news details |
|
|
| Need of democratic maturity in opposition | | |
Lalit Garg
In the Rajya Sabha on Thursday, Sh. Rajnath Singh, the defense minister presented India’s favor on the antics and misdeeds of China should be appreciated. The way he has presented his view was praiseworthy. But on this occasion, the kind of immaturity that the opposition parties showed on the ultra-sensitive subject of security was rebukable. It seems that the training of democracy is absolutely necessary for these leaders. Rajya Sabha Chairman M Venkaiah Naidu has raised the dignity of democracy by the way he has shown in Parliament for decency, restraint and maturity. Opposition leaders have not shied away from asking questions unnecessarily troubling the security and ultra-sensitive issues or endangering the security of the country. The way he created an undemocratic situation and this situation cannot be called justified from any angle for Indian democracy. The opposition should refrain from asking such questions to siege the government. While the defense minister’s tone of determination towards the neighboring country was natural, at the same time, the sentiments for improvement clearly came out. Despite the arbitrariness of the dictator’s neighbor, his statement only shows the nobility of the country. The defense minister’s statement was more important than it was important, Rajya Sabha Chairman M Venkaiah Naidu’s suggestion to maintain the strength and dignity of democracy. In the Indo-China context, some leaders wanted to ask additional questions, on which the Vice-President asked the Defense Minister to inform key leaders in his chamber and give them information. This mature attitude of the Vice President is commendable and an undertaking to strengthen the foundation of democracy. Nowadays it is a trend to ask all kinds of questions, even if asking such questions on the floor of Parliament puts the country’s security at risk. It is most important for such people to be in moderation and despite this, if they want to ask questions, then the Vice-President has publicly told the way.
The way the Vice-President explained to the MPs on this occasion, he should not have been required by law. He reminded us that this is a sensitive issue and the army is standing on the border. There is propaganda at the international level that there is a difference of opinion on this issue in India. The Vice-President rightly said that we should give such a message through this House that the whole country and Parliament are united with the Army.
He also said that the tradition and culture of India has been based on ‘Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam’ and ‘Sarve Bhavantu Sukhinah’. In the history of thousands of years, we have never attacked any country. Such inspiring speeches of the Vice-President changed the atmosphere, the opposition understood and the opposition leaders also started to call for unity and integrity of the country. Leader of the Opposition in Rajya Sabha Ghulam Nabi Azad even went on to say that ‘his party stands fully with the government on the issue of resolving the dispute with China’.
Opposition came to understand only after the Vice-President explained; it means that they are not familiar with the limits and limitations of democracy. Opposing only for protest is not rational for democracy. The Parliament is a platform to give voice to the 125 crore people of India, where the feedback is not only valuable, but this valuable time gives a new dimension to the elected representatives by their talent, furthering the development of India, and the military. Opposition should have boosted the morale of the central government for these sensitive issues of security. It’s a matter of our beloved country.
Whenever efforts were made to do politics on this supreme platform, then Indian democracy was not only ashamed but its bright existence was also stained. Therefore, the debate on the floor of the Parliament is expected to be polite and moderate. It has often happened when politics is left far behind in the action and debate that takes place here and both houses have power and opposition surround each other in decent ways based on strong and strong facts, healthy discussion and give place to the issues of development and security of the country.
Instead of creating such a positive atmosphere in Parliament, the atmosphere of an electoral assembly is created so horrible and negative. In the unparliamentary atmosphere on Thursday, the Vice-President was forced to teach the opposition the lesson of restraint, it is necessary to think that such opportunities do not come again in the history of Parliament. Solicitation, prejudice and repugnance - such people will be counted who are living out of these three conditions. But when we see the leaders engaged in conducting the politics of the nation today, no one is free from them. Seven decades have passed since independence, the maturity of the charioteers of democracy is not growing, the clean character has not been born, and we have not been trained to strike democracy. It was not seeded or irrigated with manure and water. Today, the requests are growing - without prejudice there is no thought expression and sometimes private and sometimes parties become obstinate for selfishness. Everyone imagines ‘Ram Rajya’, but Mahabharata is created. Mahabharata is also where neither Sri Krishna nor Yudhishthira nor Arjuna. Neither Bhishma Pitamah, nor Karna. All Dhritarashtra, Duryodhana and Shakuni remain. There is no one who follows up the ethics of Geeta. Only negativity is spreading everywhere; there is no co-operation and support. If the opposition parties introduce unnecessary aggression, then the government will respond to them in their own language. Due to this, there is now more noise during the sessions of Parliament. This directly means that the legislative functioning in the Parliament is less, more is chaos.
Ideally this unpleasant situation should be avoided. It is unfortunate that India’s biggest platform of expression has become a chatter box of such ruthless leaders. The dignity and seriousness of the obligation are gone. There is no tradition of thinking with an open mind for national problems, security and development. There are good reasons to believe that the opposition parties were already prepared to make efforts to not let Parliament run on the border issue. When the mindset is misguided, it is “propaganda”. No ideal message can be given to the nation.
The Indian Defense Minister, while referring to the security on the border in an indicative manner, presented the facts related to the country’s force, security and military preparedness in a restrained manner. Wherever he talked about not bending himself, it was also said that we do not want to bow the other’s head too. The sovereignty of any neighboring country cannot be more respected. Even at such a time, the world is seeing the level of decency, restraint and understanding. The tone of China is something in front and something behind the back. He talks of building consensus in the talks, but leaves no stone unturned to increase furiousness on the ground. The defense minister’s statement in the entire context of China is a reasonable response from a democratic and balanced country. China might not even expect such a statement. He must make efforts to bridge the gap between his words and his actions. In these situations, the role of the entire opposition is important and it should present itself, realizing its seriousness. But it seems that today they are living compulsions, not a democratic ideal. They are unable to prove the significance of their being. They cannot differentiate between good and bad, useful and unhelpful. The guide, that is, how holy and meaningful the word was, but now it has become the reason for raising a blank. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
