंधकारमय(unknown , or uncertain ) कर लेना, या फिर प्रशन-चक्र (loop) में डाल देना, या फिर विरोधी के कमी को इसी समय उजागर कर देना ("You too did this ") -- यह सभी तरीके काफी है plebeian वर्ग को भ्रमित कर उन पर शाशन करने के लिए / कला के ज्ञान में कमज़ोर plebeian वर्ग आत्मपरक विषयो (Subjective issues ) में सटीक प्रबंधिया-निर्णय (management  science decisions) नहीं ले सकता / वैसे भी, कला विषयों में कभी भी कोई अथवा कुछ भी सम्पूर्ण-सही या सम्पूर्ण-गलत नहीं होता है / अर्थात, किसी को भ्रमित करने के लिए विषये-वस्तु के गुण अथवा अवगुण को सही टाइमिंग से दर्शा कर plebeian जनता के विचारों को बदला जा सकता है / 

plebeian वर्ग अपने विचारों में बहोत भ्रमित होता है और अक्सर कर के विचारों में बहोत अधिक भ्रांतियां (fallacies) पाले  हुए रहता है / इसलिए  उनके निजी जीवन और समाज की  दिक्कते  कभी भी ख़तम नहीं हो पाती / 

प्रजातंत्र का  उदगम  ऐसे ही दिक्कतों से उबरने के लिए हुवा था, व्यक्ति व नागरिक को अपने जीवन में ज्ञान के द्वारा भ्रान्ति-मुक्त व आत्म-ज्ञानी होने का अवसर देने के लिए / इसी मकसद से समाज को वैचारिक स्वतंत्र (freedom of expression) को प्रदान करवाया गया , जिस से की तमाम असत्य और भ्रान्ति-पूर्ण विचारों में सत्य-विचार स्वयं ही विचारों के आपसी-प्रतिस्पर्धा से सामने उबार आये / वाद-विवाद (debate) और द्वंद्ववाद (dialectics ) सत्य-विचार के स्थापन के दो तरीके माने जाते है / असली प्रजातंत्र की यही पहचान है की वह  सत्य और अपनी दिक्कतों के सही समाधान को स्वयं से ढूढ़ ही लेता है / 

A retake of the episodes on ship HE and HP

There is a possibility of how the two episodes, of M/V HE and M/V HP, may be co-related by the office staff. 

In HE, when the valves opened by themselves resulting in cargo shift, the office liked to view this as not by itself, but by a mistake of ship staff.  Therefore, in this event , Event (1), I was to held responsible , in their views.

But towards this trouble , in their viewpoint - 'they helped'  in the building of "Team Work", by asking of me to adjust-amend the mistake thus avoiding the need to formally investigate and indict me for what happened and how. This was a sort of "Team Work", as the Indians in the Industry like to call this.

Comparable with this, on HP, when the vessel was found to be not having a damage stability module in its Lodicator, the mistake in my viewpoint was of Office Staff to have not notified this to me and to the Vetting Inspectors. So, now automatically, the pressure of "Team Work" was expected from me, to have adjust-make a Damage Stability Report of the cargo loadings to convince the inspectors of the vessel being compliant in all sorts, and that the office staff have not willfully lied to them. This was Event (2).

      Whereas the office was viewing it from their belief of "Team work", I was insisting on doing a righteous and fair work , because for me the key to tension-free living on ship is by being fully-compliant. In my views, should a problem happen, the problems are, in most likelihood, not a new kind of experience to the industry, and therefore a methodical route to meeting the problem must have been existent, which should be taken up. Since, in the Event (1), in my views, it was not my mistake, but a kind of "force majeure", something 'by self, and not in my control', I rather contributed to the "team work" by doing the adjust-amend the cargo, thus saving the company a considerable economic loss which likely could have happened due to cost incurred through the proper channel's intervention. In my views, I was never to be held responsible, because no formal inquiry or investigation had indicted me , and further I had helped the company in timely and quick detection of the cause, which too was never formally assigned except by my help, or "by my admission", as the office would like to see it . 

