'Indifferent to suffering': Rahul Gandhi slams Modi govt for inaction amid rising farmer suicides in Maharashtra
Rahul Gandhi
on Thursday attacked the
Modi government
over
farmer suicides
in
Maharashtra
, saying that it remains indifferent to farmers' plight, even as they are sinking deeper into debt every day.
In a post on X in Hindi, the leader of opposition in the Lok Sabha accused the government of ignoring farmers' demands for a
loan waiver
and a legal guarantee for minimum support price (MSP) for crops.
On Wednesday, opposition members walked out of the Maharashtra Assembly twice over issues of farmer suicides and non-payment of dues to soybean cultivators in the state.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Mercado Libre CFD: gana hasta 2.700$ a la semana trabajando desde casa
TradeLG
Undo
Congress leader Vijay Wadettiwar claimed in the assembly that 767 farmers committed suicide in Maharashtra between January and March this year. While 200 cases were declared ineligible for aid, inquiries are pending in 194 cases, he said.
Gandhi also shared a screenshot of a news report which put the number of farmer suicides in Maharashtra in the first three months at 767.
Live Events
"Think about it... in just 3 months, 767 farmers committed suicide in Maharashtra. Is this just a statistic? No. These are 767 destroyed homes. 767 families that will never be able to recover. And the government? It is silent. It is watching indifferently," the former Congress president said.
Farmers are sinking deeper into debt every day as seeds, fertilizers and diesel are expensive. "But there is no guarantee of MSP. When they demand a loan waiver, they are ignored," he charged.
"But (what about) those who have crores? The Modi government easily waives their loans. Just look at today's news -- Anil Ambani's Rs 48,000 crore SBI 'fraud'," he said.
"Modi ji had said that he would double the income of farmers. Today the situation is such that the life of the farmer is being halved.
"This system is killing farmers -- silently, but continuously and Modi ji is watching the spectacle of his own PR," Gandhi said.
BJP IT Cell head
Amit Malviya
hit back, sharing a chart on X which claimed that 55,928 farmers committed suicide in Maharashtra during the 15-year tenure of the
NCP-Congress government
.
"The politics of counting the dead is disgusting, but it is necessary to show the mirror to people like Rahul Gandhi," Malviya said.
Before opening his mouth, Rahul Gandhi should recall the sins committed by the NCP-Congress government during its tenure in Maharashtra, the BJP leader said.
"First tell why 55,928 farmers committed suicide in 15 years of Congress-NCP (Sharad Pawar) government in Maharashtra," he said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
40 minutes ago
- Time of India
Instant Scholar: Samuel P Huntington's 'The Soldier and the State' - a foundational work on civil-military relations
Representative AI image generated by Denny When The Soldier and the State was published in 1957, it instantly became a landmark contribution to the field of political science, especially in the domain of civil-military relations. Written by Samuel P. Huntington—later known for The Clash of Civilizations —the book was the first comprehensive theoretical framework to analyse how democratic states should manage their military forces without compromising either national security or liberal democratic norms. Over half a century later, Huntington 's ideas continue to shape academic research, military policy, and civilian oversight practices across the world. What Is the Book About? At its core, The Soldier and the State addresses a fundamental dilemma: how can a society ensure civilian control over the military while still maintaining an effective and professional fighting force? Huntington believed that the key to this balance lay in professionalism. He proposed that a truly professional officer corps would remain politically neutral and subordinate to civilian authority while maintaining the military expertise necessary for national defence. He called this balance objective civilian control. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Giao dịch vàng CFDs với sàn môi giới tin cậy IC Markets Tìm hiểu thêm Undo Key Concepts Explained 1. The Professional Soldier Huntington opens by examining what it means to be a professional soldier. Drawing on sociological and philosophical traditions, he identifies three defining characteristics of a military professional: Expertise: Mastery over a complex body of specialized knowledge, particularly in the management of violence. Responsibility: A commitment to using this expertise for the benefit of society, namely by serving the state and defending its interests. Corporateness: A sense of unity and identity within the officer corps, fostered by training institutions, rituals, and a shared professional ethic. This framing set the stage for his larger argument: if the military is allowed to develop as a distinct and autonomous professional institution, it will be both apolitical and effective. 2. Objective vs. Subjective Civilian Control Perhaps the most enduring theoretical contribution of the book is Huntington's distinction between subjective and objective civilian control: Subjective Civilian Control: Civilian groups—such as political parties, ideologies, or interest factions—seek to control the military by merging it into their own structure. This includes practices like appointing military leaders based on loyalty or enforcing ideological conformity. For example, a leftist government might politicise the military to ensure it supports socialist values, while a conservative regime might rely on military backing to suppress dissent. Huntington criticises this model, arguing that it weakens military professionalism and risks politicising the armed forces. Objective Civilian Control: Civilian leaders maintain firm control over the military by acknowledging and respecting its autonomy as a professional body. The military, in turn, remains politically neutral and focuses strictly on defence matters. Huntington sees this model as superior, arguing that a professional military with political detachment is more reliable and loyal to the constitutional order. 