Johran Mamdani's mayoral victory in New York City represents a philosophical shift, echoing Nehru's democratic socialist vision and the ideals of justice, equality, and fraternity.few months in November 2025 one Indian origin American Johran Mamdani became the mayor of New York City New York City is one of the world largest city in terms of population and New York City can be called as the financial capital of the world so his rise from a grass root assembly members in Queen to the mayor of New York City marks not merely a political shift in USA but it is also a philosophical one for Indians his victory represent a symbolic renewal of Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru's democratic socialist vision we all know that Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru was the first Prime Minister of India and his vision inscribed in the preamble of our constitution that was to secure justice social economic and political liberty equality and fraternity for all citizens in his victory speech Mamdani quoted Nehru's immortal words a moment comes but rarely in history when we step out from the old to new he invoke India's Trust with destiny first lecture delivered by Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru just after independence that means on midnight of 14 August 1947 Pandit Nehru addressed the crowd from Redford So Mamdani's quotation is not a rhetorical flourish Mamdani's essence embodied the endurance of Nehru's faith in democracy which is social conscience she was born in Uganda his life has been saved by exile migration and immigration so Uganda had a large Indian diaspora unfortunately in 70s one cruel dictator he was Idi Amin occupied the power and he expelled Indians from there and large number of Indians reached either UK or USA so Mamdani's father was a celebrated Ugandan scholar of Indian descent his mother Mira Nayar is an acclaimed film maker we know that he is the son of Mira Nayar and Mira Nayar made some film like Salam Mumbai and monsoon wedding Johran Mamdani's intellectual inheritance therefore was forced at the crossroad of scholarship and storytelling and activism together Johran Mamdani represent with his wife a multicultural partnership of African Indian Arab and American living emblem of pluralism in the age of polarization so American society is the most dynamic society America is the nation of nations so you will find the nationals of each and every part of the world Europeans Africans Asians Mexican of course USA is the home of the native Americans we must recall Pandit Nehru's democratic socialist experiment Nehru's socialism was not doctrinaire it was moral and pragmatic commitment to build a society where political democracy would be sustained by economic democracy the preamble of the constitution of India which was subsequently amended that declares that India is socialist secular democratic Republic Nehru argued that democracy cannot flourish amidst deprivation and inequality that true freedom must liberate not just the mind but the material conditions of life his words in the constituent assembly continues to resonate the service of India means the ending of poverty and inequality of opportunity that means the every policy maker must strive to end poverty and give equal opportunity to all so Mamdani's platform a $30 minimum wage fair free public transit universal child care and city owned grocery cooperative for Nehru spoke of dams as a temple of modern India we know that India under Nehru went to construct some mega dams and this dams were constructed to provide adequate water supplies to our farmers so I still remember and I am quoting from book when dam was constructed a large section of people protested and Nehru just console them by saying that if you are suffering then you are suffering for the sake of nations to end our poverty so that was Pandit Nehru's vision and we know that nowadays dams are required not only to supply waters but also to produce hydro electricity Mamdani's victory speech is remarkable he declared that he was young he belong to a particular faith he was a democratic socialist and he refused to apologize for any of this it was not a statement of defiance but of affirmation a refusal to fragment his identity into palatable parts his words echoing Nehru's own inclusive nationalism celebrated diversity as the foundation of solidarity he spoke of Mexican Abus Senegalese taxi drivers Uzbek nurse Trinidadian line cooks and Ethiopian aunties that means America was so diverse in that moment Mamdani channel the forgotten ideal of fraternity the emotional and ethical cornerstone of India's preamble for both Nehru and Mamdani fraternity was not sentimental but structural the belief of the democracy must recognize and dignify differences Mamdani's victory was not just an electoral but epistemic reclaiming the right to belong to descent and to dream collective freely though both Nehru and Mamdani are separated by continents and eras but they are united by a moral imagination that insist democracy must serve the many not the few Nehru faced the task of freeing a colonized nation from economic dependency poverty and Mamdani confronts the paradox of inequality in a hyper capitalist democracy Mamdani's New York and Nehru's India share the same challenge reconciling aspiration with fairness growth with humanity for India Mamdani's victory offers both a mirror and a warning the country that once championed democratic socialism as a model compass now struggles with widening inequalities and sectarian populism the constitutional promise of socialist secular Republic has receded under the pressures of privatization and identity politics so clearly we have to learn from him him Mamdani's model time identity to solidarity not exclusion provided a timely corrective it shows that socialism needs not to be statist and pluralism need not be fragmented his victory reminds Indian politics of what Nehru had long affirmed that democracy must be measured not by how light loudly it speaks but by how justly it to listen