         The office appeared to be insisting on the view that they were always capable of detecting all or any the causes which led to this trouble , and my admission was only a barter, from their view, ''to lessen by guilt in the mistake which I had only committed''. So they were not fully buying the valve-opening theory, no matter "by my mistake", or "by itself". But their alternative theory was never presented. 

        Perhaps , the idea was to keep me under guilt-pressure and to extract more "team works" from me. 

And obviously, the time for that "team work" had arrived during Event (2). 

     I ,in my viewpoint, continued to see myself as pious, honest and high-integrity man because in my beliefs, that is where the stress-free living on ship lies. 

The office would obviously reject my opinion about self under accusations such as "doodh ka dhula koi nahin hota" ('nobody, nowhere ever is sin-free, innocent') , and would like to 'suspect' hold me guilty, without any alternate theory from them on how I was to be held responsible. On the other hand, I would hold the office responsible of being dirty by intention, to have acted against me on as feeble grounds as Suspicion. In my knowledge and belief, such weak and uncertain grounds are the root source of "politics" between ship staff and shore staff, 'Politcs' = an opinion divide and acts having potential of betrayals. In a future real trouble , if it happens from me, one should expect an unfriendly, non-cooperating, "team work"-defying conduct from the office. By an inductive reasoning, I would sense the problem of 'politics' in office too , intra-personnel, where the Indian "Gang" (as I like to address the Indian contingent) was not in good terms with the Italian boss. 

      The ship owner, in my views, would like to see a trouble-free life on their ship because that is where their real profits and business reputation lies. But the Indian gang would likely counter-view it with 'claused-agreement' that "yes, but in practice it is not possible to run ships without any mishaps". So, for them, their method is the best and only method for doing a profitable business. Indian views are of curative forms, as i like to see them,  while the Italians and Europeans might rather chose to focus on preventive methods to run their ships with foreign multi-national crew who they don't know well, neither they oversee their training. To the european ship owners, there is a great business risk if the focus continues to be on curative approach more with any amount, even if minimal,  of office-representation in such events. Because if the events are big to attract the attention of authorities, and the european port authorities succeed in detecting any wilful office-representation, it might amount to mean office and the company were also be a part of causes of the mishap. The ship operation , for europeans, is a small-level management task, compared with tasks such as ship purchase, chartering, cargo booking, and operation budgeting. The lower management multinational should not be given so much free hand to work their discretion in their works that it might mean a connivance of the top management if the port authorities ever set to investigate a problem. The lower-management should work justly, by the book and the rules. In their own views, the europeans are spending enough money to smoothly run a ship trouble-free and even to maintain it trouble-free. This involves a good salary payment too, to keep the crew-related troubles off their ships. 

Indian "gang', habitually, likes to chip-in some narcissist 'power and authority' for themselves beginning with the suggestion that 'no ship can ever be cent percent perfect and trouble-free'. And obviously, true to their narcissist cultural habits, the cause of trouble lie in the men who man the ships where the Indian gang loves to apply ,"show", its 'power and authority' to manage the troubles, if any, which happen on board. 

           And sure to their claims, the Indian gang might like to give pointers to the secret adjustments by the European top-management staff as well, to establish and uphold their belief that "doodh ka dhula koi nahin hota".

