(A detailed version of this chapter in notes #301.048 on http://facebook.com/mehtarahulc )
Download this chapter 49 : http://www.righttorecall.info/301.pdf
49.1 Every (political) news is a paid news, every historian is a paid historian …..
Please google, and you will find that Henrybhai Ford had said that “History is useless”. I am quoting Henrybhai, because I also believe that “History books are useless”. In fact, I came to know of Henrybhai’s quote in around 1997, and it was long before that, around 1992, I had concluded that “History books are useless”. And worse, I concluded that “most Historians are paid Historians and all the History books they have written are paid works”, just as “most political news are paid news”. So IMO, History is worse than useless — most History-texts are carefully fabricated pages to hide important pieces of information.
Most people in India till Dec-2009 believed that most political news are unpaid news coming straight from hearts of journalists or editors. They also falsely believed that most historians write on the basis of what they find and what they truly believe. They did not know that most news, columns and editorials are paid news, and that historians are also paid up. The activists like myself understood as back as in 1990 that every political news is paid news, every political column is paid column, every political editorial is paid editorial and every historian is also a paid historian. And the person who pays decides and dictates the tone and direction of the writings of news and history. This is why those who understand payment mechanisms behind news and history have diametrically opposite view of Mohanbhai from those who still don’t know that money plays 99% of role in manufacturing of news and history.
One of the biggest distortion paid news and paid histories have created in India is on characterization of Mohanbhai. The paid newspapers of 1920-1948 and history texts written thereafter that say that Mohanbhai was Mahatma. If one doesn’t know that most news are paid news and each and every historians are also a paid historians, he will almost believe that Mohanbhai was truly a Mahatma. But if one factors in the money part, and sees how and where the money flowed in news and history business, one will understand the Mohanbhai was a Duratma No. 1 , not at all a Mahatma.
I call Mohanbhai Duratma Gandhi. Why? Because to get paid publicity from British, Mohanbhai took steps that not only delayed freedom, but later amplified partition violence in which 10 lakh men got slaughtered, some 4 core men and women crore had to flee leaving their homes behind and over 20 lakh women got kidnapped. I don’t blame Mohanbhai for partition at all — partition was due to other factors. And I don’t blame him for all the violence — I blame him for a big portion of it. If Mohanbhai had not spread his toxic waste called charkha and bhajans, then number of dead/kidnapped would have been much less and loss of property would have been less too. All along, Mohanbhai knew that charkha spinning, bhajan singing were all waste of time which only benefited British and weakened Indians. But he deliberately perused those activities because he saw that more the time-wasting activities he runs, more the money British would pay to mediamen to put his pictures on front pages of newspapers, and remove others’ pictures. Mohanbhai wanted first position in all politicians back then. Mohanbhai wanted his pictures on front page of every newspaper and he wanted to ensure that no one else’s picture should come. Mohanbhai wanted glory and fame. And Mohanbhai wanted to ensure that no one else gets any glory and any fame. Mohanbhai wanted hype and sole monopoly in hype. There is NOTHING wrong I see in his desire to become famous and even have monopoly in fame. But desire to become famous extended to a point that National Interests and even lives and honor of all Indian men and women became irrelevant to him. In his world, only his fame mattered. And so he decided to become a partner of British who can buy him the fame he wanted. And that’s why, I call him Duratma Gandhi.
I understood Duratmagiri of Mohanbhai in as early 1990s. But chose not to focus on it, because I am more interested in fixing present than removing false understanding of past. But when Mohanbhai-2 aka The Anna arrived in apr-2011, I saw that explaining Mohanbhai-1 was needed to explain defunctness of Mohanbhai-2. And so I added a chapter on Duratma Gandhi in my manifesto. Mohanbhai-2 aka The Anna is also a creation of MNC-paid TV-channels, and The Anna is opposing the proposal to add Right to Recall Janlokpal clauses only because he sees that if he supports that proposals, MNC-owners will stop paying TV-channels to give him fame. And so The Anna chose to tear apart Right to Recall Lokpal pages from the original Lokpal draft, and started promoting Lokpal with no RTR Lokpal. To him, only fame matters, Indian interests may go to hell.
This chapter explains both the Mohanbhais, and also other time-wasters.
49.2 British-Mohan partnership : you waste away youth’s time, we will pay media to show you
Let me explain why\how British funded Mohanbhai, why British needed Mohanbhai, why Mohanbhai needed British media-funding and how they both worked as partners.
Say you are a young man of India in 1920s. Say you hate British inside out and want to kick them out of India. Now say a white man comes and says “2 plus 2 is 4”. Would you believe him? And then same white man says “sun rises in east”. Would you believe him?
So when a statement is correct or seems logical or is verifiable, color of skin and hatred doesn’t matter. Even if you were to hate British, and a British were to give you penicillin medicine and say “this can cure malaria”, there may be initial distrust, but that distrust will vanish after one sees that that medicine can indeed saves lives of over 90% patients. IOW, whether a person is black or white or yellow or violet, whether he is hated or not — facts, logical talks and verifiable facts overwrite all hatred.
But lets say a white Viceroy comes and says “See dear Indians, here is a plan for freedom. Sell away all your swords in kabadi; burn all your guns; throw away all bullets in river; just spin charkha and sing bhajans. You know … if you spin charkha at the speed of 100 kmhr and sing bhajans at high decibel, we British will all get scared and run away, and India will become free”.
Would you believe the above statement coming from a Gora Viceroy. HELL NO !! No Indian would believe such nonsense from a Gora Viceroy. That’s why Viceroy never said so. Instead the Viceroys paid newspapers to print pictures of Mohanbhai who was making such statements. That was British-Mohan partnership in a nut shell. The British made it known that if anyone comes forward with a method to waste away time of Indian youth into inaction, then the British will not only issue him a certificate of Mahatma, but make sure that every Indian gets a notarized true copy of that certificate, and British will print his picture in newspapers in India and world over. They will also put him on All India Radio. Not only they will get him all the fame he wants, but will make him a monopoly in the hyped world.
Mohanbhai needed media-coverage to outsmart his competitors like Lala Lajpat Rai, Mahatma Sachendra Nath Sanyal, Mahatma Chandra Shekhar Azad, Mahatma Bhagat Singh, Mahatma Subhash Bose etc. Mohanbhai did not have courage to take actions these Mahatma took, and yet he wanted all the fame. So only option Mohanbhai had was to obtain massive media coverage. For this, he needed funds, and only source of funds back them were British or British’s men such as Tata, Birla, Bajaj, Sarabhai etc. So to get ahead of competitors, Mohanbhai decided to take actions that would convince British to fund media to highlight Mohanbhai. The actions were aimed at creating projects that would waste away the time of youth and make them passive so that British face minimal damages from Indian youth.
49.3 Why did British allowed Birla, Sarabhai et al to fund Mohanbhai?
Let me elaborate the question. Historians tell us that British were damaged by Mohanbhai and Company (aka Congress) and their Charkha Brigade. The Charkha Brigade as Historians tell us consisted of over 1000 Charkha Battalions each consisting of about 100-500 Charkha-veer spinning Charkha at the speed of 100 kmph 18 hours a day. And at the same time, Charkha-veer were trained to sing Bhajans so aloud, that no one would need loud speakers. Their Charkha spinning, Bhajan singing etc forced British to leave —- at least, that’s what each and every Historian is telling us. Now it is recorded fact the funding for this Charkha Brigade came from Tata, Birla, Bajaj, Sarabhai et al. So I asked myself a question way back in 1980s — why didn’t British stopped the Charkha Brigade’s funding? Why didn’t Viceroys asked Bajaj et al not to give cash to Mohanbhai and thus starve the Charkha Brigade of funds?
