Law of Pendulum and ghosts !!!

By: Shreepal Singh
What is the law of pendulum? It is described in detail HERE.

The law of pendulum predicts many things and throws many surprises. Let us see what more it can inform us.

In this article we are using two terms: Matter and Life, and they are defined as follows. Matter is deterministic; that is, it is governed by blind laws of nature in its constitution and motion. Life has will; that is, it has its own volition that defies the blind laws of nature.
Premise (axiom): Life is a reality of nature. Matter is a reality of nature.


  1. At the one end of universal pendulum is absolute matter and at the other end in the reverse cycle of pendulum is absolute life.
  2. In the absolute matter, there is no part of life and in the absolute life there is no part of matter.
  3. In one cycle of pendulum – in its movement from the point of absolute matter towards its end point of absolute life – there are varying graded points or stages of an incremental amount of life and proportionately decreasing amount of matter.
  4. In the reverse cycle of this pendulum – in its movement from the point of absolute life towards its end point of absolute matter – there are varying graded points or stages of an incremental amount of matter and proportionately decreasing amount of life.
  5. This cyclic movement of pendulum would be interpreted by us – humans – in one instance or cycle as ascending of matter towards life (which we term evolution of life) and in another instance or reverse cycle as descending of life into matter (which would be an evolution in reverse direction).
  6. Also this cyclic movement of pendulum would be interpreted at one end as absolute consciousness – or Sachidanand (the only absolute truth + the only absolute consciousness + the only absolute bliss) of Hindus, Nirvana of Buddhists, Kaivalya (absolute one) of Jains, God of Christians, Allah of Muslims – (at that end) and at the reverse end as absolute darkness – mass of blind matter. It is the beautiful description of cataclysmic end of this universe – turning cosmos into a small point of so called “Black Hole” in one case; and, in another case, a divine golden age (which we have no means to even speculate). It is simply a cyclic destruction and creation of universe, which – science asserts – is done under blind laws of nature and – Yogis assert – is done by the will of the Divine. It is not important how it is done but the important thing is that it – destruction and creation – is done.
  7. This law of pendulum predicts that in this universe there must be many living entities with varying degrees of consciousness, with matter and without matter, who exist at different points of the movement of this pendulum.
  8. In addition to human beings, in this universe there are multiple varieties of beings like ghosts, spirits, souls, vital bodies, psychic beings, Siddha Yogis and many more. Newspapers have been filled with the stories of ghosts infested houses and palaces. Science does not dare to test their veracity. There are children telling their previous births; science does not dare to investigate them. There are cases of “near death experience”, a person coming out of his physical body and floating freely wherever (s)he wishes; there are cases of medical hypnosis and person getting out of physical body and telling correct information of events thousands of miles away. But science does not dare to touch them. Because, it is truth and science has no explanation, and therefore look the other way. India abounds in cases – since ancient times – where a Yogi gets out of his physical body and enters into the body of a newly dead person.
  9. We human beings should be not only intelligent but also wise to leave the scope to know more tomorrow that we do not know today.
  10. Yoga is a science that exclusively deals with these unknown secrets, which are mystic to mind. It is a fascinating science. It is the science that is most valuable to humans in its utility. While our modern science deals with matter, the science if Yoga deals with consciousness.

India needs “Lok Prahari” and not “Lok Pal” !

By: Shreepal Singh

It has become in our decadent times almost a right to fool the public and get away with the booty of power. One can allege – and flaunt it as true – that Police Inspector Mohan Chand Sharma is killed in Batla House in stage-managed fake encounter; there is zero loss in coal allocation and CAG is wrong in finding a loss; there is Hindu terrorism in India; Indian army’s surgical strike across the line in Pakistan is fake; Chief Justice of India is biased and he should be impeached; Rafale deal is full of corruption and the judgment of the highest court of the country finding no such corruption in this deal is misconceived; and, there is no way to put him to accountability. It is a dismal condition.

Power may be got this way but nations are not built this way. People must wake up to this danger facing India today and find a solution to this rampant menace before it is too late to cure.

In Indian politics today, it is a state of free for all – anybody can say anything without any accountability for what one says, or has said. It is the nadir point of our democracy. The people are honest and well-meaning but helpless in the face of blatant lies a public figure says – and has the legal right to say. A right without the corresponding duty – accountability – is the sure path to disaster. We all know, a statement made by one in a court of law may send another person to gallows. But, there in the court the person making that statement is tested for its truth; it is called cross-examination. In the matter of electing our representatives – electing our government – anybody aspiring to run the government and rule the public can say – tell lies – whatever he likes, and there is no provision in democracy to test his veracity, his truthfulness.

There is a triangle – a vicious triangle – that runs our democracy and has brought a hell to this country. This triangle is: Right to say anything what one likes to say; Leaving public helpless to put faith or not to put faith in what one says; and, Giving power to this helpless public to elect their government in ignorance and rule over them.

The net result of this vicious triangle is that the public becomes  an uninformed and helpless lot of people and only they come to get elected and wield power – to occupy the government – who can misinform the most. It was not vainly said decades ago, “democracy is the last refuge of the scoundrels.” This phenomenon of fooling the public by politicians by misinforming them and getting the power in this way to run this country is testified by an amazing fact in India: All the politicians belonging to different political parties, who were sworn enemies of each other and were accusing each other of indulging in corruption and crimes, have joined hands as friends ! There is not an iota of doubt that all these politicians were – and still are – dead enemies of each other; nobody can deny this fact. Then, how come they have joined hand and become friends? The answer is: They all share one common element: The all want to come to power by hook or crook ! Misinforming the public – the public that has already been much uninformed for the last 70 years or so – is a handy tool; it is well tested by time. One can fool the public, if he has sufficient means – like vast amount of money at his disposal, a collaborating print and electronic media to serve their own interests, a great army of workers and sympathizers who are wedded to him for their own selfish interests etc. – and get the power to rule this country. How to put a full stop to this dirty game in India?

As it is said, “Light is the best disinfectant”; and a floodlight is still better to yield the result. It is wrong to say that private life has nothing to do with public life. A person’s private life does impinge on the quality of his public life, and particularly it is so in India. For a people’s representative there is nothing like a private life. His life is a public life even in the private affairs.