समाज व उसके परोक्ष मनोवैज्ञानिक विक्रित्यों

समाज व उसके परोक्ष मनोवैज्ञानिक विक्रित्यों का इतिहास मुझे आज कल बहोत दिलचस्प विषय लगाने लग गया है / कहते है इतिहास इस लिए दोहरता है क्यों को मानव-स्वभाव कभी नहीं बदलता है / अगर मानव-मष्तिष्क की कुछ विक्रित्यां भी ज्यों-की-त्यों रह जाती है तो निश्चित है की इतिहास कभी भी नहीं बदलेगा और वह समाज कभी भी नहीं सुधरेगा / मष्तिष्क की विक्रित्यां , अथवा मनोवैज्ञानिक विकारों , पर एक सामाजिक जानकारी अति आवश्यक वस्तु बन गए है / भ्रष्टाचार का एक स्रोत , शासन के लिए बल (सत्ता) का दुरूपयोग (abuse of power ) कई जगह मनोवैज्ञानिक विकार से भी जुड़ा हुआ है / इंसान का व्यक्तित्व भी अंततः उसकी वैचारिक योग्यता का प्रतिबिंब माना जाता है / ऐसी समझ  है की अच्छे विचारों वाले व्यक्तिओं का शारीरिक व चहरे का ताप भी अधिक आकर्षित करने वाल होता है / Emotional Intelligence जैसे विषयों में यह चर्चाएँ आम होती है / अब अच्छी फेस-क्रीम के प्रयोग से उत्पन्न भ्रम इसमें शामिल नहीं है :-P

The cultural "logical" fallacies of Indian people

It takes a big expense of Intellectualism (=search of moral values in a action/thought/et al) to differentiate between Hypocrisy and Duality. There are things which have fundamentally a dual nature. It is not a Hypocrisy if a person is changing is views/decisions in accordance with the dual nature of the concept. There are a lot of specious arguments floating in the public domain which need intellectual scrutiny to test their true position between Hypocrisy and Duality.
Here is list of cultural logical fallacies among our people in the public domain;

1) हमाम   में तो सब नंगे हैं (Humaam mein toh sab nange hain): 
Spoken often in context of endorsement of Corruption and mal-practises, the speaker intends to highlight that no body demand corruption because in a strict sense,(as he observes it), everybody is corrupt and involved in mal-practises in one way or the other. 
    The mistake in the logic of this statement is about the Duality involved in such issues as Perfection, Moral Philosophy, Values search. There is no denial in the truth of the statement, but it only turn out to be a half-truth, because the need for a value-filled world, of corruption-free honest world is also a genuine public need only. So whereas an individual is not expected to be fair, honest, unbiased, the societal need is always to demand honesty and transparency. The individual need as against the social need build up the Duality.


2) Virendra Sehwaag's recent comment : "Captain is as good as his team". 
    This statement from our class batsman is but a half-truth. Sometimes when the big thinkers asks us to 'look at the big picture', the untrained eyes among us never understand the meaning of it. A complete truth, sometimes, is composed to two very opposite views. Think our the truth of these statements: a) A team even without the best of players, can still be the best. b) The best of players still cannot make up the best team. c) Captaincy gives that little edge which helps make a best team. d) Good rated captain alone cannot make a team 'best' if the players are not willing to co-operate.
   So what should we make out from this remark which has been spoken in reference to MS Dhoni. a) Dhoni is the best captain, because India won the world cup.
 b) Dhoni's best captaincy alone is not enough to make India win the world cup. 


3) "Rs 20L car to each MLA will help the development of his constituency."
     Spoken in reference to UP Chief Minister's recent decision (which he had to roll back after the media/public pressure), the argument in defence of this statement was that a car will help the MLAs reach and inspect their constituency better and that is how each constituency will see development. 
Is it not possible to connect each issue and action we do in our life with the subjective issues of public domain: namely , the safety, the security and the development. there is never a final verdict on what is connected , or not connect-able , to the issues of Safety, Security and Development. Consider the Arguments: "A female escort to each MLA will help him do his work better and keep his mind cool , which will contribute towards the development of his constituency. So the State of UP will grant expenses to each MLA to keep a women 'escort'. "  (Women organisation , please overlook this proposition for the sake of hypothetical argument towards deriving a greater truth.)
   The greater truth is that one should be very careful when justifying a decision through the perspective of safety, security and public's welfare. Both, positive actions and the negative actions, have equal prospects of finding a justification.


