On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 15:08, Dinesh Venkateswaran <[email protected]> wrote: > How so? Maybe you should also reply to the points I raised about the > article?
I didn't reply to any of the points you raised about the article because none of them seemed worth raising points about. But since you've asked me for a response, you said: > While in the first part Ms Roy accuses Anna of trying to impose a > superstructure over the government, another oligarchy, etc., in the latter > half she is kind of accusing him of ignoring many other issues which also > warrant attention. Isn't this somewhat contradictory? No it isn't contradictory. The people behind the Jan Lokpal want to ignore separation of powers, and want one body to have oversight over all. That is objectionable. Given that Anna Hazare's ordering the government what to do, he might as well order it to do a few more things. That is a mix of genuine concern about his anti-politician politics and a snarky remark. Where's the contradiction? > Also, is Anna the authority on all issues, and is Anna responsible for > solving all problems in the country? She should be taking up these issues > with the government. And shouldn't you take these issues up with the government instead of expecting her to solve all these problems for the country? And shouldn't I take these issues up with the government before expecting you to take them up? [Repeat ad infinitum] > 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? A pop quiz is generally not open-book. And even the textbook was wrong in this case. I just edited that page to correct the claims that seemed to indicate that the PM was being made being immune from prosecution. > I did not hear Aruna Roy speaking about her proposal until this became a > national issue and people poured out onto the streets. Aruna Roy was speaking with a number of people, including Arvind Kejriwal, about this issue before people poured out onto the streets. In fact, there were more than ten or eleven drafts of the Jan Lokpal bill _because_ they were speaking with Arvind Kejriwal. I spoke to Nikhil Dey about this issue in early March before Anna Hazare had come on to the Lokpal scene, when it was Arvind Kejriwal, Prashant Bhushan, and SC Aggarwal who were spearheading this. > 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. If one extends your line of reasoning, all public intellectuals write for or against a prominent issue only because of their jealousy.