If he has chosen a life in the service of public, he has to sacrifice his private life. He should be under the constant public gaze in his daily activities to the level of the most minute details possible. It is his choice to enter the public life and sacrifice his private life, or alternatively, to lead a private life and get the right to protect his privacy. It is a choice voluntarily made out of his free will. If he choses the life with  power and privileges, he has to make the sacrifice and accept its stiff conditions; and if he choses the other one – the private life, he has the rights to enjoy an ordinary life and its privileges of privacy well protected by the law.

When the stakes are very high and the misuse of powers is rampant causing incalculable damge to the interests of India, the surveillance of people’s representatives should not cause an alarm on the count that it causes hurt to their ego or prestige. It would not be the ego of a people’s representative that should be pampered but the ego of the people – that he swears to represent – that should be cared for!

Now, what is that part of a private life that should become public on assuming the office of a public representative? It  should be the widest one. It includes almost everything of his life. It has become necessary in the modern times where democracy has really become, the proverbial, “the last refuge of the scoundrel”, to put him under day-light glare of public gaze.

The modern democracy has to balance two realities of life; the one reality is: the tongue of a person is very light to wag it the way one likes; he is able to tell lies endlessly; and, the public whom he seeks to represent may – and mostly would – put a faith in what he says with this tongue. The other reality is: what a man thinks in his secret mind, he acts it in his open conduct. Conduct does not tell a lie; and, to know a man what he thinks and intends to do – and not what he says he would do – is to know his conduct.

The public whom he seeks to represent has the right to know what he  intends to do – and not to go simply by what he says. It is the most valuable right of public in democracy and this right cannot be allowed to be compromised, to be diluted by any trick.

Indian people despite having a colossal diversity are gifted with a common element – the deep sense of morality and righteousness, and an urge within their heart to side with the truth. They have the ability to weigh ‘what one says’ with ‘to what extent his conduct verifies the truthfulness of his statements’ and to judge to what extent they should put their faith in what he says.

For example, if a person is found accumulating ill-gotten wealth, his statements would be considered simply dishonest; in contrast, if he is found living a life of austerity without owning wealth in person or through his relatives, he would be considered honest in saying what he says; if one is found indulging in debauchery, he would be considered cunning and unworthy of reliability; in contrast, if he is found of a chaste character, he would be considered sincere in his statements; if a person is found friendly with criminals or fraudsters, his statements would be held unreliable; in contrast, if he is simple and straightforward one, he would be taken with honesty in his statements; if one is found taking drugs, his statements would be taken as nonsense only; in contast, if he is leading his life with serenity, he would be held trustworthy;  if a person is found indulging in crimes, all his statements would be nothing but lies, etc.

A public representative needs to be put under floodlight of public gaze. How can it be done in democracy? There is need to create an institution of “Lok Prahari” with the sanctity of Constitution and the power of law. India does not need a “Lok Pal” to keep a watch over the public representatives but it needs an institution of “Lok Prahari” to inform the public what their representative does – in his private and public life – good and bad both, and on daily basis.

This Constitutional institution may  be made to run parallel to the institution of election commission of India, or may be clubbed with it by enlarging mandate of election commission of India. What should be the job assigned to this newly created institution? It should include the gathering of the information of almost every – major and minor – details of daily life – private and public both – of a public representative; and,  to constantly inform this information in real-time to public by utilizing information technology.

This institution must be legally empowered to have the access to the activities of such public representatives, to gather and record this information and to broadcast the same in real-time (with the reasonable time leg for security purposes only) to the public.

These activities would include: where that public representative goes and what does he do there; whom he meets; what he eats and where; what he buys and sells, and for what price; that is, it should include everything minus his strictly very personal family activities only (like meeting his wife and children).

This matter – the matter of inclusion and exclusion – would need an open public discussion and deliberation before enacting a law to place people’s representatives’ life under public gaze and scrutiny.

Modi, A Lee Kuan of India – Do Not Derail Him

By: Shreepal Singh

Here is a wonderful video that shows how a diverse society like Singapore could transform itself from a third world small country – almost a nation-state – to a frontline first world country – miraculously – within one generation only. The miracle was made possible by pragmatic mix of democracy with a little dose of high-handedness – that is another name of authoritarianism. To a question what India could learn from Singapore, the Singapore Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minster wisely says, “the Indian middle class must make their elected representatives accountable to their promises they make to the public – in a wise manner.”

It is an example how a country can fast progress – Singapore progressed this way: Do not be fooled by promises of freebies and false impossible promises; ask the political leaders how they are going to fulfil their impossible promises, before they become entitled to your vote; China made fast progress but it is not the way for democracy – for India; the western countries made the progress but it too is not the way for India – the India needs to learn from Singapore and to make its democracy hard, the accountable one with no place for wild promises to fool the electorate; make India a place where all diverse groups – Hindus, Muslims, Christians and all other ethnic groups – get equal opportunities to get educated, get economic prosperity, necessities of life without any discrimination and religious bigotry; invite, cultivate and promote talent and competitiveness. The Singapore Minister says, “It is our first stage. We don’t have yet the best technology and talent competitive to say, Germany. We are to move to the next stage of that competitiveness.” This is how a competent minister should be – clear headed with a vision of future.

These are Singaporean ways to achieve the miracle. Modi is Li Kuan of India when he pursues the program, “Sabka Saath, Sabka Vikas.” Modi was recently dubbed by a Singaporean newspaper as “a Li Kuan of India.”

It was a failure of the Indian middle class to ask questions and make political leaders accountable to the seemingly impossible promises they made before electing them in three states of Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh. Democracy in India should no longer be a game of fooling the ignorant and get away with the booty of power – democracy should be made accountable. It is the responsibility of the middle class – because they know the things, because they can make the ordinary public aware of the reality.

Let the educated middle class of Indians educate the public for 2019 elections; let them not allow the unaccountable promise-mongers derail Modi – the Indian Li Kuan – in his realistic project of transforming India, like the Singaporean way !

Watch this video carefully:

Electing Parliament: The On-line Way (3)

By: Shreepal Singh

This is the third, and concluding, part of this series of articles on ‘Electing Parliament: The On-line Way’. It was orginally published in 2013 on this website and is being re-published again in view of the initiative being taken by the Election Commission of India for studying the feasibility of using on-line voting for electing people’s representatives in India. Here we go:

Human beings may manage their business of self-governance under the imperatives dictated by the force either of mind – that is, reason – or of desires. Reason and desires are two totally distinct dimensions of human consciousness. Rarely, the two coincide and support mutually. Most often, what is reasonable in a given situation, finds itself in conflict with one’s desires. And, what one desires in a given situation, most often offends the reason. The explanation for this conflict lies in the difference of their respective origin. Desires originate from the cosmic bubbling energy – a conscious dimension of the ultimate reality – that seeks to find space to enable her to manifest and materialize. Reason originates from the universal symmetry of that source that seeks to impose discipline on that anarchic energy.

  In the affairs of management of human self-governance, one has to accord a place of primacy to either of these two generically different organizing forces that issue from from that ultimate source and manifest here on Earth. From the life’s evolutionary point of view, the force of reason is higher than that of the desire. The lower life’s kingdom – from plants to animals – is organized in its working by this lower force of desires, which has a wide spectrum ranging from the basic instincts of self-preservation to dominance. In human beings also, this lower force of desires plays a greatly significant role. However, human beings have evolved the faculty of reason that tends to rein in these desires when they go unreasonable, push them to the secondary place in a dark remote corner of the sub-conscious domain of mind and usurp the place of primacy for itself. Organizing the affairs of human self governance on the “principle of the working of desires” belongs to an inferior civilization, under which we are living today. A reasonable – a better – civilization cannot be guided and inspired by desires. It has to be in essence a better and reasonable one, however harsh and unpalatable it might look to our secretly lurking desires. Such a civilization is the demand of human evolution. It is the demand of our times. It is crucially needed to resolve humans’ serious disputes and for their survival against the danger of self annihilation caused by those disputes. It is the demand of our Earth.

  Reason dictates that people, who are now comparatively more enlightened, should govern themselves – that is, they should organize their collective life on the democratic principle. Reason also dictates that Earth is our single common home in this vast universe and the interests of mankind are common. Reason informs us that our knowledge of the secrets of Nature (that is, the scientific knowledge) and the exploitation of these secrets in the form of technology (that is, machines and tools in the hands of mankind) are the common property of mankind. In fact, all knowledge belongs to the humanity in general and to nobody in particular – no matter who discovered this knowledge or where it was discovered; for, an individual draws much from the society and, in return, is always indebted to the society. Reason presses us to admit that knowledge and its begotten fruit in the form of technology, which is a miraculous and force-multiplier lever in the hands of humans in their war against Nature, cannot be allowed to be usurped by a few for their own private use and benefit. Our commomsense tells us that this force multiplier lever – that is, machine – must be solely employed to the benefit of mankind as one race; that human beings now must be afforded freedom from long, routine and laborious productive work; and, that they must be afforded complete leisure, except for a short working period. Science demonstrates that it is possible, technology translates into reality, and reason dictates us that we should organize our affairs on this pattern.

  There are three elements – and all these belonging to humans – that work to negate an organization of human beings in their collective life, that is, their civilization, on such pattern. Firstly, a few of human beings who profess to own machine do wean its use away from the common good of mankind towards their own personal good; and these few, by this unholy diversion of machine, accumulate unearned wealth, which they morally justify in the name of incentive or profit. Secondly, this accumulated wealth is used by them to distort the normal collective consciousness – that is, humanity’s culture – so as to justify a dismal and unfortunate condition of humanity at large gobally found today. And, thirdly, after doing this unholy and unjustified work, they bring in to their aid the scientific knowledge (in the form of technology, which – again repeated – is the the wealth belonging to humanity at large) to suppress the popular disaproval of such unholy diversion; to advance their own selfish interests; and to cause harm to the interests of general humanity. Knowledge begotten by humanity works against the humanity in a vicious circle.

  This vicious circle can be broken by bringing into operation the information technology in the affairs of democratic self-governance. Its operation would ensure the elimination of evil impact of wealth in the matter of self governance. In fact, utilizing this technology amounts to organizing the humans’ collective life on the principle of reason. It amounts to the pushing of desires out of the seat of driver for our civilization and placing of the reason thereat in a forward movement of life’s evolutionary course. It would be ushering of a new civilization on Earth.

  The potential of information information technology in bringing such a change in the life of a nation’s democratic self-governance is unparalleled. Science and technology are the driving force of history. They work constantly and bring in a silent change in society. Surly, information technology would be employed, sooner or later, in the field of democratic self governance. And surly, that moment would bring the death of today’s money-driven democracy. It would purge the money power out of democracy.

The application of modern information technology to the field of  democratic election of a government, which government is usually out of sync with the popular mandate now a days, would empower the ordinary citizens beyond imagination. This empowerment of ordinary citizens would inflict a death blow on the current socio-political set up. And it would pave the way for crafting a new civilization.  The current political instrument of democracy has been reduced by the information technology into an archiac and obsolete edifice. Its inherent weakness – the weakness of the way we elect our representatives in people’s democratic self-governance – portends the coming of its demise.

   It is axiomatic to say that in the matter of their democratic self-governance people should be allowed freedom to choose their representatives. What is this freedom from? There may be restrictions on this freedom. And these restrictions may be direct or indirect; or these may be crude or subtle. This freedom should be secured against all such restrictions. An individual is physically restricted by resorting to the use of violence from choosing a representative of his choice. It is a crude restriction and there should be freedom from such restriction. You allow decisive advantages to one candidate for election and disallow these advantages to another one; it is subtle restriction on the freedom to choose one’s representative. There should be freedom from such indirect restriction also.

   You allow a person to let him project himself in a favorable light which in fact s/he is not; and, you disallow another one to have this undue advantage. It is subtle restriction and there should be freedom from this restriction. You let the electorate remain uninformed of the vital issues concerning their short-term or long-term welfare; or you allow a candidate for election to misinform the electorate on those issues; and disallow another one to correct that misinformation. It is subtle restriction on the citizens’ freedom to exercise their right to make an informed choice of their representative.