4) "Fundamental Rights are not absolute".
Spoken by our dear next in the queue President, Pranab mukherjee, it seems that he like to ignore another fundamental truth that nations , at this extreme point of Fundamental Rights losing their strength, also become vulnerable. People with Right of Self-Determination have a right to protest. If a nation thinks of dissolving the fundamental rights on the arguments of 'threat to the state', remember that God did not create any nation on earth. It was humans who made it, and so humans have a right to disintegrate.
        The American Jurisprudence talks of the Fundamental Rights not being absolute in a very subtle natural reasoning, that it may happen that one fundamental right can clash with another depending of an accepted way of categorizing people, which makes the fundamental right not an absolute. Such reasoning are more appropriate as they rhyme with the lessons of Natural Science that most things in Nature are not absolute. There is no political reasoning for why fundamental rights are not absolute, it is just a way of nature that nothing is absolute, except the speed of light.


5) Rights and wrongs are subject to statistical studies. "Till then, be a party to evolution."
   This one came from a friend of mine in his response to my FB wall post related to how Safety and Security arguments can destroy the reasoning ability of people (http://imsingh1999-mannu.blogspot.in/2012/07/safety-and-security-related-argumenta.html).  His arguments , exactly mentioned in the above blog, centred around the non-absoluteness of Rights and Wrongs. The fallacy we Indians have is that although the Rights and Wrongs have never been conclusively established in any society, the democratic societies have definitely set the methods on how to reach to those Rights and Wrongs. And how should one be handling  those arguments which attempt to check on the Righteousness and Wrongness of these methods itself, **as these too should not be absolute if nothing is absolute**. For example what if some one begins to question that moral propriety of the Transparency, Accountability, Public trial as the best method of fair-and-just trial ? 'There should never be a suppression of the Enquiring minds of people', I have myself argued on that. But would it not be an abuse of the argument if people stop reading History, the revolutions in the past which have led to evolution of certain binding framework of democratic societies , and jump back question that binding frame work itself. Ignorance or Abuse of the freedoms of democracy to kill the democracy itself ??
There are subjective issues where rights and wrongs are based in Statistical Data. These data, in turn, are dependent on free and fair reporting. What would happen to the Statistical answers of someone discourages free reporting, record keeping, by questioning the basic methods of Justice in a Democratic Society, and disposes away the eventual establishing of the Rights and Wrongs to the forces of nature under the control of Evolution ?? How very surly abuse of the theories and concepts of Evolution as a scientific course ? Standard Democrats will have to contest with the non-standard democrat about what is Evolution and how human intervention , and upto what degree is expected in the process of evolution for the betterment of this world?? there is a lot of fatalism in the non-standard Democrat when he assigns away the search of Rights and Wrongs to the forces of nature, the Evolution . I wonder if he would sulk or he would not if a wrong outcome happens centuries later in this surrender of today? If such surrender are not antithetical to that march towards perfections which binds all humans into one bond called the society or a nation ? if Evolution is necessarily about survival of the best, of the skill of reproduction in high numbers is also a 'skill' worth making your genes to survive. And will such a survival lead to that travel of mankind by space shuttles to other planets when the entire earth will see a catastrophe ?? My friend leaves me with lot to ponder on how to reason it out with him as to what is 'basically', 'fundamentally' mistaken in his knowledge which is resulting is such abuse of the big and respectable concepts as the Evolution.

