Unconstitutional?

There has been a lot of outrage on the part of the intellectuals of this country that the present India Against Corruption movement has been unconstitutional. However, as a friend rightly pointed out,

 "There are many political parties that conduct bandhs, hartals, dharnas, padayatras and what not on a regular basis. Offices are shut down, stones are pelted at buses, tyres are burnt. Anyone who goes on the streets are wounded too. However, the same political parties say that a peaceful, non-violent, non-disruptive, perfectly legal protest is undemocratic?"

The Constitution of India is the supreme law of India, whose principles are to be followed for framing of laws, policies, granting of rights, and the functioning of the state. Like any other legal document, it can prove quite hard to read. The principles enshrined, however, are simpler to understand. Only the intellectual population of the country pays heed to even these. Hence, only a very small population of the country actually knows what is constitutional and what is unconstitutional.

Having read the speeches that Dr BR Ambedkar made on drafting of the constitution, I know that he would have surely struck down this protest as unconstitutional. I agree. This protest has been unconstitutional. However, let me tell you that if Dr Ambedkar were alive today, he would have been baffled enough at the rampant corruption that the parliament is responsible for today to immediately recommend some amendments to curtail the powers that the Legislature possess.

The legislature towers high above any other institution in this country. They seem to be able to call all the shots at present: How to obtain arrests of anybody (by using the Delhi Police as a scapegoat) in case anything goes wrong? How many Jan Lokpal bills to consider?  Whether they should present bills to the standing committee? Whether the bill should undergo the process of voting in the parliament at all? (Whoa!)

I'd say that any constitution that has allowed for the parliament to thrive in such unfettered corruption definitely needs a re-look. (There! I've uttered a blasphemy). I'm sure that the founding fathers of the country would never have, even in their wildest dreams, envisaged the  whole sale sell out of the country that is happening today. Why, A Raja might have made only a few hundred crores out of the deal, but has cost the country a potential whopping 1.76 lakh crores. Ethics apart, costing the country so dearly for making only a fraction of that cost is bad business!

We need laws to reign in the MPs today. The constitution has been amended in their favour so much so that they are the ultimate authority in this country. The laws against corruption, and their punishments are so ridiculous, particularly in light of the powers that MPs have. Also, these laws are so replete with loopholes that one can slither his way out easily with the legal expertise that the ministers have at hand, what with many of them being lawyers themselves.

The people on the streets have seen this happening time and again. They know that any political party that comes into power in steeped in the same systemic corruption. They do not care about the word of the constitution at this point of time. They just see that the country is being looted and want changes now! In their anger, they aren't ready to wait for a decade for palpable change to happen. Hence, they jump the gun on many occasions and demand the passage of their bill outright. It is true that anger clouds our ability to make the best decisions. It is also true that for this anger, the politicians are to blame and they are now facing the music.

As Arvind Khejriwal pointed out, intellectuals abound in the country, who think about how to proceed on every matter and are quick in their criticism of anything that goes against the grain of the many principles they hold dear. However, the vast numbers of people in this country operate on something much more basic: Common Sense. They don't want to hear your explanations of what is constitutional and what is not. They want corruption rooted out, and they want it now. The intellectuals are very relevant though. They keep checks and balances in the system so that things don't get out of hand. This movement has been a refreshing attempt at a correction of the Indian democracy. Rather than saying that Indian democracy is being threatened, it is good to see it thriving as ever.

What makes people lose faith in the democratic process?

India is a participatory democracy where people have a say in who is ruling over them. Democracy is India's biggest boon, and in my opinion, the prime reason why we haven't broken up into separate states like Europe, since independence.

The best (and only) suggestion that critics of the current anti-corruption protests provide is for people to use elections to tackle corruption. However, the protesters seem to be exasperated at this democratic system's failure. Why are they on the streets? What makes the democratic process fail?