  Hitherto it was not possible for us by any democratic means to secure this freedom to citizens against all these restrictions only because these restrictions operate through subtle and indirect means; it was not possible to cure this defect since these advantages are not equally available to all. Today it has become possible to remove these subtle and indirect restrictions with the help of available information technology. It is desirable to secure freedom from all these subtle and indirect restrictions on citizens, whether the citizens possess or don’t possess such advantages. It is need of the hour for humanity. It is a step forward towards a new political order.

The subtle and indirect restrictions on citizens’ freedom also operate on a minor scale through psychological means (like taking advantage of religious, caste, national or domicile sentiments) as well as on a major scale through the economic advantages. Both of these kinds of restrictions on one’s freedom are condemn-able and desirable to be eliminated by democratic means, which was not possible before but which has now become possible with the aid of technology.

  In a democratic country, a candidate has the economic advantage to project his image in a positive manner, which in fact is not the case in reality. Money is pumped to bolster his candidacy. He is touted through print and electronic media, because he has the economic means. Like a supernova explosion, his hitherto hidden personal qualities (which in fact were never there in his personality) are presented in brilliant colours. All psychological tools are employed (which need money that he possesses) to create his positive image, which is untrue to the reality. Electorate is misinformed and mislead by money. It is wrong to project a person which he is not. It is misinformation, which may include even disinformation. This is restriction on the citizens’ freedom to make an informed choice of their representatives. This restriction should be eliminated by democratic means.

     One way of eliminating this restriction is to make all the contestants equal in economic means to take on each other so that the electorates are informed of the positive and negative qualities of all of them and are enabled to make a free and informed choice. But it is not possible to provide an equality of economic means to any and every one who may fancy contesting election. Always there are those who are the strongest in these economic advantages; there are those who are lesser in strength; then, there are weak; and there are also weakest. It is not the reality that the weakest in the economic strength is the worst candidate in quality; he may be the best; and he may be the first choice of the electorate if he is put on equal keel in publicity with all the rest of candidates. But the weakest cannot be put on equal keel. Then, what is the way out of securing equality to all who are unequal in money? It is the information technology that offers the solution to the problem here.

  The crux of the solution in information technology lies in the fact that in its psychological impact, money becomes counterproductive in its yield at a certain point. You pump money to bolster one’s image in positive manner; you can pump more and more money in this exercise and you would have its incremental effect on its result. But there is another factor – the factor of duration of time – that has its own psychological effect. If a candidate is asked to remain the choice of his electorate twenty-four hours of four weeks of a year and is thus obliged to pump money constantly to bolster his image, this very strength of money becomes his weak point. The time factor turns this money’s ‘cozy effect’ into ‘rogue effect’. This factor exposes the crude face of money. In this way the money is fatigued out. It becomes vulgar; it boomerangs on the person who pumps this money and looks apparent attempt to bribe the electorate. It turns into transparent moral wrong. Its own strength becomes its weakness. This phenomenon of turning the “money-advantage” into “money-disadvantage” is the result of a well known economics principle called the principle of “diminishing return”.  

  But can you ask a candidate to remain the choice of his electorate twenty-four hours of all the weeks of a year? Hitherto such a demand was not possible. There was no way but to hold elections only periodically and by manual counting. But now, it is not any more so. Elections can be held on internet constantly on daily basis and candidates may be asked to remain the choice of their electorates continuously and indefinitely till they lose the mandate as determined by the website maintained by the Election Commission.

  It is possible that we enact laws that cast a legal duty on citizens, under a penal provision for neglect, to express their choice every day on the internet in favor of their favorable candidates, which candidacy may be open to all citizens. It is possible that we may design a program that permits a citizen to use internet services only when he first exercises his legal obligation of marking his or her choice of a representative. No banking, buying, e-mailing, or anything on the internet could be done unless the citizen performs his legal duty to express his choice of his representative. There may be constant tallying of citizens’ votes and the moment a representative falls below 50% of votes, he may be shown the door. It is nothing but making the democracy true. It is nothing but empowering the majority who are ordinary citizens and without voice today.  The secret of this rectification, of which we have been speaking here, lies in the progress in three, and only three, fields of human activity. These are firstly, the development of science, secondly, educating people, and thirdly, empowering people through information technology to constantly elect and recall their political representatives in the matter of democratic self-governance.

The development of science and technology is already on the verge of bringing an almost total automation of production of commodities and services. To stay in the competition – to make products cheapest and best, which is required to stay in the competition – industries are already moving towards such automation, which is today technologically possible. An almost total automation of production and services would almost totally eliminate the need on the part of employers – owners of production facilities – to employ humans – working people – in industrial production and service industries. This would result in almost complete unemployment in the society. It is estimated that by the middle of this century – 21st century – 2% of jobs would require human employment – like in the fields of scientific research and research in controlling human beings. It means that 98% of the present day jobs would be go out of the market. This situation is the one – the most crucial – constituent of a deadly mix of an explosive. The second constituent is of this mix is the democratic empowerment of people by their adoption of information technology – the internet – in the matter of electing their representative government. The people would be, for the first time in social history, free to really self-govern themselves. Such empowered people cannot and would not allow a situation in the society where almost all of them are rendered unemployed – without work – amid plenty of products owned and produced by a few persons in automated plants.

  The second element – namely, educating the people – enables them to understand more and more what is good and what is not good for them. At the time when the moments of taking decisions come about matters, whether such matters are trivial in nature or momentous, not all people take uniform and equal decisions.  People more often than not take decisions on the uninformed basis, which includes lack of correct data and lack of correct fundamental premises or assumptions. Here comes the crucial role of education in bringing a change in the way we think and live.  Education is used here in the widest possible meaning, which covers acquiring knowledge relating to all spheres of human experience.

 The third element – the empowerment of people through the adoption of information technology in electing their representatives – is the key to bring a new social order. This empowerment of people in their democratic self-governance is the gift of science, which was not possible before. Human beings have come a long way on the social evolutionary path from the savage society to the modern society where we govern ourselves.

There are millions of people living in democratic countries, who self-rule by electing their representatives. But these millions cannot sit together at a place, take decisions and rule themselves. They have to elect their representatives to govern, who sit together at a place on their behalf and deliberate. They take decisions on behalf of their electorates and run the people’s government. For a member of people, the journey from the status of a mere voter to that of a powerful representative is possible only when he has his own huge money – or he gets this money from those who have it but give it on the conditions attached to it.  This constraint is for those who dream to change their own political status from the mere electors to the elected ones. What about those people who do not wish to get elected but wish to elect the representative of their choice? It is not anything better.

