The cause of the common man’s misery
The people have been cunningly brainwashed into believing that ‘traitors’ are only the people who betray their country to a foreign country for money or some other reason. Through this clever but effective ploy, they have excluded those who betray their people , the Constitution and the State from the class of traitors. Is a Prime Minister, a Chief Minister , a Minister or a top official who causes heavy loss to the State for money or any other interest or betrays the Constitution guilty of only corruption ( like a common Office Assistant) or of high treason for betraying the people , the country and the Constitution ? They are the real enemies of the nation and its people and we must “Recognise” them as traitors.
When the Constituent Assembly was debating the rights which could guarantee the welfare of the people, it was contended with some justification that the nascent Republic did not have the resources for them. It was claimed that measures like the right to work , right to education and other similar rights indispensable for welfare of the people were beyond the means of the Indian State at that point of time and had to wait. A solution was found in placing the rights not requiring material resources for implementation in Part III of the Constitution and designating them as fundamental rights .They were also made rights which could be enforced by approaching the higher judiciary. The rights to welfare measures were placed in Part IV of the Constitution and designated ‘as The Directive Principles of State Policy'(Art. 36 to 51 ) .These Directive Principles were made non-enforceable by any court (i.e. the courts could not direct the State to implement them .), but with a clear proclamation and commitment that ‘ the principles would be fundamental in the governance of the country and it shall be the duty of the State to apply these principles in making laws.’ India did not have the resources to take care of the welfare of its people on 26 January ,1950 when the constitution came into effect, but did it continue to have the same poverty and lack of resources eversince 1950?
The constitution clearly directs the State to ‘apply these principles in making laws ‘ Have the successive governments been making laws to achieve the goals enshrined in Part IV of the constitution? Realising that a democracy cannot survive if there are vast inequalities in the income of her people and any inequality in the status, facilities and opportunities of her citizens, the constitution directs the State to ‘minimise the inequalities in income and eliminate the inequalities in status, facilities and opportunities ‘ of not only the individuals but also of groups of people [Art 38 (2)]. These could not be accomplished if wealth and means of production of the nation were concentrated in a few hands and the control and ownership of the material resources were distributed disregarding the common good. The Directive Principles [ Art 39 (b & c )] give a clear direction to the State to follow a policy to prevent such a disastrous policy for our democracy.
Taking advantage of the provision that the judiciary cannot force the State to implement the Directive Principles , the successive governments for the last few decades have been following the opposite course betraying the common man and the Constitution. Had the constitution not been betrayed ,there would not have been semi-starved 80 crore Indians, a handful of Ambanis and Adanis and a Prime Minister proudly strutting around in a million rupee suit. Had the constitution and the people not been betrayed ,the governments would not have been the servants of the rich but of the common Indians. Had the constitution not been betrayed, our democracy would not have been reduced to an oligarchy of the rich. Had the constitution not been betrayed, we ( whoever we may be except a billionaire) would have been proud citizens of the Republic of India enjoying an equal status with the highest and mightiest instead of being contemptible worms liable to be crushed unnoticed under the boots of the Masters of our Constitutional rulers if we ever crossed their path.
The irony is that those ,who ever spoke for the poor, are being derided as if they committed a blasphemy. They are not being blamed for their inefficiency, deception or failure but simply because they spoke for the primary interest of the poor of the country.
The Prime Minister, Chief Minister , Ministers and all others holding a constitutional position take an oath to be true to the Constitution of India but deliberately betray its letter and spirit and their own oath. If millions of Indians are living in indescribable misery on account of their unforgivable falsehood and betrayal , they must be held responsible and must be recognised by the people as traitors .