Let us start off with a young voter of this country who wishes to do it good. He isn't a walking, talking archive of The Hindu  but he is far better informed than the huge masses who are transported in truckloads to voting booths. He can vote at the assembly level and the Lok Sabha level. But let us look at whom he can vote for. He has a choice between the two central parties, both of whom are steeped in the same corruption and malpractices. On voting for an independent candidate, he realises that his candidate will either not even cross the minimum number of votes required to collect his election deposit, or will side with one of the two 'national' parties. On voting for a state level party, he'll realise that he is playing into the hands of regionalists who are increasingly resorting to dirty, caste based politics. These regional parties also hold the trump cards in today's coalition governments and demand that they get ministerial berths out of which they can make the most money out of. ( viz. A Raja's telecom ministry)

The system is neck deep in filth. He compares it to vibrant democracies in the west where any spot of dirt on the candidates makes them liable for impeachment and unspeakable humiliation. He is now rendered speechless with humiliation at his country's netas. The parliament's first Lokpal draft dates back to 1968. His politicians haven't agreed on passing that bill for 43 years and counting. How could even the brightest optimist still harbour any hopes in the parliament?

Why not contest elections? If he wished to join either of the big parties, his purpose is defeated. Besides, there is the huge contribution he'll have to make to the party coffers for his entry. If he contests as an independent candidate... Oh wait! He already knows the fate of those naive independents.

The civil service! That is surely the panacea to his angst and eagerness to do good for the country. So he goes about exploring that option. Well, there is the rest of the young people in the country to compete with. As the civil services are highly coveted, the entire mass of India's huge and burgeoning population adds to the weight of this competition and he is faced with lakhs of competitors, vying for a few hundred posts. This also demands intricate knowledge of the country among a whole lot of other things. Only graduates can apply. After rigorous selection processes that run into the best part of a year, these hallowed people are selected to serve the masses. But wait. They are selected to serve the masses under the thumb of their neta who might not have even passed second standard! The neta is sure to transfer them if they try to do anything good against his vested interests. There is also this tradition among IAS officers to spend a huge amount of money on coaching classes and attempt at making solid returns on investment once they are in power.

The legislature and the bureaucracy are pretty much closed doors to this citizen. The judiciary is so swamped with cases to be heard that he has very bleak hope there. The legislature, with its passing of 17 bills in 12 mins, including amendments to the Prevention of Corruption Act, has also substantially weakened the judiciary's hold on it. Now that the supreme court is interfering with their dirty affairs time and again, they are going to threaten it with a judicial accountability bill. I rest my case.

The gentleman whose example has been taken in this post is mostly from the middle class. The poor are too busy making their 30 rupees per day to worry about these things. The rich aren't bothered to find out how their agent obtains their driving license. As long as he delivers it to them, they are happy. So how then does this young, middle class voter, bubbling with enthusiasm to be a part of the change and redress his grievances against systemic corruption that he encounters everywhere, from getting his birth certificate made to getting a cremation done and a death certificate obtained?

He waits for an Anna Hazare to come along. He doesn't even bother to find out the merits and demerits of the proposed bill, but plunges headlong at anything that helps him channel his anger against the corrupt politicians he so loathes. The majority of people at the rallies today don't even know what the Jan Lokpal bill does or how it proposes to root out corruption. They have lost faith in the politicians to such a grave extent that they go by the saying "An enemy of my enemy is my friend."

My Vegetarian Roots

It has always been the hallmark of human civilisation to care for those who are less capable, less fortunate and less powerful. The word 'humane' stands testimony to that fact. A humanitarian is one who partakes in, and shares the burden of those around him. As we become more and more civilised, this fact is always reinforced in stronger terms.

Coloured people, who have endured white supremacy for ages are now respected for who they are, so much so that doing or saying anything that would remotely hint otherwise is seen as taboo. Women, having been treated as the weaker sex through the centuries, are now recognised to be equal to men and the number of instances where they are being oppressed is steadily reducing world over, more so in the developed world. People who were historically seen to be handicapped, invalid and retarded are now being seen as differently abled and special people. The champions of these causes have always been held as examples for humankind to emulate.

