Here Charitable Individualism is the key!… nothing less.

Archive for December, 2011

INDIANS SLIME OUT OF CONTRACTS!


In the latest study from World Bank “Ease of Doing Business in India 2011” India is ranked as 134 out of 183 countries. Table 3 summarizes India’s ranking in “Doing Business” for key indicators. Though India has been ranked fairly for two indicators namely “ Getting Credit” and “ Protecting Investors”, it has secured embarrassingly in “Enforcing Contracts” in which it has been ranked 182 out of 183 countries and “Dealing with Construction Permits” as 177 out of 183 countries. According to the details in “Enforcing Contracts” India takes almost 1420 days and involves 40% cost of claim which is way above the OECD countries that takes just 518 days and 19% cost of claim.

Nowhere is India ranked this low by the WORLD BANK report except for ENFORCING CONTRACTS. Why is this so? The reason is neither hard to find nor is it complicated. The reason is EACH INDIAN’S UNDERSTANDING OF SOCIALISM AND THE EFFECTS OF SUCH UNDERSTANDING. What does SOCIALISM mean? It had been inserted in the Preamble to the Constitution of India along with “Secularism”. Secularism could be given a clear definition- that the state shall not discriminate nor appropriate any taxes and allot the same for any particular religion. But “SOCIALISM” is undefinable and carries a meaning dependent on the facts of each case, therefore no cogent PRINCIPLE can emerge. It is this AMORPHOUS philosophy which had been included in our constitution without defining the parameters of its operation.

This idea of SOCIALISM is enshrined in Article 39 (c) of the Constitution of India under the DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES of STATE POLICY:-

39. The State shall, in particular, direct its policy
towards securing—

(c) that the operation of the economic system does
not result in the concentration of wealth and means
of production to the common detriment;

So in effect, the State shall ensure that even legitimate gains under a Contract shall not go to the beneficiary of the Contract. Secondly, the party who wants to resile from the contract files a suit in a civil court and by the time the Decree is passed, even if the verdict were to favour the defendant, the monies due would be received by the Defendant’s great grandson! By the time, INFLATION at the rate of 6% per annum would have eaten up the monies due, leaving merely the chaff for the great grandson. Incase the defendant is the state, there is every likelihood that retrospective laws could be enacted to ensure that the state appropriates the amount.

Here is an excerpt from an article which appeared in THE OUTLOOK dated 21/02/2005 by one paromita shastri (http://www.outlookindia.com/printarticle.aspx?226537)

For some, it was as if the Ides of March had arrived a month early. On January 25, the government passed an ordinance amending the Central Excise Act to wipe out the Rs 803 crore excise relief awarded to ITC by the Supreme Court last September. Instead of recovering Rs 350 crore from the government which lost a 17-year-long dispute, ITC will now have to fork out an extra Rs 450 crore by end-February.

As expected, ITC went into a shiver and a huddle.

Why pay Rs 720 crore more for only 4 crore EPF subscribers? What about 93% of the labour?

Industry was outraged and shocked. Overseas investors dropped their jaws. Then, on February 3, the government announced a revert to the old Employees’ Provident Fund payout rate of 9.5 per cent, upping the reduced 8.5 per cent interim rate declared last August. Both the labour ministry and the EPF organisation are now in a state of shock, wondering how to say yes to a decision that will cause a deficit of Rs 927 crore and how to bridge that gap without any government support!

So, here we have a clear case of the State not submitting itself to a judgement and using its powers to evade repayment! So this is the inherent SOCIALISM which is prevalent in out country. But we do not care. We as a nation keep our word only as long as it is “convenient” for us. So The Indian Contract Act 1872 has all the provisions in LETTERS but the SPIRIT takes the colour of the parties involved. After 17 years and look at the plight of a giant like ITC, where do ordinary mortals stand?

This morning in the TIMES of India there was a piece of unsolicited advice given by the pompous and ineffectual Mikhail Gorbachev to PUTIN: QUIT LIKE ME! That is SOCIALISM from the motherland of SOCIALISM which became the flavour of India and contaminated the seventies. The reasoning given by Mikhail Gorbachev is that Putin should feel happy that he had served 2 terms as president and once as the Prime Minister. What reasoning is that? Putin did not, like Gorbachev, PRESIDE OVER THE FALL AND DISINTEGRATION OF A GREAT COUNTRY LIKE USSR with his PERESTROIKA and GLASNOST! So, Gorbachev says, YOU HAVE HAD ENOUGH rather MORE THAN ME! SO STOP.

I hope Putin, the JUDO MASTER doesn’t quit sheepishly like Gorbachev and hope Putin carries his fight to the hustings, in a true democratic fashion.

SOCIALISM is striving for PROCRUSTEAN EQUALITY,  which kills competition and the free enterprising spirit of man. The state should strive to collect taxes and use them properly for the upliftment of the poor and not stymie the spirit of the enterprising and positively oriented individuals.

Psalm 15:4 says, He that sweareth to his own hurt, and changeth not.

It means that a person should not resile from a contract merely because the contract has turned out to be disadvantageous. That OUGHT TO BE the principle. In India we have become champions of the poor and have succeeded in keeping a majority of the population that way, so that we could REMAIN CHAMPIONS. The POOR are our CAUSE, and we shall in no way let them become RICH and lose our CAUSE!!

LET US KEEP OUR WORD and when the Judiciary settles a dispute favouring the rich let us not change the rules in the name of supporting the poor or the state. In effect, the epicentre of we as a people not keeping our contracts or not enforcing our contracts is the malady of SOCIALISM which has become the bedrock of our consciousness.

Hope India would improve its position in the next review by the WORLD BANK.

Christopher Hitchens & Gandhi.


CHRISTOPHER HITCHENS, who recently passed away due to Cancer being the IMMEDIATE CAUSE and the resentment of many, he had accumulated over a long period, being the latent cause, dwelt on the motives of the most revered and the pious and excoriated them by laying open a point of view quite alien to Indian minds. In an essay title THE REAL MAHATMA GANDHI, he brings to focus the Mahatma’s views on how to handle Hitler with SATYAGRAHA and the letter the Mahatma wrote to Hitler:

And it is not disputable that Gandhi himself regarded his own versions of ahimsa and satyagraha as universally applicable. By 1939, he was announcing that, if adopted by “a single Jew standing up and refusing to bow to Hitler’s decrees,” such methods might suffice to “melt Hitler’s heart.” This may read like mere foolishness, but a personal letter to the Führer in the same year began with the words My friend and went on, ingratiatingly, to ask: “Will you listen to the appeal of one who has deliberately shunned the method of war not without considerable success?” Apart from its conceit, this would appear to be suggesting that Hitler, too, might hope to get more of what he wanted by adopting a more herbivorous approach.

PASSIVE RESISTANCE is a tool which was employed by Jesus against the Roman Empire and the Jewish Spiritual Authorities like Annas and Caiaphas.

By the way, the name ANNA seems to be associated with movements which were challenged or overthrown, for example ANNAS, the Chief Priest of the Jewish religion was responsible for the crucifixion of Jesus and thereby brought the belief of Resurrection of Jesus into the spiritual plate of the religious minded and thus brought CHRISTIANITY to fruition. There was this C.N ANNADURAI, endearingly called ANNA, from the state of MADRAS, who challenged the Congress party in the then Madras state, and till date the Congress party has been piggy backing on the Dravidian parties in Tamil Nadu (part of erstwhile Madras State) for electoral gains in Tamil Nadu. Finally we have our ANNA HAZARE, who is creating quite a furore in the political firmament strutting and issuing diktats to the PARLIAMENT and setting the agenda for the MPs in India. So we should shed all the Shakespearen query of WHAT IS IN A NAME? and realize that there are certain names which crop up from time to time and disturb the quiet of the community.

Beside the choice of words used by Christopher Hitchens, it is the skepticism he entertained in the UNIVERSAL BELIEF SYSTEMS of  LEADERS which he poignantly presented,which  won him his following. For example, the Mahatma fought against a NATION OF SHOPKEEPERS, whereas the Jews were pitted against a MILITARY IDEALOGUE. The weapons used by each was different. HITLER, besides showing that the Treaty of Versailles was preposterously biased against Germany was able to present the Jews of Germany to be the rats he pulled out and presented as the root cause of all evil in Germany. So when the Mahatma’s prescription did not tally with his epistle to Hitler, Hitchens portrays the Mahatma as an inconsistent groveling appeaser.

But to my mind Hitchens missed the point. The greatness of the INDIAN MIND is that HOLD ON TO YOUR PHILOSOPHY, BUT WHEN YOU MEET A MAD MAN SLOW HIM DOWN FIRST AND THEN INDOCTRINATE HIM. The attempt by the Mahatma was merely to start an INTROSPECTION in the MILITARY IDEALOGUE. It worked with the British, primarily because the British were in India for the CREAM and the Mahatma gradually reduced the cream by telling the Indians, what they like to do most- BE IDLE. It worked, it became UNVIABLE for the British to sustain their shop activities in India. The Mahatma upset their apple cart and prescribed PASSIVE RESISTANCE as a PANACEA for all oppression.

But the icing on the cake is the expression HERBIVOROUS APPROACH for PASSIVE RESISTANCE! I am reminded of a quotation from Dr. Samuel Johnson:

If a madman were to come into this room with a stick in his hand, no doubt we should pity the state of his mind; but our primary consideration would be to take care of ourselves. We should knock him down first, and pity him afterwards.

Like the prescription of Johnson, the Mahatma was merely applying the principle of self protection first, as he couldn’t have been sure if the INA with Netaji would have been on the winning side. It could have been a subtle hint to Hitler that in the event of Hitler winning, the Mahatma would not use ANY OTHER FORCE!!

A herbivorous approach? May be…………we gotta arrive at our own conclusions.

 

 

OATH OF OFFICE IN THE NAME OF ALLAH.


The Supreme Court of India is reported to have dismissed the petition wherein the petitioner had prayed for a declaration that the oath of office taken by the Governor in the name of ALLAH, was to be declared as void. This was an appeal taken by the petitioner from the High Court of Jharkhand. The Supreme Court of India had instead declared the appeal to be MISCHIEVOUS and DIVISIVE.

When the newspapers report such news items- especially the ones relating to sensitive issues like religion- the media should clearly state the JUDICIAL REASONING forwarded by the petitioner and the JUDICIAL REASONING given by the Justices so that such issues are  settled forever. Instead the news item in today’s TIMES OF INDIA (13/12/2011) merely states that the petition was dismissed as MISCHIEVOUS & DIVISIVE. No doubt, if one goes for the intention of the petitioner, such a MOTIVE is ascribable. But since the Supreme Court of India is the last resort for our declarations, the media should give the kernel of the judgement and not merely carry the interconnected opinion expressed by the Justices in the case.

A few weeks back my Muslim friend said that his God’s name was ALLAH. I said that ALLAH meant GOD in Arabic and it was also proven from internet resources that the Christians inhabiting the Gulf (predominantly Islamic population) call their God also as ALLAH. Please refer to WIKIPEDIA:-

Allah (English pronunciation: /ˈælə/ or /ˈɑːlə/; Arabic: الله‎ Allāh, IPA: [ʔɑlˈlɑː] ( listen), [ʔalˤˈlˤɑː]) is a word for God used in the context of Islam.[1] In Arabic, the word means simply “God”.[2][3][4] It is used primarily by Muslims and Bahá’ís, and often, albeit not exclusively, used by Arabic-speaking Eastern Catholic Christians, Maltese Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox Christians, Mizrahi Jews and Sikhs.[5][6][7] It is related to ʼĔlāhā in Aramaic.

So ALLAH means GOD in Arabic. So some Christians in the Arabic speaking areas have not allowed the name ALLAH to be appropriated by Muslims alone to refer to their idea of God.

Coming back to the Constitution of India, the Schedule prescribes the forms for Oath taking by Constitutional functionaries and the oath is taken in the name of God or through solemn affirmation. So when the Governor of Jharkhand takes the oth in the name of ALLAH, he has merely used the Arabic word for God. In fact one should be appreciative of the Governor having taken the oath in the name of ALLAH, in whom he believes, than in the generic English term GOD or the Hindi term PARAMESHWAR.  If the media had reported the kernel of the judgement and given the JUDICIAL REASONING behind the dismissal of the Appeal, the readers would have stood edified.