To explain my question, let me ask you a different question : say you are a businessman like Bajaj, and Viceroy calls you and tells you – “you dare not fund Mohanbhai, or else I will cancel all your liceneces/quota, throw 10s of cases on you, confiscate your wealth and also throw you in prison”. Then would YOU dare to fund Mohanbhai? Plato said that “in Politics, one must answer the question he asks, or else he must not ask questions”. So I will answer this question : If I were a businessman in 1920s, and if Viceroy tells me not to fund Mohanbhai, I will not give a penny to Mohanbhai. And I bet you too wont give a penny to Mohanbhai either. No businessman back then would dared to defy Viceroy even in dreams. Most of these businessmen heavily depended on British for licenses, quota as well as technology. Any move against what Viceroy says, and their licenses would get canceled and they will be bankrupt. All in all, what it means is that Viceroy never ever told these businessman to stop funding Mohanbhai.
So let me come to the first question : why didn’t Viceroy asked Bajaj et al to stop giving funds to Mohanbhai? If Mohanbhai was hurting the British, the best thing for British would have been to cut Mohanbhai’s fund supply. But British made no attempt to cut his funding. If you were Viceroy, what benefit did you see in letting businessmen give funds to Mohanbhai.
In business or politics, there are two things — maximizing the profits and sometimes minimizing the losses. Lets us analyze the scenario of what could have happened if Mohanbhai were to run out of funds?. Then all his franchise aka retail outlets aka Ashrams would be shut down. All the lakhs youth who were in Ashram and who wanted to work for freedom would be out on streets. These youth would start searching for ways and means to get freedom. Now what if even 5% of them decide to become Mahatma Bhagat Singh, Mahatma Udham, Mahatma Dhingara or a Mahatma Subhash? One Mahatma Udham or one Mahatma Dhingara can kill at least one British (please google on Mahatma Udham Singh and Mahatma Madanlal Dhingara) and with improved techniques, he can kill 4 to 10. If 100,000 youth in India become an Udham or a Dhingara, then at least 400,000 British would die. How many British were there in India in 1938? Less than 100,000. So obviously, even if as low as 25000 Indian youth had become Udham or Dhingara or Subhash or Bhagat, British would have had to leave. But if the funding to Ashrams continues, these young men would spend away all day in singing bhajans and spinning charkhas. And so few British would die.
Thats where funding Mohanbhai reduced losses to British. A young men between 14 and 22 is willing to work, kill and also die. He is energetic. Mohanbhai would make him spin charkha, make him sing bhajans, send him to clean toilets, send him to village and ask him to do all time-pass activities for 5-8 years. By 20-28 years, he gets married, has kids and has become a passive whimper and no more a threat against British. All in all Mohan Ashrams were factories that took energetic young men who could have each killed 2-10 British into harmless useless charkha spinners and bhajan singers. If viceroys had removed these Ashrams, and even if 5% of youth had become Bhagat, British would have been finished. Hence, Ashrams minimized the losses British could have faced.
But Ashrams needed busloads of money. Khadi aka charkha-spinning was a loss-making venture even back then (just as it is today). So British allowed Indian businessmen to fund Ashrams. In fact, I would put it other way — British forced Indian businessmen to fund Mohanbhai and his Charkha Brigade. The businessmen were dependent on British license , quota, technology etc. and so obeyed the British. So I would say — it was British who funded Mohanbhai via Indian businessmen, to reduce the supply of Bhagats, Udhams, Dhingaras, Subhashes.