The electors are presented with ready-made prospective representatives by the money-wielding powerful political parties, who are mostly committed to serve the interests of those who give them this huge money. Those who matter in this system come out in strength in support of their chosen candidates and use all weapons in their possession – media, campaigns, promotions, psychological rules of influencing electorates – to ensure the victory of their chosen ones.  

It is a stark reality of modern democracy. All political theories that deny this reality are motivated and false ones. The truth of this stark reality of modern democracy has long been understood by us all. But hitherto there was no way to cure this deficiency except by way of violence, which too ultimately fails to serve the ideal – provide justice.  In this respect, the technology is perfectly capable to cure this defect of democracy. What we need is to make certain preparations. These preparations would include the necessary constitutional and legal changes, which should make it legally obligatory for every citizen, under legal provision for a harsh penalty for violation; spreading internet and mobile phones (which should be integrated with internet) covering all citizens; putting in use a software that enables a computer or mobile to work only when the first prop-up for casting vote to elect, continue or re-call the representatives is answered by the user; framing of legal rules which prescribe constant process of electing or recalling representatives; provisions are made that allow all political parties, and not individuals belonging to them, and other desirous persons to be put on a government website for voting by electors on a daily basis; and other relevant and necessary provisions.

All that is required is an awareness on the part of the people and the need on the part of the State to adopt it. Will the modern democracy committed to private capital adopt this new modern political system? It may be suicidal for the private capital. But it will be the victory of people. No cost is high for this change. True democracy is the people’s demand; it is progressive in nature; it is just urge of people that they are empowered by technology in this way. There is no logical ground to oppose this demand and the elements that make it impracticable today may be removed by taking necessary precautionary steps in that behalf. This is true self-governance of people. This is true democracy.

Electing Parliament: The On-line Way (2)

By: Shreepal Singh

(Note: This article was originally published in 2013 at this website. It is again published in view of the Election Commission of India constituting a study team to look into the feasibility of using in India on-line voting for electing representatives.)

Now science has provided the technological capability to make democracy more true to its basic principle. Democracy as it obtains today cannot obstruct for long the far-reaching impact of information technology that is now common place. Democracy is theoretically the ideal mechanism of self governance invented by human beings. It is but natural that in the collective living of a group, all individuals may not always agree while taking decisions.

  Human beings in their evolutionary history have co-existed for long and devised many forms of dispute-redressing mechanism to ensure their continued comparatively peaceful co-existence. And, now we have a dispute-redressing socio-political engineering that we call democracy. Democracy is a form of human self governance. Its basic principle is the rule of the majority over the minority. In the collective living of human beings there are always recurring moments when they are required to take collective decisions, and often, momentous decisions. While taking decisions, the unanimity of decision makers is ideal but almost always elusive. And, therefore, the next best thing possible is to take decisions by majority of the decision makers. Taking decisions by majority that bind majority and minority both is democracy.

  It is natural that the minority, which did not agree to the majority view but found a much disliked-decision imposed on it by the operation of majority rule, would search for some loopholes to thwart and diminish the impact of the unpleasant majority decision. We are not talking here of the mundane routine scandalous politics that intermittently occur in democratic countries. We are up for serious things here.

  The crux is that on crucial economic issues that vitally affect human beings in their collective living, the majority must find benefit in the decision that is taken by the majority notwithstanding the opposition of the minority. However, we find that in economic matters the minority is rich to the detriment of the majority who are poor. This is impeccable proof that here democracy, the rule of the majority, has been thwarted by whoever got illegitimate benefits from this distortion and by whatever means.

  We must purify democracy by the application of science. We are not against anybody. We hold that human beings are mere instruments of forces that guide the course of events, at micro and macro scale in this grand universe.

  We stand for the truly majority rule and surely the majority would benefit by its own rule in economic matters in contradistinction to the benefit accruing to minority. The minority has usurped machine, that saves human labor, from the hands of majority and yoked it in their own selfish service by rendering millions jobless. The minority monopolizes machine so that it may earn private profit by the work of machine with the less human labor needed.  The minority has become rich and the majority has been reduced to poverty, though this majority is still flaunted as the rulers. In the rule of majority, the majority cannot be poor and the minority rich. It is distorted democracy. The science has come, as ever, to play its redeeming role to change the things in a forward movement.

  How the science can be applied to democracy? We elect our representatives for a fixed term. They represent us for this term. We need the application of available technology on this issue in two ways. Firstly, the initial electoral process is presently much influenced by artificial means. The objective image of prospective representative is allowed to be bolstered by lobbying forces. This bolstering needs money that is not sufficiently available with the majority of population and their true aspiring representative is rendered disadvantaged. This could not be helped yesterday; today it can be remedied. The voting must be done only through the suitable device of information technology and without any role for the intervening economic forces in any manner.

  It is possible. And, it must be done to redeem democracy from the hands of minority and accumulated money. Secondly, we must employ the information technology once again to constantly approve or disapprove our initially elected representatives. Of course, we need stability of the term of representation. Also, our representatives need insulation from momentary passions of the electorates who may disapprove leader’s unpopular decisions under the heat of the moment but may later on approve them on their cool calculations.

  These are some of the problems that the technology enabled true democracy would have to resolve. There may be fixed a critical approval index below which a representative must quit. However, the technology should be used to constantly elect our representatives. Our leaders should be our representatives and they should be so at every moment. There cannot be anything like fixed secured term in true democracy. The fixed or secured term must be provided only to offset the undesirable impact on the cool decisions of our representatives. In fact, the real remedy of this problem lies in educating and enlightening our people and not allowing our representatives to continue despite electorate’s disapproval. Theoretically, the electorates know their interest best and the elected representatives cannot continue in the face of disapproval by their electorates.

  For the democracy to become true today, the application of technology is necessary. For a democracy to become vibrant and healthy, it is necessary that its citizens should be educated, informed, empowered and enlightened.

Bagha Jatin – An ‘Alternative’ Father of Nation for India

Republished on 26 October 2018: First published on 12 September 2018

Image result for images of bagha jatin

By:    L. W. C.        

