The Arguments within

Predicament of Sierra is happening from the lack of Intellectual viewpoint that Tipping and Bribery, though they very closely similar , but are still different.       This refusal to accept this difference is creating the moral vacuum which is making Sierra to endorse the political groups which are indulging in the wrong. What remains shocking is that Sierra scathes the corruption of Party A , while he desires to give way to the Corruption of Party B. Therefore, he is someone who doesn't want a cure, he wants the diminishing.    However, in ground, there is no way to distinguish between the choice of complete cure AND the choice of diminishing . There is no rational criteria to judge this. It is hypocrisy to even attempt to create a distinction. No ethics, no morality offers to us this distinction.   But rational and moral thoughts do endorse the distinguishing between the tipping and Bribery. From top notch academia, to philosophers, ample evidences can be shown to prove th

अगर आप परिवारवाद (वंशवाद) के ही विरुद्ध है तब आप कोई समझदारी नहीं कर रहे हैं। आखिरकार परिवारवाद नेत्रित्व हस्तांतरण की समस्या का सबसे प्रचुर और सरल पद्धति है जो दुनिया भर में प्रयोग करी जाती है।    चाहे आप ब्रिटिश साम्राज्य को देखें जहाँ की आज भी शाही राजघराना परिवारवाद के द्वारा ही चल रहा है, या कि अमेरिका के अमीर बैंक उद्योगी। सब के सब परिवार पर ही चल रहे हैं।    मूल समस्या जिससे जनता परेशान होती है वह है शासन शक्ति का स्थाईकरण। शासन शक्ति किसी एक व्यक्ति या परिवार में जा कर अहंकार लाती है। यह अभिशाप बन जाती है। भारत में हिन्दू धर्म में घटी जात वादी प्रथा परिवारवाद से उत्पन्न हुयी सबसे बड़ी ऐतिहासिक त्रासदी है। जातिवाद ने एक परिवार वंशियों का समाज में अधिक ऊपर का दर्ज़ा दे दिया और दूसरे को अछूत और मानव जन्म के अधिकारों से ही वंचित कर दिया था।    परिवारवाद समाज में व्यक्तिगत प्रगति की प्रेरणा को नष्ट कर रहा होता है। यह सक्षमता पर अंकुश लगा देता है।   बस यही वह समस्या है जिसका निवारण करना आवश्यक है। अन्यथा परिवार ही इंसान को प्रगति करने की प्रेरणा भी देता है। आख़िरकार, आदमी कमाता किस

I no more watch Cricket ever since the match-fixing has come to settle in my beliefs. The core challenge before a Conscience-driven political party, such as the Aam Aadmi Party ,is to demonstrate to the people that **you can be winner by BEING TACTFUL, ALBEIT WITHOUT being Corrupt**.       This is what the AAP has to demonstrate and prove to everyone. Generally, it settles out as a common belief that a person who is conscience-driven cannot afford to be Tactful ,to be able to adopt the winning strategies because of the risk of being labeled as Corrupt.    Therefore, as a last measure, a conscience-driven man or party is lead into depending ,as a strategy,on the winner side themselves leaving the trails of mistake . The conscience-driven is left with the only means-- that of crying and whine on mistake committed by the corrupt winner, and thereof, to collect the support of the losers so to make his victory for tthemselves.    This is the belief which needs to be cracked and shatter

आरम्भ में प्रजातंत्र का उत्थान राजशाही और जमीदारी जैसी प्रशासनिक व्यवस्था से मुक्ति दिलाने के लिए हुआ था।     राजशाही व्यवस्था में सभी मनुष्य को बराबर का स्थान नहीं मिलता था। कुछ लोग उच्च कुलीन, बड़े और अधिक सम्मानित , न्यायालय में विशिष्ट पद-सम्मान के अधिकारी, और वह दूसरे व्यक्तियों पर शासन करने के लिए थे।    और अधिकाँश लोग निम्म-कुलीन, छोटे, अशिक्षित अथवा आवश्यकता मात्र की शिक्षा और रोज़मर्रा के कामकाज करने के जन्म लिए माने जाते थे।     प्रजातंत्र का निर्माण शासन व्यवस्था में सभी को समान अधिकार, और न्यायालयों के समक्ष समान स्थान, पद देने के हिसाब से हुआ था।    मगर इस व्यवस्था की अपनी सीमाएं उन प्राकृतिक कारणों से स्वतः प्रस्तुत होती है जिन कारणों ने पुराने मनुष्यों के समाज में राजशाही व्यवस्था को उत्पन्न किया था।                  वह प्राकृतिक कारण है की सभी मनुष्य समान योग्यतायों और कार्य दक्षता के होते ही नहीं है। यह तो भगवान् द्वारा स्वयं से निर्मित असमानता है जिसे मनुष्यों के द्वारा बनी कोई भी शासन प्रणाली निवारण कर ही नहीं सकती है। कुछ में नेतृत्व के गुण नैसर्गिक होते है, कुछ

Within a short span of time, the Supreme Court has twice delivered in favour of Privacy and Secrecy, where the Transparency should have been upheld, instead.  Transparency represents Public Conscience. Secrecy and Privacy provide that necessary Obfuscation which the Corruption so badly needs to keep itself going. The Supreme Court of India has acted a house of Stupids and Idiots. Its behavior has proven the veteran lawyer Ram Jethmalani's criticism of court, that there is an acute ' 'intellectual bankruptacy '' in the Judges who preside over these courts of India. India therefore is a proven Idiocracy, surviving itself in the guise of a Democracy. The socio-economy conditions stand as a on-ground testimony to this argument.   The case of Supreme Court endorsement to CBI Director Mr Ranjit Sinha not disclosing his Visitor's Log on the reasoning of Right to Privacy, and now the same Supreme Court sponsored guard of secrecy to disclosures of Blackmoney accoun

What the accusers have been calling as the "Shoot and scoot" practise, is the tactical "Unmask the corrupt" method suggested by the leading anti-corruption agencies such as the Transparency International.    By not letting the Public Conscience to play its part in weeding out the corruption, it is possible for a large syndicate of the politicians and the bureaucrats to create a big "Mafia" to run a parallel government in a country where a majority of the citizen may stand in very denial about the existence of such a mafia. The Supreme Court ruling on the Blackmoney issue , to weigh out the Right of Privacy of Individuals AGAINST the Necessity to Publically Unmask the Corrupt, will only be working in favour of the big mafia which might be holding grips within our country. Such an action will leave more to be answered, than answering any questions which are already raised.    The global treaty on exchange of information is meant to provide inter-governmen

In theory, no SIT should be working. The repeated Occurrence of having to form an SIT to investigate matters is a constant reminder to us as to how the Indian System is flawed from the very beginning. The SIT's are formed to answer to the accusations of two parties , Party "A" (the accused political outfit) making the claims that "accusation on them are a result of political vendetta" , and the Party "B" ( the plaintiff) making the claims that "party in the ruling is in connivance with the guilty and hence it may hamper a fair investigation).    In India, the solution to such a claim,in recent times, has come as SPECIAL INVESTIGATION TEAM or the SIT. But the flaw of the "mafia" type complete connivance Government and Opposition Political Class continues to infect the SIT too.   The SIT ,even if working under a court, depend on the members of the parent departments of Government. Their personal interest may still be attached with the G