Honour Killing or Killing the Honour?

Four of her neighbours burnt a 16 year old village girl alive while her father was out for the alleged suspicion that the girl had some sort of physical intimacy with a boy.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Cities/16-yr-old-girl-burnt-alive-in-Ghaziabad/articleshow/4308359.cms
Such is the moral policing of the commune.
The points to be raised are nothing new.
Is having a love-relation a crime? Such a crime that the lovers should be killed?

I have nothing to say about it, I am sad.

Few days ago, while discussing about parental rights and selling of babies to the willing couples who want to adopt a child,(Commercializing the Womb) I came across an opposition that parental rights should not be allowed to be sold because only natural-parents can give a good care for the child.
So here is another news related to it.
A father is convicted of raping his own daughter since 9 years regularly. The thing is, the mother of that girl also helped her father to sexually exploit the girl.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Cities/Dad-raped-me-thrice-every-week/articleshow/4298348.cms

Democracy and Propaganda

Human is a rational being, yet he is not perfect. We do possess rational faculty, our potential to judge what is right and what wrong is, what reality is and what is manipulations, yet we are prone to err, and that is why it is every Individual's responsibility to keep a keen eye on his standpoints and avoid the "herd-instincts" to take over his personal ability to judge.
We discussed how group psychology affects the crowd mentality that can easily be misdirected to create havoc in forms of riots, terrorism, aggression and other forms of crimes. "The Crowd Mentality and Terrorism"
Yet, the group psychology not only is used to perpetuate some wrong, many a times the group psychology and manipulations also are used to avoid unnecessary clashes of choices and attain the desired results in best possible way that can be achieved through persuasions and propaganda.
"Propaganda is the deliberate, systematic attempt to shape perceptions, manipulate cognitions, and direct behaviour to achieve a response that furthers the desired intent of the propagandist." —Garth S. Jowett and Victoria O'Donnell
In a democracy, where majority rule decides the policies to be put forward and accepted, the Propaganda and manipulation proves out to be necessary and inalienable tool for the politics and politicians.
Edward Bernays, popularly known as the father of public relations techniques explicitly explained the necessity of manipulations and propaganda in the Democratic system. In his book Propaganda, he mentions—
The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government, which is the true ruling power of our country. ...We are governed, our minds are moulded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. ...In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons...who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires, which control the public mind.
Being the close nephew of Sigmund Freud, Edward Bernays was well aware of the psychoanalysis and group psychology.
Although in a democracy, where the certain individual rights can be maintained by means of property rights, freedom of speech and expressions etc, we can assume that manipulating masses in order to rule over them is not that easy, yet we forget that since our early childhood, whatever we use, eat, drink, learns and allowed to accept is closely knitted by the same governing system and that provide enough indoctrination for the citizen to accept the governing system without any difficulty, inquiry or a surge to know "Are we victims of the Propaganda"?
In a free market with no government interference, this possibility of indoctrination reduces to minimum as any propaganda can be counter debated and exposed freely, free market provide the common citizen a way to create new choices too so that the spectrum of available solutions may increase.
On the other hand, in a government controlled monopolistic system, no matter it may be democracy, the lack of options and inability of the system to provide new options often creates hurdle and extreme problems regarding propaganda and manipulations.
Nazism was a propaganda accepted by Germans democratically, and Hitler besieged the democracy too with the success of that propaganda.
Most of the policies put forth by the politicians for the electorate are basically tuned up by certain propagandas and the politicians do their best to manipulate the electorate in order to win their confidence.
It obviously becomes the responsibility of the individual than, to attain the self-knowledge, to understand and accept the importance of rational selfishness, his motto of existence and use his rational faculty to decide for what is real and what is an ill-propaganda.
In a government controlled system where the system decides what we should learn, how we should be educated, it becomes difficult for an Individual to actually analyze how free he is. Often he fails to question the decisions made for him by the invisible rulers and accepts the rule as the only possible way, often he turns out to be eulogizing those regulations without actually surmising the reason behind them or checking whether they make any sense.
The heard-instinct and group psychology works well over such indoctrinating system and the individual accepts the dominance of the ruling few, as the only possible way.
Yet, not all accepts the defeat and some innovative minds do dare to question, search and find out the realities and expose the truth based on reason. Often we call them iconoclasts. Society never accepts the Iconoclasts and their entrepreneurial innovations, the society victimizes the iconoclasts and terms the new options searched through as treason, treachery, heresy and anti-social they term the iconoclast as anarchist, the enemy of system. Yet, history is evident that only the iconoclast who dares to challenge the majority against the ill-beliefs, and denies accepting the popular ways of indoctrinations, provides the stimulus for the society to prosper, flourish and liberate itself further.

The Courtroom!

Prosecuting Attorney: (to the jury) I solemnly ask of every man who hears this case, to let his own mind pronounce a verdict upon it. You have heard the testimony of the state's witnesses. The confession of Peter Keating (Who Roark drew the plans for) has made clear that Howard Roark is a ruthless egoist who has destroyed Cortlandt Homes for his own selfish motive. The issue which you are to decide is the crucial issue of our age. Has Man any right to exist if he refuses to serve society. Let your verdict give us the answer. (to the judge) The state rests.

Judge: The defence may proceed.

Roark: (to judge) Your honour, I shall call no witnesses. This will be my testimony and my summation.

Judge: Take the oath.

Court clerk: Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

Roark: (to clerk) I do. (to the jury) Thousands of years ago the first man discovered how to make fire. He was probably burnt at the stake he'd taught his brothers to light. But he left them a gift they had not conceived. And he lifted darkness off the earth. Throughout the centuries there were men who took first steps down new roads armed with nothing but their own vision.

The great creators, the thinkers, the artists, the scientists, the inventors stood alone against the men of their time. Every new thought was opposed, every new invention was denounced. But the men of unborrowed vision went ahead. They fought, they suffered and they paid, but they won. No creator was prompted by a desire to please his brothers. His brothers hated the gift he offered. His truth was his only motive. His work was his only goal. His work - not those who used it. His creation - not the benefits others derived from it. The creation which gave form to his truth.

He held his truth above all things and against all men. He went ahead whether others agreed with him or not. With his integrity as his only banner. He served nothing and no one. He lived for himself and only by living for himself was he able to achieve the things which are the glory of mankind. Such is the nature of achievement. Man cannot survive except through his mind. He comes on earth unarmed. His brain is his only weapon. But the mind is an attribute of the individual. There is no such thing as a collective brain. The man who thinks must think and act on his own. The reasoning mind cannot work under any form of compulsion. It cannot be subordinated to the needs, opinions or wishes of others. It is not an object of sacrifice.

The creator stands on his own judgment. The parasite follows the opinions of others. The creator thinks, the parasite copies. The creator produces, the parasite loots. The creator's concern is the conquest of nature. The parasite's concern is the conquest of Man. The creator requires independence - he neither serves nor rules. He deals with men by free exchange and voluntary choice. The parasite seeks power. He wants to bind all men together in common action and common slavery.

He..(the prosecuting attorney)...He claims that Man is only a tool for the use of others. That he must think as they think, act as they act, and live in selfless, joyless servitude to any need but his own. Look at history - Everything we have, every great achievement has come from the independent work of some independent mind. Every horror and destruction came from attempts to force men into a herd of brainless, soulless robots; without personal rights, without personal ambition, without will, hope or dignity. It is an ancient conflict. It has another name - the individual against the collective.

Our country, the noblest country in the history of men, was based on the principle of individualism. The principle of Man's inalienable rights. It was a country where a man was free to seek his own happiness. To gain and produce, not to give up and renounce. To prosper, not to starve. To achieve, not to plunder. To hold as his highest possession, a sense of his personal value. And as his highest virtue, his self-respect. Look at the result. That is what the collectivists are now asking you to destroy. As much of the earth has been destroyed. I am an architect. I know what is to come by the principle on which it is built.

We are approaching a world in which I cannot permit myself to live. My ideas are my property. They were taken from me by force, by breach of contract. No appeal was left to me. It was believed that my work belonged to others - to do with as they pleased. But they had a claim upon me, without my consent. That it was my duty to serve them, without choice or reward. Now you know why I dynamited Cortlandt. I designed Cortlandt. I made it possible. I destroyed it. I agreed to design it for the purpose of seeing it built as I wished. That was the price I set for my work. I was not paid.

My building was disfigured at the whim of others who took all the benefits of my work and gave me nothing in return. I came here to say that I do not recognize anyone's right to one minute of my life. Nor to any part of my energy, nor to any achievement of mine. No matter who makes the claim! It had to be said. The world is perishing from an orgy of self-sacrificing. I came here to be heard. In the name of every man of independence still left in the world. I wanted to state my terms. I do not care to work or live on any others. My terms are: a man's right to exist for his own sake. (Roark sits down)

He was found not guilty by the jury on the criminal charges.

(original link-- The Fountainhead)

"Don't help me or serve me, but let me see it once, because I need it. Don't work for my happiness, my brothers - show me yours - show me that it is possible - show me your achievement - and the knowledge will give me courage for mine."

Private Security System and IPL

India is going through an interesting moment.
Recently, The IPL committee commissioner announced the dates and venue for the upcoming cricket matches of IPL. Thoroughly independent private bodies under the headship of BCCI or ICL and now this new IPL arrange cricket in India.
The interesting twist in the tale of cricket is, now the dates of IPL matches are clashing directly with the dates of Indian General Elections.
Today in morning when the current Home Minister of India Mr. P. Chidambaram gave statements about the inability of government to provide security for the proceedings of IPL matches and exhorted the commissioner of IPL Mr. Lalit Modi to change the schedule of IPL and postpone it to re-scheduled after general elections in India, everybody though Lalit Modi will be forced out to agree with the proposal to postpone IPL.
Yet, in the evening, Mr Modi suggested new schedule in which he changed the dates but not the period. That is, now IPL matches will go on simultaneously with elections, although no match will be held in any city on the date of voting in that city.
Still this new schedule does not solve the problem of security as central government and state government have clearly denied to take responsibility of security for IPL matches. The reason being, a big chunk of security services officials will be busy in providing security for various politicians, election workers, officers, electoral booths, etc. As Indian elections will remain under the threat of terrorist attacks and so will be the IPL, government find itself unable to provide security for both of the ventures simultaneously, and that is twist of the tale.

Mr. Modi has accepted that it will be difficult for government to provide desired security, yet he is not ready to change the dates!
So the question is, how will he manage and what is he planning for providing security for the players, grounds, ground workers, match referees, umpires, audience and the cheerleaders?
Now that is a big call specially when just 3 months ago Mumbai faced extremely dangerous terrorist attack, how will he able to provide security to his seven chosen venues of Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata, Bangalore, Jaipur, Hyderabad, Chennai all?
How will manage to gain the trust of the players to play?
Well he is trying to manage the task with the help of private security forces.
It is a difficult task. Yet I feel that if it really happens and Mr Modi succeeds in inaugurating and completing the IPL cricket series without the help of Indian central or state government police and security services, than it will be a new era of libertarianism in India, the era of private security services.
After Taj Attack, even Ratan Tata announced that he will be looking forward to create a private security net much better and efficient than what we get right now.
If now Mr. Modi succeeds in finishing the IPL series at the scheduled time in same period when Indians will be voting for the new government, people will start realizing that government security system is not the only way to provide security for the common man, and that will create a platform for a strong, reasonable and practical solution for the monopoly of government in police and security systems.
Mr. Modi is talking with current private security providers in India and he is also planning to engage German and France and other European private security services to help in completing the task.
I know it will be extremely difficult for Modi and whole BCCI and IPL management to complete this task, yet if anyhow they succeeds, it will give a strong reason for Indian libertarians to stage a revolt against monopoly of state in security system and raise the issue of privatization of security forces.

