Medha Patkar only intention is to get media attention, she don't care you living in dark.Suppose govt come with hydro energy, she would tell that is anti environmental, she has no other business, another communist.I couodn't understant why media giving important to this lady.Could you say one example she did good. Communist, Russia and China said to be the mother and father of this so called cimmunist, they are dealing with USA and have nuclear energy either. It is high time to ban this 'headless chicken' antinational communist from India
I know that India despirately needs enrgy security and this deal will provide India with the security to a large extent. The only fear I see in Lay man's terminology is that America will take the bargaining advantage on India once the Nuclear Installed capacity crosses a substantial level. Thay would be in a position to push India in doing things which they want, as India will always have a fear of US taking away the deal. And once we are producing 30k MW of electricity we cannot think going back. they can also ask us to sign NPT. I am not at all against the deal, but there should be some solution to the above mentioned problem..
without US support India is doomed to be the target of jihadi terror. only the boogieman of US can keep jihadies at bay. Hindus are not up to it to stand up to Pak sponsored jihadies. India better kick the Commies and get the deal implemented.
I can understand opposition to the deal by BJP, but communist oppostion is extremely shocking. It seems to suggest say no to American imperialism but Yes to Chinsese imperialism....hehe
I quote your summing up line "The Indian Constitution which allows deals such as this, as well as international treaties and agreements to be reached without democratic consultation, needs an amendment to make public debate and referendums mandatory and pre-conditional. We need an approval from the Indian electorate before we agree to sign the agreement." Fine and a excellent suggestion, but are you prepared to make this suggestion a universal thing for all controversial issues in this country. If so are you prepared for a referendum on your activities in the states of gujarat, madhya pradesh, maharashtra and rajasthan, the states where the narmada flows and the states that are benefitted according to me, but according to you the places which has been hurt by the narmada project. Finally if you lose more than three referendrums, are you prepared to stop all your activities since that shows the people of this country do not support you. If not , my question is why not? Finally indian democracy is not matured enough to understand the issues at hand, it is more a ritual wherein the majority make a uninformed decision on the spur of the moment based on consideration of that moment rather than think of the past or the future. Given the present scenario it is not advisable to talk of referendrums.
RE:A question to Ms Medha
by on Aug 24, 2007 09:43 AM Permalink
I would completely agree to mariappan's point of view. when one tries to draw a parallel to the american democratic system, one must understand they debate to arrive at a conclusion & apparently a well-informed majority decision. one just cant be sure that the indian elected representatives have the intellectual quotient & wherewithal to grasp such critical matters, not to mention the political myopia that they often succumb to. in this scenario, the best-of-worst scenario is to leave the such decisions, especially foreign policy related, to a select group of elected representatives & hope that they have the wisdom to take the right decision. too many cooks spoil the broth & this is evident from the lack of consensus on several domestic policy matters. indian politics still has a long way to go before it could be termed as mature.
Col. (retd) Anil A Athale is a Fellow at the Centre for Armed Forces Historical Research. A former Joint Director (History Division) and infantryman, he has been running an NGO, Peace and Disarmament, based in Pune for the past 10 years. As a military historian he specialises in insurgency and peace process. Karl Marx took a dim view of India and its heritage.
Writing in the New York Tribune dated June 25, 1853 (quoted in Lewis S Feuer edited Marx and Engels Basic Writings, Anchor Books, NY 1959, pp. 474-481) he claimed that the %u2018Golden Age%u2019 of India was all myth and India was always a poor starving country. He further went on to admire and appreciate the British for destroying the Indian village industry and economy so that India could %u2018modernise%u2019.
But to the Indian communists, the words of Marx are like commandments from God. Their devotion to the dead communism can be seen on the walls of Calcutta, possibly the only city in the world where you can find pictures of Marx, Lenin and Stalin displayed with pride.
Following the footsteps of Marx, the Indian communists have deep hatred of anything Indian and are opponents of any kind of pride in Indian heritage. The communists also hold that India is not one nation but a %u2018collection of nationalities%u2019.
Another major tenet of Indian Marxist%u2019s orthodoxy is that for national reconstruction you have to first destroy the existing nation.
