Gautam Kalghatgi

I find the manifesto a mixture of sound practical ideas and utopian ideals which will, in my opinion, be unachievable. As ever, questions of who wil enforce such ideals and how, cannot be avoided. If history tells us anything, it is that almost all experiments at social engineering aimed at changing human behaviour in directions away from what ordinary people aspir to, fail. I am going to argue these points from a stance that used to be traditionally taken by the left - the kind of arguments that one can find on spiked-online.co.uk. For instance, Alexander Cockburn, an old-style leftist journalist/writer has ascribed the current preoccupations with climate catastrophism (also described as "new miserabilism" on spiked-online) to the decline of the left, and the decline of the left's optimistic vision of altering the economic nature of things through a political programme. The left has bought into environmental catastrophism because it thinks that if it can persuade the world that there is indeed a catastrophe, then somehow the emergency response will lead to positive developments in terms of social and environmental justice [liberal fascism]. Also added to this is the curious technophobia that informs some sections of society. My general stance is based on optimism. There are many problems in the world and in India - these will change as the world evolves. However, I believe that human spirit, ingenuity and technology will find solutions to these problems. Thus as I keep saying, more people live better lives in the world today than ever before ... India can feed itself because of the Green Revolution -a largely technological fix to the problems of agriculture ...Of course, it is necessary to be alert to the excesses of all these endeavours and ensure that society is free enough so that people can argue/fight against these excesses. The State or Society must be strong enough to enforce the rule of law to ensure social justice and guarantee liberty but society must also be based on a general assumption of the "goodness" of the people. I also believe that globalization is unstoppable and overall it will benefit all people. Of course, the rich will always benefit more - that has always been the case. A worthy fight is the fight to make sure that the poor people get their fair share of the wealth. A fight against globalization is ultimately doomed to fail and along the way, will cause more hardship to the poor - the rich will always do well.  read more »

Anil Sadgopal

1. This pro-people and boldly drafted manifesto deserves wide-rangin support in Karnataka and needs to be debated all over the country in preparation of the next General Elections.

2. Agenda Item No. 1: Putting a stop to mining (of not just iron, but all other ores as well) for exports will necessitate a complete review of the huge mining contracts signed with multi-national corporations during the recent decades under terms and conditions that amount to a total sell-out of India's rich natural resources to foreign capital.

3. Agenda Item No. 2: The long-pending demand for Common School System will be seen by the masses as a major political agenda if it shall,  read more »

Dr. Jyotsna Jha

1. Reservations for dalits, adivasis and other backward castes in educational institutions has been an important policy to implement the affirmative action that our Constitution guarantees. Despite limitations and problems, the policy has succeeded in enhancing the educational status of these social groups, and their representation in public sector jobs, which in turn has meant both social and economic mobility for them. Considering that these groups are still far from being close to other groups either in education or in employment status, it is important that the policy continues. Also, in view of the relatively lower status of Muslims as compared to other religious or social groups, it is desirable to extend this action to them.  read more »

ನಾನು ಈಗಾಗಲೇ ಹೇಳಿರುವಂತೆ, ಪತ್ರಿಕೆಗಳು ತಮ್ಮ ಭಾಷಣವನ್ನು ಸಾಕಷ್ಟು ತಪ್ಪಾಗಿ ಧ್ವನಿಸಿವೆ. ಪ್ರಜಾವಾಣಿ ಪರವಾಗಿಲ್ಲ ಎನ್ನುವ ರೀತಿ ಪ್ರಕಟಿಸಿದ್ದರೆ, ವಿಜಯಕಾರ್ನಾಟಕದ ಅಪಾಯಕಾರೀ ಧೋರಣೆ ಮೇಲ್ನೋಟಕ್ಕೇ ಗೊತ್ತಾಗುತ್ತದೆ. ನಿಮ್ಮ ಭಾಷಣವನ್ನು ಕೇಳಿ ನನಗೆ ಅದೆಷ್ಟೋ ನೆಮ್ಮದಿಯಾದರೂ, ನನ್ನೀ ಬರಹ ನನ್ನ ಭಿನ್ನಾಭಿಪ್ರಾಯ ಮತ್ತು ವಿಷಾದಗಳನ್ನೇ ಹೆಚ್ಚು ಅರುಹುತ್ತಿವೆ.  read more »

