प्रश्न सरकारच्या सार्वभौमत्वाचा!

प्रश्न सरकारच्या सार्वभौमत्वाचा!

http://maharashtratimes।indiatimes।com/articleshow/7953652।cms#write

स्टार माझा वर राजकीय विश्लेषक म्हनून येणारे प्रताप आसबे ज़े काही विश्लेषन करतात ते बर्‍याच वेळा आकलना पलीकडचे असते. महाराष्ट्र टाइम्स मध्ये प्रसिद्ध झालेल्या वरील लेखातील काही मुद्दे जरी विचार करण्या सारखे असले तरी एकून लिखाण बाळबोध व हास्यास्पद आहे.

आसबे यानी छान आलंकारीक शब्द येथे वापरले आहेत. परीक्षेत लिहून गुण प्राप्त करण्यासाठी हा उत्तम निबंध होऊ शकतो. संसदीय लोकशाहीचा पाया उखडू शकतो ईतकेच लिहीणे संयुक्तिक असताना वाक्यात डॉ बाबासाहेब आंबेडकराचे नाव घेण्याचा मोह ते आवरू शकत नाहीत. कदाचित त्याने वाक्याला वजन मिळत असेल. पण मग ही एकप्रकारे चिथावनि होत नाही का?. घटनेत दुरुस्ती किवा त्यावरील साधक बाधक चर्चा ही नेहमीच डॉ. बाबासाहेब आंबेडकर यांचा अवमान करणारी असते का?

आसबे म्हणतात अण्णानि कधी राष्ट्रवादी कधी कॉंग्रेस कधी शिवसेना कधी भाजप विरुद्ध आंदोलने केली. त्यामुळे भ्रष्टाचार विरुद्ध आंदोलनाची चलती होती. मग यात चुक काय? ..

आसबे साहेब किरण बेदीना सेलिब्रिटी म्हणतात. यावर हसण्या पलीकडे आपण काय करू शकतो. त्यायोगे आसबे साहेब जे स्टार माझा च्या बहुतेक चर्चेत विश्लेषक असतात तेही आमच्यासाठी सेलिब्रिटीच नव्हे का? शेवटच्या परीछेदात तर साहेब तटस्थ न राहता अगदी बाळबोध आरोप लावत आहेत. माजी कायदा मंत्री, वकील, माहीतीचा अधिकार चळवळिचा पुढारी, आयपीएस अधिकारी असताना हे म्हणतात कायद्याचे ज्ञान नसणार्यांकडून अजुन काय अपेक्षित असणार.

"संसदीय लोकशाही मोडून काढणे हा त्यांचा उघड अजेंडा आहे". हा आरोप एका विश्लेषकाला शोभत नाही. आसबे या लोकाना उच्चभ्रू म्हणतात, त्यांचा उच्च भ्रू असण्याचा निकष कोणता हे काही समजत नाही.

आसबे साहेब आमच दुर्दैव हे की आम्ही तुमच्या सारख्या एक्सपर्ट ना रोज एकतो.

ता. क. -

जन लोकपाल बिला मधील त्रुटिंविषयी इन्टरनेट वर बरयाच ब्लोग्गर्सनि मुद्देसुद लिहिले आहे, (उदा. - http://realitycheck.wordpress.com/2011/04/06/jan-lok-pal-caveat-emptor/ ), पण राजकीय विश्लेषक म्हणून वावरनारया प्रताप आसबे यांचा हा लेख अगदीच बाळबोध आणि सरकारधार्जिना वाटतो.

My counter-thoughts on Rushabh's thoughts

After reading Rushabh's post My thoughts on the Anna Hazare crusade, I thought to comment on it. While writing I realized that comment became too lengthy so I am posting it here. (Please read Rushabh's post first, else you will not understand anything.)

I have taken same points of Rushabh and expressed my counter-thoughts on it.

1. My Question to Arvind Kejriwal. Who is "civil society" and who appointed you to represent it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arvind_Kejriwal
(Read the first paragraph, rest of the article you can read later.)

Did anyone appointed him for activating India's Right to Information movement? I am sure there would have been lot of activists with him, but he got Magsaysay award for leading it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_society
(Read first summary, Definition and Robert D. Putnam's argument in section Democracy)

Summary states what ideally civil society is.
As long as I understand, civil society in this context is anything/ anyone other than the government/ opponent party (parliamentary body) who works towards well being of society.

I think, there should not be an issue of election then. Also Rushabh himself have mentioned how the elections are in his second point.
The above mentioned work itself shows that Mr. Kejriwal is one of the top candidate for this.

2. Lok Pal will not change the abuse of power by politicians.

Rushabh have mentioned about RTI and how it helped in exposing scams in this point.
We all have already read the contribution of Mr. Kejriwal for this.

Lok Pal will not change the abuse of power by politicians.

It won't remove, but can certainly reduce it. It will keep tap on, thus will be back of mind of politicians. They surely will think 10 times before surrendering to curruption.

The problem is that the law enforcement and investigative bodies are not independent enough and the Lok Pal cannot solve this.

Lokpal in some sense if not totally, propose to solve this issue only. If you read it carefully it says
Lokpal institution will cover all government ministers, officers at centre including Prime Minister (and if not mistaken justice of supreme court too). The whole idea is to make this independant of law enforcement and investigative bodies so there will be little interference.

Considering for a while that Lok Pal will not change the abuse of power by politicians, still two common questions comes to mind.

1. Why these politician are so much fearing to this, and why don't they just put it up as it is proposed by Anna and fellows.
2. Why it took 42 years for this.
   

3. The elite and middle class are participants and beneficiaries of a corrupt system.

Agree on this point.
But again currupt system is like a water which flows and filters from top to bottom. We all know what is at the top here, the government system.

It's like a chain, Lok Pal keeps tap on government - government keeps tap on corporate and other related bodies - in turn keeps tap on society and individual.


4. The "rang-de-basanti" crowd if fickle and represents only 0.1%.

Celebrity, well personally I don't care.

Media done the same thing as, many of our facebookians and twitterites did by status updates. If not totally but to some extent, it was effect of media visuals of Tehran and Libiya protest. Circus is the usual thing which they do but we can ignore it for positive things.

5. The positivity is a good sign.

No differences, except I also see Lok Pal bill as positive. The implementation will be of prime importance.