xxx

The scepter is a symbol of feudalism. In democracy, the state is run by the will of the people. All decisions taken in Parliament express the will of the people. In such a way, what will be in line with the spirit of democracy to keep sengol in the hands of the president? The President's job in the Parliament is to keep the proceedings organized. Apart from that, there was no right in his hands. Keeping the 'scepter' near his seat is totally contrary to the spirit of democracy and anti-constitutional. It is the first recognized national symbol in India. Would the presence of the alleged scepter in the Parliament House not be disrespectful to the national emblem!
In the Tamil monarchy, whenever a new king took charge of the state, the royal priest would hand over the scepter to him. But it is the days when the monarchy was under the control of the Brahmins. There were shameless arrangements like 'Manusmriti' in the name of law. Is it not an affront to democracy to install the 'sceptre' in the Parliament House, which is the symbol of the will and consciousness of the Indian people? Is there any more power to the 'Raj' than the will of the people in a healthy democracy? This is also important because the Indian Constitution, which was made after the alleged Sengol meeting, also has no provision to adopt any symbol as a 'scepter'.
Listen to the full discussion on this topic live today at 6 pm on Bahujan Samvad YouTube channel.
*****************************
Like and share Bahujan Samvad YouTube channel. Subscribe to this channel today, and also turn on the bell notification