Crime of Innocence

Crime of Innocence
In my school days if something got stolen then victim of theft used demand of bag checking of everyone before we leave home. It was usual that the one who used to cry out loud for innocence “Check mine first, I don’t want to waste my time for this stupidity” turns out to be the thief.

I thought these all are childish ways to get away from crimes we do but it is not! The more we get the identity of white man the more we use such black magic to hypnotize benign people. Recently prime minister of India shockingly commented that “Who gives bribes are guiltier than who takes!” My question to dear prime minister is who asked to rate the crime? How it matters that murderer of two should be punished before murderer of one? Or why should even a person of PM’s stature should do such childish complain? To whom he is complaining? Or why the hell are we distracting from the point that taking bribe is equally a crime!
Why the brains at Delhi are desperate to convince us that they are less to blame? First they don’t work, second they don’t take the blame of it and third, more heinous, is that they not at all feel guilty of it too. They simply pass the buck and if caught behind smile sheepishly.
Mr. Prime Minister once defended “Bribes must be legalized in some areas” I again am willing to ask some questions… certainly not “In which areas’?” is my question. Rather... “How those willing to pay will pay bribes who are even not able INR 2.00 per KG food grains?” or “Do Mr. Prime Ministers has any plans of Direct-Cash-Transfer to receive bribes?” or “How would he prefer the payments?” Well certainly like the policies they create, their wishes too are shortsighted. They fool us as good as they fool themselves.
I once was the judge of debate competition in some youngsters were given a topic “Should Politicians have minimum qualification?” I was shocked to see the topic. I realized the capacity of policy makers to befool us. I mean why this topic? On what ground this can be a subject to debate? Isn’t it they are distracting us from the point? When even they know the simplest answer that democracy means the candidate must be elected by people’s vote. Now whoever he is… a criminal, an ignorant, a deaf, dumb, mute or mental… he must be elected by people’s choice. The game here is that we have rights to selected but no rights to reject! Let me explain, if I am a voter and I don’t want to vote anybody listed then I simply will least likely vote. This means that I have silently selected the one who got maximum votes! How? Well, because electorate will declare the verdict based upon how many votes drawn and ignore who all did not cast their votes so you may assume that you have not participated in election but reality is that you did! This implies that… that debate competition should have the topic “Voters must have right to reject” because than only our votes will be counted.
There is no law in India which can effectively prove that ‘misguiding someone is a crime and it has serious implications’. More painful is that Indian judiciary is too weak to raise doubts on politicians. They have again converted this democracy into feud where whatever they are doing is innocence and whatever we are doing is crime. By and large I want to say that their crime is that they are innocent.