Debates are manipulating your vote

This is the time when every party tries to manipulate the public opinion towards them. Public are repeatedly fed with one thought so that they simply become slaves to that thought. It is very hard for a person to think on his own as he is continuously fed with the propaganda from different sources around him like television, news papers, and people surrounding him. Through this propaganda public opinion is constructed using debates which happens in our house, college, any other public place, television, any social media like whatsapp, facebook,twitter or in any conferences and meetings. Nothing is exception to this during election time.

The debates in the society during elections construct the opinion for the people to cast their vote in the coming general elections. There are two things. First parties try to construct debates which favour them. Second parties try to construct these debates in their favour. These are most important for voter in deciding one's vote.  Because these debates construct the thinking of the voter.

Before voting will the people think about the decisions taken by the government in the last 5 years which affected them directly? In order for the people not to think on this, the ruling party is shying away from the debate on development. It is not debating on how the govt improved the lives of the people during the last 5 years.

In our surroundings the debates generally are on unemployment, poverty, national security, nationalism, development, corruption and scams, religion, local candidates , etc. Debates on unemployment poverty development take stand against government and are anti incumbent in nature. While debates on nationalism national security and religion generate pro government sentiment so these are pro incumbent debates.
Opposition Indian national congress party has strengthened its debates on poverty, unemployment by proposing schemes such as NYAY , a follow up of successful MGNREGA.

The ruling bharatiya Janata Party that is national democratic Alliance trying to build debate on national security by using various incidents such as pulmava, the air strikes following that and by raising debates on articles 370 and 35A.The issue of Ram Mandir is also made to debated a lot. If people are debating on these issues then it means that they are doing so instead of debating on their political, economical, social and cultural development 

NDA initiated the debate on nationalism, if UPA joins the bandwagon extending the debate then it results in a benefit to the government because the people would have debated on poverty unemployment and others that will generally benefit opposition .

The ruling party is banking on nationalism. You can observe this from the speeches of narendra Modi , most union ministers and other leaders who are supporting bjp. BJP is making national security a bigger issue than poverty, unemployment and development. Party representatives smartly ask you to attend the conferences where your thought process is gradually altered forcing you to forget existential issues  which are important for your development.

All southern and north eastren states are completing their election by third phase. In these parts ram mandir cannot be a bigger issue and ruling party is solely using national security as its main issue. Most of the nothern India goes for election in the last four phases. BJP will try to bring Ram mandir to the forefront in addition national security after 23rd april when the third phase completes. For the party to come in power last four phases are very important for BJP and it will leave no stone unturned. It all depends how the opposition projects itself and takes the debate away from ram mandir and national security and bring unemployment, poverty and development into the forefront.

So know that you are being pulled into a debate and your thoughts are manipulated by your communication. Know what you really want and what is truly important for you before voting.

Let Democracy prevail

            In Indian democracy people elect government and so the governments have the legitimacy of people. The elected governments have the power to make laws and take administrative decisions which come under its ambit according to the constitution. From the very definition of democracy elected governments draw the authority to ‘administer the people’ from the people itself. So this concludes that the elected governments gain defacto (real or original) power in the subjects it is entitled to. The real power is attained from the feature “democracy” itself. So stripping a government of defacto powers of popularly elected government by higher government who enjoys dejure (nominal and legal) powers is against democracy.

           In Delhi people elected government so that they will be ruled by it. If the government of Delhi do not have the defacto powers in its sphere then what is the use of electing it by people. As it is elected by people Delhi government draws the authority from the people who have elected it and not by the debate whether it is union territory or state.

           Constitution i) allows minimal coordination in the whole nation, ii) specifies who has the power to make decision in a society, iii) limits the power of government, iv)fulfill the aspirations of society and v) expresses the fundamental identity of people(Indian). Constitution of India draws its legitimacy from people as they consensually accept it.

             Delhi High court has pronounced a verdict that Delhi being union territory the final authority rests with lieutenant governor. This interpretation is reflection of constitution specifying who has the power to make decisions but not reflecting the people’s legitimacy on it. This is an interpretation of constitution rather than the aspirations of people from whom the constitution draws it’s authority from. People of Delhi wanted to be ruled by a government of their choice(in the subjects it is entitled to do). People of delhi have elected a government to rule them for 5 years. Constitution says they are to be ruled by some other (LG) whom the people of Delhi have never endorsed. Here constitution is against the wishes of people. As lieutenant governor is taking over defacto power in every decision of government it reflects that he is against the wishes of the people. This results in decrease of legitimacy of constitution by the people. It is not good for the nation to take the authority on the people by saying constitution has granted me to rule over you. This is belittling constitution. Let democracy prevail.