Premium
This is an archive article published on December 10, 2009
Premium

Opinion View from the RIGHT

The editorial titled “Time to move on,nurture unity,” in the latest issue of RSS mouthpiece Organiser says...

indianexpress

Suman K Jha

December 10, 2009 02:08 AM IST First published on: Dec 10, 2009 at 02:08 AM IST

Beyond Babri

The editorial titled “Time to move on,nurture unity,” in the latest issue of RSS mouthpiece Organiser says: “What is the significance of the dome structure to the Muslims in India or elsewhere? Ayodhya is not a holy city for them,nor is the birthplace of Ram sacred for most of them. It is for us,the Hindus. And it is natural that we want a grand temple on the site. We have not been able to do it all these centuries because the rulers were all inimical to Hindu sentiments. But in independent secular India,where the governments are committed to respecting all religions and their sentiments equally,the task of rebuilding a temple in Ayodhya should have been done by the government. But here is the queer situation where the political parties support the case of one against another. Or at best send it into a legal tangle. How can the demolition of the structure in Ayodhya be considered an act of violation against the Muslim community? It was not even a mosque where worship was going on”.

Advertisement

The RSS mouthpiece further writes: “There are several serious issues facing the Muslim community that are crying for attention from its leaders. The Sachar Committee (we are not in agreement with its inference) has pointed out the problems faced by this community. While most of these are problems they share with Hindus,their resolution is in the hands of the religious and political leaders of the community. And they are the real culprits,filling minds with fake fear so that the people will not slip out of their stranglehold. These leaders decide for the entire population whether they should sing ‘Vande Mataram’,do yoga,get modern education,open doors to social reforms,etc. They do not let their people decide for themselves what is good for them. From their pulpits they never give a call to the faithful to love the motherland,join the forces to defend the country,send their girls to schools or stop living in ghettos. It is high time the community threw a way the current leadership and emerged on its own. Decide their path themselves and the road ahead”.

Junk imports

In an opinion piece titled “Globalisation of bad practices”,Bharat Jhunjhunwala writes: “The country that produces goods cheapest wins in the global markets. But the market looks only at short term costs incurred by the businesses. It ignores the long term consequences of cheap production. For example,the market goes crazy if a company sells its goods cheap. The market is not concerned whether the company may fold up in a few months from the losses so incurred. The same logic applies to countries. Junk food costs less. Therefore,that country will win in the global market that promotes junk food”.

The writer adds: “The logical result of globalisation is that every country will have to adopt the policies of the country that produces cheapest goods irrespective of whether they are good or bad. If America produced cheap cars by encouraging the consumption of junk foods,then other countries will have to adopt the same. Their cost of production will be high and they will be priced out of the global markets if they do not adopt junk foods. Consequently,they will have to face the same consequences of bad health that America is facing today. Globalisation entails import of bad practices along with cheap goods. We are today importing many such bad practices. These include movies that encourage violence,divorce and drinking; synthetic cloth; junk foods and many other items”.

Advertisement

He further adds: “We have to attain two mutually contradictory objectives. We have to make cheap goods to conquer the global markets. We will have to accept bad practices such as those of junk foods,carbon emissions and low wages because other countries are following these practices. The second objective is to keep alive our civilisation. We will have to reject the same bad practices here. The solution to this dilemma is to impose an additional ‘environment tax’ on all imports”.

Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments