Does a Bachelor’s degree mean education in politics
Hasan Davar July 19, 2002
#16 Posted by harimau on July 20, 2002 2:38:22 am
It is wonderful to be in Tamil Nadu during the celebration of erstwhile Chief Minister the late Mr. Kamaraj`s centennial year.
Kamaraj gave Tamil Nadu the best, least corrupt administration. During his leadership, Tamil Nadu ranked quite high among the industrialized states of India. It also made tremendous strides in education and health care.
Mr. Kamaraj set an example which other Congress leaders reluctantly followed when he resigned his chief ministership to devote himself to party work. Nehru used the Kamaraj Plan to get rid of unwanted hacks who were in power in various states, including Morarji Desai in the central cabinet.
Mr. Kamaraj was offered the Prime Ministership of India by the Congress Party when Lal Bahadur Shastri died but turned it down. He chose to make Indira Gandhi the Prime Minister.
A lifelong democrat, he steadfastly opposed Indira Gandhi`s Emergency and was held under house arrest. To atone for her crime, Indira Gandhi posthumously awarded Mr. Kamaraj India`s highest honor, the Bharat Ratna. If she had offered it to him when he were still alive, he would have turned it down. When he died, Mr. Kamaraj`s assets totalled a few pairs of dhotis and kurtas and his glasses.
When the statewide University of Madras was bifurcated for the first time, the state of Tamil Nadu chose to name the resulting second university The Madurai Kamaraj University.
Mr. Kamaraj`s formal education stopped with the 3rd grade.
Kamaraj gave Tamil Nadu the best, least corrupt administration. During his leadership, Tamil Nadu ranked quite high among the industrialized states of India. It also made tremendous strides in education and health care.
Mr. Kamaraj set an example which other Congress leaders reluctantly followed when he resigned his chief ministership to devote himself to party work. Nehru used the Kamaraj Plan to get rid of unwanted hacks who were in power in various states, including Morarji Desai in the central cabinet.
Mr. Kamaraj was offered the Prime Ministership of India by the Congress Party when Lal Bahadur Shastri died but turned it down. He chose to make Indira Gandhi the Prime Minister.
A lifelong democrat, he steadfastly opposed Indira Gandhi`s Emergency and was held under house arrest. To atone for her crime, Indira Gandhi posthumously awarded Mr. Kamaraj India`s highest honor, the Bharat Ratna. If she had offered it to him when he were still alive, he would have turned it down. When he died, Mr. Kamaraj`s assets totalled a few pairs of dhotis and kurtas and his glasses.
When the statewide University of Madras was bifurcated for the first time, the state of Tamil Nadu chose to name the resulting second university The Madurai Kamaraj University.
Mr. Kamaraj`s formal education stopped with the 3rd grade.
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#15 Posted by bluenoon26 on July 20, 2002 2:38:22 am
From Indian Express:
``... their (people from lower economic classes) increasing numbers as key decision-makers is, in fact, one of our republic’s greatest achievements. It reflects the spread of egalitarianism in our society. Particularly when compared with our immediate neighbours, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal and Bhutan, where feudalism still prevails and the ruling elite is largely restricted to a select few families.``
Now Pakis get very upset about India being given credit for being world`s largest democracy. Well -this is why India is known as the largest democracy - because it gives equal opportunities to ALL its people. It doesn`t restrict power to an elite class of ``bachelors``.
read the the whole article:
Lower middle class makes it to the top
Coomi Kapoor
There is a class of Indian society perennially obsessed with the question, ‘what will foreigners think of us.’ Their complaint is that representatives of our country abroad do not have the etiquette and style expected of the truly well-bred and well-educated.
They cringe when they watch a debate between an Indian and a Pakistani on foreign television channels like CNN and BBC. Their unhappiness is not so much with the content of the Indian’s argument, but that the Pakistani looks more suave and polished with his Saville Row suit, gelled hair and Oxbridge accent, compared to the Indian with his middle class mannerisms, desi accent and shiny safari suit.
This class even makes snide references to Abdul Kalam’s LMC (lower middle class) origin and style and compares him unfavourably with the more sophisticated heads of state of some other countries. The term LMC coined by Delhi’s fashionable PLUs (people like us) has a disparaging and patronising tone.
It conjures up someone whose English accent is not up to scratch; who says ‘liar’ when he means ‘lawyer’ and refers to his ‘career’ prospects as if he was talking of an aircraft ‘carrier.’ Someone who picks up his clothes from the Lajpat Nagar main market rather than going for designer labels or ethnic chic kurtas. Someone who is unsophisticated enough about his travels abroad to display his purchases on his drawing room mantle piece and puts plastic flowers in his vase.
But while the snobbish PLUs deplore the growing presence of LMCs at all levels of society, their increasing numbers as key decision-makers is, in fact, one of our republic’s greatest achievements. It reflects the spread of egalitarianism in our society. Particularly when compared with our immediate neighbours, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal and Bhutan, where feudalism still prevails and the ruling elite is largely restricted to a select few families. Prominent people from such countries may be more familiar with the finer points of etiquette — such as whether the finger bowl at the Rashtrapati Bhavan banquet was for washing hands or the fruit — but they are hardly typical of the societies they represent.
Our next president’s life story should be a source of pride, not concern. The son of a poor boatman, he was the first in his family to attend college and his sister had to hawk her jewelry to raise his college fees.
His education was entirely in his own country — Kalam does not sport any of the fancy foreign degrees our PLUs consider so essential a part of the finishing process.
K.R. Narayanan was from an equally deprived background. The son of a Dalit ayurved doctor, he had to struggle to pay for his middle school education and graduated from college and later the London School of Economics through scholarships.
If one examines the backgrounds of our 10 past presidents, one finds a large number of them came from LMC families. What is more, the LMC presidents, like Zail Singh and K.R. Narayanan, generally displayed greater initiative and courage in questioning the actions of government, whereas those from affluent families with an Ivy League education abroad, like Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed, were extremely pliant.
In the political arena, if Pakistan has its Bhutto and Sharif dynasties, we too have our share of Gandhis, Abdullahs, Badals and Scindias. The difference is that, despite the dynasties, most of our politicians belong to the LMC and have climbed up the greasy pole thanks to their own sweat, caste kinship and capacity for intrigue.
Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee is the son of a school teacher and a poet of very modest means. Bihar regent and former chief minister Laloo Prasad Yadav comes from a humble shepherd’s family who once thought the ultimate thing to do was to be recruited as a police constable.
Laloo moved from the veterinary college peon’s quarters where his brother lived, to the chief minister’s mansion in Patna.
Mayawati, a former elementary school teacher who aspired to join the IAS, triumphed over the triple handicap of gender, caste and modest means to become the chief minister of Uttar Pradesh.
The dynamism, vigour and motivation of the lower middle class is exemplified by the phenomenal success of the late Dhirubhai Ambani. The son of a school teacher from Chorwad village in Gujarat who did not complete high school, Ambani knew from personal experience the meaning of struggle. He worked for seven years as a petrol pump attendant in Aden and later as a yarn dealer in Mumbai he lived in a two room tenement with a family of seven.
Ambani changed the parameters of Indian industry and the share market, shoving aside the complacent, monopolistic, plutocratic old business families like the Tatas, Wadias and Singhanias to create India’s largest business group. His unauthorised biographer Hamish McDonald described him as an ‘‘iconoclastic poster boy of a new India: Brash, fierce, pushing his way up from the bottom.’’
Fifty years ago, officers of the Indian Army came from the country’s social elite; several boasted of blue blooded connections. Today, around half of our officers are the sons of NCOs (non commissioned officers) and JCOs (junior commissioned officers), certainly a more egalitarian break-up than the armies in the rest of the subcontinent.
We can take justifiable pride in the fact that our last army chief General V.P. Malik was the son of a JCO, something unimaginable in the Pakistani Army.
A recent study of the backgrounds of those who qualified for the all-India services and central services between 1998 and 2002 shows that an overwhelming majority were from the lower middle class. Twenty two per cent were from lower income families whose annual income was less than Rs 36,000; 34 per cent from middle income families with an annual income between Rs 36,000 and Rs 96,000; 29 per cent belonged to the upper middle income and only 15 per cent came from the high income bracket.
``... their (people from lower economic classes) increasing numbers as key decision-makers is, in fact, one of our republic’s greatest achievements. It reflects the spread of egalitarianism in our society. Particularly when compared with our immediate neighbours, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal and Bhutan, where feudalism still prevails and the ruling elite is largely restricted to a select few families.``
Now Pakis get very upset about India being given credit for being world`s largest democracy. Well -this is why India is known as the largest democracy - because it gives equal opportunities to ALL its people. It doesn`t restrict power to an elite class of ``bachelors``.
read the the whole article:
Lower middle class makes it to the top
Coomi Kapoor
There is a class of Indian society perennially obsessed with the question, ‘what will foreigners think of us.’ Their complaint is that representatives of our country abroad do not have the etiquette and style expected of the truly well-bred and well-educated.
They cringe when they watch a debate between an Indian and a Pakistani on foreign television channels like CNN and BBC. Their unhappiness is not so much with the content of the Indian’s argument, but that the Pakistani looks more suave and polished with his Saville Row suit, gelled hair and Oxbridge accent, compared to the Indian with his middle class mannerisms, desi accent and shiny safari suit.
This class even makes snide references to Abdul Kalam’s LMC (lower middle class) origin and style and compares him unfavourably with the more sophisticated heads of state of some other countries. The term LMC coined by Delhi’s fashionable PLUs (people like us) has a disparaging and patronising tone.
It conjures up someone whose English accent is not up to scratch; who says ‘liar’ when he means ‘lawyer’ and refers to his ‘career’ prospects as if he was talking of an aircraft ‘carrier.’ Someone who picks up his clothes from the Lajpat Nagar main market rather than going for designer labels or ethnic chic kurtas. Someone who is unsophisticated enough about his travels abroad to display his purchases on his drawing room mantle piece and puts plastic flowers in his vase.
But while the snobbish PLUs deplore the growing presence of LMCs at all levels of society, their increasing numbers as key decision-makers is, in fact, one of our republic’s greatest achievements. It reflects the spread of egalitarianism in our society. Particularly when compared with our immediate neighbours, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal and Bhutan, where feudalism still prevails and the ruling elite is largely restricted to a select few families. Prominent people from such countries may be more familiar with the finer points of etiquette — such as whether the finger bowl at the Rashtrapati Bhavan banquet was for washing hands or the fruit — but they are hardly typical of the societies they represent.
Our next president’s life story should be a source of pride, not concern. The son of a poor boatman, he was the first in his family to attend college and his sister had to hawk her jewelry to raise his college fees.
His education was entirely in his own country — Kalam does not sport any of the fancy foreign degrees our PLUs consider so essential a part of the finishing process.
K.R. Narayanan was from an equally deprived background. The son of a Dalit ayurved doctor, he had to struggle to pay for his middle school education and graduated from college and later the London School of Economics through scholarships.
If one examines the backgrounds of our 10 past presidents, one finds a large number of them came from LMC families. What is more, the LMC presidents, like Zail Singh and K.R. Narayanan, generally displayed greater initiative and courage in questioning the actions of government, whereas those from affluent families with an Ivy League education abroad, like Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed, were extremely pliant.
In the political arena, if Pakistan has its Bhutto and Sharif dynasties, we too have our share of Gandhis, Abdullahs, Badals and Scindias. The difference is that, despite the dynasties, most of our politicians belong to the LMC and have climbed up the greasy pole thanks to their own sweat, caste kinship and capacity for intrigue.
Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee is the son of a school teacher and a poet of very modest means. Bihar regent and former chief minister Laloo Prasad Yadav comes from a humble shepherd’s family who once thought the ultimate thing to do was to be recruited as a police constable.
Laloo moved from the veterinary college peon’s quarters where his brother lived, to the chief minister’s mansion in Patna.
Mayawati, a former elementary school teacher who aspired to join the IAS, triumphed over the triple handicap of gender, caste and modest means to become the chief minister of Uttar Pradesh.
The dynamism, vigour and motivation of the lower middle class is exemplified by the phenomenal success of the late Dhirubhai Ambani. The son of a school teacher from Chorwad village in Gujarat who did not complete high school, Ambani knew from personal experience the meaning of struggle. He worked for seven years as a petrol pump attendant in Aden and later as a yarn dealer in Mumbai he lived in a two room tenement with a family of seven.
Ambani changed the parameters of Indian industry and the share market, shoving aside the complacent, monopolistic, plutocratic old business families like the Tatas, Wadias and Singhanias to create India’s largest business group. His unauthorised biographer Hamish McDonald described him as an ‘‘iconoclastic poster boy of a new India: Brash, fierce, pushing his way up from the bottom.’’
Fifty years ago, officers of the Indian Army came from the country’s social elite; several boasted of blue blooded connections. Today, around half of our officers are the sons of NCOs (non commissioned officers) and JCOs (junior commissioned officers), certainly a more egalitarian break-up than the armies in the rest of the subcontinent.
We can take justifiable pride in the fact that our last army chief General V.P. Malik was the son of a JCO, something unimaginable in the Pakistani Army.
A recent study of the backgrounds of those who qualified for the all-India services and central services between 1998 and 2002 shows that an overwhelming majority were from the lower middle class. Twenty two per cent were from lower income families whose annual income was less than Rs 36,000; 34 per cent from middle income families with an annual income between Rs 36,000 and Rs 96,000; 29 per cent belonged to the upper middle income and only 15 per cent came from the high income bracket.
#14 Posted by krashid on July 20, 2002 2:38:22 am
The important thing to look is power politics.
With the current power structure, with army at the helm of power. It would like to continue its hold on power.
The main purpose is to divide internally the political process and create an assembly which can work under current dispensation.
To achieve this purpose, important thing is to break the main political forces which can mount any challenge to Army rule, especially when in power. In this regard sacking and creating rift in Army by Nawaz Sharif is not a distant past.
So in effect we should expect a plan by Government where they should be able to bribe or coerce the impotent members of assembly and continue their rule.
If this is clearly seen. Then two or three stint of prime minister, or graduation of members of assembly or any other so called amendments to 1973 constitution should be seen.
In this regard, it is interesting that Government has so far tried to do many experiments.
For example its initial horse, Imran Khan and Tahirul Qadri have been dumped. (And so are lamenting and criticising these days). Muslim League Quaide-Azam (with apology to Mohammed Ali Jinnah), Sind Democratic alliance and Farooq Laghari are its main pillar. Muslim League Q has its own problems of leadership (and consists only of leaders).
One thing is clear. Political process will not be allowed to continue. And struggle of political forces (from right to left will take the form of struggle against ruling group and in worst of scenario may be diverted against army.
Since Pakistan Army has compromised on its basic presumption for its survival and is ready to play as a tout of America to keep its hold on power, it should have no difficulty in holding to power.
The only question is when this dust settles who is going to foot the bill, which is being taken taken in the name of people of Pakistan.
With the current power structure, with army at the helm of power. It would like to continue its hold on power.
The main purpose is to divide internally the political process and create an assembly which can work under current dispensation.
To achieve this purpose, important thing is to break the main political forces which can mount any challenge to Army rule, especially when in power. In this regard sacking and creating rift in Army by Nawaz Sharif is not a distant past.
So in effect we should expect a plan by Government where they should be able to bribe or coerce the impotent members of assembly and continue their rule.
If this is clearly seen. Then two or three stint of prime minister, or graduation of members of assembly or any other so called amendments to 1973 constitution should be seen.
In this regard, it is interesting that Government has so far tried to do many experiments.
For example its initial horse, Imran Khan and Tahirul Qadri have been dumped. (And so are lamenting and criticising these days). Muslim League Quaide-Azam (with apology to Mohammed Ali Jinnah), Sind Democratic alliance and Farooq Laghari are its main pillar. Muslim League Q has its own problems of leadership (and consists only of leaders).
One thing is clear. Political process will not be allowed to continue. And struggle of political forces (from right to left will take the form of struggle against ruling group and in worst of scenario may be diverted against army.
Since Pakistan Army has compromised on its basic presumption for its survival and is ready to play as a tout of America to keep its hold on power, it should have no difficulty in holding to power.
The only question is when this dust settles who is going to foot the bill, which is being taken taken in the name of people of Pakistan.
#13 Posted by fuzair on July 19, 2002 11:15:15 pm
RE: Post #8
Actually, he is an LSE dropout, if I remember correctly. So, no, he cannot contest the elections, even if his conviction is overturned on appeal.
Actually, he is an LSE dropout, if I remember correctly. So, no, he cannot contest the elections, even if his conviction is overturned on appeal.
#12 Posted by Ras Siddiqui on July 19, 2002 9:51:03 pm
Hasan,
Welcome to CHOWK!
And for what its worth you have my vote for
articulating your views on this subject
extremely well.
Ras
#11 Posted by concerned on July 19, 2002 9:06:10 pm
the `graduate` requirement is not restricted to `college degrees` as commonly understood around the world, i believe.
therefore, the wobbling students from madarsas with `graduate` degrees would be eligible for candidature, one would think. this would also increase the % of population with graduate degree from 2% to a somewhat higher number.
therefore, the wobbling students from madarsas with `graduate` degrees would be eligible for candidature, one would think. this would also increase the % of population with graduate degree from 2% to a somewhat higher number.
#10 Posted by fuzair on July 19, 2002 8:57:53 pm
The Davar article presupposes that ``vox populi, vox Dei`` (the voice of the people is the voice of God). Personally, looking at the Pakistani National Assemblies for the past two decades or so, I`ve come to the conclusion that ``vox populi, vox stultorum`` (the voice of the people is the voice of stupidity). Heck, why pick on Pakistan. Look at the US Senate and the House. I don`t see too many truly capable people there either.
I think I have to agree with Hobbyty here. If we can impose all kinds of other restrictions, than why not this one as well? If nothing else, this requirement should get rid of a few Maulanas at least!
I think I have to agree with Hobbyty here. If we can impose all kinds of other restrictions, than why not this one as well? If nothing else, this requirement should get rid of a few Maulanas at least!
#9 Posted by hariharan on July 19, 2002 8:53:44 pm
OOOOh, I get it now!
I think Uncle Mushy won the election by 97%, I guess,which is the usual margin in any despotic election;
Perhaps, he wants to make himself ``feel`` better knowing that since 98% don`t have college degree and can`t stand for election for the state or for the party. His premise could be that blind can`t lead the blind.
Some sort of poetic justice, Musharraf style.
I think Uncle Mushy won the election by 97%, I guess,which is the usual margin in any despotic election;
Perhaps, he wants to make himself ``feel`` better knowing that since 98% don`t have college degree and can`t stand for election for the state or for the party. His premise could be that blind can`t lead the blind.
Some sort of poetic justice, Musharraf style.
#8 Posted by hariharan on July 19, 2002 8:53:44 pm
Does that mean Omar Sheikh, the lunatic dude responsible for Pearl`s death can contest election since he is a graduate, that too from a prestigious university?
I know he has been convicted but isn`t he appealing?
I know he has been convicted but isn`t he appealing?
#7 Posted by khokan on July 19, 2002 8:53:44 pm
Two months ago, General Pervez Musharraf
clearly went for a overkill when he questioned
Benazir Bhutto`s educational attainments and
doubted that they met the new requirements to
be a candidate in the October elections:
DAWN, Karachi, Pakistan
07 May 2002 Tuesday 23 Safar 1423
Musharraf says role of army being considered: Future setup
excerpt
...About return of Benazir Bhutto, president Musharraf said she didn`t leave because of me. She ran away because she was facing prosecution for corruption. ``If she comes, she will be taken to court, and justice will take its course. And if she really comes, it is, moreover, not even clear whether she is actually qualified to be a candidate. We want educated people in power. And her level of education is unclear to date,`` he said...
Well, General Pervez Musharraf`s minions, if
not the General himself, must have overheard
the ensuing snickers. So, just two months after
publishing General Pervez Musharraf`s less than
complimentary comments on Benazir Bhutto`s
educational attainments, DAWN has now published
a glowing report on the General`s educational
achievements:
DAWN, Karachi, Pakistan
Wednesday July 03, 2002-- Rabi-uss-Sani 21, 1423 A.H.
dawn.com
Musharraf qualifies for president`s office
By our correspondent
ISLAMABAD: General Pervez Musharraf qualifies for the office of the president as he possesses post-graduate degrees required by the constitutional package, said Lt-Gen (retd) Tanvir Naqvi here on
Monday.
Naqvi, who heads the National Reconstruction Bureau (NRB), said that President Musharraf had secured different degrees over the years in line with his career in Pakistan Army and other relevant institutes and universities. President Musharraf did his Masters in Defence and
Strategic Studies from the National Defence College (NDC), which is affiliated with the Quaid-I-Azam University, Islamabad, Naqvi continued.
He said that President Musharraf was a graduate from the Punjab and Balochistan Universities. ``There is no problem as far his education.`` Naqvi said that by the time a soldier reaches the level of a general officer, he gets equipped with educational degrees by undergoing
various courses at the Staff College Quetta, National Defence College (NDC) and others. ``Besides these, a soldier undergoes war courses and others spread over more than 1,000 hours,`` said the NRB chief.
clearly went for a overkill when he questioned
Benazir Bhutto`s educational attainments and
doubted that they met the new requirements to
be a candidate in the October elections:
DAWN, Karachi, Pakistan
07 May 2002 Tuesday 23 Safar 1423
Musharraf says role of army being considered: Future setup
excerpt
...About return of Benazir Bhutto, president Musharraf said she didn`t leave because of me. She ran away because she was facing prosecution for corruption. ``If she comes, she will be taken to court, and justice will take its course. And if she really comes, it is, moreover, not even clear whether she is actually qualified to be a candidate. We want educated people in power. And her level of education is unclear to date,`` he said...
Well, General Pervez Musharraf`s minions, if
not the General himself, must have overheard
the ensuing snickers. So, just two months after
publishing General Pervez Musharraf`s less than
complimentary comments on Benazir Bhutto`s
educational attainments, DAWN has now published
a glowing report on the General`s educational
achievements:
DAWN, Karachi, Pakistan
Wednesday July 03, 2002-- Rabi-uss-Sani 21, 1423 A.H.
dawn.com
Musharraf qualifies for president`s office
By our correspondent
ISLAMABAD: General Pervez Musharraf qualifies for the office of the president as he possesses post-graduate degrees required by the constitutional package, said Lt-Gen (retd) Tanvir Naqvi here on
Monday.
Naqvi, who heads the National Reconstruction Bureau (NRB), said that President Musharraf had secured different degrees over the years in line with his career in Pakistan Army and other relevant institutes and universities. President Musharraf did his Masters in Defence and
Strategic Studies from the National Defence College (NDC), which is affiliated with the Quaid-I-Azam University, Islamabad, Naqvi continued.
He said that President Musharraf was a graduate from the Punjab and Balochistan Universities. ``There is no problem as far his education.`` Naqvi said that by the time a soldier reaches the level of a general officer, he gets equipped with educational degrees by undergoing
various courses at the Staff College Quetta, National Defence College (NDC) and others. ``Besides these, a soldier undergoes war courses and others spread over more than 1,000 hours,`` said the NRB chief.
#6 Posted by arjun_m on July 19, 2002 6:21:22 pm
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#5 Posted by hobbyty on July 19, 2002 6:21:22 pm
Does a Bachelor’s degree mean education in politics?
Formally, academically educated legislators are necessary for the functioning of a legislature. Think of the men and women who created Pakistan and India – were they not formally educated, were they not highly educated lawyers? Does the present and any predicatable near future, allow us to believe that our lives, our institutions will be better served by persons with little or no formal education? Isn’t the opposite the case?
“In a democratic environment, the electorate is free to elect a candidate of their choice.”
Incredible! Unimaginably ignorant. Would it be fair to say that it is a REQUIREMENT that the candidate in question be a citizen? Would it be fair to say that such a candidate not be a convicted criminal serving his/her sentence? Would it be fair to say that such a candidate not be a person who by common sense and consensus, we may agree is very young, for instance, a person who is not yet of 18 years of age? If these seem fair to us and we agree that there are requirements that must be met to be considered a candidate for the office of representative to the national legislature – We have established that candidates to the national legislature must meet certain requirements. Now, as we agree on the question of requirements, how then can we disagree, that the requirement most directly related to the ability of the candidate to SERVE (not perform, as if some circus clown), that is to say, a formal education? Does a legislature have anything to do with Laws? Ought Laws to be the purview of the uneducated? This relates directly to the degree of one’s education or ignorance of the reason of and for Democracy.
Democracy is a form of government which seeks to harness power of rulers, that is to say, that it inherently mistrusts power even as it recognizes it’s utility. Informed as it is of the nature of power, that it lends itself to abuse, it calls for the separation of powers (not balance of powers). Democracy by harnessing and separating the power of rulers seeks in this way to rationalize the policies of the rulers, protect the rights of citizens and attain the public good. Its method includes the establishment of a representative legislature, consultative assemblies on every level of decision making, peaceful transfer of power, legal impeachment of rulers, freedom of expression, plurality of political expression, public education and the freedom of press and such.
“A government cannot presuppose that a candidate will perform better as a representative simply because he holds a Bachelor’s degree. Whether a candidate’s academic qualifications equip him better to represent his constituency, only his constituents can determine, not a government.”
Indeed? Can one, presuppose, that a candidate without a university education is better able to serve? Is education a requirement at all? If it is, then Mr. Davar’s position ought to be how much education is appropriate and indeed it is – the lack of university education disqualifies candidates on behalf of whom he argues, he seeks to tilt the field in favor of those less educated, therefore less able to serve as legislators. But why just use a university education or undergraduate requirement? Why not Matric or Masters and Phd or a law degree? It has already been established that there are requirements for candidacy, why ought not these other possible requirements be considered? In my opinion they ought to be. Persons desiring to be physicians educate and undergo training, the same with engineers, actually, in most all professions – the same ought to apply to legislators.
“By mandating this requirement, the government has distorted the right of the voters to determine the criteria by which they will elect their representatives.” A ridiculous argument – it supposes that no a priori propositions exist. As if we can argue whether we voted to give ourselves the right to vote. In his piece Mr. Davar points out and his piece is an example of it, that there is debate - how then has the right of the voter been distorted?
“With that, the objective of the elections to produce an assembly that performs the function of representing the voters has been compromised.”
On the contrary, a Democracy is not majoritarianism, it is government of and by LAWS. This partricular requirement was challenged in the supreme court and supreme court has decided it’s legitimacy. Shall we not be ruled by law? Shall we become the rule of the mob because uneducated or undereducated shall not be eligible? Will we next argue that the standards of education and training of those who wish to be physicians or engineers or legislators be degraded to allow greater representation of the lazy in these fields of endeavor?
“A quasi-representative assembly that lacks popular credentials will remain in conflict with non-elected popular leaders and widen the chasm between public opinion and government officials.”
“Popular credentials”? Winning the election is popuylar credentials`` enough? indeed, the elected if they be elected by persons in districts where the level of education and the number of educated is low, ought themselves be less educated – how is this argument different from arguing that only Muslims may represent Muslims? Can a Muslim elected in a largely non-Muslim district really have “popular credentials”?
“It is debatable whether the Bachelor’s degree holding candidates who get elected will meet the expectations that are being raised of them for falling in the educated category.”
Debate itself is the hallmark of freedom as value in society. Village idiots of construct circular arguments, beware!
“Just having been schooled to acquire an academic credential does not mean one is educated enough to perform a task that has nothing (at times even something) to do with ones schooling.”
The tyranny of the ignorant is a better alternative? What academic credentials suggest is that the holder of those credentials has acquired knowledge and training in the method of education and that they have the training to acquire greater knowledge and to act upon it.
“Education can be acquired through experience and not necessarily only through formal schooling. A popular leader with no degree but a lifetime in politics could be better educated to represent his constituents than a Bachelor’s in Art History.”
Indeed no education, especially formal university education is required for those who aspire to the field of politics and the requirement of BA is for those who have such aspirations. The requirement of the BA is incumbent on those who desire to serve as legislators, that legislators can also be politicians does not mean that their ablity to serve requires that they not meet the requirement prescribed by law. The standards for legislators and politicians ought therefore to be higher, not lower. It is a great responsibilty they aspire to and it is a great confidence that they seek - they ought to aspire a similar confidence among voters who can judge ability to serve and dedication to values such as the creation of a better life through education
Experience is a great teacher – The next time you wish to consult a physician, in your case, a neurosurgeon (unfortunately lobotomy is not a reversable procedure), by all means consult one that has not fulfilled the requirement of education and training, one who does not have “academic credentials”.
Think! Mr. Davar, If it is true that experience is a great teacher and that we ought to be grateful for such men and women, think, how much grateful we would be if such experience was coupple with the determination to acquire a formal education, and one that meets the minimal requirement of law.
“In a country where neither past governments nor the present one has fulfilled the responsibility of providing the masses with access to schools and universities, the Bachelor’s degree requirement is a mismatch with the realities of grassroots politics in Pakistan.”
Indeed, and you would have us believe that persons who have themselves not seen any value in formal education would nevertheless, want the citizens of this country to have greater access to schools and universities? Thieves will create academies to turn out police persons, will they? No sir, we will nver concede that an OUGHT CAN BE DERIVED FROM AN IS.
“No government can arbitrarily declare its citizens to hold a minimum academic standard unless it has first made literacy commonplace.”
Why stop there Mr. Davar? Why not argue that democractic governance is not possible unless literacy is commonplace? That as literacy is not common place, laws may not be enacted, indeed, obeyed?
Formally, academically educated legislators are necessary for the functioning of a legislature. Think of the men and women who created Pakistan and India – were they not formally educated, were they not highly educated lawyers? Does the present and any predicatable near future, allow us to believe that our lives, our institutions will be better served by persons with little or no formal education? Isn’t the opposite the case?
“In a democratic environment, the electorate is free to elect a candidate of their choice.”
Incredible! Unimaginably ignorant. Would it be fair to say that it is a REQUIREMENT that the candidate in question be a citizen? Would it be fair to say that such a candidate not be a convicted criminal serving his/her sentence? Would it be fair to say that such a candidate not be a person who by common sense and consensus, we may agree is very young, for instance, a person who is not yet of 18 years of age? If these seem fair to us and we agree that there are requirements that must be met to be considered a candidate for the office of representative to the national legislature – We have established that candidates to the national legislature must meet certain requirements. Now, as we agree on the question of requirements, how then can we disagree, that the requirement most directly related to the ability of the candidate to SERVE (not perform, as if some circus clown), that is to say, a formal education? Does a legislature have anything to do with Laws? Ought Laws to be the purview of the uneducated? This relates directly to the degree of one’s education or ignorance of the reason of and for Democracy.
Democracy is a form of government which seeks to harness power of rulers, that is to say, that it inherently mistrusts power even as it recognizes it’s utility. Informed as it is of the nature of power, that it lends itself to abuse, it calls for the separation of powers (not balance of powers). Democracy by harnessing and separating the power of rulers seeks in this way to rationalize the policies of the rulers, protect the rights of citizens and attain the public good. Its method includes the establishment of a representative legislature, consultative assemblies on every level of decision making, peaceful transfer of power, legal impeachment of rulers, freedom of expression, plurality of political expression, public education and the freedom of press and such.
“A government cannot presuppose that a candidate will perform better as a representative simply because he holds a Bachelor’s degree. Whether a candidate’s academic qualifications equip him better to represent his constituency, only his constituents can determine, not a government.”
Indeed? Can one, presuppose, that a candidate without a university education is better able to serve? Is education a requirement at all? If it is, then Mr. Davar’s position ought to be how much education is appropriate and indeed it is – the lack of university education disqualifies candidates on behalf of whom he argues, he seeks to tilt the field in favor of those less educated, therefore less able to serve as legislators. But why just use a university education or undergraduate requirement? Why not Matric or Masters and Phd or a law degree? It has already been established that there are requirements for candidacy, why ought not these other possible requirements be considered? In my opinion they ought to be. Persons desiring to be physicians educate and undergo training, the same with engineers, actually, in most all professions – the same ought to apply to legislators.
“By mandating this requirement, the government has distorted the right of the voters to determine the criteria by which they will elect their representatives.” A ridiculous argument – it supposes that no a priori propositions exist. As if we can argue whether we voted to give ourselves the right to vote. In his piece Mr. Davar points out and his piece is an example of it, that there is debate - how then has the right of the voter been distorted?
“With that, the objective of the elections to produce an assembly that performs the function of representing the voters has been compromised.”
On the contrary, a Democracy is not majoritarianism, it is government of and by LAWS. This partricular requirement was challenged in the supreme court and supreme court has decided it’s legitimacy. Shall we not be ruled by law? Shall we become the rule of the mob because uneducated or undereducated shall not be eligible? Will we next argue that the standards of education and training of those who wish to be physicians or engineers or legislators be degraded to allow greater representation of the lazy in these fields of endeavor?
“A quasi-representative assembly that lacks popular credentials will remain in conflict with non-elected popular leaders and widen the chasm between public opinion and government officials.”
“Popular credentials”? Winning the election is popuylar credentials`` enough? indeed, the elected if they be elected by persons in districts where the level of education and the number of educated is low, ought themselves be less educated – how is this argument different from arguing that only Muslims may represent Muslims? Can a Muslim elected in a largely non-Muslim district really have “popular credentials”?
“It is debatable whether the Bachelor’s degree holding candidates who get elected will meet the expectations that are being raised of them for falling in the educated category.”
Debate itself is the hallmark of freedom as value in society. Village idiots of construct circular arguments, beware!
“Just having been schooled to acquire an academic credential does not mean one is educated enough to perform a task that has nothing (at times even something) to do with ones schooling.”
The tyranny of the ignorant is a better alternative? What academic credentials suggest is that the holder of those credentials has acquired knowledge and training in the method of education and that they have the training to acquire greater knowledge and to act upon it.
“Education can be acquired through experience and not necessarily only through formal schooling. A popular leader with no degree but a lifetime in politics could be better educated to represent his constituents than a Bachelor’s in Art History.”
