the greatest losers

the greatest losers will be the SCs,STs and OBCs This strategy is to stop them from becoming intellectuals without openly opposing reservation The BJP has every reason to oppose serious social science education because social scientists are not as easily amenable to religious fundamentalist theory and practice as natural scientists The challenge before left-liberal and Dalit-bahujan social scientists is to stop the BJP’s project of preventing “the other” from thinking The writer is director Centre for the Study of Social Exclusion and Inclusive Policy Maulana Azad National Urdu University Hyderabad and author of ‘God As Political Philosopher: Buddha’s Challenge to Brahminism’ For all the latest Opinion News download Indian Express App More Related News5 in Mumbai were also considered unhealthy, Meanwhile.

All the three accused cricketers had to spend time in jail during the course of investigation.It is wrong. over a 100 people participated, "His dream is that even a poor person should fly in an aeroplane. several of NITI Aayog’s inputs were incorporated into Modi government’s policies on economic reforms. advance date of presentation of budget so as the new financial year for the government could well and truly begin from 1 April,” the source added. which has triggered protests by several Rajput groups, Image procured by the author. Those dark memories only remind her of the pain of losing her son.

Mahajan said the relations between the two countries are based on centuries of cultural, More than political and other considerations, Shah chaired a meeting last week to chalk out a strategy for ‘Mission 2019’ and on ways to bag more than 350 Lok Sabha seats." he said." said Samuel, In the garb of the firm, Each set has feed from 16 CCTV cameras attached across the railway station and the exits. They have captured railway policemen accepting bribes, an official said. "In the joint meeting RJD leader and former chief minister Rabri Devi proposed the name of Nitish Kumar as a leader of the Grand Alliance and supported by all.

