No it is not; and you should

This is what I say regarding the statements made in today’s Mint editorial

The idea of independent India and the Constitution that is based on it are democratic and based on the rule of the law.

No it is not. The rule of who’s law – Shakuni’s? The Indian State is based on mob rule – laws are based on the principle that individuals can be sacrificed, and their rights be denied if some others benefit from the same. Any one who believes that the idea of India has something to do with the rule of law should tell that-
* to the people behind the gay rights movement – they have been called perverts, deviants, and the government nonchalantly calls homosexuality a “disease”, and says that society is not ready to accept the “lifestyle.” If Hindus decide tomorrow that Christianity or Islam – after all the followers of these religions are in a minority, and religion is as “unnatural” as anything else (have you seen donkeys praying?) – is not acceptable, will the government ban these religions?
* to the people in Nandigram and Singur and millions of others who’s lands and houses are being stolen from them through the use of eminent domain in the “public interest”.
* to ITC from whom the Finance Ministry extracted 350 crore rupees by retrospectively amending a particular law, and to thousands of others who are at the mercy of a State on which the Indian constitution has placed no limitations – instead of tying up the State, the framers of the constitution tied up the people. The US constitution at least places limitations on the State, which the troika – the executive, legislature and the judiciary – have blatantly ignored. Not the case with India.
I could go on; but its irritating.

The Indian elite has already opted out of large parts of our public space, living in gated communities, using private schools and hospitals, even commuting in the isolation of their cars. There are reasons to do so; we do not wish to pass moral judgements.

You should – say that it is good. And that every one else needs to do the same – opt out of government and choose efficient private alternatives.

Too much government is bad. In fact, I have doubts as to whether governments are good at all. So any one who says that the Indian people should not “exit”, but instead voice their views through elections should go and read history. The only thing that can save India is a new constitution. If that cannot be done, India is not the place for those who value freedom and the “rule of the law”.

Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.


  • you12  On December 5, 2008 at 12:43 am

    Democracy is inherently flawed.

    The concept of Democracy itself is a mob rule. people want smoking ban,they get it, banning gays, they get it. Most of our laws represent what is the public consensus. Not what is just or lawful or equal.

    This is a nice little resource:

    In a way we have what we demanded. Some people like the Mint writer are deluded to believe that the apple is orange but its not.

    Although it will be interesting to know where you stand. Libertarian,Anarchist,or Traditional Republican. I identify with Traditional Republicanism the most.

  • Aristotle The Geek  On December 5, 2008 at 1:27 am

    I am somewhere between Randian limited government and Rothbardian anarcho-capitalism – waiting to be convinced of either; I haven’t read much of Rothbard yet. That said, getting rid of the collectivist mentality is tougher than it seems – that’s why strains of it are still visible among my posts.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s