Having not slept for last complete night, it was tough for me to go to the Lead India contest’s debate phase where I was invited as a jury member. But having taken the responsibility, I carried my mortal self through the power of my soul that was feeling that I m going to find lots n lots of good things there than I can ever find in a movie show or something where we never miss going if we have bought tickets to.
Quite a good number of people had turned up there and many have made a good research on the candidates(or were doing so right then) as it seemed from the TOI copies in there hands.
I got seated in the hall at around 3:40 PM as they had asked us to do so before 3:45 PM. I was almost sleeping when the debate started and to make it worse, the candidates who were the first to speak were singing good night songs in the hall. The topic of the debate was carefully chosen- Which form of democracy you find is more appropriate in a country like India- The Presidential or The Parliamentary?
The first 3 candidates had their view but were almost reading it mechanically from a paper making me feel sleepier. But from the fourth candidate, the momentum got picked up n that woke me up. Most of them were in the favor of Parliamentary system while one candidate said that the debate is irrelevant as both have there pros n cons and cannot be compared. The last candidate upped the ante by saying that as for so long we have had no success with the Parliamentary one, it becomes somewhat necessary to try the Presidential one.
The candidates who I enjoyed were-
Aseem Puri- He seemed clear about his view and had statistics to back his view. He spoke in the favor of the Parliamentary system.
Sanjiv Kaura- Only candidate to have spoken in the favor of the Presidential one was very good with experience, qualifications, knowledge and confidence to back him. He based his thoughts mostly on what he had himself witnessed n not just theory.
My View-
Both Presidential and Parliamentary forms are equally good as what remains to be seen as who is the leader who’ll get the power in the end. It all depends on the Political will of our Leaders.n the people, i.e. you guys. Its not the system that is at fault here, its us.
If a wood is eaten by termites, whose fault is it??? The wood’s or the Termite’s???
Its we who converted the system to what it is now n now we want a change. If after the change too we keep working like this then we’ll make the other system too the same.
Countries of both types have faced both good n bad situations so citing examples will be faulty but what more can we demand than a mixed one that we already have. We have almost all the good features of both and I say as that everything has changed since we first coined these terms, we should first try to find that are these the only two ways???? Why not try to find even a better one if possible.
Hey thinkers, have u stopped writing or is our technology too loud for any of us to hear you??
Quite a good number of people had turned up there and many have made a good research on the candidates(or were doing so right then) as it seemed from the TOI copies in there hands.
I got seated in the hall at around 3:40 PM as they had asked us to do so before 3:45 PM. I was almost sleeping when the debate started and to make it worse, the candidates who were the first to speak were singing good night songs in the hall. The topic of the debate was carefully chosen- Which form of democracy you find is more appropriate in a country like India- The Presidential or The Parliamentary?
The first 3 candidates had their view but were almost reading it mechanically from a paper making me feel sleepier. But from the fourth candidate, the momentum got picked up n that woke me up. Most of them were in the favor of Parliamentary system while one candidate said that the debate is irrelevant as both have there pros n cons and cannot be compared. The last candidate upped the ante by saying that as for so long we have had no success with the Parliamentary one, it becomes somewhat necessary to try the Presidential one.
The candidates who I enjoyed were-
Aseem Puri- He seemed clear about his view and had statistics to back his view. He spoke in the favor of the Parliamentary system.
Sanjiv Kaura- Only candidate to have spoken in the favor of the Presidential one was very good with experience, qualifications, knowledge and confidence to back him. He based his thoughts mostly on what he had himself witnessed n not just theory.
My View-
Both Presidential and Parliamentary forms are equally good as what remains to be seen as who is the leader who’ll get the power in the end. It all depends on the Political will of our Leaders.n the people, i.e. you guys. Its not the system that is at fault here, its us.
If a wood is eaten by termites, whose fault is it??? The wood’s or the Termite’s???
Its we who converted the system to what it is now n now we want a change. If after the change too we keep working like this then we’ll make the other system too the same.
Countries of both types have faced both good n bad situations so citing examples will be faulty but what more can we demand than a mixed one that we already have. We have almost all the good features of both and I say as that everything has changed since we first coined these terms, we should first try to find that are these the only two ways???? Why not try to find even a better one if possible.
Hey thinkers, have u stopped writing or is our technology too loud for any of us to hear you??
No comments:
Post a Comment