A mirror to the world
France is burning, literally. Universally, social unrest is ever incipient, flowing as an undercurrent to surface from time to time, but triggered differently in each nation. The common thread is deep-seated social and economic problems, entrenched poverty, crime, racial discrimination and educational underperformance.
For over two decades now, leapfrogging technology has elevated skill requirements that have taken away (and are taking away) jobs from the traditionally endowed working class. Blunders, as in Ukraine, now threaten to take food away from their plate. Social resentment had to ensue. In this pervasive gloom, France is but an example where one unthinking policeman could set off nationwide mayhem. No nation is immune from this.
Of as much concern or even more, should be the shaping of political governance that is seen to follow in its wake. The spectre of social disruption lures the citizen’s psyche to falsely pitch for strong right-wing dispensations. If a failing Brexit was birthed by the issue of immigration policy, now Europe is seized with it. If Turkey re-elects a die-hard Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Israel picks, yet again, Benjamin Netanyahu who in hubris is hounding for a pliant judiciary. Circa 2024 could well see the return of Donald Trump. The Indian subcontinent too may embrace this disturbing trend.
R. Narayanan,
Navi Mumbai
Governors and troubles
The role of the Governor or Lt. Governors has changed especially in States ruled by the Opposition. India follows a federal structure with governments in the States and at the Centre, each with their own distinct sense of responsibilities and domains to function.
One hopes that Governors and Lt. Governors will handle these ties more sensitively. Governors should realise that they are not pro-consuls of an imperial power and India ceased to be one since it attained freedom — this will only usher in the twilight of our democracy and Governors will not act as the guardrails of the Constitution, as they should be doing. It is one more reason why the office of the Governor should be made an elected office, as is the norm in all democracies, and not nominated as it is now.
H.N. Ramakrishna,
Bengaluru
A statement made by Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M.K. Stalin — “We have always been pleasant, courteous and respectful towards you [Governor] in line with our Tamil culture. However, that does not mean we have to abide by the unconstitutional directives issued by you” — are words that uphold the spirit of cooperative federalism. The words are relevant especially at a time when democracy in India is at the crossroads and increasing attacks on cooperative federalism continue to undermine governance.
Jos Chathukulam,
Perumbaikkadu, Kerala
Nothing can excuse the Tamil Nadu Governor’s misadventure. It is akin to tossing aside the guidelines and norms of parliamentary democracy .
C.A.C. Murugappan,
Kothamangalam, Tamil Nadu
As a layman, I am given to understand that the post of Governor is to oversee whether the State machinery is running according to the Constitution or not. If everything is to be done ‘as per the advice of the Chief Minister’, then what is the need for a Governor? If the Governor is adequately convinced that something is unconstitutional, he/she has every authority to pinpoint the error/s.
T. Raju,
Coimbatore
