GD topic

1. Yes, terrorism can be justified
Brian Brivati
Troops inAfghanistanwon'tmindMiliband'sdefence of the ANC –unlike the Taliban,itsoughtto
destroyan obscene system
Wednesday19 August2009 08.00 BST Last modifiedonThursday31 December2015 20.10 GMT
The presumptionof criticsof DavidMiliband'sview thatterrorismcanbe justifiedis,NatalieHanman
pointsout,that the state has a monopolyonviolence,whichthereforelegitimatesthe use of it,and
that any othergroupusingviolence isillegitimate.If thiswere true,then,whenNelsonMandela
dies,he shouldbe universallycondemnedasnothingmore thanaterroristand murderer –
somethingthe Thatchergovernmentlikedtocall him.Thisisnot a seriouspositiontohold.
Alternatively,we mightsaythatthe violence employedbyall states,atleastif theyare western
democracies,isillegitimate.Again,the manycasesof the necessityof war – September1939, for
example –invalidatethisposition.So,whatwe cansay isthat if we agree with the aims of a group,
thenviolence isanethicallyacceptable extensionof the struggle;andif we disagree,itisnot.
These judgmentsneednotbe merelysubjective butcanbe weighedupinthe same waythat any set
of political actionsare weighedup.Whilewe maynotreach an objective basisforthe supportof the
armedstruggle inone contextasagainstanother,we can at leastsuggestprinciplesthatare
reasonable andthendefendthoseprinciples.Butmore thanthis,we are also therefore forcedto
accept that the use of violence against"softtargets"isterrorisminwhatevercause itisemployed;
the difference isthatwe mightsupportsome causesandnotothersbecause we see themasmorally
virtuousorvicious.
It was onthisbasis,belief inthe cause,thatMilibandwasdefendingthe anti-apartheidactivistJoe
Slovo.The use of violence,whetherbystatesor othergroups,shouldbe basedonthe same
argumentas that usedtojustifyadeclarationof war – "justwar" theory.
But letus notpretendthatthe causes we believe inare notusingterrorto furthertheiraimsjust
because we believe inthem, orthatthe use of terroris notcentral to the possibilitythattheywillbe
successful.The choice of termshere isnotbetweenfreedomfighterandterroristbutbetween
murdererandterrorist – the formersimplykillingnihilisticallybecause theyare killinginacause we
do notbelieve in,andthe latterusingviolenceaspart of an achievable andjustpolitical projectwith
whichwe agree.

2. Advertisement
Miliband'scriticssaythat hisjustificationforthe ANC'sarmedstruggle isgivingcomforttothe
enemyinAfghanistan.Howdoesthisfitthatcase?
The Talibanare not merelyatribal groupseton removingforeigninvadersfromtheirland;they
have run a murderousstate thatsponsoredwaragainstotherstates,and now theymake war on
theirownpeople torecreate thatstate withall the humanrightsviolationstheypreviously
employed.Theyhave apolitical strategy,butitisnotmore realisticthanthat of theiralliesinal-
Qaida.I can understandhowyoucouldconstruct an argumentthatmakestheiruse of violence
legitimate,butIrejectit.
The ANC,though,wasalso a terroristgroup(throughitsmilitarywing,Umkontowe Sizwe).Sohow
can we decide betweenthese groups?The differenceisthatthe ANCdeployedterrorforthe
political purpose of destroyinganobscene systemthatwouldnothave beendefeatedotherwise.
The economicboycottwas important,butwouldthe worldhave launchedthe boycottwithoutthe
armedstruggle?Wouldthe people repressedunderthe apartheidpolice state have keptfaithwith
the ANCif there hadnot beenadimensionof armedresistancetothe struggle?Idoubtitverymuch.
In the case of the Taliban,the strategyisto regainand holdpowerthroughterror,andrun a state
basedon the suppressionof humanrightsandthe sponsorshipof international terroristattacks
againstciviliantargets.The meansandthe endsof the Taliban'scause strike me as the opposite of
just,and are entirelyillegitimate.Buteachof these groupscan correctlybe calledterroristand
shouldbe referredtoassuch – butthat is where the analysisshouldbegin,notend.
What were,orare, theyeachfightingfor?Or against?How do theyuse terror?Who are their
targets?What istheirpolitical strategy?These are the questionsthatneedtobe asked.Inassessing
a campaigner'slife,asMilibandwasdoing,youhave tolookat the broad picture.
Advertisement
Whenthe Maquis,for instance,were killingGermantroopsandwhenthe Warsaw Ghettorose up,
theykilledeveryenemytheycouldfind.Theywantedtohurl some of the terrorthat theyhad faced
back inthe facesof theiroppressors.Were theyterrorists –inthe sense thattheyusedterrorto
furthertheircause?Yes,theywere.Buttheircause wasjustand theirviolence justifiable.Whenthe
Naziswhosurvivedformedthe Werwolf resistance groupsandattackedthe occupyingalliedforces,

3. were theyterrorists?Yes,they were.Butthe endtheyfoughtforwasobscene andso theyalso
deservedtobe calledmurderers.Itisnotthe termitself thatmatters,butthe cause for whichthe
violence isusedthatshouldconcernus.
Will the troopsinAfghanistanbe demoralisedbyMiliband'sdefence of the armedstruggle against
apartheid?Idoubtit verymuch.Membersof the Britisharmedforces,inmyexperience,have alot
more political sense thanmanyof the politicianswhochoose tospeakforthem.
Being A Star Is A Cakewalk!
It is natural tendency of common public to believe actors as the luckiest people in the
world. Whenever they think of stars, the mind overflows with big bucks, rolling red
carpets, glamour, crazy fans and a life of perfection. Everyone firmly believes that being
a star is absolute fun. They have name, fame and money, and can do everything and
buy anything. However, this might not be the case always. So, let us discuss on the
topic, ‘Being a Star Is a Cakewalk!’
Yes
- They are of course the lucky people. Who is there in this world not working hard in an
attempt to earn a good life? Well, everyone is but actors tend to get everything best of
this world.
- Hard work does not guarantee recognition. In case of stars, the first thing they get is
recognition and they don’t even have to work hard for it.
- Celebrities have money and therefore they can spend it as much as they want to look
good and stay fit. With money they can avail the services of fitness experts and stay
healthy which makes them look good.
- Even there are many artists who cannot be stated as beautiful, smart or fit. But still they
are loved by millions of people.
- Their children are born stars and get everyone’s attention right from childhood. All
things come for easy. Clearly, their life is much simpler.
No
- Beauty requires maintenance, and in glamour world actresses are required to look
beautiful even in a death scene. They need to really work hard to stay at that level.
- Physical fitness is another important factor in stars’ life. They have to follow a regular
fitness regimen and disciplined scheduled to get that body. The dashing looks are a

4. result of arduous training sessions.
- Another problem that stars have to deal with is the lifestyle, particularly touring. These
tours sometimes last for months and the stars are required to burn the candle at both
ends.
- The job of artists is not a regular 9 am to 5 pm job. They have to work at odd hours and
at distant places to complete the project. Recognition does come but at a cost!
- Dolling up is of supreme importance for Bollywood divas. At times they may wish to
roam in simple pyjamas and ponytail without any make-up. But if they follow their heart,
the shutter bugs make a complete hype of it.
Conclusion
The life of stars may appear quite glossy from outside but it is no different from other
people. They have name, fame and money, but at the same time they have to really
work hard to maintain that lifestyle. It is this pressure due to which many stars take the
path of alcohol and drugs and suffer from deep anxiety and depression. So, next time
you call their life as a cakewalk, remember at the end of day, the stars are no different
from common people. They are humans too!
Do we really need smart cities?
Introduction
The rate of migration from rural to urban areas is increasing across the world day by
day. By 2050, around 70% of the people will be living in cities and India is no exception
in this regard.
There is an emerging need for the cities to get smarter in India so that it would tackle the
issues related with the large scale urbanization.
Smart city can be defined as a city which should be equipped with basic infrastructure to
give a decent quality of life.
Recently, PM Modi has announced his vision to set up around 100 smart cities across
the nation. The 100 smart city mission tend to promote the adoption of smart solutions
for the proper use of available resources and infrastructure.
But, does a country like India require a smart cities? Let's take a look.
Yes – Smart cities are required.
1. Good infrastructure – The main aim of constructing a smart city is to provide good
infrastructure to the residents, such as water and sanitation services, 24*7 electricity

5. supply etc. The information will be collected through the detectors – gas, electricity and
other government analytics, which will be carefully complied into small grids and then,
will be fed into the computers. This process can focus on making the city efficient.
2. Smart solutions – Smart cities are required as it would also provide smart solutions
such as providing public data, electronic service delivery, 100% treatment of water
waste, monitoring water quality etc.
3. Promotes development – Smart cities enhance the developmental activities of a
region. A lot of developmental activities such as building schools, organizations,
shopping malls can take place. These activities benefit everybody including citizens,
businesses, government and environment.
4. Housing for All – The main aim of a smart city is “housing for all”. More than 70% of
the Indian population would be living in cities by 2050. Due to the rising urbanization, a
better standard of living is required. To support this rising shift, a sustainable model of
housing should be developed.
5. Provides employment – A smart city is an economy of agglomeration. It provides
various opportunities and advantages to its residents. India is expanding rapidly and the
emergence of smart city can provide employment for many. The construction of a smart
city requires a lot of manpower.
No – Smart cities are not required
1. Dumb administration – The politicians of India have picked up the term “smart city” to
woo the youngsters. In the past few months, we have witnessed the real face of the
corrupt ministers who rule our country. Corruption has become a part of our country's
identity. Talking about a smart city and creating a plan under the corrupt minsters is a
waste of time and resources. Smart city is not possible with a set of dumb administrators
and politicians.
2. Unable to afford – In a smart city, people have to build their own houses according to
their financial capacity. A lot of people would not be able to afford a place in smart city
as it would be very costly. Thus, people from middle class and poor section of the
society won't be able to enjoy the benefits of a smart city.
3. Better utilization of places – A large acre of land would be wasted for the construction
of a smart city. If properly utilized, this area can be turned into a biodiversity park later
on. Cities which are rich in river beds and hilly regions can be utilized to avoid ecological
degeneration.
4. Proper use of fund – India is a country which is better known for its increasing poverty
rate. Only a certain part of the city would be utilized for constructing a smart city
whereas, the other part of the city would be still under the shadow of poverty. We should
understand that smart city won't be able to solve the basic issues of an entire state or

6. city. If the fund which is planned to be spent for a smart city is utilized for decreasing the
poverty rate, India would be much ahead of other countries.
Conclusion
India is a developing country and the Modi government is trying its best to develop India
into a powerful nation.
Introducing the concept of smart cities in India is a great idea but due to increasing
poverty rate, lack of infrastructure and basic amenities, the cities might have to face a lot
of challenges. Before initiating the project, the government should try to attend to the
basic issues of the nation such as implementing a proper drainage system, providing
good water, sanitation and health care facilities etc.
S For Selfie, S For Stupidity, S For Syndrome
But first let me take a Selfie! Yes, this has become one of the most commonly heard and
said statements these days. Wherever people go, they want to indulge in taking pictures,
and most importantly Selfies. The craze has increased so much that the tech companies
have launched special Selfie Smartphones to meet the demand of public. Even they
have introduced Selfie sticks to make the click process easier. This latest trend is now
becoming an addiction among youngsters. Do you think taking Selfie as an act of
stupidity?
Yes
- Clicking Selfie again and again is a weird activity as the people just click a picture of
their face, and not of the surroundings. So, in simple terms nothing is going to change in
broad terms.
- What is all this Selfie type all about? It is nothing more than a sheeple and doing what
everyone is else doing.
- Selfies are becoming an obsession these days. The self-portrait clicks result in mental
pressure as there is a deep desire to look beautiful in the picture. Many youngsters edit
their Selfie while they look much different in their real life. This results in self-doubt.
- If people consider that taking Selfie falls under the photography, then they are
absolutely wrong. Photography is a beautiful form of art and not constantly clicking
pictures of self, narcissistically.
- Selfies taken at weird places to show off or grab attention are absolutely stupid and
annoying. After all who wants to see anyone posing stupid pictures in bathroom!

7. - Selfies are becoming a syndrome. This problem can largely be attributed to rise in use
of social media which is more or less making people narcissistic.
No
- Taking Selfie is not a stupid thing but as it comes S for smart thing. It is an act to
lighten up the things, irrespective of what others think about it.
- Selfies are a part of tech-savvy life, and there is no problem with selfies till the time
they do not turn into obsession. As it is said, anything done in extreme can result in
problems.
- Selfies clicked to celebrate relationships and cherish special moments are a different
story. Like other pictures, they give people with beautiful memories to cherish forever.
- Selfies promote self-confidence and improve self esteem. People feel happy and good
about themselves.
- Clicking Selfie is just a way to express your feelings and emotions at certain moment. It
is done for fun and cannot be termed as a stupid act.
Conclusion
It is evident that selfies are a superb way to have fun with friends. It is a means to
celebrate a moment and preserve the memory. Taking a picture and sharing it with
friends is an act of self-confidence. In simple terms, taking Selfie cannot be stated as a
stupid act if it is done in limit. However, getting obsessed with Selfie and devoting all the
time to get the best picture needs attention. It can be the start of a syndrome which
should be stopped at a right time.
Swacch Bharat has more takers as a Photo-Opportunity
Number of members= 5
Time duration= 25 minutes
Aadesh Brahma - Let me just briefly explain the topic here. Swachh Bharat, or
Clean India, is a cleanliness drive launched by honourable PM Narendra Modiji with
an aim of cleaning every nook and corner of this country. He has demonstrated this
by personally picking up the broom and cleaning certain streets in New Delhi. One of
the major reasons why many of us complain here in India is because the relative lack
of cleanliness, especially since we have a huge population. If you notice here on the
roads, even garbage trucks are often found uncovered while carrying filth. If one man
can pick up a broom and inspire the nation to keep areas clean, I am sure we all can
do our respective bits.

8. Sampad Johri - I agree with Aadesh here that the PM has taken a step in the right
direction. But friends, don’t you think a lot more needs to be done than just picking
up the broom? Our problem in India is that we frequently resort to ‘spot-cleaning,’
which means picking up the garbage from your house and dumping it in front of
another house. When will we realise that it is about cleaning the entire locality, or the
city, and not just a house? Till this realisation comes, I am sure Swachh Bharat will
remain as a photo-op. Check videos on the Internet and you will find that even some
ministers have cleaned up just to get clicked by the media.
Vandana Sharma - It is time we cleaned up our act not just to show the world, but
to remain healthy individuals. We often tend to put the blame on politicians and the
media for making Clean India into a farce, but what have we done as common
people? Aren’t we guilty enough of throwing wrappers, banana skins and the like on
road? We can’t blame the politicians when most of us are guilty of doing the same
ourselves. It can start by looking for a dustbin every time we want to throw garbage.
One does not need to take pictures of the same and post on Instagram or Facebook to
get viewership. Swacch Bharat has to be turned into action from mere campaigning.
Sapna Shrivastav - October 2 in 2014, or Gandhi Jayanti was the day Modiji
decided to pick up the broom and clean India, much like Gandhiji’s vision for the
nation. It is not just a mockery of cleanliness, but a well planned campaign which will
be implemented over 5 years. Over Rs 62,000 crore is to be spent across 4,000 towns
of the country, which is certainly not a joke. Given the way he has been creating
accountability in the Government, I am sure Modiji has thought this plan through.
Although there may be challenges in its implementation, it is us common people who
have to assist the PM to make sure it does not turn into a mere photo-op. His
leadership may be inspiring, but there is a lot more that needs to be done by other
politicians and us to turn this into reality.
Sidharth Juneja - To see if Swachh Bharat has remained a photo op or has
progressed, we need to revisit the same sites which were cleaned as part of the
campaign. Take a look at Jantar Mantar in New Delhi which was cleaned recently.
Today it looks just the same after cleanliness, or may be even worse. There are many
places like this. Don’t you guys see that this campaign has the potential to turn into
another mega scam, much like 2G? If crores of money are being spent, why are the
areas not being looked after now? Agra was cleaned up just for a day when Mr
Obama was to visit, which eventually never happened. It is probably back to the same
state now. Isn’t it time we just start levying heavy fines for dumping garbage or
spitting, in every part of the city, much like other nations? If it can work in the Delhi
Metro, why can’t it in other places?
Conclusion
A mentality change has to be brought about among the people of India, for Swacch
Bharat to be successful. We also have a right to know how this campaign will be
implanted, step-by-step. If a website can be created to track Make in India, the same
can be done for Clean India as well. Of course, as citizens of the country, it is also our
duty to make sure we don’t take garbage from our home and dispose it in front of
another house, but get it disposed completely. We agree that it is a step in the right
direction by Modiji, but it needs a lot more work.

9. Made in India' versus 'Make in
India
The truth is less encouraging. While nobody has explicitly clarified what exactly "Make in
India" would be, it is being interpreted as the licensed manufacture of foreign defence
equipment, which the DPP covers under the categories of "Buy and Make" and "Buy and
Make (Indian)". This is very different from a "Made in India" product, which is
encapsulated in the "Make" category of the DPP, involving the ground-up development
of indigenous defence platforms. It is crucial for policymakers, strategists, economists
and the public to explicitly recognise this difference. In "Make in India", a foreign arms
manufacturer is paid for transfer of technology and the licence to assemble a platform -
say, a submarine, tank or aircraft - in India. The vendor supplies manufacturing
technology and the jigs and tooling needed for assembling components, sub-systems
and systems into a full-fledged combat platform. While hard bargaining sometimes
obtains the technology to build some of those systems and sub-systems in India,
vendors would seldom part with the technology to manufacture complex and high-tech
systems, which they developed at enormous cost. A high proportion of the platform,
therefore, continues to be supplied from abroad.
How "Make in India" plays out is evident from the Sukhoi-30MKI assembly line in Nashik,
whereHindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) builds the air force's front-line fighter. While
negotiating the contract for 180 Su-30MKIs in the year 2000 (which later went up to 272
fighters) India - the world's largest operator of this aircraft - employed all the leverage it
had to extract technology from Russia. Even so, just 51 per cent of the fighter (by cost)
is made in India. Russia insisted that all raw material - including 5,800 titanium blocks
and forgings, aluminium and steel plates, etc - be sourced from that country. Similarly,
HAL builds the fighter's giant AL-31FP engines in Koraput, Odisha, but is bound by the
contract to import 47 per cent of the engine (by cost), including high-tech composites
and special alloys - crucial secrets that Russia will not part with.
In defence, "Make in India" never provided Indian manufacturers the capability to
upgrade platforms that require fresh technology as time goes by; in fact, manufacturing
licensing conditions usually stipulate that the buyer can make no alterations. That is why
India, which carried out "Make in India" of the MiG-21 for decades, had to go back to
Russia when it upgraded the fighter. It is on maintenance, repair, overhaul and upgrade
that foreign vendors make their real money, even on equipment that has been licence-
built in India. It is variously estimated that the MiG-21, over its lifetime, cost India 20-40
times its purchase cost. The Mirage 2000 is another example of costs expanding ten- or

10. twentyfold. In contrast, a "Made in India" aircraft like the Tejas could be continually
upgraded without licensing issues, altered and supplied anywhere in the world.
It is disingenuously argued that India's leverage as the world's biggest arms importer
allows it to dictate terms to foreign vendors, forcing them to part with proprietary high-
technology as a condition for winning a contract. The strategic nature of defence
technology allows that up to a point. Companies negotiate contracts based on
commercial interests; but the export of technology is controlled by their governments,
which mostly regard technology as a strategic asset. Even when capitals like London or
Paris, which enjoy close strategic ties with New Delhi, are willing to clear technology
export, they are often restrained by the political risk associated with job losses in a field
as sensitive and emotive as national defence. This is even more pronounced in the
current era of defence budgetary cutbacks in arms-exporting countries, where skilled
workmen are already being laid off due to reduced procurement.
"Made in India", on the other hand, involves conceiving, designing and building a
defence platform in India, creating intellectual property in the country. In the DPP,
"Make" category projects involve Indian-led consortia developing defence platforms, with
the defence ministry funding 80 per cent of the development cost. While foreign
components and systems go into these platforms, the basic design is custom-tailored for
Indian operational requirements and user preferences. There are seldom "end-user"
issues that dog foreign platforms. Maintenance, repair, spares and overhaul are not
such bugbears, and, having designed the basic platform, the Indian integrator can
continually upgrade it through its service lifetime, evolving it incrementally into the
platform's next generation.
This is not to say that "Make in India" serves no purpose. First, it creates jobs, a key
government goal. Second, building even low-tech defence equipment creates high-
quality manufacturing capability, which goes into creating the broad-based
manufacturing ecosystem that is essential for "Made in India" projects. Weapon system
designers and integrators can then focus on high-level design, assured that components
- from the lowest level of nuts, bolts, washers and fuze boxes to higher levels of pumps,
actuators and sensors - are available without needing to import or establish
manufacturing units to supply them.
That is why the statement on Monday by secretary (defence production), G Mohan
Kumar, that at least eight to 10 "Make" projects would be kicked off every year holds the
promises of galvanising the defence industry. While purchasing foreign defence
equipment recklessly all these years, only a handful of "Make" projects have been
conceived so far and none has been shepherded to fruition. The defence ministry needs
to focus keenly on "Made in India" projects without being distracted by "Make in India"
slogans.s
Sadgoppan Ganesh

11. The AamAadmi Party was able to win in Delhi largely by virtue of offering freebies in
terms of electricity and water to the poor people of the Capital. Do you really think it
is possible to provide free power in today’s time and age? We all know that power in
Delhi is privatised and in the hands of Tata and Reliance. How will these companies
be able to provide power 24x7 if it becomes free? It appears to be far too optimistic
an achievement that has been promised by ArvindKejriwal, which I refuse to believe.
NimishaDutta
I agree with Ganesh- who is going to be accountable for all the free power and water
that will be doled out? Unlimited usage of these limited resources will spell nothing
but doom for the Capital. Earlier we had slums where people used to rob power and
water like anything. Here we middle class folk continued to pay high rates while they
enjoyed freebies. Is this justified at all?
SohailRizvi
I have absolutely no problem against power and water subsidies for deserving
residents of this city. I mean, if food and fuel can be provided at low rates, then why
not power and water? Agreed that they have limited purchasing power, but if such
freebies are rolled out, the situation is going to be very similar to what Delhi Vidyut
Board used to face more than a decade back. It is likely to end up with us in the
middle class paying through our noses and getting nothing in return, as freebies are
likely to increase theft.
SushmaDinkar
Let me explain a bit of politics to you guys. It is not that ArvindKejriwal is making
any false promises- many of us just fail to read between the lines. The reason power
theft used to take place in Delhi was because of unavailability of power in various
areas for seriously long durations. By promising free power and water,
ArvindKejriwal has, in fact, killed two birds with one stone. First, he got the votes he
needed by making these promises. Second, he will ensure that each and every corner
of Delhi gets electrified and obtains ample water, based on changes made to the
supply and distribution. When such facilities become available all around, there will
not be any need for freebies. This is what, I feel, he was trying to say. After all, it is
the packaging that really counts, doesn’t it?
Swaraj Seth
Free power and electricity are not exactly what the new Government has in mind. Of
course, power will be available, but at very low rates. 700 litre of water was, in fact,
available for Delhi households during AAP’s 49 day tenure. If they could do it within
that time period, there is no reason why they shall not be able to repeat the same.
Another demand that Kejriwal has made is for full statehood of the Capital. This is an
important project which has not really seen light, as it has been in the pipeline for
several years. Haphazard planning can soon become a thing of the past, and laws can
also be enforced in a more stringent manner. The problem is that Delhi has become
too vast a region for the administration to tackle. How can this be done unless the
NCR gains statehood?

12. Conclusion
Freebies such as water and electricity are not really practical solutions for a region
like Delhi. Subsidy is what will make more sense to a larger segment of the
population. It may have helped AAP garner enough votes in the elections, but now
comes the real test. It needs to be seen how the party is able to deliver on these
accounts, or we may just witness another dharna right around the corner!