From: thiru@lgc.com (Thiru Bollam)
Subject: Re: Federal versus State rights
Organization: Landmark Graphics Corporation
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 21:03:25 GMT

In article <15m2ndg@rpi.edu> divaka@rpi.edu writes:
>In article <1992Dec17.141622.22351@lgc.com>, thiru@lgc.com (Thiru Bollam) writes:
>|> In article <Dec.16.16.53.55.1992.10644@paul.rutgers.edu> kumarv@paul.rutgers.edu (kumar vadaparty) writes:
>|> >
>|> >What do you think of the president's dismissal of three state
>|> >governments? These govts were dismissed because they were not able to
>|> >conduct according to the Indian Constitution. 
>|>                           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>|> 
>|>   Is it not the same book, made by bunch of mediocre legislators to suit
>|>   their own party needs??? Do you guys still feel this book, which gives
>|>   authority for partisanism along religious lines, should be uphold?
>|> 
>|> 
>|> Thiru
>Could you please be a little more specific about which mediocre people
>you are talking about? Babu Rajendra Prasad? B.R. Ambedkar? Pandit Nehru?
>Sardar Patel? Please look into the membership of the constituent assembly
>before you make these accusations of mediocrity. A wide spectrum of Indian
>opinion was represented, and never again has there been any such gathering
>of Indian intellect in one place. 
>           Please let us all know how the Constitution upholds "partisanism"
>along religious lines. The core of the Indian constitution is democratic
>and secular. Each of these concepts is an anathema to the RSS brand mindset.
>No amount of revisionism is going to change the fact that the constitutent
>assembly did its best to give India a secular democratic constitution. 
>                                                    ajay

     Well, I should have probably said 'amended ??? times' instead of 'made'.
     I agree with you on the fact that it was started by great people. But,
     see what happened since then. That's what I'm referring to. Who has
     given the constitutional authority to Shao Bano case? How many times
     did these mediocre people have to change the same holy book to extend
     presidential rule in ??? states, to put emergency, and who has given
    the constitutional authority in 1970 to extend the reservations, separate
    code of conduct for the people living in the same country? Is it not
    this unpure book they(congie) refered to take advantage during current
    scenario??(I agree with you it was a master piece in 1947, but  was 
    unfortunately utilized to serve centre's political party needs in the
    last couple of decades. what else is fomenting 'partisanism'
    I guess you agree with me, of course I can find another one, that
    public confidence has eroded in the political process. It is this political
    process that is legislating the constitution. so, who is this constitution
    serving, ie.,public confidence or political process(both are at conflict, 
    unfortunately, in our country)?????? I wont talk about starvation deaths,
    centre-state relations etc. which are intricately linked into this 
    constitution.

    RSS (Rashtriya Swayam Sevak Sangh) was started in 1925 neither to grab
    power nor to serve its own interests. As someone has already reported,
    RSS was given place beside Indian Army in ?? war, by RSS hater, Nehru.
    to share honors.  Let's not discuss the fact that RSS is a voluntary 
    organization serving nations interests, and is pro-democratic and has
    suffered all through in the psedo-secular, narrow minded politicians and
    bad publicity thro press.

    In my opinion, if democracy flourishes, secularism follows. It's not
    the other way. For the sake of secularism, we have reduced our democracy
    to a 'voting democracy'. So, if one wants a secular democracy, give 
    first preference to participative democracy,unlike in India(eg. USA).

    Thiru
    PS: If you can(time and have articles), refer to my article, 'Leadership
    and Vision'.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian.telugu