Re: [IAC#RG] OUR INDIA NEEDS TO BE ETERNALLY SECULAR

Dear Radha Krishnanji,
I also feel that a two stage election system might work better. We
could start a process to change the system of elections, but it would
be a lengthy process- it could take decades. Our system has been with
us for seventy years.
I am not aware of any large democracy that has a two stage system for
choosing members for the Parliament. The system that we have , in
spite of its limitations, is the best that we have. While this system
is in force, the laws passed by the elected government must be
respected. Any opposition to the laws passed, maybe through
agitation, should not cause any disruption and inconvenience to the
public.

In the present circumstances, the agitation against the CAA, has
caused not only inconvenience and disruption to public life, but also
horrendous loss of life and property. This unlawful and violent
opposition against a law which Malhotraji ( his e mail of 10 Mar) has
rightly brought out, is constitutionally valid. All this has been a
result of ignorance of what exactly the law contains, and an
opportunistic opposition exploiting the ignorance of the general
public. Nobody seems to have bothered to explain to the agitators what
the provisions of the law are. It was in their interest to keep them
ignorant. The intention was only to cause disruption, orchestrated to
perfection, so that the peak would be reached when President Trump
reached Delhi. Why else were women (some carrying infants!) in the
forefront amongst the agitators ? Why were the men hiding behind?
Because this is a tactic that has worked well in the past- don't we
remember stone throwing in Srinagar?

A few irresponsible and at times inflammatory speeches (by leaders on
both sides) do not in any way justify the riots and consequent loss of
life and property. No doubt those who gave the speeches need to be
dealt with separately, and law must take its course. I sincerely hope
that this will be done without any delay. But there is an inescapable
need for us to respect the law- else our country will descend into
chaos. We must make every effort to prevent that.
Jai Hind.
Anand Gangoli



On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 12:51 PM Radha Krishnan RN <rnrkrish@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Dear Anand Ji,
>
> My point is that the present system of electing a Government in India is based on the UK model. It is suited to small countries of reasonably homogeneous mass, where, by and large the ruling party gets quite a sizable majority support. The mass in support can counteract the minority dissent to an effective extent in the social platform. Ruling party may not be put to the dilemma of 'damned if I do damned if I do not'.
>
> Now that we are at it, let me repeat what I have been saying to my friends said sometime earlier. There has to be a process that brings about majority mass support to the ruling party. I had suggested two stage election, first round for elimination and the second round for choosing among the top two contenders. This is my opinion. There may more effective alternatives.
>
> However, the issue is of very serious nature and involves very rational approach. If someone can open a Whats App group or Email group exclusive on an issue, perhaps the dialogue may become meaningful and fruitful as well.
>
> I am signing off as I believe I have said enough.
>
> Regards RN RADHAKRISHNAN
>
> On Tue, 10 Mar 2020 at 16:46, Anand Gangoli <anandgangoli22@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I am entirely in agreement with you. To put it simply, I am also of
>> the view that the CAA is good, but those opposing the CAA are doing
>> so only to instigate the public against the ruling government. Those
>> opposing the CAA have caused immense damage to life and property, and,
>> as important , to our national image. I have not heard any of them
>> explaining what exactly is wrong with the CAA, other than vague and
>> unsubstantiated allegations that CAA is communal and
>> unconstitutional. I am very clear that those responsible must be held
>> accountable for their actions.
>>
>> You have made an interesting point ( if I understand you correctly);
>> whether or not an elected government has the moral authority to make
>> laws if it does not have a majority vote share . On this I would like
>> to state that no government in India since our Independence has ever
>> had a vote share of more than 50%. Even Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru's
>> Congress got a vote share of just 45% in 1952 general elections- when
>> there was really no opposition party to talk about! NDA in 2019 won a
>> vote share of 44.9%. Surely we can not question their the moral
>> authority to make laws.
>>
>> Of course that does not mean that the opposition should let bad laws
>> be passed unopposed. Opposing a bad law is a right, and a duty of the
>> opposition. But opposition to a bad law should be peaceful, and as
>> important, the opposition should clearly spell out what specifically
>> is wrong with the law. On both these counts the opposition appears to
>> be at fault.
>> Regards
>> Anand Gangoli
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 2:19 PM Anand Gangoli <anandgangoli22@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >