Thoughts at the begining of the Year.

What a week. First we have the the party with less than 4% of popular votes holding up the nuclear deal, subverting critical reforms in pension, insurance sector in parliament, perpetuating violence on citizens of their own state (see Red cadres beat central forces ) for over 6 months now. Many peaceful protesters at Kolkata Film festivals were arrested, following which the 'intellectuals of the city then heart warmingly stormed the police headquarters and freed them all. The first act was legal, the 2nd (technically) not. The first act saw arrests, the 2nd will not.
On the other hand we have the UP government which gave up on key reforms on agricultural sectors after some protests that turned midly violent and which ironically forced spectators entering a cricket match between India and Pakistan in Kanpur to remove any black items of clothing including socks! Apparently this was to prevent any black cloth waving as a sign of protest during the match, protest against the UP government. So peaceful protest (assuming there were such plans - none that i heard of) is banned but if you are violent the government will be willing to harm 600 million poor farmers to save 10 million of you - just remember looting and arson are your friends in Indian politics.
Witness what happened in Gujrat and the number of orchestrators punished as yet ( no I am not talking of low level arsonists here but the planners)? Think how many of 1984 riots have been punished? How many of Mumbai train blast, Hyderabad bomb blast, Coimbatore blast perpetrators have been brought to book? What about the Kashmir victims? The victims in Northeast?
I recently read about the stories that won the Ramnath Goenka awards for journalism 2006. Some of the pieces coupled with my own observations recounted above and earlier posts are frighteningly leading me to conclusion that the nation of Gandhi actually listens to only violence which the political classes and executive reward while peaceful protesters are arrested, raped, killed.
I remember a friend who was in one of India's top civil services resigning and leaving for abroad. What he said than was that we Indians are a nation of the savage. I then thought that it was the reaction of a poetical mind to harsh realities. As I am realizing now, he just had seen much more of the system.
Its a sombre thought to start the Indian new year.

Updated 16 Nov 2007 : In the end all are equally bad. I agreed with Budhadeb's argument that population must move away from agriculture into industry. To that extent what happened in Nandigram (West Bengal) - probably a legitimate protest against land being acquired too cheap was turned by politicians into a movement against industrialization.
Instead of explaining to people why industrialization is necessary the ruling party decided to send its armed cadres to kill the opposition - not the argument, but the arguer itself! And the CM justifies the killing saying that its fair to retaliate against opposition! How is this different from the argument toted out for the Gujrat riots which we all condemn none so harsh as the left. How is it different from argument of terrorists - someone harmed me/my faith so i'll kill the next school gathering?
And how can a ruling party send its own people to "rescue" a locality and ask police to sit out for weeks while people are killed/maimed/raped? No doubt both sides of the divide were armed but how can the 'state' sit out? And if it does, how can one not then understand groups who say to hell with the state - lets get on our own and if it means killing few or many its OK. Is it not the same argument that the CM is making?