Politics of Marriage and Khasi Identity
Editor,
I write to express my deep concern over the remarks made by Aibandaplin F. Lyngdoh at a recent VPP public meeting, where she felt compelled to clarify that she is unmarried and assured the crowd that, when the time comes, she will marry only a Khasi man. The thunderous applause that followed this statement is indicative of a larger, more troubling narrative—one that dangerously conflates personal life choices with political credibility.
Marriage is, first and foremost, a deeply personal decision, and no individual—let alone a political leader—should feel obligated to publicly affirm their commitment to communal expectations regarding whom they should marry. This sets a dangerous precedent, reinforcing the idea that a Khasi woman’s worth is tied not to her intellect, leadership, or contributions to society, but to her adherence to rigid cultural prescriptions about marriage.
Furthermore, this rhetoric fuels an exclusionary mindset that isolates and alienates Khasi individuals who may choose to marry outside their community. Are we to believe that love and companionship should be dictated by bloodline rather than shared values, respect, and mutual understanding? At a time when Meghalaya is grappling with pressing socio-economic and developmental challenges, is this truly the debate we wish to prioritize?
A progressive society does not thrive by enforcing cultural purity tests. Instead, it grows when individuals—especially those in leadership—are free to make personal choices without scrutiny or coercion. The emphasis should be on merit, governance, and community welfare, not on whom someone chooses as a life partner.
It is high time we challenge such regressive narratives and focus on the real issues that need our collective attention.
Yours etc.,
Bahunlang Pde,
Via email
Some claims need further justification
Editor,
As a regular reader of “The Shillong Times” for decades, I enjoyed reading the article, “Where has the forest gone?” by respected writer, HH Mohrmen and the other “Constitution @ 75 : Achievements & Priorities,” by Prof. Satya Prakash Dash both published on January 28, 2025. In my humble personal opinion, the above two articles are very good and well written. They are also educative and eye opening.
However, in respect of the sentence, “We were under the strains of colonial rule and colonialism has drained all our resources,” as written by Prof. Satya Prakash Dash, there is need for further justification and elaboration for the information of all readers.
Yours etc.,
H B Dkhar,
Shillong -1
Essential goods and services should be tax free
Editor,
Every year the Union Budget gives the Government of India an opportunity to rid our country of its inclination towards indirect tax which is a cruel way to burden the poor and the middle class with more taxes than the rich. But year after year, every budget, unfortunately, clings to this practice. This over dependence on indirect taxes has been adding insult to injury of rising inequality. Inequality in India has already reached an alarming proportion. As per the report filed by the Paris-based World Inequality Lab, India has one of the highest levels of income and wealth inequality in the world.
In India, the poorest of the poor have to cough up substantial and the same amount of indirect tax as their creamy counterparts when they are to buy anything from soap to slippers and from food to medicine. If we calculate the percentage of indirect tax payment on one’s total income, we will see that a poor person’s contribution towards GST is higher than that of a rich person.
Moreover, when a poor person buys an LPG cylinder or uses diesel dependent transports or tractors or faces inflation as a result of high tax on diesel and petrol, his contribution towards tax and tax related expenditures are naturally much higher than that of even the richest man in this country in proportion to their respective incomes. While direct taxes depend on the taxpayers’ ability to pay, indirect taxes are blind to the economic status of the taxpayers. Direct taxes are an equitable way to fill the State’s coffers. More income tax must be levied on the higher income bracket as has been the general practice in developed countries. India needs to follow the modern welfare states that rely more on direct taxes like income tax, “super tax” for the super rich, and inheritance tax.
Interestingly, when a suggestion was made to introduce the inheritance tax in India, some politicians said that it would burden the poor and the middle class. But the fact is that it would actually protect them without burdening them with more tax. Inheritance tax can reduce inequality because with this money a government can provide social security to its citizens which protects the poor and the middle class. Moreover, as there is no income tax for a minimum income bracket, there would not be any inheritance tax upto a certain valuation of property. So, inheritance tax will not burden the poor and the middle class.
While a super-rich person in India can inherit huge property without paying a single rupee to the government coffers, a person has to pay 55 per cent in Japan as inheritance tax for it. It is 50 per cent in South Korea, 45 per cent in France, 40 per cent in the USA and the UK, 34 per cent in Spain, 33 per cent in Ireland, and 30 per cent in Belgium and Germany. Those countries spend the money to ensure that every citizen gets quality health care and quality education.
The Inequality Lab has prescribed a restructuring of the tax policies for both income and wealth as well as a broad-based public investment in health, education, and nutrition. It said that a “super-tax” of only 2 per cent on the net wealth of the billionaires would yield necessary national income in revenues and create valuable fiscal space to facilitate such investments.
India needs to rectify its economic policy. Banks should sanction more micro-loans for farming, cottage, and small enterprises that can mainly generate employment and less NPA-generating macro-credits. Moreover, the poor who are reeling from high inequality, rising inflation, and nagging unemployment must not be burdened with GST. GST should exist only on luxury and non-essential goods. But essential goods and services must be free from taxation. Instead, India should rely more on direct taxes.
Yours etc.,
Sujit De,
Kolkata
First State University VC
Editor,
The recent establishment of Captain Williamson Sangma State University was followed By the appointment of a non-tribal Vice Chancellor (VC) Vasanthi Vijayakumar. Whereas for many years the state government, like many NGO’s and others, were fighting for the appointment of a tribal VC for NEHU, but when it comes to their own University they could not find a suitable tribal candidate for the post of VC which is laughable. Kindly decide what you want for this state. Where is this state heading to by the way?
Yours etc.,
D. Swer
Shillong