On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 9:02 AM, Pranesh Prakash <[email protected]>wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 11:40, Dinesh Venkateswaran > <[email protected]> wrote: > > I think the Roys (including the Aruna one) are jealous in a most natural > way, > > only because none of their protests for any cause have become national > the > > way Anna's has. Roys, blame the media for not paying enough attention to > > your stuff, please dont blame Anna. > > This is so spectacularly short-sighted that it is astounding. > How so? Maybe you should also reply to the points I raised about the article? > > A pop quiz for all those on a "please don't blame Anna" trip: what > exactly are the difference between the Lokpal Bill and the Jan Lokpal > draft? Check this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Lokpal_Bill I understand this only at this level. Suppose that would be sufficient to take a stand on it? > (Other than the PM exemption, which is really a misnomer since > the Lokpal Bill doesn't provide the PM any kind of immunity from being > prosecuted by the Lokpal after s/he vacates office.) Seriously, I > would like to see intelligent responses to that question. Do you even > care that one bill The truth is most regular viewers of news > channels and readers of editorials cannot answer that question. The > focus, of course, lost ceased to be on the proposed anti-corruption > mechanisms and shifted to the obstinacy, idiocy, brutality, etc., of > the government and the call for arms of 'Team Anna'. > Absolutely. Agree the discussion needs to be on the merits and demerits of the different drafts. > > I, for one, think that the well-structured and thought-out proposal > put forth by Aruna Roy and her colleagues is greatly superior to > either version of the (Jan) Lok Pal that are currently hogging the > limelight. That they don't receive greater attention is due only > because they aren't 'sensationalist' enough, and don't go on hunger > strikes at the Ram Lila grounds and overtly seek their followers to > picture them as a successor to JP and Gandhi. > I did not hear Aruna Roy speaking about her proposal until this became a national issue and people poured out onto the streets. My objection was with the Roys' objection to Anna's approach and their condemning of it. I do not know of the details of Aruna's proposal, so can't comment on it. Will read up later on. > > People don't only raise their voice to seek attention for themselves. > They also raise their voice to seek attention for ideas. To accuse 'the Roys' of being jealous is laughable and is the response I'd > expect from someone who isn't interested in these issues except as a > spectator sport (most sofa- and mouse-potatoes) and has not given any > thought to the content of what they're saying. > > Well, I had a certain reason why I thought they were being jealous. With Aruna Roy on the timing of her proposal, and with Arundhati on the contradictions in her article and her rhetoric. Quote "For three days, while crowds and television vans gathered outside, members of Team Anna whizzed in and out of the high security prison, carrying out his video messages, to be broadcast on national TV on all channels. (Which other person would be granted this luxury?) " ... and for the fact that they have condemned Anna's approach without realising that its no mean feat to make the middle class to sit up and notice, and speak out. Thinking about what you have said, many Indians are not being sofa- and mouse- potatoes for a change. Well, you can accuse me of it, I don't quite mind :)
