Sunday, June 11, 2006

Anti reservation protest

It is pertinent to note that protest for anything, whether it is for good or bad, is the basic rights of the people, which are expected not to be stifled by any force so as to safe guard democracy. In the anti-reservation protest, the SC has threatened the agitators to subdue inviting contempt of court is not tasty. Protest for anything would come under law and order problem, which should be looked into only by the executive and that in which the SC need not poke its nose. By doing so it seems that the SC sided with the government to bring the agitation to a halt instead of being neutral. If the agitation is not activated, increasing of seats would not come to the fore. So the agitators have achieved their objectives to some extent only through agitation and not by the interference of the supreme court. Executive, judiciary and legislatures have seperate identity. One is expected not to interfere in another's affairs. They are also expected to safeguard their own interest by themselves. If one interferes in another's affairs the later should get ashamed of for another's interference. If the law and order are maintained properly, the courts would not come into picture. So also if the legislatures are enacting laws carefully the supreme court could not interfere in their affairs. Similarly, if the judgements are just, the legislatures would not interfere to enact laws to undo the judgement. It is better to beat their own trumpets in all affairs.

Monday, June 05, 2006

Causes for the defeat of AIADMK

Many may say many reasons for the defeat of the AIADMK in the 2006 assembly election for Tamil nadu. But the following ought tobe the reasons for its defeat.
1) It failed to bringforth its achievements such as bringing veeranam water to the city, rainwater harvesting, controlling bomblast and LTTE as well as extremists menace ( naxalites ).
2) Another reason may be the autocratic sytle of functioning of the AIADMK chief. Moreover she failed to respect anybody. She never visited Delhi for anything. But she wants others to repect her, for what? is not known. It is unethical. She must have prepared herself to respect others and to have friendship with everybody.
3) She failed to respect the seniors in her party also. viz. Kalimuthu and the finance minister Ponniyan. No body could surpass her in the party. But because of fear she failed to take them into consideration.
4) Announcing freebies is another reason. A person who is out of power can give promises of freebies as he is not in power. But the person who is in power can not give such promises of freebies. If one who is in power wants to give freebies, he can give freebies at the time of power itself. Steeling the freebies announced by the opposition is not viable and anouncing the same freebies is not good.
5) Free cycle scheme to +1 and +2 students as well as women's self employment schemes are being funded by the centre. Then one cannot be taken it as one's own sole achievements.
6) Voiko's vociferous speech has not impressed upon the people, as his alliance was considered tobe unholy one.
7) Reprimanded Sonia Gandhi is another reason. She should not have reprimanded her since Sonia has been a kingmaker even before the Congress came to power at the centre. By reprimanding her doors of friendship have been closed with the congress permanently. Further she failed to have friendship with big ones, either in the congress or BJP, the national parties. If one has a friendship with big ones, others will automatically keep mum. This is ethical. But she failed to do so. Now she is lonely.
These are tobe the reasons for the defeat of AIADMK in the post assembly elections. The AIADMK has not also conducted many party conferences to show the strength of the party.