 Had Bagha Jatin been an Englishman, his statue would be next to Lord Nelson’s at Trafalgar Square”,  said Charles Tegart, the British officer who tracked him down near Balasore, after he put up a heroic resistance for 75 minutes. Such was the admiration he evoked at the hands of his enemy.

Bagha Jatin was born as Jatindranath Mukherji, at Kustia now in Bangladesh, the ancestral land of Rabindranath Tagore, on December 8, 1879 to Sharat Shashi and Umeschandra Mukherji. Losing his father early, he was brought up by his mother, a gifted poetess herself. Growing up to be a strapping young lad, Jatin was known for his physical strength, as well as being a gifted actor, especially in playing roles of Pauranic characters like Prahalad, Hanuman, Dhruv etc. Driven by a nationalist fervor, he used the drama to spread nationalism.

Finishing his studies from Krishnanagar, Jatin joined the Kolkata Central College (now named after Khudiram Bose) to study Fine Arts in 1895. It was here he came in touch with Swami Vivekananda, who influenced his ideology, and he became one of Swamiji’s most ardent devotees. Jatin was one among the youth volunteers whom Swamiji desired with “muscles of iron and nerves of steel”, and played an active role in assisting the poor and needy, especially during floods and famines. He proved himself to be a good leader and organizer. Jatin actively assisted Bhagini Nivedita, in her service missions and also learnt wrestling. Fed up with the English education system, he began to write regularly, showcasing the British exploitation of India and the need to have an Indian National Army.

In 1900, he was married to Indubala Banerji of Kumarkhali, and had 4 children. However, when he lost his elder son Atindra, he went on a pilgrimage to Haridwar, where he found inner peace. Returning to his native village, Jatin had that encounter with the tiger, when searching for a notorious man eating leopard. He managed to kill the tiger with a khkhri, but not before being severaly wounded himself. The surgeon Lt. Col. Suresh Sarbadhikari, who treated him, and removed the tiger nails from his body, published an article, impressed by his bravery. And that is when he got the title “Bagha” Jatin, that also became his more popular name.

Jatin played a vital role in setting up one of the branches of Anushilan Samiti, at Dhaka, where he met Sri Aurobindo in 1903, and decided to collaborate with him. He played a key role in spreading both Anushilan Samiti as well as Jugantar through out Bengal.  During a processession of the Prince of Wales in Kolkata in 1905, Jatin assaulted a group of English soldiers, who were misbehaving with the Indian ladies, drawing attention of the higher ups.

Along with Barindra Ghose, one of the founding members of Jugantar, Jatin set up a bomb factory near Deoghar (now in Jharkhand), while Brindra did the same at Maniktala. He also began to set up a loose network of sleeper cells, to spread the revolutionary activities. He simultaneously developed a loose network of autonomous sleeper cells, which organized relief missions, welfare activities, as well as religious congregations like the Kumbh Mela, and celebrate the birth anniversaries of Ramakrishna Paramhansa and Swami Vivekananda annually.  By now he was fully under British surveillance, who saw him as one of the biggest threats. Soon he began to spread his activities, setting up branches of the Anushilan Samiti in Darjeeling and Siliguri, apart from being noted for his regular fisticuffs with the British officers.

One such clash led to legal proceedings, and when warned by the Magistrate to behave, Jatin shot back, stating he would not hesitate to do so again for the rights of his fellow Indians. When the British cracked down on the conspirators of the Alipore Bomb Case, Jatin was one of those who managed to get away. He soon filled up the leadership vacuum, taking over the Jugantar Party and began to set up it’s units all over Bengal, as well as in Odisha and Eastern UP. When the British government struck back with a series of repressive measures, to suppress the revolutionaries, Jatin hit back with a series of actions, most conducted in top secrecy. Assasination attempts were made on the Lt. Governor of Bengal in 1908.

finally on January 27, 1910, Jatin was arrested in connection with the assasination of prosecutor Ashutosh Biswas, and DSP Samsul Alam, but released. Only to be arrested again in connection with the Howrah-Sibpur conspiracy case, along with 46 others. Jatin was charged with waging war against the Empror, as well as instigating Indian soldiers in the Army to revolt, in the style of 1857. however, the case failed due to lack of proper evidence and in the meantime, he also made good contacts with other fellow revolutionaries in prison. On his release from prison in 1911, Jatin temporarily suspended his revolutionary activities for some time. Having lost his job, he left Kolkata and started doing contracts on the Jessore-Jhenaidah railway line, that gave him ample time to revitalize the units in Bengal.

Going on a pilgrimage to Haridwar, Vrindawan he got in touch with Swami Niralamba, an ex revolutionary Jatindra Nath Banerji, who took up Sanyas. He soon coordinated with Ras Bihari Bose, and Lala Hardayal in spreading the revolutionary work in the Northern part of India. On his return to Kolkata, he reorganized Jugantar, continuing his relief activities, especially during the devastating Damodar river floods, in Midnapore, Burdwan districts. Ras Bihari too joined him around that time, calling him a real leader of men.

Soon Ras Bihari along with Jatin, began to plan a 1857 kind of revolt, negotiation with disaffected Indian army officers at Fort William in Kolkata, the nerve center of the British Indian army then.

Jatin’s fame had spread abroad too, and expat Indian revolutionaries in US, Europe were inspired by him. His emissary Taraknath Das, along with Guran Ditt Kumar was already organizing evening schools for Indian immigrants on the West Coast of US and Canada.  These Indian immigrants on the West Coast were primarily migrant Hindus and Sikh workers spread across Seattle, Portland, Vancouver, San Francisco. Apart from teaching them simple English, they were made aware of their rights, and the message of nationalism. Lala Hardayal meanwhile resigned from his teaching job at University of California, Barkley in 1913, and travelling along the West Coast, openly exhorted the Indian migrant workers to revolt against the British rule.

Lala Hardayal founded the Ghdr Party in US, made up primarily of Sikh and Hindu Panjabi emigrants in the West Coast of US, Canada. And soon became one of the key players in the Indian revolutionary movement, later was associated with Savarkar too. When World War I, broke out in September 1914, the Berlin Committee was formed by Virendranath Chattopapdhyaya that included members of the Ghdr party too. It’s aim was to foment an 1857 style uprising, in India. With the British engaged in the War, it was felt this was the best time to stir up an 1857 style armed uprising. The German Government supported the mission with arms, ammunition and funds, while a large number of Ghdr party members too began to leave for India.

