Progressivism: Maharashtra’s Responsibility to the Future

There are words that belong to the noise of politics, and there are words that belong to the architecture of civilization. Progressivism — पुरोगामित्व — is not a slogan coined for election seasons. It is a metaphysical orientation. A direction in time. A covenant with evolution itself.

Maharashtra’s history is not merely administrative geography; it is a moral topography shaped by saints, reformers, rationalists, and rebels of conscience. From the abhangas sung on dusty pilgrim roads to the legislative battles fought in modern assemblies, the state has carried a distinct inheritance: a commitment to reason, equality, and moral courage.

That inheritance is not ornamental. It is responsibility.

As India approaches the centenary of its independence in 2047, the next twenty-five years will determine whether Maharashtra continues to breathe the winds of progress — or hesitates at the edge of regression. The youth must understand that “progressive” and “reactionary” are not mere political coins; they are opposing directions in the journey of human consciousness. One moves forward into complexity and freedom. The other retreats into fear and hierarchy.

To choose between them is to choose the future.

I. Progressivism as the Law of the Universe

Long before human societies debated reform, the cosmos had already chosen progress.

The universe began in a primordial expansion — a movement from chaos to structure, from energy to matter, from elementary particles to galaxies. Modern cosmology describes a 13.8-billion-year arc from simplicity to staggering complexity. Evolution on Earth mirrors this ascent: from single-celled organisms to conscious beings capable of self-reflection.

The French philosopher Henri Bergson called it élan vital — the vital impulse of life pushing toward greater forms. The German thinker G. W. F. Hegel described history as the unfolding of Spirit toward freedom. Charles Darwin, without metaphysical rhetoric, demonstrated the biological engine of adaptive transformation.

Nature does not move backward. It adapts, experiments, refines.

If evolution is the grammar of life, then progress is its syntax.

How, then, can the permanent disposition of human consciousness be regression?

A child’s first instinct is inquiry — “Why?” That question is the seed of progressivism. The refusal to ask is the beginning of decline.

II. The Philosophical Foundations of Progress

In Western thought, progress found moral articulation in the Enlightenment. Immanuel Kant urged humanity to emerge from “self-imposed immaturity” by daring to know. John Stuart Mill defended liberty of thought as the engine of social improvement. Karl Popper later argued that an open society survives only through criticism and falsifiability.

Yet progress is not solely Western. Indian civilization contains its own currents of radical reform.

The Buddha challenged ritual orthodoxy. The Upanishads dethroned blind formalism in favor of inquiry. The Bhagavad Gita replaced ritual fatalism with ethical action.

In Maharashtra, this spirit took lyrical and revolutionary forms.

III. Sant Tradition: Equality in Song

When Sant Tukaram sang his abhangas in the 17th century, he did more than compose devotional poetry. He struck at caste arrogance and ritual monopolies. He placed spiritual dignity in the common man. His verses democratized transcendence.

Similarly, Sant Dnyaneshwar brought philosophical knowledge into Marathi through the Dnyaneshwari, dissolving linguistic elitism. Spiritual insight was no longer confined to Sanskritic gatekeeping.

These were not minor cultural gestures. They were epistemological revolutions.

The saints insisted that divinity does not recognize caste. If God is universal, then social hierarchy is a human distortion.

That was progressivism.

IV. Social Reform: Breaking the Architecture of Regression

Centuries later, Maharashtra again confronted entrenched structures of inequality.

Jyotirao Phule and Savitribai Phule opened schools for girls and marginalized communities, challenging Brahmanical patriarchy at its roots. Education became an instrument of liberation.

Shahu Maharaj institutionalized affirmative measures to dismantle structural inequity. And B. R. Ambedkar — architect of the Indian Constitution — transformed moral protest into constitutional principle.

Ambedkar understood that democracy is not merely a political mechanism; it is a social ethic. Without fraternity, liberty decays into privilege.

These reformers faced ridicule, boycott, and hostility. But history vindicated them. Their struggle was not against tradition as such; it was against stagnation masquerading as tradition.

V. Scientific Temper: The Constitutional Imperative

India’s Constitution, under Article 51A(h), calls upon citizens to develop scientific temper. This is not ornamental rhetoric. It is recognition that progress requires method: observation, skepticism, experiment, verification.

When Galileo shifted the heavens from divine temper to celestial mechanics, he embodied intellectual courage. When Pasteur replaced superstition with germ theory, he liberated medicine. When printing presses democratized knowledge, monopolies trembled.

Scientific temper is progressivism operationalized.

Regression, by contrast, is not natural evolution. It is constructed. It thrives on fear — fear of heaven and hell, fear of impurity, fear of dissent. It wraps power in sacred language and labels questioning as betrayal.

Fear is its weapon. Ignorance its armor. Tradition its shield.

But knowledge expands. Education spreads. Information circulates. The monopoly fractures.

VI. The New Face of Reaction

Regression in the 21st century does not sit in caves chanting incantations. It operates through algorithms. It repackages myth with digital graphics. It circulates misinformation at viral speed. It questions science while using smartphones engineered by the very science it doubts.

It weaponizes nostalgia.

This is the paradox of modern reactionary culture: technologically sophisticated, philosophically regressive.

Progressivism is not threatened by faith; it is threatened by anti-reason. It does not fear culture; it fears coercion. It does not reject heritage; it rejects hierarchy.

The conflict is not between past and present. It is between openness and closure.

VII. Maharashtra at the Crossroads

Maharashtra has long been regarded as a progressive state — industrially dynamic, culturally vibrant, intellectually restless. Mumbai’s financial energy, Pune’s educational institutions, Nagpur’s administrative centrality — these are not accidents. They are products of an ecosystem that historically valued reform and reason.

But progress is not self-sustaining. It requires vigilance.

If public discourse begins to penalize questioning…
If education substitutes memorization for inquiry…
If history becomes propaganda…
If equality is replaced by symbolic appeasement…

then the direction shifts subtly — almost imperceptibly — from forward to backward.

Progressivism must be renewed in every generation.

VIII. The Youth as Custodians of the Flame

The coming twenty-five years will define India’s centenary destiny. Maharashtra’s youth — educated, connected, aspirational — must grasp that progressivism is not rebellion for its own sake. It is alignment with the evolutionary arc of civilization.

To be progressive is:

  • To defend scientific temper.
  • To insist on equality beyond rhetoric.
  • To protect freedom of expression.
  • To question authority without fear.
  • To place reason above rumor.

The philosopher Bertrand Russell once remarked that the whole problem with the world is that fools are certain and the wise are full of doubts. Doubt is not weakness; it is the engine of refinement.

The saints of Maharashtra sang doubt into devotion. The reformers legislated doubt into justice. The scientists institutionalized doubt into method.

This is the lineage.

IX. Progress as Moral Alignment with Evolution

Progressivism is not mere social reform rhetoric. It is alignment with the universe’s tendency toward complexity, consciousness, and freedom. To resist this movement is to fossilize oneself against the current of time.

Evolution does not reverse. Galaxies do not collapse back into singularity at whim. Humanity, too, cannot afford civilizational regression.

The struggle today is not won by hatred but by reason. Not by censorship but by dialogue. Not by violence but by education.

The progressive mind does not fear scrutiny. It invites it.

The Torch Forward

Human nature is not static. It questions. It explores. It creates. As long as that instinct survives, darkness cannot permanently prevail.

Maharashtra’s identity — shaped by saints like Tukaram, reformers like Phule and Ambedkar, thinkers who translated knowledge into the vernacular of the people — is not a relic. It is a torch.

The youth must carry it.

Because progressivism is not merely a political stance. It is the human alignment with evolution. It is the refusal to surrender curiosity to fear. It is the insistence that dignity belongs to all.

And if Maharashtra remains true to that inheritance — if it chooses forward over backward, inquiry over intimidation, equality over hierarchy — it will not merely keep pace with India’s centenary.

It will lead.

-Mahesh Zagade

Standard

The Rampage of Opportunistic Power Politics

Seventy-five years have passed since India attained independence. After one hundred and fifty years of British colonial rule, this country adopted a democratic system founded upon a written Constitution. Despite its vast geographical expanse, linguistic multiplicity, cultural plurality, and enormous population, the Indian democratic experiment has, comparatively speaking, proved successful—this must be acknowledged. Many Western thinkers, sociologists, and political critics doubted whether such an experiment could endure for long. That doubt, however, has been decisively disproved.

Yet, within the very womb of this democracy, certain deeply pernicious tendencies have taken root—slowly but inexorably. Today they have grown so rampant that one is compelled to ask whether democracy has been reduced to a mere name. Particularly in light of the recent elections to local self-governing bodies in Maharashtra, what is unfolding no longer remains a matter of suspicion alone; it has nearly reached the level of an unavoidable conclusion.

Politics in Maharashtra today has become so fluid—fluid like a sewage drain—so unstable and so devoid of principles that it has become difficult even to identify which leader belongs to which party. A political worker no longer holds an ideology; for him political parties have become merely a temporary halts, convenient platforms, escalators to power.

In Maharashtra, on 24 December, the Thackeray brothers announced that they would contest the local body elections together. Following this declaration, Shiv Sainiks and MNS workers across the state erupted in celebration. Among the jubilant was a senior former corporator from Nashik belonging to MNS Party—an individual with long experience in party-hopping and a seasoned wrestler in this political arena. Before the echoes of that celebration had even faded, the same corporator joined the Bharatiya Janata Party. To abandon, within hours, the very leadership in whose name slogans were raised, applause thundered, and emotions overflowed—and to embrace another party—defies any psychological, ideological, or political explanation. Yet the corporator justified his decision as being “for the development of Nashik,” attempting thereby to soothe both his own conscience and the discernment of gullible citizens. He may well have succeeded—because gullibility has today become the strongest pillar supporting our democracy.

This is not an exception; it is a system. In post-independence India, the term “Aaya Ram, Gaya Ram” became synonymous with Indian politics. To curb this menace, the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution—the anti-defection law—was enacted. To some extent, it did prove useful; this cannot be denied. But it is here that the ingenuity of Indian politicians reveals itself: they rendered even this law ineffective. Instead of direct defections, a new game began under the guise of “party splits.” While paying ostensible respect to the letter of the law, the spirit of democracy was murdered, and the arithmetic of power was recalculated.

What transpired in Maharashtra just days before the nomination process for municipal elections would be an insult to language if described merely as “political chaos.” In the vocabulary of the Shiv Sena, it was nothing short of a “maha-rada”—a grand melee. Who was allying with whom, who was abandoning whom, lay beyond comprehension. Such a colossal disorder—such a spectacle—had never before been witnessed by Maharashtra. One could no longer tell whether this was an electoral process or a battlefield. Even in war, one can identify friends and enemies. Here, yesterday’s enemy becomes today’s ally, and today’s associate becomes tomorrow’s foe. The word “loyalty” has grown so obsolete that it survives only in speeches. Party workers who have laboured for years are sidelined, while candidates “downloaded and imported” overnight are handed tickets—because they possess money, connections, and the ‘capacity’ to win. What lies at the root of all this? Is it merely an individual moral decline, or does it point to a deeper, more entrenched structural reality? The question arises inevitably.

If one wishes to understand Indian politics, it cannot be examined merely through the framework of parties, elections, and alliances. Beneath these flows a far more ancient, long-standing, and civilisational struggle. The Indus Valley Civilisation and its successor, the Vedic Civilisation, rooted for nearly 3,900 years, have shaped the Indian collective psyche through two fundamentally distinct world-views. On one side stands the Indus inspiration—emphasising scientific temper, equality, civic reason, and systemic discipline. On the other stands the Vedic inspiration—anchored in spirituality, social hierarchies, sacrifice, Yadnya, rituals, symbols, and notions of sanctity.

In the post-independence era, the Congress largely represented the Indus Valley civilisational perspective, while the BJP represented the Vedic civilisational outlook. Within this ideological struggle, the question of right or wrong does not arise; these are two independent and distinct visions of the world. In a democracy, voters can choose parties aligned with whichever civilisational ethos they prefer through the electoral process. But today, in Maharashtra—and indeed across the country—this conflict has been relegated to the background.

For a third force has now become decisive. This force belongs neither to the Indus nor to the Vedic tradition. It is the force of opportunistic power politics, money culture, and ideological hollowness. For this force, ideology is merely a costume—changeable according to occasion. A party is merely a vehicle—to reach power. An election is not an opportunity to serve, but an investment—from which returns are expected within five years. Tragically, elements devoid of any ideological trace, driven solely by money and power, have entered the parties representing these two civilisational streams and have taken them in a stranglehold. One is compelled to ask today—what truly binds political parties together now: ideology and civilisation, or groups that have infiltrated them purely on the strength of money?

This condition is not confined to Indian democracy alone; similar patterns are visible across the world. Nobel Prize–winning economist Joseph Stiglitz once titled an article, “Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%.” In that essay, he argued that Abraham Lincoln’s definition of democracy—“government of the people, by the people, and for the people”—no longer exists, and has been replaced by a system “of the 1%, by the 1%, and for the 1%.” It is a system that has become a puppet in the hands of the wealthiest 1 percent. I agree with this assessment one hundred percent. Democracy today has become the handmaiden of the rich, and the global deterioration it has suffered is mirrored in our local self-governing institutions as well. Therefore, the crying, rioting, sulking, wailing, aggression, appeasement of leaders, protests, confrontations, hunger strikes, public denunciations of one’s own party during campaign meetings, vandalising party offices, and the ultimate absurdity—swallowing the AB form—are not acts of social service. They are driven by the hunger for power and the financial benefits that flow from it. One does not need a Nobel laureate to explain this; all of it arises from the frustration of being deprived of anticipated economic gains. Stiglitz’s thesis today stands nakedly visible in Maharashtra’s local self-governing bodies. The outcry over denial of a ticket is not a cry for public service; it is a scream of anguish born of the fear of losing potential financial profit.

Today, party-switching does not occur for development, for public interest, or for the betterment of cities. It occurs solely for power—and for the money that power brings. There may be exceptions; but democracy does not function on exceptions. It functions on averages—and today that average is grotesque.

What is unfolding during elections in Maharashtra is not merely political news for any rational citizen who believes in democracy; it is a grave warning. The ideological struggle between the Indus and Vedic civilisations has been pushed aside, and a conquering “money culture” has seized control of politics. Even more tragic is the fact that both these great civilisations are being used merely as weapons to win elections, exploit emotions, and capture power.

The conflict between archaeological remains and sacred hymns has not disappeared; but it has now been overrun by a third intruder—the culture of money—which feels neither shame before the remains nor reverence for the hymns. And before this encroachment, the people remain asleep.

This is an extremely dangerous phase for Maharashtra, and by extension for Indian democracy. For when thought exits politics, only the arithmetic of money remains—and in that arithmetic, the human being is always deceived.

In municipal and local body elections today, party-switching is not seen as a means to improve public services, build infrastructure, generate employment, or maintain social harmony. The craving for power exists to increase one’s own wealth. There are exceptions—indeed, there are—but democracy does not run on exceptions. All corporators, as elected representatives, are expected to function as “guardians of the city.” Hence, the chaos, instability, and moral degeneration witnessed in Maharashtra during local body elections now provoke the unsettling question: has this become a political inevitability?

Whether to run governments or to win elections, alliances are formed and broken; yesterday’s opponents become today’s friends. Political workers cross ideological and civilisational boundaries to defect from one party to another. There is only one reason behind this—power. And power means more money, more influence, and greater personal gain.

The question is no longer whether the Indus civilisation flaunted by the Congress is superior or the Vedic civilisation wielded by the BJP; that debate itself has become a grotesque distraction, for democracy lies already asphyxiated—strangled by a rapacious” money-culture” that has subjugated both the parties and now rules Indian politics with impunity.

This is a tragic and deeply worrying reality. Even more unfortunate is the misuse of the ideological traditions of both the Indus and Vedic civilisations as mere tools to win elections, binding those ideologies to the yoke of money culture—while the people remain in a state of slumber. What is happening in Maharashtra during elections today is a matter that demands serious reflection from every progressive, rational citizen who believes in democracy.

-Mahesh Zagade

Standard

भ्रष्टाचार : लोकशाहीला पोखरणारा अमर विषाणू

(सौजन्य: सामना दिवाळी अंक २०२५)

भ्रष्टाचार हा विषय म्हणजे कधीही न संपणारा एक अखंडकाळ चालणारा महाभारताचा युद्धप्रसंग आहे. अलीकडेचप्रसिद्ध झालेल्या आकडेवारीनुसार महाराष्ट्र पुन्हा एकदा भ्रष्टाचाराच्या बाबतीत देशात अव्वल ठरला आहे—हा‘क्रमांक एक’चा बहुमान मात्र दुर्दैवाने गौरवाचा नाही, तर लज्जेचा आहे. ट्रान्सपरन्सी इंटरनॅशनलच्या अहवालानुसार, 2024 मध्ये भारताचा पारदर्शकतेच्या बाबतीत 180 देशांपैकी क्रमांक 96 असून तो 2003 च्या तुलनेत तीन अंकांनीघसरलेला आहे. म्हणजे भारताचा प्रवास प्रगतीकडे नसून भ्रष्टाचाराकडे सरकतो आहे—आणि हा प्रवास गतीमान होतचालला आहे.

भ्रष्टाचार हा लोकशाहीला लागलेला अमर शाप आहे. लोकशाहीमध्ये जनतेला ‘राजा’ म्हटले जाते, पण ह्या राजालाराज्यकारभार चालवण्याचा अवकाश नाही; म्हणूनच प्रतिनिधी या नावाने काही निवडक व्यक्तींना अधिकार सोपवलेजातात. परंतु, जे ‘सेवक’ म्हणून निवडून येतात, तेच हळूहळू ‘स्वामी’ बनतात, आणि मग जनतेचा राजाच गुलाम होऊनबसतो. जनतेला सुशासन हवे असते; त्यांना मिळतो भ्रष्टाचाराचा दुर्गंध. लोकशाहीचे मूळ तत्त्व म्हणजे पारदर्शकता, जबाबदारी आणि जनकल्याण — पण या तीनही गोष्टी भ्रष्टाचाराच्या मळभात हरवून गेल्या आहेत.

भ्रष्टाचार हा काही आज जन्मलेला नाही; तो मानवाच्या चेतनेत पुरातन काळापासून रुजलेला आहे. तो कोणत्याहीएकाच कालखंडाचा किंवा प्रदेशाचा रोग नाही — तो मानवजातीच्या सामाजिक, आर्थिक आणि नैतिक जीवनातशिरलेला एक घातक परजीवी आहे. मानवी स्वभावातील लोभ, लालसा, सत्तेची मोहिनी, आणि स्वार्थाची अस्मितायांचा संयोग झाला की भ्रष्टाचाराची पाळेमुळे घट्ट रोवली जातात.

आपल्या पौराणिक कथांमध्ये सुद्धा भ्रष्टाचाराचा शिडकावा टाळला गेलेला नाही. जर आपल्या महाकाव्यांमध्येभ्रष्टाचारविरहित समाजाचे आदर्श चित्र रंगविले असते, तर कदाचित आजची भारतीय समाजरचना अधिक प्रबुद्धअसती. पण, सुमारे ३८०० वर्षांपूर्वी जेव्हा सांस्कृतिक संक्रमण झाले, तेव्हा मानवी मनातील मत्सर, स्पर्धा, कपट आणिसत्तेची आस यांना समाजमान्यता मिळू लागली. महाभारतामधील दुर्योधन आणि शकुनी यांच्या कृत्यांमधूनसत्तालालसेचे कुरूप दर्शन घडते, तर रामायणात रावणाचे भ्रष्ट आचरण दाखवूनच रामाचे तेज अधिक उजळवलेजाते.कौटिल्याच्या अर्थशास्त्रात तर राजाच्या नीतीत भ्रष्टाचार, लंपटपणा आणि त्यावरील नियंत्रण याचे विलक्षणसखोल विवेचन आहे.

यावरून हे निर्विवाद सिद्ध होते की भ्रष्टाचार हा आधुनिक काळातील नव्हे, तर मानवजातीच्या नैतिक आणि जैविकरचनेत खोलवर रुजलेला एक अनुवंशिक दोष आहे.

संविधान निर्मात्यांनी भ्रष्टाचारविरहित, पारदर्शक आणि उत्तरदायी शासनव्यवस्था उभारण्याची स्पष्ट इच्छा व्यक्त केलीहोती. त्या भावनेतूनच कायद्यांचा सांगाडा तयार झाला आहे. पण माझ्या प्रशासनातील साडेतीन दशकांच्याअनुभवावरून सांगतो — जर संविधानातील तत्त्वे, तरतुदी आणि कायदे अक्षरशः अंमलात आणले गेले असते, तरदेशात आणि महाराष्ट्रात भ्रष्टाचार शोधूनही सापडला नसता. दुर्दैवाने, मानवी लोभाने आता भ्रष्टाचाराचे समांतरसाम्राज्य उभारले आहे — आणि अधिक भयानक म्हणजे, आता त्याला सामाजिक मान्यता मिळू लागली आहे.

आज समाजाच्या नजरेत ‘हुशारी’ आणि ‘चतुराई’ म्हणून जे गौरवले जाते, ते बहुधा भ्रष्टाचाराचे दुसरे नाव असते. काहींना पद मिळते, काहींना पैसा; आणि दोघांनाही प्रतिष्ठा मिळते. अशा समाजात प्रामाणिकपणाच संशयास्पदठरतो आणि प्रामाणिक माणूस मूर्ख समजला जातो.

समाजाने जर ही प्रवृत्ती थोपवली नाही, तर लोकशाहीचा विध्वंस हा फक्त वेळेचा प्रश्न आहे. भ्रष्टाचार हा केवळआर्थिक गुन्हा नाही — तो राष्ट्राच्या नैतिक कणाचाच क्षय करणारा भस्मासुर आहे. आणि आज आपण त्याभस्मासुराला दररोज नवे अर्पण करत आहोत — पदे, पैसे, आणि कधी कधी आपली आत्मादेखील.

 

 

भ्रष्टाचाराचे भारुड : एक न संपणारे नाट्य

या देशातील भ्रष्टाचाराचे संपूर्ण भारुड लिहायचे ठरवले, तर त्याचे कित्येक खंड होतील — इतकी त्याची व्याप्ती, विविधता, दृश्य आणि अदृश्य रूपे आहेत. तो इतका सर्वव्यापी झाला आहे की आता भ्रष्टाचार ‘असतो’ हे वाक्य नव्हे, तर ‘असावाच’ हे नियम झाले आहे. एका लेखात त्याची सर्व रूपे सामावणे अशक्य आहे. म्हणून हा लेख म्हणजे त्यामहासागरातील फक्त एक थेंब — तरी तो गंध पुरेसा दुर्गंधी आहे.

भ्रष्टाचाराची व्याख्या करणे सोपे नाही. सर्वसामान्यांच्या दृष्टीने तो म्हणजे — शासकीय कामकाज करवून घेण्यासाठीदिली जाणारी ‘लाच’. पण ही केवळ बाह्य ओळख आहे. आज भ्रष्टाचाराचे मूळ स्वरूप इतके खोलवर रुजले आहे कीतो केवळ पैशातच नाही, तर मनात, विचारात, आणि धोरणांमध्येही आहे. उच्च पातळीवरील भ्रष्टाचार आता विरोधीपक्ष, प्रसारमाध्यमे, आणि काही सामाजिक कार्यकर्त्यांच्या चर्चेत येऊ लागल्याने थोडाफार जनजागृतीचा भास होतो— पण वस्तुस्थिती अशी आहे की भ्रष्टाचार आता समाजाच्या आत्म्यात मिसळलेला आहे.

संविधानिक भ्रष्टाचार – भ्रष्टाचाराची जननी

भ्रष्टाचाराचा उगमच त्या प्रश्नात आहे की — त्या देशाचे संविधान खरेच कोणासाठी लिहिलेले आहे? जर संविधान सर्वनागरिकांना समान हक्क, समान आर्थिक संधी, अन्यायापासून संरक्षण, आणि सन्मानाने जगण्याचा अधिकार देते, तरत्याचे पालन सुनिश्चित करणे ही प्रत्येक शासनाची पवित्र जबाबदारी ठरते. पण जर या तरतुदी स्वतःच्या किंवाआपल्या गटाच्या फायद्यासाठी वाकवल्या, मोडल्या किंवा रद्द केल्या, तर तोच सर्वात घातक, सर्वात अदृश्य आणिसर्वात विनाशकारी भ्रष्टाचार ठरतो.

अनेक देशांमध्ये हा संविधानिक भ्रष्टाचार प्रत्यक्ष पाहायला मिळतो. उदाहरणार्थ, रशियात एक व्यक्ती दोनपेक्षा जास्तकार्यकाळ राष्ट्राध्यक्ष राहू शकत नाही, अशी तरतूद होती. पण सत्ता मोहाने अंध झालेल्या पुतीन यांनी संविधानचबदलून आपल्यासाठी अनंत कार्यकाळांचे दार उघडले. हेच सर्वात उघड आणि भयंकर संविधानिक भ्रष्टाचाराचेउदाहरण आहे.

काही देशांमध्ये धर्मनिरपेक्षतेची तरतूद आहे, पण काही कट्टरपंथी प्रवृत्ती त्या तरतुदींना नाकारतात, आणि मग देशाचासमाजधागाच तुटतो. विचारांचा भ्रष्टाचार हा सर्वात धोकादायक — कारण तो डोळ्यासमोर दिसत नाही, पण राष्ट्राच्याविवेकबुद्धीचा गळा आवळतो.

लोकशाहीतील निवडणूक भ्रष्टाचार – प्रजेचा मूक वध

लोकशाहीतील दुसरा मोठा भ्रष्टाचार म्हणजे निवडणूक प्रक्रियेचा भ्रष्टाचार. जेव्हा निवडणुका मुक्त, पारदर्शक आणिप्रामाणिक न राहता ‘व्यवस्थापित’ होतात, तेव्हा लोकशाहीचा आत्माच मरतो. चुकीच्या मार्गांनी निवडून आलेलीसरकारे, पैशाने, सत्तेने, धमक्यांनी किंवा खोट्या प्रचाराने मिळवलेली सत्ता — हे सर्व एकत्र मिळून लोकशाहीलामृत्यूच्या दिशेने ढकलतात. जेव्हा सत्तेचे सौदे मतपेटीत होतात, तेव्हा जनतेच्या भविष्याचे सौदे संसदेत होतात.

न्यायव्यवस्थेतील स्थगित न्याय – एक सुसंस्कृत अत्याचार

न्यायालये दिसायला भ्रष्टाचारमुक्त असतात, पण प्रलंबित न्याय ही सुद्धा भ्रष्टाचाराचेच एक रूप आहे. कोट्यवधीप्रकरणे वर्षानुवर्षे धुळ खात पडून राहतात, आणि न्याय मिळत नाही. न्याय विलंबाने मिळतो, म्हणजे न्याय नाकारलाजातो — हा न्यायव्यवस्थेचा नव्हे तर समाजव्यवस्थेचा मौन भ्रष्टाचार आहे.

या प्रकरणांपैकी बहुसंख्य प्रकरणे प्रशासनाच्या चुकीच्या निर्णयांमुळे निर्माण होतात. सरकारच्या निर्णयातील त्रुटीओळखण्याची आणि दुरुस्तीची इच्छाच नसेल, तर तो ‘संस्थात्मक भ्रष्टाचार’ ठरतो.

प्रशासनातील व्यावहारिक भ्रष्टाचार – लाचखोरीचे यंत्र

भ्रष्टाचाराचे सर्वात दैनंदिन रूप म्हणजे — काम करवून घेण्यासाठी लाच देणे. नागरिकांना त्यांच्या वैधअधिकारांसाठीच भ्रष्टाचाराच्या नखांखाली जायला लागते. यंत्रणा काम ‘नियमाने’ करत नाही, तर ‘दराने’ करते. कामाची किंमत नसते, पण काम होण्याची दरपत्रक असते.

ही लाचेची रक्कम कोट्यवधींमध्ये असते, आणि तिचा हिशोब कधी घेतलाच जात नाही. मी परिवहन आयुक्तअसताना, आरटीओ एजंटमार्फत होणारा हा काळाबाजार मी राज्य शासनाकडे मांडला होता — ती रक्कम शेकडोकोटींमध्ये होती. वस्तुतः, त्या खात्यात भ्रष्टाचाराची गरजच नाही. सर्व प्रक्रिया पारदर्शकपणे, डिजिटल पद्धतीने सुलभकरता येतात. पण जेव्हा भ्रष्टाचार संस्कृती बनतो, तेव्हा पारदर्शकता ‘अडथळा’ वाटू लागते.

याचप्रमाणे, बांधकाम परवानग्या, विकास परवाने, जमीन रूपांतरण इत्यादींमध्ये भ्रष्टाचार म्हणजे एक परंपरा झालीआहे. बांधकाम व्यावसायिक देखील हे ‘नियम’ म्हणूनच स्वीकारतात, कारण शेवटी तो पैसा घरखरेदीदारांकडून वसूलकेला जातो. म्हणजे भ्रष्टाचार शेवटी नागरिकांच्या घरांच्या भिंतींसोबतच बांधला जातो.

निविदा प्रक्रियेतील उघड चोरी – सार्वजनिक पैशाचा चौरस लिलाव

शासनातील आणखी एक मोठे भ्रष्ट केंद्र म्हणजे निविदा प्रक्रिया. ‘किती टक्के कुणाला’ हे आता उघड गुपित झालेआहे. सरकारे बदलतात, पक्ष बदलतात, पण टक्केवारी मात्र तशीच राहते — फक्त खातेदार बदलतात.

आर्थिक शुद्धतेसाठी Canons of Financial Propriety म्हणजेच ‘आर्थिक प्रामाणिकतेचे तत्त्व’ सांगते कीसार्वजनिक पैसा वैयक्तिक पैशासारखा जपावा. पण प्रत्यक्षात, सार्वजनिक पैशाला कोणी स्वतःचा मानत नाही, म्हणूनच त्याचा वापर स्वार्थासाठी मोकळेपणाने होतो.

सार्वजनिक पैसा म्हणजे जनतेच्या घामाचे संचित. आणि तोच पैसा जर काही मोजक्या लोकांच्या भ्रष्ट हातात गेला, तर समाजाचा पाया सडतो. आज देशात आणि राज्यात शासनाच्या प्रत्येक स्तरावर भ्रष्टाचाराचे गट्ठे जमा झाले आहेत, आणि तोच पैसा विकासाच्या नावाखाली नष्ट होतो.

 

 

भ्रष्टाचाराचे शास्त्र : चेक्स अँड बॅलन्स की चेक्स अँड ब्लॅंक चेक्स?

शासनव्यवस्थेतील एक मूलभूत तत्त्व म्हणजे checks and balances — म्हणजेच परस्पर नियंत्रण आणि संतुलन. हेतत्त्व जिवंत असेल, तर भ्रष्टाचार श्वास घेऊ शकत नाही. पण दुर्दैवाने, आज या ‘चेक्स अँड बॅलन्सेस’ना चेक्स अँडब्लॅंक चेक्स बनवण्यात आले आहे — म्हणजे कोणालाही हवे तितके, हवे तिथे, आणि हवे तसे खर्च करण्याचे मुक्तस्वातंत्र्य.

पूर्वी सर्व निविदा या विभागीय किंवा प्रादेशिक कार्यालयांतूनच मागविल्या जात असत. त्या स्थानिक पातळीवर होतअसल्याने त्यावर राज्य शासनाचा पर्यवेक्षणात्मक नियंत्रण असायचे. म्हणजे, जर काही गैरप्रकार झाले, तर शासन त्याअधिकाऱ्यांना जबाबदार धरू शकत होते. पण आता परिस्थिती उलटी झाली आहे. राज्य शासन स्वतःच अनेकदा थेटनिविदा काढते. मग त्याच शासनावर प्रश्न विचारणारा कोण? परिणामतः — भ्रष्टाचाराचे वादळ उठते, काही दिवसगोंधळ होतो, राजकीय आरोप-प्रत्यारोप होतात, आणि मग नेहमीप्रमाणे सर्व शांत. शांततेचा हा अर्थ म्हणजे गुन्ह्याचीसंस्थात्मक मान्यता.

तांत्रिक मान्यता – विज्ञानाच्या वस्त्रात लपलेले अनैतिक सौदे

प्रत्येक निविदा प्रक्रियेतील दोन अत्यंत महत्त्वाचे घटक म्हणजे तांत्रिक मान्यता आणि प्रशासकीय मान्यता. तांत्रिकमान्यता म्हणजे — काम गरजेचे आहे का, तांत्रिक दृष्ट्या योग्य आहे का, भविष्यात समस्या निर्माण होणार नाहीत का, आणि निधीचा वापर न्याय्य आहे का याची सखोल तपासणी.
पण वास्तव हे की, तांत्रिक मान्यता ही आज बहुधा कंत्राटदारांना सुखावण्यासाठी दिली जाते, कामाच्या गुणवत्तेसाठीनव्हे.

सन 1998–99 मध्ये सोलापूर जिल्ह्यातील कोल्हापूर बंधारा आणि निदल प्रकल्पात मी प्रत्यक्ष पाहिले की, तांत्रिकमान्यतेच्या पंखाखाली भ्रष्टाचाराने उड्डाण घेतले होते. आयटीआय सारख्या बाह्य संस्थेकडून तपासणी केली असताउघड झाले की तांत्रिक मान्यता म्हणजे फक्त कंत्राटदारांच्या नफ्याची मुक्तहस्ते मंजुरी होती. पुढे त्यावरएफ.आय.आर. व सीआयडी चौकशी झाली, पण अशा हजारो प्रकरणांचा पत्ता आजवर लागलेलाच नाही. कारणतांत्रिक मान्यता हा शब्दच ‘पवित्र’ मानला जातो, आणि त्या पवित्रतेत पापांचे स्फोट होत असतात.

प्रशासकीय मान्यता – गरज की गडबड?

प्रशासकीय मान्यता म्हणजे कामाची खरी गरज काय आहे, निधी पुरेसा आहे का, आणि निविदेच्या अटी स्पर्धात्मकआहेत का, हे तपासणे. पण अनेकदा अटी अशा तयार केल्या जातात की फक्त ठराविक कंत्राटदार पात्र ठरतील. स्पर्धानामशेष, पारदर्शकता कालबाह्य, आणि जनहित फक्त कागदावर.
प्रशासकीय मान्यता म्हणजे आता कायदेशीर भ्रष्टाचाराचे शिलालेख बनले आहे.

जर या दोन्ही — तांत्रिक आणि प्रशासकीय मान्यता — काटेकोर व पारदर्शकपणे दिल्या गेल्या, तर भ्रष्टाचारालामोठा आळा बसू शकतो. अशा उदाहरणे काही राज्यांमध्ये पाहायला मिळतात. पण महाराष्ट्रात, ‘आळा’ बसण्याऐवजी‘आळशीपणा’ बसला आहे.

नोकरशाहीची जबाबदारी – आणि पलायनवाद

अशा प्रकारच्या भ्रष्टाचारांना मी नेहमीच एकच दोषी मानतो — नोकरशाहीचा पलायनवाद. राजकारणी दबावआणण्याचा प्रयत्न करू शकतील पण त्यांना तांत्रिक वा प्रशासकीय सखोल ज्ञान असावे असे अभिप्रेत नाही नाही. पणनोकरशाही, जी निर्णयांची खऱ्या अर्थाने मूलभूत व्यवस्था असते, ती जर स्वार्थासाठी किंवा राजकीय दबावाखालीझुकली, तर प्रणालीच झुकते.

व्यवस्थेला हवे त्या अटी, हवे ते कंत्राटदार, हवे ते दर, आणि हवे ते फायदे — हे सर्व नोकरशाहीच्या हातांनीच साधलेजाते. त्यामुळे भ्रष्टाचार हा ‘सामूहिक गुन्हा’ ठरतो — एक कॉर्पोरेट क्राइम सिंडिकेट, ज्यात सत्ता, पैसा आणि अधिकारहे तिघे एकाच परिघात वावरतात.

राज्य सरकारने ठरविलेल्या निविदा धोरणांमध्ये अनेकदा जाणीवपूर्वक छिद्रे ठेवली जातात — म्हणजे भ्रष्टाचारालाकायदेशीर हवा मिळावी. काही वेळा धोरण तगडे असले तरी त्या विसंगत अल्प मुदतीत प्रचंड निधीच्या निविदाकाढल्या जातात, जेणेकरून स्पर्धाच होऊ नये. या सर्व कृती म्हणजे राज्याच्या अर्थव्यवस्थेच्या छातीवरून चालणाराकंत्राटी बुलडोझर.

संविधान, अनुच्छेद 166 आणि सचिवांची वैधानिक जबाबदारी

खरे म्हणजे, भ्रष्टाचार होऊ नये अशी व्यवस्था संविधानातच बांधलेली आहे. पण अंमलबजावणी न झाल्याने ती फक्तशिलालेख राहते. अनुच्छेद 166 नुसार राज्य शासनाची कार्यपद्धती ठरविण्यासाठी नियम बनविण्याची तरतूद आहे. महाराष्ट्रात ही शासनकार्य नियमावली 1975 पासून अस्तित्वात आहे.

या नियमांनुसार प्रत्येक खात्याला एक सचिव असावा, जो त्या खात्याचा प्रशासकीय प्रमुख असेल. म्हणजे त्याखात्यातील सर्व दैनंदिन कामकाज, अमलबजावणी आणि आर्थिक व्यवहारावर देखरेख आणि नियंत्रण — हे सर्वत्याच्या जबाबदारीखाली येतात. त्यामुळे तो केवळ अधिकारी नसून, संविधानाचा संरक्षक ठरतो.

जर हे सचिव सर्व कायदे, नियम आणि धोरणे काटेकोरपणे राबवतील, तर भ्रष्टाचार होणे जवळपास अशक्य आहे. अर्थात, असे केल्यास त्यांची बदली होईल — पण जर सर्व सचिवांनीच प्रामाणिकतेचा निर्धार केला, तर ‘बदली’ हेशस्त्र बोथट ठरेल आणि व्यवस्था नव्याने जागी होईल.

अनेकदा जेव्हा भ्रष्टाचाराची मोठी प्रकरणे बाहेर येतात, तेव्हा मंत्र्यांना तांत्रिक नियमांचे ज्ञान नसते आणि ती जबाबदारीसचिवांची आहे असा पवित्रा घेतला जातो आणि जबाबदारी शेवटी सचिवांवरच येते. म्हणून, सचिवांची सामूहिकनैतिक जागृती ही भ्रष्टाचारावरील अंतिम आणि प्रभावी लस ठरू शकते.

भ्रष्टाचार प्रतिबंधक कायदा, लोकायुक्त, लोकपाल — या संस्था म्हणजे आजार झाल्यावर दिल्या जाणाऱ्या औषधी. पण सचिवाची भूमिका म्हणजे लस — जी आजारच होऊ देत नाही. दुर्दैवाने, आज लस दिली जात नाही, कारणरोगातून काहींना राजकीय आणि आर्थिक पोषण मिळते.

 

भ्रष्टाचार म्हणजे आज केवळ गुन्हा नाही — तो एक संघटित सवय झाली आहे. आणि जेव्हा सवयींना संरक्षण मिळते, तेव्हा न्याय, नीतिमत्ता आणि संविधान — हे सगळे ‘प्रतीकात्मक’ होतात.

 

तंत्रज्ञानाने आलेली फसवणूक — पारदर्शकतेचा बहाणा आणि अधिकारांची हातचलाखी

नवीन तंत्रज्ञान, सेवा हमी कायदे आणि ऑनलाईन सेवा ह्या सर्वांचा उद्धारक म्हणून प्रचार केला जातो— आणि वस्तुतः या माध्यमांनी भ्रष्टाचार कमी करण्याचे काही प्रयत्न शक्य केले हे खरे आहे. पण हादावा इतका नीरसा आणि सौम्य आहे की त्याने भ्रष्टाचाराचा प्रश्न अत्यल्प पातळीवरच हलविला आहे— त्याचा खरा स्वरूप अविकसितच राहिला. कारण प्रत्यक्षात तंत्रज्ञानाचा वापर हा कधीही स्वतःचाउद्देश नसतो; तो राजकीय आणि प्रशासकीय अधिकार टिकवण्याचा एक नवा कवच बनला आहे.

ऑनलाईन व्यवस्था राबवताना एक प्रश्न सतत दिसून येतो — ती व्यवस्था खरोखरच पारदर्शक आहे की केवळकागदावरून सायबर स्पेस मध्ये झालेले स्थलांतर ?अनेकदा या ऑनलाईन पोर्टल्स, डेटाबेसेस आणि ‘इंडेक्स-२’ किंवा‘सातबारा’ सारख्या प्रणालींना तंत्रज्ञानाच्या चमकदारपणा देऊन नागरिकांना काहीतरी नवीन दिले हे दाखविले जाते. प्रत्यक्ष निर्णय आणि अधिकार लपवले जातात. प्रगत संगणकीय साधने दाखवून देतात की आपण डिजिटल युगातआहोत, पण त्या तंत्रज्ञानाच्या आतली रचना ही प्रशासनाच्या नियंत्रणाखाली कशी राहील, हे अगदी नियोजित पद्धतीनेकरण्यात आलेले असते.

उदाहरणार्थ, ‘सातबारा’ किंवा जमीन नोंदणीसंदर्भातील अनेक प्रक्रियांचे डिजिटायझेशन झाले तरी एक मूलभूत प्रश्नमांडण्यास कोणी धाडस करत नाही — २१व्या शतकात ‘सातबारा’ या मध्ययुगीन कागदाची वास्तविक गरज कायआहे? तिच्या पारंपारिक स्वरूपाला पारदर्शक, भ्रष्टाचारमुक्त आणि शेअर प्रमाणपत्रासारखे सुलभ आणि सुरक्षितबनवता येणार नाही का? तंत्रज्ञान उपलब्ध असूनही, अशा मूलभूत सुधारणांवर विचारच न करणे म्हणजे प्रशासनालास्वतःचे अधिकार टिकवायचे असतात — कारण पारदर्शकतेने त्यांचे हस्तक्षेप आणि वैयक्तिक लाभ कमी होतील. त्यामुळे नव्या प्रणालींचे विकसन करताना तेच अधिकार डिजिटल आच्छादनाखाली गुप्तरीत्या टिकवून ठेवण्याचाप्रयत्न दिसतो.

हे खरंच देहातल्या शक्‍तीने केलेले मुखवटा आहे — लोकांना डिजिटल सुविधा देऊन त्यांना सांगेले जाते की “तुमचेहक्क आता ऑनलाईन सुरक्षित आहेत”, आणि त्याच वेळी प्रशासनाने आपले जुने सुप्त -धंदे तिथेच मोठ्या प्रमाणातकायम ठेवलेले असतात. त्यामुळे तंत्रज्ञान वरच्या वर पारदर्शकता देत असते, पण वास्तविकता अशी की ते केवळभ्रष्टाचाराचे स्वरूप बदलते — 

परिस्थिती बदलायची आहे? मोठे नवे कायदे नव्हेत तर काटेकोर अंमलबजावणी हवी!

खरी आश्चर्याची गोष्ट म्हणजे —  नवे कायदे, नवे नियम किंवा नवकल्पना यांची गरज इतकी मोठी नसते जितकीगरज ती असते की विद्यमान कायदे, नियम आणि तंत्रे काटेकोरपणे अंमलात येतील. हे महाकाय राक्षस संपवण्यास नवेआयटी प्रणाल्या किंवा अधिक कायदे नको; तर जे काय आधीपासून अस्तित्वात आहे — त्या नियमांचे कठोर पालन, प्रक्रियेचे शुद्धीकरण, आणि अधिकार्‍यांची जबाबदारी ठाम करणे अपेक्षित आहे.

जर प्रशासकीय यंत्रणा स्वतःच्या अधिकारांचे भोग करून ठेवण्यापेक्षा जनसेवेला प्राधान्य देईल; जर सचिव-पातळीतूनकठोर, पारदर्शक आणि जबाबदार अंमलबजावणी सुरू झाली — तर भ्रष्टाचाराचे मोठे प्रमाण नष्ट करता येईल. डिजिटल तंत्रज्ञानाला सामर्थ्य देण्याऐवजी त्याला चाचणी, संतुलन आणि स्वचलनशीलता अशा तऱ्हेने राबवायला हवे— म्हणजे तंत्रज्ञान हे अनुषंगिक साधन असावे, अधिकार टिकवण्याचा नव्हे.

सारांश असा की — तंत्रज्ञानाने दिलेला फायदाच उपयोगात आणायचा असेल तर त्याची रचना ही नागरिकांचेअधिकार व पारदर्शकता सुनिश्चित करण्यास असावी; अन्यथा तंत्रज्ञान हे भ्रष्टाचाराला नवे मुखवटे आणि नवीशिफ्टिंग बॉक्स देऊन अधिक कुशल बनवेल. आणि आपण ते पाहत आहोत — तंत्रज्ञानाचा उपयोग होत आहे, पणव्यवस्थेचा हेतू बदलला नाही. म्हणून भ्रष्टाचार फारसा कमी झालेला नाही — तो फक्त, अधिक सूक्ष्म आणि अधिकधोखेबाज स्वरूपात उभा राहिला आहे.

-महेश झगडे

Standard

The People Are the Government

(Reflections on a Dialogue with the Rotarians, Pune — On “Citizen Participation in Governance” on 7th October 2025)

Good evening to all of you — the President, the Secretary, all Rotarians, and especially Nitinji. I am truly overwhelmed to stand before such a gathering — a congregation not merely of achievers, but of those who translate their achievements into silent social service. You do not serve merely Pune; you serve humanity, across borders and continents.

I will not recite what your organisation stands for — you know that far better than I. I stand here as an outsider, but an admirer nonetheless. I have seen how Rotarians quietly accomplish what vast bureaucracies often fail to deliver. Having long worked in the health sector, I have observed with respect the magnitude and sincerity of your efforts worldwide.

Now, my friend who introduced me was rather generous. He read a long list of my official designations. Please, ignore that. IAS officers are known to wear many hats, though perhaps not masters of any! We perform because the State requires us to perform, and yes, we are compensated for it — with handsome salaries ..So, there is no charity like you all.

You Are the Government

The subject given to me today is “How Rotarians Can Participate in Governance.” A noble topic — but I must confess, I have a quarrel with the title itself.

You cannot participate in governance, dear Rotarians, because you are the Government who govern!…..Yes, let me repeat, you are the government. The moment you say you wish to “participate,” you unknowingly detach yourself from the very institution that exists because of you.

It is your sweat and toil that sustain this elaborate machine called the State. The political representatives and the bureaucracy — they are your employees, appointed and maintained by your will and your taxes. Over the last two-and-a-half millennia, however, democracy has been quietly metamorphosed into monarchy by another name. We have allowed rulers to re-emerge in democratic robes — emperors with electoral legitimacy — while the people, the true sovereigns, have been reduced to mere recipients.

This is not democracy. The essence of democracy lies in the collective will delegating authority — not surrendering it. Because every citizen cannot sit in the Secretariat or implement every policy, we delegate. But delegation is not abdication. The question, therefore, is not “How can you participate in governance?” The question is “How can you make them govern the way they are meant to?”

The Forgotten Sovereigns

Whenever I address students — whether of a humble village school or an elite college — I remind them: you are the king.In democracy, there is no “them” and “us.” There is only we. Yet, our civic consciousness has been buried beneath a thick crust of submission. We have internalised the idea that those in office are the authority and we are the subjects.

This evening, let us attempt to unearth that buried truth. You must spread this awareness: democracy is not about pleading for participation; it is about asserting ownership. The government’s participation must be sought in your vision of society — not the other way around.

We complain about bad roads, poor economy, failing policies, and unemployment — but who elected the very people responsible for these conditions? We did. So the failure is not theirs alone; it is ours too.

When we hire a domestic help, we think a hundred times — will he arrive on time, perform sincerely, keep confidences? Yet, when we hire our government, we scarcely ask what kind of people we are employing.

The Decline of Democracy

You, as Rotarians, are enlightened citizens, and therefore your responsibility is heavier. Post–World War II, there was an optimistic belief that democracy would one day envelop the entire planet. Today, the story is grimly reversed. Each year, democracy’s index slides lower. Reports by the Economist Intelligence Unit — and others — reveal the same pattern: the power of the people is shrinking, while the power of the few is swelling.

We are now in an age where, to borrow from the Nobel laureate and economist, Joseph Stiglitz, democracy has become government of the one percent, by the one percent, and for the one percent. Only about 6.8 percent of the world’s population now lives under what can still be called a true democracy.

So when I speak to you — who have the means, intellect, and networks to influence society — I urge you to look beyond the comfort of your cottages. Because while you are repainting and polishing them, the forest around you is on fire. And if the forest burns, no cottage shall survive.

Beyond Charity: Towards Change

You have already achieved what many governments could not. The global eradication of polio bears your imprint. But it is time to move from curing to preventing, from repairing to reforming.

Why not attempt the eradication of corruption?
Why not the eradication of opacity in governance?

Why not demand that the government perform the very tasks for which it exists, instead of you substituting for it with noble charity? Yes, repair a school’s toilets if you must — but also question why, after seventy-five years of freedom, a school still needs charity to build one.

The Rot of Bureaucracy

Half the nation’s budgetary expenditure goes into the salaries of bureaucracy — the so-called “public servants.” Yet, many of them have turned into non-performing liabilities, not assets. I can say this after thirty-four years within that system.

In 1992, the Earth Summit at Rio de Janeiro formally recognised that governance must rest on four pillars: international agencies, national governments, sub-national governments, and non-governmental organisations as watchdogs. NGOs were not meant to merely patch potholes or distribute benches. Their true role was to monitor — to ensure that governments and international bodies performed ethically and effectively.

You must not merely push the vehicle of governance with muscle power; you must steer it. You must keep your hands on the wheel, ensuring the driver does not doze off or deliberately take a wrong turn.

The Accountability Vacuum

Let me speak of something closer home. Maharashtra carries a debt of nine lakh crores rupees. Ask: where has that money gone? Why, despite such borrowing, are unemployment, poor roads, and water scarcity still rampant?

Take Pune as an example. In 1987, a 34-kilometre high-capacity mass transit route(HCMTR) was planned. Thirty-seven years later, not a single brick has been laid. The same fate befell the outer ring road project. No citizen, no NGO, no organisation has persistently questioned the authorities — not the Commissioner, not the Mayor, not the Guardian Minister.

The ability to question — that is what democracy demands. Not petitions for permission, but questions for accountability.

I once thought of creating a Shadow Bureaucracy for Maharashtra — a parallel civil structure to mirror the official one, solely to monitor and report: a Shadow Chief Secretary, Shadow Divisional Commissioner, Shadow Tahsildar, and so on — all to remind society what each official is supposed to do and what they actually do not.

The Law Exists, the Spirit Sleeps

Under the law, every urban area must have Area Sabhas — citizens’ assemblies covering the population of one or two polling booths — to identify and address local problems. The law was enacted in 2011. Fourteen years have passed, and these assemblies remain dormant. The machinery of participation has been built — but never switched on.

During my tenure as Municipal Commissioner, I initiated them informally. Corporators resisted, for it diminished their intermediary power between citizens and administration. Yet, I persisted. Governance must belong directly to the governed.

The Constitution’s 74th Amendment of 1993 gave municipal corporations the duty to prepare Economic Development Plans and Social Justice Plans. From 1993 to 2025, not one such plan has been properly prepared. The law mandates that each year, a municipal commissioner must publish an administrative report and statement of accounts. How many of you have ever seen one?

A Call to the Enlightened

You are the torchbearers. Keep doing your humanitarian work — but let your work not be limited to compassion; let it extend to correction. Demand performance. Demand transparency.

Remember always: you are the masters; they are your servants. The democratic spirit will survive only when this equation is restored in public consciousness.

Perhaps you expected a different kind of speech this evening. But if it has disturbed you, even a little — then perhaps that disturbance is the beginning of awakening.

Thank you all….

=Mahesh Zagade

Standard

श्रद्धेच्या जंजाळात अडकलेली शुद्ध हवा : कबुतरांना खाद्य घालण्याच्या हट्टामागील अंधश्रद्धा 

कुठल्याही समाजाच्या अधोगतीचा एक निश्चित टप्पा असतो — जिथे श्रद्धा आणि शहाणपण यांच्यातली सीमारेषा कायमची पुसून जाते. आणि ती रेषा आपल्या शहरांच्या फूटपाथांवर, खिडक्यांच्या सिल्ल्यांवर आणि घरांच्या गॅलऱ्यांमध्ये — कबुतरांच्या विष्ठेच्या थरांमध्ये अडकलेलीदिसते.

हो, कबुतरं — ही तथाकथित “पवित्र” जीवं. पवित्रतेच्या पंखावर विराजमान झालेले रोगांचे वाहक. काहीजण त्यांना दैवी समजतात, काही धार्मिकतेचे प्रतीक. पण आजच्या काळात ती झाली आहेत शहरांच्या श्वासमुक्तीवर बसलेली जीवघेणी सावली.

कोर्टांनी कबुतरांना खाद्य घालण्यावर बंदी घातली आहे, डॉक्टरांनी इशारे दिले आहेत, आणि आरोग्य तज्ज्ञांनी स्पष्ट सांगितले आहे की यामुळे फुफ्फुसांचे आजार, एलर्जी, श्वसनदोष आणि अनेक बुरशीजन्य रोग वाढत आहेत. पण या सर्व ज्ञानावर पंखात घेत — काही स्वयंघोषित धर्मरक्षक अजूनही बिनधास्त गहू, बाजरी, तांदूळ रस्त्यावर उधळत फिरतात.

त्यांच्यासाठी ही फक्त श्रद्धा नाही, ही एक हट्टाने फुलवलेली अंधश्रद्धा आहे, जी आता सामाजिक हानीचे रूप घेत आहे.

सामाजिक  अधिकार की सामाजिक आतंक?

श्रद्धा वैयक्तिक आहे. पण जिथे तुमची श्रद्धा इतरांच्या आरोग्याचा घात करत असेल, तिथे ती श्रद्धा नसून स्वार्थी हट्ट ठरतो. आज घरोघरी श्वसनाच्या तक्रारी, सततची खोकली, डोळ्यांची खाज, आणि अ‍ॅलर्जीक अ‍ॅस्थमा वाढत आहे, त्यामागे या कबुतरांच्या विष्ठेचे सूक्ष्म कण आहेत — जे हवेत मिसळून शरीरात शिरतात आणि आजारांचा कहर घडवतात.

कबुतरं रोज एक-दोन नव्हे तर शेकडो वेळा विष्ठा करतात. ती विष्ठा इमारतींचे प्लास्टर कुरतडते, पाईपलाइन堵 करते, बाल्कनी अडवते, आणि एकंदरीत नागरिक जीवनाचा श्वास रोखून टाकते.

आणि या सर्व संकटांवर उपाय करायला गेले की, काही तथाकथित धर्मप्रेमी, धर्माची ढाल पुढे करत ओरडतात — “आमचा श्रद्धेचा अधिकार आहे!”

हो का? मग इतरांचा श्वास घेण्याचा अधिकार कुठे गेला?

‘कबुतरखान्यांचा’ कलंक

शहरांतील तथाकथित ‘कबुतरखान्यां’ मध्ये रोज हजारो कबुतरं अन्नासाठी गोळा होतात. तेथील दृश्य म्हणजे पुण्याच्या  नावावर उभारलेली जैविक महामारी. पिंजऱ्यात घातलेल्या रोगांपेक्षा या उघड्या कबुतरखान्यांतून फैलावणारे आजार जास्त धोकादायक.

सगळ्यात हास्यास्पद म्हणजे — जे लोक ही कबुतरं खाद्य घालतात, तेच त्यांना स्पर्शही करत नाहीत. घराच्या गॅलऱ्यांत जाळ्या लावतात, स्पाईक्स लावतात, पण सकाळी तांदूळ टाकतात. ही कुठली श्रद्धा? ही तर संवेदनशून्य दांभिकता आहे.

आरोग्य, विज्ञान आणि न्यायालये – या तिघांनाही झिडकारणे

जेव्हा न्यायालये निर्णय देतात, डॉक्टर सल्ला देतात, महापालिका सूचना करते — तेव्हा ही मंडळी त्या सगळ्यांना “धर्मद्रोही” ठरवतात. कारण त्यांना त्यांची श्रद्धा विज्ञान, कायदा आणि आरोग्याच्या हितापेक्षा जास्त श्रेष्ठ वाटते.

हे श्रद्धा आहे की हट्ट? भक्ती आहे की बिनडोकपणा?

कोणत्याही धार्मिक ग्रंथात “कबुतरांना विष्ठा करु दे, आणि आजूबाजूचे श्वास घेऊ शकत नसले तरी चालेल”, असे कुठेही लिहिलेले नाही.

‘पवित्रता’ की ‘पॉईझनिंग’?

कोणी पक्ष्यांना खाऊ घालणं चुकीचं नाही — पण जिथे ते सार्वजनिक आरोग्यावर घात करत असेल, तिथे ते अपराध आहे.
कोणालाही अन्नदान करायचं असल्यास शहराबाहेर, नियोजित पक्षी-आहार केंद्रांमध्ये, योग्य पद्धतीने करा.
पण घरांच्या खिडक्यांवर, रहिवासी संकुलांच्या कंपाऊंडमध्ये, किंवा रुग्णालयांच्या बाहेर कबुतरांवर अन्नवर्षाव करणं म्हणजे जनतेच्या आरोग्यावर थुंकणं होय.

शेवटी…

श्रध्देचा  उपयोग माणूस उन्नत करण्यासाठी व्हायला हवा — त्याच्या श्वासावर गुदमरवण्यासाठी नव्हे.

कबुतरांना खाद्य घालण्याचा हट्ट हा श्रद्धेचा नाही, समाजघातक अंधश्रद्धेचा मुद्दा आहे. तो थांबला पाहिजे. अन्यथा आपल्या शहरांचे भविष्य मंदिरासारखे पवित्र नव्हे, तर कबरस्तानासारखे निःशब्द असेल.

चला, पंख झाडूया — पण या अंधश्रद्धेचे, नाहीतर उद्याची हवा उरलेली नसेलच.

-महेश झगडे

Standard

The Droppings of Devotion: When Superstition Smothers Sanity

There comes a time in every society’s slow descent into mediocrity when a line must be drawn—not in sand, but in pigeon droppings. It is here, in the dense, choked arteries of our great urban jungles—Mumbai, Delhi, Pune—that the line between faith and folly is smeared into a foul, feathered mess. And nothing embodies this grotesque fusion more pungently than the devout insistence of a few self-anointed saviours of culture to feed pigeons, come plague or pneumonia, come reason or ruling.

Yes, the sacred pigeons. The airborne carriers of piety and pathogens. The fluttering vahanas of virtue and viral load.

They descend in flocks, summoned by handfuls of wheat and misguided compassion, to alight upon every parapet and power line, every balcony and cornice—leaving behind not divine blessings, but acidic excreta potent enough to etch their theology into the very stone of civilization. And still, their feeders—those urban priests of pigeonhood—demand that their right to pour grain upon filth be protected, even as courts of law, public health departments, and lungs of asthma-stricken children cry out in protest.

Superstition: The New Public Policy

Let us be clear: the matter has transcended religion. This is no longer about reverence; it is about recalcitrance. A perverse determination to uphold ritual even when it stinks of decay—literally and figuratively. The High Courts have ruled. Medical science has spoken. Municipalities have scraped, swept, and sprayed. But none of these interventions can outflap the wings of blind belief when it is cloaked in the garb of tradition.

These pigeon feeders, emboldened by centuries of unquestioned ritual, now assert their constitutional right to infect the atmosphere with Histoplasmosis, Psittacosis, and Cryptococcal meningitis—as if the Constitution ever promised the freedom to corrode balconies and bronchi alike. Their offerings, they claim, are acts of charity. Yet in the name of this charity, they convert housing societies into guano graveyards and hospital wards into temples of the breathless.

Balconies of the Damned

One need only gaze upwards in any old quarter of a city to witness the architecture of this lunacy. What were once stately facades now bear the calcified wrath of decades of pigeon dung. The white crusts of sanctimonious indifference cling to ledges, drip from air-conditioners, and fill the corners where once children leaned out to watch the monsoon.

And inside, behind mesh screens and windows sealed tighter than secrets, families suffocate in a haze of fungal spores. The immunocompromised, the elderly, the very children the feeders claim to love—they all breathe in the slow curse of the devout.

Is this charity? Is this dharma? Or is this simply domestic terrorism dressed as devotion?

Of Faith and Faeces

The tragedy is not that people believe pigeons to be auspicious. Superstitions, after all, are as old as humanity. The tragedy is that these beliefs now demand immunity from law, from reason, and from consequences.

When a court rules against pigeon feeding in residential zones, it is not attacking faith. It is defending lungs, defending walls, defending what little sanity remains in a city at the edge of asphyxiation. But those drunk on ritual scoff at the evidence. “Let the birds be fed,” they chant, as if their piety were a pesticide. As if centuries of myth outweigh milligrams of mycotoxins.

And so, armed with a brass pot and half a kilo of bajra, they march towards residential rooftops with all the zeal of medieval flagellants—flagging not their own backs, but the future of their neighbours.

The Cult of the Kabutarkhana

Nowhere is this pathology more pronounced than in the city’s infamous Kabutarkhanas—those self-declared temples of defecation. These are not sanctuaries; they are centres of contagious compassion, where a spoonful of grain buys a pound of pestilence.

Here, amid cooing and coughing, the faithful gather to feed what they will not touch, to glorify what they dare not clean. And woe betide the civic officer who tries to interfere! For he shall be branded anti-tradition, anti-people, even anti-Hindu, by those who cannot distinguish spirituality from spore count.

The Price of Passive Governance

Refusing to regulate pigeon feeding, the State itself becomes an accomplice in this aviary apocalypse. Its silence fertilizes the very superstition it should uproot. It tolerates a culture that measures faith by grain count and holiness by how many pigeons defecate on your rooftop before noon.

A Prayer for Rationality

Let it be known: compassion is not the same as contamination. Feeding birds is not a crime—but doing so at the cost of human health, infrastructure, and sanity certainly is.

Let those who insist on feeding pigeons do so in regulated, open, non-residential spaces. Let municipal bodies establish designated bird feeding zones, supervised and cleaned. Let faith be reclaimed from filth, and charity decoupled from contamination.

And let us, as a society, learn at last to distinguish between worship and waste, between devotion and disease, between ritual and ruin.

A city is not a coop, and its citizens are not sacrificial offerings at the altar of obstinacy. The right to believe cannot be the right to blind others, and the right to feed cannot be the right to foul the very air we share.

To persist in pigeon feeding, in defiance of law and logic, is not religious—it is reckless. It is not sacred—it is selfish. And if this plague of piety is not checked, the cities of tomorrow will be not temples, but tombs—choked with feathers, fables, and the silence of those too breathless to object.

Let us not allow superstition to fly so freely that it snuffs out the very breath of civilization.

-Mahesh Zagade

Standard

कोलाहलाचा बोजा: भारताच्या प्राथमिक शिक्षणातील त्रिभाषा सूत्राचा पुनर्विचार

प्रत्येकमूलजगाचानवाआरंभकरतेआपणकायशिकवतोयाचेस्मरणठेवण्यासाठीनव्हे, तरजगआहेतरीका?’ हेविचारण्यासाठी.”

शब्दांचा भरकटलेला संग्राम

भारतातील भाषिक कोलाहलात अनेकदा नुसत्या गोंगाटालाच भाषिक सूक्ष्मतेचा फसवा मुखवटा चढतो. शाळांमधील भाषा धोरणावरून सध्या सुरू असलेली सार्वजनिक चर्चा — जी बहुतांशी मराठी विरुद्ध हिंदी असा बनाव करते — ही एक दिशाभूल करणारी द्वंद्वात्मकता ठरते. हा वाद जणू झाडांच्या पानांवर चर्चा करताना जंगलच विसरून जाण्यासारखा आहे. येथे मूळ प्रश्न एका भाषेच्या विरुद्ध दुसरीची मांडणी नसून, सहा वर्षांच्या अल्लड, कोवळ्या, अद्याप ‘अस्तित्वाच्या वर्णमाले’चा परिचय होत असलेल्या बालमनावर थोपविल्या जाणाऱ्या तीन स्वतंत्र भाषांचा शैक्षणिक विवेक, किंवा त्याचा अभाव, हाच खरा प्रश्न आहे.

राष्ट्रीय शैक्षणिक धोरण २०२० (NEP 2020) हे व्यापक दृष्टीकोनातून स्तुत्य असले, तरी या अत्यंत मूलगामी बाबतीत ते जरा अपुरे पडते. तीन भाषा शिकवण्याच्या धोरणामुळे राष्ट्रीय एकात्मतेस व भाषिक प्रतिनिधित्वास प्राधान्य दिले जाते — परंतु बालकांच्या मेंदूच्या आरोग्यावर त्याचा विपरित परिणाम होतो. ‘विविधतेतील एकता’ हे जसे उदात्त तत्त्व आहे, तसेच ‘विकसनशील समतोलाचा बळी’ हे एक धोकादायक समीकरण ठरते. अर्थात पहिल्याच वर्गापासून तीन भाषा शिकण्याची वैधानिक तरतूद या धोरणातसुद्धा नाही कारण हे धोरण आहे, कायदा नव्हे!

२. बालपणाची नाजूक माती: विज्ञान काय सांगते?

या धोरणाचा परिणाम समजून घेण्यासाठी आधुनिक मेंदूविज्ञान व मानसशास्त्र काय सांगतात, हे समजून घ्यावे लागते.

हरवर्ड विद्यापीठातील ‘Center on the Developing Child’ नुसार, जीवनाच्या पहिल्या काही वर्षांत मुलांच्या मेंदूत दर सेकंदाला १० लाखाहून अधिक नवे न्यूरल कनेक्शन तयार होतात. हे वर्ष — जन्मापासून सुमारे आठव्या वर्षापर्यंत — वैज्ञानिक दृष्ट्या ‘संवेदनशील कालावधी’ मानले जाते. या काळात मेंदू पर्यावरणीय उद्दीपनांस प्रतिसाद देतो, पण तेवढाच संज्ञात्मक भारही सहन करत नाही.

स्विस मानसशास्त्रज्ञ Jean Piaget यांच्या मते, पाच ते अकरा वर्षांचे वय हे ‘संकल्पनात्मक क्रिया टप्पा’ (Concrete Operational Stage) असते. या टप्प्यात मुले संकल्पना, वर्गीकरण, तार्किक अनुक्रम अशा बाबी समजू लागतात, पण विचारांची अमूर्तता अजून नवजात असते. म्हणूनच त्यांना स्पर्शिक अनुभव, शोधाभिमुख शिक्षण व त्यांच्या स्वाभाविक कुतूहलाची जोपासना आवश्यक असते.

आणि अशा या नाजूक वास्तुरचनेत आपण एकाच वेळी तीन भाषा ओततो — स्वतंत्र व्याकरण, उच्चारप्रणाली, भाषासंरचना व साहित्यसंपन्नतेसह! परिणामी काय होते? बहुभाषिक सशक्तीकरण नव्हे तर संज्ञात्मक गोंधळ, पाठांतराची कंटाळवाणेपणा, आणि सर्जनशीलतेचा श्वास घोटणारी भयानक वास्तवता!

३. आकडे काय सांगतात: भाषाभार आणि शैक्षणिक अपयश

या मांडणीला आधार देण्यासाठी वस्तुनिष्ठ आकडे तपासूया.

प्रथम संस्थेने २०२३ मध्ये केलेल्या Annual Status of Education Report नुसार, ग्रामीण भागातील पाचवीच्या सुमारे ५०% विद्यार्थ्यांना दुसरीच्या पातळीवरील मजकूर मातृभाषेतसुद्धा भाषेत वाचता येत नव्हता. इतकेच नव्हे, तर त्या टक्केवारीत गण्याच्या प्राथमिक क्षमतेतही अपयश दिसून आले. मुले मातृभाषेतही कार्यक्षम साक्षरता गाठू शकत नसतील तर तीन भाषांचा भर त्यांच्यावर टाकणे हीच शोकांतिका.

PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment) या OECD च्या आंतरराष्ट्रीय चाचणीमध्ये, भारताचा क्रमांक २००९ मध्ये ७४ पैकी ७३ वा आला. भारत त्यानंतर सहभागी झाला नाही. परंतु सिंगापूर, जपान, दक्षिण कोरिया हे देश दरवेळी आघाडीवर असतात — आणि हे देश दोन भाषांवर लक्ष केंद्रित करतात, तीनवर नव्हे.

फिनलंडमध्ये औपचारिक शिक्षण सातव्या वर्षी सुरू होते, तेही फक्त एका भाषेत. येथे खेळ, शोध, आणि समजूतदार विचारप्रणाली यावर भर असतो. शिक्षणतज्ज्ञ Pasi Sahlberg यांनी म्हटले आहे: लहानवयातशिक्षणासाठीकमीम्हणजेअधिकहेतत्त्वलागूहोतं.”

त्यामुळे भारतीय त्रिभाषा सूत्र हे शैक्षणिक नव्हे, तर विचारसरणीचे अवशेष बनले आहे — सुंदर पण उपयोगशून्य अलंकार.

४. बहुभाषिकता : एक दुधारी तलवार

इथे स्पष्ट करणे गरजेचे आहे — बहुभाषिकता हा खलनायक नाही. उलट, UNESCOAmerican Academy of Pediatrics च्या अभ्यासांनुसार, द्विभाषिक मुलांमध्ये उत्तम विचारक्षमता, कार्यकारी कार्यपद्धती व समस्या सोडवण्याची जास्त क्षमता दिसते. पण हे लाभ हळूहळू भाषा शिकवले तरच प्रकट होतात — आधी मातृभाषेत भक्कम साक्षरता आणि संख्याज्ञान हे आवश्यक.

Journal of Experimental Child Psychology मध्ये २०१८ मध्ये प्रसिद्ध झालेल्या संशोधनानुसार, एकाच वेळी अनेक लिपींशी (जसे देवनागरी, रोमन, उर्दू) ओळख झाल्यास वाचनक्षमता उशिरा विकसित होते. मेंदूचा जास्त वेळ उच्चार समजून घेण्यावर जातो, अर्थ समजावण्यावर नाही.

समय हेच निर्णायक तत्व आहे. विचार करायला शिकणाऱ्या मेंदूला एकाच वेळी तीन भाषेत विचारायला लावणे म्हणजे घातच!

५. शिक्षणाचा पडसाद : शिक्षक, पालक आणि पुस्तकांची हुकूमशाही

या त्रिभाषा धोरणाचे प्रत्यक्ष परिणामही तितकेच गंभीर आहेत. विशेषतः सरकारी शाळांतील शिक्षक आधीच गोंधळात आहेत — त्यांना एकच भाषा नीट शिकवण्याचे प्रशिक्षण मिळालेले नसते, तर तीन शिकवण्याची अपेक्षा ठेवली जाते! पाठ्यपुस्तके वेळेवर मिळत नाहीत. वर्ग कोंदट आणि गच्च असतात. आणि नवोदित, पहिल्या पिढीतले विद्यार्थी — या भाषिक जंगलात स्वतःच वाट काढण्यास भाग पाडले जातात.

पालकही गोंधळतात. एकीकडे मराठी बोलणारी आई, दुसरीकडे हिंदी समजणारे वडील, आणि इंग्रजीत शिकवणारी शाळा — अशा त्रिकोणात शिक्षणाचा आत्मा हरवतो. गृहपाठ युद्ध बनतो. शिक्षण कष्ट बनते. आनंद हरवतो.

आणि परिणामी, आपण अशा पिढीची निर्मिती करतो की जिच्या मुखी तीन भाषांतील क्रियापदे असतात, पण एका भाषेतही “का?” असा प्रश्न विचारायची आत्मिक उमेद नसते.

६. आंतरराष्ट्रीय आरसा : इतर देश आपल्याला काय शिकवतात?

जरा आंतरराष्ट्रीय दृष्टीने पाहूया की शैक्षणिक दृष्ट्या यशस्वी देश काय वेगळं करतात.

फिनलंड: सातव्या वर्षापर्यंत फक्त एकच भाषा, जिज्ञासावर्धनावर आधारित शिक्षण, शिक्षकांना स्वायत्तता, आणि सोळाव्या वर्षापर्यंत कोणतीही प्रमाणित परीक्षा नाही.

सिंगापूर: दोन भाषांची नीती (मातृभाषा + इंग्रजी), शिक्षकांचे दर्जेदार प्रशिक्षण, आणि सुरुवातीपासून STEM (विज्ञान-तंत्रज्ञान) वर भर.

दक्षिण कोरिया: लहान वयातील शिक्षणात मोठी गुंतवणूक, राष्ट्रीय भाषेवर आधारित द्वैभाषिकता, आणि कमी धावपळीचा अभ्यासक्रम.

या कोणत्याही देशाने पहिल्याच इयत्तेपासून तीन भाषा लादलेल्या नाहीत. त्याऐवजी, शिक्षणाचे बांधकाम हळूहळू, एक एक दगड रचत, बालकाच्या मानसिक क्षमतेचा सन्मान राखत केले आहे.

७. भारतीय विसंगती : शैक्षणिकतेचे सोंग घेतलेली धोरणे

भारताची त्रिभाषा योजना ही खरे तर उदात्त हेतूंनी प्रेरित होती — भाषिक ऐक्य राखणे, प्रादेशिक वैविध्य जपणे, आणि उत्तर-दक्षिण समन्वय साधणे. पण केवळ हेतू पवित्र असले म्हणजे परिणामही पवित्रच होतील, असे नाही.

प्रत्यक्षात ही योजना आता एक ‘शासकीय अवशेष’ बनली आहे — एक अशी धोरणात्मक मूर्ती जी मेंदूविज्ञान, शिक्षणशास्त्र व जागतिक अनुभव यांच्याशी काहीही देणेघेणे न ठेवता, जुन्या साच्यात गोठून राहिली आहे.

जेव्हा भाषिक प्रतिनिधित्व हे शैक्षणिक विवेकाच्या जागी येते, तेव्हा आपण अशा पिढीला जन्म देतो जी तीन भाषांत कविता म्हणू शकते, पण एका भाषेत वैज्ञानिक घटना समजावून सांगू शकत नाही. हे रूंदीचा आभास देणारे खोलीचा अभाव असलेले शिक्षण आहे — पाठांतराला प्रतिष्ठा देणारे, पण समजून घेतल्यावर मौन पसरवणारे.

८. घटनात्मक पार्श्वभूमी: कायदे, स्वायत्तता आणि बंधनाची सीमारेषा

भारताची राज्यघटना शिक्षणाला एकीकडे वैयक्तिक प्रवास मानते, तर दुसरीकडे सार्वजनिक कर्तव्य. अनुच्छेद२४६ आणि सप्तमअनुसूचीतील ‘सामायिक यादी’ (List III) हे याचे प्रतिबिंब आहेत. यामध्ये केंद्र व राज्ये दोघांनाही शिक्षण क्षेत्रात कायदे करण्याचा अधिकार आहे. तथापि, जर केंद्र व राज्य यांच्यात एकाच विषयावर मतभेद झाले, तर अनुच्छेद२५४ प्रमाणे केंद्रीय कायद्यास वरील स्थान आहे.

परंतु विशेष बाब म्हणजे — शाळांमध्ये पहिल्याच वर्गापासून तीन भाषा सक्तीने शिकवण्याचा कोणताही केंद्रीय कायदा अस्तित्वात नाही. ही त्रिभाषायोजना केवळ शिफारस म्हणून मांडण्यात आली होती, ती कायद्याने बंधनकारक नाही.

म्हणूनच, महाराष्ट्रशासन अशा धोरणात्मक निर्णय घेत असताना राज्यघटनेच्या मर्यादेत वावरते. मात्र, कायदा करण्याचा अधिकार असूनही, तो ‘शहाणपणाने’ वापरणे ही त्याची नैतिक आणि शैक्षणिक जबाबदारी आहे. केवळ प्रतिनिधित्व किंवा प्रशासकीय समता यासाठी नव्हे, तर मुलांच्या विकासासाठी हे धोरण असले पाहिजे.

९. राष्ट्रीय शैक्षणिक धोरण २०२० : दिशा, आदेश नव्हे

NEP 2020 ही भारताच्या शिक्षणाला नव्याने घडवण्यासाठी आखलेली महत्त्वाकांक्षी रूपरेषा आहे. ती भाषिक विविधतेला स्वीकारते, पण लहान वयातील मेंदूवर होणाऱ्या अति-भाषिक भाराबद्दल सावध करते. त्रिभाषा योजना यात आहे खरे — पण ती प्रथम इयत्तेपासून सक्तीची नव्हे, आणि सर्वांवर लागू होणारी ‘एकसंध’ अटही नव्हे.

विशेषतः कलम 4.12 नुसार, पहिल्या दोन इयत्तांपर्यंत मुलांना मातृभाषेत किंवा प्रादेशिक भाषेत शिकवावे असे सुचवले आहे. कारण या टप्प्यावर लक्ष केंद्रित असते — अक्षर व अंक साक्षरता यावर.

धोरणात हेही सांगितले आहे की, इतर भाषा हळूहळू व विवेकी पद्धतीने शिकवाव्यात — मुलांची मानसिक क्षमता, भाषिक परिसर आणि शिक्षकसामग्री लक्षात घेऊन. मूल एका भाषेत विचार करायला शिकल्याशिवाय त्याच्यावर इतर भाषांचा भार टाकणे म्हणजे पद्धतशीर अन्याय.

त्यामुळे महाराष्ट्र सरकारचे त्रिभाषिक धोरण NEP 2020 च्या मूळ दृष्टीकोनाशी आणि शैक्षणिक भावनेशी विसंगत आहे. जे धोरण विद्यार्थ्यांना सक्षम बनवण्यासाठी होते, त्याचे इथे कोवळ्या मेंदूंवर बोजा बनले आहे.

१०. एक नवी दिशा : भाषाशिक्षणाचा नव्याने विचार

मग पुढचा मार्ग कोणता?

मूलाधार साक्षरता प्रथम: मातृभाषेत मजबूत साक्षरतेने प्रारंभ. UNESCO Global Education Monitoring Report (2022) नुसार, मूल आपल्या मातृभाषेत उत्तम शिकते.

द्वैभाषिक संरचना नंतर: इंग्रजी किंवा हिंदी (किंवा दोन्ही) हळूहळू इयत्ता ५ किंवा ६ पासून सुरू करणे.

विज्ञानवादी दृष्टिकोन: लहान वयात प्रश्न विचारण्याची सवय, कथाकथन, कोडिंग, विज्ञान व तर्कशास्त्र यांचा समावेश.

शिक्षकांचे सशक्तीकरण: भाषाशिक्षणासाठी योग्य प्रशिक्षण, संज्ञानात्मक भार ओळखण्याची क्षमता.

पाठ्यपुस्तकांची पुनर्रचना: भाषा व मजकूर वयानुसार व संस्कृतीशी सुसंगत.

मुलाला श्वास घेऊ द्या…

शिक्षणाला ओळखाच्या राजकारणाचे रणांगण बनवू नका. भारताचे भविष्य भाषिक अभिमानाच्या खंदकात गमावण्यासारखे महाग आहे. एकता हवीच — पण ती हेतूची असावी, नव्हे की आदेशांची.

मुलाला श्वास घेऊ द्या. त्यांना प्रश्न विचारू द्या. चूटचूटीत वाक्य लिहू द्या. नवीन शब्द निर्माण करू द्या. ते खडूने जमिनीवर सूर्यमालेचे चित्र काढतील, कागदातून रॉकेट बनवतील. त्यांना अगोदर एक भाषा आत्मसात करू द्या — मगच तीन शिकवा.

त्यांना शिकण्याचा गोडवा निर्माण होवू द्या — केवळ “रामधारी सिंह दिनकर” आणि “कुसुमाग्रज” पाठ करण्यासाठी नव्हे, तर अणूमधील जादू आणि आकाशातील काव्य शोधण्यासाठीसुद्धा!

शेवटी शिक्षण म्हणजे आपण काय शिकवतो हे नव्हे — मूले काय विचार करतात, काय प्रश्न करतात, काय नव निर्माणाची क्षमता ठेवतात अशा बाबींना प्रोत्साहन देणे, वैचारिकतेला वाव देणे, सर्जनशीलता वाढविणे — हेच खरे शिक्षण. आणि त्यासाठी, कमी म्हणजे अधिक, खोलपणा म्हणजे शहाणपण, आणि नेहमी, ‘अभ्यासक्रमा’आधी ‘मूल’ महत्वाचे हे तत्व अवलंबिने!

Standard

A Second Chance at Enlightenment: Rewriting India’s Educational Destiny

History is a river with many tributaries—some clear, some murky, all converging to form the complex current of the present. The educational voyage of the Indian subcontinent is precisely such a river. It has never flowed in a single, unified stream; rather, it has bent, broken, merged, and meandered under the pressures of culture, conquest, and cosmic beliefs. Now, as the tides of global transformation swell, India finds herself at a decisive bend—offered, perhaps for the first time in millennia, a chance to re-script the very grammar of learning and rectify the historical wrongs inflicted upon the collective intellect of her people.

In the Beginning: A Landscape of Learning

Long before scripts were inked on bark or stone, the seeds of scientific curiosity were sown in the alluvial soils of what would become India. The great migrations from Africa to South Asia, occurring roughly 40,000 to 60,000 years ago, brought with them not merely survival instincts but rudimentary sparks of reasoning and observation. The ruins of Mohenjo-daro and Harappa whisper of minds that could orchestrate intricate urban planning, systematic water management, sewage system and civil engineering. This was not mere instinct but the expression of an organized epistemology—a silent testimony to an educational framework that predated priests and psalms.

Though we have no surviving scrolls from those eras, the evidences etched in fired bricks and drainage channels suggest the presence of a culture rooted in empirical and scientific understanding. It would not be far-fetched to infer that learning, in those times, was experiential, inclusive, and pragmatic—traits any modern education system would envy.

The Fork in the Path: When the Abstract Replaced the Analytical

But then, somewhere around 1500 BCE, the winds from Central Asia carried new waves of settlers bearing the Vedic worldview—an intricate tapestry of spiritual verses, cosmologies, and rituals. With them came Sanskrit, a beautiful but inaccessible tongue to the majority, and with it, the doctrine that knowledge was the privilege of a chosen few. The earlier scientific and civic bent of Indian learning began to buckle under the growing weight of metaphysical abstraction and priestly exclusivity.

The shift was not just philosophical; it was architectural—structuring a society where learning was no longer a right but a ritualistic inheritance. The Manusmriti, that grim ledger of social hierarchies, encoded knowledge into a tightly guarded vault, locked with caste, and guarded with gender. For centuries, the Indian intellect, save a slender echelon of pseudo upper-class males, was systematically starved.

Sanskrit, which might have become the language of logic and law, was instead weaponized as a gatekeeper of knowledge. Women, Shudras, Dalits—vast oceans of potential—were excommunicated from the very pursuit that defines humanity: the quest to know. The consequence? A continent of thinkers reduced to reciters; a civilization of makers, turned into mystics.

A Struggle Rekindled: Modernity Pierces the Cloister

The 19th and 20th centuries were not merely epochs of rebellion—they were a resuscitation of reason. When Jyotiba Phule opened the first school for girls, when Savitribai Phule braved abuse to teach them, when Vidyasagar challenged orthodoxy, when Dr. Ambedkar rose from untouchability to rewrite India’s Constitution—they were not just fighting for access to books. They were liberating the Indian mind.

Even the British, though their motives were coloured by imperial convenience, introduced an education system that breached the old fortresses. It brought English, not as a tool of cultural dominance alone, but as a bridge to modernity. Science, rationalism, and a sense of global belonging slowly returned to Indian classrooms.

Independence brought with it not merely self-rule but the constitutional guarantee of education as a fundamental right. The establishment of IITs, IIMs, national research centres, and public universities heralded a new dawn—an India willing to invest in its intellect once more. And the fruits were swift: from nuclear science to space exploration, from software exports to startups, India began to reclaim her rightful place in the global intellectual arena.

And Yet, The Shadows Persist

But here lies the paradox: a country that now boasts the world’s largest youth population still struggles to answer a foundational question—education, for what?

Are we merely churning out degree-holders for an increasingly narrow job market? Are our institutions preparing students for a life of inquiry and innovation, or merely survival? The answer, sadly, is ambivalent.

Curricula too often lack vision. The marketplace dictates educational priorities more than societal needs. Worse still, troubling reports suggest attempts to dilute scientific temper and sneak back archaic, faith-based ideologies into classrooms under the guise of “cultural renaissance.” Such regression is not a revival—it is a betrayal.

The goal of education must not be restricted to employability; it must awaken empathy, instill ethics, provoke imagination, and nurture reason. The child who enters Class I today will graduate into a world ruled by artificial intelligence, genomic manipulation, and machine-human hybrids. If their education is shackled to rote learning and spiritual fatalism, they shall be adrift in a future they neither comprehend nor control.

Correcting the Course: The Mandate of the Next 25 Years

The next quarter century is not a planning horizon; it is a destiny window. If we fail now, the costs will be civilizational.

India must design education policies that are future-ready and philosophically sound. The curriculum must be dynamic, multilingual, and multicultural, but rooted in scientific methodology. Pedagogy must shift from memorization to exploration. Skills must be interwoven with values—creating citizens, not just workers.

Moreover, our institutions must begin producing intellectual property at a scale that reflects our demographic strength. With 17% of the world’s population, we contribute a negligible fraction of global patents. That is not a statistical quirk—it is the legacy of millennia of intellectual suppression.

To reverse this, we must invest not just in education but in educated environments—libraries, labs, makerspaces, public science forums, community colleges, vocational hubs. The goal must be clear: transform India from a consumer of global knowledge to a creator of global paradigms.

The Ethical Imperative: Education with Humanity

And let us not forget: the best minds can also become the most dangerous when devoid of moral compass. Our emphasis must be not just on what is taught, but how it shapes the soul. Compassion, critical thinking, collaboration—these must become the cornerstones of every school and university.

For too long, education in India was a weapon of exclusion. Now it must become an instrument of inclusion.

For too long, learning was a ladder only for the few. Now it must become a bridge for the many.

A Call to Conscience

We stand today with history in our hands. It has offered us a second chance—rare, precious, and perhaps final. If we ignore the lessons of the past and allow ignorance to wear the garb of tradition, we will have not only failed ourselves, but betrayed the memory of those who fought to educate us.

But if we act—deliberately, inclusively, and courageously—we may yet become the society we once aspired to be: curious, just, luminous with knowledge.

Let this be the century in which India does not merely reclaim her lost legacy of learning, but redefines what it means to educate a nation—and through it, the world.

-Mahesh Zagade

Standard

मुहूर्ताचा मोह: एका कल्पित शुभक्षणाचे अवडंबर 

मानवी जीवन म्हणजे प्रवाह—अनुभवांचा, आकांक्षांचा, आणि निर्णयांचा अखंड प्रवाह. या प्रवाहात एखादा क्षण ‘शुभ’ असतो तर दुसरा ‘अशुभ’—अशी एक धारणा आपल्या समाजाने संस्कृतीच्या नावाखाली आत्मसात केलेली आहे. ‘मुहूर्त’ ही संकल्पनाही त्याच प्रवाहातील एक काल्पनिक वाटा आहे, जिच्यावर आजही अनेकांची श्रद्धा असून, व्यवहार, विवाह, घरप्रवेश, नवोदयाचे स्वप्न अशा अनेक महत्त्वाच्या घटनांची सुरुवात ‘मुहूर्ता’वरच केली जाते. परंतु, जेव्हा आपण विज्ञानाच्या निर्मळ प्रकाशात ही संकल्पना तपासून पाहतो, तेव्हा या विश्वासाचे बुडाशी उभे असलेले अंधश्रद्धेचे पाय मूळासकट ढासळताना दिसतात.

कशाला हवा मुहूर्त?

‘मुहूर्त’ म्हणजे काय? काही निवडक ग्रह-ताऱ्यांची स्थिती, तिथी, वार, नक्षत्र यांचा एक मिलाफ, ज्याला पुरोहित किंवा जोतिषी शुभ अथवा अशुभ म्हणतात. पण एक प्रश्न विचारावासा वाटतो—काय खरंच आकाशातील ग्रह आपल्या निर्णयांवर परिणाम घडवतात का? जर पृथ्वीवरील एखाद्या व्यक्तीने व्यवसाय सुरू करायचा ठरवले, आणि तोच ग्रहसंयोग आफ्रिकेतील एखाद्या अनोळखी गावातही तसाच असेल, तर तिथल्या व्यक्तीचंही जीवन त्याच मार्गाने चालेल काय?

या प्रश्नाचे उत्तर जर ‘हो’ असेल, तर विज्ञानाचे सारे सिद्धांत फोल ठरावेत. पण वस्तुस्थिती अशी नाही.

शास्त्र आणि अंधश्रद्धा: दोन टोकांची यात्रा

शास्त्र आपल्याला सांगते की ‘काळ’ (Time) हा एक सातत्याने प्रवाहित होणारा आयाम आहे, ज्यात कोणताही क्षण स्वतःहून ‘शुभ’ किंवा ‘अशुभ’ असू शकत नाही. कोणत्याही क्षणाचे मूल्य हे केवळ त्या क्षणी आपण केलेल्या कृतीने ठरते, त्या क्षणाची कोणतीही आकाशीय ‘गुणवत्ता’ नसते. उलट, एखादी संधी गमावण्यामागे मुहूर्ताच्या प्रतीक्षेचा मूर्खपणा कारणीभूत ठरतो, हेच शास्त्रीय दृष्टिकोन सूचित करतो.

इतिहासाचा आरसा: कुठे होते मुहूर्त?

इतिहासात डोकावून पाहा. अलेक्झांडरने मोहिमा काढताना ‘शुभ वेळ’ शोधला होता का? आल्बर्ट आइनस्टाइन किंवा आयझॅक न्यूटन यांनी आपली महान संशोधनयात्रा मुहूर्त पाहून आरंभ केली होती का? मुघल आक्रमक, ईस्ट इंडिया कंपनी, किंवा आपलेच स्वातंत्र्यवीर, महाराणा प्रताप, छत्रपती शिवाजी महाराज इ नी कोणाचा इतिहास एखाद्या पंचांगाच्या पानावर ठरवलेला होता? त्यांनी वेळ निवडली नव्हती, वेळ घडवली होती.

यातून हे स्पष्ट होते की यशाची गुरुकिल्ली ही आकाशात नाही, ती मनात आणि कृतीत असते. महानता ही मुहूर्तावर नव्हे, तर निर्धारावर उभी राहते.

‘शुभ काळ’ हे व्यावसायिक तंत्र

कुठल्याही वस्तूला जर किंमत द्यायची असेल, तर ती दुर्मीळ ठरावी लागते. मुहूर्त सांगणाऱ्या जोतिषी यांनी सिद्धांताचा वापर केला. ही तत्कालीन सर्व जनतेला अत्यावश्यक अशी बाब निर्माण करून “सेवा” हा प्रोडक्ट तयार केला आणि त्याचे अव्याहतपणे आणि कोणत्याही जाहिरातीशिवाय त्याचा प्रसार आणि भीती निर्माण करण्यासाठी त्यांनी वेद, ज्योतिष आणि ग्रंथ यांच्या साहाय्याने लोकांना पटवले की केवळ काही क्षणच शुभ असतात आणि उर्वरित सारे काळ अशुभ. त्यातून त्यांना एक हमखास अर्थार्जनाचा व्यवसाय तयार झाला जो वंशपरंपरागत पुढे चालू राहील आणि ग्राहकांची अजिबात वानवा भासणार नाही. या कल्पनेमुळे लोक संभ्रमित झाले. परिणामी, ‘शुभ काळ’ ओळखून सांगणारे एक संपूर्ण व्यावसायिक वर्ग उभा राहिला—पुरोहित, पंचांगकर्ते, जोतिषी इत्यादी.

ही सेवा म्हणजे एक प्रकारची अनिर्बंध ‘अंतःविक्रय व्यवस्था’ झाली. प्रत्येक विवाह, गृहप्रवेश, व्यवहार, खरेदी, अगदी केस कापण्यापासून नवजात बालकांच्या बारशापर्यंत—सर्व गोष्टींसाठी एखादा ‘शुभ वेळ’ सांगून शुल्क आकारले गेले. यामध्ये समाजातील भयग्रस्तता, अज्ञान आणि ‘देव रागावेल ’ अशा मानसिकतेने खूप मदत केली.

प्रगतीचा अडसर ठरलेली परंपरा

शास्त्र आणि तंत्रज्ञानाच्या क्षेत्रात भारत जगभरात नाव कमावत असताना, समाजाच्या मानसिकतेत मात्र हा पुरातन विषारी अंकुर अजूनही ठाण मांडून बसलेला आहे. आपण ‘चंद्रयान’ चंद्रावर पाठवतो, पण ‘मुहूर्त पाहून रॉकेट उडवले का?’ असा प्रश्न आजही काही मंडळी विचारतात. एवढंच नव्हे, तर कित्येक शासकीय योजनांच्या उद्घाटनांसाठीही ‘मुहूर्त’ शोधला जातो, जणू काही वेळेचे चक्र कोणाच्या आज्ञेवर चालते.

खरे शुभ म्हणजे धैर्य आणि निर्णायक कृती

कुठलाही क्षण शुभ असतो का? हो, जर त्या क्षणी तुम्ही योग्य निर्णय घेऊन धैर्याने कृती केली, तर तो क्षण शुभ असतो. अन्यथा तोच क्षण भय, विलंब आणि शंकांनी भरलेला असतो. इतिहासातील महान वैज्ञानिक, लेखक, नेता किंवा योद्धा यांनी कधीही ‘मुहूर्त’ पाहून कृती केली नाही. त्यांनी वेळ घालवला नाही—वेळ घडवला!

काय करायला हवे?

आजच्या आधुनिक काळात शिक्षण, वैज्ञानिक जागृती आणि विवेकाचा सन्मान यांचा प्रसार करणं आवश्यक आहे. कोणताही तरुण किंवा तरुणी त्यांच्या आयुष्यातील महत्त्वाचे निर्णय घेताना शुद्ध विचार, योग्य नियोजन आणि आत्मविश्वास यांचा आधार घ्यावा, न की एखाद्या ज्योतिषांनी सांगितलेल्या मुहूर्ताची वाट पाहावी.

‘मुहूर्त’ ही संकल्पना म्हणजे एका समाजात  पेरलेली, एक निरंतर चाललेली आणि हमखास खरेदीदार उपलब्ध होणारी व्यावसायिक संधी आहे, जी आजही अनेकांच्या अंधश्रद्धांवर पोसली जाते. या क्षणभंगुर कल्पनां आता तरी हद्दपार व्हायला हव्यात. आपण त्यांच्यावर वैज्ञानिक सत्याचा शिडकावा करायला हवा. कारण माणूस त्याच्या कर्माने मोठा होतो, वेळेच्या सूचनेने नव्हे. 

Standard

The Croaking Retiree: A Bureaucrat’s Eulogy to Ignorance

In the grand theatre of governance, where wisdom and prudence were once considered the pillars of administrative service, emerges a voice from the abyss—an erstwhile high-ranking bureaucrat, whom we shall, for the sake of brevity, call the Retiree. This distinguished specimen of public service has taken it upon himself to issue a diktat to the nation: Thou shalt not question the omniscience of the IAS officer in power today, for they are the harbingers of all knowledge and governance.

The Retiree, once perched on the tallest branches of administration, now finds himself croaking from the depths of irrelevance. His proclamations reek of a devotion not to public service, but to a brand of ideological servitude that blinds him to reason, morality, and even the faintest echoes of reality. He has found his true calling not in post-retirement reflection but in a self-righteous crusade against intelligence, progress, and above all, the idea that power should ever be questioned.  

The Gospel According to the Retiree

According to this self-anointed oracle of bureaucracy, any discussion about the plight of farmers, the destitute, or the socially disadvantaged is not an exercise in governance but an act of sedition. To even suggest measures that may alleviate their suffering is, in his lexicon, to flirt with the ghost of Karl Marx. Indeed, the mere act of questioning economic disparity or proposing a fairer system he maligns such an individual with the most damning of all titles—A Communist!  

One would imagine that a person who once wielded the pen of policy and the sword of executive power would at least grasp the basic tenets of governance. But no, the Retiree sees the world through a peculiar prism, where stark ignorance is wisdom, mental derailment is intellectual prowess, and logic is but an unfortunate affliction of the weak-minded. His convictions, as unshakable as a weathered bureaucratic file gathering dust in a forgotten ministry, are not merely wrong but stunningly oblivious to their own contradictions.  

Trump, Putin, and the Retiree’s Political Waltz

The Retiree’s ideological compass points resolutely to the extreme right, and his devotion to the gospel of Donald Trump is near religious. Why? Because Trump, like Retiree, thrives on the belief that knowledge is overrated, that institutions exist to be dismantled, and that those who question authority are to be ridiculed rather than heard. But here lies the comedy of it all: while the Retiree worships Trump as the supreme leader of the far-right, he conveniently ignores the rather inconvenient reality that Trump himself now embraces Vladimir Putin, a man who—by any stretch of the Retiree’s fevered imagination—would qualify as an extreme communist.  

But such glaring contradictions do not trouble the fortified walls of the Retiree’s mind, for inside that citadel of circular logic, only one rule exists: I am right, because I say so. The fact that Trump, his ideological messiah, is dancing a diplomatic tango with a leader the Retiree would otherwise despise does not cause him the slightest distress. No, because to acknowledge such paradoxes would require a cognitive flexibility that he has long since abandoned in favor of the simple, comfortable dogma of the far-right echo chamber.  

The Bureaucratic Landmines in India’s Progress

The Retiree’s existence is not merely a minor embarrassment to the IAS fraternity; he is a cautionary tale, a stark reminder of how the corridors of power sometimes breed men who mistake their titles for infallibility. The Indian Administrative Service, for all its imperfections, has been the backbone of governance for nearly eight decades. It has weathered crises, delivered policies, and, at times, served as the last line of defense against political waywardness.  

But then, there are anomalies like the Retiree—bureaucratic landmines, waiting to explode with ignorance, bigotry, and an inexplicable hostility to progress. Such individuals do not merely fail to serve the people during their tenure; they continue their reign of intellectual terror long after retirement, spreading their warped legacy with the enthusiasm of a zealot.  

A Nation’s Imperative: Shun the Croakers

If India is to move forward, it must learn to distinguish between administrators and ideological zealots, between wisdom and dogma, and most importantly, between governance and hollow grandstanding. The Retiree represents the rot that festers when power is mistaken for intelligence, when ideology eclipses logic, and when the civil services, meant to be impartial and rational, become breeding grounds for blind allegiance to extremism.  

We must not merely reject such individuals—we must hold them accountable for the damage they do, both in service and in retirement. The true measure of an administrator is not in the power they wield, but in the integrity with which they wield it. And by that measure, the Retiree, in all his croaking glory, is nothing more than a lamentable footnote in the annals of bureaucracy—a relic best left in the past, as India strides toward a future where governance is dictated not by ideology, but by reason and justice.

Standard

Of Machines and Men: The Dehumanizing Vision of Endless Toil  

In the ceaseless march of industrial progress, where technology promises to alleviate human drudgery, the remarks of Larsen & Toubro (L&T) chairman S.N. Subrahmanyan jar like a discordant note in a symphony of supposed advancement. Addressing employees in a video that has sparked widespread outrage, Mr. Subrahmanyan proposed a grueling 90-hour work week, dismissed the sanctity of Sundays, and trivialized personal relationships with a flippant, patriarchal jest: “How long can you stare at your wife?” His statement is not merely controversial; it is emblematic of a regressive vision that reduces human existence to mechanical toil, disregards gender equity, and undermines the essence of what it means to live a fulfilling life.  

The Commodification of Human Labor  

Mr. Subrahmanyan’s exhortation is rooted in a utilitarian philosophy that views humans as mere components in a vast corporate machine. This ideology champions productivity above all else, stripping away the multidimensional nature of life and reducing individuals to their capacity to labor. It is the apotheosis of “hustle culture,” a modern malady that glorifies overwork while neglecting its devastating consequences.  

Decades of research expose the perils of such relentless labor. The World Health Organization has linked excessive work hours to myriad health issues, from cardiovascular disease to chronic stress. Burnout—a term that once described engine failure—has become a ubiquitous human condition, a lamentable badge of honor in workplaces that equate self-sacrifice with commitment. By advocating a 90-hour work week, Mr. Subrahmanyan champions a model that history and science have repeatedly discredited, one that prioritizes corporate gain over individual well-being and societal harmony.  

Sundays and the Wholeness of Life  

The suggestion that employees forego Sundays is a rejection of the wholeness of human existence. Life’s richness lies in its balance—a mosaic of work, leisure, family, and introspection. Sundays, for many, represent a sacred pause, a time for spiritual reflection, familial bonding, and the pursuit of passions that infuse life with meaning.  

To dismiss this is to deny the inherent need for rest and renewal. The creative spark often kindled during moments of leisure is vital not only to personal fulfillment but also to professional ingenuity. Far from being an indulgence, time away from work is an investment in human potential. Mr. Subrahmanyan’s flippant remark about “staring at one’s wife” trivializes not just marital bonds but the foundational relationships that sustain emotional health and social cohesion.  He’s forgetting that due to Narayan Meghaji Lokhande’s efforts in 1890, workers started getting a weekly holiday on Sunday.

The Patriarchal Undertones  

Equally troubling is the patriarchal assumption embedded in Mr. Subrahmanyan’s rhetoric. By imagining a male-dominated workforce with wives relegated to domestic roles, his remarks resurrect the specter of antiquated gender norms. This worldview not only marginalizes women but also fails to recognize the evolving realities of modern households, where both partners often share professional and domestic responsibilities.  This also echoes the regressive tenets of Manusmriti, an ancient Indian text that relegates women to subservience and confines them to the domestic sphere. Had Mr. Subrahmanyan been genuinely egalitarian in his worldview, he might have posed the inverse question: “How long can women stare at their husbands?”  In a society striving for gender parity, such regressive commentary does more than offend; it undermines decades of progress toward equality and inclusion.  

The Fallacy of Corporate Overreach  

Underlying Mr. Subrahmanyan’s vision is a broader trend of corporate overreach that prioritizes profit over people, treating employees as expendable resources rather than stakeholders in a shared enterprise. Yet, the premise that longer hours yield greater productivity is demonstrably flawed. Research consistently shows that overwork diminishes efficiency, increases errors, and stifles innovation.  

Furthermore, Mr. Subrahmanyan’s remarks betray a profound disconnection from the realities of India’s workforce. Over 90% of employment in India lies in the informal sector, encompassing agriculture and unregulated industries. These workers toil under harsh conditions, often without the protections or privileges afforded to their corporate counterparts. Suggesting that India’s path to development requires more labor from its formal workforce ignores the systemic inequities and entrenched hardships already borne by millions.  

Economic, scientific, and social progress is not tied to excessive work hours. The United States, a global economic leader, thrives on innovation, efficiency, and work-life balance—not a 90-hour work week as wrongly suggested by S.N. Subrahmanyan. True progress stems from nurturing creativity and well-being, not relentless toil.

A Call for Humanity  

The public outcry against Mr. Subrahmanyan’s remarks reflects an evolving societal ethos. Today, there is a growing recognition that the true measure of progress lies not in GDP growth or corporate profits but in the well-being of individuals and communities. As the world confronts crises of mental health, climate change, and inequality, the need for compassionate leadership has never been greater.  

Leaders must embrace a vision of work that enhances, rather than diminishes, life. This means fostering environments that value balance, creativity, and respect for human dignity. It means rejecting the dehumanizing ethos of endless toil and instead celebrating the richness of human experience in all its forms.  

Beyond Machines  

Mr. Subrahmanyan’s comments are not just an affront to common decency; they are a stark reminder of the dangers of unchecked corporate ambition. In a world increasingly dominated by machines, humanity’s greatest challenge is to preserve its essence: the ability to love, to reflect, and to find meaning beyond material achievement.  

As we navigate the complexities of a rapidly evolving society, let us reaffirm our commitment to a future where work serves humanity, not the other way around. Let us envision workplaces that nurture, leaders who inspire, and a culture that honors the full spectrum of human life. Only then can we hope to transcend the dehumanizing vision of endless toil and embrace the profound potential of machines and men working in harmony—not as masters and slaves, but as partners in the grand endeavor of progress.  

-Mahesh Zagade, IAS(rtd)

Standard

The Curse of the Slumbering Collective Consciousness

Throughout the human history, one haunting refrain reverberates with grim familiarity: humanity, time and again, succumbs to the slumber of collective consciousness, only to awaken amidst the wreckage of catastrophes wrought by its own indifference. This torpor—a pervasive, shared passivity—has allowed monstrous injustices, tyrannical regimes, and existential threats to fester and flourish. It is as though the collective will of societies, lulled into apathy, concedes its agency to forces that reshape destinies, often for the worse. Only through great suffering and turmoil does humanity endeavor to undo the damage inflicted during these eras of somnolence, as though catastrophe itself is the price of awareness.

History, indeed, is the sternest of tutors, presenting countless examples of this phenomenon, yet humanity remains an inattentive student, doomed to repeat its follies.

The Caste System: A Lingering Blight

Over 3,500 years ago in the Indian subcontinent, the Varnashrama system emerged—a hierarchical division of society initially intended as a pragmatic framework for roles and responsibilities. Yet, through the collective slumber of its people, this system metastasized into the inhumane and rigid caste hierarchy, condemning millions to lives of indignity and subjugation. The silence of the majority enabled the codification of oppression, transforming what was meant to be fluid into an unyielding social prison.

Even today, the vestiges of this system linger as an enduring blight on Indian society, a grim reminder of the inertia that allowed injustice to embed itself into the fabric of culture. The lessons from this epoch are stark: passivity in the face of nascent inequities ensures their perpetuation across millennia.

Human slavery

Human slavery, one of history’s darkest chapters, stands as a harrowing testament to the slumber of collective consciousness. For centuries, societies across the world normalized the bondage of millions, treating human beings as mere commodities to be bought, sold, and exploited. This moral atrocity persisted not because of ignorance alone but because of the widespread apathy and passive acceptance of those who benefited from or silently condoned the system. From the transatlantic slave trade that uprooted and dehumanized countless African lives to the caste-like indenture systems in ancient civilizations, slavery thrived under the weight of societal indifference. It was only when awakened consciences—embodied by abolitionists, revolutionaries, and those enslaved themselves—dared to challenge this grotesque order that the chains began to break. Yet, even today, the echoes of this slumber resonate in the forms of modern slavery and human trafficking, reminding us that the struggle against the torpor of collective consciousness is far from over.

Tyrants and the Sleep of Reason

The rise of despots across history is perhaps the most damning indictment of humanity’s proclivity for collective slumber. Tyranny, by its very nature, thrives in the vacuum created by the abdication of collective vigilance.

Consider the devastating reigns of leaders like Genghis Khan, Pol Pot, Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, and Mao Zedong. These men, driven by grandiose ambitions and unbridled ruthlessness, reshaped the course of nations. Yet, they were not solitary forces of destruction. The societies they ruled, whether through fear, manipulation, or misguided loyalty, became complicit in their rise.

The Holocaust, orchestrated under Hitler’s rule, stands as a harrowing testament to what happens when collective conscience is lulled into submission by propaganda and fear. Stalin’s purges, Mao’s Cultural Revolution, and Pol Pot’s Killing Fields likewise reveal the grim potential of societal inertia to enable mass suffering.

In each case, it was not merely the will of the tyrant but the apathy, silence, or misdirected faith of the many that allowed such atrocities to unfold. The sleep of reason, it seems, breeds not only monsters but systems of monstrosity.

The Annihilation of Indigenous Peoples  

The annihilation of Native American populations in North America offers another grim chapter in this history of collective apathy. Waves of European colonization, driven by greed and a sense of manifest destiny, decimated entire cultures. Land was seized, treaties were broken, and indigenous peoples were subjected to systematic violence and forced assimilation.  

Here too, the slumber of collective consciousness played a pivotal role. While some spoke out against these atrocities, the majority remained indifferent, viewing the plight of Native Americans as an inevitable byproduct of progress. This collective failure to acknowledge the humanity of indigenous peoples allowed one of history’s greatest injustices to unfold with devastating finality.  

Apartheid: Institutionalized Injustice  

In more recent history, South Africa’s apartheid system stands as a glaring example of societal inertia enabling systemic oppression. For decades, the slumber of collective consciousness among the privileged minority and the global community allowed the institutionalized subjugation of millions based on race. The apartheid regime’s survival depended on the silence and complicity of those who benefited from its structure, as well as the reluctance of international powers to intervene decisively.  

It was only through relentless activism, internal resistance, and international pressure that the apartheid system was dismantled. Yet, the scars of those years linger, serving as a testament to the catastrophic consequences of allowing injustice to thrive unchecked.  

Climate Change: The Looming Abyss

In the present day, humanity faces perhaps its most daunting challenge yet: climate change. Unlike the tyrants of old, this enemy does not wear a crown or wave a flag. It is faceless, incremental, and, therefore, perilously easy to ignore.

Despite mounting scientific evidence and increasingly severe natural calamities, the collective consciousness of humanity remains somnolent. Politicians dither, corporations exploit, and societies cling to unsustainable comforts—all while the clock ticks ominously toward irreversible ecological collapse.

The parallels with past disasters are unsettling. Just as the caste system entrenched inequality and tyrants wrought havoc, the current apathy toward climate change threatens to undermine the very foundations of human civilization. Yet again, the slumber of collective consciousness allows the seeds of catastrophe to germinate.

Modern-Day Tyranny: Shadows of Oppression

Even today, the specter of tyranny looms large, cloaked in the garb of modernity. Leaders like Kim Jong Un in North Korea perpetuate regimes of fear and oppression, their power sustained by a population too terrorized or desensitized to resist. How many such figures operate in obscurity, shielded from scrutiny by the apathy or ignorance of the global community?

The rise of authoritarianism in various guises across the world—aided by disinformation, eroding democratic norms, and the passive acquiescence of societies—signals a dangerous trend. As history has shown, the cost of ignoring such trends is invariably steep, paid in blood, freedom, and dignity.

The Rise of Techno-Feudalism and Joblessness  

In the 21st century, humanity faces a new and insidious threat: the encroachment of technology on livelihoods. Automation, artificial intelligence, and digital platforms are rendering traditional jobs obsolete at an alarming rate, creating a chasm between the technologically empowered elite and the disempowered masses.  

The raw power of capitalists and techno-feudalists increasingly subjugates governments, reducing them to pawns in a game of profit maximization. Wealth concentration reaches unprecedented levels, and the collapse of the world economic system looms large as inequality deepens.  

Yet, despite these warning signs, the collective consciousness of society remains dormant. Discussions about universal basic income, labor retraining, and ethical technology development are drowned out by the clamor of technological triumphalism. This apathy, if left unchecked, may well sow the seeds of a dystopian future marked by mass unemployment and social unrest.  

The Disturbing Shadow of World War III  

Amidst these crises, the specter of global conflict looms ominously. Disturbing trends—rising nationalism, economic rivalry, and the proliferation of nuclear weapons—threaten to plunge the world into chaos once more. The mechanisms of diplomacy and international cooperation falter, as nations retreat into isolationism and brinkmanship.  

The slumber of collective consciousness in this context is particularly perilous. Lessons from two world wars, hard-earned and dearly paid, risk being forgotten in the fog of modern geopolitics. The path to global calamity is paved not with bold actions but with the quiet acquiescence of societies that fail to demand peace.  

Humanity’s history is both a cautionary tale and a call to arms. The recurring slumber of collective consciousness has allowed atrocities, injustices, and existential threats to proliferate, exacting a heavy toll on generations. Yet, it is within humanity’s power to break this cycle, to remain awake to the perils of passivity, and to forge a future where awareness and action prevail over apathy and inertia.  

For in the end, the greatest curse is not the challenges we face, but our failure to face them with eyes wide open. Let this moment in history be one of awakening, lest future generations look back upon us and wonder why we slept through their hour of need.  

-Mahesh Zagade, IAS(rtd)

Standard