It is disconcerting to see people around me blindly echoing the chants of "Are you against corruption? I am!", it is disconcerting to see everyone getting swept up in the anti-corruption tide and not using their mental faculties to sit for a moment and think about the implications of the JLB.
I have had a few debates with supporters of Anna Hazare and JLB and their best argument for supporting it is - Look at the work that Anna Hazare has done so far; we need to trust someone, why not him?
Let me tell you something about human integrity : it has a price.
There is no human being on earth who cannot be bought. No one. Give someone a good enough incentive, and they will jump aboard the ship of evilness in under a second. That is called the survival instinct. You have evolved into the upright, hairless, brainy human being that you are because you only did what is advantageous, not always what is right.
Tell me this - it is the final exam, and your friend needs a certain number of marks or else he will fail the course. He asks you to show him your answers. He is your good friend, he has promised to work hard and pass the other subjects on his own and you know that he will be very sour indeed, if you didn't show him your answers. Will you show him your answers?
If you answered yes, then I just quoted you your price.
Many of us don't think "helping" friends pass courses like this is a big deal. But don't tell me that what you are doing is fair to the other about-to-fail students who were unfortunate enough to not be your friends.
In a similar vein, tell me if you have ever paid a bribe to a traffic police officer.
Isn't that corruption?
Aren't you corrupt yourself?
Look, let us be clear about one thing - I am as against corruption as you are. I don't want my tax money decorating a fat politician's abodes. But at the same time, I do not think the JLB is an effective solution.
JLB intends to set up a committee that will investigate cases of corruption in the government, and the members of the committee will be chosen (freely and fairly and transparently) by the people (or some such thing).
You know something very interesting about the Indian government? It is also elected by the people, via a process that is free, fair and transparent. And look at the kinds of people we have elected! Goodness, do you really trust your judgement that much to elect others to look into your mistakes? I honestly don't. What you elected once, became corrupt. There is no guarantee that what you elect the second time round, will not become corrupt.
But perhaps the trouble is that we trust our judgement far too much. We just don't trust the judgement of the other people who voted in the corrupt politicians, who were swayed by caste and religion politics. Why, we didn't even vote because none of the candidates were worth it! But this time we will vote, we will vote in strong, pious men and women into the committee who will look into the mistakes of those other people.
Please, please, as free-thinking, rational human beings, tell me, is this what I am saying not a logically drawn conclusion? Or am I wrong? Will the committee really be corruption free themselves? Will they not abuse the power they hold over the entire government? Will it somehow, magically, eradicate corruption from India? Is it not somehow possible that we, as citizens really vote in useful politicians, instead of getting swayed by their gifts and promises?
And most importantly, is Anna Hazare really the next Gandhi? Gandhi led hunger strikes against the British government, Hazare is leading strikes against our own government, that we have voted for.
21 Say What They Think:
Right on. This is exactly what I think about the current protests.
JLB intends to set up a committee that will investigate cases of corruption in the government, and the members of the committee will be chosen (freely and fairly and transparently) by the people (or some such thing).
I requests you to read the Jan Lokpal bill draft before drawing any conclusions on weak (and rather incomplete) argument.
No one believes that JLB is a silver bullet BUT it's definitely a step towards achieving a corrupt free state.
Yes, exactly.
I'm so so so glad that most of my peer group - the ones whose opinions I value at any rate - aren't falling for this bullshit.
Power is a politician's drug.
He/she has power. Uses it. Abuses it. Wants more. Gets more. Can't get enough of it.
Very few can handle the responsibility that comes with power. And our politicians already have a bad history.
@mcenley: How is the argument weak or incomplete? And how is JLB a step towards achieving a "corrupt free state"? Granted, it just Might help in the short term. But in the long run, it can't possibly be a good option.
Ankur & Wild Iris - You should blog about this too. Let us spread awareness!
Mcenley - It is a step in the right direction only in an ideal world (ie, a world where the members themselves wouldn't be corruptible and would uphold our trust in them). But in an ideal world, we would never even need JLB because our elected politicians would never be corrupt.
Longevita - Are you saying this in support of the argument that the members of the committee will also not be able to handle the responsibility?
+1
Setting up a committee is just a 'find-a-solution-quick' way of handling an issue that is prevalent in every field.These work only for a very very short term.
The roots of this problem go deeper.
All those people who are currently spending their otherwise precious time demonstrating would greatly help the cause of anti-corruption if they would try and incorporate the change in their own lives. They'll fight for the bill, for Anna and then go back to their daily lives trying to find newer, more innovative ways of getting around the system.
So, basically yes, the members won't be able to handle the responsibility. They are all human.mostly bad. xD
@Molar,
I have highlighted a part of the blog post on reasons "why" the argument is weak. One has to read the draft first to make an argument. The highlighted part clearly suggests that one has an overview. Moreover, you accept that it will help in the short-term. Fine, as I mentioned earlier it's not the *only* bullet but one amongst many.
Espera,
I'm not sure you understand the naivette of what you say. If the argument is the "ideal" world, any idea on why you should trust the Rajya Sabha and the Judiciary? In fact, why should you trust democracy to work in the "ideal" world. I once again request you to read and *understand* the bill (all three drafts).