It was Jatin who carried out the entire mission, leading the Jugantar, while Ras Bihari Bose began to execute the plan in UP and Punjab. Called as the German plot or Hindu-German conspiracy, he began to raise funds organizing a series of armed robberies, using taxicabs. With police surveillance intensifying, Jugantar members urged Jatin to shift to a safer spot like Balasore on the Odisha coast, which was also the entry point for German arms into India. He went into hiding at a small village Kaptipada in Mayurbhanj district.

Jatin sent one of his close associates Naren Bhattacharya, who would later become more well known as M. N. Roy, the founder of the Communist party in India, to make a deal with the Germans regarding financial aid and arms.  However a group pf Czech revolutionaries, who had infiltrated the network, uncovered Jatin’s plans, and soon the information was leaked out to the higher authorities in Britain and US. Also aided by some of the Indian associates, who acted as spies for the British.

The British sealed off the Eastern coast of India from Chitgong to Gopalpur, as well as the entire Gangetic delta. The British also raided Harry and Sons, which Jatin had set up as a front, for smuggling in the arms, and soon traced his location to Kaptipada village. Jatin was hiding at Kaptipada, with his fellow companians, Chittapriya Ray Chaudhari, Manoranjan Sengupta. He was advised to flee from the place, however his insistence on getting 2 more companions of his Niren and Jatish, caused a delay.

That delay was enough for the police to reach Kaptipada, with a large contingent, along with an army unit from Chandbali, cutting off all escape routes for Jatin and his fellow associates. They were trapped from all sides.  For two days, Jatin along with his companians fled through the thick forests of Mayurbhanj, before reaching Balasore station. However tempted by the reward for capture of the five “bandits” announced by the British, the local villagers, informed the police.

Finally on September 9, 1915, Jatin and his associates took up position in a small trench at Chashakhand near Balasore. Inspite of Chittapriya, asking him to flee, Jatin refused to abandon his companions and fought back against the British. For 75 minutes, Jatin and his 4 associates armed with just Mauser pistols, held out against a much larger fully armed police contingent, inflicting heavy casualties on them. It was one of the most heroic resistance ever, as Jatin fought to the end like a tiger. Chittapriya died in the firing, Jatin was severely wounded, while Manoranjan and Niren ran out of ammunition and were captured. And the tiger, Bagha Jatin himself was severely wounded, taken to the Government hospital in Balasore.

On September 10, 1915, the man who fought and killed a tiger with bare hands, Jatindranath Mukherji, aka Bagha Jatin was no more, dying of the bullet wounds he received. Truly a tiger, who fought till the end, gave sleepless nights to the Indian enemy – the British. His heroic resistance to the end won the admiration of Charles Tegart the British intelligence officer, who led the capture. “Though I had to do my duty, I have a great admiration for him. He died in an open fight.” Salute and respect to you, Jatin Bagha, truly a hero. Charles Tegart also claimed that had Bagha Jatin been an Englishman, his statue would be right up there along with Lord Nelson’s in Trafalgar Square. Unfortunately in our country, not many even know about him, except in Bengal and Odisha.

I could not forget the injumction of the only man I ever obeyed almost blindly, Jatin Da’s heroic death must be avenged. But in the meantime I had come to realise that I admired Jatin Da because he personified, perhaps without himself knowing it, the best of mankind,” said M. N. Roy.

Bagha Jatin’s ideals were inspired by Swami Vivekananda, he was truly the youngster with muscles of iron and nerves of steel, whom Swamiji wanted. “Amra morbo, jagat jagbe” – that is, “We shall die to awaken the nation”. And he indeed did that, his heroic fight was an inspiration to many brave sons and daughters of India who fought for her independence. It were revolutionaries, like Jatin Bagha, who made the British dreadful of another specter of 1857 and ultimately made them decide on their own to leave India in their own interest. There is no iota of doubt that in fact it were these Indian revolutionaries who made India free and the contrary claims are intentional falsifications of history.   

Making Democracy Work Better in India

By: Shreepal Singh

1. Man is by nature creative, provided he is allowed freedom. His creativity has no limits. A multitude of humans can create wonders and achieve glorious things beyond imagination. Population is an asset, provided people are free, intelligent and not obsessed with religious fanaticism. In religious fanaticism, human energy and creativity are diverted to an objective that is destructive.
2. Man is an animal by nature, mostly driven by instincts, unless he is put in restraint by his own discretion, personal psychology, social norms or the fear of law.
3. All individuals are not equal in the matters of their education, intellectual capacity, psychological inclinations, economic circumstances and the amount of wealth one has. Always there are some who are more educated, wealthy and capable than others.
4. We live in groups, which we call society. In society, people live together and depend on each other in almost all matters that are crucial for their individual life.
5. These separate groups are formed in society because of their sharing of common concerns based on their common ethnicity, religion, political ideology or economic circumstances etc. These groups in their common conduct behave with other similar groups, just as individual persons behave with one another. These groups too compete and struggle with each other to protect and safeguard their collective interests. Just like an individual is actuated in his conduct by his basic instincts of survival, dominance etc., so does a group do in its relation to other groups in society. Because of this social behaviour, these groups based on caste, ethnicity, religion, region, economic interests or political ideology have their own peculiar sensitivities, priorities and preferences.
6. In our liberal democratic system, we grant under our Constitution an equal right and freedom to every citizen to carry on trade, profession or business according to one’s likings. But the hard reality is that every citizen is not equal in the matters of one’s education, intelligence, capability, economic circumstances and wealth. Because of these differences among individuals, every citizen is not equal in taking the advantage of equal rights and freedom granted by our Constitution.
7. The facts that these equal rights and freedom are allowed to us by our Constitution and that every citizen is not equal in the matters of education, intelligence, capability, economic circumstances and wealth, a situation arises in our society where a few who are in advantageous position on this aspect of equal rights and freedom become more powerful and wealthy in comparison to those who do not have these advantages in equal measure. This is the starting point – the fountainhead – of the distortion of our liberal democracy.
8. The essence of liberal democracy is that here in this political economic system every citizen has an equal amount of rights and freedom and all these citizens – that is, people – rule themselves, which is beautifully paraphrased as, ‘The rule of the people, for the people, by the people’. Here we come from the people’s equal rights and freedom to the people’s right to rule themselves and the issue of the distortion of democracy.