49.4 Mohanbhai started Namak Satyagrah to kill Mahatma Bhagat Singh’s Purna Swaraj call
Consider the following dates
|08-apr-1929||Mahatma Bhagat Singh and Mahatma Butukeshwar Dutt threw bomb in Assembly|
|Trial against Mahatma Bhagat Singh et al starts. They decide to use trial to promote speech and ideas on Indian independence. Mahatma Bhagat Singh raises demand for Purna Swaraj in prison and during trial|
|Mahatma Bhagat, Mahatma Dutt and Mahatma Jatindra Nath Das start hunger strike|
|Mahatma Jatindra Nath Das passes away due to 65 days of hunger and torture. No Mohanvaadi ever died fasting. Some real fasters do die.|
|in whole country, Mahatma Bhagat Singh , Mahatma Dutt et al become 10 to 100 times more famous than Mohanbhai. Mohanbhai develops fever and depression when he saw that everyone was praising Mahatma Bhagat Singh and he was losing his no. 1 position|
|Mohanbhai starts Dandi Namak (Salt) March|
|———–||British paid media gives huge focus to Salt March and Mahatma Bhagat Singh and his demand for Purna Swaraj loses focus|
|Viceroy takes advantage of the fact that citizens’ focus on Mahatma Bhagat Singh has reduced and orders emergency and a secret trial.|
|court issues death sentence on Mahatma Bhagat Singh|
All in all, the dateline shows that the real motive behind Dandi Salt March was to kill the Purna Swaraj issue. If all Mohanbhai wanted was a march, why didn’t he lead the march on issue of Purna Swaraj, which was already a hot issue due to trial speeches made by Mahatma Bhagat Singh? Why did Mohanbhai took chillar issue like salt tax? Because he could see that if he takes a chillar issue, then the British would pay paid media to cover salt issue so that Purna Swaraj issue gets eclipsed. And the history repeated in feb-2011 – the paid media gave coverage to Lokpal issue to kill the :”Bring black money bank” movement started by Swami Ramdev and Right to Recall movement, which was supported by none other than Rajiv Dixitji.
49.5 Mohanbhai-2 aka The Anna
Now lets see how history is repeating. The new age Mahatma-2 aka The Anna is no different. To his merit, he did an excellent work in managing Govt grants which were obtained to improve water harvesting in Ralegaon Siddhi. And as a result, Ralegaon improved. But there are over 50000 villages in India which have improved in past 20 years, and each one improved because of a few good men there.
In jan-2011, two movements were growing. One was “Bring black money back” started by Swami Ramdevji. Another was equally powerful in activists, though had no presence in mass-media. It was Right to Recall movement. The RTR movement did not gain much in media as mediamen opposed RTR drafts, particularly Right to Recall Doordarshan Chairman as RTR DD Chairman will reduce economic gains of mediamen. So though RTR movement had not gained much in media and commons, but amongst non-80G-activists, RTR was no. 1 movement by dec-2010. One reason was the activists were convinced that the RTR procedure drafts I wrote are inexpensive to implement. And other reason was — Rajiv Dixitji himself was promoting RTR openly.
The MNC-owners and BJP\Congress were most likely completely unaware of RTR movement, as it hasn’t come in media yet. But the MNC-owners as well as BJP\Congress MPs started looking for ways to create an alternate psuedo-movement to keep activists busy, and take them away from BBMB movement. That’s why they recruited The Anna and The Team, and started Janlokpal movement. The main goals of sponsoring Janlokpal movements were
1. MNC-owners and super-corporates needed Lokpal system so that they can control whole Indian administration by bribing/controlling just 11 people.
2. kill focus from BBMB issue
3. reduce clout of Ramdevji
4. create a myth that Right to Recall is not needed and Lokpals will reduce corruption problem to cut Right to Recall movement
5. remove the focus from issues like MNC-domination, weakening of Indian Military, infiltration of Bangladeshies, poverty, inflation, nexus of Ministers, judges, elitemen etc at high places and focus only on retail corruption
6. create a myth that Lokpal bill is coming due to mass pressure and not because MNCs made UN pass UNCAC resolution, which makes Lokpal-like body essential.