Pakistan, cricket, terrorism and conspiracy

After the terrorist attack on Srilanka cricket team, Pakistan government is playing the cards of blame game again.

Lahore commissioner Pervez Khusro said, we could not rule out Indian involvement in the terror attack on the Sri Lankan cricket team.

A retired ISI official Rt. General Hameed Gul said that India was trying to weaken Pakistan, India wanted to declare Pakistan a terrorist state and the firing on Sri Lankan cricket team is a part of that conspiracy.(more on Times of India)

This is not the first time when Pakistan tried to colour its fallacies, intelligence failure and security lapses as some conspiracy against Pakistan. Even Indian government do the same. It seems like a cats fight, Indian government will blame Pakistan for every Indian security failure, and Pakistan government will blame India for its own security failure.

Conspiracy has become cliché, too much overused.

Yet all these incidents significantly shows one reality and that is, governments are seriously unable to protect common citizens, even they cannot protect a foreign delegate. Now since in a government ruled state, there is monopoly of government over the security system, they seriously lack any competitive check for their own failures and blaming the other countries becomes a hide out for them.

The common man in the absence of any better alternative find himself forced to believe such blames and that further infuriates the environment, creating further grounds of discontent, disbelief and hatred.

It is not hard to realize that the terrorist attack on the Sri Lankan team simply suggest that the security net was thoroughly breached by terrorists, they had information about the route through which team will be headed to the Gaddaffi cricket ground, they exactly knew how much security guards will be there with the Sri Lankan team. Anyone can surmise that the terrorists has all prior knowledge and hence they were able to plan the attack in such a managed way, that is, the terrorists have connections within the security services of Pakistan too.

In case of Hotel Taj attack also, we simply cannot rule out the possibilities of help for the terrorists to implement their attacking plan from within Indian borders. Furthermore, just like Pakistan had prior information that some terrorists may try to attack and harm the Sri Lankan team, Indian intelligence and government had information about a possible terrorist attack at specific points of Mumbai, and yet the intelligence and security services failed.

The way Indian and Pakistan government blames each other for conspiracies and support for terrorist attacks just strengthen the illusion that a country can stabilize and progress only at the cost of the failure of other state. Now that is a blatant lie.

If the neighbouring states of India remain in troubled waters, even India cannot maintain peace, individual liberty, security and progress, and this is true for other neighbouring states too.

The very basic and simple idea of cumulative progress is the environment of peace, justice, individual liberty and security within whole of the Indian sub-continent and adjoining states. A failure of Pakistan or Bangladesh or Sri Lanka cannot help India, nor does a terrorist attack on India help any other country by any means. Such acts can destroy progress, wealth and human life only; they cannot bring forth any sort of progress or success.

Yet, the states are unable to provide any secure, peaceful friendly and trustworthy environment and that aborts any try to improve the human life and its standards.

It is very easy to claim that certain brutal minds cause such havoc. Some may blame fundamentalist nature of Islam Taliban and other insurgent groups and to insure safety against such insurgent groups, they will claim strong government is necessary.

So can we say that Pakistan was better under military rule of Pervez Musharraf?

Often people ignore the fact that the real cause of such fissures in intelligence and security system actually signifies the failure of the government system. India is suffering similar failure and nobody has any solution.

Furthermore, when there are inklings that the terrorist have some links in the inner realms of security departments, we cannot expect a proper investigation and a justified trial for the real conspirators and criminals behind the crime.

Overall, the situation is fuzzed up.

The security lapses although can be rectified, yet can any government monopoly provide a proper security system progressive and competitive enough?

With whom will they compete and on what grounds.

Obviously, when they have no solution for the existing problems, they will keep blaming each other in hope of gaining some sort of relief.

Ultimately, it would be the individuals who will need to give up their subjective view point and will have to realize the sanctity of life; they will have to realize the importance of peace, freedom, happiness and they will have to realize the importance to defend themselves too.

Let us hope that apart from engaging in blame games, and announcing restrictive laws on common innocent citizens, these governments will take some positive steps to solve out the problem of terrorism and militancy.