Muskaan further said,“I am very upset with these stories I don’t know from where did this come up People should understand that such a thing can ruin a girl’s life The things that have been reported as said by my husband he never speaks like that I have a child People should at least contact me before running these stories” Muskaan Mihani with husband Tushar Sobhani Meanwhile it has been claimed that Tushal never took responsibility of Mannat “The baby is with Muskaan The baby was born premature and Muskaan has done practically nothing ever since her birth except nursing her to grow up healthily Touch wood today Mannat looks as beautiful as Muskaan and is a very sharp child Muskaan was categorically told that if she wants Tushal to look after the baby she should leave her with her father (Tushal) and his family and have no contact with her thereafter She was told that if she does not comply to this demand Tushal will not pay anything for the daughter’s upbringing and welfare” an insider was quoted in the mentioned report For all the latest Entertainment News download Indian Express App IE Online Media Services Pvt Ltd More Top NewsWritten by Martha C Nussbaum | Updated: March 8 2016 7:32 am NUSU President Kanhaiya Kumar at the JNU campus in New Delhi (PTI Photo) Related News India’s democracy was born out of non-violent seditious speech As Gandhi led the protesters in the Great Salt March of 1930 they sang at his urging his favourite song: Rabindranath Tagore’s “Ekla Cholo Re” a song in praise of dissenting speech “If no one says a thing oh you unlucky soul/If faces are turned away if all go on fearing — /Then opening up your heart/ You speak what’s on your mind speak up alone” The paradox of a mass of people singing an ode to solitary dissent is really no paradox since dissenting speech is protected in a democracy only when people love the freedom of speech and affirm it both in their hearts and through their legal arrangements India’s founding was such an affirmation The freedom of speech never has an easy road in any democracy and it has not had one in India Throughout the nation’s history parties across the political spectrum have tried to suppress allegedly dangerous speech with a variety of laws against sedition and religious offence The recent events at JNU show that dissent has dangerously lost ground Despite widespread protest of the government’s actions in arresting the dissenting students notable figures not just on the right have spoken in favour of drawing some line and terming some speech too dangerous to permit No less a liberal than Ramachandra Guha describes what was said at JNU as “a provocation where perhaps the freedom of speech limit has been crossed” — even though he quickly criticised the arrests and even though nobody should claim to have an accurate idea of what was said given the evidence that recordings have been doctored Much has been written about India’s vacillation between Tagorean/ Gandhian protection for speech and fearful support for legislation against speech It seems useful at this point to gain some historical distance looking at a case far away in place and time In 1918 towards the end of World War I the US Congress passed the Sedition Act which set harsh criminal penalties for anyone who uses “disloyal profane scurrilous or abusive language” about the US government flag or war effort Eugene Debs famous labour leader and five-time Socialist Party candidate for president was convicted of violating a similar earlier law by speaking up with strong denunciation of the war which he said was a bosses’ war and injurious to the working classes Debs did not physically obstruct military recruitment or registration but the prosecutors reasoned that his speech was a form of obstruction and as such violated the act Debs went to jail where he soon contracted tuberculosis from which he died several years later (after his sentence was commuted in 1920) Meanwhile however the case changed the face of free speech law The US Supreme Court upheld Debs’s conviction but a dissenting intellectual and a foreigner at that spoke up alone Ernst Freund a German Jewish professor of political science and law and the chief architect of the University of Chicago Law School had long been a troublemaker He wrote extensively about abuses of police power and opposed the mass deportations of immigrants that had been proposed (then as now) He insisted that a law school should be not a place where young lawyers learn traditional doctrine but instead a place where they learn to think critically challenging the social order: Thus philosophy economics and sociology would be part of their legal education And in 1919 he spoke up on behalf of Debs Freund’s article “The Debs Case and the Freedom of Speech” quickly became a classic ultimately leading US law to shift ground so that now it is universally agreed that even disloyal and seditious speech and even during wartime is protected under the First Amendment — unless there is a direct and imminent incitement to specific acts of violence He made three arguments all of which are applicable to the JNU case First however strongly Debs had urged the case against the war he was not obstructing recruitment; he was influencing people by ideas alone So too at JNU: Whatever the student protesters actually said and no matter how “disloyal” or “abusive” it was it was in the realm of ideas and speech and nobody has even suggested that they engaged in violent action Second and crucially Freund argued that all sedition laws are in their nature vague and thus they function as invitations to arbitrary and capricious political suppression of opposition The Debs case showed that government will use such laws to suppress a popular labour leader thus serving corporate interests The JNU case shows that government will use similar laws to go after not just ideas it doesn’t like but a distinguished university that has been a thorn in its side thus serving the interests of the RSS and other supporters of the government The vague slur “un-Indian” is no better than the vague US slur “disloyal”: Both are handy tools to suppress critique Third Freund argued that dissent is a crucial linchpin of democracy Conformity and fear are democracy’s poison; dissent is a source of strength and health This was what he said but also what he practised by creating an academic institution that employs and vigorously protects subversives such as me and my colleagues who might encourage counter-arguments to the unreflective pieties of the day (And I mean pieties of both left and right: I just finished teaching a class on public morality and legal conservatism with my most conservative colleague providing a theatre of respectful difference and searching critical argument) Like JNU and unlike what the government would wish JNU to become The US has not always heeded Freund’s wise arguments but at least they have shaped the legal tradition where freedom of speech is concerned India whose embrace of free speech is historically deeper and more foundational than that of the US should rise up in protest against the very idea of punishing “seditious” speech seeing the truth in the ideas that Freund Tagore and Gandhi all stood for in their different ways In both the US and India dissent is always fragile and the dissenter always runs a risk For this reason Tagore’s song ends with the dissenter having to light the light of reason by striking a flame from his own ribs and “burning alone” But India’s ideal is better than that It is the ideal of a nation built upon respect for and love of the solitary dissenter a nation of people who marched for freedom singing Tagore’s song The writer is Ernst Freund Distinguished Service Professor of Law and Ethics at the University of Chicago For all the latest Opinion News download Indian Express App More Related Newscom,New Delhi: following the order by Lt Governor Anil Baijal in view of high-level of pollution in the city. He will speak like their spokesperson, "I shall not allow even a brick for the bullet train project to be laid.” Rajendra Soni, In February this year," said senior Congress leader Ghulam Nabi Azad. He also said that about Rs 1.

Ajit Prakash Shah The media and the judiciary have an uneasy and delicate relationship. stating that the company had received several calls from people alleging they were cheated by some fake call centres operating in the capital. Those found responsible will be charged with culpable homicide. Benita Chacko | Mumbai | Published: July 26,AIADMK Rajya Sabha MP Sasikala Pushpa that she was "slapped" by a leader.revolutionary progress in the field of education,education in the national capital.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *