Editor,
In her article “Why make us chose between two bad options”(ST 22nd Nov 2013), Patricia Mukhim mentioned the word ‘HUBRIS’ which according to Wikipedia is an ancient Greek word meaning extreme pride or arrogance. Hubris often denotes loss of contact with reality and an over-estimation of one’s own competence, accomplishments or capabilities, especially when the person exhibiting it is in a position of power. In a democracy, the characteristics of hubris are rarely exhibited by a leader or by any one in power . But if a leader shows this trait and if those equally responsible to run a democratic government are overawed and simply choose to acquiesce then democracy is doomed. We are likely to slip into a state of monocracy which appears to be the trend here. The writer has rightly stated in her article that in a democratic government , some positive conflicts in the cabinet would have led to generation of better ideas. Judging by the unpleasant manifestations in the State in the past several months the possible avoidance of conflict might have dissuaded constructive suggestions and meaningful ideas. It ironic that this should happen when we have two Deputy Chief Ministers in the cabinet who have had years of experience in public administration. One of them is highly qualified educationally! A lot is expected from them. Strangely both are silent observers of the deteriorating situation in the State. But then there are other brilliant minds in the cabinet who could also contribute creative ideas. But as Kong Patricia mentioned in the article, the problem with those affected with hubris is that no one dares to challenge them; they are too busy talking and not listening . People contribute ideas provided there is a willingness from the other side to listen. Moreover, those afflicted by hubris usually don’t delegate and they discourage free thinking. So where do we go from here? Lack of development in Meghalaya demands the greatest attention yet promises are made through grandiose announcements with vague outcomes. Till date we see no inclination to solve the current impasse which afflicts the public. The malaise which has led to violence and extortions in Garo Hills has made life unsafe and unlivable for our brethren there. The continued violence might seep through to this part of the State as well, God forbid. It is dreadful to think of those horrific days of militancy again! While one should not be pessimistic and hope for the best, since this government has a long way to go, one cannot be overly optimistic too if the present state of affairs continue. Therefore, while we hope for religious leaders to guide, lead and pray for peace to prevail and for positive progress to make headway, we sincerely hope that our political leaders can also see the writing on the wall and act courageously in the best interests of the people before it is too late.
K.L Tariang,
Via email
Always outsiders!
Editor,
I fully endorse the views of Prodip Sen expressed in the letter ‘ILP and Violence.’ It is a known fact that silent ethnic cleansing of non-tribals has been going on since 1979 at the behest of some pressure groups, community leaders and to an extent even church bodies. May I ask the Government who will protect the human rights of these people? Is the Meghalaya Peoples’ Human Rights Council (MPHRC) constituted only for protecting the rights of tribals? Consistently we see a spate of violence perpetrated on non-tribals and the offenders usually go Scot- free or are protected by pressure groups whose members are mostly school drop outs. Can they protect the Hynniewtrep people, or prevent illegal influx? Can they be clear who these illegal migrants are? Are they from across the border or from other Indian states? In recent times we have not seen a single foreigner being apprehended by them. Rather the non-tribal settlers of Meghalaya have been the victims. So the picture is clear. They are not against anybody but people from mainland India. How easily they forget that the same citizens from mainland India are subsidizing their expensive lifestyles through their taxes! It is time for the pressure groups to spell out their action plan so that clear battle lines can be drawn. Let’s not forget for a moment that the local indigenous tribals are also spread outside the Hynniewtrep land.
Recently, a group of students from a premier Institute in Shillong were asked how they felt about Shillong ? To everyone’s surprise their answer was, ” Shillong sucks.” Why? Because some of their fellow students were harassed and assaulted by local goons just because they were from the mainland and were studying in an Institute at Shillong! I reiterate that living in pride and dignity is the critical essence of life. This age- old mistrust is never going to die even if one lives here for a thousand years. In fact, non-tribals can never experience what it is to live in a state, “Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high.”
Yours etc.,
T Lyngdoh,
Via email
bbbNEHU’s skewed marking system
Editor,
I would like to know why students of NEHU affiliated colleges can never score more than 60-70 % marks. How is it that when the same students go to universities outside they score 80% and above? The main reason for this is that NEHU lacks a transparent and systematic marking system. Whether a student submits a one page or three-page answer the same marks are allotted. Interestingly, even while solving problems no step-marking is given. Even when there are no red marks in the corrected script to point out the deficiencies, marks are still deducted and that too more than 5-8 marks from each answer. In the present situation where top colleges of the country are giving admissions to students with 85 percentile marks and above, students from Meghalaya don’t stand a chance of getting seats in those colleges. Yet MBOSE and NEHU are both complacent about their evaluation models. Is this because the correction is too stiff? Or is it the incompetence of the teaching staff? It is very disappointing given the fact that students from here have the potential to compete at the national level but are let down by the very people who taught them to read and write. It almost seems as if the idea of deducting 30-40% marks from the script gives them sadistic sense of accomplishment. NEHU should look into this matter and bring in necessary checks and balances.
Yours etc.,
I Dhar.
Via email