Fair Conduct on Bandh & Blockade!

Manipur would be the state in India that tops in experiencing some kinds of bandh or blockade. This time the bandh in and around National Highways started on 1st August The bandh was called by Sadar Hill District Demand Committee (SHDDC) in their demand for the upgradation of Sadar Hill area of Senapati District into a full-fledged district, which entails that present Senapati district be bifurcated into two. Six people have lost their lives in bandh related incident, and 12 women have began fast unto death, out of which 7 are reported to be critical condition. United Naga Council, the apex body of the Nagas in Manipur, oppose the move and therefore have called for indefinite bandh in the Naga areas from 21st August This implies that Imphal, the capital of Manipur, is virtually cut off from all kinds supplies.

SHDDC argues that the demand for upgradation is for better administration of the Sadar Hill area. UNC argues that Naga villages be excluded from the proposed district, implying that only non-Naga areas should be considered for upgradation. This tussle, for and against, has been going on for decades. And it is high time that Government finds a solution that is acceptable to both the parties, instead of postponing it for later generation as well to fight! 

This post, however, is meant to be about how one should conduct bandh and blockade. This time the third major community of Manipur, the Meeteis, are ambivalent on the issue. But they seem to be the community that suffers the most because they live mostly in and around Imphal. However, considering that Meeteis are equally notorious in calling bandh or blockade, this post is meant for them too. If anyone would accuse me of seeing the problem through communal lens, let me assure that such is the ground reality. Whether one likes it or not the political aspiration in the state are drawn almost virtually on ethnic lines. 

First, I would say 'economic blockade' is not an appropriate phrase.  I thought so because I believe it is wrong to put a bandh/blockade on all kinds of economic activities. I believe food item should be given safe passage even in bandh/blockade. 'Food items' are basic needs for survival, and imposing bandh/blockade amount to assaulting on human right of a person or a community that suffers due to such bandh/blockade. Second, I also believe that ambulance should be given safe passage. Even in time of war, Red Cross is allowed to work per international norms. And this is not even war, so ambulance, medical supply etc should be allowed to pass through. Third, party on a funeral duty should be exempted from such bandh/blockade. Allowing such party would not affect the bandh/blockade overall because such party would generally be very rare. Moreover, on humanitarian ground such party should be given safe passage.Fourth any party calling for bandh should not cause major damage to roads, bridges or property, private and government. Fifth, this is a slightly different point in that it is about the norm to protest, not bandh/blockade. I believe 'fast unto death' as a political tool should be employed only in extreme situation. For example, I support the kind of 'fast unto death' by Irom Sharmila because her demand is against human violation by the army. However, the 'fast unto death' by the women demanding Sadar Hill district does not amount to human right issue, and so is not an extreme situation that deserves 'fast unto death' kind of protest.

I believe bandh/blockade are democratic means to press for one's demand or aspiration. So I am not against any party calling for bandh/blockade to press for their legitimate demand. But such activities must be carried out within certain norms. And unfortunately, in Manipur all the parties calling bandh/blockade oftentime violate one of these norms. And it is high time we rectify such erroneous methods for the sake of common good.

NB: Since the issue is highly explosive I would request that those who post their view do so in a civilized way. Thanks!

John Stott on Evolution

Indeed, speaking for myself, I cannot see that at least some forms of the theory of evolution contradict or are contradicted by the Genesis account of creation. It is most unfortunate that some who debate this issue begin by assuming that the words 'creation' and 'evolution' are mutually exclusive. If everything has come into existence through evolution, they say, then biblical creation has been disproved, whereas if God has created all things, then evolution must be false. It is, rather, this naive alternative which is false. It presupposes a very narrow definition of the two terms, both of which in fact have a wide range of meanings, and both of which are being freshly discussed today. For example, although the great majority of scientists continue to believe that there had been a long evolutionary process, the Darwinian theory of 'natural selection' ( or 'the survival of the fittest') as its operational principle is being increasingly questioned, and instead of a single and gradual progression a theory is being developed which posits multiple changes, in fits and starts, and sometimes by inexplicable major leaps. Of course any theory of evolution which is presented as a blind and random process must be rejected by Christians as incompatible with the biblical revelation that God created everything by his will and word, that he made it 'good', and that his creative programme culminated in Godlike human beings. But there does not seem to me any biblical reason for denying that some of purposive evolutionary development may have been the mode which God employed in creating. 