3. The Military Mindset: Realism and Conservatism Another distinctive feature of Huntington's analysis is his portrayal of the military ethos. According to him, the military profession is naturally inclined toward a conservative and realist worldview. Key traits include: Skepticism of change : The military values tradition, hierarchy, and discipline, making it wary of rapid political or social transformations. Focus on order and security : Officers are trained to view the world in terms of threats, conflict, and strategy, rather than ideals or reform. Moral clarity : Military culture often encourages binary thinking—friend vs. foe, duty vs. betrayal—which can conflict with civilian complexity and compromise. Huntington does not see this conservative orientation as inherently problematic; in fact, he argues that it serves as a necessary counterbalance to the liberal values of civilian society. The danger arises, he claims, when civilians attempt to mould the military in their own ideological image. Case Studies: US, Britain, and Prussia To ground his theory, Huntington offers historical and comparative analysis of civil-military relations in three key countries: United States In the US, Huntington believed the tradition of civilian supremacy was strong but had undervalued military professionalism. American liberalism often fostered distrust of standing armies, leading to a military that was politically subordinated but also underdeveloped professionally. He called for greater respect for military autonomy in order to build a more capable defence establishment. United Kingdom Britain represented a model of subjective control, where the military was closely tied to the aristocracy and the civilian elite. Huntington viewed this as stable but less applicable to democratic societies with broader political participation. Prussia Prussia (later Germany) exemplified objective control: the military developed as a distinct, professional body with a clear mission and a strong sense of duty to the state. Huntington admired the Prussian model for its balance of autonomy and subordination, although he acknowledged its flaws—especially its later descent into nationalism and militarism during the World Wars. Huntington's View on American Civil-Military Relations Huntington's own context—the early Cold War—deeply influenced his recommendations. In the 1950s, the United States was confronting a long-term geopolitical threat from the Soviet Union. At the same time, domestic politics were turbulent, with intense partisan competition and ideological suspicion (e.g., McCarthyism ). In this environment, Huntington urged a restructuring of civil-military relations to meet the demands of a permanent national security state. His main arguments included: The US should embrace a more professionalised military that could think strategically and act globally. Civilian leaders must resist politicising the military, especially in times of national crisis. The officer corps should be educated not just in tactics but in grand strategy and policy, making it a capable partner—not a rival—of civilian leadership. Influence and Criticisms Why the Book Matters Since its publication, The Soldier and the State has become a foundational text for scholars, military officers, and policymakers alike. It introduced a clear normative framework for understanding and managing civil-military relations in liberal democracies. The book is routinely assigned in war colleges, political science departments, and defence institutions. Its principles continue to influence how nations like the United States, India, and Israel train their military and oversee national defence. Key Criticisms Despite its influence, Huntington's work has drawn critiques over the years: Overidealisation of the Prussian model: Some scholars argue that Huntington overlooked the dangers of excessive military autonomy, such as the rise of militarism in Germany. Assumption of military apoliticism: Critics say that even 'professional' militaries can develop institutional interests and ideological leanings, which may subtly influence policy. Rigid binary thinking: The distinction between subjective and objective control may oversimplify a more complex reality where civil-military interactions are fluid and contextual. Modern scholars like Peter Feaver and Eliot Cohen have developed more nuanced models (e.g., the 'agency theory' or 'unequal dialogue' frameworks) that attempt to describe the real-world interplay between military institutions and civilian leaders. Relevance Today In an era marked by military coups, democratic backsliding, and politicisation of defence forces across many countries, Huntington's insights remain disturbingly relevant. From Turkey and Egypt to the United States and India, the debate over civilian supremacy versus military autonomy is far from settled. As democracies grapple with threats both internal and external, the challenge is to maintain strong and effective armed forces without eroding the civilian foundations of constitutional government. Huntington's answer still resonates: Professionalism, not politicisation, is the key to a stable civil-military relationship. Samuel P. Huntington's The Soldier and the State offers a powerful theoretical lens through which to view one of the most critical aspects of governance—how to manage the relationship between the sword and the shield, between the guardians and those they serve. While not without its critics, the book remains an essential guide for understanding the delicate balance between military power and democratic control, a question as vital today as it was in 1957. Full text: Samuel P Huntington's 'The Soldier and the State' Ready to navigate global policies? Secure your overseas future. Get expert guidance now!
