maddhan1979
January 15th, 2014, 10:37 AM
India is changing, and changing for good. This is happening due to increase in education and awareness. We must agree that Indians have a habit of "reacting and hitting back at any new thought and idea very fast". Is it a reactionary society? or the society first hears and then expresses its views. I think, it is more of a reactionary society, where each person is trying to attack other person at a personal level or at an organizational level.
This can be seen from the very foundations of this country for e.g. "the parliament and state political powers". The founding fathers of this nation had a different approach for solving a problem. Had they had a "reactionary approach", this country would have developed long standing conflicts like in several parts of the world. If we look how the parliament is conducted these days, one can see, how different it is from the day when this nation was formed.
This nation was formed when Britishers left India. The concepts of parliament, constitution, conducting and executing the work at national, state and other levels was inherited by British and American systems. If we study how our constitution was made, we find that it was heavily derived from major world economies and especially "The British system".
I got this extract from wikipedia:
"Adoptions from other constitutions[edit]
The architects of Indian constitution were most heavily influenced by the British model of parliamentary democracy. In addition, a number of principles were adopted from the Constitution of the United States of America, including the separation of powers among the major branches of government and the establishment of a supreme court. The principles adopted from Canada were Unitary government with strong center and also distribution of powers between central government and state governments along with placing residuary powers with central government. From Ireland, directive principle of state policy was adopted. From Germany, the principle of suspension of fundamental rights during emergency was adopted. From Australia, the idea of having a Concurrent list of shared powers was used as well and some of the terminology was utilized for the preamble.[28]"
Now come the major points:
We have inherited, so many good things from the world but have we learnt to conduct ourselves the way these systems conduct themselves? The very base of conducting a "parliamentary democracy" is debate and listening of views from other participants.
Now let us see, how these parliaments conduct themselves:
Below is a heated moment in "British Parliament":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QnKKPwEX_ac
And this is the conduct of Indian parliament in a heated moment:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fu8uqMEmyRE
And this is the conduct of Chinese parliament:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRDnBhbWi5M
I sometimes wonder, how can all of the political parties thrive on the images of great leaders who were also the founding fathers of this nation, whether that be Mahatma Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel and the list goes on.
Besides that other parties thrive on religious or communal sentiments of uneducated, deprived and abused people, which is very bad, because most of the times these people are emotionally driven by religious, communal and other sentiments. Deprived and abused people do not have any caste, community, race, tribe or creed. They exist everywhere in every place.
Political parties also thrive more at local state levels and often make politics a family owned identity to accumulate wealth from the system, state and people. Many times such political families and parties also take help of religious sentiments to gain power at state and national level.
I wonder, who should really sit in parliament?
Educated people who are not reactionary to ideas and thoughts?
Industrialists, Economists, Thinkers, Environmentalists, Business leaders, who are really making the real progress and changes in economy of the country and life of people.
or
Family driven, Wealth accumulating, Community driven, religious driven, corrupt, criminal political people/political parties who are just hungry for power and money through any means. These are different shades of a vast section of politics that is happening in country today.
This can be seen from the very foundations of this country for e.g. "the parliament and state political powers". The founding fathers of this nation had a different approach for solving a problem. Had they had a "reactionary approach", this country would have developed long standing conflicts like in several parts of the world. If we look how the parliament is conducted these days, one can see, how different it is from the day when this nation was formed.
This nation was formed when Britishers left India. The concepts of parliament, constitution, conducting and executing the work at national, state and other levels was inherited by British and American systems. If we study how our constitution was made, we find that it was heavily derived from major world economies and especially "The British system".
I got this extract from wikipedia:
"Adoptions from other constitutions[edit]
The architects of Indian constitution were most heavily influenced by the British model of parliamentary democracy. In addition, a number of principles were adopted from the Constitution of the United States of America, including the separation of powers among the major branches of government and the establishment of a supreme court. The principles adopted from Canada were Unitary government with strong center and also distribution of powers between central government and state governments along with placing residuary powers with central government. From Ireland, directive principle of state policy was adopted. From Germany, the principle of suspension of fundamental rights during emergency was adopted. From Australia, the idea of having a Concurrent list of shared powers was used as well and some of the terminology was utilized for the preamble.[28]"
Now come the major points:
We have inherited, so many good things from the world but have we learnt to conduct ourselves the way these systems conduct themselves? The very base of conducting a "parliamentary democracy" is debate and listening of views from other participants.
Now let us see, how these parliaments conduct themselves:
Below is a heated moment in "British Parliament":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QnKKPwEX_ac
And this is the conduct of Indian parliament in a heated moment:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fu8uqMEmyRE
And this is the conduct of Chinese parliament:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRDnBhbWi5M
I sometimes wonder, how can all of the political parties thrive on the images of great leaders who were also the founding fathers of this nation, whether that be Mahatma Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel and the list goes on.
Besides that other parties thrive on religious or communal sentiments of uneducated, deprived and abused people, which is very bad, because most of the times these people are emotionally driven by religious, communal and other sentiments. Deprived and abused people do not have any caste, community, race, tribe or creed. They exist everywhere in every place.
Political parties also thrive more at local state levels and often make politics a family owned identity to accumulate wealth from the system, state and people. Many times such political families and parties also take help of religious sentiments to gain power at state and national level.
I wonder, who should really sit in parliament?
Educated people who are not reactionary to ideas and thoughts?
Industrialists, Economists, Thinkers, Environmentalists, Business leaders, who are really making the real progress and changes in economy of the country and life of people.
or
Family driven, Wealth accumulating, Community driven, religious driven, corrupt, criminal political people/political parties who are just hungry for power and money through any means. These are different shades of a vast section of politics that is happening in country today.