ಈ ಲೇಖನದಲ್ಲಿ ಫಣಿರಾಜ್ ಅವರು ದಕ್ಷಿಣ ಏಷ್ಯಾದ ಸಂಬಂಧಗಳನ್ನು ಕೇಂದ್ರವಾಗಿಟ್ಟು ಅನಂತಮೂರ್ತಿಯವರು ಬರೆದ ಲೇಖನಗಳಿಗೆ ಪ್ರತಿಕ್ರಿಯಿಸಿದ್ದಾರೆ

ಕಳೆದ ನಾಲ್ಕು ವಾರಗಳ `ಋಜುವಾತು' ಅಂಕಣದಲ್ಲಿ ಅನಂತಮೂರ್ತಿ ಯವರು ಕಥನಾಶೈಲಿಯಲ್ಲಿ ತಮ್ಮ ವಿಚಾರಗಳನ್ನು ನಿರೂಪಿಸುತ್ತಿದ್ದಾರೆ. ಕಥನಾಶೈಲಿಯ ನಿರೂಪಣೆ ಆಪ್ತವಾಗಿರುತ್ತದೆ, ಕತೆಗಾಗಿಯೇ ಓದುವ ಕುತೂಹಲವನ್ನು ಓದುವವರಲ್ಲಿ (ಕೇಳುವವರಲ್ಲಿ) ಮೂಡಿಸುತ್ತದೆ. ಅನಂತಮೂರ್ತಿಯವರ ಬರಹದಲ್ಲಿ ಈ ಗುಣಗಳಂತೂ ಇದ್ದೇ ಇವೆ- ಅನಂತಮೂರ್ತಿ ನಮ್ಮ ಅಗ್ರಪಂಕ್ತಿಯ ಕತೆಗಾರರಾಗಿರುವುದರಿಂದ ಇದು ವಿಶೇಷವಲ್ಲ. ಆದರೆ ವೈಚಾರಿಕ ನಿಲುವುಗಳನ್ನು ಕಥನಾಶೈಲಿಯಲ್ಲಿ ನಿರೂಪಿಸುವಾಗ, ಅದರಲ್ಲೂ ಸ್ವಾನುಭವದ ಕಥನವಾಗಿ ನಿರೂಪಿಸುವಾಗ, ಕೆಲವು ಅಪಾಯಗಳು ಇರುತ್ತವೆ.

ಸಿದ್ಧವಾದ ಸೈದ್ಧಾಂತಿಕ ದೃಷ್ಟಿಕೋನದಿಂದ ವಿಚಾರಗಳನ್ನು ಪ್ರಕಟಿಸುವಾಗ ಕಣ್ಣೋಟ ಕಿರಿದಾಗುವ ಹಾಗೆಯೇ ಉದ್ದೇಶಿತ ನಿಲುವನ್ನು ಕಥಾಮಾರ್ಗದಲ್ಲಿ ನಿರೂಪಿಸುವಾಗಲೂ ಆಗುತ್ತದೆ. ಇಲ್ಲಿ, ನಿರೂಪಕನ ವಿಚಾರಗಳ ಸಾಚಾತನವನ್ನು ಸಾಬೀತು ಮಾಡುವುದು ಮಾತ್ರ ಕತೆಯ ಕೆಲಸ. ಇದು ಒಂದು ಬಗೆಯ ಅಪಾಯ. ಮತ್ತೊಂದು ಇದಕ್ಕೆ ತದ್ವಿರುದ್ಧವಾದದ್ದು: ನಿರೂಪಕ, ತನ್ನ ಕತೆಯ ಮೋಹದಲ್ಲಿ ತಾನೇ ಸಿಲುಕಿ, ಕತೆ ಹೇಳುವುದೇ ಒಂದು ವಿಲಾಸವಾಗಿ, ಕೊನೆಗೆ ತಾನು ಹೇಳಹೊರಟ ವಿಚಾರದ ಸ್ಪಷ್ಟತೆಯನ್ನೇ ಕಳೆದುಕೊಂಡುಬಿಡುವುದು. ಹಾಗಿದ್ದರೆ ಯಾವ ಸುಖಕ್ಕಾಗಿ ಕಥನಾ ಮಾರ್ಗ ಹಿಡಿಯಬೇಕು?  read more »