The election time (at least in TN) is here and the famous 'Hamletian' question is here too 'To Vote or Not to Vote'. If you decide to vote, then you end up with the 'su-do-ku' puzzle - 'whom to vote for'? The conventional wisdom is that (in descending order):
1) you vote for the person, who will look after your constituency well; (LOL-the problem is what is perceived (by him) as his constituency)
2) you vote for the party, who will look after all the constituencies well;
3) you vote for the party, with whose ideology you agree with;
4) you vote for the person or party who is the least of the evils;
5) Not vote for the candidate/party who has done something (a rule, law or in an election manifesto) to prospectively or directly or indirectly harm you or your standard of living or your social standing;
[A cynic's view - for e.g.., I cannot vote for xxx because of 'CAS'; not for xxx because they will abolish 'CET'; not for xxx because of '49.5%'; not for xxx because of 'rabid communalism'; not for xxx because of 'rabid communism'...& so on... LOL)
6) vote for the candidate who belongs to your own caste (CRY,CRY - this most reprehensible thing is what has been happening, in most places, isn't it?)
Well... the one who can answer well, will truly deserve the Nobel for Philosophy. After all (s)he would have the answer to the profound puzzle, "What happens when an unanswerable question meets the revealing answer" (a-la 'irresistible force vs immovable object').
Triva about EVMs:
It was former PM Rajiv Gandhi, while the EVM was demoed to him, who suggested an inbuilt time-delay between 2 votes, to prevent massive 'bogus' voting or e-equivalent of 'ballot-box stuffing' - Tamil writer/novelist 'sujatha', GM, BEL (retired) & chief co-ordinator for Project EVM (by BEL and ECIL).
No comments:
Post a Comment