The Hindu
41 minutes ago
- The Hindu
PM Modi, Amit Shah falsely claim more allocation of funds to Tamil Nadu, alleges DMK
Tamil Nadu's ruling DMK on Friday (July 4, 2025) alleged that the BJP-led Centre is "lying" that funds provided to the State is more under its regime than during the Congress party's dispensation. The Dravidian party's official organ Murasoli in its editorial on the DMK's "Oraniyil Tamil Nadu" (Tamil Nadu as a single team) membership enrolment campaign said the party had always been reinventing itself and that is the reason for it being still young, though it has crossed the milestone of 75 years. On July 1, Mr. Stalin launched the Oraniyil Tamil Nadu (OTN) campaign and on July 3, the door-to-door visit to reach out to the people commenced. According to DMK President Stalin, the OTN encompasses election campaign, membership enrolment, the DMK government's achievements and the Centre's betrayal of Tamil Nadu as well and broadly, it is to bring together the people to protect the state's language and honour. Assembly election is due in Tamil Nadu during April 2026. The DMK's Tamil daily said people of Tamil Nadu know 'pretty well that the BJP-led Union government betrayed Tamil Nadu'. 'Betrayal alone is BJP's practice and they do not know doing good to the people. However, they divert through lies,' the Dravidian newspaper alleged. Right from Prime Minister Narendra Modi, everybody in the Centre have been "lying" again and again that funds to Tamil Nadu is more under the BJP regime than during the Congress rule. "Union Home Minister Amit Shah is often saying this. They did not specify the schemes through which they are providing the funds and they cannot say that." Chief Minister M.K. Stalin has said that the Tamil Nadu government is pitching in with its funds even for the implementation of Central government schemes. 'What is the Centre's special scheme for Tamil Nadu during the past 10 years? This is the CM's question to the Union government,' the daily said. The Madurai AIIMS initiative, though announced by the Centre in the year 2015, is yet to become functional. In 2019, PM Modi laid the foundation stone for the hospital. Citing a video clip recently released by authorities on the progress of the Madurai hospital project, the DMK mouthpiece said, "It has taken them six years to produce the video and this is the respect the BJP gives to the Tamil Nadu people." The DMK has commenced its OTN campaign to bring people together against such injustices to Tamil Nadu, Murasoli asserted. On July 3, the ruling DMK kickstarted its 45-day door-to-door campaign across the state to enroll as party members, 30% voters in every polling station under the "Oraniyil Tamil Nadu" membership drive.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
'Is Election Commission God?': Pappu Yadav's 'do-or-die battle' call as roll revision row heats up
NEW DELHI: , who is a Congress-leaning Independent Lok Sabha MP, made a call for the "do-or-die battle" over the 's (ECI) move to revise the electoral roll as part of its special intensive revision (SIR) ahead of the . Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Labelling the poll body as "office of the ," the Purnia MP asked if the "Election Commission was God?" Pappu Yadav, who is a six-time MP, said he would lay his life for "the identity of Bihar and Bihari". "The commission is precisely the office of the RSS and should be stopped. The people are ready to end anything that threatens constitutional responsibility. Talks have been held with the Congress incharge regarding this... Is the Election Commission God?... There will be a battle across the state. And for the identity of Bihar and Bihari, if we have to sacrifice our lives, then we will do it," Pappu Yadav told news agency ANI. Earlier in the day, Congress alleged that the poll body's special intensive revision of electoral rolls in Bihar was a "sinister exercise" to deprive lakhs of voters of their franchise and a clear effort to "destroy" the electoral system in the state. In a post on X, Congress general secretary in-charge organisation, K C Venugopal, said, "This government specialises in giving people hell. The SIR is a sinister exercise to deprive lakhs of voters of their franchise." "The unnecessary haste, and their absolute refusal to address genuine concerns raised by the Opposition, points to this being a clear effort to destroy the electoral system in Bihar," he said. "We will not let this go through. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now They must halt this ridiculous exercise immediately," Venugopal said. On Wednesday, leaders of several INDIA bloc parties met the EC over the SIR issue and raised concerns over its timing, alleging that over two crore voters of the state may be disenfranchised by this mammoth exercise being done just ahead of assembly elections. The Election Commission on Thursday said it has decoded the entire exercise to a group of opposition parties to assuage their fears. While the EC said that the revision, happening after 22 years, is in line with the Constitution and the Representation of the People Act, opposition parties claim the timing is suspiciously close to the assembly polls and could "skew the voter base". The opposition has maintained that a revision this close to elections casts doubt on the EC's intentions. However, contrary to their protests, opposition parties have gone all in. The RJD has deployed 47,143 BLAs, second only to BJP's 51,964. Congress has appointed 8,586, while Left outfits like CPI(ML), CPM, and CPI have sent in their own agents. On the NDA side, JDU, LJP, and RLSP have mobilised more than 30,000 BLAs in total.
