Terrorism is the gravest international problem in modern times. Many of us in India would like to believe that it is uniquely an Indian or American or British crisis. It is not so. There is hardly any country, which lacks this characteristic feature or is not affected by the global spread out of this epidemic.
Yes, I call this a disease. A communicable disease. A communicable disease caused by contamination of opinion and often carried by poverty and greed for wealth. Well, it’s always stated that prevention is better than cure. But in this case, I hold that prevention cannot be separated from cure.
There have been raids, there have been operations, and there have been wars to destroy terrorism. What’s the outcome? Absolutely nothing. Because we’re not caring about the roots of this phenomenon, which are spreading out like those of a tree with a severed trunk.
Now first let us analyse the reasons for terror – fanaticism, greed and compounded grievances unhealed over ages. Please mark that I’m not talking only about the so-called ‘Islamist’ terrorism. But I hold greed to be a minor cause. Why?
We are grounding many a militant, terrorizing terrorists, shedding blood for blood. We’re pushing them out on many fronts, but to no avail. What we’ve forgotten is that terrorism is nothing alien to any nationality; it’s always bred within a nation’s borders. The Americans blasted the Talibans, but they seem to be back with a bang. The Bangladesh government have hanged and handcuffed quite a few Mujaheedin fundamentalist heads, but there are reports of new uprisals. The less we talk of our country on this aspect, the better it will be. A huge number of militants may have been finished off, but we have failed to kill their philosophy! Yes, this is what I’m trying to say. It’s the thought that’s destructive.
Most “do not know what they do!” They have built in such a way that they believe emphatically in what they do. Have you seen the film “Main Hoon Na”? There you see that Raghavan’s followers blindly believe in and follow his views.
Now, what helps more is unattended and insulted personal wounds, and the deadliest of them are poverty and racial discrimination. Almost from the attainment of intellect, these are aggravated slowly into ulcers. Your anger comes up, but you can’t even protest lawfully. Here evolves the urge for revenge – the urge to teach the society a lesson (remember Cho?). And this is when the militant philosophy appeals to you.
Maybe you can understand a little more if I draw a reference from the very recent developments related to the bomb attacks in Glasgow. 8 medical professionals have been held. Now, to some interesting figures. According to a study made on 172 Al Qaida militants, 75% of them are from middle or upper class families, 75% are married, 66% are graduates, 66% are professionals like physicians, engineers, architects, lawyers or scientists and 66% have joined militant groups while living abroad. It also says that the average age for conversion to militancy is just 26.
These are the worst concerns. A large number of intellectuals are associating themselves, and an innumerable number are misled into the unfortunate tunnels at an age when you just begin dreaming. Today, you cannot tell a terrorist from a normal person like you and me. Your nearest friend, highly placed and respected to a society, maybe one to have fallen pray. How many you’ll kill? Today one goes down, tomorrow ten more will come up, including his offspring. No defence system can vanquish militancy.
Better kill the thought. How? Irrationalism breeds extremism. Our education system has to be revolutionised – it has to be put in the budding years of a child, all and sundry; it’s as important as a polio vaccine. Secondly, neglect fires hatred. Spread love. Next time you go on to insult a hapless person, beware that he might be the one to blow up you and your family. Take care!
Sunday, July 8, 2007
Industrialisation and Agriculture
I reside in West Bengal. While you all have been shouting about reservations, the greatest crisis here has been the civil war like situation in a village known as Nandigram. I am not sure if you have been following the events, so I will go into a brief history.
It seems to have started with the first experiment by the Left Front government on the Special Economic Zones policy in Singur. Despite a strong protest by the farmers, the State government handed over the plots to the Tata Group. Just within days after things quite settled down in Singur, news broke around that agricultural land in Nandigram were to be brought into private hands to bring up a chemical hub over there. Then we witnessed one of the stiffest resistances offered by the peasant fraternity in recent times (although it often appeared to be a conflict among the CPI(M) supporters, the Trinamool Congress activists and the police).
The government, at last, has yielded to the pressure, calling off the chemical hub project in Nandigram, and then in Haldia. Recently, they have announced a package for the landless peasants, promising them jobs in the Tata Motors factory coming up there and some compensation money.
The measures the government planned to encourage industrialisation in the State have received a big jolt. This has brought to the fore a host of potential problems for the whole country. These I shall put down in block letters:
1.INDIA IS AN AGRICULTURAL COUNTRY. BUT FOR THE ADVANCE OF OUR ECONOMY WE NEED INDUSTRIALISATION. WE MAY UNDERSTAND BETTER. WE ARE TODAY’S YOUTH. THE RISING DEGREES OF UNEMPLOYMENT CAN BE THRALLED ONLY BY INDUSTRIALISATION.
2.BUT, JUST LOOK AT THE OTHER SIDE OF THE COIN. THE SUPPLY OF CROPS IN THE MARKET IS FAR LESS THAN ENOUGH. THE PRODUCTIVITY OF CROPS IS TOO LESS FOR A COUNTRY LIKE INDIA. LAST SEASON, WE HAD TO IMPORT WHEAT FOR DOMESTIC PURPOSES. IN SUCH A SITUATION, WE CAN HARDLY AFFORD TO GIVE AWAY AGRO-PLOTS FOR INDUSTRY.
3.THE GOVERNMENT HAS ASSURED SECTIONS OF THE PEASANTS OF EMPLOYMENT IN THE FACTORIES COMING UP. HERE TOO, THERE ARE TWO PROBLEMS. FIRSTLY, THE FACTORIES WILL BE UNDER PRIVATE CONTROL, AND THE INVESTORS ARE NOT LIABLE TO ANY SUCH CONDITIONS. SECONDLY, INDUSTRIAL LABOUR IS NO ALTERNATIVE TO PEASANTRY. EVEN IF THE PEASANTS UNDERGO TRAINING, THEY WILL NOT BE AS EFFICIENT AS THE PROFESSIONAL LABOURERS.
4.THIS CRISIS HAS REFLECTED THE NEED OF FURTHER PLANNING FOR DISTRIBUTION OF LAND. ANALYSIS OF LAND POSSESSIONS SAYS THAT, MORE THAN 70% OF PEASANTS ARE EITHER LANDLESS OR POSSESS LAND OF AREA LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO 2.5 ACRES. IN WEST BENGAL, THE FIGURE IS AROUND THE 75% MARK. AGAIN THE LANDLESS PEASANTS EITHER CULTIVATE LANDS ON LEASE OR ARE BONDED LABOURERS IN FIELDS. THIS MEANS THAT, TAKEOVER OF LAND TAKES PLACE FROM THE HOLDERS OF LARGE PIECES OF LAND, BUT ROBS A LARGE SECTION OF THE RURAL POPULATION FROM THE MEANS OF SURVIVAL.
These are the consequences of errors in the formative years of our nation. Now, the State is bent on imitating China, talking of Special Economic Zones; it would have been better had the predecessors thought about Special Agricultural Zones. We know that while a plot for industry is chosen, they always look for cheap transport routes for the raw material to reach there. Here I won’t comment on Nandigram, but would like to draw special mention on Singur. The land overtaken there was very, very fertile. It was quite an injustice, but I think it was the transport bit that influenced the Tatas. Now, had the pre-1990 governments been farsighted enough to plan special zones with cooperative farming, supplemented by a State controlled agro market, thus converting subsistence agriculture from a means of survival to a profession, we could have solved this problem, along with bonus benefits like increase in productivity and price control. Well, at this point of time, it seems a little too difficult to introduce such plans, because our economic and political system has got into a set pattern. But I warn you, if not dealt with, these problems will be dangerous for the nation.
It seems to have started with the first experiment by the Left Front government on the Special Economic Zones policy in Singur. Despite a strong protest by the farmers, the State government handed over the plots to the Tata Group. Just within days after things quite settled down in Singur, news broke around that agricultural land in Nandigram were to be brought into private hands to bring up a chemical hub over there. Then we witnessed one of the stiffest resistances offered by the peasant fraternity in recent times (although it often appeared to be a conflict among the CPI(M) supporters, the Trinamool Congress activists and the police).
The government, at last, has yielded to the pressure, calling off the chemical hub project in Nandigram, and then in Haldia. Recently, they have announced a package for the landless peasants, promising them jobs in the Tata Motors factory coming up there and some compensation money.
The measures the government planned to encourage industrialisation in the State have received a big jolt. This has brought to the fore a host of potential problems for the whole country. These I shall put down in block letters:
1.INDIA IS AN AGRICULTURAL COUNTRY. BUT FOR THE ADVANCE OF OUR ECONOMY WE NEED INDUSTRIALISATION. WE MAY UNDERSTAND BETTER. WE ARE TODAY’S YOUTH. THE RISING DEGREES OF UNEMPLOYMENT CAN BE THRALLED ONLY BY INDUSTRIALISATION.
2.BUT, JUST LOOK AT THE OTHER SIDE OF THE COIN. THE SUPPLY OF CROPS IN THE MARKET IS FAR LESS THAN ENOUGH. THE PRODUCTIVITY OF CROPS IS TOO LESS FOR A COUNTRY LIKE INDIA. LAST SEASON, WE HAD TO IMPORT WHEAT FOR DOMESTIC PURPOSES. IN SUCH A SITUATION, WE CAN HARDLY AFFORD TO GIVE AWAY AGRO-PLOTS FOR INDUSTRY.
3.THE GOVERNMENT HAS ASSURED SECTIONS OF THE PEASANTS OF EMPLOYMENT IN THE FACTORIES COMING UP. HERE TOO, THERE ARE TWO PROBLEMS. FIRSTLY, THE FACTORIES WILL BE UNDER PRIVATE CONTROL, AND THE INVESTORS ARE NOT LIABLE TO ANY SUCH CONDITIONS. SECONDLY, INDUSTRIAL LABOUR IS NO ALTERNATIVE TO PEASANTRY. EVEN IF THE PEASANTS UNDERGO TRAINING, THEY WILL NOT BE AS EFFICIENT AS THE PROFESSIONAL LABOURERS.
4.THIS CRISIS HAS REFLECTED THE NEED OF FURTHER PLANNING FOR DISTRIBUTION OF LAND. ANALYSIS OF LAND POSSESSIONS SAYS THAT, MORE THAN 70% OF PEASANTS ARE EITHER LANDLESS OR POSSESS LAND OF AREA LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO 2.5 ACRES. IN WEST BENGAL, THE FIGURE IS AROUND THE 75% MARK. AGAIN THE LANDLESS PEASANTS EITHER CULTIVATE LANDS ON LEASE OR ARE BONDED LABOURERS IN FIELDS. THIS MEANS THAT, TAKEOVER OF LAND TAKES PLACE FROM THE HOLDERS OF LARGE PIECES OF LAND, BUT ROBS A LARGE SECTION OF THE RURAL POPULATION FROM THE MEANS OF SURVIVAL.
These are the consequences of errors in the formative years of our nation. Now, the State is bent on imitating China, talking of Special Economic Zones; it would have been better had the predecessors thought about Special Agricultural Zones. We know that while a plot for industry is chosen, they always look for cheap transport routes for the raw material to reach there. Here I won’t comment on Nandigram, but would like to draw special mention on Singur. The land overtaken there was very, very fertile. It was quite an injustice, but I think it was the transport bit that influenced the Tatas. Now, had the pre-1990 governments been farsighted enough to plan special zones with cooperative farming, supplemented by a State controlled agro market, thus converting subsistence agriculture from a means of survival to a profession, we could have solved this problem, along with bonus benefits like increase in productivity and price control. Well, at this point of time, it seems a little too difficult to introduce such plans, because our economic and political system has got into a set pattern. But I warn you, if not dealt with, these problems will be dangerous for the nation.
RELIGION AND SECULARISM Part II
Secularism-India view
What is secularism? The answer to this question seems very easy, but quite difficult to find out. Apparently, secularism is a view or belief stating that society's values and standards should not be influenced or controlled by religion. The meaning strikes much deeper if we care to dig in.
The term 'secularism' is very much related to the theory of a 'Secular State'. Literally, it is a State that patronizes no religion. We do understand the adjective 'secular' as an antonym to the word ' communal'. Speaking in detail, a Secular State does have communal features.
For example, let us take the case of our country, India. The State recognizes the existence of various 'religious communities' and even if, the caste system has been abolished, has prepared a list of Scheduled Castes and Other Backward Classes along hereditary grounds. The State has termed some of the numerically weaker 'religious communities' as 'minority communities'. These 'minorities' (in some cases) and the Scheduled Castes enjoy some special privileges. Now think of this little theory. Had men learnt not to discriminate among themselves on such artificial grounds, there would have been no such 'minorities' or 'under-privileged' classes. India has been defined as a 'Socialist Secular' State, paying equal respect to every so-called community. Then, how come a particular group claims to be a 'minority' or 'backward' group? Again, agreeing with the fact that the Scheduled Castes were the deprived sections of the society in the pre-Independence era, this feature of the Constitution also has its faults.
In today's world, resources do not come on such basis in all cases and the basic universal factor for development is always the extent of availability of resources. A person of a so-called Scheduled Caste may be a millionaire, but he still enjoys the privileges under this system. It is found in many cases that this system is the only remainder of the caste system in the young educated society. Still remains an ill will between the so-called higher castes and the Scheduled Castes. It presents a question of dignity, too. Imagine the pain inflicted when someone is abused on such grounds. In the rural areas, the conditions are far worse than it ever was in the apartheid stricken South Africa. But there have been no whole-hearted efforts to even prepare a Below Poverty Line list that would present a true outline of the underprivileged. The State needs to demarcate the weaker sections on the economic basis, which is the real scale for measuring development anywhere. Also, even when the Constitution declares equality of all before law, the State has differential legal provisions for different ‘religious sects’.
Socialism is one of the goals stated in our Constitution. But the above stated ‘secular’ features are acting as a hindrance in the way of attainment of this goal. To reach socialism, we have to undertake programmes for the emancipation of the poor. Such programmes are carried out, but, frankly, are given less importance than those for the ‘upliftment’ of the so-called ‘minorities’ and ‘backward castes’.
One of the main tenets of Socialism is not to recognize the existence of any ‘religious sect’. And combining it with the definition of Secularism, we can clearly understand that the State has been playing with the twin ideals for low political causes.
A State has to proceed scientifically if it has to become a Secular State. Still do sentiments of ‘religious and caste differences’ exist in the society. Still there remains a prejudice about the rise of the so-called ‘other religious sections’. Still a person is termed as the first ‘Hindu’, or the first ‘Muslim’ or the first ‘Sikh’, etc. in any field. Still we experience communal riots. Still we have to notify our ‘religion’ in official matters. Still we bear ‘religion’ as an IDENTITY. We are still clutching on to the same mistakes committed by our foreparents that led to the partition of India in 1947. 60 years on, we don’t seem to have learnt anything.
How often do we hear people belonging to the so called ‘minority sects’ say that the ‘Hindus’ still ‘hold power? How often do we hear within our families, lamenting the ‘gradual transfer of power’ into the hands of ‘minorities’? And how often do we still chance upon matrimonial ads stating the ‘caste identities’? These are various symptoms of that very old conservative disease. It cannot be eradicated unless the State changes its stand. The State has to help spread scientific awareness and determine the futility and void ness of the theory of ‘sectarian differences’. The State has to shift to absolute equality on such questions. Only this can give rise to a Secular State.
So, after all the discussion, secularism can be defined as a view in which the society recognizes no distinctions of religion, caste, creed, colour, etc. and a Secular State should be one that does not encourage such artificialities.
Secularism is the indisposable need of the hour. This is the only ray of hope against communalism, radicalism, separatism and the danger of national disintegrity. We have to start somewhere, in dead earnest, and there is no better place to set an example before the world than India for this purpose. The secular idea will materialize in India or nowhere, as we are the only declared Secular nation (mind it, I’m not talking about Atheism).
Before signing off, a humble message:
Na tu Hindu hai
Na hai Mussalman
Na tu Sikh hai
Na hi Christian
Na bhi tu Bouddh hai
Nahin tu Jain
Koi parichay nahin tera
Sivay – Aulad-e-Insaan!
What is secularism? The answer to this question seems very easy, but quite difficult to find out. Apparently, secularism is a view or belief stating that society's values and standards should not be influenced or controlled by religion. The meaning strikes much deeper if we care to dig in.
The term 'secularism' is very much related to the theory of a 'Secular State'. Literally, it is a State that patronizes no religion. We do understand the adjective 'secular' as an antonym to the word ' communal'. Speaking in detail, a Secular State does have communal features.
For example, let us take the case of our country, India. The State recognizes the existence of various 'religious communities' and even if, the caste system has been abolished, has prepared a list of Scheduled Castes and Other Backward Classes along hereditary grounds. The State has termed some of the numerically weaker 'religious communities' as 'minority communities'. These 'minorities' (in some cases) and the Scheduled Castes enjoy some special privileges. Now think of this little theory. Had men learnt not to discriminate among themselves on such artificial grounds, there would have been no such 'minorities' or 'under-privileged' classes. India has been defined as a 'Socialist Secular' State, paying equal respect to every so-called community. Then, how come a particular group claims to be a 'minority' or 'backward' group? Again, agreeing with the fact that the Scheduled Castes were the deprived sections of the society in the pre-Independence era, this feature of the Constitution also has its faults.