The reason for change in this direction is the ever increasing ability to choose, that has resulted as a consequence of our progress. The desperate thief, who in his need cannot afford to be compassionate to those who he steals from, doesn't have a choice. But on progressing as a race, our choices have ever been on the increase. Earlier, we all had to roam about, foraging, hunting and living off the land. Today, the choices we have on both, making a living and consuming for living, are unlimited in their variety.

Which brings me to vegetarianism. Very frequently have the people around me put forth the question as to why I do not consume meat, so much so that they sympathise with my having to forgo the often pleasurable experiences that accompany its consumption. I never had a clear answer to that question. I somehow managed to shrug it off by saying that it was an inherent tendency.

It is not that I've never tasted meat. I've consumed enough of it in the days of early childhood. I can even vaguely remember what it tastes like. However, even as a little child, I had been shocked to learn about how silk was extracted by boiling silkworm cocoons and had told my parents categorically that I was never going to be wearing any silk all my life. One morning, when I was probably in Std 5, I attended a birthday party where I decided not to eat the cake that was on offer for its containing egg, even though I have always been very fond of cake. This was the beginning of my life as a vegetarian. On introspection, it becomes amply clear that this choice is based on an inclination towards non violence, followed by the development of a rationale that reinforces this inclination. Also, I've been born in a race, I'm proud to say, is known for having advocated vegetarianism centuries ahead of anywhere else world over. In this aspect, I deem that we are an advanced race indeed.

I'm not one of those who is for strongly enforcing vegetarianism (at times this is done even violently), for such an act would defeat the entire purpose of being vegetarian. Unlike plants, we cannot produce our own food and have to rely on the consumption of other forms of life for our living. But unlike carnivores, who cannot but eat meat, we have the power to choose what we eat. I just choose to do it in a manner as to cause a lesser amount of pain to things around me.

"What pain?," one might ask. "Animals are slaughtered with one flourish of the knife so that they don't feel pain at all."

Well, have we really thought about the conditions in which they are bred and subsequently slaughtered for our pleasure? Do we not see how chickens are cooped up in poultry farms, so much so that their coops lend to us the phrase? Don't we see them being transported, strung up mercilessly by their leg, upside down and slung across scooter seats? A lamb being led to slaughter. Butchered mercilessly. Dead meat. The phrases that turn to animal slaughter for expressing savagery are endless. Even the word massacre has its roots in butchery. These words arise from western civilisation which is only just exploring vegetarianism.

There is another school of thought that holds, very naively I must say, that if we all became vegetarians, this world would be flooded with animals and that we'd all starve to death because we'd run out of plant based food. The amount of grain and feed that goes into making meat is mind boggling. Animals could live off pastures and not consume any grain, but the lack of pastoral land and the difficulties associated with adopting that approach are formidable. It takes 16 kilos of grain to produce 1 kilo of meat. It takes nearly 1000 times the amount of water to produce one Kg of meat as opposed to wheat. Between May 2000 and August 2006, Brazil lost nearly 150, sq km of forest, an area larger than Greece, 70% of this going to cultivate soya beans to be fed to a burgeoning pig cultivation market in China. There are many more staggering facts that one can discover with a very simple search string online. In effect, the production of meat is proving so wasteful that a day might come where we are all forced to turn vegetarian. A love for nature goes very much hand in hand with vegetarianism.

But these are just facts to silence ill informed critics. The essence of vegetarianism, for me, stems out of the inherent disposition to live and let live, that has guided human civilisation ever since man ventured outside of his cave. As I question my stand, it only becomes clearer to me that it is one that I will always adopt. The variety offered by vegetarian food, seen better in India than anywhere else, is abundant. Though one can point out that it can only increase when you include meat, I'm wholly satisfied with what it has on offer, for a lifetime's worth.