Implications of correcting the Social Democracy fallacy on Lokpal institution

Once the dichotomy of an uprising from citizens and from external agents is resolved, this can be used to press upon whether the Prime Minister and the President can be brought within the purview of Lokpal Bill. The one basic contention of the government is that such provisions as corruption investigations against top heads can cause de-stabilization of the government. Lokpal being another government institution, "the fear of abuse of Lokpal Institution" can find a new interpretion in the form of uprising from within, from citizenry group, as against those fears which are from foreign elements.
Presently a non-differential view of any proceeding against the PM in the form of impending threat to the state is where India differs from the US and the western nations ideology (these nations are the ones marked low on corruption), in cases of NarasimhaRao JMM bribery case, the Rajiv Gandhi Bofors case, and now the Manmohan Singh Coal Scam case as against the Bill Clinton proceedings , Nixon Proceeding. The Indian investigation agency has not been fair because it lacked independence from the accused himself.

The cultural "Logical" problems of Indians

(based on a Facebook Conversation with a friend):

One cultural-"logical" problems for Indians is that If everybody will become educated, and the Shudra will rise above through reservations, then who will do these menial jobs of cleaning the neighborhood ?? When the Sixth Pay Commission asks for finishing the Grade 'D' salary group, they mean to say only about raising the Basic Pay of ex- Grade 'D' employees to Grade 'C' level, not about improving the skill level of these employees. No body thinks it is worth thinking about the drainage system in India, perhaps apart from the Indus valley and Harappan systems. Mumbai has one of the dirtiest systems and places for a metropolitan city. Discovery and National geographic talk about the history and evolution of drainage in Paris and London. They have huge size underground tunnels and maintained through robots and Computer based Maintenance Systems. That means the labourers are learned enough to handle those robots and Computer PMS. Boston and NewYork have the biggest sewage treatment plant before the sewage water in released in the local rivers.

The Safety and Security related arguments...a good-intentioned path of self-destruction

Safety and Security related arguments must be done with extreme care and thoughtfulness. These two words have the mathematical power of Indices of 'raise to the power zero'.

2 raise to the power zero is equal to 1, is also equal to 5 raise to the power zero, which is also equal to 1. 

            One can thereof claim that 2 is equal to 5, based on 'mathematical logic', an apparently correct but highly meaningless and corrupt logic. The mental problem of social democrat also comes from the issue of this meaningless logic when they put the security threat against the State, whether from citizens or from foreign agents, as one and same, thereby destroying the meaningfulness of the concept of Nation as a voluntary commitment of citizens.

One ordinary day-today life example which is running in my head about what length and self-destruction the safety-arguments can reach is that of a Cook not making good chapatis. Naivete might wonder how a cook not making good chapatis can lead to a safety-trip in a workplace. But the experienced oldies know about the intra-group clashes which have happened in the past in the hard work condition places such as merchant naval ships, where the bad food has proved to be the last nail in the coffin for people to revolt up. It is not for passing causes that the cook on board merchant ships is one qualified and certified person for the job. History carries the legacy in the form of 'lessons learnt'.
  But the dilemma of a naivete would be due to his unawareness of such historical backgrounds. This might make him to slip into Safety implications of such reports. In the modern times, as it is the meaningfulness of good chapatis made by on-board ship cook is reduced when we have so many alternatives in the packed fast-food industry which are capable of being stored for indefinite times.
     But can a man still argue that in modern times the bad-chapaties-complain should be deemed inconsequential ? And then, can another man argue against how free speech to people to make their endless complains is NOT an unsafe act ??
There is never a conclusive answer to first query; rather the answer, as can be seen from the above discussion, is relative to the milieu. The next query illustrates how and what the political implications of the Safety Arguments running into 'meaninglessness' can  mean . Meaninglessness is relative to the times prevailing. Statistical intuition of the people awards the meaningfulness credits to such complains. Statistics itself being subject to Free Speech right so to make complains.
       In summary, a habitual complain of bad chapatis in modern times has resulted in a generation of people cultivated to believe that the free speech is most dangerous and unsafe act !  In the situation which is under study, the bad-chapatis complains, the civil procedures lessons of historic revolutions have lost currency when Safety-related arguments ran into the time frame relative meaninglessness. 