To suggest this tentatively need not in any way detract from man's uniqueness. I myself believe in the historicy and Adam and Eve, as the original couple from whom the human race is descended. I shall give my reason in chapter 7, when I come to the question of how we are to interpret Scripture. But my acceptance of Adam and Eve as historical is not incompatible with my belief that several forms of pre-Adamic 'hominid' seem to have existed for thousands of years previously. These homonids began to advance culturally. They made their cave drawings and buried their dead. It is conceivable that God created Adam out of one of them. You may call them homo erectus. I think you may even call some of them homo sapiens, for these are arbitrary scientific names. But Adam was the first homo divinus, if I may coin the phrase, the first man to whom may be given the  specific designation 'made in the image of God'. Precisely what the divine likeness was, which was stamped upon him, we do not know, for Scripture nowhere tells us. Bu it seems to have included those rational, moral, social and spiritual faculties which make man unlike all other creatures and like God the creator, and on account of which he was given 'dominion' over the lower creation.

NB:  Quoted from John Stott, Understanding the Bible: GLS, Mumbai, 2008 ) pp 48-49

Why there is corruption in India...

I think everyone acknowledges that there is widespread corruption in our system. Even before Anna Hazare became a household name, the talk is already there that we need to do something about corruption. It is just that Anna Hazare translated the talk into action. I very much endorse modifying or introducing new systems that will arrest corruption. Just that I am not happy with 'fast unto death' kind of approach. I believe some other different measures should be employed to put pressure on the government for setting up Lokpal.

Legal systems are not going to be sufficient for ethical uprightness of a nation. Strong legal systems may deter people from being corrupt. After all no one likes to go to jail. But we need more than legal systems to run the nation. We need moral uprightness too. And moral uprightness go beyond legal demands. And I believe that is why religion or moral philosophy is an essential element for a nation. For example, our legal system cannot deter people from committing adultery; it is only religious teaching that can exhort people to restrain from such act. Our legal system cannot deter people from "expecting" gifts for favour done. Our legal systems cannot deter people from "loving" one person more than the one who deserves it.

So how is our/your religion teaching us/you about moral uprightness? If a religion offers only moksha and not teach us how to walk uprightly on this earth, such a religion is lame. If a religion teaches us only about rituals, and not about how to conduct our life in relation with other human persons, such a religion too is lame. Most of time that is in our disposal we spend time with other human persons; and most difficult part of life is to get along with all other human persons in the righteous way. It is easy to get along with machines, difficult to get along with human persons. And this important aspect of human life, a religion that undermines is lame and therefore is not to be taken as a valid religion. 

I do not think that all religions give equal importance to moral teaching,  and teaches moral matters equally. If you are concerned for the moral condition of the nation, and wish that people conduct their affairs with moral uprightness, it is important which religion you follow. Do not think that the religion you are born into is the automatically the best for the nation. Human legal systems will have flaws; similarly human religious institutions too will have flaws. It is so because though the One communicated to human being rightly, we do not always rightly received the message since our heart and our mind are not always tuned to taking that which is pure and good.There is a bit in us that loves to go astray, even knowingly. Let us say Aristotle would call that as akrasia; and Augustine original sin.

To believe that human legal system alone is sufficient to out weed corruption is, I believe, to fail to understand human nature correctly.So coming back to why there is corruption, I would say the legal system is not adequate and even the moral injunction that religion is supposed to provide is not adequately provided.

Some statistical figures from India's 2001 Census.

Name of Religion	Literacy Rate ( Total )	Literacy Rate ( Male )	Literacy Rate ( Female )	Percentage of Population	Sex Ratio
Hindus Muslims Christians Sikhs Buddhists Jains Other religions India	65.1 59.1 80.3 69.4 72.7 94.1 47 64.8	76.2 67.6 84.4 75.2 83.1 97.4 60.8 75.3	53.2 50.1 76.2 63.1 61.7 90.6 33.2 53.7	80.5 13.4 2.3 1.9 0.8 0.4 0.6 100	931 936 1009 893 953 940 992 933

