Isn’t Mr. Narendra Modi’s talk of a “pink revolution” (April 3) patently communal and aimed at polarising voters on communal lines? It must be noted that Mr. Modi has thus far been cleverly treading the soft Hindutva plank while on the campaign trail. His claim of a “subsidy by the Congress” to those who slaughter cows appears to be a wild allegation.
J. Anantha Padmanabhan,
Tiruchi
While I am in agreement with Mr. Modi’s observations on unchecked meat export from India, I would disagree with the term “pink revolution” used and propagated by the media. In the context of revolutions in India in the field of agriculture, “pink revolution” would refer to onion production/pharmaceutical and prawn production. Meat production and tomato production are both referred to as “red revolution.” Some of the other revolutions are “black revolution” (petroleum production); “blue revolution” (fish production); “brown revolution” (leather/non-conventional/cocoa production); “grey revolution” (fertilizer production); “silver revolution” (egg/poultry production); “white revolution” (milk/dairy production, in India referred to as ‘Operation Flood,’ and “yellow revolution” (oilseeds production).
Venkatesh Reddy,
Hyderabad
On Ambedkar
If a person not producing a caste certificate while introducing Dr. Ambedkar’s work (“An Ambedkar for our times, April 2) results in a controversy, should we expect only women to write on feminism, or the poor on poverty? It might be her controversial image which led the publisher to opt for Ms. Arundhati Roy to introduce the book, but one cannot take the credit away from her for the extensive research she has done. She underscores that Dr. Ambedkar’s role in shaping the history of Indian society has been underplayed. It is preposterous to imagine that his ideas and vision were limited to a particular caste. Casteism, like all injustices, has more to do with the psyche of the oppressor than that of the oppressed.
Therefore, it is more important and encouraging that someone from outside the fold should draw attention to the “real” Ambedkar in context. Lastly, Ms. Roy’s alleged image as a Maoist sympathiser (more aptly, Adivasi sympathiser) should not make her critics cringe at everything that she writes.
Mir Khubaib Ali,
Aligarh
It is sad that every adjective or label that is attached to Dr. Ambedkar is being interpreted as the act of vested interests. Dr. Ambedkar was never the prisoner of any ideology, and any attempt to fit him in any specific ideological fixation will be in vain. He acted on principles and refused to get dogmatic by any ideology. The welfare of the lowest of the low and the interests of the nation were always at the core of his heart.
Kamod Kartik,
Aurangabad
The Pritzker Prize
It is a delight to know that the Pritzker Architecture Prize has truly met its objective after a long time (Editorial, April 3). It will motivate innovators who think ahead in the context of human suffering. From an Indian perspective, such innovations are the need of the hour, bearing in mind the conditions prevalent in slums and the overall plight of displaced communities. Periodic open invitations for innovations in the field of human development can change the face of our nation.
Amit Singh,
New Delhi
After coming across pictures of grandiose buildings and of construction and architecture that have no meaning in the lives of the poor, it was interesting to read about solving the real problems of the underprivileged humanity by constructing socially relevant housing taking centre stage. It takes a lot personally to eschew professional ego, reflected through expensive and grandiosely designed buildings, rather than work toward ensuring public good.
Mritunjay Kumar,
Kolkata