In today's world, resources do not come on such basis in all cases and the basic universal factor for development is always the extent of availability of resources. A person of a so-called Scheduled Caste may be a millionaire, but he still enjoys the privileges under this system. It is found in many cases that this system is the only remainder of the caste system in the young educated society. Still remains an ill will between the so-called higher castes and the Scheduled Castes. It presents a question of dignity, too. Imagine the pain inflicted when someone is abused on such grounds. In the rural areas, the conditions are far worse than it ever was in the apartheid stricken South Africa. But there have been no whole-hearted efforts to even prepare a Below Poverty Line list that would present a true outline of the underprivileged. The State needs to demarcate the weaker sections on the economic basis, which is the real scale for measuring development anywhere. Also, even when the Constitution declares equality of all before law, the State has differential legal provisions for different ‘religious sects’.
Socialism is one of the goals stated in our Constitution. But the above stated ‘secular’ features are acting as a hindrance in the way of attainment of this goal. To reach socialism, we have to undertake programmes for the emancipation of the poor. Such programmes are carried out, but, frankly, are given less importance than those for the ‘upliftment’ of the so-called ‘minorities’ and ‘backward castes’.
One of the main tenets of Socialism is not to recognize the existence of any ‘religious sect’. And combining it with the definition of Secularism, we can clearly understand that the State has been playing with the twin ideals for low political causes.
A State has to proceed scientifically if it has to become a Secular State. Still do sentiments of ‘religious and caste differences’ exist in the society. Still there remains a prejudice about the rise of the so-called ‘other religious sections’. Still a person is termed as the first ‘Hindu’, or the first ‘Muslim’ or the first ‘Sikh’, etc. in any field. Still we experience communal riots. Still we have to notify our ‘religion’ in official matters. Still we bear ‘religion’ as an IDENTITY. We are still clutching on to the same mistakes committed by our foreparents that led to the partition of India in 1947. 60 years on, we don’t seem to have learnt anything.
How often do we hear people belonging to the so called ‘minority sects’ say that the ‘Hindus’ still ‘hold power? How often do we hear within our families, lamenting the ‘gradual transfer of power’ into the hands of ‘minorities’? And how often do we still chance upon matrimonial ads stating the ‘caste identities’? These are various symptoms of that very old conservative disease. It cannot be eradicated unless the State changes its stand. The State has to help spread scientific awareness and determine the futility and void ness of the theory of ‘sectarian differences’. The State has to shift to absolute equality on such questions. Only this can give rise to a Secular State.
So, after all the discussion, secularism can be defined as a view in which the society recognizes no distinctions of religion, caste, creed, colour, etc. and a Secular State should be one that does not encourage such artificialities.
Secularism is the indisposable need of the hour. This is the only ray of hope against communalism, radicalism, separatism and the danger of national disintegrity. We have to start somewhere, in dead earnest, and there is no better place to set an example before the world than India for this purpose. The secular idea will materialize in India or nowhere, as we are the only declared Secular nation (mind it, I’m not talking about Atheism).
Before signing off, a humble message:
Na tu Hindu hai
Na hai Mussalman
Na tu Sikh hai
Na hi Christian
Na bhi tu Bouddh hai
Nahin tu Jain
Koi parichay nahin tera
Sivay – Aulad-e-Insaan!
Saturday, July 7, 2007
Child Labour ~ Part 1
The National Sample Survey 2000, reported 16.4 million Indian children aged 5-14 years were 'engaged in economic activities and domestic or non-remunerative work'. Another 46 million children of school-going age are unaccounted for, neither enrolled in school nor officially working. Giving India at least one reason to be #1 — home to the largest number of child labourers on the planet. (source : Indiatogether ezine - http://www.indiatogether.org/2006/aug/hrt-notify06.htm)
Poverty and illiteracy are the main reasons behind rampant exploitation of children. Depriving a child of it's education for the sake of daily wage jobs temporarily solves financial problems of many poor families. An extra hand to earn is always welcome. But the Rs.20 daily wage is all that the child is probably going to earn for the next 20 - 30 years, no matter how much inflation soars. Leave out college studies, school education alone will fetch the child at least a decent monthly salary job. But alas, majority of the poor families are still ignorant of the rewards of school education. Awareness and intellectual progress that education alone can offer is the usually unknown extra benefit. But, poor families whose major day to day problem is food for survival do not pause to think about long term benefits. Their grand parents could not afford to think about educating these children's parents, so these parents too are in poverty and cannot afford to think about educating their children.It would continue for generations if this vicious cycle is not broken.Thus the first step to increase literacy is to reach out to uneducated parents and make them aware of the benefits of education, it's power to bring their family out of poverty.
Awareness and encouragement are the much needed start up steps to make illiterate parents aware of the benefits of educating their children. Most of the children who manage to find their way to schools turn away from education due to lack of interest. Think of a government funded school where the average teacher to student ration is around 1: 40. And remember in most of the government schools, it is only one teacher who handles all subjects. Based on the fact that most of these students come from families that have minimal or no education, they need more attention and intensive coaching from primary school onwards. But the poor teacher to student ratio only shows that most of the poor students do not get the coaching and attention they need. When a child spends 5 to 8 hours in school without understanding most of the subjects taught, school ceases to be an interesting place. It becomes more of a burden to the kid. Nagging poverty at home is an additional factor contributing to the child's interest turning against education. Most of them picturise schools as punishment centers and teachers as frightful people. Changing this attitude is key to making them continue their education. Conducive family environment and playful learning methods are imperative to boost their interest in education. Government run schools have the largest student drop off numbers as they cater to the BPL families. Improving teacher to student ratio in all these public Govt funded schools is a must. Separating children in to groups depending on their capacity to learn quickly would help identify children who need intensive attention.
Now, is it necessary that only government can take these steps? Believing that only governments or influential NGOs can reduce illiteracy is an indication of our tendency to ignore our duty towards society. Any one irrespective of age, gender and status can contribute. The more willing we are to work for the society, the more are the ways in which we can help.
-- Sri Saranya.
Poverty and illiteracy are the main reasons behind rampant exploitation of children. Depriving a child of it's education for the sake of daily wage jobs temporarily solves financial problems of many poor families. An extra hand to earn is always welcome. But the Rs.20 daily wage is all that the child is probably going to earn for the next 20 - 30 years, no matter how much inflation soars. Leave out college studies, school education alone will fetch the child at least a decent monthly salary job. But alas, majority of the poor families are still ignorant of the rewards of school education. Awareness and intellectual progress that education alone can offer is the usually unknown extra benefit. But, poor families whose major day to day problem is food for survival do not pause to think about long term benefits. Their grand parents could not afford to think about educating these children's parents, so these parents too are in poverty and cannot afford to think about educating their children.It would continue for generations if this vicious cycle is not broken.Thus the first step to increase literacy is to reach out to uneducated parents and make them aware of the benefits of education, it's power to bring their family out of poverty.
Awareness and encouragement are the much needed start up steps to make illiterate parents aware of the benefits of educating their children. Most of the children who manage to find their way to schools turn away from education due to lack of interest. Think of a government funded school where the average teacher to student ration is around 1: 40. And remember in most of the government schools, it is only one teacher who handles all subjects. Based on the fact that most of these students come from families that have minimal or no education, they need more attention and intensive coaching from primary school onwards. But the poor teacher to student ratio only shows that most of the poor students do not get the coaching and attention they need. When a child spends 5 to 8 hours in school without understanding most of the subjects taught, school ceases to be an interesting place. It becomes more of a burden to the kid. Nagging poverty at home is an additional factor contributing to the child's interest turning against education. Most of them picturise schools as punishment centers and teachers as frightful people. Changing this attitude is key to making them continue their education. Conducive family environment and playful learning methods are imperative to boost their interest in education. Government run schools have the largest student drop off numbers as they cater to the BPL families. Improving teacher to student ratio in all these public Govt funded schools is a must. Separating children in to groups depending on their capacity to learn quickly would help identify children who need intensive attention.
Now, is it necessary that only government can take these steps? Believing that only governments or influential NGOs can reduce illiteracy is an indication of our tendency to ignore our duty towards society. Any one irrespective of age, gender and status can contribute. The more willing we are to work for the society, the more are the ways in which we can help.
-- Sri Saranya.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)