Few quotes from Vinoth Ramachandra

1. Unless we subscribe to the naive belief that governments do not engage in acts of terror against their own citizens, let alone the civilians populations of other nations, the one-sided use of terrorism by the world's media is baffling. Violent actions by the Israeli army or Israeli settlers against Palestinian civilians are never described as "terrorist," but the term is routinely used in large sections of the Western media for violent acts undertaken against Israelis. Surely journalistic integrity requires that the term terrorism should either be dropped for its vagueness or be used evenhandedly to embrace all organized acts of terror, including those by government. The term militants, guerrilla or insurgent do not carry the same connotations of evil that terrorism does; and hence the hijacking of that term by governments who want to scapegoat those who challenge their legitimacy. ( p. 41)

2. So, a morally and culturally "neutral" state which makes no moral demand on its citizens and is equally hospitable to all cultures and conceptions of the good is logically incoherent and practically impossible. And since every law coerces those not sharing its underlying values, a morally and culturally noncoercive state is a fantasy. Openly recognizing this fact is the first step forward in reconfiguring the nature of politics in any pluralist society. ( p. 143)

2. We all have what has come to be called our cultural blind spots. However rich it might be, no single culture embodies all that is valuable in human life and develops the full range of human possibilities. Only when I am deeply exposed to another cultural tradition and community do I become aware of my own; my imagination is stretched as I am forced to rethink my own in the light of the another way of life, and I come to cherish wha this good and challenge what is bad or ugly. (p. 145)

3. Why are North American or British or German theologies never named as such, but Indian or Latin American or African theologies are? Western theologies are simply assumed to be universal, but non-Western theologies are "contextual." The insularity of most Western theological institutions is astonishing... The only situation in which the typical theology student is likely to learn about other cultures, histories and religious is if he were to follow a course on missiology. In the more academic faculties, these courses do not exist. And in most missiology courses Asians religions are taught in an Orientalist style. Moreover, where chairs of mission or missiology have been established, these studies have become isolated from other parts of the theological task. They became what David Bosch calls " the theological institution's 'department of foreign affairs,' dealing with the exotic but at the same time the peripherical." ( p. 259)

NB: These quotes are from Sri Lankan thinker and social activist Vinoth Ramachandra's Subverting Global Myths: Theology and the Public Issues Shaping our World, published in 2008 by Inter Varsity Press, US. To my friends, I wish to suggest that you purchase the book and read it because it is so good. If you don't have money, sell your coat and get this book! 

You can purchase with debit card or pay when it is delivered from here: 

http://www.flipkart.com/books/0281060231?_l=CJHVEqJO3veuHytbACc9dw--&_r=3QWdvuC3Mw%20wz_dRf_fZmw--&ref=5b142d01-b7b2-4eba-9931-85ddab7cf15d&pid=rsw3f9cd0w

Conduct Unbecoming of an IPS officer or a Chief Minister

It was in 2002 that 790 Muslims were killed after Narendra Modi, the Chief Minister of Gujarat, allegedly asked the officials to allow the Hindus to vest their anger on the Muslims. The controversy surrounding the present controversy is whether the CM indeed asked the officials to allow the Hindus to vest their anger on the Muslims or not. And when an IPS officer Sanjeev Bhatt alleged that he was present in the meeting when CM had said it, the matter cannot be taken lightly. Modi does not want anyone to question him, whether it is the Muslims or any government official. Anyone who dare point his finger will get his finger burnt. If Muslims challenge him they will invite his wrath; and if any government official press charges against him, the officer will be dealt with severely. And that has happened exactly to Mr. Bhatt when he was suspended from the service.

The people of Gujarat elected Mr. Modi as  their Chief Minister. However, BJP lost the election at the centre government because of Modi. Had Advani allowed Vajpayee to remove Mr. Modi from the chair then, BJP probably would have been in power, and its image not dented. But that was not to happen.  And even today the ghost of Godhra returned to haunt the Chief Minister. His conscience would prick him, yet the lust for power would never let him stay quiet whenever anyone questioned him on Godhra riot. Modi's love-and-hate story of the Muslim community is well known. And as long as he is in power, democracy will continue to be abused. His conduct of going after anyone who would point finger at him for involvement, or lack thereof, on Godhra masssacre is unbecoming of a Chief Minister.