A detailed discussion on the nature of Arguments pertaining to safety and security matters, one will see that :


Safety and security related arguments can destroy the normal Cognitive Ability of Mind. They can


 demolish the reasoning power. They can make a person psychometric ship-wrecked. They do, 


what we proverbially call, ''Dimag ka Dahi''. 




My other friend, argues that:


Mathematics is the numeral interpretation of logical thoughts and like anywhere you do find


 absurdity which is also logical. It will definitely take statistical detour for correction in co-


relation between security and Safety. Till then be a party of the evolution.

In my response, I say that:

logical correctness is studied through this numerical (mathematical) representations.

 Statistics, also a mathematics, is built on Historical experiences. Once the right and wrong 

of logical thoughts are identified and documented away as law codes, there is no reason to 

confuse oneself and challenge the right and wrong once more. Rights and wrongs have

 compiled up as the law codes. Violations of established procedures are like challenging the

 correctness of this statistical mathematics. Avoiding undocumented use of Discretion is the

 key method of avoiding to challenge the laws.

The concept of "market place of ideas" as the most acceptable reasoning for uphold the Free 

Speech to everyone is a kind of celebration of the basic logics involved in the Statistical 

Mathematics. That, what is right is not known to anybody, but the method to reach, through a 

open market competition of Ideas, to that Right is well-accepted by everyone.  

Statistics depends a lot on the data collection. The result of a statistical study is bound to be

 affected until the data collection methodology is not robust. The law of stability of large number

 holds for the statistics world. Doesn't the Free speech provide for preventing affections in the

 data and also the  large volume of data for the self-correction of errors.

Logical Fallacy of Indians on the heels of non-absoluteness of Fundamental Rights

reference the Debate happening at the Blog page of Bhagirath Baria http://www.rathandeconomics.co.in/2012/02/are-fundamental-rights-absolute.html

My quest to the know the implications of the condition that Fundamental Rights are NOT absolute after I heard  our Presidentail Candidate Mr Pranab Mukherjee speaking this in TV News talk.

I am of the opinion that Indian Intellect comes to a sudden halt at such juncture of Logic, and rolls back into it's old state of feudal governance by assuming that there is not path ahead of this fact. It is life walking on a mathematical graph where a point of Discontinuity has resulted into interpretations that the curve has no value further onwards.
Indian philosophy overall suffers a jolt when there is failure in application of a philosophy derived from studies in pure mathematics, into the field of Sociology and Political Science.

Producing hereunder  a response I have made to the debate about the path ahead when the Fundamental Rights are not Absolute.

Rath, Thanks for your response. Being a regular blogger for quite a few year now, I would have all respect for your evolving state of mind from the time you wrote this blog to the present day. It often happens that we write a thing in a particular state of mind and then we pass over it, becoming oblivious of what made us write that! But then, an in-depth knowledge emerges from human Emotions only. That state-of-mind was that Emotional State from which some fountain of wisdom had come. Greater is the need that people record it down just as that Emotional state happen because, as you say (and I agree) that we forget it away within momemts , losing away all that Emotional Wisdom too. Emotional Wisdom is of transient nature. So, you have done a right work by atleast recording down whatever it was.

     

You say, and I quote:

I find this proposition vague & incorrect. It would be wrong to come on such a generalization about our interpretation of fundamental rights. Nationalism, and appeals to collective concepts is a characteristic feature of our History of freedom struggle, but not the only one. Moreover, the concept of fundamental rights too emerged slowly through struggle of various ideas during the freedom movement. These rights aren't merely some byproducts of intellectual cognition of few great politicians but lessons that we learnt during the struggle itself. Considering them nationalistic and absolute will be a gross negligence on the interpreter's part.

