AMERICA post Obama !!!

"God bless America!", is an old phrase uttered on stages, both small and big in the context of modern day America. The phrase could never have been more relevant than today`s Trump led America.The victory of Republicans is touted as a landslide of sorts. But in reality, it follows the global trend of rising popularity of Far -Right groups amongst common populace. The reason is the growing terror quotient of the planet ,thanks to our brothers with arms- ISIS, Al-Qaeda, Boko Haram etc. Terrorism exported to Europe and America has made people vary of immigrants and refugees. This has led to the rise of political parties and leaders propagating protectionism and anti-immigration ideas.

In that context, experts miscalculated the people of America to be more liberal, secular and Cosmopolitan. But I`ve felt that people everywhere are the same. When pushed against the wall, own survival becomes paramount. The recent attacks on migrants is a testimony of deep insecurities of the American people.The executive order banning immigrants from 7 muslim countries was part of a poll promise rightfully turned down by the courts. A toned down immigration policy came in next. It promised action against illegal immigrants only. An immigrant became an enforcement priority if he is charged with an offence. He will be summarily deported. Such a step gives sweeping powers to law enforcement authorities which is prone to abuse,

Immigrants from Mexico will bear the brunt of this policy. As far as Indians are concerned,this crackdown doesnt effect them a bit. Most of them are H1B visa holders and I.T companies of India have ensured that they are on the right side of tha law.However, the Silicon Valley is in a state of panic due to uncertainity clouding the current administration.There are talks of increasing the minimum wages for H1B visas making hiring outside the U.S costly and also decrease in the number of visas.

Another conciliatory message that came out recently was moving to a merit based immigration system and moving away from low unskilled labour from abroad. This is a more President like announcement which is better articulated and looks practical.What does "merit " mean?? It is still open to interpretations. Doubling of minimum wages for H1B visa holders, limiting the number of visas ,auctioning of visas , reduction of visas for family members are all possible solutions.

The road ahead is a bumpy one for approximately 300,000 Indians holding H1B visas in the U.S. A policy change will definitely be regressive and at best the rhetoric will always keep an air of uncertainity around. A common misconception  that the balance of trade and investment is positive for India must be cleared promptly. We provide IT/ITES services which is more than balanced by U.S companies providing consultancy and financial solutions. This would create a balance in perception .

It goes without saying that America is a land of migrants and it cannot do without them. Just as Superman -"With greater power, comes greater responsibility". The leader of the free world has its rewards and paybacks. America must shoulder this burden in the near future as its moral responsibility.

Freedom Of Expression Vs Nationalism.

This debate is the basic crux of all the infighting going on in our country since the current government came to power. A discussion was long due `coz of the degeneration of public discourse in recent times when everyone has to take sides without getting the holistic picture of any damn issue. The extant blog is against the backdrop of the protest in Ramjas College and the violence that ensued following clashes b/w ABVP and AISA. There is hardly any novelty as such clashes have become the order of the day. Clashes between co-students can be traced back to the JNU fiasco almost a year back. The recent FIR against teachers for staging a play by MahaDevi Verma in Haryana University or an FIR against teachers in Udaipur University are fresh cases.

The ABVP`s version of events :- "Terrorists like Umar Khalid"should not be allowed to speak in the D.U Campus. Further there was no permission for the events from the administration. The virus of Anti- Nationalism which started in J.N.U. has spread to many campuses in the nation. Unity and Integrity of the Country cannot be compromised at any cost. Inciting the mob to "break the nation into many parts" or "singing songs for a convicted terrorist as if he was a martyr "cannot be protected under the garb of Freedom Of Expression. The violence that ensued in Ramjas was a result of provocation and stone pelting by AISA.

The AISA says;- Umar Khalid is a scholar on Kashmir Issues and he has not yet been chargesheeted by the Police. Inviting him was not anti-national. The violence was started by ABVP and the police was a mute spectator. Normally in any protest of this kind, video recording of the place is made by the police. The same was not being done to shield the attackers. This is a violation of Freedom of Expression and is forceful imposition of  the "RSS form of Nationalism". They further allege that the government is vitiating the university campus to suit its political ends.

Our Constitution has guaranteed us the right to "ptotest peacefully". The ABVP or for that matter AISA had the right to protest peacefully against each other. The police had to do its job in checking violence of any kind and ensuring that the perpetrators are brought to book. Umar Khalid is not a convicted criminal and thats a fact. His presence on any stage is not anti-national. However the choice of Umar Khalid over many towering personalities and experts on Kashmir can throw some light on the intention of the organisers. But they were within their rights nonetheless. Creating ruckus over a person even though he hasn`t spoken a word is idiocy of the worst kind. Its like mking a mediocre guy famous for no reason, But again the ABVP was within its rights in doing so.

Lets broaden the scope of this discussion. Why every such issue is made out to be a Nationalism Vs Freedom of Speech debate and we are compelled to take sides.Our Civilisation boasts of its "Shastrarth Parampara".  Academic questions must be discussed academically. Dont end the discussion because you dont like it. Put your arguments and try to persuade the audience. Trust their judgement. It is the academic duty of teachers to give a platform to their students to explore multiple worldviews. Teachers have complained of shrinking of academic space due to threat of violence. The recent cases of F.I.R`s exemplify it.

