We cannot have it both ways. There were liberals who wrote opinion pieces about how the pandemic is being used as an erosion of democracy. Would you have supported the centre confiscating health as a subject when India had low Covid cases ? That was when we could have acted.
The fact is this: federalism is bad in pandemics. This had been proved in every place. USA could have avoided so many deaths if it had centralized directives. Europe is still reeling from Covid due to lack of EU level policies for stopping Covid. India’s suffering now is similar.
Even right now, when the situation had become too large to control, the *correct* procedure is to have the centre confiscate the power of the states and enact national level policy on Covid. This will be more effective in fighting the disease. But will we support it?
The situation has become so bad that we have idiotic elements of chaos, like the farmer protesters, who want to march onto Delhi amidst a raging pandemic! We have a highly irresponsible media spreading panic and fake news. Does this call for emergency powers? No.
We are a democracy. A fundamental rule of democracy is that everyone has a share in the responsibility. It cannot all be passed to the centre. If you are willing to pass the responsibility to the centre, be prepared to also accept a centralization of powers.
If we are not capable of being a democracy, and hundreds of thousands of people die needlessly because of it, what is the better alternative:
Centralize the powers and deal with this in a war footing?
Or hold the states accountable?
Or both?
We need a policy, not a blame game.
I will argue that the answer is “both”. Blaming the states is necessary. A detailed investigation must be performed on the lapses last year. The centre must take over the powers temporarily and enact national policy.
But health must be returned to the responsibility of states.
This is me arguing against @Ram_Guha in April last year, that we should have a centralized national level policy for fighting Covid. I wish the powers remained with the Centre the whole of last year. We wouldn’t have seen this disaster now.
First, Merkel mentions that Europe cannot defend itself by itself,but needs the NATO. Similarly, she says, that Europe must be part of the global supply chains of production. There are problems, like with the current Covid pandemic, where supplies of pharmaceuticals have stopped.
In this context, she mentions India. She says that India became a global pharmaceutical giant, and Europe "let it be" (werden lassen) also from the European point of view, with specific commitments about supplies etc. This is not as bad as "allowed it to" in the translation.
At the least, patents are an open publication. It is really sad that the vaccines are not open sourced. This is an important service to protecting health across the globe. It should be supported through a global commons. Not profit making endeavors that are closed from scrutiny.
The bad habits from our IT and digital communications market, where the overall cyber health of our infrastructure is left compromised by closed source systems, are being extended to our own health infrastructure.
It is high time that we get our act together.
If we soon don’t have a functional global commons and a dedicated funding to support such health infrastructure, we can be certain that more nastier viruses will appear on the globe, or even developed as bio weapons by rogue actors, and we will remain defenseless against them.
Whatever success India's top institutions got is simply due to the talent aggregation from a vast country. But they are terribly underperforming compared to the size of India. Nehru's policy of destroying Indian languages ensured that they are disconnected from Indian industry.
Why credit Nehru for starting these institutions? Why not the Islamist Maulana Azad who was gifted the role of the Education Minister of India? The Maulana was so scientific that he didn't even have a degree.
Nehru had so much of scientific temper that he pissed off C.V. Raman.
It is ridiculous that Nehru is given laurels for all the hardwork that Indian scientists achieve, despite
* the terribly low funding to higher education
* the terrible government interference in R&D
* the terribly low success in retaining top students within India for research.
There is no universal definition of "religion" (or "faith"). In fact, the various Sampradāyas of India are not faith-based, but practice based. Even the philosophical tenets (like the 8-fold noble path of Buddha) are not "faith based". They are a practice driven by self-inquiry.
Some scholars, like S.N. Balagangadhara argue that even the reconstruction of Indian Sampradāyas as "religion" is problematic. The native word is "Dharma", which is a universal ethic, which is grouped into "Sampradāyas" (traditions) that are not mutually exclusionary.
తంత్రికాజాలశిక్షణ ద్వారా జరిపిన అవకలనచిత్రణం వినియోగించి అతి భారీ త్రివిమరూపనిర్మాణాలను శరవేగంగా చిత్రణం చేయగల ప్రక్రియ ఇది! త్రివిమరూపాలను వస్తువర్ణధర్మాలను సంక్షిప్తపరిచినప్పుడు చిత్రభూమికపై కలుగు లోపాలను కనిష్టీకరించు ఉత్తమసంక్షిప్తాలను ఈ ప్రక్రియ గణిస్తుంది. #విజ్ఞానవిశేషాలు
నిజప్రపంచపు వస్తువుల త్రివిమప్రతిగ్రహణకు ఇటువంటి పద్ధతులు వాడేవాళ్లము. ఇలా కృత్రిమవస్తుచిత్రణకు, అతి భారీ సమరూపాల స్వసిద్ధసరళీకరణకు సంక్షిప్తీకరణకు యంత్రశిక్షణ ప్రక్రియలు ఉపయోగిస్తారని ఊహించలేదు. ఎంత త్వరగా మారిపోతోంది ఈ కాలం! కృత్రిమచిత్రణ పాఠ్యాంశాలను మొత్తం తిరగవ్రాయాలి. 😀
The supposed divergence of Buddhism from Dharma is a cock and bull story manufactured by colonial Indologists. In reality, Buddhism is just one other Sampradāya of Dharma. Once you see this clearly, you will see the scam that separates 500+ million Buddhists from other Dharmics.
The best antidote to the colonial bullshit are the works of Ananda Coomaraswamy. Arguing from fundamental principles, he explains how all the tenets of Buddhism have deep roots in traditional Indic texts. All the symbolism of Buddhism is intertwined with other streams of Dharma.
Obviously, Buddhism is an independent Sampradāya with its own distinctive features. But such is the case with million other Sampradāyas of Dharma, grouped into "Hinduism". Colonial scholars have successfully separated out other streams as well: Divide and Hunt is the policy.