7. waste away time of youth in useless activities
The (6) was something all political parties’ MPs needed. In 2008, MNC-owners bribed PMs across world and made them pass “United Nations Convention against Corruption” in UN. What UNCAC says (pls clause-1 and clause-2 of article-6 http://www.unodc.org/pdf/corruption/publications_unodc_convention-e.pdf ) is that each country will have a “independent body” to control corruption.. This body as per UNCAC article-5 and article-6 must have powers to investigate and prosecute any and every public official, including Prime Minister. The “against corruption” were just words to fool people. The real goal of MNC-owners is to create a body of 10-15 oligarch in each country so that via these oligarchs, MNC-owners can control 1000s of MPs, Ministers, IAS, IPS etc. So MNC-owners bribed PMs of all countries to pass a proposal, namely UNCAC, which would create a Lokpal like body.
Now India signed UNCAC in 2008 and so MPs had no option but to enact Lokpal like law. Now if it appears that MPs passed Lokpal like law-draft due to UN = MNC-owners pressure, then it would have been a big loss of face before citizens. But if it appears that Lokpal came due to mass-movement, then it will become difficult to prove that Lokpal came due to UN pressure or pressure of MNC-owners.
IOW, just as British were paying newspapers back them to publicize Mohanbhai to cut influence of Mahatma Bhagat Singh, Mahatma Subhash Bose etc, same way MNC-owners paid TV-channels to project The Anna to kill the influence of Ramdevji, divert BBMB issue and cover the fact that Lokpal is coming due to UN = MNC pressure.
49.6 The general method of “give funds and media coverage to the Time-Wasters”
There are some people who agree to live with less and partially give up ambition of career and thus manage to find some time for activism. The MNC-owners as well as Indian elitemen need a method to keep activists busy with harmless, even if useless, activism. One method they have perfected is to give funding and media coverage to time-wasting activist-leaders who will get activists administer activists, make them perform useless activities and waste away his time.
How does this method work from end to end?
1. The junior-activists wrongly feel that they alone cant do much, and so they decide to join a team. This itself a fallacy. In chap-13, I have shown how 200,000 activists, all working alone and not in any group can improve India and make it at par with West in few months. Nevertheless, activists want to join some group. So they look for activist leaders.
2. The activists leaders want funding and look for donors – be foreign donors or Indian donors. And so activist leaders has no option but to subtract the items from their agenda which they think donors will not like, even if the items are extremely and urgently needed for India. This is how the activist leaders become time-wasters. There is no order from elitemen — the activist leader willingly becomes time-waster in order to suit the “trends” set by donors.
3. The activist leaders also use costume, posture and jargon that will make activist leader look “anti-establishment”. This is needed to appeal the junior activists.
4. Now the elitemen are looking for activist-leaders who are time-wasters. So when elitemen find time-waster activist leaders, they give him funding and also pay mediamen to give him favorable media-coverage so that he gains limelight in junior activists, and more and more junior activists join him. So with media-highlighting and costume/posture etc, the activist leader gets junior activists, asks them not to focus on campaigning to get good Gazette Notifications printed and instead and wastes away his time in far less efficient activities such as teaching, health, environment jihad, rallying, shouting, sloganeering etc.
5. Thus same laws will continue, and elitemen’s rule will also go on.
This is how technique of “give funds and media coverage to timewasters” works. And these days, giving media-coverage is more important that giving funds. The media coverage is almost always 95% or more of total expenditure. Eg in the Janlokpal Drama Act-1 (between feb-4-2011 to feb-8-2011, the money MNC-owners paid to TV-channels must have crossed over Rs 2000 crores).
Mohanbhai aka Duratma Gandhi is the best example of such time-wasters I can think of. He knew that if he promotes bhajan singing, charkha spinning and other time wasting activities, then British would pay media to highlight him. So Mohanbhai started activities to waste away youth’s time. And British paid for giving him national as well as internal coverage. And British also asked Indian businessmen to fund all the time wasting activities he was conducting.
