Letters to the EDITOR

Only rarely do readers, in their responses to articles and reports carried in this newspaper, come up with a detailed rejoinder.

• Only rarely do readers, in their responses to articles and reports carried in this newspaper, come up with a detailed rejoinder. But every good newspaper — and especially the Express — thrives on deepening the debate on issues of contemporary relevance. Ahmedabad-based K. Raghu attempted to do this in his letter ‘Voters’ default’, and gets this week’s award.

• This refers to ‘The Venugopal law mirrors our polity’ by P.V. Indiresan. He says that our democratic process is deeply flawed. The prevailing one vote per voter rule is an unfair restriction of voters’ freedom and even politicians with only 7 per cent votes get elected. Many readers would believe that this is too pessimistic. The democratic process transfers power without bloodshed. Our democracy is only 60 years old, and a two-party system may not evolve in India ever. Coalition politics is inevitable in a pluralistic society like ours. Which sometimes means that even a man with only 7 per cent of the votes wins. The fact is that the winner has the ‘minimum’ number of eligible voters against him. Further, our voter turnout has often been less than 50 per cent, meaning that half of the ‘eligible’ voters do not vote. Are the non-voters rejecting all the candidates? Whatever the interpretation, the rules of the game are set and there is no other viable alternative that suits India better.

Bengal blunder

• This refers to your editorial, ‘Enlightened Buddha’ about the West Bengal CM’s admission of having made a ‘mistake’ on Nandigram. Committing a mistake that is not a wilful one is regrettable, but a blunder is a wilful act that has nothing to do with regret or an admission to be rectified. It was described as an ‘administrative’ and ‘political’ failure. Let it be clearly known that those two failures constitute a totality and show the widespread and adverse impact of such failures. To err may be human, but to continue erring is something of a joke. Therefore, it may not be right to allow Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee to get away with his apology.

— Mohite Kr Dasgupta

Gurgaon

Caste bane

• The concerns that Pratap Bhanu Mehta has raised in ‘The Bans of Caste’are of immense national importance. His observations that caste has become inescapable owing to the shrewdness of politicians who use it for political gains are correct. But it would be sheer folly to assume that our politicians do not know of ways to eradicate the caste system, or at least make it ineffective. The question is: who would sacrifice the mirage of political advantage in favour of morality? Our politicians are not bankrupt of ideas, but of ideals.

— Satwant Singh Kalkat

Ludhiana

Politicos don’t retire

• Health Minister Anbumani Ramadoss has settled his score with AIIMS Director Dr P. Venugopal by ensuring that the UPA passes a bill to retire AIIMS directors at 65. There is a retirement age for most public/private concerns’ employees. Even a healthy person retires at the age of 58/60/65. However, there is no retirement age for politicians. One can be elected an MLA, MP and become PM or president, even if one cannot stand or walk. Do they also not need to enjoy a retired life? Why do they insist on serving the public at such an old age, ignoring their own health? It is time then for Venugopal to enter politics and stand against Ramadoss in the next election!

— Madan Mohan

Pune