[Reader-list] "Stand up to the mullahs" - Vir Sanghvi

[Rakesh Iyer]

Dear Kshamendra Jee (and all)

I read your reply with respect to the points made by Shuddha jee.

You are not committed to the State and yet you want rights. Only the State
can make available your rights and regulate their protection. Without the
State there will be anarchy.

What this means is that if I don't belong to a state, I can't have a right.
This is absolutely atrocious. Even Amartya Sen, in his book 'Development as
Freedom' has said (in the context of human rights), that this is not
correct.

The reason why an agency (in this case, the state) is required to provide
rights, in our 'organized societies' (I don't know if the migration of
Kashmiri Pandits, the rapes and slaughter of women in Gujarat, and molesting
of women going on in Karnataka right now every day in the name of 'moral
policing are virtues of organized societies.) is that in addition to a
right, this very agency is also going to assign a duty corresponding to the
right, so that a pair of right-duty can be maintained. (as mentioned by
Amartya Sen, Ch-10, Culture and Human Rights, Development As Freedom)

The idea of having a right for any individual, even if the agency doesn't
provide for it, is and must be certainly acceptable. What is wrong in it?
For example, I think that if the Indian Constitution gives the 'Right to
Life', similarly, each citizen must also have the 'Right to Death'. Now the
state doesn't guarantee that right, but does that mean that I can't ask for
rights?  The same argument goes for Shuddha jee or anyone else, whether
he/she believes in state forms or not.

Now about whether it's the state alone which can provide the right or not.
Maybe this statement is true in the current world, and as a realist you may
argue that since this is true, be attached to any state. I however don't
have any knowledge about the past, and hence would like others to enlighten
all of us, regarding the agencies which provided rights to people at
different stages of history.

The problem with state-supporting people is that, they dread anarchy. With
the kind of nation-state we have created (the British were as much
responsible for this), this certainly is a problem. Otherwise, we could have
returned to the 'India of old' where the wars and intrigues were a problem
at the top; the common man at the bottom could peacefully live his/her life.
(The Idea of India, Sudhir Kakar)

Regards

Rakesh