Mr Kak argues both ways. He suggests that it is not alright to take away the right to privacy and association and YET he appears to have a problem when precisely these rights are allowed to linguistic and religious minorities! So then, it appears that he has a problem not about right of privacy and right of association per se but rather about who is permitted the latitude to enjoy these rights...fairly flexible (and subjective) libertarian views these.
It is now commonly accepted by even die hard libertarians that the right to privacy, and right of association is not paramount and can and should always be subjected to the larger good. Is Mr Kak's view that the larger good is not relevant in a society riddled with inequality. In this case, is the libertarian argument just a red herring and nothing short of a blatant attempt at perpetuating inequalities and protecting status quo?
Mr Kak's view that the government should spend more on education is just platitudinous, and out of touch with reality ! (Unless he has innovative suggestions on how these investments can be made by rationing investments and yet keeping the fiscal deficit under check)