Indeed no education, especially formal university education is required for those who aspire to the field of politics and the requirement of BA is for those who have such aspirations. The requirement of the BA is incumbent on those who desire to serve as legislators, that legislators can also be politicians does not mean that their ablity to serve requires that they not meet the requirement prescribed by law. The standards for legislators and politicians ought therefore to be higher, not lower. It is a great responsibilty they aspire to and it is a great confidence that they seek - they ought to aspire a similar confidence among voters who can judge ability to serve and dedication to values such as the creation of a better life through education
Experience is a great teacher – The next time you wish to consult a physician, in your case, a neurosurgeon (unfortunately lobotomy is not a reversable procedure), by all means consult one that has not fulfilled the requirement of education and training, one who does not have “academic credentials”.
Think! Mr. Davar, If it is true that experience is a great teacher and that we ought to be grateful for such men and women, think, how much grateful we would be if such experience was coupple with the determination to acquire a formal education, and one that meets the minimal requirement of law.
“In a country where neither past governments nor the present one has fulfilled the responsibility of providing the masses with access to schools and universities, the Bachelor’s degree requirement is a mismatch with the realities of grassroots politics in Pakistan.”
Indeed, and you would have us believe that persons who have themselves not seen any value in formal education would nevertheless, want the citizens of this country to have greater access to schools and universities? Thieves will create academies to turn out police persons, will they? No sir, we will nver concede that an OUGHT CAN BE DERIVED FROM AN IS.
“No government can arbitrarily declare its citizens to hold a minimum academic standard unless it has first made literacy commonplace.”
Why stop there Mr. Davar? Why not argue that democractic governance is not possible unless literacy is commonplace? That as literacy is not common place, laws may not be enacted, indeed, obeyed?
#4 Posted by Nagnatheshwar on July 19, 2002 6:21:22 pm
Does a Bachelor?s degree mean education in politics?
No...
But Politics needs to be educated badly .
In the subcontinent too many ``angutha Chaap`` have been elected.. which is why we are in mess all over.
Though there has been some improvement in basic education level since the independence, still POLITICS is made to look as if only Un or Ill educated can be good at it .
``In a democratic environment, the electorate is free to elect a candidate of their choice.......``
Yehein maar kgha gaya Hindustaan
We all talk about RIGHTS ,CHOICE ,WILL ,but these things are commodities & dont come cheap .You have to be RESOPONSIBLE first ,You cant be a criminal & get elected ,Just as in job you must pass minium requirement as leader you have been determined by constuitutional means to have the requisite degrees if that is what is found to assure minimium standard & expectations.
You dont need degree for many things to operate bus machinse ,tools ,even computers can be mechanically taught BUT only reading writing & rithmetics can make you THINK ,FEEL & EXECUTE your own or others ideas.
Dont try to make a big deal out of ``oh this is politics you wont understand ...leave these political stuff to us ministers & partys ``I challenge a real honorably passed college graduate can DO,all those things of politics in shorter time than the geriatric Atal or Advani taking whole Life to learn!!
The consensus is althiough no body has alladins Lamp to perform flawless every time commanded ,a scholastic achievement indirectly mirrors the capability & capacity of the individual in unforseen circumstances to behave logically rationaly & sanely
#3 Posted by bluenoon26 on July 19, 2002 6:21:22 pm
It will be interesting to see how the Pakistani blue-bloods lurking around in this board react to this one. How, in name of Allah, do you guys manage to come up with such stupid and ridiculous ideas!!! I mean ``killing hindus/kafrs``, ``liberating kashmir by thousand cuts``, ``one muslim = 10 hindus`` - as horrible these ideas are - they are still explainable under circumstances of the extremist existence of a hijacked nation - but how do you defend the idea of a democracy in which only 2% people have the right to power???
How low can you guys go?
How low can you guys go?
#2 Posted by Zakkk on July 19, 2002 6:21:22 pm
I believe some form of basic education should be required for people to contest, graduation is a bit extreme, but considering the standard of the average matriculate, I can understand why people say that, after all people need law makers not, glorified councillors as many of our leaders post 1985 were...
To be fair though, if law makers needed to be qualified people, then assemblies should be packed with lawyers alone...
To be fair though, if law makers needed to be qualified people, then assemblies should be packed with lawyers alone...
#1 Posted by ana on July 19, 2002 6:21:22 pm
``What`s a BA got to do with it?``
Interesting article.
Interesting article.
Interact Index
Latest Interacts
- masadi: Ras writes "RE: #6... Three Cups of Tea
- Inaara: http://allpoetry.com/poem/3988919
Inaara... Demon - Inaara: I was moved by... Demon
- pmishra2: Thanks, KaalChakra for posting... Muhammad Aslam Khan Khattak:
- pmishra2: ugh, yet another of... Muhammad Aslam Khan Khattak:
- captainjohann: Nobody is stopping legal... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- mohar11: Re: # 133 There is... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- ahmedmadani: Re: # 37 Parth... Rape Survivor Families Struggle
