Why are politicians fearing people?

There could be two major reasons for the politicians to fear people. Both are related to elections. It is on the assumption that people do not make the right choice.  The second reason is that people make the right choice. In either case, several politicians are there to lose power. It is those who are in power who fear the worst.

A good number of politicians who are involved in electoral politics, either as part of a political party or as an independent, engage in small and large electoral fraud. Some do not want the election to be held at all. They cling to power by pretending to be doing good for the people. Politicians who are members of the political organisations use the organisational support and force to dictate terms. They bully, intimidate, harass, browbeat, etc., members of the smaller organisations and independents. They even use amygdala hijacking on some people. In some cases, they narrate the advantages of unity in the absence of elections and the consequences of division among the people if an election takes place.

We have faced some extreme electoral fraud in recent years and, of late, in the college union elections.

Some of them are the following.

1. Illegal interference with the process of an election

2. Persuading the possible opponents to withdraw from contesting elections

3. Libel

4. Ad hominem attack

5. Finding accomplices

6. Working on the letter of the law rather than on the spirit of the law

7. Influencing the electoral officers for unfair actions

The situation is not different in educational institutions. For long, in the college/university union elections, students have also used almost every possible manipulation/fraud. Students fear other students. They fear fair elections and use unfair means to hijack elections. We need to train our students to come out of this. We need to help the students understand the real meaning of democracy.

In football/soccer, the term 'parking the bus' is used when teams operate with a lot of players behind the ball when out of possession. That is, they spend most of the time on their own posts rather than engaging in scoring. This is done when the particular team is leading. In elections, a similar thing is done by not letting others contest or campaign or both. People use several simple technical/clerical issues to disqualify the opponents. People also exhibit many unsportsmanlike actions to let opponents quit contesting.

It is difficult for a loser to accept the verdict of the election. If the loser does not consent to the defeat, the entire democratic process is jeopardised. Loser’s consent is generally obtained if the loser is given the opportunity to be heard on the doubts of the transparency and fairness of the election. Loser’s consent is doubtful if the losing margin is very thin. Recently, Mr. Rahul Gandhi claimed that 1,00,250 “fake votes” were created in one of the constituencies in India in favour of the ruling party. This count was on the basis of a manual search of the voter's list. However, nobody can prove that these fake voters voted in favour of the ruling party. Being a serious allegation, it is not difficult for the Election Commission to provide the digital voter's list, the hour-wise voting frequency in each of the polling booths, the voting machine data of the record of votes polled, CCTV records, etc. to come out clean. Even if, under the current laws, it is not a requirement, for a transparent system and to uphold the noble values of democracy, our rulers must follow in the footsteps of a noble king who abandoned his wife, who was under the captivity of another king. Our rulers have to prioritise the welfare of our country and should uphold dharma (righteousness) over their personal feelings. Caesar's wife must be above suspicion.

In democratic systems, if the elected representatives, irrespective of being the office bearers or not, can be given more financial and administrative decision-making power, then losers’ consent is not very difficult. In India, the Members of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme (MPLADS) and the Member of Legislative Assembly Local Area Development Scheme (MLALADS) are very good examples of such procedures. However, financial allocation to these schemes has to be increased substantially.

Angry losers are a real threat to democracy. Rather than going ahead with the constitutional methods to challenge the elections, weaponising the anger and using the anger rhetoric have to be severely punished. As against the loser’s consent, the winner’s restraint is also an important factor establishing faith in the electoral process and thus in democracy.

For a democracy to be successful, rationality, respect, and restraint are very important.

How to understand the retraction of publications?

Retraction is the act of withdrawing a published document (article, book, book chapter, report, etc.) either by the publisher or by the author. This can happen when someone confesses to academic malpractice knowingly or unknowingly.

The major reasons for retraction are the following.

Retraction by the author

●       Inaccurate result
●       Faulty experiment or methodology
●       Unethical practices by the journal
●       Compromised data/content
●       Compromised peer review

Retraction by the publisher

• ●       Inaccurate result
• ●       Faulty experiment and methodology
• ●       Unethical practices by the author
• ●       Compromised data
• ●       Compromised peer review
• ●       Compromised editing
• ●       Falsification of data
• ●       Image manipulation
• ●       Violation of publication ethics
• ●       Unethical use of AI tools
• ●       Plagiarism

Who is responsible for retraction?

The primary responsibility of retraction lies with the publisher itself. The publisher should take utmost care in publishing accurate and ethically sound documents. A journal/publisher that claims to uphold the peer-review system should not compromise its publication policy.

Who are affected by retraction?

Retraction affects all the stakeholders simultaneously. The community of researchers and academicians, authors and publishers are burdened with the garbage publication.

What are the major reasons for retraction?

Some of the major reasons for retraction are the following.

• ●       Lack of proper training in publication
• ●       Ignorance of publication ethics
• ●       Predatory Publications
• ●       Open Access Publications that provide fast publication
• ●       Paid publications that are busy making a fortune
• ●       Ranking and accreditations focused on certain publications
• ●       Universities providing promotion, increments and rewards based on publication

Should Institutions be penalised for retractions?