Rath, you are partially correct and partially mistaken. You are correct to that extent that intellectualism about the Fundamental Rights did not arrive merely by some arm-chair brainstorming , but also through the lessons learnt from the past. You are mistaken at your observations that these "lesson-learning" ever happened in India! In truth, Indians do not recognise fundamental rights as so basic ingriendients in their day-today lives. We do not honour free speech in offices too. We normally assume that 'boss is always right'. Our parliament believes that it has right to demand respect from us, while our constitution teaches us to respect the book of Constitution and the Parliament. So, in truth when the argument arrives at this conflation where It is taught and expected that Citizen should respect the Constitution, Parliament and National Symbols, and we meet a situation where Someone of stature such as Team Anna, Arvind Kejriwal , Om Puri, Anupam Kher, Ronen sen, Kiran Bedi,- is found not to be doing so, our Logic Colapses and we sink into Logical fallacy exposing our real understanding of what is nation and what are these national symbols.

LOGICAL FALLACY among Indians about the concept of Nation: We see the concept in, as the westerner like to describe it, in a "Socialist" way. That is, the Big Brother style of doing things-- The big brother is offering to his younger brother to make 'voluntary' amends and make-up with each other, lest he knows "what to do".  That is what the Westeners think of "Socialism" to be like. If people are not willing to vountarily respect the National Symbols, the Constitution and the Parliament, the socialist country does not recognise between the Positive Liberty and the Negative Liberty (To read more check the Wikipedia site on Liberty )and like to deal with them with the same high-handed as for an external threat to their nation. The debate of acceptable protest versus case of hidden external threat to nation ends in a Socialist State. The courts too halt down because the seizure of the Fundamental Rights is deemed correct TO ABSOLUTE. In another word, Since the Fundamental Rights are NOT absolute, the Seizure of Fundamental Rights becomes 'ABSOLUTELY correct' in all the situations. That is how a "Socialist" State becomes an evolved extension of a large geography "Feudalism".
         Quoting from the Wikipedia on Liberty about the Socialist Interpretation of Liberty:

The dichotomy of positive and negative liberty is considered specious by political philosophers in traditions such as socialism, social democracy, libertarian socialism, and Marxism^{[citation needed]}. Some of them argue that positive and negative liberty are indistinguishable in practice, while others claim that one kind of liberty cannot exist independently of the other. A common argument is that the preservation of negative liberty requires positive action on the part of the government or society to prevent some individuals from taking away the liberty of others.

India has that problem about it's understanding of Fundamental Rights. The problem can be better exposed to Intectual groups as worded in the speech of B R Ambedkar Himself " Fundamental Rights are like a GIFT of State to the CITIZENs". --This Gift concept being suggestive of the logic that State therefore has a right to take them away anytime under the condition of threat to state.

In comparison, the westeners see Fundamental Rights as the basic Terms and Condition of the Social Contract between the Citizens and the State. In peacetime situations ,when the state is not at wars against an external enemy, the State cannot take back away the Gift, even if the internal Agents are demanding a separation.

No wonder, this attitude created among the Indians due to the above Logical Fallacy can weaken our position about the affairs of State of Kashmir, and also about the understanding of the Naxalite Problem too. We are indirectly suggesting that Naxalism is a Military problem, not a consequence of the socio-economic failures of the State.


Wars of national liberation : talks of how there is a difference between the Western thinkers and the Third World and Eastern Thinkers on the issue of "nation". Perhaps , the third world thinkers (which includes we the Indians too) like to accept that Fundamental Rights are NOT absolute, but we do not accept that a "nation" is also NOT an absolute concept , created by a powerful emotional and voluntary act of human intellectualism
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wars_of_national_liberation)

Legal issues

International law generally holds that a people with a legal right to self-determination are entitled to wage wars of national liberation.^[6][7] While Western states tend to view wars of national liberation as civil wars, Third World and communist states tend to view them as international wars.^[6] This difference in classification leads to varying perceptions of which laws of war apply in such situations.^[6] However, there is general agreement among all states today in principle that the use of force to frustrate a people's legal right to self-determination is unlawful.^[6]