Crimes ‘unfit’ for TV and "unmentionable" for Chief Justices

Crimes ‘unfit’ for TV - Analysis - DNA:

There is something fundamentally wrong with our systems - social,economic, ethical, political, legislative, judicial and information-communication. We never take a problem by its horns and try to bury unpleasant events under the carpet. This is the sign of a decadent society, which has given in to the " Chalata Hai " culture - permissiveness at its worst. We have given up the hope of bettering ourselves and our society. Our youth is forced to suffer for the "politically correct" stand of our political parties whose Summum bonum is to win elections to capture power. For our political parties power is not a means to an end, but an end in itself.

Even our judiciary is failing us. We go to the courts to get justice, but when women lawyers are denied hearing and justice in the courts and the CJ refuges to register the case as the act is " unmentionable". What a shame?Our judiciary has become the den of various crimes as judges are not only short on ethical behaviour but have begun to appear more and more politically correct.
About our media less said the better. However, Sunetra Choudhary of NDTV24*7 has publicly admitted the shortcomings of TV News Channels in suppressing some news and not reporting them correctly, even when they report.

One of the accused lawyers involved in the incident hails from Bihar. This has punctured the myth of changing Bihar.

Politics: Power shifts | The Economist

Politics: Power shifts | The Economist:

The Indian democracy has been transformed into an oligarchy and a kleptocracy by the UPA2. Other parties also benefit from this kleptocracy, but the main culprit is the Ruling Combine.

Govt to seek review of SC order on judges as CICs -

Govt to seek review of SC order on judges as CICs - Hindustan Times:

One of the casualty of bad governance in India has been the institutional balance created by the Constitution. Appointment, including the appointment of judges, is legitimately function of the Executive, but the Govt's acts of omissions & commissions in appointments raised doubts about the intentions and ability of the Govt to put right people in right places. The ideas of committed bureaucracy and committed judiciary, with a captive media, lowered people's faith in Institutions. In this backdrop the Supreme Court stepped in and claimed for itself a larger role in the appointment of judges. People's distrust of the Govt made the SC's task easy. After tasting blood the Supreme Court wants for itself and the judicial fraternity more & more power. This can't and shouldn't be allowed. The Court should step in only when the Govt fails to put right people in right place.

The Irrelevance of Modern Political Science

The Irrelevance of Modern Political Science — The American Magazine:

If in the land of its birth Political Science( not politics/Rajneeti/ NeetiShastra/ RajDharm) is beginning to be thought as irrelevant, what about countries like India where no first hand or first rate work has been done in the discipline?

The Weaker Sex - Sandra Tsing Loh

The Weaker Sex - Sandra Tsing Loh - The Atlantic:

Are we going to experience role reversal soon? The workplace is likely to be more feminine and housework more masculine.

The Desirability of Bunds

Bunds, Gheraos, HallaBols are Indian contrivance for disrupting the rule of law and making  democratic life miserable.Even though Bunds have not found entry in Wikipedia & dictionaries, they are very popular with Indian political parties. Why are Bunds called? What is the teleological explanation of a Bund? Through Bunds what do we try to achieve?Are Bunds a means to an end or an end in themselves? Are Bunds rational? These questions beg an urgent answer.

If I recollect correctly Bunds were first introduced in Indian polity by the Socialists and Communists. The then Kerala Governor Mr Vishwanathan rightly pointed out that to call Bund to protest against shortage of rice was meaningless as " Bunds do not produce rice." Let us see why are Bunds called? There may three main reasons : 1) to protest against a particular policy or policies of the govt.; 2) to protest against an event; and 3) to show the support of the people for the cause. For these purposes the political system provides for mechanism of political communication and feedback. Why don't the Bund-callers make use of these mechanisms? The Bund-callers wrongly believe that causing hardship to the common people will frighten the side against which the Bund has been called. In public affairs, particularly in a democracy, the argument of reason is more effective than a show of strength and argument of violence. Bunds achieve nothing, cause immense hardship to the people, particularly the patients, children, travelers and daily bread earners. For organizers of Bund calling for a Bund is not a means to an end, but an end in itself. It tramples the Fundamental Rights of others, it endangers our lives, it fosters indiscipline and an atmosphere of anarchy. The time has come when we should firmly say a big NO to Bunds. 

'Foolish and Backward Nation': A Self-Effacing Chinese Satire of America - The Atlantic

'Foolish and Backward Nation': A Self-Effacing Chinese Satire of America - The Atlantic

This satire, ostensibly of the USA, but actually of China, proves that the Chinese Govt is more tolerant of criticism than our own UPA. Had this been about India, the UPA would most certainly have banned it.