What to Read in Indian Express Editorial( Topic and Syllabus wise)

EDITORIAL 1 : Every day is Women’s Day — with or without support

 

Introduction:

• International Women's Day (IWD) has a historical significance rooted in struggles for women's rights.
• The day serves as a reminder of the long and hard-fought battles by women for better working conditions, equal pay, shorter work hours, and voting rights.
• The 1909 New York Shirtwaist Strike, led by 20,000 female garment workers, was a landmark event that inspired the proposal for International Women’s Day in 1910 by Clara Zetkin.

 

Historical Background:

• 1909 New York Shirtwaist Strike: 
  • Close to 20,000 female garment factory workers in New York marched for better pay, shorter work hours, and voting rights.
  • Their demands inspired Clara Zetkin, a German activist, to propose the International Women's Day during the Second International Conference of Working Women in Copenhagen in 1910.
  • Over time, the day was adopted globally to acknowledge and honor women’s rights and achievements.

 

Women's Rights in India:

• The Indian Constitution guaranteed universal suffrage (right to vote) and equality before the law from the moment of its existence in 1950.
• However, in practice, women had to struggle harder to be seen, heard, and recognized in society, like their global counterparts.
• The progress achieved by women in India reflects their unwavering resolve and determination despite social, economic, and political hurdles.

 

Contemporary Scenario:

• In recent times, women-led development has become a foundational promise of governance in India.
• Political parties have started addressing women's aspirations by offering schemes and initiatives tailored towards their empowerment.
• This shift reflects a bottom-up upsurge where women have demanded change and have been pivotal in shaping their destiny.

 

Achievements of Women:

• Education:
  • The Female Gross Enrolment Ratio (GER) has overtaken the Male GER since 2017-18.
  • In 2020-21, the number of women enrolled in medical colleges was equal to that of men.
  • In prestigious institutions like the IITs, women's representation has increased due to affirmative action policies.
• Resilience:
  • Despite challenges, women have continued to break barriers with or without men’s support.
  • Their indomitable spirit has transformed every day into Women's Day.

 

Conclusion:

• The fight for equality and rights has been long and arduous for women, but their resilience has ensured progress and representation in all fields.
• The increasing participation of women in education, workforce, and governance is a testament to their unrelenting spirit.
• While political parties may now compete to address women’s issues, it is women’s own resolve that has paved the way for their growing empowerment.
• Indeed, every day is Women’s Day, with or without external support.

 

EDITORIAL 2 : The Third Edit: Rewriting Shakespeare, turning love into politics

Introduction:

• Shakespeare’s Sonnet 116 is widely recognized as a timeless ode to romantic love, emphasizing unchanging, unwavering love.
• The famous lines “Love is not love which alters when it alteration finds” have become synonymous with eternal love and commitment.
• However, a political reinterpretation of the sonnet emerged a generation after Shakespeare’s death, transforming the theme of love into a political statement.

 

Historical Context:

• During the English Civil War (1642-1651), two opposing factions emerged: 
  • Cavaliers (Royalists): Supported the King (Charles I) and monarchy.
  • Roundheads (Parliamentarians): Fought for Parliament's supremacy and later supported Oliver Cromwell.
• A Cavalier version of Sonnet 116 was discovered in the Bodleian Library, Oxford, within a collection of royalist literature from the 1640s.
• The unidentified writer altered the lines of the sonnet, shifting its romantic meaning to symbolize unwavering loyalty to the king.

 

The Alteration of Sonnet 116:

• Original Theme: 
  • Shakespeare’s Sonnet 116 emphasized love as an unchanging, fixed point, impervious to time or circumstance.
• Cavalier Version: 
  • The sonnet was rewritten to advocate steadfast loyalty to the royal cause.
  • Phrases like “ever-fixèd mark” were metaphorically reinterpreted as unshaken allegiance to the king during the civil conflict.
  • The tone of romance was entirely replaced with political defiance against the Roundheads.

 

Significance of the Discovery:

• This version of the poem lay hidden in plain sight in Oxford’s Bodleian Library and was miscatalogued in the 19th century, with no mention of Shakespeare.
• It was only discovered recently by a doctoral researcher, revealing how Shakespeare’s words were appropriated for political purposes.
• The alteration of the sonnet highlights how art and literature can be weaponized during political turmoil.

 

Contrast Between Shakespeare and Milton:

• While Shakespeare's posthumous work was dragooned into the royalist cause, his contemporary, John Milton, actively supported the parliamentarians.
• Milton wrote panegyrics (high praise) to Oliver Cromwell, advocating for republicanism and Puritanism.
• The clash of ideologies in literature mirrored the political divisions of the time.

 

Turning Love into Politics:

• The appropriation of Sonnet 116 demonstrates how love — originally presented as timeless and universal — can be manipulated to serve a political agenda.
• The phrase “Love is not love which alters when it alteration finds” was turned into a royalist manifesto advocating loyalty to the king.
• This transformation underlines how literature is never apolitical, especially in times of social and political unrest.

 

Conclusion:

• The discovery of the Cavalier version of Sonnet 116 reveals a third edit of Shakespeare’s work — one that goes beyond romantic love and delves into political allegiance.
• It also raises profound questions about the nature of art and literature: Can art ever be apolitical, or will it always be shaped by the dominant ideologies of the time?
• Shakespeare, despite being long dead, was unwillingly recruited into the Cavalier cause, proving how powerful words can transcend their original intent.
• The third edit of Sonnet 116 is a testament to how love can indeed alter when it finds political alteration.

 

EDITORIAL 3 : The Delimitation Debate — North vs South or Representation vs Federalism?

Introduction:

• The debate on delimitation has resurfaced in India in a charged political context, especially with Tamil Nadu Chief Minister MK Stalin leading a push-back from the South.
• The core demand is to extend the 1971 Census-based delimitation framework for another 30 years beyond 2026, to protect representation for states like Tamil Nadu, which have effectively controlled their population.
• However, the debate has also taken a North vs South political tone, raising questions about representation, federalism, and political equity.

Background of Delimitation:

• Delimitation refers to the process of redrawing the boundaries of constituencies to reflect changes in population.
• After the 1971 Census, the delimitation process was frozen to avoid penalizing states that had controlled their population growth.
• This freeze is set to end in 2026, raising concerns that Southern states (with slower population growth) may lose representation in Parliament, while Northern states (with higher population growth) may gain more seats.
• Tamil Nadu's demand: Extend the 1971 Census-based framework for another 30 years to ensure fair representation.

Political Context:

• CM MK Stalin's Position: 
  • He has positioned himself as the leader of the South’s resistance against what is perceived as a North-dominated Centre led by the BJP.
  • The push-back is also tied to larger concerns regarding the National Education Policy (NEP), NEET exam, and the three-language formula, which are viewed as tools for cultural homogenisation.
• BJP’s Southern Expansion: 
  • The BJP’s recent electoral success in the North has been consolidated, and now they are attempting to expand into Southern states.
  • Stalin’s demand can also be seen as a political resistance to the BJP's Southern ambitions.

The Misleading North vs South Narrative:

• The framing of the debate as North vs South is simplistic and reductive: 
  • The North itself is internally diverse with varied economic and social development.
  • Similarly, the South is not homogenous; different Southern states have distinct development trajectories.
  • The perception that a “less developed” North is gaining at the expense of a “better developed” South overlooks complex historical, geographical, and policy factors.

Representation vs Federalism:

• Core Debate: Should representation in Parliament be strictly based on population size (one-person-one-vote) or should federal balance also be considered to protect smaller or better-developed states?
• Majoritarian Argument: 
  • The demand to base representation strictly on population size resembles a majoritarian logic, where higher population equals more representation.
  • However, the Constitution also guarantees federal safeguards and protections for minorities, ensuring equitable representation regardless of population size.
• Balancing Act: 
  • While the one-person-one-vote principle is essential for political equality, it should not come at the cost of federal balance.
  • The Constitution's spirit recognizes that political representation must also accommodate regional diversities.

Short-term Political Interests vs Long-term Policy Vision:

• The delimitation debate is too significant to be reduced to short-term political agendas or binary debates.
• The risk lies in framing the debate as: 
  • North vs South — portraying it as a cultural or regional conflict.
  • BJP vs Opposition — reducing it to mere political rivalry.
  • Representation vs Federalism — without acknowledging the nuanced balance required between the two.
• A long-term policy approach is needed to ensure both equitable representation and federal balance.

Conclusion:

• The delimitation debate raises important questions about representation, federalism, and political equity.
• While population-based representation seems democratic, it can disproportionately disadvantage states that have controlled their population growth.
• The framing of the debate in North vs South binaries is misleading and oversimplifies the complexity of the issue.
• Moving forward, India must find a balance between equal representation and federal protection, ensuring that political equity prevails without compromising federalism.