9. In our liberal democracy, people rule themselves. But they do not – and can not – rule themselves in person; people rule through their representatives. What a beautiful idea that in ruling ourselves we, that is ‘We the people’, can have our ‘representatives’! This idea is an invention of our liberal democracy. So in our democracy, we elect our representatives, who rule on our behalf. Here does onset the distortion of democracy.

10. This distortion comes in three ways. Firstly, in our liberal democracy, representing others – that is, representing people – becomes a business in itself. The spirit of democracy does not allow that it should be the life-long business or profession of some individuals to represent others. But in reality, in our democracy it is a business, it is the whole time business and it is the exclusive business of some persons. They do nothing in their life but to represent the will of others. This is the first distortion of democracy.

11. Then, this democracy is faced with the most important aspect of its life: How to ensure that the will of people is really represented through their representatives. This is made possible by a Constitutional provision guaranteeing the equal right of all to elect or get elected to the governing body by the periodical elections. Here every citizen has an equal opportunity to elect. But to get elected he needs to fulfil one additional precondition: He or she needs to earn a public perception about him or her – he or she needs to grow as a well-known brand. In the society, persons who themselves belong to that class who have got an advantage in terms of their economic circumstances and wealth, more often enjoy a lesser positive public perception than those persons who belong to that class who are so disadvantaged. In democracy, public perception can make or unmake a person in the matter of getting elected to the governing body. Cultivation of public perception with the help of wealth, which is not equally available to all citizens, is the second distortion of our liberal democracy.

12. However, in rare and exceptional circumstances, in our democracy some persons who may belong to (and represent the interests of) the disadvantaged poor may earn a better public perception and get elected. It may happen and do happen, though rarely. If it so happens, then such charismatic leader naturally tries to advance the interests of those to whom he or she belongs. And, if he does so, his positive public perception is rapidly multiplied and, in the same measure, the class of the advantaged lot get alarmed to the coming danger to their interests. Such people are intelligent, capable and wealthy. They use their money power and intelligence to divide the common electorates along the caste, ethnicity, religion or region lines so that the positive public perception of the charismatic leader, which happened to rule the country despite their money power, is nullified. This is the third distortion of liberal democracy.
13. However, a society that adopts this liberal democracy races faster in economic advancement in comparison to the society that does not adopt such liberal system. It is for this reason that the liberal democracies are more developed in the matter of science and technology, defence capabilities, wealth generation and achieving higher living standards for common citizens. All these achievements are of the crucial importance to humans living in groups.
14. The facts that all individuals are not equal in their capabilities, that human is basically an animal driven by his instincts, and that those who happen to be more capable become wealthy and powerful, inevitably create a situation in society where the less capable masses become victim of the exploitation at the hands of those who are more capable.
15. In liberal democracy, this freedom of everyone to act and right to reap the fruits of that act is reflected in its political institution of electoral democracy. However, in liberal democracy an unfair advantage of their wealth is always taken by those who happen to be more capable. They utilize their power of wealth to distort the institution of electoral democracy. They utilize their money power to help those politicians, who in fact protect their own economic interests  rather than those of the less capable  ones, who constitute the majority. This capable wealthy class of persons create conditions wherein the popular political leader in fact representing the interests of the less capable masses is projected in poor public image, so that he is not elected. They distort the democracy and do not allow the will of the majority reflected in the electoral results.
16. Though generally in the liberal democracy the will of the majority – who are less capable – is not truly reflected in the matter of democratic self governance, still this system is congenial to the fast paced economic development and progress of society.
17. To cure this deficiency, it is advisable to allow the more capable the freedom to act and the right to reap its fruits, but to put at the same time some restraint on them and stop them from unduly utilizing their wealth to distort the democracy.
18. The wisdom tells us that the fast economic progress must be made through our liberal democratic system. Wisdom also tells us that our democracy must not be distorted by the unfair use of money by anyone.
19. Given the human propensity to react to situation that causes pain and suffering, it is very easy for the less capable unfortunate poor to complain, cry, agitate and make revolution without offering an alternative pragmatic solution. But such agitations and revolutions do not provide any solution to the problem. Our world has seen many revolutions that attempted to solve this problem and failed. It is the liberal democracy only that is the best available way for us to achieve the needed fast economic progress of India. But this liberal democracy needs devising in a way that is better and works for India.
20. We suggest the following measures, which – if adopted in our country – would mitigate our problems to some extent:
21. Educate more those who are the uneducated, poor, less privileged and less capable – but who are in the majority in India – by carrying out a sustained vigorous awareness mass campaign directed at them. In this work, utilize the immense capacity of internet to the hilt to educate these ignorant masses.

22. The greatest tragedy that has been historically inflicted on India is that the governance of this country is done in English language, which is an alien language to 90% Indians. It is estimated that about 10% of Indians know and speak English. It is not the question of imposing a single language on a multilingual India. It is a question about the fact that 90% Indians are made ignorant – rather fooled – by those who rule over them, simply because they are governed in a language that 90% of them do not understand. To obviate this barrier, it is advisable to utilize the “translation technology” in every field of governance. It needs to be done under the force of law.  This technology is capable of translating “instantly  and in real time” all that material which is spoken or written by the governing institutions in English language into all local languages of India.
23. Frame a simple “Geo-political Awareness Test” relevant to Indian conditions and make it mandatory for everyone to qualify in this simple test to become eligible to cast vote in any election. This simple quiz must be framed to test in the Indian context the general awareness of our times, history, Geo-political position of India and national integrity.
24. Put a certain limit – say two – on the number of children one can have to be eligible to cast vote in any election beyond which number he or she would be barred from casting vote.
25. Make it mandatory for all citizens to work in defence forces for a certain period of time – say two years or so – to be eligible to cast vote in any election.
26. The motto of these prescriptions should be: “Let our democracy be the true rule of people. Let our people be informed, wise and intelligent. Let all Indians care for their well-being.”

Previous Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: