Hacker News Reader

Comment by anovikov | Hacker News Reader

I am sure this story has nothing to do with the democracy. India isn't a repressive country by any measure, and far and away the most democratic one of all countries with the similar per capita GDP. It's not the government that rapes women, or shelters the rapists. It's about public opinion and gender relationships - when women are considered 2nd grade people raping them is well, nothing to be worried much about. Government can't change that. If it tries, it will result in the same thing as when it tried to limit birth rate in Indira Gandhi times - which eventually cost her life. Selective abortions and fighting them is another case of government's helplessness when the people's minds are broken. Government can't change (at least in a positive way - in a negative it can, see Hitler) public morale, even in such doubtless situations as this one. It is up to the people to change.

View on HN

"It's not the government that rapes women, or shelters the rapists."

Police regularly try to pressure rape victims into marrying their rapists, or accepting a cash settlement. See below link to another case a few days ago. The problem in India is society's treatment of women and India is among the very worst places in the world for a girl or woman to live. Somalia and Afghanistan are often considered safer places for females to live than India. The level of unreported violence is staggering and shameful. Until this is widely accepted and acknowledged, by more than a small minority cross-section of Indian society, little will change in India.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/india/9768614...

The police is not the government. The police is composed of people from society - much like the government.

Police are civil servants under the direction and policies of ministries within the framework of government. The government is not just the political elite, rather its the civil service as well and that is who the majority of people deal with on a daily basis. If there isn't sufficient ministerial direction or aren't adequate agency policies in place and very importantly those policies are enforced, then the lower ranks of police (and other civil servants) will largely do as they please. This is why corruption, collusion and incompetence are so very tough to remove from much of India's civil service and society.

I think you miss the point. It is us.

I understand your point. Change can come from the top down (government) or from bottom up (citizens). But if the middle ground (often the government/civil service in India) is stopping change or reform, pressure must be put on it. Usually this is from the top, as from the bottom, its usually only possible via a revolution, and that may not bring the changes the people who lead the revolution want (see Egypt as an example). To change mass opinion in India, not those demonstrating already, but billion plus unable or unwilling to, will be very tough. Many of them do not want or are unwilling to accept change of any kind.

I appreciate your point, but failures by the police are failures by the government. If the government cannot figure out how to rein in its police force, that's a very serious problem and can't be dismissed.

Your point is useful insofar as we recognize that the police are dominated from a particular subset of society--those who condone marrying rape victims to their rapists, for instance, implicitly by permitting it or explicitly by encouraging it.

Thus, it's something that needs to be dealt with, and perhaps that is an avenue to explore to find a solution.

Sure, society must change, but government is a fundamental part of both the problem and the solution. The United States was a "democracy" for nearly 200 years before black people received equal treatment before the law. The change was sparked by demonstrations and civil unrest during the 1950s and 60s but attitudes didn't begin to change until the government enacted new laws, enforced existing statutes, assigned resources and accepted responsibility.

The analogy with enforced birth control is a poor one. This issue is about creating a civil society where laws are enacted and enforced for the protection and well-being of all citizens regardless of gender, caste, sexual orientation, economic status etc.

In a modern society, the state has a duty to protect innocent persons from harm. So far, India has been stunningly inept in this area.

All of that is true. But corruption (and neglecting the written law for the sake of 'traditions' like those described, on the part of government officials and law enforcement, is nothing but corruption) is also a part of the culture, not government. Nobody doubts corruption is rampant in India, but there is little government could do about it unless there is a wide understanding in the society that it and end should be put on it. Right now there doesn't seem to be much understanding, outside of the narrow educated class.

There are some factual inaccuracies in your post Anovikov. <<<If it tries, it will result in the same thing as when it tried to limit birth rate in Indira Gandhi times - which eventually cost her life. >>> The forced sterilization was done during the period of emergency in India, during which most of the democratic rights/civil liberties were suspended. Also the immediate cause of her death was her decision to use the armed forces against the "Khalistan" insurgents who were hiding the "Golden temple", a holy place for the followers of Sikh religion.

I was a bit confused by seeing the news about anti-rape protests in India. Who are they protesting against? This makes about as much sense as protest against, say, stupidity. Seeing calls for stricter punishment (up to death sentence) was also discouraging—it is not the strictness of the punishment it is the inevitability of it that makes the difference.

The current protest is not against anything in particular. Repetition of such incidents,to brutality of this particular case and the harassment women face on a daily basis made this the last straw that broke the camel's back. The call for death sentence and chemical castration is just a knee-jerk reaction. The politicians are supporting this demand because solving the problem much harder than stipulating harsh punishments.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com