The Anna is next best example. He wanted his pictures of TV and nothing else. The MNC-owners needed someone who by costume, posture etc looks pro-Indian, anti-corruption and so they recruited an Anna and by paying TV-channels, created The Anna out of him.
There are over 10000 activist leaders in India, and IMO, over 9900 are deliberately wasting away time of activists into inaction, so that they can get media coverage from MNC-owners and Indian elitemen. The MNC-owners and Indian elitemen give them coverage because the MNC-owners and Indian-elitemen want to waste away time of the youth. The activists will have to search on their own who is time-waster and who is not.
49.7 Against Shri Nathubhai Godse
I am anti-Nathubhai, because he took shortcut of killing Mohanbhai and not the hard but needed way of destroying Mohanism by exposing Mohanbhai to people of India. Many of my colleagues refer to Shri Nathubhai Godse as Mahatma Nathubhai Godse, which I do NOT. I despise him for his bad decision. Nevetheless, his bad decision did result in one good –– Shri Sardar Vallabhabhai Patel could use Indian Army against Hyderabad, something that Mohanbhai would have opposed and delayed or even aborted. So as a tribute, I do refer to him as “Shri Nathubhai Godse”.
Shri Nathubhai should have seen that this nonsense of Mohanbhai was not liked people or even Congress worker. Even in 1940, Mohanbhai’s chamcha Pattabhi lost against Mahatma Subhash Chandra Bose, even though Mohanbhai had spent 10-100 times more money than Mahatma Subhashji and had more media/travel coverage. So in 1947, the anti-Mohanbhai sentiment was much higher and universal. Shri Nathubhai should have seen that Mohanbhai was dominant due to paid-media, nit due to its rational appeal. The solution was to create a good media and while the good media comes, take efforts to spread correct information at personal levels. All non-violent ways, like pamphlet distribution, speeches and even burning effigies of Mohanbhai, are OK. But killing Mohanbhai was a wrong idea.
A homicide is Vadh only when speech against that person is punished with death, otherwise it is murder. Eg Homicide of Sanders was Vadh, because if Mahatma Bhagat Singh had made a speech demanding execution of Sanders, British would have murdered him. Homicide of Governor Dwyer was Vadh because British would have murdered Mahatma Udham Singh if he had made a speech asking for Governor Dwyer’s execution. Further, Homicide is Vadh only when majority has agreed that person should killed. In case of Sanders and Dwyer, the majority of Indians wanted them dead. But Shri Nathubhai Godse did NOT have sanction of majority — neither explicit nor implicit. Further, Shri Nathubhai had alternate remedies. Eg Consider the demand of Mohanbhai that India should give Rs 55 cr (about Rs 100,000 cr by today’s level) to Pakistan or he will fast till death. Or many such useless demands. Shri Nathubhai should have asked citizens of India to demand a referendum on such demands. The outcome of the referendum would have been — (A)don’t give even 55 paise to Pakistan (B)end Mohanbhai’s fast by giving him poison. And that would have solved both problems — Rs 55 crore issue as well as his fast till death. But Shri Nathubhai did not campaign for such referendums — he instead wanted decided to take a shortcut which had no implicit or explicit sanction of majority. This I see as a proof of laziness. All in all, Shri Nathubhai had alternate remedy — demanding referendums — which he was free to take and was never stopped. But he out of laziness did not take those route. And so his act was murder, not vadh.