In any crime, a penalty is awarded only to the person who is committing the crime. The transitive effect of crime refers to the ripple effect or indirect consequences that crime has on individuals, communities, and society as a whole, beyond the immediate victim and offender. However, as no punishment is given to the family of a criminal, the institutions of the author/editor who is part of a retracted publication should not be punished. Nevertheless, those institutions that are funding or providing incentives to their members for publishing in predatory and spurious journals should be penalised.

In this context, the recent announcement of awarding negative weightage to the institutions for the retracted papers is unethical and is stemming out of pure ignorance. Further, how can institutions be awarded negative weightage for citations from retracted papers? This is absurd.

Instead, the Ministry of Education, Government of India, should take necessary steps to blacklist academic publishers who are publishing content without proper peer review. Further, an author who is publishing compromised content should be awarded proper academic penalties. The role of the Institutional Academic Integrity Panel is very important in this regard.

How to deal with retraction?

In a general sense, retraction is positive. Removing erroneous content from the public space is always welcome. If the author takes initiative in retraction, she/he should be appreciated for it. If the publisher retracts the publication on its own, institutions should conduct proper enquiries of those authors involved in those publications and take appropriate actions. In any case, the benefits that were given to the author should be withdrawn with retrospective effect, including the award of a degree.

Discipline, Financial Penalty and Success

Every educational institution is primarily a training house. Good institutions transfer good values to the students/trainees that are good for the future of the student/trainee. No discipline seems pleasant at the time, but painful. Later on, however, it produces a harvest of righteousness and peace for those who have been trained by it (Hebrews 12:11).

Disciplinary action is an essential tool for managing unwanted behavior in the workplace. In ancient Indian political and strategic philosophy, the four actions of Saam (dialogue), Daam (persuasion), Dand (coercion) and Bhed (alienation) were very significant. These are processes through which training can be implemented. They were also used in bilateral relations among nations, employer-employee interactions and training houses.

Although there are many processes involved in instilling discipline among the students/trainees in comparison to mature employees, monetary penalties, like fines, are always justified to be most effective. Compared to any other steps, it discourages people from repeating the offence by making it financially undesirable. A significant fine can temporarily limit an offender's ability to continue her/his carelessness due to financial strain.

As a means to deter future misconduct by imposing a financial cost on the offender and thereby acting as a punishment proportional to the offence, financial penalties have brought stability and quality to many nations and organizations. However, its effectiveness can be debated based on factors like the offender's ability to pay and the severity of the violation.

Some of the following points are worth considering in relation to financial penalties.

1. A student/trainer/employee should be aware of the pros and cons of offence

2. An educational institution/government/firm/trainer should make the policies transparent at least through an internal note

3. Decisions on financial penalties should be objective. 

4. A student/trainer/employee should not take anything for granted. For, St. Paul writes, ‘but I discipline my body and keep it under control, lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified’ (1 Corinthians 9:27).

In a transparent system where the penalties are not arbitrary, one must note that the penalties are not income-generating mechanisms for the institutions. If people comply with the rules and regulations, there will not be a fine.

I like the way credit card companies use penalty policies. They have a combination of late payment fees, higher interest rates, and over-limit fees. Additional charges are levied when cardholders don't pay their due on time as late payment charges. Late payment charges can damage one’s credit score and lead to interest accrual. Many credit card companies levy a penalty interest rate if a payment is due for over 60 days. The penalty rate may be as high as 50% of the outstanding bill amount. A penalty is charged by credit card companies when cardholders' purchases exceed their credit limit. All these are imposed after one enjoys the privilege of purchasing without cash in hand. Does a credit card company accept any apologies for the late payment or for crossing the credit limit? If students are going to face the world, they should be aware of the things in the world. Whoever loves discipline loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid (Proverbs 12:1).

If a student’s/trainee's performance remains unsatisfactory, she/he should receive penalties of various levels depending on the expected outcome of the training. However, the student/trainee can always leave the training if she/he is unsatisfied with the system. It is said, “if you throw peanuts, you will get only monkeys”. If your discipline is diluted, you will not get the expected outcome.” Mr Narendra Modi, is the prime minister of India for three consecutive terms. It is heard that he works for nearly 19 hours a day. Ms Mamata Banerjee, the West Bengal chief minister for the third time, is also working around 20 hours a day. Many successful sportspersons, including some Olympians, engaged in financial penalty-based training. A well-disciplined hard work, with a clear view of what is at a loss if they do not work hard, is the simple justification for their success. It is said in the Bible, ‘whoever spares the rod hates his son, but he who loves him is diligent to discipline him’ (Proverbs 13:24).

Jesus said, ‘Give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and God what belongs to God (Mark 12:17). If you want to be smart in the world, do smart things of the world and get trained in the hardest way.