Longevita - Yeah, it seems like a replay of the Lok Sabha elections. :/
Mcenley - Okay, forget about the ideal world.
I have read and understood the bill. There are a lot of very good and important issues that it covers (mainly, getting CBI Anti-Corruption wing out of the government influence), but the thing I want to ask is, who is the committee going to be accountable to? I read that they will be accountable to the general public. But isn't that what they say for the Lok Sabha members too? In what way is it going to be different?
And, how do you know that without a strong system to check corruption in the Lokpal in place, the members of the Lokpal committee will not misuse the power in their hands.
That is a question that I have asked many people and all I have received in response is that the members will have no reason to become corrupt and that we must trust them.
Agreed.
Also, for all the personal shortcomings Mahatma Gandhi had, he was always about the movement and never about himself being in the limelight. It's the opposite with Anna Hazare. Statements like "Anna is India and India is Anna" and the "Main Anna Hoon" t-shirts and Gandhi caps give the impression that people are protesting because Anna hazare, the brand, is popular right now.
http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/article2379704.ece
Bum and Espera,
All your questions are answered here
http://clearvisor.wordpress.com/2011/08/23/why-i%E2%80%99d-rather-be-anna-than-arundhati/
Mcenley - Both the article you gave me the link to as well as the article in The Hindu that it is a response to, are very strongly worded. They only provide arguments that suit their PoV and not that of the other. I don't believe that either PoV is entirely wrong or entirely right.
Unless I read an article that has balanced arguments of both PoV's, I will not take any article seriously.
Espera,
"Be the change you want to see."
Your blog post itself contains a biased POV.
Right you are.
But for me to change my biased PoV, I would need an unbiased PoV, that's all I am saying. :)
I believe those two articles sum up everything one needs to look into. You need to form your own opinion depending on the matter given to you rather than waiting for a "great" opinion.
In anyways, the title of the blog is highly derogatory and insinuating.
Both articles are written such that they ignore the valid arguments of the other. Where they can pick at something, they pick at it. Where there really Is a valid point, they ignore it.
So for now, my opinion is still that the Lokpal Bill intends to create a Big Brother type body that will have the power to question everything, but will not have too many checks that might control misuse of the power.
The title of my blog post is supposed to imply that I shouldn't have to support JLB in order to show that I am a nationalist, not a fan of corruption etc. It's bullshit because half of the people out there proclaiming their anti-corruption-ness have themselves paid/accepted/been party to paying bribes. What kind of hypocrisy is this?
"So for now, my opinion is still that the Lokpal Bill intends to create a Big Brother type body that will have the power to question everything, but will not have too many checks that might control misuse of the power."
You really haven't read the bill, have you? The above statement looks out of the books of the media. I once again suggest going through various drafts to understand the intricacies. Also, let me add that Lokpal's are not the only one with the so called "supreme power". I hope you are aware of the EC, CVC, CAG etc. If not, dig deeper into their functions and the way they operate. Lokpal is just a dedicated and more importantly "independent" anti-corruption unit. We lack one as of now. The Team Anna draft in entirety may not be the solution but so isn't "no JanLokpal Bill".
"I shouldn't have to support JLB in order to show that I am a nationalist"
I really hope you meant patriotic instead of "nationalism". Both imply very different meanings.
"It's bullshit because half of the people out there proclaiming their anti-corruption-ness have themselves paid/accepted/been party to paying bribes. What kind of hypocrisy is this?"
Two things :
* You can get your message across without acerbity
* From what I understand, you are confused between two things. Cause and people supporting the cause.
Lastly,
You don't need to support the JLB to show you are "patriotic" and you have every right not to do so. However, just to put my point across for argument can I call this blog post as bullshit? :-)
Think about it !
I am aware of the EC and the CAG etc. And I do realise that the CBI Anti-Corruption Wing needs to be independent from the government. As a short term solution, I admit that the JLB would work. But I do not see it working in the long term.
And yes, I meant patriotic. Sorry about that.
"From what I understand, you are confused between two things. Cause and people supporting the cause."
I am equally annoyed at the protestors' antics and slogans and the sentiments that equate support for JLB to patriotism (you may say that they are independent of each other, but many, many people don't think so) and at this quick fix solution that's being pushed for implementation.
If you think this blog post is bullshit, you are entitled to your own opinions and I wouldn't say anything to that.
"And I do realise that the CBI Anti-Corruption Wing needs to be independent from the government. As a short term solution, I admit that the JLB would work."
The CAG, CVC, EC aren't a short-term solution. There's a reason for it being "independent" even in the long run. I would like to know why you think it may not work in the long-term. How would the Lokpal's misuse the power? By filing more cases in court!
"I am equally annoyed at the protestors' antics and slogans and the sentiments that equate support for JLB to patriotism"
Since your powers of discernment exceed than the jingoists you should ignore it. Also, to add you shouldn't pass the issues you have with the supporters to the bill.
"If you think this blog post is bullshit, you are entitled to your own opinions and I wouldn't say anything to that."
Ah! I think I didn't make it explicit. All I meant was that one can put his/her opinions with valid bases of course by avoiding acerbity.
Post a Comment