A Responsibility to Say No, and a Right to Say No

Over the last 2 weeks, a new India emerged, from the shadows of the World Cup. We lifted a cup we can be truly proud of … middle-class India, united with the common man to raise its voice, in an uncommon expression of concern and social activism.

Anna Hazare probably achieved more in 2 weeks than any other political leader or social activist of recent times, and I feel privileged that we still have people like him in our midst. But at the same time, I can not but help feel a little despondent, because I fear that all his efforts will go in vain. It’s not that I don’t trust the political society to live up to their promises, for me that is a given ! I don’t trust myself, and many others who supported the cause, to live by the ideals that Anna proposes. Am I ready to go through the hassle of getting a traffic ticket when I jump the red-light or drive at 80 kmph on JJ flyover ? Isn’t it still easier to give the policeman a Rs 50 note ? Am I prepared to visit the telephone department in Ghaziabad 3 times to get my phone repaired or would I just pay Rs 100 to the lineman and get the job done sitting at home ?

If we truly support the fight against corruption, we have to live by the ideals that Anna fights for … its’ not enough to show up at Jantar Mantar in the morning and watch the tamasha ! We have a Responsibility to Say No, say NO to the short-cuts in life we wish to take, and which every Government official exploits. We have a Responsibility to say No to bribes … if we want an honest society, it has to begin with us. I fear that I am not ready for this, I am afraid I am still the ‘convenient’ Indian who likes to take the easy way-out; so what if it costs Rs 100.

As we fight for our Rights – the Right to Information, the Right to Education, the Right to Work, etc, was wondering whether we also should have the Right to Say No. The Right to tell our politicians that enough is enough, we don’t want to make a choice between the Devil and the deep-sea. If we are electing these corrupt politicians today, maybe it’s because we have not been given a choice. Many Indians still believe in the Indian circus called “Democracy” and will brave the sun, rain and crowds to cast their vote … so what if all the candidates are equal scoundrels ! I am not prepared to do that. I ask for the Right to Say No; to say that I don’t want to vote for any of the candidates. I want the right to express my vote of no-confidence, by voting, and not by not voting ! It might be better to have an empty Parliament because we didn’t vote for any MPs than to have an empty parliament because the MPs were throwing slippers at each other.

Friends, Indians and countrymen, join me in the asking for the Right to say NO, and also in the Responsibility to say NO

About Neeraj Garg

Business builder, Change agent, Entrepreneurial professional, Growth seeker .... describe what I do at work. Personally, sometimes talkative and sometimes silent, sometimes completely engaged and sometimes completely detached. Observe and absorb at all times. Write infrequently, but write straight from the heart. Write spontaneously. Write on all things that peek my interest.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to A Responsibility to Say No, and a Right to Say No

  1. Samik Das says:

    Here’s something interest that I came across …

    India’s chief economic adviser Kaushik Basu argues that to reduce bribery we should make the paying of bribes (not the demanding!) legal.

    Under the current law…the bribe giver and the bribe taker become partners in crime. It is in their joint interest to keep this fact hidden from the authorities and to be fugitives from the law, because, if caught, both expect to be punished. Under the kind of revised law that I am proposing here, once a bribe is given and the bribe giver collects whatever she is trying to acquire by giving the money, the interests of the bribe taker and bribe giver become completely orthogonal to each other. If caught, the bribe giver will go scot free and will be able to collect his bribe money back. The bribe taker, on the other hand, loses the booty of bribe and faces a hefty punishment.

    Hence, in the post-bribe situation it is in the interest of the bribe giver to have the bribe taker caught….Since the bribe taker knows this, he will be much less inclined to take the bribe in the first place.
    In theory, once a demand for a bribe has been satisfied—and the service received, one presumes—the bribe giver may be interested in cooperating in getting the bribe taker caught, knowing that he or she will not face any punishment. That possibility could deter the bribe taker from taking a bribe in the first place. Right now, the interests of both converge, since both payer and taker face punishment if caught, and so the payer has a reduced interest in uncovering bribery. This establishes that there will be a drop in the incidence of bribery.

    Basu notes that he intends this to apply to bribes where the person paying the bribe is receiving only what they are entitled to receive, e.g. when you have to bribe to get a business license that you are entitled to or to get your rice rations or get an income tax refund.

    Click to access Act_Giving_Bribe_Legal.pdf


  2. Manoranjan Darla says:

    Yes, To build a responsible society which shuns corruption at all levels we need to move out of our Comfort Zones and persevere these inconveniences.


  3. Dr.Nitin Kulkarni says:

    Good posts Mr.Neeraj. Please continue writing and also update the site till date.Thanks


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s