The final argument that I want to put is-"Nobody has the right to act on behalf of the state unless authorised by the same". Private citizens can articulate their form of Nationalism but fighting anyone doing anything less that that and branding them as Anti-National is not correct. Similarly acts of Bajrang Dal on Valentine`s Day and so on are actually Anti-National and must be dealt accordingly.I would like to close the argument by cautioning the "liberals"about the restriction to Freedom of Expression enshrined in Article 19(2) of Our Constitution. Criticism of the government is allowed but inciting a mob to an uprising against the country by breaking it into smaller parts is NOT COOL . It must be dealt as per law of the land and let the judiciary have the final word

JALLIKATTU --Culture vs Animal Rights..

Jallikattu is a traditional spectacle in which a Bos Indicus bull is released into a crowd of people who attempt to tame it as the bull tries to escape. It is a part of the Pongal celebrations in the Indian state of Tamil Nadu. The Supreme Court imposed a permanent ban on the sport in 2014 after its 12 guidelines formulated in 2006 to let the sport go on was not followed in letter. The recent protests in Marina and the knee jerk reaction of the State government by first using police force and then hushing with an ordinance sends mixed signals.  Further, such a belated upsurge after almost 2 years of the ban, points to larger issues in the Tamil politics.

The protests are an indicator of larger discontent of the masses against the political establishment. The spate of droughts is commonly associated with the step motherly treatment by the Centre in the sharing of Cauvery waters. The problem got majorly aggravated by the sad demise of Jayalalitha aka Amma. Political vacuum in the state and persistent neglect of the people was expressed through these protests showcasing Tamil pride and local culture. The ordinance and the full fledged bill to nullify the ban and soothe local tempers needs close examination.

 Legislative action to counter judicial pronouncements is not a new phenomenon for India , notably the Shah Bano case. The bill exempting Jallikattu from the ambit of Prevention of Cruelty against animals Act,1960 creates 3 changes- separate definition for Jallikattu ,specific exemption in sec 11(3) and blanket cover from the ambit of PCA,1960. The specific grounds stated in the bill are a) promotion of culture and tradition and b) protection of native breed of bulls. So, constitutionally there doesn't seem to be a problem. It depends on the approach of the judiciary and the executive as to how the issue plays out.

The animal right perspective is in order. Worldwide, such sports are prevalent and popular even in the U.S.A. The animal right groups have done little to the cause. The scrutiny was initiated by the Madras High Court and has been followed up by the executive later on. However cruelty like use of chilli powder to incite the bull and ways to create fear in the mind  of the bull is a concern. In the same breath, the argument of Animal rights activists that religion and culture can be no grounds for exemption  as far as PCA act is considered doesn't have merit. The act under section 28 specifies that the manner in which an animal is killed shall not be questioned if it has religious justification. So clearly the law of the land recognises religious and cultural exceptions. The question remains the extent till which animal rights and culture can be balanced.

The balance of opinion suggests that the sport must continue only after the 12 specific guidelines framed by the Supreme Court must be followed in letter and spirit. Strict monitoring of such events and broad consultations among stakeholders in future legislations regarding animals needs mention. Animal rights is a dynamic concept having spatial and temporal variations. Hence continuous debate is essential for a policy addressing contemporary demands. Eliminating dissection in schools after consultation with animal husbandry board and civil society is a noteworthy example. The future of Jallikattu must also be addressed by a multi stakeholder approach of Consensus building peacefully.

Politics of Caste and Religion!!!

The recent Supreme Court judgement on use of religion ,caste etc during elections has drawn comments from a plethora of actors, with very few having real understanding of the locus and focus of the decision. The Court was examining the question whether religion, caste can be used as tools in election campaigns? A split verdict concluded that any appeal for votes on grounds of religion/caste/race/community/language amounts to a corrupt practice under RPA, 1951. This in no way has superseded the " Hindutva" judgement of '95. In reality, the 7 judge bench categorically distanced itself from reviewing the same. So , constitutionally Hinduism /Hindutva is still not a religion, but a way of life😂😂

The next question is the novelty associated with the judgement. The answer is a NO. RPA was amended in 1961 to include asking of votes in the name of caste, religion etc as a corrupt practice . So , it is established that the decision is not a Judicial Overreach. Secondly, the provision has failed to produce any visible results because an election can be challenged only through a petition in a competent court. But the time in which the judgments arrive , usually the candidates have completed their terms. Hence , it has little deterrence value. Hardly anyone knew that the crux of the judgment already had a statutory backing. The main Issue remains the implementation of this pipe dream. The Election Commission doesn't have powers to cancel the candidates nomination on these grounds. Any  action is possible only post facto through the cumbersome judicial process.

The dangers of this judgment can be to Free Speech. It has ignored the ground realities of our society which is clearly divided on many lines and egalitarian framework is an utopia. Many political parties and their leaders owe their existence to religion , language , caste etc. Upliftment of their Vote-banks is always paramount in their manifesto. Further, the view of a Candidate may not be known to the voters on crucial issues like Talaaq, inheritance , Ram Mandir etc. It may also challenge the free Media and their free speech.

However the positives must not be lost in the noise.The judgment has caught public imagination by reaffirming the statute and giving it a judicial backing. Fast track courts to dispose of election petitions in a time bound way is the way forward. This would create a deterrence in the campaigners against using religion ,caste etc during elections. Empowering the Election Commission to take swift action against the culprits is also imperative. It is high time that people and politicians move away from parochial interests  to a development centric model.