The great Indian beef politics

In a Hindu dominated country, appeasing the Hindu community is the only way to grab maximum vote banks. How do politicians go about it? Bring in the holy cows for Hindus believe that the cow is the embodiment of divine virtues like love, compassion, benevolence, tolerance and non-violence.

To gain political mileage state governments started implementing animal preservation acts as early as the 1950s. On October 26, 2005, the Supreme court of India, in a landmark judgement upheld the constitutional validity of anti-cow slaughter laws enacted by different state governments in India.

Today 24 out of 29 states in India have various regulations prohibiting slaughter of cow.  Kerala, West Bengal, Arunachal Pradesh, Mizoram, Meghalaya, Nagaland, Tripura and Sikkim are the states where there is no restrictions on cow slaughter. Why? Because majority of the people in these states eat beef for economic reasons. Politicians understood that prohibition of cow slaughter in these states will definitely back fire.

Here is a great example of how politics play a big role in deciding the food habits of the Indian people.

There is yet another economic angle to cow slaughter. Beef in India costs less than half the price of lamb or chicken. It is the preferred source of first-class protein for the poor, who constitute a majority of India's population. The absence of beef will raise the food bill for the underprivileged. 

Having said that law can not be taken by mobs in their own hands pretending to uphold the ban. If there are breaches, let the law take its own course. In a secular country there is no place for intolerance towards the sentiments of other religion.

Moving away from beef, before leaving India, one most important lesson the British taught the Indians and the Indians learned very well is ‘divide and rule’.

Everything that politician does is based on this concept. Politicians thrive on spreading hatred. They teach us to divide and hate for their political gains. Nowadays media also plays a big role in exaggerating trivial matters. Endless debates on petty issues are norms on national TV these days.

Come to think of it, aren’t we paying a big prize for upholding democracy? Can we ever envisage a time when we can all co-exist united rather than divided? Is democracy a hindrance for secularism given the size of the nation consist of various religion and caste? How can we not let the politicians take us for a ride?  These are all pertinent questions we must all ask ourselves.

When will we open our eyes to identify religious outfits camouflaged as political parties? When will we stop accepting political agendas forced upon ourselves?

Ignorance is the sole reason people fail to understand the motives of communal politics. It is high time we understand that democracy, secularism and ideologies don’t go hand in hand.

Sadly in India and similarly in several other countries, religious fundamentalism has spread like cancerous cells and we are at a point of no return. Various conflicts in the world are testimonial to this fact.

In a broader sense the truth is secularism is a myth. Don’t believe if any politicians or government state we are secular. They are a bunch of liars.

If today beef is off the menu, what will be off the menu tomorrow? Let us wait and watch.

Is the death penalty for drug traffickers justified?

 “The world has watched on as this theatre of cruelty played out, with this most tragic endings.

It did not have to come to this. The death penalty is never the answer”

Words from Amnesty international UK director Kate Allen pretty much sums up the sentiments of many concerning the execution of 8 drug convicts in Indonesia on 29^th April 2015.

Among the 8 who were executed by the firing squad, Andew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran (allegedly the masterminds of a drug ring) were part of the Bali 9, the name given to a group of 9 Australians who were convicted of smuggling 8.3 Kg of heroine valued at around 4.1 million US dollars from Indonesia to Australia. After serving nearly 10 years in Indonesian prison, the lives of these 2 young men ended tragically for a foolish decision they made in an attempt to make quick bucks.

Executions of drug smugglers are becoming more common. While Indonesia carried out only seven executions of drug traffickers between 1999 to 2014, since taking office six months ago, President Joko Widodo has overseen 14 executions as part of a fight against drug addiction at home (Never mind that some of the recently killed prisoners were smuggling drugs out of Indonesia, rather than into it).

Although 32 countries impose death penalty for drug smuggling, only 6 countries –China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Vietnam, Malaysia and Singapore- routinely executes drug offenders and soon Indonesia is going to join the ranks of these countries following its recent executions.