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Judicial Conundrum in India

Recently one fire incident in the official resident of Justice Yashwanta Varma led to recovery of crores of burnt notes not only  shocking but also shook people's confidence in higher Judiciary as an infallible institution .One store room of justice Yashwanta Sinha was caught fire while he was not in his resident,and fire brigade came to extinguish fire and crores of burnt notes were recovered.Justice Varma was not in Delhi for any kind of comments at that time.Once he was a contacted ,he immediately denied his involvement in that incident rather he alleged that it was a conspiracy to tarnish his image.The Chief Justice Of India constituted a high powered committe ,consisting of two Chief Justices of High Courts and one sitting judge of a High Court.to enquire the alleged recovery of money.The Supreme Court Collegium recommended his immediate  transfer to Allahabad High Court ,which triggered a hugh protest initiated by Allahabad Bar Association against that transfer,that Alla...
Read more

Hungarian revolution of 1956Is Revolution was also known as the Hungarian uprising, an attempted Rebellion against the communist government , that came into existence after the World War II. Hungry was an axis ally of Nazi Germany. The USSR occupied Hungary and April 28 government was established. Hungary became a satellite state of USSR. Soviet government was actually a totalitarian government. Hungarian people are descendants of Slavic and Huns. In disrespect remember the cruel rule Attila the Hun. The Hungerian revolution of lasted for l 15 days, until it was crushed by Soviet tanks. Several thousands hungarians lost their lives m several hundred Russians also lost their lives.On 23rd of October 1956, some University students appealed to the civilian population to protest against Russian authoritarian rule the domination of USSR in its geopolitical interest. At that time, Hungary was ruled by a Stalinist government. The students demanded reform on 16 points, but all the students were detained by security guards. The Hungarian people rose against the Communist Party and the secret police of Hungary. And the local communists and secret policemen were executed. A new government was formed under Imrey Negi, who was the liberal man. Under his leadership hungry had withdrawn from Warshaw pact. The new government agreed to hold new election, hungry was heading towards democracy.Initially the USSR agreed negotiate with the new government and accordingly delete Army withdrew. Russians apprehended Hungary embrace the Western block live by USA would be a big threat two dog communist block. So the Russians betrayed the hungarians and hungry was invaded by several Russian divisions. The Hungarian Army was no match before the might of Russian army and after Fierce resistance the hungarians were defeated. The free hungarians were expecting Western help but that did not come. Finally the new government was rendered useless the leaders were arrested and executive latter. The communist government again was installed in Hungary and hungry again became is satellite state of USSR . The Communist rule finally collapse in 1989 after destruction of Berlin Wall. Now Hungary is a Democratic state.

Read more

[10/10/2024, 8:51 PM] Sisir Kumar Gogoi: A K Gopalan v The State(1950,S.C.R.88) was a momentous case in the Constitutional history of India.Any discussion/ lecture on the Constitutional law is incomplete without first examining this case, whether critically or analytically.This case was decided at a time When the Country got independence from British rule and The Constitution of India had come into force,and more than it , for the first timea chapter on Fundamental Rights had been incorporated in the Constitution .The Supreme Court got a golden opportunity to interpret the Article 19,21 and 22 expansively against Executive or legislative power of the state.[10/10/2024, 8:51 PM] Sisir Kumar Gogoi: Brief Fact of the case-A K Gopalan,a radical leftist of the Madras Province was detained under the Preventive Detention Act ,1950,and in fact he was detained for several times under the Act.Under Entry 9 of Union list ,the Parliament has the power to enact law on Preventive Detention.Though Preventive Detention is an anathema in modern time,it was justified as a necessary evil to protect the unity and integrity of the state.Even in Britain and America it was used only during the war time ,that too against suspected enemy aliens[10/10/2024, 8:51 PM] Sisir Kumar Gogoi: A K Gopalan filed a habeas Corpus writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution and challenged the detention ordering a wide ground that the Detention Act ,under which he was detained was void for violating Articles 19 and 21 and also on a narrow ground that it did comply with the requirements of Article 22.Article 22 prescribes certain procedural safeguards against it.Learned Counsel M K Nambiyar on behalf of Gopalan contended that the Detention Act 1959 violated Article 21 and was void on following grounds1.Personal liberty included the freedoms conferred by Article 19(1)(a) to (e) and (g) and the impunged act ( detention act) did not satisfy the test of Article 19(2) to (6).2.The Preventive Detention Act directly violated Gopalans right to move freely , because the freedom of movement is of essence of personal liberty.3.Article 19 (1) and 21 should be read together because Article 19 dealt with substantive rights and Article 21 dealt with procedural rights.4.The reference in Article 21 to Procedure established by law meant due process of law and the Act did not satisfy the requirements of due process of law.5.The word law in Article 21 meant not the state made law but jus naturale ,of the principles of natural justice.The law did not comply with the requirements of Natural justice[10/10/2024, 8:51 PM] Sisir Kumar Gogoi: It will be seen that from 1 to 5 that the proposition that Article 21 applied to the Preventive Detention ,was the foundation of all the reasons,and learned Attorney General M C Seetlevad countered by contending that Article 22 was a complete code and Article 21 didnot apply to Preventive Detention law.All the questions raised some points of immense Constitutional importance and a Six Judge Bench comprising CJI H L J Kania ,Justices P .Shastri ,M C Mahajan,B K Mukherjee ,SS Das and Fazl Ali S was constituted to hear the matters .All the six judges delivered separate judgments after a lengthy hearings .Five learned judges( Fazl Ali dissenting) held that Article 19 did not apply to Preventive Detention thought the freedoms as a result of detention freedoms may be curtailed.Fazl Ali dissented and held that Preventive Detention was a direct infringement of Article 19 and was subject to Judicial review even it was narrowly construed The majority judges did not hold that Article 22 was a complete code ,so they disagreed with learned Attorney General contention and only M C Mahajan alone held Article 22 was a complete code on Preventive Detention.Fazl Ali dissented by holding that " No calamitous or untoward result would follow even if the Provisions of Penal code became justiciable".CJI Kania, and Justices Shastri, Mukherjee and SS Das held the concept of right to move freely throughout the territory of India was entirely different from the Concept of the right to personal liberty.[10/10/2024, 8:51 PM] Sisir Kumar Gogoi: Except Justice M C Mahajan who held that Article 22 was a complete code, majority held that Articles 19 (1) and Article 21 did not operate in the same field, because Article 18 conferred rights only one citizens, article 21 conferred rights on all persons. Again if article 21 conferred only procedural rights then the most precious right the Right to life was nowhere found in our Constitution. Therefore the majority held that Article 21 also conferred substanrive rights also. It may be observed that far from holding that fundamental rights were mutually exclusive, Mukherjee held that a substantive law authorizing the deprivation of life must conform to the requirements of Article 20.[10/10/2024, 8:51 PM] Sisir Kumar Gogoi: CJI Kania, Justices Mukherjee and SR Das held that law in Article 21 had been used in the sense of State made law and not in the embodying the Principle of Natural Justice, and Procedure established by law meant a law made by Union Parliament or by State legislatures. Justice Shastri held that the law meant Positive or state made law and did not mean jus naturale, but the procedure meant well established criminal procedure. Justice Fazl Ali dissented by holding that whatever Procedure established by law may mean, and must include 1 . Notice 2.opportunity to be heard 3.impartial tribunal 4.orderly procedure. So according to fazl Ali a positive law must include jus naturale.[10/10/2024, 8:51 PM] Sisir Kumar Gogoi: The majority judges held that the Procedure established by law didnot mean due process of law as understood in United States of America. The report of Drafting Committe showed that the words Procedure established by law were substituted for the words without due process of law. Our founding fathers were well aware of its abuse by American judges during the New Deal period.[10/10/2024, 8:51 PM] Sisir Kumar Gogoi: So in this case, different views were expressed by different judges, so no common points emerged on the correlation of articles 19 to 20,21 and 22 or the meaning of the expression personal liberty.[10/10/2024, 8:51 PM] Sisir Kumar Gogoi: But Justice Fazl Ali dissenting points are regarded as one of the greatest dissents of all time. Justice R Nariman paid a rich tribute to Fazl Ali foresight by saying "simply takes our breath away".

Read more