The news item further states that the names of INCARNATIONS could be used- i do not understand that. For example if a person were to use the name Jesus or Krishna or Rama would that be okay? I suppose NOT. The Constitution of India envisages the generic name of GOD (of course in any language) than a specific incarnation. Maybe a Thamizhan might take the oath in the name of KADAVUL or AANDAVAN, which are the generic names of God in Thamizh. Why make a fuss if GOD IS ONE? But as readers of NEWS PAPERS we should prefer the Judicial reasoning that went into that DECISION MAKING.

ALLAH HU AKBAR. GOD IS TRULY GREAT.

Pope Joan!


Not merely thru habit, but by conviction i am a Protestant. Yet this morning, the Female pastoress in my church brought to reference the incidence of a FEMALE POPE. She said that during the middle ages there was a female Pope; that she fell down from her horse while giving birth; that she was killed by the fanatics who discovered that she was a female disguised as a male and that her name was JOAN.

Nice, very nice. Extremely edifying on a Sunday morning. For the life of me i can’t understand why these female priests want positions of power and pelf to be allocated to them- merely because they belong to that gender! This doesn’t seem to me as GENDER EQUALITY, but GENDER SOCIALISM!

I don’t think i have to  be apologetic merely because i am spewing venom on these half-baked agendas! I am not persuaded by Paul’s exhortations thru his epistles wherein he says that HE GIVES NO WOMAN THE AUTHORITY TO TALK IN THE CHURCH. For me Paul was a pharisee first and then he became a Christian Pharisee, and got included “ritualism” into Christianity, to advance his own prospects with the Jews. Further, who is he to give or not to give the AUTHORITY for women to talk? Merely because he was born ahead of us all, and proximate in time with Jesus and claimed direct conversion by Jesus, still he and his preachings cannot be the repository of all Christian “rules”. If women contribute  and build systems, then they have all the right to head, preach, teach, heal and do everything that a male is allowed to do.

Now the female Pastoress in my Church says: WOMEN FACE A LOT OF TROUBLES AND DO NOT GET RECOGNIZED. True, but this is not only true to women, but also to men and anything for that matter, as Thomas Gray had said

Full many a gem of purest ray serene
The dark unfathom’d caves of ocean bear:
Full many a flower is born to blush unseen,
And waste its sweetness on the desert air.

We can complain about the gems which have not been laid open for human appreciation or about the flower which has been lost in the desert, but EVERYTHING has its own time. Some deeds get recognized some don’t, this doesn’t mean one should promote one gender over the other.

Duty of man and all systems is to create systems which will recognize  effort, contribution, initiative, courage shown by humans irrespective of the gender to which the person belongs. Bringing in a Female Pope named Joan, who sustained her Papacy through a lie (stating that she was a male), having sex when CELIBACY was the rule of the Roman Catholic Church seems an uneven agenda merely to promote a world ruled by females. 

Poor pastoress, she wants to make a beehive out of this society. Why don’t they simply read the Bible and understand that there have been Deborahs, Jezebels, Ruths, Esthers, Bathshebas, Rahabs and a whole host of prominent women and that Jesus himself was born in the line of Rahab, Ruth, whose forebear was Judah who  was the father to the children born to his daughter-in-law TAMAR? and that ALL  these women, including Tamar, came to the limelight only through effort? The society is NOT GOING TO EVER GIVE WOMEN ALL THE ROYAL JELLY & HONEY and keep the drones at bay! Life is a struggle, at best we could avoid negative discrimination but to  recommend positive discrimination on the basis of gender seems preposterous for me. Otherwise our society would turn itself into an effeminate culture unable to withstand the underlying Bacchanalian forces. I’d like to end this rant with a wise saying by Andre Gide:

“Man cannot discover new oceans unless he has the courage to lose sight of the shore.”

It fits for WOMEN TOO!

 

 

Tag Cloud