Referendum could have been a powerful tool till prove that people of India hated Mohanbhai. The people of India were already realizing that Mohanbhai was a willful liar, not just wrong. Eg crores of citizens were questioning — that if Mohanbhai actually believed that fasting, singing bhajan, spinning charkha etc is cool, why didn’t he go to Lahore, Karanchi, Islamabad, Dhaka and fasted there? As more and people asked this question, the answer was becoming clear that Mohanbhai knew that fasting etc was a useless method and that he was a willful liar. If Mohanbhai were alive, within 2-3 years, people of India would have said the following to Mohanbhai
o see Mohanbhai, pls change your name to Mohasinbhai
o and pls go to Haj right away
o and on your way back, pls stop in Pakistan
o and pls stay in Pakistan for ever and never come back to India
In sep-1947, the common men, not RSS, in Harijan Basti in Delhi had ransacked his Ashram’s furniture and told Mohanbhai not to even come again in Harijan Basti. Mohanbhai could not find even one residential colony in Delhi which would give him a house to stay, which is why Mohanbhai had to live in Birla Temple. So with campaign, it was possible to convince every citizen of India to ask Mohanbhai to leave India. And all that was needed to convince all that all hate Mohanbhai was one general election. One general election – and he and all his men would have lost so badly, everyone would have come to know that everyone hates Mohanbhai. After facing one general election, Mohanbhai himself would have drowned himself in Sabarmati river — if he had any shame left. But by killing Mohanbhai, Shri Nathubhai ended up giving an opportunity to Congress leaders to create a sympathy wave and false image of popularity.
So IMO, Shri Nathubhai should have taken the good, though hard way, of informing citizens about defunctness of Mohanbhai and demanding referendums on “give Rs 55 cr to Pakistan” and other issues. He should have asked Mohanbhai to fast in Lahore and asked more and more people to ask Mohanbhai to fast in Lahore. Mohanbhai knew that Ahmisa was just a bluff which can work when paid-media supports it, and would not work in Lahore where media was against him. So Mohanbhai would have never fasted in Lahore and would have stood exposed. All this were hardcuts — needed a lot of work, lot of time, lot of efforts and yes, also needed money to print pamphlets etc. This was the least unethical way — far less unethical than killing unarmed man, no matter how dangerous his speech may be.
All in all, if a bad leader is yet unarmed, but still has image in paid-media, then solution is to expose his lies — not kill him. Killing unarmed man will do more damage than good. Which is what happened — Shri Nathubhai killed Mohanbhai and his action enabled Congressmen to extend life of Mohanbhai by 60-70 years and do more damage.
One lesson to learn from Shri Nathubhai is — shortcut never helps. Have patients, be prepared to lose all — but never take a shortcut.
49.8 What can YOU do to expose Duratma Gandhi, The Anna, Arvind Gandhi etc
The long term approach is to enact Right to Recall over Textbook Officer in-charge of publishing all textbooks (see chap-10, chap-30) and RTR over Doordarshan Chief (see chap-10). The full proposal involves splitting DD into 5 independent channel with each channel having recallable CEO ; each channel having slot for PM; and allowing each State Govt to have one channel with recallable CEO and slot for CMs. Once RTR comes over Textbook Officers, they will all print real information on Duratma Gandhi, Rashtrapita Mahatma Subhashchandra Bose etc. Now how to convince PM to print drafts for “RTR over Doordarshan Chairman” and “RTR over Textbook Officer”? For that, please read chap-13 of this book http://rahulmehta.com/301.htm . It has several steps where-in you can spend 6 hours a week and help to bring TCP draft in Gazette in India. The steps involve distributing pamphlets, informing citizens on motives of leaders such as Congress MPs, BJP MPs, Anna etc who oppose TCP draft, by giving newspaper ads and contesting elections. Once TCP draft gets printed in Gazette, using TCP, it will become easy for activists to get citizens’ opinion law-drafts such as Right to Recall DD Chairman, RTR Textbook Officer etc .should be printed in the Gazette or not.
As a short term approach, you can give newspaper ads and distribute pamphlets to expose The Anna, Arvind Gandhi, Duratma Gandhi, Subramanian Swamy etc. Exposing them is necessary as they are time-wasters and fake medicines. And time-waster doesn’t do any direct damage himself, but if enemy such as China, USA etc are wasting less time, and we end up following time-wasters, then time-wasting is nothing but helping the enemy destroy India. So I request all activists to spend at least 2 hours a week and say 33% of their activism time in exposing fake medicines and time-wasters.