Did these 8 and similarly several others deserve the death penalty? There is a scant research on whether the death penalty deters drug trafficking. Experts who have  considered the issue of the death penalty as a punishment for murder, and some cases drug offences, around the world, say there is not enough evidence to conclude that the death penalty deters.

Ironically the trade in narcotics has its upside for law enforcement. For poorly paid police, extracting bribes from tourists caught taking drugs is a big business. The incentives for them to crack down on drugs are therefore skewed. The threat of capital punishment exerts fear on drug offenders and therefore increases the bribes that can be extracted. Drug kingpings are seldom charged, let alone put to death. Rather it is the lowly traffickers and drug users who suffer the most grievous of punishments.

Abolishing the death penalty will go a long way to improving law enforcement and governance in Southeast Asia, thereby diminishing drug trafficking, which is the ultimate aim of governments that enforce the death penalty. If the region is serious about tackling drug trafficking it would be wise to abolish the death penalty.

Je Suis Charlie - Charlie Hebdo attack

Picture this. You are a second or third generation Muslim immigrant born and brought up in a country where freedom of expression has no boundaries. Being insensitive to your religion or its religious figures through media mean an insult to your belief which you will not tolerate. What do you do? How far would you go to fight against blasphemy similar to this? Would you vandalize the office of those media publications? Gun down the people behind the publication? Well it all depends on what moral values you hold and how far your religious faith takes you to.

What happened in Paris on 7^th January 2015 was tragic. Two Islamist gun men opened fire in the head office of Charlie Hebdo  (a French magazine known for its biting humor) killing twelve people for publishing a string of satirical cartoons about Islam and the Prophet Muhammed. The events following that incident of hostage taking and subsequent killing of the gun men made headlines across the world.

The cartoons mocking religion  published in Charlie Hebdo maybe considered nothing out of the ordinary in a country where freedom of expression far outweighs hurting religious sentiments. While moderates take it as a joke and move on, the extremists do not hold the same view. They take it far more seriously and the consequences can be fatal.

On 11^th January 2015 millions including world leaders from several countries gathered in Paris expressing solidarity towards the French people condemning the terrible killings. The crowd included Muslims and Jews among others. It is reassuring to hear from many of the French Muslims gathered in the rally that they do not support terrorism and that Islam is a religion of peace.

The muslims rallied condemning the attack reassures that extremist minorities do not represent the vast majority of peace loving Muslims. While it is difficult to understand why certain individuals choose violent methods to protest, the question is, has Charlie Hebdo magazine gone too far with their freedom of expression in the form of cartoons making fun of Islam and similarly mocking other religion?  French foreign minister Laurent Fabier once asked of its cartoons, “Is it really sensible and intelligent to pour oil on the fire”.  Granted, no amount of blasphemy justifies taking someone’s life.

The question is who really is responsible or who is the mastermind behind the vicious attack at Charlie Hebdo? Were the two gun men who was involved in the attack merely pawns of a larger conspiracy? By and large that is most likely the case.

While we wait for the larger picture behind the attack to emerge, it is heartening to know that Egyptian president Abdel-Fattah al-Sisi has come forward with an ambitious call for reform in Islam.  Al-Sisi’s professed goal is to purge religion of extremist ideas of intolerance and violence that fuel several terrorist groups.

Some view the problem with Islam is that it has remained stuck in a time warp. Islam has remained a 7^th century faith. As one columnist puts it, all religious texts are as good or as bad as their interpretations and unfortunately it’s the most violent and abusive followers who are heard the most.

The millions who lined up in Paris with the message “Je Suis Charlie (I am Charlie)” supporting the freedom of expression by the Charlie Hebdo magazine may have made very little impact on the terrorists who are out there plotting the next vicious attack. A much more deeper analysis of the terrorist outfits, tracking and hunting down the masterminds behind the attack, and cutting down their arm supply chain are some of the actions required by the authorities with the support of all countries. That is the need of the hour.