Comments on: Drinking and Democracy

By: ARUN KUMAR SINGH

ARUN KUMAR SINGH — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 17:36:46 +0000

Respected Sir,
please tell me that my result has been publised or not?
my Reg-No:-61603114002 (B.E Mech)Regulation 2001(Anna University)

By: dipesh

dipesh — Fri, 24 Nov 2006 08:30:11 +0000

So those who think (Vikas and Sunil) that a “forced” dry day makes them pay tribute to Gandhi, can we can conclude that if there was no dry day they would not have paid that tribute ? So my question is what’s the point in forcing a tribute from someone who may not be interested in it in the first place ?

By: Vikas Agarwal

Vikas Agarwal — Sat, 12 Nov 2005 14:17:16 +0000

I agree with Sunil, that dry day is a tribute to Father of the Nation. In addition, it prevents many (in fact, most) of us to go boozing on a day. Isn't that good. Leave discussing the case of riches, because the one who has got power, uses it! It's that simple that money and the number of followers brings you the power. So, the step, which should be taken care of , on such dry days is to keep a watch on all the sources(especially the ones, which are the usual sources for rich) on these particular days, which I think is a feasible job if serious thought of. Vikas

By: Dr. Prahalathan KK

Dr. Prahalathan KK — Sun, 09 Oct 2005 18:37:33 +0000

The XML feed you provide doesn’t seem to work on Opera browser though. But I’m happy with the in built RSS feed reader through which I get your posts.

By: Dr. Prahalathan KK

Dr. Prahalathan KK — Sun, 09 Oct 2005 18:35:31 +0000

Dry days dont matter to the rich and the corrupt.
They get their supply anyway…..
People wont die if they abstain for a day. I feel this is not an issue at all….
I take an RSS feed to your site through opera browser. But for those who use Internet explorer… You should do something

By: sunil

sunil — Fri, 07 Oct 2005 20:58:38 +0000

Atanu,
Look at “dry day” from another point of view at least that of 2nd oct.If MKGandhi is ok to be called “father of Nation” and majorty of Indians remember him as one, “dry day” is like paying tribute to him the way you will pay tribute to your father on his birthday by doing something that he thought right.

By: Rakesh

Rakesh — Wed, 05 Oct 2005 18:16:20 +0000

As for dry days, I don’t think the Govt. is trying indicate that it does not trust people with drinking. Having dry days is a populist move which plays well to the gallery.
dry days was just an example to indicate how Govt. is slowly encroaching on our personal freedom( hat books we can read, what we can see on television etc.)

By: Neha

Neha — Wed, 05 Oct 2005 17:09:38 +0000

Antihistamines have pretty much the same impact as too much alcohol. Anyone in the mood to ban them as well. The Government links morality (which usually is the burden of the poor and the connection-less) with alcohol, which is really ridiculous. If people can be trusted not to drink and drive, they can be trusted to go vote by 11 AM and then sit and guzzle all they want.

By: Global Voices Online » Blog Archive » India: Alcohol and the Government

Wed, 05 Oct 2005 17:07:14 +0000

[...] er 5th, 2005 @ 12:46 EDT South Asia India Global Roundups Atanu Dey made a point about Government enforced dry days, to which there was quite a bit of a reaction. He responds [...]

By: Shivani

Shivani — Wed, 05 Oct 2005 13:49:05 +0000

Voting does not have properties of these â€œcontrolled substances.â€

I completely agree with Ishani’s views on this matter.

By: Atanu Dey on India’s Development » The Government as the Big Daddy

Atanu Dey on India’s Development » The Government as the Big Daddy — Wed, 05 Oct 2005 13:14:41 +0000

[...]

I am surprised that the simple point I attempted to make in the post called Drinking and Democracy about adult universal franchise being inconsistent with treating adults like irresp [...]

By: Ishani

Ishani — Wed, 05 Oct 2005 12:18:00 +0000

Trying to add potency to your argument by saying how can the government trust people to vote when they can’t trust them to drink is silly. People’s judgement to drink can be marred by addiction and substance abuse; excessive drinking leads to terrible things. THAT is why many governments decide to control certain things like guns, tobbaco, alcohol and drugs. Voting does not have properties of these “controlled substances.”

Trusting people to vote and trusting people to drink are VASTLY different!

By: Navin

Navin — Wed, 05 Oct 2005 09:12:10 +0000

Atanu,

Thanks for taking the time out to respond.

I am with you on personal freedom and I hate the fate that I can’t have a nice drink in the evening on a holiday

By: sv

sv — Tue, 04 Oct 2005 23:13:46 +0000

Shivani,

May be it’s your who is on drinks since you don’t see the connection.

Navin,

Gandhi is the greatest human being. The greatest human being does not have to familiar with economics 101.

By: Navin

Navin — Tue, 04 Oct 2005 20:51:07 +0000

Atanu,

I am getting my doubts now. If you say “drinking is a basic decision” .. why did then Gandhi himself propose “booze ban” etc.

I am asking this to you, since you have mentioned earlier that you were reading his autobiography. Just wanted to get the rationale behind Gandhis stand.

Atanu’s response: Gandhi, as far as I can tell from reading his autobiography, was an egotist in that he was convinced that his preferences are absolute and universal. If he preferred not to drink, he thought it was absolutely reasonable that nobody should drink.

I am not a mahatma of course. I think that people have different preferences and while I like what I like, others like other things. Together with that, I believe in being free to do what I want to do (as long as my actions do not harm others) and naturally I extend that freedom to others to do whatever the heck they want to do (again as long as their actions do not get in my way.)

Someone wants to drink, a little or a lot, should not concern anyone. If a particular act of drinking causes harm to another, then the drinker is liable for that harm and for which there must be laws that redress the harm. But banning drinking because some drinkers cause harm to others is like banning driving because some people cause property damage while driving. So if a person drinks and kills himself as a result but no one is harmed, then it is nobody’s business. But if the person is neglecting to support his children as a result of his drinking, that is a different matter for which the laws appropriate to family obligations apply.

By: Shivani

Shivani — Tue, 04 Oct 2005 16:16:03 +0000

“If the people are so dumb as to not know what is good for them in a simple matter of a drink, can you really trust them with a vote?”

I fail to see the rationality in your above post. Drinking and Voting?

This post would probably seem to be more inspired from the fact that you didnt get hold of a drink that day. ( though that may not be the case ).

Atanu’s response: The point that I was attempting to make is that there is a logical contradiction in the position that Indian society takes in claiming that a person is competent enough to vote–and thus direct the affairs of state–and simultaneously trying to control people as though they are incompetent retards by deciding on their behalf if and when a person should have a drink.

The micro-ban on alcohol was just an example and it was not meant to convey that there is a direct link between democracy and drinking. The title of the post was just a feeble attempt at alliteration.

By: history_lover

history_lover — Tue, 04 Oct 2005 10:32:39 +0000

Although many people drink alcohol whether they are rich or poor,alcohol is still considered BAD and thus prohibtion has been included in the Directive Principles of State Policy alongwith your favourite – the Uniform Civil code

By: DesiPundit » i want to vote (hic!)

DesiPundit » i want to vote (hic!) — Tue, 04 Oct 2005 09:57:18 +0000

[...] on 10.04.05 in Current Affairs, Governance

Atany Dey has a post on drinking and democracy, inspired by the recent dry day on 2 Oct.

[...]

By: Michael H.

Michael H. — Tue, 04 Oct 2005 00:14:33 +0000

Hi Atanu
When I lived in St. Louis many years ago, I recall trying to buy some beer at a supermarket on a Sunday. Missouri had “blue laws” and prevented the sale of alcohol on Sunday. I was embarrassed when the checkout girl explained this. I thought “what right do others have to tell me what I can or cannot buy on Sunday and what a store can or cannot sell on Sunday.”

But these laws survive because most people just adapt (stock up) and are only occassionally annoyed. They think, “if the government felt it was necessary, I guess it’s good.”

By: Dilip

Dilip — Mon, 03 Oct 2005 23:12:36 +0000

As you yourself have said so eloquently about the electorate in India’s cargo cult democracy – “Democracy cannot work when the electorate is nearly totally uninformed, where there are strong vested interests, where the notion of accountability is non-existent, where voters can be intimidated and bribed, where the culture is steeped in feudalism, and where illiteracy, superstition and
corruption is the norm.” It is no surprise that the rulers set up these controls since they too are aware that the people need controlling. This is the very fact (that the people can be manipulated, that they are not a mature electorate) that is exploited by politicians to get votes in the first place. The electorate gets the leaders it deserves – if you have an electorate that is ignorant and susceptile to bullying and bribing, politicians will (and have) make use of those weaknesses to come to power. These politicians have more or less no respect for the electorate in light of their gullibility. The fact of the matter is that the people are immature and though I suspect that the micro-prohitions are more of a token gesture in respect of the occasion (Gandhi’s birthday or any other festival), it goes to show that both the poiticians and the people are aware of it and accept it as a way of life.

By: Navin

Navin — Mon, 03 Oct 2005 21:07:18 +0000

Yes, “dry days” are an example how backward we are and how much “regulation” is necessary .. (or how much the loony politicians think is necessary)

Here are some other good examples of how much “cool” we are.

Anna Univ bans wearing T-shirts and jeans:
http://www.hindu.com/2005/09/30/stories/2005093009100100.htm

(Cell phones were banned three months back)

Dance parties and having fun are a “no no”:

http://indiauncut.blogspot.com/2005/09/no-kissing-in-chennai-please.html

(amits post above has lots of links to the insanity thats going on in chennai.)

It sucks to be frank. What is one supposed to do ? Just sit at home ?

By: Pankaj

Pankaj — Mon, 03 Oct 2005 10:47:43 +0000

Hello TTG,

Paswan moving around with an Osama lookalike in the Bihar elections is a fact. The “secular” english media reported the incident but were silent on condemning this atrocity as Paswan with Laloo are the resident prophets of secularism in India.

“Whatever happens in Bihar, usually stays in Bihar” is quite a strange thing to say. Please do throw some light on the comment.

Also, please go to google.com and type paswan + osama. The proof you seek would be there.

Regards.

By: TTG

TTG — Mon, 03 Oct 2005 07:22:48 +0000

I love how you extrapolate without any restraint, reason or logic. I don’t see any picture of the OBL look-alike anywhere. Could he be a tall-man with a beard, and turban perhaps? It is just what the NDTV site mentions. Further, whatever happens in Bihar, usually stays in Bihar. Voters may have voted for the candidate because he looked like OBL, or not. What proof do you have for these lovely statements? You started off with a great point about Dry day and the whole mai-baap attitudes of the Socialist government, which breed dependence and a culture of victimisation and then go on to ruin it with some silly anecdote.